Chapter II

1775-1776.

THE SECOND CONTINENTAL CONGRESS.--FORMATION AND CHARACTER OF THE REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT.--APPOINTMENT OF A COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF.--FIRST ARMY OF THE REVOLUTION.

A new Continental Congress assembled at Philadelphia on the 10th of May, 1775; and in order to observe the growth of the Union, it is necessary to trace the organization of this body, and to describe briefly the kind of sovereignty which it exercised, from the time of its assembling until the adoption and promulgation of the Declaration of Independence.[24]

The delegates to this Congress were chosen partly by the popular branch of such of the colonial legislatures as were in session at the time, the choice being afterwards ratified by conventions of the people; but they were principally appointed by conventions of the people held in the various colonies. All these appointments, except those made in New York, took place before the battle of Lexington, and most of them had been made in the course of the previous winter.[25] The credentials of the delegates, therefore, while they conferred authority to adopt measures to recover and establish American rights, still expressed, in many instances, a desire for the restoration of harmony between Great Britain and her colonies. In some cases, however, this desire was not expressed, but a naked authority was granted, to consent and agree to all such measures as the Congress should deem necessary and effectual to obtain a redress of American grievances.

When this Congress assembled, it seems to have been tacitly assumed that each colony should continue to have one vote through its delegation actually present. All the thirteen colonies were represented at the opening of the session, except Georgia and Rhode Island. Three days after the session commenced, a delegate appeared from the Parish of St. Johns in Georgia, who was admitted to a seat, but did not claim the right of voting for the colony. On the 15th of May, a delegation from Rhode Island appeared and took their seats.

The credentials of the delegates contained no limitation of their powers with respect to time, with the exception of those from Massachusetts and South Carolina, whose authority was not to extend beyond the end of the year. The Congress continued in session until the 1st of August, and then adjourned for a recess to the 5th of September. When they were again assembled, the delegations of several of the colonies were renewed, with different limitations as to their time of service. Georgia sent a full delegation, who took their seats on the 13th of September. Still later, the delegations of several other colonies were renewed from time to time, and this practice was pursued both before and after the Declaration of Independence, thus rendering the Congress a permanent body.[26]

Notwithstanding the absence of any express authority in their instructions to enter upon revolutionary measures, the circumstances under which the Congress assembled placed it in the position and cast upon it the powers of a revolutionary government. Civil war had actually commenced, and blood had been shed. Whether this war was to be carried on for independence, or was only to be waged until the British ministry could be compelled to acknowledge the rights which the colonies had asserted, the Congress necessarily became, at once, the organ of the common resistance of the colonies against the parent state. The first thing which evinces its new relation to the country was the application made to it by the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, immediately after the battle of Lexington, for direction and assistance. While they informed the Continental Congress that they had proceeded, at once, to raise a force of thirteen thousand six hundred men, and had made proposals to the other New England colonies to furnish men in the same proportions, stating that the sudden exigency of their affairs precluded the possibility of waiting for direction, they suggested that an American army ought forthwith to be raised for the common cause.[27] In the same manner, the city and county of New York applied for the advice of Congress, how to conduct themselves with regard to the British troops expected in that quarter. These applications caused the Congress at once to resolve itself into a committee of the whole, to take into consideration the state of America.[28]

These proceedings were soon followed by another application on the part of the Provincial Convention of Massachusetts, setting forth the difficulties under which they were laboring for want of a regular form of government; requesting explicit advice respecting the formation of a new government; and offering to submit to such a general plan as the Congress might direct for the colonies, or to endeavor to form such a government for themselves as should not only promote their own advantage, but the union and interest of the whole country.[29]

Placed in this manner at the head of American affairs, the Continental Congress proceeded, at once, to put the country into a state of defence, and virtually assumed a control over the military operations of all the colonies. They appointed committees to prepare reports on military measures: first, to recommend what posts should be occupied in the city of New York; secondly, to devise ways and means for procuring ammunition and military stores; thirdly, to make an estimate of the moneys necessary to be raised; and fourthly, to prepare rules and regulations for the government of the army.

