Excerpts from The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792
Robert A. Rutland, ed., 3 vols. (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1970).
1785 Documents
28 Mar 1785 The Mount Vernon Compact, pp. 812-822.
[Images of most of these pages have already been made available for download elsewhere on this web site. I'll distill what's there to a few paragraphs:]
pp. 812-813: Ed. Note: The Mount Vernon Conference of 1785 was the first in a series of cooperative endeavors which culminated in the Federal Convention of 1787. . . . As neighboring colonies, Maryland and Virginia had separate governments . . . with . . . a mutual interest in their shared lifeline, the Potomac. Once the royal mantle was removed from the Chesapeake, old rivalries and disagreements over navigation, coastal defense, fishing and riparian rights, customs duties, lighthouses, and safety regulations became matters of continuous concern between the two states. . . . The maze of interstate regulations had a restrictive tendency despite the provisions of the fourth Article of Confederation which guaranteed Americans "free ingress and regress to and from any state." Cooperation between the two neighbors was not enhanced by the reluctance of Maryland leaders to ratify those Articles, an unfriendly act which was partly laid to speculation by Marylanders jealous of Virginia's extensive western land claims. [Perhaps we should examine the later cooperative endeavors with an eye to finding common patterns. And a look at the court cases that resulted from the reanimation of those old rivalries and disagreements could lead us to understand the intent behind the seventh article of the compact.]
Notwithstanding all these problems, the two states recognized their need for agreement on the jurisdictional limits in their shared waterway. In 1778, Virginia had appointed commissioners to work toward that end, but the exigencies of war shoved the plan aside. [What are the records of this earlier appointment?] Peace in 1783 brought a return to normal oceangoing commerce, and the increased trade made an interstate agreement vital, if the Potomac was to be a flourishing avenue for shipping and a food source for fishermen, without cumbersome prohibitions.
In June 1784 the Virginia General Assembly declared that "great inconveniences are found to result from the want of some concerted regulations between this
State and the State of Maryland, touching the jurisdiction and navigation of the river Potomac." The legislators proceeded to appoint four commissioners,
empowering "any three of them" to meet with a Maryland commission to "frame such liberal and equitable regulations concerning the said river, as may be
mutually advantageous to the two states . . ." (JHD, 1828 ed., 28 June 1784 entry).Implicit in the resolution was the governor's responsibility for notifying
Mason, Edmund Randolph, Alexander Henderson, and James Madison of their appointment as commissioners. After the resolution was dispatched to Maryland,
however, it was placed in a clerical pigeonhole and forgotten. Months passed without any action by the Virginia appointees, such as Mason, who were
completely unaware of their commission. Then, rather suddenly, the commissioners converged upon Alexandria, reconvened at Mount Vernon, and in the space
of a few days reached an agreement that was to have impact upon the whole structure of the fledgling confederation.
pp. 816-817: THE COMPACT BETWEEN MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA RELATING TO THE JURISDICTION AND NAVIGATION OF THE POTOMAC AND POKOMOKE RIVERS
"At a meeting of the Commissioners appointed by the General Assemblies of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland, for forming a compact
between the two States to regulate and settle the Jurisdiction and navigation of the Potomack and Pokomoke Rivers and that part of the Chesapeake Bay which
lieth within the Territory of Virginia to wit George Mason and Alexander Henderson Esquires on the part of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Daniel of Saint
Thomas Jenifer, Thomas Stone and Samuel Chase Esquires on the part of the State of Maryland, at Mount Vernon in Virginia on the twenty eighth day of March
in the Year one thousand seven hundred and eighty five, the following compact was mutually agreed to by the said commissioners."
p. 817: <Article the> "First.
The Commonwealth of Virginia disclaims all Rights to impose any Toll Duty or Charge, prohibition or Restraint on any Vessel whatever sailing through the Capes of Chesapeake Bay to the State of Maryland, or from the said State through the said Capes outward bound, and agrees that the Waters of Chesapeake Bay and the River Pokomoke within the limits of Virginia be forever considered as a common High Way free for the Use and Navigation of any Vessel belonging to the said State of Maryland or any of its Citizens, or carrying on Commerce to or from the said State or with any of its Citizens and that any such Vessel inward or outward bound may freely enter any of the Rivers within the Commonwealth of Virginia as a Harbour, or for safety against an Enemy without the payment of any Port Duty or any other Charge and also that the beforementioned Ports of Chesapeake Bay and Pokomoke River be free for the Navigation of Vessels from one part of the State of Maryland to another."
[Note that the Potomac River is not mentioned in this article, because this one deals with Virginia waters. The commissioners from both states understood that
the Potomac was wholly owned by Maryland. Third, the lower reaches of the Chesapeake Bay lay within Virginia's borders, so it was critical for Maryland to
obtain free navigation of them. Mason later admits this point was the "sine qua non" for the Maryland commissioners. Third, that part of the Pokomoke River
lying in Virginia is wholly below tidewater. By the time the Pokomoke ceases to be navigable, it lies within Maryland. Fourth, the definitions of the words
"vessel," "sailing," "navigation," "harbour," and "port" all stamp this article as referring solely to the tidewater.]
p. 817: "Second
The State of Maryland agrees that any Vessel belonging to the Commonwealth of Virginia or any of its Citizens, or carrying on Commerce to or from the said Commonwealth or with any of its Citizens may freely enter any of the Rivers of the State of Maryland as a Harbour or for safety against an Enemy without the payment of Port Dutys or any other Charge."
[This article is the counterpart of the first, and delineates what Maryland gives up as a balance to Virginia's earlier cessions. Free entry to the Potomac, one of
Maryland's rivers, was encompassed by this article.]
pp.817-818: "Third
Vessels of War the property of either State shall not be subject to the payment of any Port-Duty or other charge."
[This is a mutual article, granting equal rights to both states. Again, the words "vessels" and "port" denote that this article refers to the tidewater.]
p. 818: "Fourth
Vessels not exceeding forty feet Keel nor fifty Tons burthen the property of any Citizen of Virginia or Maryland, or of Citizens of both States trading from one State to the other only, and having on board only the produce of the said States, may enter and trade in any port of either State with a Permit from the naval officer of the District from which such Vessel departs with her Cargo and shall be subject to no Port Charges."
[It would make no sense for a naval officer to be stationed at an inland town, above the navigable portion of any river, because no vessel could have reached him
there. Nor would there have been any duty or charge for him to collect, because any such duty would already have been collected at a port on the navigable
portion of the Chesapeake Bay or its tributaries in either state. The only duties or charges that could have been due would have been those resulting from
overland transport, which were payable at the county courthouse, there being no possibility of a "port" inland. The description of the vessels' size was not
intended to include tiny boats, but only those smaller sea-going vessels that could carry only a small quantity of goods.]
p. 818: "Fifth
All Merchant Vessels (except such as are described in the fourth Article) navigating the River Potomack shall enter and clear at some Naval office on the said River in one or both States according to the Laws of the State in which the Entry shall be made, and when any Vessel shall make an Entry in both States such Vessel shall be subject to Tonnage in each State only in proportion to the Commodities carried to or taken from such State."
[Larger sea-going vessels would have to enter at designated ports only, and pay such charges as required by the laws of the relevant state. This article would,
again, be meaningless as applied to the upper Potomac, not only because it's nonsensical to speak of a Naval Officer inland, but also because a vessel could not
"enter and clear" the falls that mark the limits of navigability.]
p. 818: "Sixth
The River Potomack shall be considered as a common High Way for the purpose of Navigation and Commerce to the Citizens of Virginia and Maryland and of the United States and to all other Persons in amity with the said States trading to or from Virginia or Maryland."
[Again, this clause cannot refer to inland navigation of the Potomac because of the reference to commerce from the other states in the Union, none of which
could have reached the inland portions of the Potomac unless they crossed through the inland territory of Virginia or Maryland first. This clause, therefore, refers
only to navigation and commerce entering the navigable portions of the river.]
p. 818: "Seventh
The Citizens of each State respectively shall have full property in the Shores of the Potomack River adjoining their Lands with all Emoluments [profits] and advantages thereunto belonging and the privilege of making and carrying out Wharfs and other Improvements so as not to obstruct or injure the Navigation of the River; But the Rights of fishing the River shall be common to and equally enjoyed by the Citizens of both States, provided that such common Rights be not exercised by the Citizens of the one State to the Hinderance or Disturbance of the Fisheries on the Shores of the other State, and that the Citizens of neither State shall have the Right to fish with Nets or Seines on the Shores of the other."
