“Confidence in Government Was Abysmally Low”

“The rump end of the Continental Congress still wobbled along in New York City, where it had met since 1785, but it hadn’t achieved a quorum since October. Its secretary, Charles Thompson, buttonholed members on the street, when he could find them, and dragged them into his office so that he could claim in his records that they had technically, “assembled.”

The people had elected a President, but nobody was sure what the man was supposed to do. People from Pennsylvania considered people from New England to be their enemies, and the feelings were mutual. Southerners trusted no one except themselves. The states didn’t want to work together, not that this seemed especially likely given the “the yawning listlessness” and “over-refining spirit in relation to trifles” exhibited by Congress’s first members. Apart from a few clerks, the Federal government had no employees. And almost no money. There was no Supreme Court, and there no lower courts. There were more than fifty different currencies in use, plus plenty of counterfeit currencies. There no political parties, but there were Federalists, who believed in the potential of a powerful central government, and Anti-Federalists, who did not. The Anti-Federalists were ready to take apart the new U.S. Constitution and start over, this time favoring these States, not a unified nation.

And we’re only a dozen pages into the book, “First Congress” by historian Fergus M. Bordewich. As a modern reader, the dysfunction is almost beyond comprehension. Not only was nothing much done in preparation for operating a nation, there were almost no likelihood that  the First Congress would accomplish anything in particular. And the only guy who could pull the whole country together—George Washington—expressed tremendous apprehension about becoming the President, or the King, or whatever the leadership role might be called. George had his doubts, but he really, really wanted the job and needed to be careful about seeming too anxious. (Ron Chernow, who wrote the biography “Hamilton” on which Broadway musical is based, also wrote a great bio book called “Washington: A Life” which is heavy on George’s constant internal conflicts. Bordowich does not as deeply here because he has other territory to cover.)

So it’s James Madison—whose story ought to follow “Hamilton” as a Broadway musical—who convinces George to man-up, and run the country. Hamilton is also in a leadership role, convincing Congress that the new country ought to set up a bank, assume the states’s debts, and establish a meaningful credit rating. But everything in those early days seems more like an informal startup company than the beginning of the richest nation on earth. “There was also John Jay who ran the Confederation’s Department of Foreign Affairs from his law office, and Henry Knox, who presided over the War Department from rented rooms at a Water Street tavern.”

Look into his eyes. This is James Madison, a politically savvy man who convinced George Washington to lead the new nation.

Look into his eyes. This is James Madison, a politically savvy man who convinced George Washington to lead the new nation.

Eventually, they got to work. Madison was the first congressman to propose a law so that the new country would have some revenue, and control its coastlines. And then, everybody argued, and protected their regional interests. And besides, nobody was clear on how these new rules could possibly be enforced.

With or without proper tariffs, Vice President John Adams “tirelessly repeated that Europeans would never take the United States seriously unless its chief executive was endowed with the trappings of sovereign grandeur…At minimum, he considered His Highness or His Most Benign Highness as the barest acceptable forms of address for its president. He…scathingly dismissed President as appropriate for ‘Fire Companies & of a Cricket Club.’ Any member of Congress willing to settle for less he considered a ‘driveling idiot.” Everything was new, nothing was settled, and everybody carried a strong opinion of how things must be done. Still, they were not without humor: Ben Franklin, who was always good for a laugh, called Vice President Adams “Your Superfluous Excellency,” while others looked at his widening girth and favored, “His Rotundity.” (I found Franklin’s comment on the web, not in the book).

Did the First Congress get anything done?

The surprising and overwhelming answer is “yes!” In surprising chapter by chapter, Bordowich leads us through one astonishing accomplishment after another. Congress establishes itself as a powerful legislative body. They manage to keep the government running at a time when it appears as though George Washington will not survive an illness. They worked out the Bill of Rights. They figured out where to place the new nation’s capital—a  major political accomplishment because of the many competing interests. While busy complaining about how little they understood about finance, they did not stop Alexander Hamilton from establishing the U.S. as a viable financial operation—a capitalist one at that. They worked on a reasonable solution for slavery—but failed in the attempt. They—and Adams gets much of the blame for this—managed to make the Vice President an ineffective leadership role. They invented the President’s Cabinet and its various departments—and convinced a very reluctant Thomas Jefferson to leave his lovely Paris mansion and lovelier lifestyle to return home and establish the State Department. They learned to deal with lobbyists (Quakers were the first lobbyists).

“Men who had seen themselves primarily as citizens of their individual states had now mostly come to see themselves as the common citizens of a nation and embraced their new government as their own in a way they had never done before.”

“Public opinion now mattered. Newly emboldened newspapers brought the doings of government to the door of every citizen, including the illiterate , who gathered in urban taverns and frontier hamlets to avidly hear reports read to them by their literate neighbors.”

A new nation had begun.

Lincoln Wins! – The Story According to Fergus


Presidential wannabe George McClellan

Buried on the bottom of a back page in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, a fairly amazing story worth retelling. The author is historical Fergus Bordewich. The place is the United States, right around this time of year, 150 years ago. You may remember the name George McClellan. “Handsome and self-confident,” he had utterly failed in his role as the General in charge of President Lincoln’s Union Army. At the time, the charismatic McClellan was running against Lincoln in the 1864 election, and everyone (including Lincoln) was certain that McClellan would become the next president (Lincoln’s Republicans considered re-election “an impossibility”). According to Bordewich, “In practical terms McClellan’s victory would likely have led to European recognition of the Confederacy, Southern Independence and the forcible return to slavery of hundreds of thousands of former slaves who had fled to the Union armies for safety.” To make matters worse, the current Union General, Ulysses Grant, was making a habit of losing battle after battle.

Vice President Hannibal Hamlin

Vice President Hannibal Hamlin

So here’s the staunch abolitionist Hannibal Hamlin of Maine, then-current Vice President of the United States, a man who would have been President (after Lincoln’s passing) if history had played out differently. The party decides that what Lincoln really needs is a “deep-dyed racist” as his replacement running mate, and they choose a Democrat, the Governor of Tennessee (which was controlled by the Union), Andrew Johnson. Lincoln hoped that Johnson would swing some Democrats over to his side. Then, Lincoln got lucky. The North started winning his battles, and Union Admiral Farragut took over Mobile, Alabama (and said, “damn the torpedoes—full speed ahead!). Sherman captured Atlanta. (Grant was still struggling, but generally heading in a positive direction).

Lincoln wins. He carries every state except Kentucky (makes sense, right?), Delaware (kind of southern), and New Jersey (huh?).

President Andrew Johnson, whose extensive political career included time as a Senator and Congressman from Tennessee, and its  governor. He also reached the rank of Brigadier General in the Union Army.

President Andrew Johnson, whose extensive political career included time as a Senator and Congressman from Tennessee, and its governor. He also reached the rank of Brigadier General in the Union Army.

The aftermath: Lincoln in April, 1865. If Hamlin had remained on the ticket, he would have become President and, according to Bordewich, he would have gotten reconstruction underway in a thorough and meaningful way, and probably would have ignited the Civil Rights movement some eighty years before it finally came together. Instead, we had the unexpected President Johnson, in place for purely political reasons—without him, McClellan would have won. Johnson did his job for his Southern friends—he did everything he could to restore the pre-war status quo, and “tolerated horrific reprisals against blacks to attempted to exercise their newly run freedoms.” Congress was so unhappy with Johnson’s defiant ways, they did something they had never done before: they impeached the President of the United States.

Here’s the original WSJ article written by Fergus Bordewich.


%d bloggers like this: