Sunday, March 16, 2025

ARP346 The Constitutional Convention Begins

Last week we covered the events leading up to the Constitutional Convention.  This week, we will take a look at the start of the convention and how the delegates set up the procedures for the convention itself.

The Convention Begins

As I mentioned last week, the Convention was supposed to begin on Monday May 14, 1787.  Only two state delegations showed up that day, so the delegates that did just had to sit around and wait.  Many of them used that time to chat informally amongst themselves, hanging out in bars or in someone’s parlor to exchange ideas.  

James Madison
I guess technically there was no minimum requirement since the Convention had not yet set any standards.  The delegates, however, did not want to look like a tiny minority was setting rules for everyone else. They informally accepted the requirement under the Articles of Confederation that delegates from at least seven states, in other words a majority of the thirteen states, were present.

The delegates had to wait nearly two weeks until the New Jersey delegation finally showed up on Friday, May 25.  They were the seventh state delegation to show up, enough to make a quorum and begin their business. There were at least partial delegations from New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.  There was also a single delegate from Massachusetts and one from Georgia.  But the Convention decided that at least two delegates must be present from each state in order to represent that state.

The convention met in the east room of the Pennsylvania State House, what we call Independence Hall today.  This was the same 40x40 foot room where the Continental Congress had met when it was in Philadelphia.  By this time, of course, the Continental Congress had been meeting in New York city for several years.

The room was set up with tables so that each state delegation could sit together.  The tables were  covered with green table cloths that matched the window drapes, and surrounded by wooden Windsor chairs.  The delegations were arranged by geography with the northern state delegations seated at tables at the northern end of the room, then the middle state delegations in the middle, and the southern delegations on the southern side of the room.

There were never more than eleven delegations there at any time.  Rhode Island never sent a delegation.  The New Hampshire delegation did not arrive until July.  By the time New Hampshire arrived, the New York delegation had left.  The states had selected a  total of seventy-four men to serve  as delegates. Only 55 of those actually attended the convention.  Many of the conventions came and went, being absent sometimes for days or weeks at a time.  On most days, there were probably no more than thirty or forty delegates present.  Of those, maybe about twenty of them formed the hard core that were there for most of the Convention and did most of the work on the Constitution.

On that first day, the convention accepted the credentials of the 29 delegates from seven states that were present that day.  Normally, this would be a rather boring and pro forma event.  But when the Delaware delegation presented its credentials, it noted its instructions required that the delegation not accept any change that altered the one-state, one-vote power structure that existed in the Articles of Confederation.  Since there were a great many delegates who thought that was one of the biggest problems that needed to be fixed, those limiting instructions which set a line in the sand before debate even began, created an immediate frustration.  That said, this was not the time to argue over that.  Such a time would come later.

With the state delegation credentials completed, the next thing for the Convention was to pick a president.  That is, someone to preside over the Convention.  There really was no debate over this.  Robert Morris of Pennsylvania rose to nominate George Washington.  The honor of nominating Washington was supposed to go to Benjamin Franklin, but he was too sick to attend that day.  The 81 year old Franklin was becoming quite enfeebled by this time, frequently bedridden with gout or other ailments.  Franklin had to be carried to the convention. The warden of the Walnut Street Prison had sent trustee-prisoners, four of them, to carry Franklin in a sedan chair from his home which was about a block and a half from the state house.  Despite his condition, Franklin had made the trip several times, only to have to turn around and go home due to the lack of a quorum.  It’s not clear why Franklin stayed home on the Friday when the convention finally reached a quorum.  By some accounts, he was having a flare up of his kidney stones.  It was also raining particularly hard that morning.  For whatever reason, Franklin missed the first day, and requested that Robert Morris take up the honor of nominating Washington as president.

Typically a nomination might begin by singing the praises of the nominee.  In this case, there was little need.  Everyone knew Washington was the man.  Morris only noted that he made the nomination on behalf of instructions by the Pennsylvania state delegation.  John Rutledge of South Carolina was given the honor of seconding Washington’s nomination.  He only added that he was confident that the choice would be unanimous.  He was right.  It was unanimous.  No one else was even nominated.

Washington rose to thank the Convention for the honor, then fell into a short “aw shucks” response, much like when he was selected as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army.  He told the delegates he lamented his lack of better qualifications and asked for their indulgence in advance for any errors he might make.

When Morris and Rutledge escorted Washington to the chair, Madison took a seat right in front of Washington so that he could take notes.  Madison had appointed himself to take notes.  No one asked him to do this.  

In fact, Congress selected William Jackson to serve as the Convention’s secretary on that first day as well.  Jackson was responsible for taking notes during the Convention.  Jackson had been an aide-de-camp to General Benjamin Lincoln during the war.  After the war, he became an attorney and acted as a business agent for Robert Morris.  This appears to have been the most contentious vote of the day. James Wilson of Pennsylvania nominated Benjamin Franklin’s grandson, Temple Franklin to serve as secretary.  Again, I would have guessed Benjamin Franklin himself would have made the nomination had he not been sick in bed.  Hamilton nominated Jackson.  The vote by state went for Jackson by a vote of five to two.

So why was Madison taking notes when it was Jackson's job to do this? Madison did not trust Jackson, or anyone else, to keep a full record of the debates.  On that point he was correct.  Jackson only recorded formal motions and votes.  He did not record any of the debate over those motions.   Madison believed the record of the debates would be very important and therefore took it upon himself to record them.  As a result, Madison’s notes are the best record we have of the debates at the Convention.

The Convention did not really dive into any other issues that day.  Instead, it also appointed Nicholas Weaver as the messenger for the convention and Joseph Fry as door-keeper.  Both men served in similar roles for the Pennsylvania legislature which normally met in that same room.

With the clerical appointments done, the delegates turned to the creation of a rules committee that would determine how the Convention would work.  After that it adjourned until Monday.

Rules of the Convention

George Wythe of Virginia would serve as chair the rules committee.  He was a longtime attorney and legislator who had served in the Virginia legislature for decades and had also served in the Continental Congress.  In Virginia, he had served on the committee, along with Thomas Jefferson, to re-codify all of the state’s laws after independence.  He also served as a judge and a law professor during and after the war.