[This is the first article that seems to refer to inland portions of the river, as well as the navigable portions. But I would argue that the scope of the agreement has
already been set by the first six articles, and is limited to the tidewater portions of the river. So, even though fish live in the upper parts of the river, too, this
article governs only the tidewater reaches. Furthermore, although it is possible to build wharves on inland portions of the Potomac, because of the shallow and
rocky conditions there, they could serve only small boats. This article specifically refers to wharves that might obstruct and injure navigation, meaning
large-scale, sea-going navigation worthy of interstate regulation, not small-scale inland navigation (which would, in any case, be regulated by the Potomac
Company, not the two states).]
pp. 818-819: "Eighth
All Laws and Regulations which may be necessary for the preservation of Fish or for the performance of Quarentine in the River Potomack, or for preserving and keeping open the Channel and Navigation thereof, or of the River Pokomoke within the limits of Virginia, by preventing the throwing out Ballast, or giving any other obstruction thereto, shall be made with the mutual Consent and Approbation of both States."
[The inclusion of the Pokomoke in this article, a river that is wholly navigable where it is within the bounds of Virginia, helps show that the article applies only to
tidewater matters. And the concept of "ballast," of course, makes no sense when applied to small river boats, which do not require such stabilization.]
p. 819: "Ninth
Light Houses, Beacons, Bouys, or other necessary Signals shall be erected fixed and maintained, upon Chesapeake Bay, between the Sea and the mouths of the Rivers Potomack and Pokomoke and upon the River Potomack, at the Expense of both States-if upon Potomack River at the joint and equal Charge of both States and if upon the beforementioned part of Chesapeake Bay, Virginia shall defray five parts, and Maryland three Parts of such Expence, and if this proportion shall in future times be found unequal, the same shall be corrected. And for ascertaining the proper places, mode and Plans for erecting and fixing Light Houses, Bouys, Beacons and other signals as aforesaid, both States shall upon the application of either to the other appoint an equal number of Commissioners, not less than three or more than five from each State to meet at such times and places as the said Commissioners or a major part of them shall judge fit, to fix upon the proper places, mode and Plans for erecting and fixing such Light Houses, Beacons, or other Signals and report the same with an Estimate of the Expence thereof to the Legislatures of both States for their approbation."
[Lighhouses and bouys are devices to ensure the safety of open navigation, and make no sense for inland navigation.]
pp. 819-820: "Tenth
All Piracies, Crimes or Offenses commited on that part of Chesapeake Bay which lies within the limits of Virginia or that part of the said Bay where the Line of
Division from the South Point of Potomack River (now called Smiths Point) to Watkins's Point near the mouth of the Pokomoke River may be doubtful and on
that part of Pokomoke River within the limits of Virginia, or where the line of Division between the two States upon the said River is doubtful, by any Persons
not Citizens of the Common wealth of Virginia against the Citizens of Maryland shall be tried in the Courts of the State of Maryland which hath legal Cognizance
of such offenses. And all Piracies, Crimes and Offences commited on the before mentioned Parts of the Chesapeake Bay and Pokomoke River by any Persons not
Citizens of Maryland against any Citizen of Virginia shall be tried in the Courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia which hath legal Cognizance of such offences.
All Piracies, Crimes and Offences commited on the said Parts of Chesapeake Bay and Pokomoke River by Persons not Citizens of either State against Persons
not Citizens of either State shall be tried in the Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia having legal cognizance of such offences. And all Piracies, Crimes, and
Offences commited on the said Parts of Chesapeake Bay and Pokomoke River by any Citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia or of the State of Maryland,
either against the other, shall be tried in the Court of that State of which the offender is a Citizen. The Jurisdiction of each State over the River Potomack shall be
exercised in the same manner as is prescribed for the beforementioned Parts of Chesapeake Bay and Pokomoke River in every respect except in the case of
Piracies, Crimes and Offences commited by Persons not Citizens of either State upon Persons not Citizens of either State. In which Case the offenders shall be
tried by the Court of the State to which they shall first be brought. And if the Inhabitants of either State shall commit any Violence Injury or Trespass to or upon
the Property or Lands of the other, adjacent to the said Bay and Rivers, or to any Person upon such Lands, upon proof of due Notice to the Offender to appear
and answer, any Court of Record or Civil Magistrate of the State where the Offence shall have been commited having jurisdiction thereof, may enter the
appearance of such Persons and proceed to trial and Judgement in the same manner as if the legal Process had been served on such offender, and such Judgement
shall be valid and effectual against the Person and Property of such Offender both in the State where the offence shall have been commited and also in the State
where the said offender may reside, and execution may be issued by the Court or Magistrate giving such Judgement, in the same manner as upon Judgements
given in other Cases or upon a transcript of such Judgement, properly authenticated being produced to any Court or Magistrate of the State where such offender
may reside having Jurisdiction within the State or County where the Offender may reside in Cases of a similar Nature. Such Court or Magistrate shall order
execution to issue upon such authenticated Judgement in the same manner and toi the same extent as if the Judgement had been given by the Court or Magistrate
to which such transcript shall be exhibited."
