The Election of 1789 George Washington was sworn in as the first president of the United States on April 30, 1789. As the most highly esteemed public figure of his generation, Washington conferred upon the new government a dignity and gravitas that it probably would not have enjoyed had any other person occupied the office. Mindful that the Constitution represented a bold and historic political experiment, Washington said in his inaugural address, “the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.”

The Electoral Count for the Presidential Election of 1789 http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/scores.html

Washington's Inaugural Address of 1789 http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/inaugtxt.html

Article, “George Washington: The Reluctant President,” by Ron Chernow http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/George-Washington-The-Reluctant-President.html

The Material Culture of the Presidency http://www.mountvernon.org/node/8279

“A New Display of the United States of America” (Image) http://www.americanantiquarian.org/Exhibitions/Men/01.jpg

Letter from George Washington to Alexander Hamilton (August 26, 1792) on the Rise of Political Faction http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-12-02-0206

The First Federal Congress The first Congress met in New York City in 1789, keenly aware that the fate of the new government depended on how Congress managed its affairs. As Representative James Jackson of Georgia explained, “Our constitution . . . is like a vessel just launched, and lying at the wharf she is untried, you can hardly discover any one of her properties; it is not known how she will answer her helm, or lay her course; whether she will bear in safety the precious freight to be deposited in her hold.”

Birth of the Nation: The First Federal Congress (Online Exhibit) http://www.gwu.edu/~ffcp/exhibit/index.html

The Bill of Rights One of the first items of business for the new Congress was drafting a Bill of Rights for ratification by the states. On June 8, 1789, James Madison introduced a draft bill of rights “to satisfy the public mind that their liberties will be perpetual, and this without endangering any part of the constitution, which is considered as essential to the existence of the government by those who promoted its adoption.”

The First Federal Congress: Amendments to the Constitution (Online Exhibit) http://www.gwu.edu/~ffcp/exhibit/p7/

James Madison Presents the Bill of Rights to Congress http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/james-madison/proposed-amendments-to-the-constitution.php

Photographic Image of the Bill of Rights http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights.html

Transcript of the Bill of Rights http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Article, “James Madison and the Bill of Rights,” by Jack Rakove http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/jamesmadison.pdf

The Judiciary Act of 1789 Principally drafted by Senators Oliver Ellsworth and William Paterson, the Judiciary Act of 1789 fully fleshed out the system of federal courts loosely drawn by Article III of the Constitution. The Judiciary Act created a federal judicial system that acknowledged the authority and jurisdiction of state courts while establishing the supremacy of the federal system in national affairs.

Background on the Judiciary Act of 1789 http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/landmark_02.html

Text of the Judiciary Act of 1789 http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/landmark_02_txt.html

The Whiskey Rebellion In 1791, Congress levied an excise tax on whiskey. The tax provoked much resentment, which reached a head in 1794 with the outbreak of armed resistance in Pennsylvania. It was the first major domestic crisis of the Washington administration, and the president dealt with it swiftly. On August 7, President Washington issued a proclamation announcing his intention, “to take measures for calling forth the Militia.” He further stated, “I have accordingly determined to do so, feeling the deepest regret for the occasion, but withal, the most solemn conviction, that the essential interests of the Union demand it.” The rebellion was crushed and the rebels pardoned.

Excise Tax on Whiskey (1791) http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=322

Sixth Annual Message of George Washington (November 19, 1794) http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washs06.asp

Washington’s Supreme Court Appointments As the first president to nominate justices to the Supreme Court, George Washington set precedents that would endure through the centuries. Washington nominated justices who shared his political vision for the United States. He also sought to achieve balanced geographic representation on the Court in order to ensure that different regional interests were represented.

