 |
| There are no known illustrations of Daniel Shays. This rendition is from Bickerstaff’s Genuine Boston Almanac (Boston) - 1787. Captain Shays’ image appears on the left. |
PART 1 - What was Shays’ Rebellion and Why is it Important?
In 2006, The History Channel released a DVD series entitled ‘Ten Days that Unexpectedly Changed America’. Episode 10 focused on Shays’ Rebellion in Springfield, Massachusetts, which took place on January 25, 1787 at the US Arsenal there. Thousands of residents, mostly farmers from the western part of the state, attempted to seize the arsenal and then march to Boston to overthrow a government that had seized the property of indebted farmers. [i]
How could this happen in Massachusetts which had led the protest against the British, and the War for Independence? Historically, why does this Rebellion become so important? The immediate issue focused on attempts in Massachusetts to retire their Revolutionary War debt. Farmers who had fought in the American Revolution had been ‘paid’ for their service, if at all, by Continental dollars and financial bonds and notes which had become increasingly worthless. Over time, the notes had been purchased at fractional values from these veterans/farmers by financial speculators near Boston.
In Massachusetts, Governor James Bowdoin had a personal stake in having bonds and notes owned by financial speculators bought by the state at face value plus 6% interest. The purchase cost would be paid for by harsh increases in property taxes in gold and silver, not paper currency.[ii] Farmers and artisans were left in a bad position as they were mired in personal debt, oppressed by heavy taxes levied on behalf of these wealthy speculators who controlled the state debt.[iii]
Beginning in 1786, crowds of debt ridden farmers who called themselves ‘Regulators’ after protestors from the colonial Carolinas in the 1760s, began to shut down some state courts in counties in Western Massachusetts to prevent these courts from seizing their lands to pay the taxes.[iv] Without legislative approval, Governor Bowdoin on January 4 called for the establishment of a privately funded militia to stop the protest. The protest became militant in January 1787 when Daniels Shays, a Revolutionary War veteran from Massachusetts, and others led a group of protesters to the arsenal at Springfield. On January 25, 1787 a brief confrontation led to the death of 4 protestors and injuries to others. The regulators dispersed and the rebellion was over.[v] The rebellion ended in a whimper and was named Shays Rebellion by its opponents after who they considered the leader of the rebellion, even though other leaders were more proactive. In its aftermath, trials in Massachusetts led to hundreds of indictments and 18 death sentences, which resulted in only 2 hangings. Four thousand confessions and promises of loyalty helped return the state to more normalcy.[vi] Governor Bowdoin was voted out of office in a landslide election won by John Hancock. Hancock was wealthy but popular. The direct tax which hurt farmers was replaced by one which affected speculators and the tax on farmland was reduced dramatically.[vii]
So why is it so important? Shays Rebellion caused panic and dismay in Massachusetts and other states, in the opinions of many leaders of the Continental Congress and other Founding Fathers. It was an important catalyst which led to the Constitutional Convention which convened in May, 1787 to address the limitations of the Articles of Confederation. In the opinions of many, the Central Government needed to be stronger, to address problems like the public debt that Massachusetts sought to address. [viii]
PART 2 - Shays’ Rebellion and The Lloyd W Smith Collection
 |
| Promissory note authorized by Daniel Shays, 1777. Box 87, Folder 43. |
Approximately 80 of the letters and all 188 of the summary documents appear to be part of one collection acquired by Sweet from a source unidentified. One of the documents is what appears to be an unsigned and undated catalogue which indicates that “…the story of the campaign against the insurgents is best told in accompanying letters and documents, which formed General (Benjamin) Lincoln’s correspondence file during that period.”[ix] In addition, 25 documents related to Shays’ Rebellion were in the overall collection acquired by Smith but were not included in the catalogue documents.
The documents referenced here involve a number of the major players on both sides of the rebellion. It was not uncommon for private individuals to lend money to the new United States of America to support the Revolutionary War. Ironically, Daniel Shays himself authorized a 30-pound note to the State of Massachusetts Bay on October 24th 1777.[x] This was to be repaid with interest in late 1779. Veterans of the Revolutionary War had been paid for their service in paper Continentals and notes which had become increasingly worth less in the years after the Revolution, which contributed to the tensions in late 1786 and early 1787.
 |
| Letter from Henry Knox, 1786. Box 86, folder 26. |
The government of Massachusetts was becoming increasingly concerned as the insurgents became more organized under Captain Shays and others. The decision was made to raise a privately funded militia to protect the financial interests of Eastern Massachusetts who dominated the Massachusetts legislature. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts did not have the power to raise an army. Governor James Bowdoin selected Revolutionary War General Benjamin Lincoln to lead the militia. On January 19, 1787 he wrote to Lincoln to restate his charter. “ You will take command of the Militia detached in obedience to my Orders of the fourth (of January) instant…to protect the Judicial Courts…if the Justices of said Courts should request your aid: to assist the Civil Magistrates in executing the laws, and in repelling or apprehending all and every such person and persons as shall in a hostile manner attempt…the destruction , detriment or annoyance of this Commonwealth…”[xii]
On the same day Lincoln received a letter from Major General William Shepard who without official authority had moved some militia troops to protect the U.S. Arsenal in Springfield, Mass, believed to be a target of the insurgents. “Yesterday I took possession of the public buildings in this place with at least a thousand men… In the County of Berkshire we must expect a large body of Insurgents (led by Shays and Palmer) will march to oppose the works of the Government…The Militia are not more than half armed.”[xiii] Shepard asks permission to take arms from the US Arsenal to better protect it from Shays and others.
