the fathers of the constitution-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


sponsible　for　others　being　added　to　the　commission。　Adams　was　a　sturdy　New　Englander　of　British　stock　and　of　a　distinctly　English　type　medium　height；　a　stout　figure；　and　a　ruddy　face。　No　one　questioned　his　honesty；　his　straightforwardness；　or　his　lack　of　tact。　Being　a　man　of　strong　mind；　of　wide　reading　and　even　great　learning；　and　having　serene　confidence　in　the　purity　of　his　motives　as　well　as　in　the　soundness　of　his　judgment；　Adams　was　little　inclined　to　surrender　his　own　views；　and　was　ready　to　carry　out　his　ideas　against　every　obstacle。　By　nature　as　well　as　by　training　he　seems　to　have　been　incapable　of　understanding　the　French；　he　was　suspicious　of　them　and　he　disapproved　of　Franklin's　popularity　even　as　he　did　of　his　personality。　Five　Commissioners　in　all　were　named；　but　Thomas　Jefferson　and　Henry　Laurens　did　not　take　part　in　the　negotiations；　so　that　the　only　other　active　member　was　John　Jay；　then　thirty…seven　years　old　and　already　a　man　of　prominence　in　his　own　country。　Of　French　Huguenot　stock　and　type；　he　was　tall　and　slender；　with　somewhat　of　a　scholar's　stoop；　and　was　usually　dressed　in　black。　His　manners　were　gentle　and　unassuming；　but　his　face；　with　its　penetrating　black　eyes；　its　aquiline　nose　and　pointed　chin；　revealed　a　proud　and　sensitive　disposition。　He　had　been　sent　to　the　court　of　Spain　in　1780；　and　there　he　had　learned　enough　to　arouse　his　suspicious；　if　nothing　more；　of　Spain's　designs　as　well　as　of　the　French　intention　to　support　them。　In　the　spring　of　1782　Adams　felt　obliged　to　remain　at　The　Hague　in　order　to　complete　the　negotiations　already　successfully　begun　for　a　commercial　treaty　with　the　Netherlands。　Franklin；　thus　the　only　Commissioner　on　the　ground　in　Paris；　began　informal　negotiations　alone　but　sent　an　urgent　call　to　Jay　in　Spain；　who　was　convinced　of　the　fruitlessness　of　his　mission　there　and　promptly　responded。　Jay's　experience　in　Spain　and　his　knowledge　of　Spanish　hopes　had　led　him　to　believe　that　the　French　were　not　especially　concerned　about　American　interests　but　were　in　fact　willing　to　sacrifice　them　if　necessary　to　placate　Spain。　He　accordingly　insisted　that　the　American　Commissioners　should　disregard　their　instructions　and；　without　the　knowledge　of　France；　should　deal　directly　with　Great　Britain。　In　this　contention　he　was　supported　by　Adams　when　he　arrived；　but　it　was　hard　to　persuade　Franklin　to　accept　this　point　of　view；　for　he　was　unwilling　to　believe　anything　so　unworthy　of　his　admiring　and　admired　French。　Nevertheless；　with　his　cautious　shrewdness；　he　finally　yielded　so　far　as　to　agree　to　see　what　might　come　out　of　direct　negotiations。　The　rest　was　relatively　easy。　Of　course　there　were　difficulties　and　such　sharp　differences　of　opinion　that；　even　after　long　negotiation；　some　matters　had　to　be　compromised。　Some　problems；　too；　were　found　insoluble　and　were　finally　left　without　a　settlement。　But　such　difficulties　as　did　exist　were　slight　in　comparison　with　the　previous　hopelessness　of　reconciling　American　and　Spanish　ambitions；　especially　when　the　latter　were　supported　by　France。　On　the　one　hand；　the　Americans　were　the　proteges　of　the　French　and　were　expected　to　give　way　before　the　claims　of　their　patron's　friends　to　an　extent　which　threatened　to　limit　seriously　their　growth　and　development。　On　the　other　hand；　they　were　the　younger　sons　of　England；　uncivilized　by　their　wilderness　life；　ungrateful　and　rebellious；　but　still　to　be　treated　by　England　as　children　of　the　blood。　In　the　all…important　question　of　extent　of　territory；　where　Spain　and　France　would　have　limited　the　United　States　to　the　east　of　the　Alleghany　Mountains；　Great　Britain　was　persuaded　without　great　difficulty；　having　once　conceded　independence　to　the　United　States；　to　yield　the　boundaries　which　she　herself　had　formerly　claimedfrom　the　Atlantic　Ocean　on　the　east　to　the　Mississippi　River　on　the　west；　and　from　Canada　on　the　north　to　the　southern　boundary　of　Georgia。　Unfortunately　the　northern　line；　through　ignorance　and　carelessness　rather　than　through　malice；　was　left　uncertain　at　various　points　and　became　the　subject　of　almost　continuous　controversy　until　the　last　bit　of　it　was　settled　in　1911。*　*　See　Lord　Bryce's　Introduction　（p。　xxiv）　to　W。　A。　Dunning。　〃The　British　Empire　and　the　United　States〃　（1914）。