They then proceeded to create a continental, or national army. To the battle of Lexington had succeeded the investment of Boston, by an army composed of regiments raised by the New England provinces, under the command of General Ward of Massachusetts. This army was adopted by the Congress; and, with other forces raised for the common defence, became known and designated as the American Continental Army.[30] Six companies of riflemen were ordered to be immediately raised in Pennsylvania, two in Maryland, and two in Virginia, and directed to join the army near Boston, and to be paid by the continent.[31]

On the 15th of June, 1775, Colonel George Washington, one of the delegates in Congress from Virginia, was unanimously chosen to be commander-in-chief of the continental forces.[32] Having accepted the appointment, he received from the Congress a commission, together with a resolution by which they pledged their lives and fortunes to maintain, assist, and adhere to him in his great office, and a letter of instructions, in which they charged him to make it his special care, "that the liberties of America receive no detriment."[33] In the commission given to the general, the style of "the United Colonies" was for the first time adopted, and the defence of American Liberty was assumed as the great object of their union.[34] On the 21st of June, Washington left Philadelphia to take command of the army, and arrived at Cambridge in Massachusetts on the 2d of July. Four major-generals and eight brigadier-generals were also appointed by the Congress for the continental army; rules and regulations for its government were adopted and proclaimed, and the pay of the officers and privates was fixed.[35]

The Congress also proceeded, as the legislative authority of the United Colonies, to create a continental currency, in order to defray the expenses of the war. This was done by issuing two millions of dollars, in bills of credit, for the redemption of which the faith of the confederated colonies was pledged. A quota of this sum was apportioned to each colony, and each colony was made liable to discharge its proportion of the whole, but the United Colonies were obligated to pay any part which either of the colonies should fail to discharge.[36] The first of these quotas was made payable in four, the second in five, the third in six, and the fourth in seven years from the last day of November, 1775, and the provincial assemblies or conventions were required, by the resolves of the Congress, to provide taxes in their respective provinces or colonies, to discharge their several quotas.[37] The Congress also directed reprisals to be made, both by public and private armed vessels, against the ships and goods of the inhabitants of Great Britain found on the high seas, or between high and low water-mark; this being a measure of retaliation against an act of Parliament, which had authorized the capture and condemnation of American vessels, and which was considered equivalent to a declaration of war. They also threw open the ports of the United Colonies to all the world, except the dominions and dependencies of Great Britain.

Further, they established a general Treasury Department, by the appointment of two joint Treasurers of the United Colonies, who were required to give bonds for the faithful performance of the duties of their office,[38] and they organized a general Post-Office, by the appointment of a Postmaster-General for the United Colonies, to hold his office at Philadelphia, to appoint deputies, and to establish a line of posts from Falmouth in Massachusetts to Savannah in Georgia, with such cross posts as he should judge proper.[39]

The proceedings of the Congress on the subject of the Militia were, of course, in the nature of recommendations only. They advised the arming and training of the militia of New York, in May, 1775,[40] and in July they recommended to all the colonies to enroll all the able-bodied, effective men among their inhabitants, between sixteen and fifty years of age, and to form them into proper regiments.[41] The powers of the Congress to call into the field the militia thus embodied were considered to be subject to the consent of those exercising the executive powers of government in the colony, for the time being.[42]

The relations of the country with the Indian tribes and nations were deemed to be properly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress. Three departments of Indian Affairs, Northern, Southern, and Middle, with separate commissioners for each, were therefore established in July, having power to treat with the Indians in the name and on behalf of the United Colonies.[43] Negotiations and treaties were entered into by these departments, and all affairs with the Indians were conducted by them, under the direction and authority of the Congress.[44]

With regard to those inhabitants of the country who adhered to the royalist side of the controversy, the Congress of 1775-6 did not assume and exercise directly the powers of arrest or restraint, but left the exercise of such powers to the provincial assemblies, or conventions, and committees of safety, in the respective colonies, with recommendations from time to time as to the mode in which such powers ought to be exercised.[45]

