382 NEGOTIATIONS OF LAMB AND BARCLAY. of bribing the Barbary powers or fighting them, and Congress was too poor to do either.* others, awaited the establishment of a national government. Lamb, however, had completely Writing to Jefferson June 6, 1786, failed in his negotiations at Algiers, John Adams says: "The first question is, what will it cost us to make peace with all five of them. Set it, if you will, at five hundred thousand pounds sterling, though I doubt not it might be done for three, or perhaps for two. The second question is, what damage shall we suffer if we do not treat. Compute six or eight per cent. insurance upon all your exports and imports; compute the total loss of all the Mediterranean and Levant trade; compute the loss of one-half your trade to Portugal and Spain. The third question is, what will it cost to fight them. I answer at least half a million a year, without protecting your trade; and when you leave off fighting, you must pay as much money as it would cost you now for peace. The interest of half a million sterling is, even at six per cent., 30,000 guineas a year. For an annual interest of £30,000 sterling, then, and perhaps for £15,000 or £10,000, we can have peace, when a war would sink us annually ten times as much."† While Adams was negotiating in London, Lamb and Barclay were making progress in Africa. Barclay's first visit to the Emperor of Morocco resulted favorably, and late in January, 1787, news arrived in London that a lasting treaty had been concluded between the United States and Morocco. But when the treaty was placed before Secretary Jay, he was still busy with the Spanish treaty, and this treaty, like the *Schuyler, American Diplomacy, pp. 197-200; McMaster, United States, vol. i., pp. 406-408; McLaughlin, The Confederation and the Constitution, pp. 106-107 Fiske, Critical Period of American History, pp. 157–162. John Adams, Works, vol. viii., p. 400. See also pp. 406, 407, 410-412. Schuyler, American Diplomacy, pp. 203-204. For text, see Snow, Treaties and Topics in American Diplomacy, pp. 143–148. for, though he had "followed for many years the Barbary trade, and seemed intimately acquainted with those States," yet he could speak nothing but English and was at such a great disadvantage that the Vekil Hadji subsequently expressed the hope that "if the Americans sent an American to Algiers to make the peace, they would send a man who could speak the Spanish or Italian language. He ridiculed much the sending of a man that no one could understand what he had to say." However this may have been, Jefferson himself said: "I am persuaded that an agent sent on this business, and so much limited in his terms, could have done nothing. But should Congress propose to try the line of negotiation again, I think they will perceive that Lamb is not a proper agent." Lamb had been politely received by the Dey, who said that he was well acquainted with the exploits of Washington, but as he never expected to see him, he hoped Congress would send a full-length portrait to be hung in his palace. His regard for Washington, however, did not diminish the prices for the release of captives, which were as follows: three captains each $6,000; $4,000 for the mates and passengers; and $1,500 for each of the seamen,* beside a customary * John Adams, Works, vol. viii., p. 394. JEFFERSON ATTEMPTS TO RANSOM CAPTIVES. duty of 11 per cent. on the whole amount. This averaged $2,800 per captive, while the agents had been authorized to offer only $200.* JefJefferson then attempted to obtain the release of the captives through a religious order in Paris called the Society of the Holy Trinity for the Redemption of Captives, commonly 383 known as Mathurins. In 1789 a sum of money was placed at their disposal, but by July, 1790, only one captive had been ransomed, while six had died. Shortly afterward the Revolution in France abolished all religious orders, and the unfortunate captives were allowed to remain in confinement for several years.