Essays, “The Supreme Court Before John Marshall,”by Robert Lowry Clinton http://www.supremecourthistory.org/publications/the-supreme-court-before-john-marshall/#sthash.VvhYWtfh.dpuf

John Jay http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/chief-justices/john-jay-1789-1795/

John Rutledge http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/chief-justices/john-rutledge-1795/

William Cushing http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/william-cushing-1790-1810/

James Wilson http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/james-wilson-1789-1798/

John Blair http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/john-blair-jr-1790-1796/

James Iredell http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/james-iredell-1790-1799/

William Paterson http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/william-paterson------1793-1806/

Samuel Chase http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-court/associate-justices/samuel-chase-1796-1811/

Hayburn’s Case (1792) Hayburn’s Case called upon the Court to decide whether Congress could assign nonjudicial functions to federal judges. Congress changed the law before the Court could rule on the merits of the case.

Hayburn’s Case (1792) http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a3_2_1s31.html

Ware v. Hylton (1796) In Ware v. Hylton, the Supreme Court struck down a Virginia debt sequestration law on the ground that it violated the terms of the Treaty of Paris.

Ware v. Hylton (1796) http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/3/199/case.html

Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) In Chisholm v. Georgia, the Supreme Court held that citizens of South Carolina could sue the State of Georgia in federal court under Article III of the Constitution.

Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0002_0419_ZO.html

Hylton v. United States (1796) In Hylton v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of an act of Congress for the first time. Because the Court held the statute in question constitutional, the ruling was relatively uncontroversial.

Hylton v. United States (1796) http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/3/171/case.html

Vanhorne’s Lessee v. Dorrance (1795) In Vanhorne’s Lessee v. Dorrance, the federal circuit court for Pennsylvania struck down a state law on the ground that it violated the Contract Clause of the Constitution.

Vanhorne’s Lessee v. Dorrance (1795) http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/2/304/case.html

United States v. Hudson and Goodwin (1812) In United States v. Hudson and Goodwin, the Supreme Court held that there is no federal common law.

United States v. Hudson and Goodwin (1812) http://www.constitution.org/ussc/007-032.htm

Alexander Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, the nation’s first secretary of treasury, was the architect of the early republic’s economic policy. He believed that a well-financed national debt was essential to establish the nation’s credit, and that manufacture and commerce were the principal engines of economic growth. He proposed the creation of the Bank of the United States and was responsible for the establishment of the national mint.

Report on the Subject of Manufactures (Excerpts) http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/livingrev/politics/text2/hamilton.pdf

Hamilton's Opinion as to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States (1791) http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bank-ah.asp

The First Bank of the United States: A Chapter in the History of Central Banking http://philadelphiafed.org/publications/economic-education/first-bank.pdf

Neutrality Proclamation

The French Revolutionary Wars of the 1790s triggered much controversy in the United States. Some, including Thomas Jefferson, viewed the French Revolution as the embodiment of the republican ideals that had animated the American Revolution. They urged the United States to honor earlier diplomatic commitments to France by assisting in her war against Britain. Others, including Alexander Hamilton, were wary of the radicalism of the French Revolution and urged the United States not to provoke Great Britain, the greatest naval power in the world. The controversy culminated in the Pacificus–Helvidius debates and Washington’s Neutrality Proclamation of 1793.

Text of the Proclamation of Neutrality (1793) http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/neutra93.asp

The Pacificus–Hevidius Debates of 1793–1794 http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php?title=1910&Itemid=27

Letter from Thomas Jefferson to James Madison (July 7, 1793) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1910&chapter=112549&layout=html&Itemid=27

Article, “Pacificus & Helvidius Reconsidered,” by William R. Castro http://repository.law.ttu.edu/bitstream/handle/10601/474/casto1.pdf

Citizen Genêt Notwithstanding Washington’s Proclamation of Neutrality, French ambassador to the United States Edmond-Charles Genêt attempted to galvanize domestic support for the revolutionary cause. He commissioned privateers to attack British commerce and exhorted Americans to assist in the defense of the French West Indies. In a notice of 1793, he urged, “I cannot too much encourage the citizens of the United States to continue to assist with unremitting exertions their republican brethren of the French West Indies, whose existence, from the liberal principles adopted by the national Convention with regard to the Colonies of the French Républic must essentially contribute to the prosperity of the United States.”