Besides all this, the different applications made to the Congress by the people of Massachusetts,[46] of New Hampshire,[47] of Virginia,[48] and of South Carolina, concerning the proper exercise of the powers of government in those colonies, and the answers to those applications, furnish very important illustrations of the position in which the Congress were placed. To the people of Massachusetts, they declared that no obedience was due to the act of Parliament for altering their charter, and that, as the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor would not observe the directions of that instrument, but had endeavored to subvert it, their offices ought to be considered vacant; and, as the Council was actually vacant, in order to conform as near as might be to the spirit and substance of the charter, they recommended to the Provincial Convention to write letters to the inhabitants of the several towns entitled to representation in the Assembly, requesting them to choose representatives, and requesting the Assembly when chosen to elect councillors; adding their wish, that these bodies should exercise the powers of government until a Governor of the King's appointment would consent to govern the colony according to its charter.[49] The Provincial Conventions of New Hampshire, Virginia, and South Carolina were advised to call a full and free representation of the people, in order to establish such a form of government as, in their judgment, would best promote the happiness of the people and most effectually secure peace and good order in their Provinces, during the continuance of the dispute with Great Britain.[50] This advice manifestly contemplated the establishment of provisional governments only.

But between the date of these last proceedings and the following spring a marked change took place, both in the expectations and wishes of the people of most of the colonies, with regard to an accommodation of the great controversy. The last petition of the Congress to the King was refused a hearing in Parliament, as emanating from an unlawful assembly, in arms against their sovereign. In November, the town of Falmouth in Massachusetts was bombarded and destroyed by the King's cruisers. In the latter part of December, an act was passed in Parliament, prohibiting all trade and commerce with the colonies; warranting the capture and condemnation of all American vessels, with their cargoes, and authorizing the commanders of the King's ships to compel the masters, crews, and other persons found in such vessels, to enter the King's service. The act also empowered the King to appoint commissioners, with authority to grant pardon, on submission, to individuals and to colonies, and after such submission to exempt them from its operation.[51] Great preparations were made to reduce the colonies to the submission required by this act, and a part of the troops that were to be employed were foreign mercenaries.

The necessity of a complete separation from the mother country, and the establishment of independent governments, had, therefore, in the winter of 1775-6, become apparent to the people of America. Accordingly, the Congress, asserting it to be irreconcilable to reason and good conscience for the people of the colonies any longer to take the oaths and affirmations necessary for the support of any government under the crown of Great Britain, and declaring that the exercise of every kind of authority under that crown ought to be suppressed, and a government of the people of the colonies substituted in its place, recommended to the respective assemblies and conventions of the colonies, where no government sufficient for the exigencies of their affairs had been already established, to adopt such a government as in the opinion of the representatives of the people would best conduce to the happiness and safety of their constituents and of America in general.[52]

* * * * *

It is apparent, therefore, that, previously to the Declaration of Independence, the people of the several colonies had established a national government of a revolutionary character, which undertook to act, and did act, in the name and with the general consent of the inhabitants of the country. This government was established by the union, in one body, of delegates representing the people of each colony; who, after they had thus united for national purposes, proceeded, in their respective jurisdictions, by means of conventions and other temporary arrangements, to provide for their domestic concerns by the establishment of local governments, which should be the successors of that authority of the British crown which they had "everywhere suppressed." The fact that these local or state governments were not formed until a union of the people of the different colonies for national purposes had already taken place, and until the national power had authorized and recommended their establishment, is of great importance in the constitutional history of this country; for it shows that no colony, acting separately for itself, dissolved its own allegiance to the British crown, but that this allegiance was dissolved by the supreme authority of the people of all the colonies, acting through their general agent, the Congress, and not only declaring that the authority of Great Britain ought to be suppressed, but recommending that each colony should supplant that authority by a local government, to be framed by and for the people of the colony itself.