The　fisheries　of　the　North　Atlantic；　for　which　Newfoundland　served　as　the　chief　entrepot；　had　been　one　of　the　great　assets　of　North　America　from　the　time　of　its　discovery。　They　had　been　one　of　the　chief　prizes　at　stake　in　the　struggle　between　the　French　and　the　British　for　the　possession　of　the　continent；　and　they　had　been　of　so　much　value　that　a　British　statute　of　1775　which　cut　off　the　New　England　fisheries　was　regarded；　even　after　the　〃intolerable　acts〃　of　the　previous　year；　as　the　height　of　punishment　for　New　England。　Many　Englishmen　would　have　been　glad　to　see　the　Americans　excluded　from　these　fisheries；　but　John　Adams；　when　he　arrived　from　The　Hague；　displayed　an　appreciation　of　New　England　interests　and　the　quality　of　his　temper　as　well　by　flatly　refusing　to　agree　to　any　treaty　which　did　not　allow　full　fishing　privileges。　The　British　accordingly　yielded　and　the　Americans　were　granted　fishing　rights　as　〃heretofore〃　enjoyed。　The　right　of　navigation　of　the　Mississippi　River；　it　was　declared　in　the　treaty；　should　〃forever　remain　free　and　open〃　to　both　parties；　but　here　Great　Britain　was　simply　passing　on　to　the　United　States　a　formal　right　which　she　had　received　from　France　and　was　retaining　for　herself　a　similar　right　which　might　sometime　prove　of　use；　for　as　long　as　Spain　held　both　banks　at　the　mouth　of　the　Mississippi　River；　the　right　was　of　little　practical　value。　Two　subjects　involving　the　greatest　difficulty　of　arrangement　were　the　compensation　of　the　Loyalists　and　the　settlement　of　commercial　indebtedness。　The　latter　was　really　a　question　of　the　payment　of　British　creditors　by　American　debtors；　for　there　was　little　on　the　other　side　of　the　balance　sheet；　and　it　seems　as　if　the　frugal　Franklin　would　have　preferred　to　make　no　concessions　and　would　have　allowed　creditors　to　take　their　own　chances　of　getting　paid。　But　the　matter　appeared　to　Adams　in　a　different　lightperhaps　his　New　England　conscience　was　arousedand　in　this　point　of　view　he　was　supported　by　Jay。　It　was　therefore　finally　agreed　〃that　creditors　on　either　side　shall　meet　with　no　lawful　impediment　to　the　recovery　of　the　full　value　in　sterling　money；　of　all　bona　fide　debts　heretofore　contracted。〃　However　just　this　provision　may　have　been；　its　incorporation　in　the　terms　of　the　treaty　was　a　mistake　on　the　part　of　the　Commissioners；　because　the　Government　of　the　United　States　had　no　power　to　give　effect　to　such　an　arrangement；　so　that　the　provision　had　no　more　value　than　an　emphatic　expression　of　opinion。　Accordingly；　when　some　of　the　States　later　disregarded　this　part　of　the　treaty；　the　British　had　an　excuse　for　refusing　to　carry　out　certain　of　their　own　obligations。　The　historian　of　the　Virginia　Federal　Convention　of　1788；　H。　B。　Grigsby；　relates　an　amusing　incident　growing　out　of　the　controversy　over　the　payment　of　debts　to　creditors　in　England：　〃A　Scotchman；　John　Warden；　a　prominent　lawyer　and　good　classical　scholar；　but　suspected　rightly　of　Tory　leanings　during　the　Revolution；　learning　of　the　large　minority　against　the　repeal　of　laws　in　conflict　with　the　treaty　of　1783　（i。　e。；　especially　the　laws　as　to　the　collection　of　debts　by　foreigners）　caustically　remarked　that　some　of　the　members　of　the　House　had　voted　against　paying　for　the　coats　on　their　backs。　