Excerpts from The Papers of George Washington, Confederation Series

W. W, Abbot, ed.. (Charlottesville, Va., 1992)

Volume 1: January 1784 to July 1784

6 Mar 1784	Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, pp. 175-176.

p. 176: "The present hurry forbids me to write you on a subject I have much at heart, the approaching & opening the navigation of the Ohio & Patowmac. I will trouble you by the next post."

15 Mar 1784	Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, pp. 215-218.

pp. 215-218: "The deed for the cession of Western territory by Virginia was executed & accepted on the 1st instant. I hope our country [i.e., Virginia] will of herself determine to cede still further to the meridian of the mouth of the Great Kanhaway. further she cannot govern; so far is necessary for her own well being. The reasons which call for this boundary (which will retain all the waters of the Kanhaway) are [six reasons follow, then] 7. it will preserve to us all the upper parts of Yohogany & Cheat rivers within which much will be done to open these which are the true doors to the Western commerce. the union of this navigation with that of the Patowmac is a subject on which I mentioned that I would take the liberty of writing to you. I am sure it's value and practicability are both well known to you. this is the moment however for seizing it if we ever mean to have it. all the world is becoming commercial. . . . we must then in our own defence endeavor to share as large a portion as we can of this modern source of wealth & power. that offered to us from the Western country is under a competition between the Hudson, the Patomac and the Missisipi itself. down the last will pass all heavy commodities. but the navigation through the Gulf of Mexico is so dangerous, & that up the Missisipi so difficult & tedious, that it is not probable that European merchandize will return through that channel. . . . there will therefore be a rivalship between the Hudson and Patowmac for the residue of the commerce of all the country westward of L. Erie, on the waters of the lakes, of the Ohio & upper parts of the Missisipi. . . . to proceed on to N. York will be 970 miles from thence [the Cayahoga] & five portages, whereas it is but 430 miles to Alexandria, if it turns into the Cayahoga [etc.] . . . nature then has declared in favour of the Patowmac, and through that channel offers to pour into our lap the whole commerce of the Western world. but unfortunately the channel by the Hudson is already opened. . . . I have lately pressed this subject on my friends in the General assembly, proposing to them to endeavor to have a tax laid . . . to be employed first in opening the upper waters of the Ohio & Patowmac, where a little money and time will do a great deal, leaving the great falls for the last part of the work. . . . but a most powerful objection always arises to propositions of this kind. it is that public undertakings are car[e]lessly managed and much money is spent to little purpose. to obviate this objection is the purpose of my giving you the trouble of this discussion. you have retired from public life. . . . I am confident that would you either alone or jointly with any persons you think proper be willing to direct this business, it would remove the only objection the weight of which I apprehend. . . . when you view me as not owning nor ever having a prospect of owning one inch of land on any water either of the Patowmac or Ohio, it will tend to apologize for the trouble I have given you of this long letter, by shewing that my zeal in this business is public & pure."

p. 218, Ed. Note: Jefferson listed the same seven points in his letter to James Madison of 20 Feb. 1784 (Hutchinson and Rachal, Madison Papers, 7:422-35; Boyd, Jefferson Papers, 6:544-51).

29 Mar 1784	George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, pp. 237-241.

pp. 237: "My opinion coincides perfectly with yours respecting the practicability of an easy, & short communication between the waters of the Ohio & Potomack, of the advantages of that communication & the preference it has over all others, and of the policy there would be in this State, & Maryland, to adopt & render it facile. but I confess to you freely, I have no expectation that the public will adopt the measure; for besides the jealousies wch prevail, & the difficulty of proportioning such funds as may be allotted for the purposes you have mentioned, there are two others, which in my opinion, will be yet harder to surmount–these are (if I have not imbibed too unfavourable an opinion of my Countrymen) the impracticability of bringing the great, & truly wise policy of this measure to their view–and the difficulty of drawing money from them for such a purpose if you could do it."

p. 238: "More than ten years ago I was struck with the importance of it [this scheme] , & dispairing of any aid from the public, I became a principal mover of a Bill to empower a number of subscribers to undertake, at their own expense, . . . the extension of the Navigation from tide water to Will's Creek (abot 150 Miles) . . . To get this business in motion, I was obliged, even upon that ground, to comprehend James River, in order to remove the jealousies which arose from the attempt to extend the Navigation of the Potomack. The plan, however, was in a tolerable train when I set out for Cambridge in 1775, and would have been in an excellent way had it not been for the difficulties which were met with in the Maryland Assembly, from the opposition which was given (according to report) by the Baltimore Merchants, who were alarmed, and perhaps not without cause, at the consequence of water transportation to George Town of the produce which usually came to their market."

