local interests, till The fable of the In a like strain

thirteen distinct states, each pursuing its they are annihilated in a general crash. bunch of sticks may well be applied to us."* he addressed other trusty correspondents and friends. † His wants as commander-in-chief did not confine his attention to the progress of the war; he aimed at nothing less than an enduring government for all times of war and peace.

As soon as the new form of union was proclaimed, congress saw its want of real authority, and sought a way to remedy the defect. A report by Madison, from a committee, was completed on the twelfth and read in congress on the sixteenth of March; and this was its reasoning: "The articles of confederation, which declare that every state shall abide by the determinations of congress, imply a general power vested in congress to enforce them and carry them into effect. The United States in congress assembled, being desirous as far as possible to cement and invigorate the federal union, recommend to the legislature of every state to give authority to employ the force of the United States as well by sca as by land to compel the states to fulfil their federal engagements." #

Madison enclosed to Jefferson a copy of his report, and, on account of the delicacy and importance of the subject, expressed a wish for his judgment on it before it should undergo the final decision of congress. No direct reply from him is preserved, but Joseph Jones, who, after a visit to Richmond,

* Washington to Joseph Jones, 24 March 1781. MS.

Compare his letters to R. R. Livingston of New York, 31 January 1781— Sparks, vii., 391; to John Sullivan of New Hampshire, 4 February 1781-Sparks, vii., 401, 402; to John Matthews of South Carolina, 14 February 1781, MS.; to James Duane of New York, 19 February 1781, MS.; to Philip Schuyler of New York, 20 February 1781, MS.; to John Parke Custis of Virginia, 28 February 1781-Sparks, vii., 442; to William Gordon, in Massachusetts, 9 March 1781Sparks, vii, 448; to Joseph Jones of King George, Virginia, 24 March 1781, MS.; to John Armstrong of Pennsylvania, 26 March 1781-Sparks, vii., 403.

Reports of committees on increasing the powers of congress, p. 19. MS. #Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 88-90. Reports of committees, 20, 22. MS. Madison was a member of the committee to which were referred the papers from the Hartford convention of November 1780. That committee, on the sixteenth of February 1781, made a report, which was referred back to it. Whether Madison's report of the twelfth of March proceeded from that committee, the imperfect record does not show.

None of the letters of Jefferson to Madison of this year have been preserved.

was again in Philadelphia about the middle of May, gave to Madison a copy of the letter of Washington to Jefferson and his two associates.* There were no chances that the proposal of Madison would be approved by any one state, yet on the second of May it was referred to a grand committee; that is, to a committee of one from each state. On the eighteenth the Chevalier de la Luzerne, then the French minister in America, sent this dispatch to Vergennes: "There is a feeling to reform the constitution of congress; but the articles of confederation, defective as they are, cost a year and a half of labor and of debates; a change will not encounter less difficulty, and it appears to me there is more room for desire than for hope." +

Even while he was writing, the movement for reform received a new impulse. In a pamphlet dated the twenty-fourth, and dedicated to the congress of the United States of America and to the assembly of the state of Pennsylvania, William Barton # insisted that congress should "not be left with the mere shadow of sovereign authority, without the right of exacting obedience to their ordinances, and destitute of the means of executing their resolves." To remedy this evil he did not look to congress itself, but "indicated the necessity of their calling a continental convention, for the express purpose of ascertaining, defining, enlarging, and limiting the duties and powers of their constitution." This is the third time that the suggestion of a general constituent convention was brought before the country by the press of Philadelphia.

*Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 81.

+ Reports of committees on increasing the powers of congress, 22. MS. Luzerne to Vergennes, 18 May 1781. MS.

# Not by Pelatiah Webster, as stated by Madison. Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 706; Elliot's stereotyped reprint, 117. First: at a later period, Webster collected his pamphlets in a volume, and this one is not among them; a disclaimer which, under the circumstances, is conclusive. The style of this pamphlet of 1781 is totally unlike the style of Pelatiah Webster. Through my friend F. D. Stone of Philadelphia I have seen the bill for printing the pamphlet; it was made out against William Barton and paid by him. Further: Barton from time to time wrote pamphlets, of which, on a careful comparison, the style, language, and forms of expression are found to correspond to this pamphlet published in 1781. Without doubt it was written by William Barton.

