Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

forgot to mention even the presence of the Ohio Company, and claimed the whole credit of the Ordinance for himself. In his letter of March 26, 1830, to Mr. Webster, he says: "In pages 389, 390, Sect. 3, Vol. VII. [of General Abridgment and Digest], I mention the Ordinance of '87 was framed, mainly, from the laws of Massachusetts. This appears on the face of it; meaning the titles to estates, and nearly all the six articles, the permanent and important parts of it, and some other parts; and, in order to take the credit of it to Massachusetts, I added 'this Ordinance (formed by the author, etc.) was framed,' etc. . . . . I have never claimed originality, except in regard to the clause against impairing contracts, and perhaps the Indian article, part of the third article, including, also, religion, morality, knowledge, schools, etc." *

His claim in Appendix to the ninth volume of his "General Abridgment and Digest, Note A, published in 1830, is, owing to the obscurity of his style, difficult to understand. He quoted this note in his letter of May 12, 1831, to the Indiana Historical Society. He says: "It will be observed that provisions 4, 5, and 6, some now view as oppressive to the West, were taken from Mr. Jefferson's plan. The residue of the Ordinance consists of two descriptions, one original, as the provisions to prevent legislatures enacting laws to impair contracts previously made, to secure the Indians their rights and property, part of the titles to property made more purely republican and more completely divested of feudality than any other titles in the Union were in July, '87. The temporary organization was new, no part of it was in the plan of '84. The other description was selected mainly from the Constitution and laws of Massachusetts, as any one may see who knows what American law was in 1787, as: 1. Titles to property by will, by deed, by descent, and by delivery. Here it may be observed that titles to lands once taking root are important, as they are usually permanent; in this case, they were planted in four hundred thousand square miles of territory, and took root, as was intended. 2. All the fundamental, perpetual articles of compact, except as below, as, first, securing forever religious liberty; second, the essential parts of a bill of rights

Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 1867-69, p. 479.

declaring that religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and education shall forever be encouraged. These selections from the Code of Massachusetts, as also the titles to property, have created for her an extensive and lasting influence in the West, and of the most republican, liberal, and beneficial kind." *

Some persons reading this note will understand him to say that the clause relating to religion, morality, and education was taken from the Code of Massachusetts; but such was evidently not his intention, as it would contradict the claim he made about the same time in his letter to Mr. Webster. These extracts illustrate Mr. Dane's style of writing, and the claims he has made as to the authorship of the Ordinance. None of these claims were made during the lifetime of Dr. Cutler or of any person immediately concerned in its formation.

There is nothing in the Ordinance of 1787 concerning religion, morality, knowledge, and schools which had not been practically exemplified in the laws and customs of Massachusetts, and which were not embodied in her Constitution of 1780. These principles were happily condensed in the Ordinance into a single sentence as follows: "Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." No part of the Ordinancethe antislavery clause alone excepted - has been more noted than this sentence, and it has a place in the constitutions of several of the Western States. There is evidence tending to show that Dr. Cutler was the author of this clause; that it was one of the amendments or suggestions which he made in writing at the request of the committee. Its style, and the efforts he subsequently made for the establishment of the institutions of religion and education in the territory, to be presently noticed, render the inference highly probable. Accepted by the committee and incorporated in the draft by Mr. Dane, he (Mr. Dane) after the lapse of more than forty years may have forgotten its origin. There have been traditions and positive evidence in the family of Dr. Cutler, since his death,

*New York Tribune, July 18, 1875.

that he caused the insertion, in the Ordinance of 1787, of the clause quoted above, and also of the one relating to the prohibition of slavery. Several autograph letters are in the possession of the writer which are evidence on this point.

Dr. Joseph Torrey, an eminent physician of Salem, Mass., who married a daughter of Dr. Cutler, wrote January 30, 1847, to Judge Ephraim Cutler of Ohio as follows: "At a recent professional call at Hamilton,* Brother Temple [Cutler] produced large files of Ohio documents, but I had only time for a hasty examination. I saw among these documents the Ordinance of 1787 on a printed sheet. On its margin was written that Mr. Dane requested Dr. Cutler to suggest such provisions as he deemed advisable, and that at Dr. Cutler's instance was inserted what relates to religion, education, and slavery. These facts have long been known to me as household words." The letter further states that Hon. Caleb Cushing and Hon. Daniel Webster had inquired what agency Dr. Cutler had in framing the famous Ordinance, and as to the authorship of an anonymous pamphlet of twenty-four pages which Dr. Cutler wrote and had printed at Salem in 1787, describing the Northwestern Territory, and entitled "An Explanation of the Map which delineates that part of the Federal Lands comprehended between Pennsylvania West Line, the Ohio and Scioto Rivers, and Lake Erie." +

Temple Cutler, of Hamilton, Mass., writing September 29, 1849, to Judge Cutler of Ohio (both sons of Dr. Cutler), and speaking of the interest in New England on the subject of the Ordinance, says: "Hon. Daniel Webster is now convinced that the man whose foresight suggested some of its articles was our father."