Also appointed to the rules committee was Charles Pickney of South Carolina.   Pickney was one of the youngest delegates at the convention, still in his late 20s.  He was a Charleston lawyer, and had served in the South Carolina militia during the war.  He had been taken prisoner when the British captured Charleston in 1780.  Since he was a militia officer, and not a Continental officer, he was paroled after a few months.  He served in the Continental Congress after the war and had been a vocal advocate in the Congress to approve this Convention.

The final member of the committee was New York delegate, Alexander Hamilton.  I'm not going to get into much detail on Hamilton's background.  You should know this already. He was about the same age as Pickney.  Hamilton had served as an aide to Washington during the war, before moving to an independent command.  He was appointed to the Continental Congress near the end of the war

After the war, he began a legal practice in New York City.  Marrying into the powerful Schuyler family, increased Hamilton’s stature, but he had a pretty strong reputation on his own for a young man with no respected family of his own.

Hamilton had a reputation of dominating most committees where he was appointed.  But by most accounts, Wythe dominated the drafting of the rule.  Hamilton certainly had input, but Wythe chaired the committee and was very much the senior to the other two members.

The committee worked over the weekend and reported the rules on Monday.  By that time a few more delegates had arrived, including delegates from Connecticut and Maryland.  This brought the total number of state delegations to nine. 

The delegates voted on the recommendations of the rules committee.  One of the most controversial rules, at least for those not in attendance at the convention, was secrecy.  In order to encourage free and open debate on all issues, there would be no public records of the debates.  Delegates had to take an oath that they would not speak or write about anything that happened during the convention until after it had ended.  Sentries would be stationed by the doors to prevent any spectators or journalists from trying to overhear debates.  At one point during the debates, they moved upstairs to a second floor room in the State House so they could open windows to help endure the summer heat, but wanted to make sure people were not listening by the open windows.

The rule regarding secrecy might seem rather anti-democratic today.  But keep in mind that the convention was not really a group of lawmakers.  They were there simply to come up with recommendations for other people to enact.  

The members took the secrecy requirement very seriously.  George Washington even stopped recording discussions in his private diary.  There were a few minor leaks.  French officials recorded some information about the convention in letters home,  indicating they had talked to someone inside.  At one point, early in the convention, someone dropped a copy of the Virginia plan outside the meeting chamber.  Washington sternly admonished the delegates to be more careful.  There were a few private letters that were later discovered to have discussed some matters before the convention, but amazingly nothing really found itself into the public newspapers or the public discourse until the convention ended.

A second rule involved reconsideration of votes.  They would take votes on issues over the course of the convention, but a vote deciding a matter would not mean it was final.  Delegates could bring any matter up for reconsideration, as long as they gave a day’s notice.  While there was an argument that this could prevent the convention from actually making any progress since no issue would ever be finalized, it was necessary since votes on controversial issues might cause some delegations to walk out of the convention.  Knowing that they could have a chance to reconsider the matter in the future meant that they could stay and continue to debate.

Voting would be done by state, not by individuals.  Since states had sent wildly differing sized delegations, and those delegation sizes had nothing to do with the size or power of the state, offering individual votes made little sense.  For example, New York had three delegates present.  Delaware had five.  The Pennsylvania delegation wanted each delegation to have voting power more proportionate with its own population, but several delegations from small states threatened to walk out.  In the end, the delegates agreed that each state delegation would decide amongst themselves how that state would cast its single vote.

The delegates also agreed that a quorum to do any business would require the presence of delegates from at least seven states.  The convention also approved some more basic rules, like an instruction that memes would not read, gossip among themselves, nor interrupt when someone else was speaking.  Anyone speaking would address their remarks to the President, and that no delegate, unless given special leave, would speak twice on a subject before every delegate had a chance to speak.  Any member who spoke out of order could be called to order, not only by the chair, but by any other delegate.  There were other basic rules of procedure, which I won’t cover in more detail here.  No one wants me to discuss parliamentary procedure for the entire episode.

The rules committee also recommended a rule that any delegate could call for a roll-call vote on any motion.  The majority of delegates voted down this recommendation.  George Mason argued that putting delegates on the record with a position might make it more difficult for them to change their minds later.  Following the establishment of the rules for the convention, the delegates adjourned for the day.

While not a formal rule, the convention met for about five hours a day, six days a week, taking off only Sundays and for the Fourth of July holiday.  There would also be a break later in the summer. The reason for relatively short days in session was that it gave delegates time to go out and have even more informal discussions with each other as a way of coming to consensus.  Because of the secrecy rule, they could not speak with others outside the Convention, but could speak with each other in a more casual environment.

Introducing the Virginia Plan

The following day, Edmund Randolph of Virginia rose to introduce the resolution that the Articles of Confederation ought to be “corrected and enlarged” to ensure the “common defense, security of Liberty, and general welfare.”  This made clear at the outset that the convention was going to have a broad mandate, not just matters of trade.  

His introductory speech mentioned the commercial discord that had arisen between states, some states like Massachusetts had dealt with internal rebellions, paper money was causing havoc, and states were violating treaties.  The current articles gave the Congress no power to prepare for foreign invasions, to enforce treaties, to raise money, to establish commercial regulations, or really prevent the states from doing anything they wanted.  He feared the United States could fall into anarchy and fulfill the prophecies of those who predicted that a republic could not stand on its own without a king.

As head of the Virginia delegation, Governor Randolph introduced Madison’s draft plan for a new constitution, the so-called Virginia Plan that I discussed last week.  Among its more controversial recommendations was a congress where states would be represented by population rather than the old one-state, one-vote standard.  Again, I won’t go over all the proposals again here, but we will get into them as the debate begins.

The important thing to remember is that it was the Virginia Plan that would become the basis of discussion as the Convention began its debate.  

Committee of the Whole

To begin debate on the Virginia Plan, the Convention voted to meet as a Committee of the Whole.  This was a common parliamentary fiction used at the time, and still used today.  A committee of the whole means everyone at the convention sat on the committee.  The point of doing this was to allow debate and discussion to remain informal and to avoid the more rigid parliamentary rules that would apply when the Convention met in regular session.