Extract from the Registers of the Deliberations of the Provisory Executive Council of France: Official Instructions to Edmond-Charles Genêt http://books.google.com/books?id=5uw1AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA144&lpg=PA144&dq=citizen+genet&source=bl&ots=8iQ8tvxXLB&sig=dv_OCCRb7w4HiJm2DQzOqeU2EQk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YCxbUp-UOMGmkQevgIGgAg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAzhQ#v=onepage&q=citizen%20genet&f=false

Edmond-Charles Genêt’s Notice to the Citizens of the United States (June 17, 1793) http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-26-02-0284

Cabinet Opinion on the Recall of Edmond Genêt (August 23, 1793) http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-13-02-0352

Jay’s Treaty Relations between Britain and the United States remained tense after the Revolution. Britain flooded U.S. markets with cheap manufactures while excluding American goods; Britain continued to occupy territory in the Northwest that it had ceded to the United States under the Treaty of Paris; and Britain continued impressing American seamen into the Royal Navy. Jay’s Treaty secured the evacuation of the Northwest and granted Britain most-favored-nation status in commerce with the United States. Because of his weak bargaining position, Jay could achieve little more. In a letter to General Henry Lee on July 11, 1795, Jay wrote, “The treaty is as it is; and the time will certainly come when it will very universally receive exactly that degree of commendation or censure which, to candid and enlightened minds, it shall appear to deserve. In the meantime I must do as many others have done before me—that is, regretting the depravity of some, and the ignorance of a much greater number, bear with composure and fortitude the effects of each. It is as vain to lament that our country is not entirely free from these evils, as it would be to lament that our fields produce weeds as well as corn.” The treaty was deeply unpopular at home and brought the nation to brink of war with France.

Text of Jay’s Treaty http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jay.asp

Letter from John Jay to General Henry Lee (July 11, 1795) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2330&chapter=220673&layout=html&Itemid=27 Letter from George Washington to John Jay (August 31, 1795) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2330&chapter=220678&layout=html&Itemid=27

Letter from John Jay to Edmund Randolph (August 20, 1795) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2330&chapter=220677&layout=html&Itemid=27

Letter from John Jay to George Washington (September 3, 1795) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2330&chapter=220679&layout=html&Itemid=27

Essay, “The Jay Treaty,” by James Baird, with Links to Select Digital Images of John Jay’s Papers http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/jay/jaytreaty.html

Essay, “Jay Treaty,” by Richard J. Behn http://lehrmaninstitute.org/history/jay-treaty.asp

The X, Y, Z Affair As diplomatic relations with France worsened, President Adams sent a delegation of commissioners to Paris in the hope of negotiating a treaty to prevent the outbreak of war. The French government refused to receive the delegation, instead sending three agents to conduct negotiations. The agents, known as X, Y, and Z, demanded a loan for the French government and a bribe for members of the Directory, the current ruling body of France. The American commissioners flatly refused. When details of the French demands became known, the Hamiltonian faction of the Federalist party called for war, a course of action opposed by President Adams and averted by the Convention of 1800.

Coded Letter from James Monroe to George Washington (March 24, 1796) Notifying the President that the French Have Intercepted His Correspondence http://emuseum.mountvernon.org/code/emuseum.asp?style=browse&currentrecord=1&page=search&profile=objects&searchdesc=Jay%20Treaty&quicksearch=Jay%20Treaty&sessionid=1E0D72DD-DA23-4192-B43A-A39C66B35708&action=quicksearch&style=single&currentrecord=1

Quasi War with France (Primary Sources) http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/quasi.asp

The X, Y, Z Affair and the Quasi-War with France, 1798–1800 http://history.state.gov/milestones/1784-1800/XYZ

XYZ Affair Speech by John Adams (May 16, 1797) http://historicaldocuments.org/xyz-affair-speech-by-john-adams/

Letter from George Washington to William Vans Murray in the Wake of the X, Y, Z Affair (August 10, 1798) http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2418&chapter=229093&layout=html&Itemid=27

Treaty of Morfontaine http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/fr1800.asp

Alien and Sedition Acts As the undeclared naval war with France escalated, Congress passed several internal security measures. The Alien Act authorized the deportation of individuals deemed by the president to be a threat to national security. The Sedition Act, which was directed at the Republican press, criminalized the publication of any “false, scandalous and malicious writing” that brought the government, members of Congress, or the president into disrepute. The acts served to deepen the rift between the Republican and Federalist camps in government.

Text of the Alien and Sedition Acts http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=16&page=transcript

Photographic Images of the Alien and Sedition Acts http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=16

Background, “The Sedition Act Trials,” by Bruce A. Ragsdale http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/tu_sedition_background.html

Article, “George Washington and the Alien and Sedition Acts,” by Marshall Smelser http://www.jstor.org/stable/1843624

Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions The Virginia and Kentucky legislatures passed resolutions condemning the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Resolutions, known as the Principles of ‘98, were drafted by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson for the Virginia and Kentucky legislatures, respectively. The Resolutions characterized the federal government as a compact government having only powers granted to it by the Constitution. Therefore, argued Kentucky’s Resolution No. 1, “this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.” The theory of government advanced in the Resolutions gained prominence during the Nullification Crisis of 1828–1833.

Virginia Resolution http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp

Kentucky Resolution http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp

Essay, “The Principles of ’98: An Essay in Historical Retrieval,” by H. Jefferson Powell http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1392&context=faculty_scholarship

Election of 1800 The hotly contested election of 1800 resulted in a clear Republican victory, but by an unclear deadlock: Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr tied in the race for the presidency. The vote was sent to the House of Representatives, where Alexander Hamilton ultimately intervened, encouraging Federalists to support Jefferson as the lesser of two evils. Aaron Burr became vice president. The episode led to the ratification of the Twelfth Amendment, which provides for the election of the president and vice president on separate ballots.

Tally of Electoral Votes for the 1800 Presidential Election, February 11, 1801 http://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/1800-election/1800-election.html

Article, “Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr and the Election of 1800,” by Thomas Ferling http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Thomas-Jefferson-Aaron-Burr-and-the-Election-of-1800.html

Essay, “The Presidential Election of 1800: A Story of Crisis, Controversy, and Change,”by Joanne B. Freeman http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/early-republic/essays/presidential-election-1800-story-crisis-controversy-and-change

Online Exhibit: The Election of 1800 http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/creatingtheus/BillofRights/Electionof1800/Pages/objectlist.aspx

Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry (January 26, 1799) http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/thomas-jefferson/letters-of-thomas-jefferson/jefl125.php

Letter from Alexander Hamilton to Harrison Gray Otis (December 23, 1800) http://www.scribd.com/doc/40097417/Alexander-Hamilton-writes-to-Harrison-Otis-encouraging-Federalist-to-vote-for-Thomas-Jefferson-in-the-1800-Presidential-Election#fullscreen

Twelfth Amendment (with Commentary) http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/amendXII.html

Judiciary Act of 1801 The Judiciary Act of 1801 reorganized the federal judiciary, reducing the number of Supreme Court justices to five and eliminating circuit duties for members of the Court. The Act created sixteen circuit judges, all appointed by President Adams during his final months in office. The act made the federal judiciary more efficient but was bitterly controversial because it was obviously motivated by party politics.

Text of the Judiciary Act of 1801 http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/landmark_03_txt.html

Background on the Judiciary Act of 1801 http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/landmark_03.html