Judge Ephraim Cutler, November 24, 1849, wrote to a gentleman making inquiries on the subject, as follows: "I visited my father at Washington during the last session he attended Congress [1804]. In his boarding-house he occupied a room with

*The town of Ipswich was divided in 1793, and the part of the town where Dr. Cutler resided was set off, and incorporated as the town of Hamilton.

This pamphlet, now very rare, was reprinted in Nahum Ward's "Brief Sketch of the State of Ohio," Glasgow, 1822, and London, 1823; and a French transla tion was issued in Paris in 1789. A copy of the original pamphlet was sold at the recent auction sale of Mr. Fields's Library, in New York, for twenty-one dollars.

[blocks in formation]

the reverend gentleman who represented Hampshire and the Connecticut River Counties, whose name I have forgotten. We were in conversation relative to the political concerns of Ohio, the ruling parties, and the effects of the [Ohio] Constitution in the promotion of the general interest; when he observed that he was informed that I had prepared that portion of the Ohio Constitution which contained the part of the Ordinance of July, 1787, which prohibited slavery. He wished to know if it was a fact. On my assuring him it was, he observed that he thought it a singular coincidence, as he himself had prepared that part of the Ordinance while he was in New York negotiating the purchase of the lands for the Ohio Company. I had then not seen the journal he kept while he was in New York at that time. The journal came into my possession during a visit of Dr. Torrey and my sister, Mrs. Torrey, in 1837." *

Dr. Cutler's interest in the promotion of religion and education in the Northwestern Territory appears in his negotiations with Congress for the Ohio purchase. The general law for the survey and sale of Western lands, passed by Congress May 20, 1785, provided that one section (No. 16) in every township should be reserved for the support of common schools. Dr. Cutler was not satisfied with this provision, and demanded that Congress should donate in addition one section in every township for the support of an educated ministry, and two entire townships for the establishment and support of a university. This new claim was resisted by members of Congress. One bill passed authorizing the Ohio Company's purchase, but without these additional reservations; and Dr. Cutler would not accept it. He packed his trunk, made his parting calls, said he should leave the town immediately, and make his purchase of some of the States. This was somewhat of a ruse on his part, and it turned out as he expected. Members flocked to his room and entreated him to remain, and they would try to get more favorable terms. He wrote out these conditions as a sine qua non on which he would make the contract, and brought Congress to vote precisely the terms he

* Judge Cutler, from the time he was three years old till his emigration to Ohio, resided with his grandparents in Connecticut, and hence had lived with his father only on occasional visits.

dictated. He had full powers from the Company to negotiate alone the terms of the purchase; but, if he thought it advisable, when reaching New York, to associate with himself Mr. Winthrop Sargent, he could do so. Near the close of the negotiation he invited Mr. Sargent to join with him, and they both signed the contract.

In an autograph letter to his son Judge Cutler, written August 7, 1818, when he was seventy-six years of age, Dr. Cutler says: "The fact is, the people of Ohio are wholly indebted to me for procuring the grant of those townships [for the University] and the ministers' lands in the Ohio Company's purchase; and indeed for similar grants in Judge Symmes's purchase. When I applied to Congress for the purchase, no person, to my knowledge, had an idea of asking for such grants. When I mentioned it to Mr. Sargent and others friendly to the measure, they were rather opposed, fearing it would occasion an increased price for the lands. I had previously contemplated the vast benefit that must be derived from it in future time, and I made every exertion to obtain it. Mr. Sargent, indeed, cordially united with me in endeavoring to surmount the difficulties which appeared in the way, till the object was obtained. . . . . It is well known to all concerned with me in transacting the business of the Ohio Company, that the establishment of a University was a first object, and lay with great weight on my mind."

The Ohio University, at Athens, the first college in the Northwest, was established on this foundation; and Dr. Cutler himself drew the act of incorporation, arranged the course of study, and selected the instructors. He was the author of that public policy which has been so beneficial to the educational interests of these Northwestern States, of reserving public lands for the support of universities.

Three of his sons came to Ohio and took prominent parts in its settlement. Dr. Cutler himself never removed his residence from Massachusetts. He came to Marietta, in his sulky, on a visit of inspection, and to attend a meeting of the Directors of the Ohio Company, in the summer of 1788, where he was honored as one of the chief promoters of the enterprise. He died in the parish where he had been the settled minister

« AnteriorContinuar »