The powers exercised by the Congress, before the Declaration of Independence, show, therefore, that its functions were those of a revolutionary government. It is a maxim of political science, that, when such a government has been instituted for the accomplishment of great purposes of public safety, its powers are limited only by the necessities of the case out of which they have arisen, and of the objects for which they were to be exercised. When the acts of such a government are acquiesced in by the people, they are presumed to have been ratified by the people. To the case of our Revolution, these principles are strictly applicable, throughout. The Congress assumed, at once, the exercise of all the powers demanded by the public exigency, and their exercise of those powers was fully acquiesced in and confirmed by the people. It does not at all detract from the authoritative character of their acts, nor diminish the real powers of the Revolutionary Congress, that it was obliged to rely on local bodies for the execution of most of its orders, or that it couched many of those orders in the form of recommendations. They were complied with and executed, in point of fact, by the provincial congresses, conventions, and local committees, to such an extent as fully to confirm the revolutionary powers of the Congress, as the guardians of the rights and liberties of the country. But we shall see, in the further progress of the history of the Congress, that while its powers remained entirely revolutionary, and were consequently coextensive with the great national objects to be accomplished, the want of the proper machinery of civil government and of independent agents of its own rendered it wholly incapable of wielding those powers successfully.

* * * * *

NOTE TO PAGE 33.

ON WASHINGTON'S APPOINTMENT AS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF.

The circumstances which attended the appointment of
Washington to this great command are now quite well known. He
had been a member of the Congress of 1774, and his military
experience and accomplishments, and the great resources of
his character, had caused his appointment on all the
committees charged with making preparations for the defence
of the colonies. Returned as a delegate from Virginia to the
Congress of 1775, his personal qualifications pointed him out
as the fittest person in the whole country to be invested
with the command of any army which the United Colonies might
see fit to raise; and it is quite certain that there would
have been no hesitation about the appointment, if some
political considerations had not been suggested as obstacles.
At the moment when the choice was to be made, the scene of
actual operations was in Massachusetts, where an army
composed of troops wholly raised by the New England colonies,
and under the command of General Ward, of that Province, was
besieging the enemy in Boston. This army was to be adopted by
the Congress into the service of the continent, and serious
doubts were entertained by some of the members of the
Congress as to the policy of appointing a Southern general to
the command of it, and a good deal of delicacy was felt on
account of General Ward, who, it was thought, might consider
himself injured by such an appointment. On the other hand,
there were strong reasons for selecting a general-in-chief
from Virginia. That colony had taken the lead, among the
Southern provinces, in the cause of the continent, and the
appointment seemed to be due to her, if it was to be made
upon political considerations. The motives for this policy
were deemed sufficient to outweigh the objections arising
from the character and situation of the army which the
general would, in the first instance, have to command. But
after all, it cannot be doubted, that the preëminent
qualifications of Washington had far more weight with the
majority of the Congress, than any dictates of mere policy,
between one part of the Union and another, or any local
jealousies or sectional ambition.

Mr. John Adams, whose recently published autobiography
contains some statements on this subject, speaks of the
existence of a Southern party against a Northern, and a
jealousy against a New England army under the command of a
New England general, which, he says, he discovered after the
Congress had been some time in session, and after the
necessity of having an army and a general had become a topic
of conversation. (Works, II. 415.) In a letter, also, written
by Mr. Adams in 1822 to Timothy Pickering, he states that, on
the journey to Philadelphia, he and a party of his
colleagues, the delegates from Massachusetts to this
Congress, were met at Frankfort by Dr. Rush, Mr. Mifflin, Mr.
Bayard, and others of the Philadelphia patriots, who desired
a conference with them; that, in this conference, the
Philadelphia gentlemen strongly advised the Massachusetts
delegates not to come forward with bold measures, or to
endeavor to take the lead; and represented that Virginia was
the most populous State in the Union, proud of its ancient
dominions, and that "they [the Virginians] think they have a
right to take the lead, and the Southern States, and the
Middle States, too, are too much disposed to yield it to
them."

"I must confess," says Mr. Adams, "that there appeared so
much wisdom and good sense in this, that it made a deep
impression on my mind, and it had an equal effect on all my
colleagues." "This conversation," he continues, "and the
principles, facts, and motives suggested in it, have given a
color, complexion, and character to the whole policy of the
United States from that day to this. _Without it, Mr.
Washington would never have commanded our armies_; nor Mr.
Jefferson have been the author of the Declaration of
Independence; nor Mr. Richard Henry Lee the mover of it; nor
Mr. Chase the mover of foreign connections. _If I have ever
had cause to repent of any part of this policy, that
repentance ever has been and ever will be unavailing._ I had
forgot to say, nor had Mr. Johnson ever have been the
nominator of Washington for general." (Works, II. 512, 513.)