"The local interest of that place (Baltimore) joined with the short sighted politics, or contracted views of another part of that Assembly, gave Mr Thomas Johnson who was a warm promoter of the Scheme on the No. side of the River, a great deal of trouble. . . . the War afterwards called Mens attention to different objects, . . . but with you, I am satisfied not a moment ought to be lost in recommencing this business; for I know the Yorkers will delay no time to remove every obstacle in the way of the other communication, so soon as the Posts at Oswego & Niagara are surrendered; and I shall be mistaken if they do not build Vessels for the Navigation of the Lakes, which will supercede the necessity of coasting on either side."

pp. 238-239: "It appears to me that the Interest & policy of Maryland is proportionably concerned with that of Virginia to remove obstructions and to envite the trade of the Western territory into the channel you have mentioned. You will have frequent opportunities of learning the sentiments of the principal characters of that State, respecting this matter, and if you should see Mr. Johnson (formerly Govr of the State) great information may be derived from him."

p. 240, Ed. Note: A move was afoot as early as 1769 for Maryland and Virginia to have another go at extending the navigation of the Potomac upstream from Georgetown and Alexandria, above the Great Falls. In 1770 GW became one of the leading proponent, on the Virginia side of the river, of the enterprise. See John Semple to GW, 8 Jan. 1770, Thomas Johnson to GW, 18 June 1770, and GW to Johnson, 20 July 1770. In February 1772 GW guided through the Virginia assembly a bill "for opening and extending the navigation of the river Potowmack from Fort Cumberland to tide water" (8 Hening 570-579), and he continued to be active in the affairs of the Potomac River Company until he left for Philadelphia and Boston in 1775. His involvement in the company's affairs may be traced in what survives of his correspondence with the Marylander Thomas Johnson (Johnson to GW, 26 Mar., 10 May 1772, 21 Feb., 28 June 1774, 17, 24 Jan., 25 Feb. 1775, and GW to Johnson, 5 Aug. 1774). For an earlier attempt by Virginians and Marylanders to join forces in making the upper Potomac more navigable, see GW to a Participant in the Potomac River Enterprise, c. 1762, and notes, printed above.

p. 241: Ed. Note: GW's interest in improving the navigation of the upper Potomac, as Jefferson knew, was both long-standing and intense; but Jefferson's letter of 15 Mar. may have served to focus GW's attention, after his return home from the war, on the urgency of resuming efforts to open up the river. In any case, by the time he got back in early October from his trip to the wilds of Pennsylvania, GW was firmly committed to take immediate action for making the Potomac fully navigable as a part of a larger project to connect it by other streams and short portages to the Ohio River and the Great Lakes. See particularly GW to Benjamin Harrison, 10 October. As his correspondence from October 1784 through January 1785 documents, GW emerged from his short-lived retirement from the public stage to push through the Virginia and Maryland legislatures identical bills for creating the ambitious Potomac River Company, of which he became the first president.

10 July 1784	George Washington to James Craik, pp. 492-493.

Ed. Note from Vol. 1, p. 178: Dr. James Craik (1730-1814) [had been] GW's friend since he joined the Virginia Regiment.

p. 492: "I have come to a resolution (if not prevented by anything, at present unforeseen) to take a trip to the Western Country this Fall, & for that purpose to leave home the first of September–By appointment I am to be at the warm-springs the 7th of that month; & at Gilbert Simpsons the 15th–where. having my partnership accounts, with some of very long standing to settle, & things to provide for the trip to Kanhawa, I expect to be by the 10th or 11th–that is four or five days before the 15th."

p. 493, Ed. Note: For GW's account of his trip into Pennsylvania in September,. see Dairies, 4:1-71.