pp. 820-821: "Eleventh
Any Vessel entering in any Port on the River Potomack may be libelled or attached for Debt by Process from the state in which such Vessel entered, and if the commercial regulations of either State shall be violated by any Person carrying on Commerce in Potomack or Pokomoke Rivers, the Vessel owned or commanded by the Person so offending, and the property on board may be seized by Process from the State whose Laws are offended, in order for trial, and if any Person shall fly from Justice in a civil or criminal Case or shall attempt to defraud Creditors by removing his Property, such Persons or any Property so removed may be taken on any Part of Chesapeake Bay of the Rivers aforesaid by Process of the State from which such Person shall fly or Property be removed. And Process from the State of Virginia may be served on any Part of the said Rivers upon any Person, or Property of any Person, not a Citizen of Maryland indebted to any Citizen of Virginia or charged with Injury having been by him commited; and Process from the State of Maryland may be served on any Part of the said Rivers upon any Person, or Property of any Person, not a Citizen of Virginia indebted to any Citizen of Maryland or charged with Injury having been by him commited; and in all cases or trial in pursuance of the Jurisdiction settled by this Compact Citizens of either State shall attend as Witnesses in the other upon a Summons from any Court or Magistrate having Jurisdiction, being served by a proper officer of the County where such Citizens shall reside."
[Even if we disregard the meaning of the words "vessel"and "port," both of which apply to sea-going, as opposed to riverine, navigation, this article clearly refers
to the tidewater portion of the Potomac, because it is impossible for any vessel to "enter" (from the Chesapeake Bay) the portion of the Potomac above the falls.]
p. 821: "Twelfth
The Citizens of either State having Lands in the other shall have full liberty to transport to their own State the produce of such Lands, or to remove their Effects
free from any Duty Tax or charge whatsoever for the liberty to remove such Produce or Effects."
p. 821: "13TH
These Articles shall be laid before the Legislatures of Virginia and Maryland, and their approbation being obtained, shall be confirmed and ratified by a Law of
each State never to be repealed or altered by either without the Consent of the other."
G.Mason Commrs. for the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Alex.Henderson
Dan. of St. Thos. Jenifer
T. Stone Commissioners for
Samuel Chase the State of Maryland
28 Mar 1785 TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, pp. 822-823.
p. 822: "In Pursuance of Directions from the Legislatures of Virginia and Maryland, respectively to us given, we beg Leave to represent to the State of Pennsylvania, that it is the Contemplation of the said two States to promote the clearing & extending the Navigation of Potomack, from tide-Water, upwards, as far as the same may be found practicable; to open a convenient Road, from the Head of such Navigation, to the Waters running into the Ohio, and to render these Waters navigable, as far as may be necessary & proper; that the said works will require great Expence, which may not be repaid, unless a free Use be secured to the said States, & their Citizens, of the water of the Ohio & it's Branches, as far as the same lie within the Limits of Pensylvania: that as essential Advantages will accrue from such Works to a considerable Portion of the said State, it is thought reasonable that the Legislature thereof shou'd by some previous Act engage, that for the Encouragement of the said Works, all Articles of Produce & Merchandize, which may be conveyed to or from either of the said two States, thro' either of the said Rivers, within the Limits of Pensylvania, to or from any Place without the said Limits, shall pass throughout, free from all Duties, or Tolls whatsoever, other than such Tolls as may be established, & be necessary for reimbursing Expences incurred by the State, or it's Citizens, in clearing, or for defraying the Expence of Preserving the Navigation of the said Rivers. And that no Articles imported into Pensylvania thro' the Channel or Channels or any Part thereof to be opened as aforesaid, and vended or used within the said State, shall be subject to any Duties or Imposts, other than such Article wou'd be subject to, if imported into the said State thro' any other Channel whatsoever."
