The United States of America, part 1 (1783-1830) | Page 3

This period of fear of centralisation, which began even before the close
of the Revolutionary War, a time of mutual distrust, of paramount
individualism, is little known and rarely dwelt upon at present. Perhaps
the omission is due to a happy nature, which recalls only the pleasant
events of the past. The school-texts dismiss it with a few paragraphs;
statesmen rarely turn to its valuable lessons of experience; and to the
larger number of the American people, the statement that we have lived
since our independence under a national frame of government other
than the Constitution is a matter of surprise. A writer of fiction
somewhere describes two maiden sisters, one of whom had a happy and
the other a melancholy disposition. In recalling the family history, one
could remember all the marriages and the other all the deaths. To recall
only national successes is undoubtedly most pleasant; but posterity

sitting ever at the feet of History gains a more valuable lesson by
including the failures of the past.
Criticism of the Confederation which our fathers framed to take the
place of British rule must be tempered by the reflection that the action
was taken while the land was in the chaos of war. Praise is due their
genius for organisation, inherited from the mother country they were
warring against, which enabled them to contemplate a new form of
government while engaged in dissolving the old. The Government is
dead; long live the Government. According to the intention, there was
to be no interregnum in which Anarchy might rear his ugly head, and
destroy existing forms and instincts of government. Unfortunately a
genius for undertaking a beneficent enterprise may lack opportunity of
carrying it out. The war to secure the permanence of the Government
they were trying to establish produced a delay in completing the frame,
and allowed the individual States to assume a headway and win the
people to an allegiance, which the Union has not yet fully overcome.
In the form of British colonies, the States were well-recognised units
before resistance to authority compelled the people to entrust the
common defence to an irregularly formed Continental Congress. To the
revolutionary central authority thus formed and acknowledged through
necessity, colony after colony had turned for advice as their governors
and other royal officials fled to escape popular vengeance. Over a year
before national Independence was declared, the Congress had advised
the colony of Massachusetts that she owed no fealty to a parliament
attempting to change her charter, or to a governor who would not abide
by the old compact. The people, therefore, were urged to select certain
representatives. They in turn were to choose a council to act until a
governor should be appointed by the King, who would consent to rule
justly. Similar advice given to the other colonies resulted in the
formation of State constitutions and the erection of State governments.
The States, in this peculiar manner, dated their existence from the
suggestion of the Central Government, made at a time when it itself
had not been regularly formed. In turn, the States were now to complete
the Central Government by confederating themselves under a written
document.
Great Britain, the mother country, had never possessed a written
constitution, or frame of government; but the colonies were planted

under written charters. Perhaps this precedent has produced the
American predilection for written constitutions. Many statesmen of the
colonial days had attempted a written plan of union for the colonies.
Franklin had been one of these and, within three weeks after
Washington took command of the American Army, Franklin presented
to the Congress certain Articles of Confederation creating "The United
Colonies of North America." The federation was intended to be
temporary in case the colonial grievances were redressed, but otherwise
permanent. The proposition was unheeded at the time but was recalled
nearly a year later by one part of Richard Henry Lee's famous motion
for Independence. A committee was to be appointed "to prepare and
digest the form of a confederation to be entered into between these
colonies." The importance of the task was indicated by the fact that the
committee was composed of one member from each of the colonies
represented, while the committee, appointed at almost the same time, to
draw up a declaration concerning independency, had only five
members. On July 12th, the former committee brought in a draft of
thirteen Articles of Confederation, by common consent ascribed to
John Dickinson, but evidently based on Franklin's draft of a year before.
This is indicated by the style and form, although the details differ in
many particulars. Eighty copies of these proposed Articles were
ordered printed for the use of the members, extreme secrecy being
enjoined upon all concerned.
These steps toward a national government were taken, it must be