|America under the Articles of Confederation: 1783–1789
Copyright © 2012 Henry J. Sage
Republican Government. The most radical idea to come out of the American Revolution was the idea of republican government. To be called a republican in Europe in 1780 was something like being called an anarchist in later times, or a political extremist in today's world. That idea of republican government—government by the people—profoundly changed the relationship between men and women and their government. Some of those changes were subtle, but over the years their force was felt. Perhaps most important was the idea of virtue: Where did virtue reside in the political structure, and how could virtue be cultivated?
In a state run by an aristocracy, a monarchy such as England's, for example, the virtue—the goodness or quality or character—of the state was determined by the ruling class. Ordinary people had no real civic responsibility except to obey the laws. In a republic, from the Latin res publica, the people are responsible for the virtue of the state.
The qualities that make virtuous citizens and therefore a virtuous state—decency, honesty, consideration of others, respect for law and order—are qualities that are first learned at home, generally at the mother’s knee. So in a very subtle way the role of motherhood, the job of raising virtuous citizens, became a public good. The concept was known as “republican motherhood,” and although women were still treated as second-class citizens for decades, when they began to make their case for full equality, they could and did point to seeds sown during the Revolution.
Other significant changes that came into focus during and after the Revolution included a new and more highly developed sense of equality, the idea that people should be judged by their worth rather than by their birthright, that being highly born is not a requisite for achievement or recognition. Those ideas developed slowly and unevenly, but the Revolution made such radical thinking possible. Some of those changes in attitude were translated into new laws and practices, such as:
The young American nation also had the extraordinary luxury of having about six years between the end of the fighting in America and the next outbreak of violence—the French Revolution—to find a new way to govern itself. If the French Revolution with all its turmoil had started earlier, or if the Americans had taken longer in getting around to writing their Constitution, things would certainly have turned out differently, quite possibly for the worse. Few nations have had such a broad and untrammeled opportunity to form a government under so little pressure.
The Articles of Confederation. Once the British system of government was rejected, the states, operating under the inefficient Articles of Confederation, saw themselves as independent republics, so that American government under the Articles was, in effect, a “United Nations of North America,” rather than the “United States” as a single nation. For years the country was referred to in the plural: “The United States are. . . .” Americans were in no hurry to create a powerful national government—only after several years of experiment did they begin to realize that thirteen “sovereign and independent republics” could not function as a nation without a strong central authority. The Articles provided for no executive authority. Although the Confederation Congress had a presiding officer, he had very little power. The Congress also had very little authority over the thirteen states, not being able to tax them nor to make any significant moves without unanimous consent of all the the states. (No way to run a railroad, much less a nation.)
Summary of Political Issues in the Early Federal Period
The Articles of Confederation were finally ratified in 1781: Maryland was slow to ratify, and unanimous consent was required. Unde
r its provisions Congress had managed to win the Revolutionary War, but with difficulty and inefficiency. John Adams, for example, had served on more than eighty committees. Wartime problems had been huge, although much was accomplished. But the confederation was cumbersome and inefficient. The colonies had never really gotten along very well, and now the states were jealous of federal power and of each other. Government under the Articles had less power than Parliament: There was no executive, and no courts were provided for. Government was operated by scores of committees. (Definition of a camel: a horse that was put together by a committee.)
In the 1780s, many Americans feared their Revolution could still fail if not grounded in a virtuous republican government, but ordinary folk, influenced by evangelicalism, expected God-given progress founded on “goodness and not wealth.” They expected the Revolution to bring them greater liberty, a voice in government, and an end to special privilege. Others, fearing that too much liberty might lead to democratic excesses, emphasized the need for order. At issue was the debate over liberty vs. order.
Thus Republicanism was as radical for its time, as Marxism was later, although the concept had its origins in Greece and Rome. The concept spread throughout Europe in the 18th century. These ideas came together in revolutionary Americans to form “one of the most coherent and powerful ideologies the world has ever seen.” Republicanism was a social as well as political construct, and the simplicity and plainness of American life were now seen as virtues. The evils of the Old World were seen as rooted in too much government, but in order for government to be minimized, the citizens had to be virtuous, patriotic, and willing to give to the mother country.