Without impeaching the accuracy of Mr. Adams's recollection,
on the score of his age when this letter was written, and
without considering here how or why Mr. Jefferson came to be
the author of the Declaration of Independence, it is believed
that Mr. Adams states other facts, in his autobiography,
sufficient to show that motives of policy towards Virginia
were _not_ the sole or the principal reasons why Washington
was elected general. Mr. Adams states in his autobiography,
that at the time when he observed the professed jealousy of
the South against a New England army under the command of a
Northern general, it was very visible to him "that Colonel
Washington was their object"; "and," he adds, "so many of our
stanchest men were in the plan, that we could carry nothing
without conceding it." (Works, II. 415.) When Mr. Adams came,
as he afterwards did, to put himself at the head of this
movement, and to propose in Congress that the army at
Cambridge should be adopted, and that a general should be
appointed, he referred directly to Washington as the person
whom he had in his mind, and spoke of him as "a gentleman
from Virginia who was among us and very well known to all of
us, a gentleman whose skill and experience as an officer,
whose independent fortune, great talents, and excellent
universal character, would command the approbation of all
America, and unite the cordial exertions of all the colonies
better than any other person in the Union. Mr. Washington,
who happened to sit near the door, as soon as he heard me
allude to him, from his usual modesty, darted into the
library-room." (Works, II. 417.) It is quite clear,
therefore, that Mr. Adams put the appointment of Washington,
in public, upon his qualifications and character, known all
over the Union. He further states, that the subject came
under debate, and that nobody opposed the appointment of
Washington on account of any personal objection to him; and
the only objection which he mentions as having been raised,
was on the ground that the army near Boston was all from New
England, and that they had a general of their own, with whom
they were entirely satisfied. He mentions one of the Virginia
delegates, Mr. Pendleton, as concurring in this objection;
that Mr. Sherman of Connecticut and Mr. Cushing of
Massachusetts also concurred in it, and that Mr. Paine of
Massachusetts expressed strong personal friendship for
General Ward, but gave no opinion upon the question.
Afterwards, he says, the subject being postponed to a future
day, "pains were taken out of doors to obtain a unanimity,
and the voices were generally so clearly in favor of
Washington, that the dissentient members were persuaded to
withdraw their opposition, and Mr. Washington was nominated,
I believe, by Mr. Thomas Johnson of Maryland, unanimously
elected, and the army adopted." (Ibid.)

It is worth while to inquire, therefore, what were the
controlling reasons, which so easily and so soon produced
this striking unanimity. If it was brought about mainly by
the exertions of a Southern against a Northern party, and by
the yielding of Northern men to the Virginians from motives
of policy, it would not have been accomplished with so much
facility, although even a Washington were the candidate of
Virginia. Sectional jealousies and sectional parties inflame
each other; the struggles which they cause are protracted;
and the real merits of men and things are lost sight of in
the passions which they arouse. If policy, as a leading or a
principal motive, gave to General Washington the great body
of the Northern votes, there would have been more
dissentients from that policy than any of the accounts
authorize us to suppose there were, at any moment, while the
subject was under consideration. Nor does the previous
conduct of Virginia warrant the belief, that her subsequent
exertions in the cause of American liberty were mainly
purchased by the honors bestowed upon her great men, or by so
much of precedence as was yielded in the public councils to
the unquestionable abilities of her statesmen. Some of them
had undoubtedly been in favor of measures of conciliation to
a late period; and some of them, as Washington, Patrick
Henry, and Richard Henry Lee, had been, from an early period,
convinced that the sword must decide the controversy. They
were perhaps as much divided upon this point, until the army
at Boston was adopted, as the leading men of other colonies.
But when the necessity of that measure became apparent, it
was the peculiar happiness of Virginia to be able to present
to the country, as a general, a man whose character and
qualifications threw all local and political objects at once
into the shade. In order to form a correct judgment, at the
present day, of the motives which must have produced a
unanimity so remarkable and so prompt, we have only to
recollect the previous history of Washington, as it was known
to the Congress, at the moment when he shrank from the
mention of his name in that assembly.