The　story　goes　that　he　was　summoned　before　the　House　in　full　session；　and　was　compelled　to　beg　their　pardon　on　his　knees；　but　as　he　rose；　pretending　to　brush　the　dust　from　his　knees；　he　pointed　to　the　House　and　said　audibly；　with　evident　double　meaning；　'Upon　my　word；　a　dommed　dirty　house　it　is　indeed。'　The　Journal　of　the　House；　however；　shows　that　the　honor　of　the　delegates　was　satisfied　by　a　written　assurance　from　Mr。　Warden　that　he　meant　in　no　way　to　affront　the　dignity　of　the　House　or　to　insult　any　of　its　members。〃　The　other　question；　that　of　compensating　the　Loyalists　for　the　loss　of　their　property；　was　not　so　simple　a　matter；　for　the　whole　story　of　the　Revolution　was　involved。　There　is　a　tendency　among　many　scholars　of　the　present　day　to　regard　the　policy　of　the　British　toward　their　North　American　colonies　as　possibly　unwise　and　blundering　but　as　being　entirely　in　accordance　with　the　legal　and　constitutional　rights　of　the　mother　country；　and　to　believe　that　the　Americans；　while　they　may　have　been　practically　and　therefore　morally　justified　in　asserting　their　independence；　were　still　technically　and　legally　in　the　wrong。　It　is　immaterial　whether　or　not　that　point　of　view　is　accepted；　for　its　mere　recognition　is　sufficient　to　explain　the　existence　of　a　large　number　of　Americans　who　were　steadfast　in　their　support　of　the　British　side　of　the　controversy。　Indeed；　it　has　been　estimated　that　as　large　a　proportion　as　one…third　of　the　population　remained　loyal　to　the　Crown。　Numbers　must　remain　more　or　less　uncertain；　but　probably　the　majority　of　the　people　in　the　United　States；　whatever　their　feelings　may　have　been；　tried　to　remain　neutral　or　at　least　to　appear　so；　and　it　is　undoubtedly　true　that　the　Revolution　was　accomplished　by　an　aggressive　minority　and　that　perhaps　as　great　a　number　were　actively　loyal　to　Great　Britain。　These　Loyalists　comprised　at　least　two　groups。　One　of　these　was　a　wealthy；　property…owning　class；　representing　the　best　social　element　in　the　colonies；　extremely　conservative；　believing　in　privilege　and　fearing　the　rise　of　democracy。　The　other　was　composed　of　the　royal　officeholders；　which　included　some　of　the　better　families；　but　was　more　largely　made　up　of　the　lower　class　of　political　and　social　hangers…on；　who　had　been　rewarded　with　these　positions　for　political　debts　incurred　in　England。　The　opposition　of　both　groups　to　the　Revolution　was　inevitable　and　easily　to　be　understood；　but　it　was　also　natural　that　the　Revolutionists　should　incline　to　hold　the　Loyalists；　without　distinction；　largely　responsible　for　British　pre…Revolutionary　policy；　asserting　that　they　misinformed　the　Government　as　to　conditions　and　sentiment　in　America；　partly　through　stupidity　and　partly　through　selfish　interest。　It　was　therefore　perfectly　comprehensible　that　the　feeling　should　be　bitter　against　them　in　the　United　States；　especially　as　they　had　given　efficient　aid　to　the　British　during　the　war。　In　various　States　they　were　subjected　to　personal　violence　at　the　hands　of　indignant　〃patriots；〃　many　being　forced　to　flee　from　their　homes；　while　their　property　was　destroyed　or　confiscated；　and　frequently　these　acts　were　legalized　by　statute。　The　historian　of　the　Loyalists　of　Massachusetts；　James　H。　Stark；　must　not　be　expected　to　understate　the　case；　but　when　he　is　describing；　especially　in　New　England；　the　reign　of　terror　which　was　established　to　suppress　these　people；　he　writes：　〃Loyalists　were　tarred　and　feathered　and　carried　on　rails；　gagged　and　bound　for　days　at　a　time；　stoned；　fastened　in　a　room　with　a　fire　and　the　chimney　stopped　on　top；　advertised　as　public　enemies；　so　that　they　would　be　cut　off　from　all　dealings　with　their　neighbors；　they　had　bullets　shot　into　their　bedrooms；　their　horses　poisoned　or　mutilated；　money　or