mentioned as incident to a large commercial emporium; since the inland trade would bring into them a different class of population from that which throngs our seaport towns-one accustomed to the institutions of the country, and more disposed to the preservation of good order. This, too, it was thought, would be a security against the place becoming slavishly dependent upon Congress, giving it a healthy trade, but not one which would supersede entirely the advantages derived from the presence of go

vernment.

Such were some of the considerations which led to the passage, by a vote of 32 to 29, on the 16th day of July, 1790, of an act entitled "An act establishing the temporary and permanent seat of government of the United States." As we have only endeavored to set forth those reasons which were considered general and permanent in their application to the subject, we have not alluded to one topic, growing out of the politics of the day, which, it is well known, had an important effect in hastening a decision on the question. Under the then great object of funding the debt, the seat of government would concentrate the public paper; hence, a situation was desirable from which all parts would be equally benefited by sending forth and circulating government funds, rather than building up local benefits. "It was supposed," says Mr. Gibbs, "materially to benefit the Northern States, in which was the active capital of the country, and a more Southern residence was considered a countervailing advantage." This question infused peculiar bitterness into the debate.

Another consideration which led to the decision, was the deference and regard which would thus be paid to the wishes of General Washington, who had, from the first, strongly advocated the site upon the Potomac, and who seems to have formed rather extravagant calculations in relation to the future growth of the city. Some of the opinions which he expresses in his letters, seem to conflict with the views we have given relative to the disadvantages of a commercial city; but it is to be borne in mind that it was chiefly a seaport to which those views have reference ; and we have, in this respect, relied mainly on the statements of gentlemen who lived at that time.

ters.

*

In reviewing the debates on this subject, it is to be remarked that the growth of the Western country was anticipated, and depicted in glowing colors by some of the members of that day. "If," said Mr. Madison, "the calculation be just, that we double in twenty-five years, we shall speedily behold an astonishing mass of people on the Western wa* * We see the people moving from the more crowded to the less crowded parts. The swarm does not come from the Southern, but from the Northern and Eastern hives. This will continue to be the case until every part of America receives its due share of population. If there be any event upon which we may calculate with certainty, I take it that the centre of population will rapidly advance in a south-westerly direction. It must, then, travel from the Susquehanna, if it is now found there—it may even extend beyond the Potomac-but the time will be long first; and, as the Potomac is the great highway of communication between the Atlantic and the Western country, attempts to remove the seat must be impossible." "I confess," said Mr. Vining, "to the House and to the world, that, viewing this subject in all its circumstances, I am in favor of the Potomac. I wish the seat of government to be fixed there, because I think the interest, the honor, and the greatness of the country, require it. I look on it as

the centre from which those streams are to flow, that are to animate and invigorate the body politic. From thence, it appears to me, that the rays of government will naturally diverge to the extremities of the Union. I declare that I look on the Western territory in awful and striking point of view. To that region the unpolished sons of earth are flowing from all quarters-men to whom the protection of the laws, and the controlling force of government, are equally necessary. From this consideration, I conclude that the banks of the Potomac is the proper situation."

It is true that, at the time these remarks were made, the Union comprised but thirteen States; and, probably, no one anticipated that the num ber of States would double in fifty years, whatever might be the population. But, even at this time, we find that the East is to the West, in point of population, as the West is to the East in point of territory.

The following table, which has been calculated by Dr. Paterson, of the United States mint, in Philadelphia, singularly confirms Mr. Madison's prophecy :

CENTRE OF REPRESENTATIVE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES AT EACH CENSUS.

DISTANCES, IN MILES, FROM

WASHINGTON.

Period.

PLACES.

Distance Distance Dist. on
North. E. or W. stra't line.

1790

1800

1820

In Baltimore county, Maryland, 13 miles S. of Pennsylvania line, and 17 miles N. of Baltimore... In Carroll county, Maryland, 7 miles S. of Pennsylvania line, and 9 miles N. E. of Westminster..... 1810 In Adams county, Pennsylvania, 5 miles N. of State line, and 17 miles W. of Gettysburgh... In the western part of Morgan county, Virginia, 10 miles W. S. W. of Bath, 1 mile from Potomac, 12 miles S. of Pennsylvania line.....

Note. The parallel of 40° N. divides the representative population of the United States into two equal parts very nearly, according to the census of 1840.

The average progress westward, during each ten years, has been about thirty-four miles. This average is slightly increasing; and, if we set it down at fifty miles, it will require a century to carry this centre five hundred miles west of Washington, or as far as the city of Nashville, Ten

nessee.

The comparatively small importance which was attached to "the centre of territory," as a criterion by which to select a capital, will strike many with surprise; and it is worthy of observation, that Mr. Madison, in presenting the importance of such a centre in what he thought the most prominent point of view, remarked that, "if it were possible to promulgate our laws by some instantaneous operation, it would be of less consequence where the government might be placed"-a contingency which now seems to be supplied by the "magic wires" of Morse, which communicate intelligence "not merely with the swiftness of lightning," but "by lightning itself."

In the course of a recent debate in the United States Senate, Mr. Calhoun remarked that a moment's attention to the seat of government in the different countries of the world, would show that they very rarely occupied a central position. They were generally situated on the frontier that was most exposed; near to those places where the armies would be required to be encamped for the protection of the country against invasion. Look over Europe-where was London situated? Near the southeast frontier. Where was the capital of France? Far from central. Where was the capital of Russia? Upon the frontier; and the same locality will be found to prevail, and very properly so, in regard to capitals throughout the world. And, if it were true in general, it was eminently true in respect to our confederation.

Mr. Allen said that "the example of the monarchies of Europe was not to be followed by us, for the location of their capital was dependent on the location of their forts and fortifications, and not in convenience in other respects." This was certainly not the case with Russia or Prussia. The advantage of having the government near to protect the commerce of the country, is to be observed by circumstances of daily occurrence. It is probably on the coast that our principal fighting will be done, and it is certainly here that the most unexpected and sudden assaults will be made, requiring immediate action. It is from Europe that our enemies will be most likely to come in time of war, and it is with the States of Europe that, in time of peace, we are likely to have the most complex relations. It is of the highest importance that our legislators and executive officers should be so near the commercial sections of the country as to enter understandingly upon those discussions in which practical knowledge is of the utmost importance; and it is certain that there will be hundreds called into the public service, from time to time, whose first impressions of the merits of the navy, or the extent of the merchant service, will be formed by actual inspection at our commercial cities-and, while the Western agricultural interests are subserved by whatever contributes to enlarged and liberal commercial views, and the protection of the sea-coast, our Western frontier will be far more easily fortified by government when at a distance; the principal enemies we are ever likely to suffer from there, being the Indians, the power of which unfortunate race is daily dwindling away before the good or bad, but inevitable effects of Anglo-Saxon pro

gress.

But, we were further told by Mr. Allen, that "the location of our seat of government in the vicinity of our great commercial cities, gave to those cities a preponderating influence in the proceedings of this government of, at least, a hundred to one over the influence excited by a corresponding number of people in the vast interior. There were no committees of farmers from the banks of the Missouri, the Mississippi, or even the Ohio, entering the lobbies of those halls, and endeavoring to influence the legislation of Congress. There were no combinations of individuals from the interior, delegated to the capital with a view of obtaining the passage of laws, the object of which was to administer to individual wants, instead of the wants of the mass of the nation. There were no such delegations here." Does the senator suppose that the lobbying committees from commercial cities, of which he hints, would not follow the government wherever it went? The interests of commerce enter too widely into all the ramifications of society for mere

time and space to prevent those interested in their advancement from laboring assiduously on their behalf, wherever the government may be. Mr. Allen's argument applies equally to the good and the bad projects. The only difference would be that, were the government placed in the interior, they would have legislators not so well informed, more blinded by sectional prejudices than they even now are, less capable of appreciating those enlarged plans which comprise the good, and more easily imposed upon by the advocates of more limited systems which are bad. It has been objected that the Eastern States secure to themselves greater benefits in the way of congressional and legislative patronage for oflice; but we apprehend that this source of jealousy has been greatly overrated. Is it not rather the section of country from which the Executive comes, that governs in this matter? But, admitting it to be an evil, it is one which must always exist, to a greater or less extent, to the injury of different parts of the Union, wherever the government may be; since, as was remarked in the Congress of 1790, the capital cannot remain, for any considerable length of time, at the actual centre of territory, that centre being as variable as the centre of population.

The necessity or propriety of disfranchising the seat of government, is not at first view quite apparent, and has been the subject of some discussion. If we consider the extent to which party feeling was carried in the canvass that immediately preceded Mr. Jefferson's election, when private social relations were, in some instances, almost entirely suspended between families of different political parties, we can feel the force of the reasoning given for this measure, and can realize what a serious evil such a state of things would be at the capital, should it again recur, and be fostered by continual local elections, accompanied with all the excitement and misrepresentation which we now see every four years in the principal cities of the Union, and in the midst of which, it is not too much to suppose that the position of public officers might subject them to annoyance and insult in a thousand ways, even without actual violence. And, from similar experience, it is obvious that the votes of those in the public employ might be directly or indirectly controlled by the government, so that there would be, in reality, little freedom of choice. Other positions assumed in these discussions will be adverted to in the course of our remarks on the progress of the city.

Maryland and Virginia had previously, by acts passed in 1788 and 1789, authorized their representatives to make the necessary cessions. The first section of this act is in these words :-" Be it enacted, &c., that a district of territory, not exceeding ten miles square, to be located, as hereafter directed, on the river Potomac, at some place between the mouth of the Eastern Branch and Connogocheague, be, and the same is hereby accepted for the permanent seat of government of the United States."

The word "temporary," in the title of the act, refers to Philadelphia, where the Congress were to hold their sessions until 1800; when, as Mr. Wolcott expressed it, they were "to go to the Indian place with the long name, on the Potomac."

It may be well to allude here to a discussion which has arisen under the article of the constitution and this act, in reference to the powers of Congress to remove the seat of government at any future time. Mr.

John Carroll Brent, of Washington city, in a pamphlet* relative to the interests of the District of Columbia, dedicated to the members of the National Institute, has summed up the principal arguments in opposition to any such claim of right. He contends:-1st. That the constitution gave Congress limited powers in the premises; and that body, as a mere agent, is bound by instructions and limitations, and can, under no circumstances, exercise more authority than is given to that effect by the constitution. 2d. That a change of the seat of government would be a violation of the implied contract between the Federal government and the States of Maryland and Virginia, which never would have made the necessary grants, had not permanency been guaranteed by the solemn act of Congress. 3d. That the right and reasonable expectations of the original proprietors, the purchasers, and inhabitants of this District, would be trifled with and destroyed by such a move towards transferring the metropolis elsewhere, on the part of those who falsely imagine themselves clothed with the necessary power and capacity.

The introduction of the word "permanent "in contradistinction to "temporary," in the title of the act, is regarded by him as significant of the views of Congress and the proprietors on the subject, viz: "that certain powers were given, certain acts required, and Congress, in the execution of this commission, was confined within fixed limits, was to accept a specified amount of territory; and by the acceptance, and the act estab lishing a permanent seat of government, in accordance with the requisitions of the constitution, bound itself to that instrument, to Maryland and Virginia, the owners, purchasers, and inhabitants of the district in question, and the people at large, by a positive engagement, to make the metropolis of the Union durable and unchangeable."

In the report of a committee of the House on the 25th February, 1846, on the petition for the retrocession of Alexandria, this objection is thus answered:

"There is no more reason to believe that the power in this case, when once exercised and executed, is exhausted, than in any other of the long list of enumerated powers to which it belongs, and which it is provided that Congress shall have.' The phraseology of the grant is the same, and as much reason seems to exist for the continuance of the right to exercise this power, as in most of those contained in the list to which we have referred. If this construction be true, when Congress had once fixed the seat of government, it could no more be removed, although it should prove to be unsafe from foreign invasion, or so unhealthy as to endanger the lives of the members of the government, or so located as to be inconsistent with a due regard to the facilities of access to our whole population, or to their convenience; and yet it is manifest that some of these considerations might make the removal of the seat of government a matter of necessity. To have excluded the conclusion that the framers of the constitution had regarded considerations so manifest and reasonable, there must have been terms so precise and accurate as to have left no doubt of their intention to make the act irrevocable when the power was once exercised. As some proof that the framers of the constitution did

* Letters on the National Institute. Smithsonian Legacy. The Fine Arts, and other matters connected with the interests of the District of Columbia. Washington: J. & G. S. Gideon.