* CHAPTER IV. 1784-1789. LAND CESSIONS: WESTERN SETTLEMENTS: NEW GOVERNMENTS. Congress urges States to cede western territory-Cessions by New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and South Carolina · The Virginia territory - The Ordinance of 1784-Jefferson's scheme of erecting States The names proposed - The slavery proviso - The Ordinance for the government of the Northwestern Territory introduced - Machinations of Ohio Company - Memorial presented to Congress by Parsons Ordinance of 1787 passed-Cutler's negotiations with Congress regarding grant of territory - Colonizing parties sent out - Provisions of the Ordinance of 1787 Territory South of the Ohio - North Carolina territory in the West-Act of cession passed · State of Franklin General Sevier elected president Dispute compromised and North Carolina authority reestablished in State of Franklin - Restlessness in Kentucky Petition to Virginia for separation - Various conventions Separation authorized Indian war in the West Westerners discontented by the refusal of right to navigate Mississippi - Wilkinson's intrigue. Appendix to Chapter IV.—I. The Ordinance of 1787. II. Letters of Dane and King regarding authorship of Ordinance of 1787. 384 LAND CESSIONS BY NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, ETC. Maryland proposed that Congress should be given the right to "fix the western boundary of such States as [lay] claim to the Mississippi or south sea; and lay out the land beyond the boundary so ascertained into separate and independent States from time to time as the numbers and circumstances of the people thereof may require." Until this were done Maryland refused to sign the Articles of Confederation. Gradually, one by one, New York, Connecticut, and Virginia signified their willingness to do this, and on March 1, 1781, Maryland's delegates in Congress signed the Articles.† 66 On February 19, 1780, New York ceded her territory in the West, fixing the western boundaries of the State by a line from the northeast corner of the State of Pennsylvania, along the north bounds thereof, to its northwest corner, continued due west, until it shall be intersected by a meridian line, to be drawn from the 45th degree of north latitude, through a point twenty miles due west from the most westerly bent, or inclination of the river, or strait of Niagara; thence by * Secret Journals of Congress, vol. i., p. 328; Herbert B. Adams, Maryland's Influence upon Land Cessions to the United States, in Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, series iii., no. i., p. 22; and the same paper under a slightly different title in Maryland Historical Society Publications, no. X.; Fiske, Critical Period, pp. 191-193; Ogg, Opening of the Mississippi, p. 403. See the Journals of Congress for September 6, October 10 and 12, 1780; February 12, March 1, 1781; September 12, 1783. See also Curtis, Constitutional History, vol. i., pp. 90-97. the said meridian line, to the 45th degree of north latitude, thence by the said 45th degree of north latitude." Congress accepted this cession in 1782.* On April 19, 1785, Massachusetts ceded her territory west of the line fixed by New York.t Connecticut retained possession of her lands until September, 1786, when she relinquished title to all that lying 120 miles west of the eastern boundary of Pennsylvania, but reserving to herself the valuable tract known as the "Western Reserve " over which the United States did not receive jurisdiction until 1800.|| South Carolina did not cede her lands until August 9, 1787.§ At this time Virginia possessed extensive, rich and well-populated lands in the Northwest, out of which territory have since been carved the States of Michigan and Wisconsin * Journals of Congress, October 29, 1782. Ibid, April 19, 1785. 223. Ibid, September 14, 1786, vol. xi., pp. 221 || Marshall's Report, American State Papers, Public Lands, vol. i., pp. 94-98. § On the cessions, see Moore, The Northwest under Three Flags, pp. 315-326, and authorities cited, especially B. A. Hindsdale, The Old Northwest; Roosevelt, Winning of the West, vol. iii., pp. 246-251; Winsor's Narrative and Critical History, vol. vii., app. i.; Johnston, Connecticut, pp. 280-283; King, Ohio, p. 163 et seq.; F. J. Turner, Western State-Making in the Revolutionary Era, in American Historical Review, vol. i., pp. 251-258; Shosuke Sato, The Land Question in the United States, in J. H. U. Studies, series iv., nos. vii.-ix.; Henry Gannett, Boundaries of the United States and of the Several States and Territories; Joseph Blunt, Historical Sketch of the Formation of the Confederacy; Thomas Donaldson, The Public Domain (House Misc. Doc., 47th Congress, 2d session, pt. 4, no. 45. |