The Articles of Confederation: An Interpretation of the Social-Constitutional History of the American Revolution, 1774-1781

V The Dickinson Draft of the Confederation

v The Dickinson Draft of the Confederation FEW SOURCES remain for study of the work of the committee appointed on June 12, 1776, to draft articles of confederation . Much must be inferred from the political views of the thirteen committeemen and from the document they presented to Congress on July 12. The weight of influence as well as of numbers lay with the conservative party, which up to May, 1776, had spent its efforts in opposing independence and then, when that appeared inevitable, in trying to delay a declaration of independence until a government could be created for the thirteen colonies and foreign alliances could be obtained. Three outstanding opponents of independence, John Dickinson, Edward Rutledge, and Robert R. Livingston, were members of the committee , and of these John Dickinson was the recognized leader. Thomas McKean, though in favor of independence, was on the whole also a conservative, as were Francis Hopkinson and Thomas Stone. Joseph Hewes was a North Carolina merchant and a business associate of Robert Morris. Button Gwinnett was Englishborn . Thomas Nelson was a product of Trinity College, Cambridge , and closely connected with the royal government of Virginia. Roger Sherman and Josiah Bartlett may be described as middle-of-the-road men. This leaves only two whose radicalism is unquestioned. One was Stephen Hopkins, a very old man. The other, Sam Adams, was unquestionably a radical, but his talents were hardly suited to the work of drafting articles of confederation . There is little doubt that Dickinson was dominant in the committee . His prestige as a writer and the honesty of his convictions led men to respect him whether they agreed with his political views or not. To him was given the task of writing the Articles which were presented to Congress, and it would seem that, in spite of many compromises, the draft presented was an embodi- The Dickinson Draft of the Confederation l1.7 ment of the views of the conservatives, and of his own views in particular. Dickinson himself admitted that every article was bitterly fought over,! and the existing evidence indicates that the disputes were long and sharp. Five days after the committee was appointed Josiah Bartlett wrote that "as it is a very important business , and some difficulties have arisen, I fear it will take some time before it will be finally settled." 2 On June 29 Edward Rutledge wrote to his friend John Jay that he had lately been much engaged upon a plan of confederation which Dickinson had drawn and that it had "the Vice of all his Productions to a considerable Degr~e; I mean the Vice of Refining too much." 3 Rutledge's attitude toward Dickinson's draft of the Articles illustrates the division of opinion which had been the undoing of the conservative party during the past two years. Unlike the radicals , whose single-minded devotion to one end overcame most of the obstacles they faced, the conservatives were divided, and, being timid and largely on the defensive, they had been helpless in the face of a determined minority. The conservatism of Rutledge was the conservatism of the South, of an aristocracy that had the situation well in hand at home and was determined not to surrender to democratic influences from New England. If South Carolina supported Massachusetts because she feared that her own legislative independence might be endangered once Massachusetts had been conquered,4 it was not to be expected that she would surrender it to a government such as the conservatives of the Middle states wished to create. To Rutledge, who feared the democratic pretensions of the New Englanders, it seemed that "the Idea of. destroying all Provincial Distinctions and making every thing of the most minute kind bend to what they call the good of the whole, is in other Terms to say that these Colonies must be subject to the Government of the Eastern Provinces." He had no respect for the military prowess of New England, but he spoke from deep conviction and some experience when he said that he dreaded "their 1 John Dickinson, "Arguments ag.' the Independence of these Coloniesin Congress," Dickinson MSS., in the Pennsylvania Historical Society. •Josiah Bartlett to John Langdon, June 17, in Burnett, Letters, 1:495. 3 Edward Rutledge to John Jay. June 19. ibid., 517. •McCrady, South Carolina in the Revolution, 1:171-171. 128 The Articles of Confederation overruling Influence in Council . . . their low...