History of the United States of America, Volume 8 (of 9) : $b During the second administration of James MadisonAdams, Henry
History
History of the United States of America, Volume 8 (of 9) : $b During the second administration of James Madison
Adams, Henry
United States -- History -- 1801-1809; United States -- History -- 1809-1817
Every member of the Senate who heard these words knew that they
were meant to express the will of the convention which was to meet
at Hartford within a month. The sentiment thus avowed was supported
by another New England senator, whose State was not a party to the
Convention. Jeremiah Mason of New Hampshire was second to no one in
legal ability or in personal authority, and when he followed Daggett
in the debate, he spoke with full knowledge of the effect his words
would have on the action of the Hartford Convention and of the State
executives.
“In my opinion,” he said, “this system of military conscription
thus recommended by the Secretary of War is not only
inconsistent with the provisions and spirit of the Constitution,
but also with all the principles of civil liberty. In atrocity
it exceeds that adopted by the late Emperor of France for the
subjugation of Europe.... Such a measure cannot, it ought not to
be submitted to. If it could in no other way be averted, I not
only believe, but I hope, it would be resisted.”
Mason pointed to the alternative,--which Massachusetts was then
adopting, as the necessary consequence of refusing power to the
government,--that the States must resume the powers of sovereignty:
“Should the national defence be abandoned by the general
government, I trust the people, if still retaining a good
portion of their resources, may rally under their State
governments against foreign invasion, and rely with confidence
on their own courage and virtue.”
At that time the State of Massachusetts was occupied for one hundred
miles of its sea-coast by a British force, avowedly for purposes of
permanent conquest; and the State legislature, October 18, refused to
make an inquiry, or to consider any measure for regaining possession
of its territory, or to co-operate with the national government for
the purpose,[380] but voted to raise an army of ten thousand men.
The object of this State army was suggested by Christopher Gore, the
Federalist senator from Massachusetts who followed Mason in the debate.
In personal and political influence Gore stood hardly second to Mason,
and his opinions were likely to carry the utmost weight with the
convention at Hartford. With this idea necessarily in his mind, Gore
told the Senate,--
“This [bill] is the first step on the odious ground of
conscription,--a plan, sir, which never will and never ought to
be submitted to by this country while it retains one idea of
civil freedom; a plan, sir, which if attempted will be resisted
by many States, and at every hazard. In my judgment, sir, it
should be resisted by all who have any regard to public liberty
or the rights of the several States.”
These denunciations were not confined to New England. Senator
Goldsborough of Maryland, also a Federalist, affirmed that the
sentiment of abhorrence for military duty was almost universal:--
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account