Excerpts from The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792

Robert A. Rutland, ed., 3 vols. (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1970).

1775 Documents

1775, Feb 14? Letter: George Washington to GM [not found], pp. 219-220.

Ed. note: Thomas Johnson of Maryland had been working on a bill to improve navigation on the Potomac, and Washington appears to have discussed and perhaps encouraged GM to draft similar legislation for Virginia.

1775, Feb 17 Letter: GM to George Washington, pp. 220-221.

"I had gone a good Way thro' the Bill for improving the Navigation of Potomack, before I went to Maryland, & am happy in finding that I had fallen into many of Mr. Johnson's Sentiments, tho' I was a Stranger to them, 'til I recd. yr. Letter upon my Return last Night. I wish it was within my Power to spend a Day wth. him on the Subject. Some of his Remarks are not so intelligible to me as they wou'd be, if I had all the Queries which he seems to answer. When he mentions some kind of Jealosy least the Virginians shou'd have some Advantage, & that there shou'd be some Equality between the Maryland & Virga. Subscriptions, I can have no Idea of. What Matter is it whether the Majority of the Subscribers are Marylanders or Virginians if their Property is put upon an equal Footing & the Work is of general advantage to both Provinces? Nor can I think his Notion of proportioning the Tolls to the average Profits can well be reduced to Practice. A sufficient Sum can't be raised by those only who are locally interested; men who are not, will not advance their Money, upon so great a Risque but wth. Veiws of great & increasing Profit, not to depend upon future Alterations: the Tolls, to be sure, must be moderate, such as the Commodities will bear, with advantage to the Makers; it is probable for some Years they will yield very little Profit to the Undertakers, perhaps none; they must run the Risque of this, as well as of the ultimate Failure of the Undertaking, & surely if they succeed they have a just Right to the increased Profits; tho' in the process of Time they may become very great. If I am not misinform'd, this is the Principle upon which everything of this Nature has been successfully executed in other Countrys."

Ed. note: The Bill for improving the Navigation of Potomack was a project to cut a canal from the tidewater to Fort Cumberland. A plan already approved by the Virginia General Assembly (Hening, VIII, 570-579) had been written by GM's brother, Thomas Mason, in 1772 which would have created a private corporation to build and maintain the canal. Washington had served on the House of Burgesses committee with Thomas Mason and took an active interest in promoting the canal scheme. Speculators in western lands--which included Washington, Johnson, and GM--expected a rise inland values if a cheaper mode of transportation could be devised. Johnson had written Washingon on 21 Feb. 1774 (Washington Papers, DLC) that he helped push a £3,000 appropriation for western road-building through the Maryland General Assembly and "made a shew of pushing for a further Sum for improving the River with a View to secure more certainly the £3,000 for the Road." Meanwhile John Ballendine publicly announced a scheme to build a canal and announced (Va. Gaz. [Purdie & Dixon], 3 Nov. 1774) the appointment of 21 Virginians and 22 Marylanders as trustees of the plan. The Virginians includedGM, Thomson Mason, and Washington, while Johnson was listed as a Maryland trustee. A meeting of the trustees, scheduled at Georgetown on 12 Nov. 1774, drew scant attention and was rescheduled for 26 Jan. 1775 with no more success (Fitzpatrick, ed., Diaries of Washington, II, 170, 183). Ballendine continued to promote his scheme and announced in the Annapolis Md. Gaz., 16 Feb. 1775, that he was hiring 50 slaves to start work on a canal. On 24 Jan. 1775 Johnson had written Washington saying "you may depend on my best Endeavors to get a Bill passed here similar to yours . . . I Really believe if I had not a foot of Land above the falls I should be as warm a friend to the scheme . . ." (Hamilton, ed., Letters to Washington, V, 85). GM apparently had access to a later letter of Johnson's addressed to Washington, which is now lost. Thomson Mason's earlier bill provided for a public lottery, an elaborate system of tolls, and a deadline (1 Nov. 1773) which was not met, and the plan was thus stillborn. GM continued to work on a draft and reported his labors finished on 9 March 1775. GM's bill may have been the one passed by the Virginia General Assembly in June 1775 (JHB, 1772-1776, 274) which never became operative as the military crisis mounted. However, GM's participationin maters involving the Potomac continued to 1785.

1775, Feb 18 Letter: GM to George Washington, pp. 223-224.

"It has not been in my Power to do any thing, since I came from Maryland, towards the Potomack River Bill; but I will apply to it as soon as I can, & when finish'd forward it to you."

1775, Mar [8] Letter: GM to George Washington, p. 224 .

"I have at last finished the Potomack River Bill; which I now send you, together with some very long Remarks thereon, & a Letter to Mr. Johnson; into which you'll be pleased to put a Wafer, when you forward the other Papers to him. I also return the Acts of Assembly, & Mr. Johnson's Notes, which you sent me. This Affair has taken me five times as long as I expected; and I do assure you I never ingaged in any thing which puzled me more; there were such a Number of Contingencys to provide for, & drawing up Laws a thing so out of my Way I shall be well pleased if the Pains I have bestowed upon the Subject prove of any Service to so great an Undertaking; but by what I can understand, there will be so strong an Opposition from Baltemore, & the Head of the Bay, as will go near to prevent it's passage thro' the Maryland Assembly, in any Shape it can be offered."

Ed. note: The Potomack River Bill, which had been on GM's mind for some weeks, was meant as a joint effort that would have evoked similar aid from Maryland in the construction of canals enabling ocean-going vessels to ascend the Potomac as far as Fort Cumberland. The idea appealed to western land speculators and GM, Thomson Mason, Washington, Thomas Johnson and others with trans-Allegheny interests had been enlisted by John Ballendine in a scheme thatappeared to be on the verge of activity (see B to Washington, 17 Feb. 1775, and notes). The bill may have been the basis for a measure introduced in the House of Burgesses by James Mercer, who certainly owed GM and Washington a favor, on 5 June 1775 (JHB, 1772-1776, 191). Neither the bill enclosed here not that Mercer introduced has been found. The latter bill, calling for a company capitalized at £40,000 to extend "Navigation of the River Potomack," passed the Virginia General Assembly but never became operative because the warintervened. Similarly, Ballendine's venture faltered and was abandoned, but the idea implanted was revived after the war. Johnson's notes and GM's letter to Johnson are lost. The Marylander's involvement is related in Edward S. Delaplaine, The Life of Thomas Johnson . . . (New York, 1927), 59-84. The Maryland General Assembly eventually acted on the proposal in 1784, and GM became a Virginia commissioner in the interstate negotiations of 1785.

1775, Mar 9 Letter: GM to George Washington, pp. 226-227.

"I beg you to inform Mr. Johnson that the Bill I have drawn is intended only as a Ground-work, & that I desire every part of it may be submitted to his Correction."