He was forty-three years of age. From early youth, he had had
a training that eminently fitted him for the great part which
he was afterwards to play, and which unfolded the singular
capacities of his character to meet the extraordinary
emergencies of the post to which he was subsequently called.
That training had been both in military and in civil life.
His military career had been one of much activity and
responsibility, and had embraced several brilliant
achievements. In 1751, it became necessary to put the militia
of Virginia in a condition to defend the frontiers against
the French and the Indians. The province was divided into
military districts, in each of which an adjutant-general,
with the rank of major, was commissioned to drill and inspect
the militia. Washington, at the age of nineteen, received the
appointment to one of these districts; and in the following
year, the province was again divided into four grand military
divisions, of which the northern was assigned to him as
adjutant-general. In 1753, the French crossed the lakes, to
establish posts on the Ohio, and were joined by the Indians.
Major Washington was sent by the Governor of Virginia to warn
them to retire. This expedition was one of difficulty and of
delicacy. He crossed the Alleghany Mountains, reached the
Ohio, had interviews with the French commander and the
Indians, and returned to Williamsburg to make report to the
Governor. Of this journey, full of perilous adventures and
narrow escapes, he kept a journal, which was published by the
Governor; was copied into most of the newspapers of the other
colonies; and was reprinted in London, as a document of much
importance, exhibiting the views and designs of the French.
In 1754, he was appointed, with the rank of
lieutenant-colonel, second in command of the provincial
troops raised by the Legislature to repel the French
invasion. On the first encounter with a party of the enemy
under Jumonville, on the 28th of May, 1754, the chief command
devolved on Washington, in the absence of his superior. The
French leader was killed, and most of his party were taken
prisoners. Washington commanded also at the battle of the
Great Meadows, and received a vote of thanks for his services
from the House of Burgesses. This was in 1754, when he was at
the age of twenty-two. During the next year, in consequence
of the effect of some new arrangement of the provincial
troops, he was reduced from the rank of colonel to that of
captain, and thereupon retired from the army, with the
consolation that he had received the thanks of his country
for the services he had rendered. In 1755, he consented to
serve as aide-de-camp to General Braddock, who had arrived
from England with two regiments of regular troops. In this
capacity he served in the battle of the Monongahela with much
distinction. The two other aids were wounded and disabled
early in the action, and the duty of distributing the
General's orders devolved wholly upon Washington. It was in
this battle that he acquired with the Indians the reputation
of being under the special protection of the Great Spirit,
because he escaped the aim of many of their rifles, although
two horses were shot under him, and his dress was perforated
by four bullets. His conduct on this occasion became known
and celebrated throughout the country; and when he retired to
Mount Vernon, as he did soon after, at the age of
three-and-twenty, he not only carried with him a decisive
reputation for personal bravery, but he was known to have
given advice to Braddock, before the action, which all men
saw, after it, would, if it had been duly heeded, have
prevented his defeat. But he was not allowed to remain long
in retirement. In August, 1755, he was appointed
commander-in-chief of all the provincial forces of Virginia,
and immediately entered upon the duties of reorganizing the
old and raising new troops, in the course of which he visited
all the outposts along the frontier. Soon afterwards, a
dispute about rank having arisen with a person who claimed to
take precedence of provincial officers because he had
formerly held the King's commission, it became necessary for
Colonel Washington to make a visit to Boston, in order to
have the point decided by General Shirley, the
commander-in-chief of his Majesty's armies in America. He
commenced his journey on the 4th of February, 1756, and
passed through Philadelphia, New York, New London, Newport,
and Providence, and visited the Governors of Pennsylvania and
New York. In all the principal cities his character, and his
remarkable escape at Braddock's defeat, made him the object
of a strong public interest. At Boston, he was received with
marked distinction by General Shirley and by the whole
society of the town, and the question of rank was decided
according to his wishes. General Shirley explained to him the
intended operations of the next campaign; and, after an
absence from Virginia of seven weeks, he returned to resume
his command. The next three years were spent in the duties of
this laborious and responsible position, the difficulties and
embarrassments of which bore a strong resemblance to those
which he afterwards had to encounter in the war of the
Revolution. In 1758, he commanded the Virginia troops in the
expedition against Fort Duquesne, under General Forbes. Great
deference was paid by that officer to his opinions and
judgment, in arranging the line of march and order of battle,
on this important expedition; for the fate of Braddock was
before him. The command of the advanced division, consisting
of one thousand men, was assigned to him, with the temporary
rank of brigadier. When the army had approached within fifty
miles of Fort Duquesne, the French deserted it; its
surrender to the English closed the campaign; and in December
Washington resigned his commission, and retired to Mount
Vernon. What he had been, and what he then was, to the Colony
of Virginia, is shown by the Address presented to him by the
officers of the provincial troops, on his retirement. "In our
earliest infancy," said they, "you took us under your
tuition, trained us up in the practice of that discipline
which alone can constitute good troops, from the punctual
observance of which you never suffered the least deviation.
Your steady adherence to impartial justice, your quick
discernment, and invariable regard to merit, wisely intended
to inculcate those genuine sentiments of true honor and
passion for glory, from which the greatest military
achievements have been derived, first heightened our natural
emulation and our desire to excel. How much we improved by
those regulations and your own example, with what alacrity we
have hitherto discharged our duty, with what cheerfulness we
have encountered the severest toils, especially while under
your particular directions, we submit to yourself, and
flatter ourselves that we have in a great measure answered
your expectations.... It gives us additional sorrow, when we
reflect, to find our unhappy country will receive a loss no
less irreparable than our own. Where will it meet a man so
experienced in military affairs, one so renowned for
patriotism, conduct, and courage? Who has so great a
knowledge of the enemy we have to deal with? Who so well
acquainted with their situation and strength? Who so much
respected by the soldiery? Who, in short, so able to support
the military character of Virginia? Your approved love to
your King and country, and your uncommon perseverance in
promoting the honor and true interest of the service,
convince us that the most cogent reasons only could induce
you to quit it; yet we, with the greatest deference, presume
to entreat you to suspend those thoughts for another year,
and to lead us on to assist in the glorious work of
extirpating our enemies, towards which so considerable
advances have already been made. In you we place the most
implicit confidence. Your presence only will cause a steady
firmness and vigor to actuate every breast, despising the
greatest dangers, and thinking light of toils and hardships,
while led on by the man we know and love. But if we must be
so unhappy as to part, if the exigencies of your affairs
force you to abandon us, we beg it as our last request, that
you will recommend some person most capable to command, whose
military knowledge, whose honor, whose conduct, and whose
disinterested principles we may depend on. Frankness,
sincerity, and a certain openness of soul, are the true
characteristics of an officer, and we flatter ourselves that
you do not think us capable of saying any thing contrary to
the purest dictates of our minds. Fully persuaded of this, we
beg leave to assure you, that, as you have hitherto been the
actuating soul of our whole corps, we shall at all times pay
the most invariable regard to your will and pleasure, and
shall be always happy to demonstrate by our actions with how
much respect and esteem we are," &c.