Observations on the Nature and Use of Paper Credit, etc., Philadelphia, 1781, 37. The preface of the pamphlet is dated 24 May 1781.

The grand committee of thirteen delayed their report till the twentieth of July, and then only expressed a wish to give congress power in time of war to lay an embargo at least for sixty days, and to appoint receivers of the money of the United States as soon as collected by state officers. By their advice the business was then referred to a committee of three.*

Day seemed to break when, on the twentieth of July, Edmund Randolph, who had just brought from Virginia the news of its disposition to strengthen the general government, Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, and James M. Varnum of Rhode Island, three of the ablest lawyers in their states, were selected to "prepare an exposition of the confederation, to devise a plan for its complete execution, and to present supplemental articles." +

In support of the proceedings of congress, Hamilton, during July and August, published a series of papers which he called "The Continentalist." "There is hardly a man," said he, "who will not acknowledge the confederation unequal to a vigorous prosecution of the war, or to the preservation of the union in peace. The federal government, too weak at first, will continually grow weaker." "Already some of the states have evaded or refused the demands of congress; the currency is depreciated; public credit is at the lowest ebb; our army deficient in numbers and unprovided with everything; the enemy making an alarming progress in the southern states; Cornwallis still formidable to Virginia. As in explanation of our embarrassments nothing can be alleged to the disaffection of the people, we must have recourse to impolicy and mismanagement in their rulers. We ought, therefore, not only to strain every nerve to render the present campaign as decisive as possible, but we ought, without delay, to enlarge the powers of congress. Every plan of which this is not the foundation will be illusory. The separate exertions of the states will never suffice. Nothing but a well-proportioned exertion of the resources for the whole, under the direction of a common

Continentalist. Reprinted in J. C. Hamilton's edition of the Federalist, cxl., cxli., cxlv., cxlvi., cxlvii., cxlviii.

council with power sufficient to give efficacy to their resolutions, can preserve us from being a conquered people now, or can make us a happy one hereafter."

The committee of three, Randolph, Ellsworth, and Varnum, made their report on the twenty-second of August. They declined to prepare an exposition of the confederation, because such a comment would be voluminous if co-extensive with the subject; and, in the enumeration of powers, omissions would become an argument against their existence. With professional exactness they explained in twenty-one cases the "manner" in which "the confederation required execution." As to delinquent states, they advised, "That-as America became a confederate republic to crush the present and future foes of her independence; as of this republic a general council is a necessary organ; and as, without the extension of its power, war may receive a fatal inclination and peace be exposed to daily convulsions-it be resolved to recommend to the several states to authorize the United States in congress assembled to lay embargoes and prescribe rules for impressing property in time of war; to appoint collectors of taxes required by congress; to admit new states with the consent of any dismembered state; to establish a consular system without reference to the states individually; to distrain the property of a state delinquent in its assigned proportion of men and money; and to vary the rules of suffrage in congress so as to decide the most important questions by the agreement of two thirds of the United States.”*

It was further proposed to make a representation to the several states of the necessity for these supplemental powers, and of pursuing in their development one uniform plan.

At the time when this report was made the country was rousing its energies for a final campaign. New England with its militia assisted to man the lines near New York; the commander-in-chief with his army had gone to meet Cornwallis in Virginia; and Greene was recovering the three southernmost states. Few persons in that moment of suspense cared to read the political essays of Hamilton, and he hastened to take part in the war under the command of Lafayette. The hurry of

*Reports on increasing the powers of congress.

crowded hours left no opportunity for deliberation on the reform of the constitution. Moreover, the committee of three, while they recognised the duty of obedience on the part of the states to the requisitions of congress, knew no way to force men into the ranks of the army, or distrain the property of a state. There could be no coercion; for every state was a de1 linquent. Had it been otherwise, the coercion of a state by force of arms is civil war, and, from the weakness of the confederacy and the strength of organization of each separate state, the attempt at coercion would have been disunion.

Yet it was necessary for the public mind to pass through this process of reasoning. The conviction that the confederacy could propose no remedy for its weakness but the impracticable one of the coercion of sovereign states compelled the search for a really efficient and more humane form of government. Meantime the report of Randolph, Ellsworth, and Varnum, which was the result of the deliberations of nearly eight months, fell to the ground. We shall not have to wait long for a word from Washington; and, when he next speaks, he will propose "A NEW CONSTITUTION."