It also meant that Washington would not have to sit at the head of the Convention all day, every day.  The convention voted Nathaniel Gorham to sit as chairman of the Committee of the Whole.  During this time, Washington took his seat with the Virginia delegation and acted just like any other delegate.  In this role, Washington was free to debate just like any other delegate.  Even so, the general mostly kept his mouth shut.  He only rose to speak once during the entire convention, and it was on a relatively minor point near the end of the convention.

Washington knew that his name and reputation gave his words far more power than he would have liked.  He did not want to be seen as bullying the delegates. Even simply by arguing a point just like any other delegate, he words would have more power and receive more deference than any other delegate would get.  Instead, he kept a low profile.  This is not to say that he never expressed an opinion.  Washington regularly spent time outside of the convention, speaking informally with other delegates and sharing his opinion on things.  He just didn’t want to be seen as dominating the debate at the convention itself.  While the delegates debated in the Committee of the Whole, Washington tried to stay above the fray.

Gorham of Massachusetts was a long time legislator, serving in the Provincial Congress and the Massachusetts legislature.  He was also a delegate at the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention and a state judge.  Gorham had also recently served as President of the Continental Congress.

The selection of Gorham appears to have been pretty uncontroversial, and perhaps decided in outside discussions ahead of time.  The vote was seven to one, with the one vote going to John Rutledge of South Carolina.  The vote was taken in secret, but I’ve seen other historians speculate that the vote for Rutledge came from Gorham himself, just to appear humble and keep the vote from being unanimous.

Once Gorham took his seat at the head of the convention, the Committee of the Whole took up the Virginia Plan as the matter under debate.

Next week: we will dive into that debate, and will cover the most controversial issue that the convention would face.


- - -

Next Episode 346 Constitutional Convention Begins (coming soon)

Previous Episode 344 Northwest Ordinance of 1787

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on X (formerly Twitter) @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 
 
Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://merch.amrevpodcast.com


American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20) or Zelle (send to mtroy1@yahoo.com)


Click here to see my Patreon Page
You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Help Support this podcast on "BuyMeACoffee.com"


Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!





Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Further Reading

Websites

Adams, John A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States, London: C. Dilly, 1787: 

Brant, Irving James Madison: Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800. Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1950 (borrow only). 

Donovan, Frank R. Mr. Madison’s Constitution: The Story Behind the Constitutional Convention, New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. 1965 (borrow only) 

Farrand, Max (ed) The Records of the Federal Convention of 1781, Vol. 1Vol. 2, and Vol 3, Yale Univ. Press, 1911.  

Ford, Worthington, Chauncey The Federal Constitution in Virginia, 1787-1788. Cambridge: University Press, 1903. 

Jameson, J. Franklin Studies in the History of the Federal Convention of 1787, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1903. 

Madison, James Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, Ohio Univ. Press, 1966. 

McMaster, John Bach (ed) Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution: 1787-1788, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1888. 

Richardson, Hamilton P. The Journal of the Federal Convention of 1787 Analyzed, San Francisco: Murdock Press, 1899. 

Scott, James B. James Madison's notes of debates in the Federal convention of 1787, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1918. 


Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Amar, Akhil Reed America’s Constitution: A Biography, Random House 2005. 

Beeman, Richard R. Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution, Random House, 2009. 

Bowen, Catherine Drinker Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, Little, Brown & Co. 1966 (borrow at archive.org).

Collier, Christopher Decision in Philadelphia: The Constitutional Convention of 1787, Random House, 1986 (borrow at archive.org).

Morris, Richard B. Witnesses at the Creation: Hamilton, Madison, Jay and the Constitution, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. 

Rossiter, Clinton 1787: The Grand Convention, Macmillan Co. 1966 (borrow on archive.org).

Smith, Page The Constitution: A Documentary and Narrative History, Morrow Quill, 1978. 

Stewart, David O. The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution, Simon & Schuster, 2007. 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sunday, March 9, 2025

ARP345 Planning a Constitutional Convention


We last left off with the nationalists in Episode 341.  In that episode, the Annapolis Convention in September, 1786 resulted in a poor showing of delegates and a report that they should try again the following year.  

Independence Hall, as it looked in 1787
Many Americans did not want this to happen.  While the existing situation between the states might not be optimal, many feared handing over more power to a central government.  For them, things were good enough the way they were.  States could work out their issues through the Continental Congress Another overarching and more powerful government risked the freedoms they had won from Britain in the Revolutionary War.

Another faction, however, disagreed.  They saw the states slowly drifting apart, politically and economically.  The war that had forced them to unite was over.  People were returning to their parochial interests.  To these men, this seemed like a huge mistake.  The states themselves were fighting over issues of trade, borders, and other things. 

Foreign powers in Europe were already trying to divide the states in order to gain more influence with them.  For example, shortly after the war ended, Spain closed the Mississippi River to American navigation.  Spain was willing to grant better trade deals with America if the US would agree to Spain’s control of the Mississippi River for 30 years.  New England states were fine with that since they really wanted the trade and didn’t care about the Mississippi River.  Southern and Western states cared much more about river to bring their goods to market, than they did did trade with Spain.  The result was a deep political division that threatened to split the Union.

If the union failed, it would be far easier for foreign powers to prevail in their interests against America.  Smaller states had much less negotiating power than a united nation would. Divide and conquer was the way tyrants operated.  Americans needed a government that would keep them united.

The initial reasons for meeting in a national convention were over issues of trade and commerce.  The Nationalists wanted free trade between the states, and to use their collective power to negotiate better trade agreements abroad.  The other issue that stuck out for many was the repayment of debts from the war.  For some, this was a fundamental issue of fairness.  The country should repay those who helped to make independence a reality.  But it was also a matter of interest.  Failure to repay foreign powers would result in an even more restricted ability to trade abroad, and could even result in another war.  Some states had made great efforts to pay off their war debts, while others had barely done anything.  This also created resentment among states over nationalizing the remainder of the war debt.

Over the course of late 1786 and early 1787, events swung opinion in favor of a stronger government.  The riots in New England, the worst being Shays Rebellion, which we discussed last week, convinced many that the current confederation of states would not be strong enough to maintain law and order.  The example of democracy run amok in Rhode Island also convinced many wealthier men that greater protection of private property and a government that would protect such rights, was a necessity.