Washington's marriage took place soon after his resignation
(January 6th, 1759), and his civil life now commenced. He had
been elected a member of the House of Burgesses, before the
close of the campaign, and in the course of the winter he
took his seat. Upon this occasion, his inability, from
confusion and modesty, to reply to a highly eulogistic
address made to him by the Speaker, Mr. Robinson, drew from
that gentleman the celebrated compliment, "Sit down, Mr.
Washington, your modesty equals your valor, and that
surpasses the power of any language that I possess." He
continued a member of the House of Burgesses until the
commencement of the Revolution, a period of fifteen years. He
was not a frequent speaker; but his sound judgment, quick
perception, and firmness and sincerity of character, gave him
an influence which the habit of much speaking does not give,
and which is often denied to eloquence. As the time drew
near, when the controversies between the colonies and England
began to assume a threatening aspect, he was naturally found
with Henry, Randolph, Lee, Wythe, and Mason, and the other
patriotic leaders of the colonies. His views concerning the
policy of the non-importation agreements were early formed
and made known. In 1769, he took charge of the Articles of
Association, drawn by Mr. Mason, which were intended to bring
about a concert of action between all the colonies, for the
purpose of presenting them to the Assembly, of which Mr.
Mason was not a member. In 1774, he was chosen a member of
the first Virginia Convention, and was by that body elected a
delegate to the first Continental Congress, where he was
undoubtedly the most conspicuous person present. The second
Virginia Convention met in March, 1775, and reflected the
former delegates to the second Continental Congress, from
which Washington was removed by his appointment as
Commander-in-chief.