p. 822: "We request, Sir, that you will take the earliest Opportunity of laying this Representation, on Behalf of the two States, before the Legislature of Pensylvania; and that you will communicate the Result to the Executives of Virginia & Maryland."
p. 823: "By Acts of the Legislatures of Virginia & Maryland for opening the Navigation of the River Potomack above tide-Water, the Citizens of the United States have the same Right of trading thro' the said Water, which the Citizens of Maryland & Virginia enjoy; and we have no Doubt but the Legislature of your State will, agreeably to this Principle, give every Encouragement to Measures, which have for their Object, the Interest & Convenience of their Citizens, and those of the other States in the Union."
p. 823: Ed. Note: The clearing and extending the Navigation of Potomack was a project delayed by the war, but close to the hearts of Washington and others
with property on the shoreline (see above, the correspondence between GM and Washington, 8, 9, Mar, 1775). After his return to Mount Vernon in 1783,
Washington renewed his interest in the scheme and his prestige probably helped muster legislative support for the project (see Va. Journal & Alexandria
Advertiser, 4 Nov. 1784). Later, Maryland legislators notified Delaware lawmakers of the Mount Vernon Compact and invited participation in a uniform code
for the Chesapeake Bay.
11 May 1785 From Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, p. 824-825.
p. 824: "Pray have you heard from the Attorney General or Mr. Maddison on the Subject of our Proceedings at Mount Vernon[?]"
p. 825: Ed. Note: The Attorney General was Edmund Randolph, who along with James Madison, had missed the meeting because of a mistake by the Richmond officialdom.
2 June 1785 From James Madison, p. 825.
Ed. Note: In his letter to Madison of 9 Aug. 1785, GM acknowledged a message from Madison [not found], which apparently sought details of the Mount
Vernon Conference of March 1785.
9 Aug 1785 To James Madison, pp. 826-828.
p. 826: "I shou'd have answered your Favour of the 2d. of June, long ago, had not ill Health, & the Absence of my Sons from Home, disabled me from making out the Copys of the Proceedings of the Virga. & Maryd. Commrs. which I now inclose; and upon which I wish to be favour'd with your Sentiments."
p. 826-827: "So great has been the Neglect in some of our public Departments, that neither Mr. Henderson or myself had been furnished with Copys of the Assembly's Resolutions [leading to the Conference]; and I shou'd not have known that I was one of the Persons appointed, had I not, by mere Accident two or three Days before the Meeting, been informed of it, by two of the Maryland Commissioners writing to me. . . . His Excellency General Washington happened to have a Copy of the Assembly's Resolutions respecting the Application to be made to the Government of Pennsylvania, which he very obligingly gave us; by which any two or more of the Comrs. were empowered to proceed; and it was natural for us to conclude that these last Resolutions had pursued the Style of the former respecting the Jurisdiction of the two States; as well as that this Subject had been taken up, upon the same Principles as in the Year 1778; when Comrs. were directed to settle the Jurisdiction of Chesapeake Bay & the Rivers Potomack & Pokomoke; in which Sentiments, Mr. Henderson, from what he was able to recollect of the Resolutions, concurred."
p. 827: "Some Time after, Mr. Henderson wrote to Mr. Beckley (Clerk of the House of Delegates) for a Copy of the Resolves; upon receiving which, we were surprized to find no mention made of Chesapeake or Pokomoke River, that our Powers were confined to Potomack River, and to not less than three of the Commissioners. I am still inclined to think that the Ommission of Chesapeake Bay & Pokomoke River was owing to Mistake, or Inadvertence, in not attending to the Resolves of 1778; and if so, it was perhaps lucky, that we had not been furnished with a Copy of the Resolves; for the Maryd. Comrs. had an express Instruction, from their Assembly, to consider the Relinquishment, on the part of Virginia, of any Claim of laying Tolls &c, on Vessels passing thro' the Capes of Chesapeake, as a sine qua non; and if it was refused, immediately to break off all further Conference with the Virginia Commissioners."
p. 828: Ed. Note: The Assembly's Resolutions which Washington gave the commissioners must have been those passed at the June 1779 session of the General
Assembly (Hening, X, 520; JHD, 1827 ed., 4, 24 June 1779). GM was thinking of the resolution also passed in the Year 1778, when he, Richard Henry Lee, and
James Henry had been named to serve on a commission authorized to meet with Maryland delegates to adjust "the use and navigation of, and jurisdiction over,
the Bay of Chesapeake, and the rivers Potomac and Pokomoke" (JHD, 1827 ed., 10 Dec. 1777). That body had never been able to function, apparently because
the British naval blockade of the bay made jurisdictional matters purely academic.