State Delegations

The report from Annapolis Convention recommended that the states try again by meeting in Philadelphia in May 1787.  Each state legislature would need to appoint a delegation to attend the Convention.  

New Jersey was the first to appoint a delegation in November, 1786. It included William Paterson, former attorney general of the state, Chief Justice David Brearley, and former governor William Livingston.

In December, Virginia appointed a nine member delegation to the Convention.  Most prominent on that list was George Washington.  They also appointed James Madison, the legislator who seemed to most strongly back a stronger national government.  Edmund Randolph, who had been Attorney General when he attended the Annapolis Convention, had since won election as governor, would also go to Philadelphia as governor of the state.  George Mason, famous for having authored the Virginia Bill of Rights and who had also been at the Mount Vernon Conference, also received an appointment, despite the fact that he had retired from the legislature.

The state also appointed two former governors: Patrick Henry and Thomas Nelson.  Henry declined to go, saying later he supported states rights and opposed the goals of the convention.  Nelson also begged out, citing health issues.  The state also appointed Richard Henry Lee, who also declined.  He cited his recent appointment to the Confederation Congress and the difficulty of traveling between New York and Philadelphia to try to do both.

Pennsylvania also appointed a seven member delegation around the same time as Virginia.  Its delegation included president of the state, Benjamin Franklin, as well as top financial leaders, Robert Morris and Gouverneur Morris.

Some states, even larger ones, appointed smaller delegations.  New York appointed only three members.  One was Alexander Hamilton. Governor George Clinton, who was skeptical of a stronger federal government also appointed two close political supporters who wanted power to remain with the states, mostly to keep Hamilton in check.  Massachusetts appointed only four delegates, while tiny Delaware appointed five, including John Dickinson.

Maryland did not get around to appointing delegates until near the end of April, 1787.  After those appointments, all five of the appointees declined to serve.  As a result, the state had to appoint a second round of delegates, which it only did on May 26, the day after the convention began in Philadelphia.  

New Hampshire had appointed a delegation in January, but did not authorize any travel expenses.  When none of the delegates went, the state appointed another four person delegation in June, more than a month after the convention began, but again refused to pay any expenses.  One of the delegates, John Langdon, finally agreed to pick up expenses for the delegation, which allowed him and Nicholas Gilman to go to Philadelphia.  They arrived in late July, meaning New Hampshire did not participate in most of the debates.

Rhode Island never appointed a delegation at all. The pro-paper money faction was still in charge there. They did not trust the convention.  They believed monied interests from other states would try to reign in their economic policies, which were benefiting small farmers and debtors.

Many states that did send delegates also provided instructions on just how far the delegates could go.  Delaware, for example, instructed its delegates that they could not agree to any changes that would eliminate the one-state one-vote system that existed under the Articles of Confederation.  Massachusetts required that there be no change to the annual election of members of Congress and the right of states to recall them at any time.  It also instructed its delegates to maintain term limits on members of Congress.

There were also some notable absences of founding fathers from the list.  John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were away in Europe in diplomatic posts.  Samuel Adams was in a political fight with John Hancock at the time and did not receive an appointment.  Adams was also highly skeptical of a stronger federal government, but Hancock did appoint others who shared Adams’ skepticism.

The Confederation Congress gave its own approval to the Convention in February, 1787 after letting it sit in committee for about four months. The convention would be “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and reporting [the proposed revisions] to Congress and to the several legislatures.”

George Washington Hesitates

George Washington was particularly hesitant to attend the convention.  His initial concern was that it would violate the public pledge he had made in 1783 when he resigned from the Continental Army never to meddle in public matters again.  As I’ve said before, he considered himself retired.  He was more than happy to spend the rest of his life living on his comfortable plantation.  He especially did not want to lend his name to an effort that would be controversial.  He worried that the convention might be seen as an extralegal effort to overthrow the existing republican government.  He did think changes needed to be made, but if he lent his name to this effort and it went off the rails and failed, it could ruin his good name.

Another reason for skipping the convention was the Society of the Cincinnati.  Washington had agreed years earlier to be the national leader of this group of veteran officers.  The Society had become controversial.  At its first meeting in 1784, Washington had called on its members to make significant reforms in some of its more controversial practices.  The members had largely ignored Washington.  The group was set to have its second triennial meeting in Philadelphia at the same time as the Convention.  

Washington did not want to attend the meeting of the Cincinnati because of the Society’s controversy.  At the same time, he did not want to look like he was protesting this group of some of his closest friends by his refusal to attend.  He wrote to the Society’s other leaders that he no longer wished to serve as president of the Society when his term ended in 1787, and that he would not attend the national meeting in Philadelphia because he was retired from public life.  He cited his poor health and busy schedule as reasons.

If Washington then attended the Constitutional Convention, which met at the same time in the same place, his excuses for skipping the meeting of the Cincinnati would look, well, insincere - to put it politely. For these reasons, Washington sent his regrets to Governor Randolph and said he would not attend the Constitutional Convention.  

Randolph and Madison, however, refused to take no for an answer.  The nationalists were relying on Washington’s reputation as a way to encourage other states to attend this convention. He was the most well respected figure on the Continent.  His attendance lent immediate credibility to the Convention.

Randolph responded to Washington’s letter declining the appointment by saying he would hold Washington’s spot open for the time being, hoping that circumstances might change his mind, noting that he could always replace Washington on the delegation later if needed. Randolph, Madison, and others in the Virginia delegation then began a pressure campaign to convince Washington to attend.

As time passed, word spread across the continent that Washington would attend the Convention as part of the Virginia delegation.  This put Washington on the spot.  If he went, he looked like he supported the convention.  If he did not go, he looked as if he opposed it. There was no good way for him to look neutral.  Madison and the other delegates also put personal pressure on Washington to attend, impressing on him that the United States could fall apart if this convention was not a success and that everything they had worked and fought for could die along with it.

Many states remained reluctant even to name delegates to the Convention.  Washington’s name was a big draw for many states who might have skipped the convention, just as they did the one at Annapolis the year before.

Others began to pressure Washington to go.  Henry Knox, who was putting down Shays Rebellion in Massachusetts, took time to write to Washington about the chaos and about the need to have a stronger government.  Knox had been Washington’s chief of artillery during the war and had a close relationship with the commander.