There can be no doubt, therefore, that Washington was chosen
Commander-in-chief for his unquestionable merits, and not as
a compromise between sectional interests and local
jealousies.

(The authorities for the statements in this note concerning
Washington's history are the biographies by Marshall and
Sparks, and the Writings of Washington, edited by the
latter.)

FOOTNOTES:

[24] Peyton Randolph, President of the first and reëlected President of the second Congress, died very suddenly at Philadelphia on the 22d of October, 1775, and was succeeded in that office by John Hancock. Mr. Randolph was one of the most eminent of the Virginia patriots, and an intimate friend of Washington. Richard Henry Lee wrote to Washington, on the day after his death, that "in him American liberty lost a powerful advocate, and human nature a sincere friend." He was formerly Attorney-General of Virginia, and in 1753 went to England as agent of the House of Burgesses, to procure the abolition of a fee, known as the pistole fee, which it had been the custom of the Governors of Virginia to charge for signing land patents, as a perquisite of their office. He succeeded in getting the fee abolished in cases where the quantity of land exceeded one hundred acres. He was commander of a company of mounted volunteers called the Gentlemen Associators, who served in the French war. He was President of the Virginia Convention, as well as a Delegate in Congress, at the time of his death. Sparks's Washington, II. 58, 161; III. 139, 140; XII. 420.

[25] In Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, they were made in December; in Connecticut, in November; in New Jersey, in January; in South Carolina, in February; in the Lower Counties on Delaware and in Virginia, in March; in North Carolina, on the 5th of April; and in New York, on the 22d of April.

[26] Virginia renewed her delegation for one year from the 11th of August, 1775, and Maryland hers with powers to act until the 25th of March, 1776. These new delegations, as well as that of Georgia, appeared on the 13th of September, 1775. On the 16th of September, a renewed delegation appeared from New Hampshire, without limitation of time; Connecticut sent a new delegation on the 16th of January, 1776, and Massachusetts did the same on the 31st of January, for the year 1776. The persons of the delegates were not often changed.

[27] Journals, I. 81, 82.

[28] May 15, 1775. Journals, I. 162.

[29] Journals, I. 112.

[30] Form of enlistment, Journals, I. 118.

[31] Ibid.

[32] See note at end of the chapter.

[33] Secret Journals of Congress, I. 18; Pitkin's History of the United States, I. 334, 335.

[34] Journals, I. 122.

[35] June 16-July 4, 1775. Journals, I. 112-133.

[36] Journals, I. 125, June 23, 1775. Ibid., I. 185, July 29, 1775.

[37] Ibid.

[38] Journals, I. 186, July 29, 1775. Michael Hillegas and George Clymer, Esquires, were elected Treasurers.

[39] Journals, I. 177, 178, July 26, 1775. Dr. Franklin was elected Postmaster-General for one year, and until another should be appointed by a future Congress.

[40] Journals, I. 106.

[41] Journals, I. 170.

[42] Journals, I. 285.

[43] Journals, I. 161, 162.

[44] Journals, II. 112, 141, 163, 201, 255, 302, 304.

[45] Journals, I. 213; II. 5.

[46] June 9, 1775.

[47] November 3, 1775.

[48] December 4, 1775.

[49] Journals, I. 115.

[50] Journals, I. 231, 235, 279.

[51] Annual Register.

[52] May 10, 1776. Journals, II. 166, 174.