As highlighted in Part 1, January 25, 1787 became an important day in American History. A force of insurgents faced Shepard’s forces at the arsenal in Springfield. After first firing warning cannon shots over the heads of Shays insurgents, the next round was fired into their crowd, killing four and injuring others – the only fighting casualties of Shays Rebellion. The insurgents dispersed and the immediate crisis was over. On January 27, Governor Bowdoin congratulated General Lincoln, who had rushed troops to Springfield to assist Shepard. “It was with pleasure I [xiv] read your account of your pressing on to join General Shepard…Those persons in particular, being killed by General Shepard have fallen in consequence to their own temerity.”
In a follow up letter on January 30, Governor Bowdoin continued this theme: “ I am extremely happy to find you were able to disperse the Insurgents without shedding (more) blood. Justice tempered with mercy must have the most happy effects upon the minds of all ranks in the Community… You can best determine if it will be necessary to retain in the field any force more than was first ordered out.”[xv]
Before things settled down, some follow up activities were required, including pursuit and potential trials for Rebellion leaders, pardons and oaths of allegiance directed toward rank and file Insurgent participants. Lincoln had written to Shays who in turn wrote his reply on January 30, 1787 on the back side of Lincoln’s letter. “…The people are willing to lay down their arms on the condition of a general pardon, and return to their respective homes, as they are unwilling to stain the land which we in the late war purchased at so dear a rate with the blood of our brethren and neighbors.”[xvi] Ultimately, a non-vindictive peace was achieved. Shays was never apprehended and spent time in the independent area of Vermont before moving to New York, where he lived until his death in 1825. He eventually received his Revolutionary War pension.The Founding Fathers referenced in the introduction saw Shays Rebellion as proof that a stronger Central Government than provided in the Articles of Confederation, was needed. George Washington had remained keenly interested in events in Massachusetts, which helped convince him he needed to attend the Constitutional Convention scheduled to begin in May, 1787. His days of retirement at Mt. Vernon were coming to an end. In March 1787 he wrote to Thomas Cushing – a judge in Western Massachusetts. “…I am happy to find by the last accounts from the Northward that the disturbances in your State were almost totally suppressed. I hope before this that peace and good order are again restored. Mrs. Washington joins me in my best wishes for Mrs. Cushing and yourself.”[xvii]
 |
| George Washington to Cushing, 1787. Box 86, Folder 25. |
PART 3 – How Have Historians and Others Viewed the Impact of Shays’ Rebellion and The Constitutional Convention of May, 1787?
There is little dispute regarding the facts of Shays’ Rebellion itself, however, historians have had varying views over time on the causes of Shays’ Rebellion and its impact on the Constitutional Convention which met in May 1787. Davidson’s The Art of Historical Connection reminds us that “…there is a difference between what happened in the past to what history really is. …The past is not history, only the raw material of it.” [xviii]
Key to the debate over Shays’ is whether its cause was economic or political. Was it strictly about impoverished farmers in Western Massachusetts attempting to avoid economic ruin, or was it more a political protest, taking literally the Declaration of Independence published only ten years prior? Were the needs of the 55 representatives at the Constitutional Convention to protect their own property interests at risk with the weak Articles of Convention?
What is clear is that a number of influential leaders in the United States sounded the alarm as events in Massachusetts evolved. Sam Adams, a former leader of the Sons of Liberty declared that “… the man who dares rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death.” [xix] James Madison of Virginia warned that “…liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as the abuses of power.” From France, Thomas Jefferson countered that “…a little rebellion now and then is a good thing…The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”[xx] George Washington, the most famous man in the United States in 1787, complained “…what a triumph for our enemies…to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves.”[xxi]
Understandably, the ‘history’ of Shays’ Rebellion has been redefined over time. The early standard view of the Rebellion was compiled in 1786 by George Minot, clerk of the lower House of the Massachusetts Legislature – The History of the Insurrection in Massachusetts 1786 and the Rebellion consequent. In 188 pages, he focused on the economic spin - deluded farmers down on their luck. Minot hid the biases of state authorities and financial speculators. Washington felt this was a judicious view of the insurrection. Historian Leonard Richards states this view was notable for what it omits.[xxii]
Jonathan Smith in a 1905 speech in Clinton, Massachusetts, summarized the causes of the Rebellion as a combination of economic and political – the absence of a strong national government, the large quantities of paper money (Continentals and State Issued) that was worthless, and poverty due to the Revolutionary War, and public and private debt.[xxiii]
In 1913, Charles Beard, one of the most influential American historians of his time published An Economic Interpretation of the United States focused on the 1787 Convention which produced a Constitution which “…was formulated by interest groups whose motivations were just as much personal financial ones as they were political ones.”[xxiv] Politicians at the time were outraged at the time at the implication.