Similarly, David Humphreys of Connecticut wrote to Washington about the need for him to attend.  Humphries had been Washington’s closest aide in the final years of the war.  Humphries had been with him when he resigned his command, and had traveled home to Mount Vernon with him at the end of the war.  Soon an all out letter writing campaign began with Benjamin Franklin and Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, William Livingston of New Jersey, and John Jay of New York all writing to Washington to convince him that his attendance was vital to the convention’s success.

Finally, by the end of March, just over a month before the convention was scheduled to begin, Washington wrote to Randolph, reluctantly agreeing to go.

Meeting in Philadelphia

The report from the Annapolis Convention has recommended the time and place for the Convention to meet.  It had suggested May 14, 1787 in Philadelphia.  You may recall that the Continental Congress left Philadelphia, or you might even say they fled the city, in 1783 at the end of the war.  A bunch of soldiers had surrounded the State House, later called Independence Hall, and were demanding their promised benefits.  When state officials refused to offer protection for Congress, they ended up leaving the city, first meeting in New Jersey and Maryland, before finally settling in New York City in 1785.

Despite the decision of Congress to leave, Philadelphia was still considered a good meeting place for national events.  It was the largest city on the Continent, and was in a relatively central location.  There were two other major conventions going on at the same time.  The Society of the Cincinnati was meeting in Philadelphia, as was a national convention of Presbyterian ministers.

Madison’s Vices

James Madison was the first to arrive.  He rode into Philadelphia on May 3, nearly two weeks before the Convention was scheduled to begin.  He had come straight from New York where he was serving in the Continental Congress.  In Philadelphia, he got a room at the boarding house across the street from the State House.  Madison had been preparing for this convention for months.  He wrote a paper called “Vices of the Political System of the United States” which laid out the problems with the current system.

Among the problems that Madison identified were the failure of the states to provide proper financing to the government.  Many states simply ignored Congressional requisitions.  States also interfered with Congress’ authority, such as making their own treaties with each other and Indian tribes, and often ignoring Congress’ treaties with Indians and with foreign countries.

States regularly acted in their own self interest and against the national interest.  Issues regarding trade, naturalization, building infrastructure such as canals were all being blocked by parochial interests.  

Madison noted the inability of states to protect basic rights of republican government.  Powerful minorities might rise up and void the acts of elected governments, a reference to incidents such as Shays’ Rebellion.  Governments did not always have the power to enforce their own laws. He also noted that slavery made a sham of republican government.

States had the power to ignore laws passed by Congress, and have their local courts enforce their actions.  States were also passing all sorts of crazy laws, and often regularly changing their laws so frequently that it was hard to keep up with them.  Many of the laws were just stupid, or as Mandison more politely put it “prove a want of wisdom.”  Many state leaders acted only aout of personal ambition or interest rather than the public good.  Even when laws were the will of the people, Madison often noted that the people were willing to violate basic rights out of personal interest. There needed to be checks and balances.

Virginia Plan

Madison also brought with him a draft Constitution, which came to be known as the Virginia Plan.  It called for a bicameral legislature. One house would be elected by the people of each state based on the population of free inhabitants.  The second house would be elected by the first house, chosen from nominations sent by the state legislatures.

It called also for a national Executive to be chosen by the legislature to ensure execution of the laws.  The executive and members of a judiciary would have the power to review all laws and veto ones that they did not like.

The national government would have the power to admit new states to the union and ensure that all states maintain a republican form of government.  States would be obligated to support the Union and its laws, but that there would be a way for the states to amend the Constitution.

The plan was clearly a draft, with many details to be determined by the Convention.  But Madison was looking for a radical change from the Confederation.  This would be a national government with three branches and with a connection directly to the people through voting, not just appointments by state officials.  Madison would have more than a week before other delegates arrived.  He did call on Benjamin Franklin, who lived only a block away and who was happy to discuss plans with the young delegate from Virginia.

Delegates Arrive

The next delegate to arrive in Philadelphia came on May 13, when George Washington rode into town.  Of course, the entry of the admired former general got far more attention than Madison's arrival.  As when he traveled anywhere, Washington made regular stops to attend parties and parades in his honor. The Philadelphia Light Horse met Washington and escorted him into town.

Washington had made reservations at the same boarding house were Madison was staying.  But Pennsylvania delegate Robert Morris insisted that Washington stay in his nearby mansion as his personal guest.

The next day, three more Virginia delegates arrived in town.  The Virginia and Pennsylvania Delegations walked to the State House the following morning.  But that was about it.  No one else had arrived at the appointed time.  

The members opened the Convention, meeting in the east room of the State House the same room where the Continental Congress had met.   then immediately adjourned due to the lack of a quorum.  Rather than getting down to business, the delegates would have to wait for more state delegations to arrive.  

It took nearly two weeks for delegations from seven states to make it to Philadelphia to hold a quorum.  Over that time, delegates dribbled in slowly.  Poor weather was partly to blame.  No one seemed to think it was a big deal if they showed up late.

Finally, on Friday May 25, the Convention had a quorum to do business. 

Next week, we’ll discuss how the convention begins.

- - -

Next Episode 346 Constitutional Convention Begins (coming soon)

Previous Episode 344 Northwest Ordinance of 1787

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on X (formerly Twitter) @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 
 
Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://merch.amrevpodcast.com


American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20) or Zelle (send to mtroy1@yahoo.com)


Click here to see my Patreon Page
You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Help Support this podcast on "BuyMeACoffee.com"


Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!





Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Further Reading

Websites

Instructions to the Convention Delegates https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/the-constitutional-convention/convention-delegates

“From George Washington to Edmund Randolph, 28 March 1787,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-05-02-0110

“Vices of the Political System of the United States, April 1787,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-09-02-0187

The Virginia Plan: https://www.senate.gov/civics/common/generic/Virginia_Plan_item.htm

The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/white-papers/the-constitutional-convention-of-1787-a-revolution-in-government

The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Day by Day Account: https://www.nps.gov/inde/learn/historyculture/stories-constitutionalconvention.htm

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Adams, John A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States, London: C. Dilly, 1787: 

Brant, Irving James Madison: Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800. Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1950 (borrow only). 