10 July 1784	George Washington to David Luckett, pp. 493-494.

p. 493: "If nothing, unforeseen at present, happens to prevent it, I propose to be at my plantation on Yohoghaney the 10th of September . . . . from thence I have thoughts of visiting my Lands on the Great Kanhawa, & on the Ohio between the two Kanhawas, if I can do it conveniently, & obtain the means for a water conveyance."

p. 494, Ed. Note: Lt. David Luckett, a Marylander, recently had assumed command of a small detachment of soldiers manning Fort Pitt. . . . GW saw Luckett at Washington's Bottom, at Gilbert Simpson's house, on 14 Sept., when Luckett helped persuade GW that the "discontented temper of the Indians" made it unwise for him to go down the Ohio (Diaries, 4:21).

Volume 2: July 1784 to May 1785

2 Aug 1784	George Washington to Charles Washington, p. 21.

p. 21: "I still hold to my resolution of setting off the first of September for the Western Count[r]y, and if I am not obliged (in business) to go by the way of Fredericks Town in Maryland to the Springs, I shall most assuredly spend a night at [Happy Retreat] with you."

p. 21, Ed. Note: GW set out from Mount Vernon on 1 Sept. and spent the night of 3 Sept. at Happy Retreat. See Diaries, 4:1-5. Charles Washington recently had moved from Fredericksburg to Berkeley County and built his house, Happy Retreat, on Evitt's Run.

20 Aug 1784	Stephen Sayre (in Georgetown, Md.) to George Washington, pp. 49-
51.

p. 49: "The importance of clearing the river & the necessity of doing so immediatly induces me to offer Some thoughts on it to your Excellencys Consideration to prevent the Fatall consequ[e]nces of delay. I wish any kind of Navigation or Mode of bringing down productions by Water May be adopted, that no time may be lost in removing prejudices, which are worce than the Rocks in our way, or advantages lost in application to bodies of Men who may Never agree–Governor Johnson & his friends, I am told, are more than Confident they Shall clear the Seneca Falls within a few weeks–let them do so–my opinion is that, with a few hundred pounds, the great & little Falls may be mead equally Navigable, to anything they will be able to do at the Seneca. It is difficult, in a letter, to explain the Various things which different parts would require, but whereever the waters were too rapid anchors made to fitt the Purpose by taking hold of Solid Rocks Chains & boats, Properly placed, & a few Bouys to direct the Channel would be all that is wanting except in two places, where Some part of the Rocks must be blown to make the decent Some what gradual, wide enough to let 2 Boats pass. the decending one to force up the other, which is infinitly more Simple & more certain of Perpetuall use than any Lock can be–If I am well informed as to the Shenandoah Falls, boats may assend & decend there without removing any Rocks; a force like this, on the same Simple plan, will then make them Navigable also."

pp. 49-50: "I am clearly of opinion that a practicable Navigation may be immediate, & done by a few Gentlemen as a Company–looking forward either to improve it or apply to the Legislatures of the two States to incorporate them, & others who may wish to do it on a more large & expencive Scale. If you have doubts as to this being done–I mean a practical navigation. I should be hapy to attend you on the Spot, when I could point out the mode of doing it with great facility."

p. 50: [Sayre then continues to discuss a plan for raising money for the company.]

p. 51, Ed. Note: GW must have discussed with Sayre the prospect of opening up to navigation the Potomac River above Alexandria and Georgetown. In his subsequent monthlong excursion into western Pennsylvania, GW worked out his ideas and plans for such an undertaking. See GW to Benjamin Harrison, 10 Oct. 1784, for a comprehensive statement of what GW had in mind for the Potomac after his return.

p. 51, Ed. Note: Thomas Johnson (1732-1819) of Frederick County, Md., who was governor of the state from 1777 to 1779, joined GW as one of the commissioners to conduct the affairs of the Potomac River Company after it was formed in early 1785 largely through GW's efforts. See editorial note in Harrison to GW 10 Oct. 1784. Johnson was also the leader of the group of Marylanders who before the Revolution had joined forces with a number of Virginians, including GW, to form a company for improving the navigation of the Potomac (see, for instance, GW to Johnson, 20 July 1770).

