University of Virginia Library

TO NOAH WEBSTER.[20]

I received, during a visit to my farm, your letter
of Aug. 20, and hoped that I should, in that situation,
find leisure to give it as full an answer as my
memory and my papers would warrant. An unforeseen

pressure of public business, with a particular
one of private business interesting to others as well
as to myself, having disappointed me, I find myself
under the necessity of substituting the few brief
remarks which return to the occupations of this
place, and the absence of my papers, will admit.

I had observed, as you have done, that a great
number of loose assertions have at different times
been made with respect to the origin of the reform
in our system of federal government, and that this
has particularly happened on the late occasion
which so strongly excited the effusions of party and
personal zeal for the fame of Gen. Hamilton.

The change in our government like most other
important improvements ought to be ascribed
rather to a series of causes than to any particular
and sudden one, and to the participation of many,
rather than to the efforts of a single agent. It is
certain that the general idea of revising and enlarging
the scope of the federal authority, so as to answer
the necessary purposes of the Union, grew up in many
minds, and by natural degrees, during the experienced
inefficacy of the old confederation. The
discernment of Gen. Hamilton must have rendered

him an early patron of the idea. That the public
attention was called to it by yourself at an early
period is well known.

In common with others, I derived from my service
in the old Congress during the latter stages of the
Revolutionary war, a deep impression of the necessity
of invigorating the federal authority. I
carried this impression with me into the legislature of
Virginia; where, in the year 1784, if my recollection
does not fail me, Mr. Henry co-operated with me
and others in certain resolutions calculated to
strengthen the hands of Congress.

In 1785, I made a proposition with success in the
legislature of the same state, for the appointment
of commissioners to meet at Annapolis such commissioners
as might be appointed by other states,
in order to form some plan for investing Congress
with the regulation and taxation of commerce.[21]
This I presume to be the proceeding which gave you
the impression that the first proposal of the present
constitution was then made. It is possible that
something more might have been the subject of
conversation, or may have been suggested in debate,
but I am induced to believe that the meeting at
Annapolis was all that was regularly proposed at
that session. I would have consulted the journals
of it, but they were either lost or mislaid.

Although the step taken by Virginia was followed
by the greater number of the states, the attendance
at Annapolis was both so tardy and so deficient, that

nothing was done on the subject immediately committed
to the meeting. The consultations took
another turn. The expediency of a more radical
reform than the commissioners had been authorized
to undertake being felt by almost all of them, and
each being fortified in his sentiments and expectations
by those of others, and by the information
gained as to the general preparation of the public
mind, it was concluded to recommend to the states a
meeting at Philadelphia, the ensuing year, of commissioners
with authority to digest and propose a
new and effectual system of government for the
Union. The manner in which this idea rose into
effect, makes it impossible to say with whom it more
particularly originated. I do not even recollect
the member who first proposed it to the body. I
have an indistinct impression that it received its
first formal suggestion from Mr. Abraham Clark
of New Jersey. Mr. Hamilton was certainly the
member who drafted the address.

The legislature of Virginia was the first I believe,
that had an opportunity of taking up the recommendation,
and the first that concurred in it. It
was thought proper to express its concurrence in
terms that would give the example as much weight
and effect as possible; and with the same view to
include in the deputation, the highest characters in
the state, such as the governor and chancellor. The
same policy led to the appointment of Gen. Washington,
who was put at the head of it. It was not
known at the time how far he would lend himself

to the occasion. When the appointment was made
known to him, he manifested a readiness to yield
to the wishes of the legislature, but felt a scruple
from his having signified to the Cincinnati, that he
could not meet them at Philadelphia, near about
the same time, for reasons equally applicable to
the other occasion. Being in correspondence with
him at the time and on the occasion, I pressed him
to step over the difficulty. It is very probable that
he might consult with others, particularly with
Mr. Hamilton, and that their or his exhortations and
arguments may have contributed more than mine
to his final determination.

When the convention as recommended at Annapolis
took place at Philadelphia, the deputies from
Virginia supposed, that as that state had been first
in the successive steps leading to a revision of the
federal system, some introductory propositions might
be expected from them. They accordingly entered
into consultation on the subject, immediately on their
arrival in Philadelphia, and having agreed among
themselves on the outline of a plan, it was laid before
the convention by Mr. Randolph, at that time
governor of the state, as well as member of the convention.
This project was the basis of its deliberations;
and after passing through a variety of changes
in its important as well as its lesser features, was
developed and amended into the form finally agreed
to.

I am afraid that this sketch will fall much short
of the object of your letter. Under more favorable

circumstances, I might have made it more particular.
I have often had it in idea to make out from the
materials in my hands, and within my reach, as
minute a chronicle as I could, of the origin and
progress of the last revolution in our government.
I went through such a task with respect to the
declaration of independence, and the old confederation,
whilst a member of Congress in 1783; availing
myself of all the circumstances to be gleaned from
the public archives, and from some auxiliary
sources. To trace in like manner a chronicle or
rather a history of our present constitution, would
in several points of view be still more curious and
interesting; and fortunately the materials for it are
far more extensive, Whether I shall ever be able
to make such a contribution to the annals of our
country, is rendered every day more and more
uncertain.

I will only add that on the slight view which I
have taken of the subject to which you have been
pleased to invite my recollections, it is to be understood,
that in confining myself so much to the
proceedings of Virginia, and to the agency of a
few individuals, no exclusion of other states or persons
is to be implied, whose share in the transactions
of the period may be unknown to me.