Donovan, Frank R. Mr. Madison’s Constitution: The Story Behind the Constitutional Convention, New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. 1965 (borrow only) 

Farrand, Max (ed) The Records of the Federal Convention of 1781, Vol. 1, Vol. 2, and Vol 3, Yale Univ. Press, 1911.  

Ford, Worthington, Chauncey The Federal Constitution in Virginia, 1787-1788. Cambridge: University Press, 1903. 

Jameson, J. Franklin Studies in the History of the Federal Convention of 1787, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1903. 

Madison, James Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, Ohio Univ. Press, 1966. 

McMaster, John Bach (ed) Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution: 1787-1788, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1888. 

Richardson, Hamilton P. The Journal of the Federal Convention of 1787 Analyzed, San Francisco: Murdock Press, 1899. 

Scott, James B. James Madison's notes of debates in the Federal convention of 1787, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1918. 


Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Amar, Akhil Reed America’s Constitution: A Biography, Random House 2005. 

Beeman, Richard R. Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution, Random House, 2009. 

Bowen, Catherine Drinker Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, Little, Brown & Co. 1966 (borrow at archive.org).

Collier, Christopher Decision in Philadelphia: The Constitutional Convention of 1787, Random House, 1986 (borrow at archive.org).

Morris, Richard B. Witnesses at the Creation: Hamilton, Madison, Jay and the Constitution, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. 

Rossiter, Clinton 1787: The Grand Convention, Macmillan Co. 1966 (borrow on archive.org).

Smith, Page The Constitution: A Documentary and Narrative History, Morrow Quill, 1978. 

Stewart, David O. The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution, Simon & Schuster, 2007. 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sunday, March 2, 2025

ARP344 Northwest Ordinance of 1787

The last few weeks we’ve talked about some of the economic crises that the states faced in the years following the end of the war.  The big hope to end many of those crises was wrapped up in selling western lands to raise money.  This made opening up the lands that came to be known as the Northwest Territory a critical event.  This week we’ll take a look at the final major legal step needed to make that happen: the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.

That land that today makes up the states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin.  For people at the time, this was the land that was northwest of the Ohio River, reaching as far west as the Mississippi River, and as far north as the border with British Canada.

The Continental Congress’ first two legislative efforts to establish a legal framework for this territory came in the form of the Land Ordinances of 1784 and 1785, which we discussed in Episodes 334 and 336.

Land Cessions

The first step in this process was for Congress to get various states to give up their personal claims to this land.  France, Spain, and Britain had already ceded their claims to the land in the peace treaty that ended the war in 1783.  But that treaty did not specify anything more than that those foreign powers would not assert claims on the land.  It did not settle who was the undisputed owner of such lands within the US.

Different states had conflicting claims to western lands, based on various colonial charters.  Britain had granted contradictory charters during the colonial era for a variety of reasons.  Beyond those disputes between states, even if only one state could claim the land, Congress wanted to take that to form new states.  Congress put pressure on the states to give up land claims on these western lands.  It did so by coming up with plans to assess taxes on states based on the land they owned.  By giving up the land, which did not generate revenue for the state, the state could avoid owing more taxes to Congress.

The first cession came back in 1783, when Virginia formally ceded its claims to this area.  Virginia had agreed to do that in order to get Maryland to agree to the Articles of Confederation in 1781.  Virginia’s cession was conditional in that it called for the territory to be formed into new states that would join the Union.  Virginia did not want to give up its claims, just so some other eastern state could assert its claims to the land.  This put further pressure on the other states to give up their claims.

New York had a more questionable claim to some of the land, which it gave up early as well.  Several New England states also had claims based on their colonial charters.  Massachusetts and Connecticut had claims that stretched all the way to the Pacific Ocean.

The original point of granting such broad charters was to encourage the colonies to challenge land claims by other European powers to those inland areas.  At the time Britain wrote these charters, there was no Pennsylvania colony, and New York was under the control of the Dutch.  Further to the west, France and Spain had made land claims.  

The New England states had not made any effort to act on these claims to the far inland areas during the colonial era.  Connecticut had tried to claim some lands that eventually became part of New York and Pennsylvania, but never moved further west during the colonial era.  Similarly, Massachusetts agreed to a western border with New York early in the colonial era.  Pennsylvania’s western border was set by its colonial charter.

Massachusetts ceded its claims to western lands in 1785 without much fuss.  Connecticut was more reticent.  The state had only recently given up on its claims to what is today northern Pennsylvania.  Connecticut colonists and Pennsylvania colonists actually fought over these claims before and during the Revolutionary war, and I mean literally went to war and shot at each other.  The most recent flare up of the Pennamite-Yankee War took place in July 1784, after the Revolutionary war had ended, when a group of Connecticut Yankees burned a Pennsylvania fort and attempted to occupy land around what is today Wilkes-Barre.  Pennsylvania militia soon captured and arrested the trespassers, but the conflict would simmer for many more years.

Connecticut also still hoped to claim the land west of Pennsylvania.  Finally, in 1786, Connecticut gave up on most of these claims, but still claimed what it called the “western reserve,” an area of land that makes up most of what is today northern Ohio, along the southern bank of Lake Erie.  In total, the reserve made up nearly 3.3 million acres, nearly the size of Connecticut itself.

There was also the issue of the Indians who actually lived on this land.  Many of these tribes had been pushed into this land after having been pushed out of Pennsylvania and Virginia.  But given the relative power of the United States, the tribes were not in a position to put up an effective resistance. As we discussed back in Episode 336, representatives of these tribes ceded much of the land in the Treaties of Fort Stanwix, Fort McIntosh, and Fort Finney.  While many Indians did not recognize the legality of those treaties, it settled the matter legally as far as Congress was concerned.  Even so, those treaties reserved large swaths of land for the Indians to remain in central Ohio, as well as further west.

Finally, there was the issue of settlers who already had taken some of this land.  Virginia had carved out a district in what is today southern Ohio, to make good on its promises of land to Revolutionary War veterans.  Thousands of acres had already been settled under the guidance of George Rogers Clark.  There were also several settlements along the Mississippi River that Virginia had taken during the war.  French settlers moving south from Quebec had established most of these little villages, and had land claims to them.  While this posed no threat to Congress’ sovereign control of the land, it did have to respect the private property ownership claims on some parts of the territory.  Those areas, however, were rather small and could be handled.  