Property ownership was seen as requisite to participation in republican government because people needed to have a stake and be independent. Jefferson saw dependency as an evil—“it begets subservience and venality”—so he proposed that Virginia give fifty acres of land to every citizen who didn’t own that much. Because it was widely believed that the early state constitutions were flawed experiments in republican government, some Americans began to argue that a stronger central government was necessary.
Massachusetts set an important precedent by drafting its constitution in a special convention called for that purpose. In all states, more of “the People’s men” appeared in government. At the heart of the American experiment was the idea of equality. Ability, not birth, was what mattered. The new American aristocracy would be based on merit, not birth—“stern and disinterested heroes.” The theory of a born aristocracy was contradicted by “the surging individualism of American life.”
As the need for a stronger central government became more apparent after 1783, the United States could easily have become a monarchy, with George Washington as George I of America. The American states first became independent republics, and the feeling was that viable republics were of necessity small.
With a successful war for independence behind them, the Americans still faced many difficulties in shaping a new republican government, having closed “but the first act of the great drama . . .” Much hard work remained to be done. Without the completion of the task of creating a viable government, the experiment still might have foundered.
The States: The Lessons of Republicanism
The state constitutions provided the practice arena for the writing of the United States Constitution. (They can all be viewed at Yale’s Avalon Project—links on the Sage History site.) When the war was over, and even before it ended, constitution writing was going on all over in special conventions, the Massachusetts invention. As John Adams put it, how glorious it was to be able to participate in the making of a government—few in history have had such an opportunity. Americans were aware that the entire world was watching, with more than a little skepticism about whether this experiment in republican government could work. Many Europeans assumed that the American experiment would fail and that America will become some sort of despotism or perhaps attach itself to one of the great nations of Europe.
The new state constitutions emphasized fundamental freedoms such as freedom of religion, speech, and the press. The office of governor was generally weak, and elected assemblies were given the most power. The state constitutions had to be ratified by a referendum of the people. Americans wanted written constitutions that would clearly define the rights of the people and the limits of government power. Their attitude reflected the American distrust of power, an American characteristic that continues to this day. While they incorporated parts of the British system into their new governments, being wise enough not to throw out the baby with the bath water, they still created radical new forms.
A National Culture
Foreign Affairs: Diplomatic Humiliation
Congress commanded so little, and had so little power over the states and therefore over foreign policy, that other nations either ignored the young United States or ran roughshod over their interests with little fear of retaliation. The British ignored certain provisions of the Paris agreement and kept troops on American soil long after the peace treaty was signed. In addition, the Royal Navy remained in American waters, a threat to American independence of action.
When Spain closed the port of New Orleans to American commerce in 1784, Congress sent John Jay to Madrid to achieve terms to open the Mississippi to Americans. Instead, Jay signed an agreement that ignored the problem of the Mississippi in exchange for commercial advantages benefiting the Northeast (the Jay-Gardoqui Treaty). Congress rejected the treaty, and the issue smoldered for ten more years. Congress also claimed lands in the West still occupied by the British and Spaniards but could not forcefully challenge those nations for control of the land.
The American armed forces, except for state militias, over which Congress had little control, were for all practical purposes disbanded after the war. (The U.S. Army numbered fewer than one hundred men in 1784.) For good or ill, foreign affairs would come to dominate American public life and politics between 1790 and 1815—as Europe became steeped in the wars of the French Revolution and Empire. But even in the immediate postwar years, American carried little weight in the world despite having won the Revolutionary War. The issue of unpaid debts persisted, though some thought they should be renounced. (George Mason is supposed to have said, “if we still owe those debts, then what were we fighting for?”)
Problems with Great Britain and Spain
Commercial Issues: Foreign Trade
After the Revolution the American balance of trade was very negative, which led to a serious recession from 1784 to 1786. As Americans had been unable to trade with Great Britain during the war but still had an appetite for British goods, British imports to the United States expanded after the war, so money and wealth were leaving the country. The young country also was critically short of hard currency, a situation exacerbated by the fact that cash was flowing overseas. Furthermore Congress had no taxing authority, and massive war debts, including promised pensions for soldiers, remained unpaid. It was clear that a strong central authority was needed to regulate trade—the Confederation government could not get a tariff bill through because of jealousy among the states. On the bright side—and there was not much there—new ports were now open and American ships could go anywhere they pleased, but without, of course, the protection of the Royal Navy. The vessel Empress of China sailed to the Far East in 1784–85, opening up trade with that part of the world for Americans.