Leonard Richards writing in his 2002 book Shays’s Rebellion: The American Revolution’s Final Battle came down on the side of political motivation, changing the long held economic explanation. The 1780 Massachusetts Constitution consolidated power in the hands of the mercantile elite and the Eastern part of the state. It attempted to enrich the few at the expense of the many.[xxv]
Dr. Jude Pfister (Director of Cultural Resources at MNHP) has the view in his 2016 book Charting an American Republic, that Shays’ was more political than economic.[xxvi]
More recent podcasts and blogs focus on the economic undertones present among the Founders without dwelling on Shays’ Rebellion as the most important catalyst to the convention in Philadelphia. Historian Woody Holton reveals in his book ‘The Capitalist Constitution “….the fathers’ general contempt for democracy (called for) the necessity of a strong central government”. Article 1. Section 10 centers on prohibiting states from printing money, adopting any law impairing the obligation of contracts et al”. In other words, make the U.S. safe for investment. [xxvii] Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 was in direct response to Shays Rebellion: Powers granted to Congress includes the power “…to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.” [xxviii]Unlike many revolutions, the American Revolution was led by rich men. The Declaration of Independence was more like a document on secession than a revolutionary document. American business leaders wanted to more British meddling.[xxix]
George Washington who lent significant credibility to the Constitutional Convention just by attending, was part of the wealthy elite of 55 white men - slave owners and business people- who crafted the powers of the new government. The feeling was there is ‘too much democracy’ at the state level and that the common man is not trustworthy. Some of the powers of the federal government looked to preserve versus level economic classes, is seen in themes such as regulation of commerce, taxes on imports and the fugitive slave clause. [xxx] It wasn’t until the fight for ratification that the separate inclusion of the Bill of Rights became the constitutional quid pro quo.
In conclusion, this blog is not intended to come up with the authoritative answer to the questions posed at the beginning. The unnamed cataloger to the majority of the Shays’ documents in the LW Smith collection in his or her overview had closed his overview with the following aspiration
Adequate space in American History is yet to be given to Shays’ Rebellion. No historian has given us a proper account of this intensely interesting political situation but this can now be done from these original sources.[xxxi]
 |
| LWS catalog entry for Shays' collection. |
[i] Oxford Journal, Donald Robinson, Journal of American History, Dec. 2006
[ii] Podcast, Scene on Radio – The Excess of Democracy, January 22, 2020
[iii] Massachusetts Historical Society – March 2013.
[iv] Foner, Give Me Liberty – AP Edition, 2013, p. 265.
[v] Danzer et al., The Americans 2003 and 2010, p. 67
[vi] Richards, Shays’s Rebellion – The American Revolutions Final Battle. 2002, pp. 43-4.
[vii] Massachusetts Historical Society – March 2013
[viii] Danzer et al., The Americans 2003 and 2010, p. 67
[ix] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 13
[x] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 87 folder 43
[xi] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 26
[xii] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 30
[xiii] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 33
[xiv] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 87, folder 14
[xv] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 87, folder 20.
[xvi] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 87, folder 21.
[xvii] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 25.
[xviii] Davidson, The Art of Historical Detection, McGraw Hill, 2005.
[xix] Richards, Shays’s Rebellion – The American Revolution’s Final Battle, 2002, p.16.
[xx] Foner, Give Me Liberty, AP Edition 2013, pp. 265-6
[xxi] Danzler, et al. Americans, 2013, p.140.
[xxii] Richards, Shays’s Rebellion, p. 160.
[xxiii] Pfister, Charting an American Republic, McFarland and Co. 2016, p. 117.
[xxiv] Britannica Online Encyclopedia, Charles Beard.
[xxv] Richards, Shays’s Rebellion pp. 63 and 74.
[xxvi] Pfister, p. 118.
[xxvii] Woody Holton and the Capitalist Constitution, Todd Burst, medium.com, May 24, 2018.
[xxviii] United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15.
[xxix] Podcast, Scene on Radio, Rich Man’s Revolt, January 8, 2020.
[xxx] Podcast, Scene on Radio, The Excess of Democracy, January 22, 2020.
[xxxi] LWS Collection, MNHP, Box 86, folder 13
Additional Resources:
Scene on Radio Podcast : Rich Man's Revolt
Scene on Radio Podcast : Rich Man's Revolt
In the American Revolution, the men who revolted were among the wealthiest and most comfortable people in the colonies. What kind of revolution was it, anyway? Was it about a desire to establish democracy—or something else?
This post Michael Collins, Education Volunteer, Cultural Resources, Morristown National Historical Park April 27, 2020
No comments:
Post a Comment