Ed. Note from Vol. 1, pp. 426-427: Stephen Sayre (1736-1818) is described by his biographer as "soldier, merchant, ship-builder, politician, speculator, propagandist, diplomat, inventor, and occupant of prisons," who has also been characterized as "a most active gallant, a wicked schemer, a liar, a fool, a madman, an embezzler, and a traitor" (Alden, Sayre, 1). A New Yorker and a graduate of the College of New Jersey in 1757, Sayre went to England in 1766 where he became a colonial agent, a merchant, and in 1773 sheriff of London through the support of John Wilkes. Sayre spent most of the Revolution on the Continent, returning to New York from France in 1783. He was in Georgetown, Md., and Alexandria, Va., in the late summer and early fall of 1784 (see GW to Sayre, 15 July [an invitation to dine with GW on 16 July], 1 Sept., and Sayre to GW, 20 Aug., 15 Oct. 1784). Sayre did finally settle in Virginia, but only after GW had been dead for nearly two decades and shortly before Sayre's own death.

1 Sept 1784	George Washington to Stephen Sayre, pp. 65-66.

pp. 65-66: "I can do no more than give [your letter] a bare acknowledgment, being in the very act of setting out for the Western Country. I could not depart however without thanking you for the sentiments you have conveyed respecting the mode for extending the inland navigation of the Potomac. I have not time to be explicit in giving you mine–it shall be the subject of conversation when I return; in the mean while it would give me pleasure to hear that you are disposed to submit your plan to the public. My wish is that the public should be possessed of every scheme that has a promising tendency, that [they] may adopt the best, after a just comparison of them."

p. 66, Ed. Note: GW left Mount Vernon with Dr. James Craik on 1 Sept. for his journey into Pennsylvania. There he visited his property at Washington's Bottom and at Chartiers Creek, or Millers Run, among other places, before giving up his plans to go down the Ohio in order to inspect his landholdings on that river and on the Great Kanawha. GW wrote very few letters during the trip, which lasted from 1 Sept. to 4 Oct., but he did keep a journal. The journal, with the editors' extensive notes, in Diaries, 4:1-71, provides a detailed record of GW's movements and activities. See also GW's cash accounts for September 1784 in Ledger B, 1998-200. GW and Craik were joined by GW's nephew Bushrod Washington and by Craik's son William, who accompanied them into Pennsylvania.

7 Sept 1784	Certificate for James Rumsey, p. 69.

p. 69: "I have seen the model of Mr Rumsey's Boats constructed to work against stream; have examined the power upon which it acts; have been an eye witness to an actual experiment in running water of some rapidity; & do give it as my opinion (altho' I had little faith before) that he has discovered the art of propelling Boats, by mechanism & small manual assistance, against rapid currents; that the discovery is of vast importance–maybe of the greatest usefulness in our inland navigation–&, if it succeeds, of which I have no doubt, that the value of it is greatly enhanced by the simplicity of the works; which when seen & explained to, might be executed by the most common Mechanic's."

Ed. Note: In his journal on 6 Sept., GW describes at some length viewing the operation of James Rumsey's model at Bath in Frederick County (see Diaries, 4:9-10). A sketch of the mechanical boat that "walked on the bottom of shallow streams" is reproduced there on p. 9. See also GW's correspondence with Rumsey in 1785.

2 Oct 1784	James Craik to George Washington, pp. 82-83.

pp. 82-83: "I have thought it might be more satisfactory to leave you the different Accounts I received respecting the Communication between the waters of the Yoheogany & the North Branch of Potowmack, that you might from a view of the whole Collect an opinion for yourself–it appears to me that the land Carriage from the Forks of Yoheogany to Cumberland which from a variety of Accounts will not be more than thirty miles is to be preferred to Sixty miles to difficult Navigation up the little Crossing, and twenty miles land Carriage afterwards, which is the distance from the little Crossing on the Turkey foot Road to Cumberland–If the Communication is to be carried on by the little Crossing, the Turkey Foot Road is to be preferred to Braddocks old Road, as it is infinitely better and above two miles shorter. Indeed I found the whole Turkey foot Road across the mountains much better & nearer than Braddocks Road, that if there were good entertainment no one could hesitate in the choice."

p. 83, Ed. Note: GW and Bushrod Washington parted from James Craik and his son William on 21 Sept., intending to rejoin them at Warner Washington's house in Frederick County. On 29 Sept. GW decided to return to Mount Vernon by way of Staunton in Augusta County and sent his nephew to tell Craik that he would not come to Warner Washington's. Craik then proceeded to Mount Vernon and left this letter there pending GW's return on 4 October.