The bigger issue for Congress was squatters.  These were private citizens who simply moved onto land and claimed it as their own, without paying for it and without registering it.  In some cases, they made private deals with neighboring Indians to acquire their claims.  In other cases, they just moved into an empty area and began developing the land. This was rough country with rough people settling the land.  Without any government, squatters could use brute force to retain possession of their land claim.  If Congress settled the land too slowly, squatters would simply move in ahead of them and take the land  for themselves.

Yet, Congress could not move too quickly.  The vast area of land available would have to be populated over many years.  It would take several years just to survey the area.  After that, trying to sell the land all at once would simply create a land glut that no one would be able to purchase.  The result would be unsettled land simply going into private hands.

Speculators

Under the 1785 land ordinance, tracts of land were supposed to be sold in parcels of 640 acres.  The plan was to sell the land at auction, but with a $1 per acre minimum.  Of course, most private citizens could not come up with that kind of money, $640 for a parcel.  Congress wanted all sales in specie, that is gold or silver. It was not going to accept paper dollars at face value.  It required payment in full at the time of the sale.

Also, all of the land had to be surveyed before land sales could begin.  The time for the surveys meant that land auctions did not begin until 1787. 

There were groups of speculators who formed to take advantage of buying in bulk and then selling to individual families at a profit.  As early as 1785, Nathaniel Sackett offered to take all the land which currently makes up most of the state of Ohio off Congress’ hands for nothing.  Sackett’s plan was to serve as an administrator of the land, making sure that the land would go to families who would actually settle on the land that they bought from him, and that the land could not be resold for several years.

Some of you may recall the name Nathaniel Sackett.  He was the Continental Army’s head of intelligence under General Washington during an early part of the war.  Benjamin Talmadge later took over his role.  Sackett, like Talmadge,  was a character on the TV show, Turn.  After leaving intelligence, Sacket made a fortune as a sutler for the army.  He hoped to spend his post-war years creating and settling a new western state.  

Sackett’s request for an entire state to be handed over to him for free might seem a bit outrageous.  But you have to remember that in the colonial era, governors often gave away very large tracts of land to men who they thought would be capable of settling the territory, thus preventing foreign claims to the land from taking hold and keeping settlements organized. That said, Congress needed money and was not prepared to give anything away.

A serious effort to make bulk purchase of land came from the newly-formed Ohio Company of Associates.  You may remember some discussions in really early episodes of this podcast of an Ohio Company that formed in the 1760s, when Virginia was pushing British officials to open up this same territory.  That company folded when the Revolutionary War began.  This new Ohio Company is a completely different one.

This new organization was founded by a group of investors, all veteran Continental Officers from New England. Major General Samuel Holden Parsons had several key commands in New York and Connecticut during the war.  General Rufus Putnam, who helped to build West Point, and other important engineering projects.  He only became a brigadier general at the very end of the war.  Benjamin Tupper served throughout the war, with notable service at Saratoga and Monmouth. He received a brevet to brigadier general at the end of the war.  The fourth founder was Manasseh Cutler, a New England minister who had served as a chaplain for several years during the war.

These four former officers who had served together during the war, met at Bunch of Grapes Tavern in Boston in March of 1786.  If they could create a company that could front a large amount of money and offer some services in helping individuals to settle the territory, they could make a fortune. 

During its first year, the Ohio Company sold shares to 250 investors.  Meanwhile, Cutler traveled to New York on behalf of the company to lobby the Congress to purchase a large portion of the new territory.  Initially, the company hoped to purchase 600,000 acres along the Ohio River.  Congress rejected this offer.

The Scioto Group

Cutler began working with William Duer, who briefly served as a Continental colonel, also had served in both Congress and the New York state legislature during the war, and had sat on several congressional boards involving government finances. He had also amassed a small fortune through government contracts and the purchase of loyalist properties during the war.  Duer was serving as secretary of the Congressional Board of Treasury when Cutler arrived in the summer of 1786.

Duer advised Cutler that Congress might find the deal more attractive if there was a larger offer for more land. Duer formed his own land company called the Scioto Group, which would take a much larger land claim further north and west of the land sought by the Ohio Company.  This land would go as far west as the Scioto River, in what is today Central Ohio. Duer promised to raise a much larger investment group, taking in large investors from across America and Europe.

The two companies worked together to create an acceptable offer to Congress. Many investors put money into both companies, so they tended to work together in getting Congress to go along with a deal. Essentially the offer to Congress was an agreement for the Ohio Company to purchase 1.5 million acres, with an option to buy an additional 3.5 million acres.  The Ohio Company turned over that option to the Scioto group.  The buyers also insisted that the government assume the cost of governing these newly settled lands, offering military protection from Indians, as well as courts and law enforcement.

The Ordinance

The main problem with this offer is that Congress had no legal authority to accept it.  The Land Ordinance of 1785 said that all land was supposed to be sold at auction, meaning one group could not just buy a really large chunk of land without giving anyone else a chance.  The law also required minimum purchases at $1 per acre.  The offer from the Ohio Company came to 67¢ per acre.  They wanted to buy 1.5 million acres for $1 million dollars.  

On top of that, the company was only offering paper money, Continental dollars and certificates from veterans that were currently trading at about 12¢ on dollar.  So really, the company was offering the equivalent of about $120,000 in specie for the 1.5 million acres, or about 8¢ per acre.  The company also was not willing to pay all of this up front, as was required under the law.  They would pay half up front and half when the surveys were completed.  The larger option for 3.5 million more acres would not require a purchase for several years, after which time that land would become much more valuable. This all meant that government insiders were getting a massive sweetheart deal on land that would enrich themselves as they sold off all the land at retail.

Since the offer did not comply with the current law, Congress had to vote on whether to create a new law to allow this deal to go forward. Over a period of more than a year, in late 1786 and early 1787 Congress debated the terms of a new ordinance for the territories.

One of the biggest changes was that Congress would initially assume governance of the new territories directly.  Earlier laws had been written with the assumption that those who moved to the territories would govern themselves.   Investors did not like the idea that they might have to go before locally elected judges and juries to assert their legal claims.  Juries made up of locals would likely support the interests of locals.