The Free Trade Issue—The Downside:
The American Economy: “Anarchy and Confusion”
The financial problems of the new United States were huge. The U.S. treasury, such as it was, was empty. The national government and many other states had huge debts, and in order to have some currency so that business might be conducted, the wartime practice of issuing paper money continued; the result was rampant inflation. American paper was practically worthless, and state paper money was worth even less, if that was possible. (In Rhode Island, legal tender paper was created, and it had so little value that people refused to accept it as payment for anything.)
With no power to tax, Congress could do little to ease the situation. Nationalists such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison wanted Congress to have a taxing authority, but their efforts came to naught, as the states were jealous of federal power to tax, having just fought a war initiated in large part over unwanted taxation. In 1781 Robert Morris tried to set up a Bank of North America, thinking that that “the debt will bind us together.” He was given near dictatorial powers, but he resigned in frustration in 1784, having been unable to stabilize the economy.
The situation even held potential danger for the government itself, as war veterans threatened to march on Congress. Before leaving Newburgh, General George Washington had thwarted one such movement, but the seeds of discontent among the former soldiers and officers remained apparent. To make matters even more confusing, economic jealousy existed among the new states. Various tariffs were applied to goods that moved between the states, and state laws came into conflict with the treaty made with Great Britain in 1783.
During this time the national debt rose from $11 million to $28 million, which included foreign debt. Those debts were never brought under control during the Confederation period—it was not until Alexander Hamilton reformed American finances under the constitutional government that America’s economic house began to be put in order.
In January 1787 Daniel Shays led a rebellion of Massachusetts farmers who were frustrated because they were unable to pay their debts because of depressed crop prices, and mortgages were being foreclosed. They captured the arsenal in Springfield and threatened to advance on the Massachusetts Legislature. Americans from George Washington to Abigail Adams were horrified by the prospect; Washington declared it “liberty gone mad,” and the situation reminded many that mob rule was sometimes seen as a natural outgrowth of too much democracy. Thomas Jefferson was less bothered by the uprising, believing that a little violence was necessary for the good health of liberty, but it was obvious that the federal government could not respond to the needs of the people.
All these events pointed up weaknesses in the American government and showed the need to revise the Articles of Confederation. Meanwhile other reforms were emerging from the fire of rebellion, such as religious freedom—the separation of church and state. Most states abandoned tax support for churches, and Jefferson’s Statute of Religious Freedom in Virginia set an important example. In the northern states of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, the Congregational Church still got some tax money. Despite their newly found liberalism, most Americans were nevertheless intolerant of views that were strongly anti-Christian.
Rights of Women: “Republican Motherhood” (see above)
Slavery and the Promise of Liberty
The American Revolution did not abolish slavery, although in some states the innate contradiction between the institution and the Declaration were apparent. During the Revolution, many African Americans fought for freedom in their own way—some on the British side, some on the American. Slavery was gradually abolished, but mostly where it was economically unimportant. At this stage of its history, slavery was not seen as morally defensible; even southerners questioned the morality of slavery, and no one defended it as a “positive good.” That would come later.
Slavery was an important issue during the Revolutionary War. Governor Dinsmore of Virginia had promised freedom to all slaves who would fight against the American rebels. As a result, the British army emancipated many slaves—about twenty thousand escaped to the British, including some of Jefferson’s.
During the revolutionary period, provisions for emancipation were incorporated into most northern state constitutions. Even outsiders were struck by the contrast between American cries for freedom and its practice of slavery. Samuel Johnson asked, “How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty from the drivers of Negroes?” Some Americans were equally outraged by the practice. As Abigail Adams put it, “It always appeared a most iniquitous scheme to me to fight ourselves for what we are daily robbing and plundering from those who have as good a right to freedom as we have.”
Meanwhile, slavery was dying elsewhere in the world. In England a slave owner could not exercise his property rights over a slave. In America, excuses were found not to use blacks to fight for independence. And yet, in the words of one historian, “For all its broken promises, the Revolution contained the roots of the black liberation movement.” For blacks had been at Lexington, had crossed the Delaware with Washington, and many had been recognized at Bunker Hill and during the surrender of the British at Saratoga. In fact, British soldiers mocked the American army because it contained so many blacks. All the same, in the South the sight of a black man with a gun evoked fear. The time for full emancipation was not yet at hand.