9 Nov 1785 To George Washington, pp. 833-834.
p. 834: " I intended to go down to Richmond about the 15th of this month, to have reported the Compact with the Maryland Commissioners; but I have lately had so severe a Fit of the Convulsive Cholic, or the Gout in my Stomack, that I dare not venture far from Home."
Ed. Note: Although GM was apprehensive that the Mount Vernon Compact of 28 Mar. 1785 might be declared void because of a technicality, his absence from
Richmond did not impeded ratification of the agreement between Maryland and Virginia.
7 Dec 1785 To James Madison, pp. 835-838.
[GM quoted herein much of the text of his earlier letter to Madison, dated Aug. 9th.]
p. 837: "My Paper draws to an End, & leaves me only Room to beg your Attention to the inclosed Memorandum, to express my Desire of hearing from you on the Subject of the Compact."
Ed. Note: The inclosed Memorandum, printed below, appears to have been ignored when the House of Delegates voted to accept the Virginia commissioner's report and ratified the Mount Vernon Compact (JHD, 1828 ed., 26, 29, 30 Dec. 1785).
pp. 837-838: [enclosure] [7 December 1785] "Memdm. The concluding Clause of the seventh Article of the Compact is not so clearly expressed as it ought to be, & is capable of a Construction, which was not intended; and tho' it wou'd be a strained and unnatural one, it had better be removed."
"The Words are-"Provided" &c, "and that the Citizens of neither State shall have a Right to fish with Nets or Seins upon the shores of the other." This may be construed to restrain the Citizens of either State, having Lands upon the River in the other, from fishing with Nets or Seins upon their own Shores; which wou'd be unreasonable & unjust; altho' in it's present form, it seems to be the Grammatical Construction. The Addition of two or three words will set it right. Thus-"and that the Citizens of neither State shall have a Right to fish with Nets or Seins upon the Shores of the Citizens of the other." I never observed this Circumstance, 'til very lately, or I am sure I cou'd easily have had it altered by the Maryland Commissioners, at any time before the Meeting of their Assembly. The Fisherys upon Potomack River are becoming a very important Object; & therefore I cou'd wish the above Clause in the Compact properly amended: if the Amendment goes no further than I have mentioned, it will occasion no Objection from Maryland; and I wish the Article to be no[t] otherwise altered; for this was the most difficult Business we had to settle with the Maryland Commissioners. The Idea of the Right of fishing on both Shores of Potomack River is one the Marylanders are not fond of parting with; and I trust it will be found we have obtained every thing for Virginia, with Respect to Potomack River, which she can desire. The exceptionable Part of the Article before mentioned was really a Mistake. Not having time now to write to my Friend the Attorney [Edmund Randolph] upon this Subject, Mr. Madison will be pleased to mention it to him."
[The fact that GM sought to amend this part of Article 7 proves that he had continued think about the Compact of 1785 after he had signed it. One may conclude that he considered whether the other parts of Article 7 (including the part about wharves and other improvements) were in any way flawed, but concluded that they were not, since he offered no corrections there. Note that GM considered Article 7 the "most difficult Business we had to settle": more evidence that the commissioners from both states took particular care to ensure this article was otherwise worded correctly. Marylanders clearly considered the right to fish off both shores of the Potomac as theirs to retain or cede as they chose, another indication that they owned right up to the Virginia shore.]
Ed. Note: Despite GM's concern and positive recommendation that the concluding Clause of the seventh Article of the Mount Vernon Compact be amended,
Madison apparently made no effort to insert the words GM thought desirable. The text of the ratified compact in Hening, XII, 50-55, indicates that the
legislators were inclined to leave a good job untouched.
8 Dec 1785 To Benjamin Harrison, pp. 838-839.
p. 838: "I flattered myself I shou'd have had the pleasure of paying you my Respects in Person, and delivering you the inclosed Packet, containing the Proceedings of the Commissioners on the Compact between the States of Virginia & Maryland; but am disabled by ill Health, from undertaking a Journey to Richmond."