Instead, the new ordinance established that the territory governed in three separate stages.  In the first stage, a secretary, and three judges, all appointed by Congress, would govern.  The second state would kick in once the population exceeded 5000 adult males.  At that point, locals could vote for a lower house, but Congress would still appoint the governor and the rest of the executive and judicial branches, as well as an upper house in the legislature.  Once the population reached 60,000, the people’s representatives could write a state constitution and petition Congress for statehood.  Only when Congress agreed to the constitution would statehood be granted and the local population would have the full rights as states on an equal footing with the original 13 states.

The ordinance also guaranteed certain basic rights for all inhabitants.  This included the freedom of religion, habeas corpus, trial by jury, due process of law, a prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments, protection of private contracts, and the free use of the waterways. There was an assurance that the government could not take private property without compensation, other than normal taxes that were similar to those paid by people in the original states.  The law also provided for free public education, banned slavery and involuntary servitude, and guaranteed that the new states would have a republican form of government.

The new law retained the grid system that had been set up in 1785, where each township would be divided into 36 grids of 640 acres each.  However, it did not attempt to set up territorial or state borders within the territory.  Instead, it simply decreed that the whole territory eventually would be divided into at least three, but no more than five states.  Until it was large enough to be subdivided, it would be governed as a single territory.

After considerable debate, Congress finally passed the Northwest Ordinance on July 13, 1787.  Only one member of Congress voted against it. Abraham Yates was concerned that the movement into this territory would set off a series of wars with the Indians.

Congress further authorized the Board of Treasury to negotiate with the Ohio Company to come up with acceptable terms.  This eventually led to the sale of 1.5 million acres for $1 million in depreciated currency, with only half paid up front, along with the 3.5 million acre option, just as the Company wanted.

Even with the deal in place, Congress did not receive the Ohio Company’s first payment until October, 1787. The Ohio Company began selling preferred lots of land, at first to insiders, for $10 per acre.

Settlement of the land would begin in 1788 when Rufus Putnam led a group of 48 New England settlers to establish what would become Marietta, Ohio. This settlement, on the north side of the Ohio River, directly across from a military outpost built on the southern bank.  

Arthur St. Clair, who had been president of Congress when the ordinance passed, received appointment as the first governor of the Northwest Territory in October, 1787.  He made his way to Marietta to assume governance of the new territory.  The initial settlers arrived in April 1788. St. Clair arrived in July.  The following month, the town of Cincinnati was established. That was where St. Clair made his home.

Next week, the nation’s leaders begin the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

- - -

Next Episode 345 Constitutional Convention Begins (coming soon)

Previous Episode 343 Shays' Rebellion

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on Twitter @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 
 
Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://americanrevolutionpodcast.dashery.com


American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20) or Zelle (send to mtroy1@yahoo.com)


Click here to see my Patreon Page
You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Help Support this podcast on "BuyMeACoffee.com"


Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!





Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Further Reading

Websites

Northwest Ordinance https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/northwest-ordinance

Northwest Ordinance (1787) [full text of ordinance]: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/northwest-ordinance

Berkhofer, Robert F. “Americans versus Indians: The Northwest Ordinance, Territory Making, and Native Americans.” Indiana Magazine of History, vol. 84, no. 1, 1988, pp. 90–108. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27791142

HEGRENESS, MATTHEW J. “An Organic Law Theory of the Fourteenth Amendment: The Northwest Ordinance as the Source of Rights, Privileges, and Immunities.” The Yale Law Journal, vol. 120, no. 7, 2011, pp. 1820–84. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41149580

Hill, Robert S. “Federalism, Republicanism, and the Northwest Ordinance.” Publius, vol. 18, no. 4, 1988, pp. 41–52. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3330332

Hulbert, Archer Butler. “The Methods and Operations of the Scioto Group of Speculators.” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 2, no. 1, 1915, pp. 56–73. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1889105

Witgen, Michael. “A Nation of Settlers: The Early American Republic and the Colonization of the Northwest Territory.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 76, no. 3, 2019, pp. 391–98. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.5309/willmaryquar.76.3.0391

Background Information: Historical Information: Ohio Company of Associates https://library.marietta.edu/c.php?g=693159&p=4910822

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

The records of the original proceedings of the Ohio company, Marietta Historical Commission, 1917. 

Laws of the territory of the United States northwest of the river Ohio: adopted and published at a session of the legislature begun in the town of Cincinnati, Edmund Freeman, 1798. 

Cutler, Julia P. The founders of Ohio: brief sketches of the forty-eight pioneers, Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Co. 1888. 

Cutler, William P. Life, Journals and Correspondence of Rev. Manasseh Cutler, LL. D, Vol. 1, Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Co. 1888. 

Dawes, E.C. The beginning of the Ohio Company, Cincinnati: Peter G. Thompson, 1882. 

Hulbert, Archer B. “The Methods and Operations of the Scioto Group of Speculators” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review. Part 1 and Part 2, 1915.

Jarrold, Rachel Marian Arthur St. Clair: Governor of the Northwest Territory 1787-1802, Univ. of Illinois (Master’s Thesis) 1909. 

Phillips, Philip Lee The first map and description of Ohio, 1787 by Manasseh Cutler, Washington: W.H. Lowdermilk & Co. 1918. 

Taylor, Robert M. (ed) The Northwest Ordinance, 1787: A Bicentennial Handbook, Indiana Historical Society, 1987.

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Alexander, Robert The Northwest Ordinance: Constitutional Politics and the Theft of Native Land, Mcfarland, 2017. 

Lindley, Harlow (ed) History of the Ordinance of 1787 and the Old Northwest Territory, Kesseinger Publishing, 1937 (borrow on archive.org). 

Onuf, Peter S. Statehood and Union: A History of the Northwest Ordinance, Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1987 (borrow on archive.org

Sakolski, Aaron Land Tenure and Land Taxation in America, Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, 1957 (available on cooperative-individualism.org).

Taylor, Robert M. The Northwest Ordinance, 1787: A Bicentennial Handbook, Indiana Historical Society, 1987 (borrow on archive.org). 

Williams, Frederick D. (ed) The Northwest Ordinance: Essays on its Formulation, Provisions, and Legacy, Michigan State Univ. Press, 1989 (borrow on Archive.org). 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.