10 Oct 1784	George Washington to Benjamin Harrison, pp. 86-99.

Ed. Note from Vol. 1, p. 23: Benjamin Harrison (c.1726-1791), of Berkeley, Charles City County, Va., was elected in November 1783 to his third and last one-year term as governor of Virginia.

p. 86, Ed. Note: GW's letter to Governor Harrison marks his return to public life as the leader of a movement to form a public company for improving the navigation of the upper Potomac and linking it with the waters of the Ohio. He first became deeply involved in schemes for opening up the Potomac in the early 1770s (see particularly the source note and its references in Thomas Johnson to GW, 18 June 1770). His determination to use the Potomac to tie the burgeoning transmontane West to the states along the Atlantic seaboard was renewed in the spring of 1784 after his return to Mount Vernon in his exchange of letters with Thomas Jefferson (see Jefferson to GW, 15 Mar., and GW to Jefferson, 29 Mar. 1784, and notes). One of the main purposes of GW's recent trip into Pennsylvania had been to confirm the feasibility of making the upper Potomac navigable and of linking it by means of short land portages with navigable streams flowing into the Ohio (see Diaries, 4:1-71). After writing this letter to Harrison on his return from the West, GW in the next few weeks also corresponded about the Potomac with, among others, Stephen Sayre, George Plater, Jacob Read, and Norman Bruce (see Sayre to GW, 15 Oct., Plater to GW, 20 Oct., GW to Plater, 25 Oct., GW to Read, 3 Nov., and Bruce to GW, 13 Nov.). On 2 Nov., presumably on GW's initiative, a notice was printed in the Alexandria newspaper calling for any gentlemen living "contiguous to Potomack" in both Virginia and Maryland who "wish to see an attempt made to open and extend the navigation of that River" to meet in Alexandria on 15 Nov. (the notice is quoted in note 4, GW to Read, 3 Nov.).

pp. 86-87, Ed. Note: Before the meeting was held, at Lomax's tavern in Alexandria, GW left for Richmond, arriving there on 14 November. The purpose of his trip to the capital was to meet Lafayette and to persuade key members of the house of delegates, then in session, to adopt a scheme for forming a Potomac River company. (For GW's reception in Richmond, see the notes in GW's address to the Officials of the City of Richmond and to the Virginia House of Delegates, both 15 Nov.). Governor Harrison probably had given GW's letter of 10 Oct. to the house of delegates at the opening of its session, on 1 or 2 Nov., but there is no indication in its journals that the house took any action on the letter before GW's arrival (see Harrison to GW, 13 Nov., n.1). While in Richmond, GW discussed the Potomac River project with the leader of the house of delegates, James Madison, and with other members. He left on 21 or 22 Nov. with Lafayette for Mount Vernon.

p. 87, Ed. Note: A letter that Henry Lee wrote to GW from Alexandria on 15 Nov., the day of the "very numerous and respectable Meeting of the Gentlemen of this State and Maryland," has not been found, and Lee's letter of 18 Nov. enclosing the meeting's petition to the Virginia and Maryland legislature and its draft of a bill for forming a Potomac River company did not reach GW before he left Richmond. (A report on the meeting in Alexandria which appeared in the Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser on 25 Nov. is printed in note 1, Lee to GW, 18 Nov.) After Lee's letter and the enclosed documents finally caught up with him at Mount Vernon, GW on 28 Nov. forwarded to Madison the draft bill and petition, neither of which has been found (see GW to Madison, 28 Nov., and particularly note1 of that document).

Ed. Note: Immediately after writing Madison on 28 Nov., GW left Mount Vernon with Lafayette for Annapolis where he conversed "with some of the leading characters in the different branches of the Legislature of Maryland, on the subject of inland navigation, and the benefits which might arise from a commercial intercourse with the Western Territory." GW "was happy to find them so forcibly struck with the importance of these objects; and that there appeared the most favorable disposition to give encouragement to them." (GW to Madison, 3 dec.). His conversations with the leaders of the Maryland and Virginia legislatures confirmed GW in his opinion that he could not look to public funds to finance his great Potomac project, and so after his return from Annapolis on 2 Dec., he wrote Madison to urge that one or more members of the Virginia legislature be appointed to meet with a man or men chosen by the Maryland legislature for the purpose of devising a bill for creating a Potomac River company composed of private investors. The bill would be one that each of the legislatures could consider simultaneously and hence adopt before adjournment (see GW to Madison, 28 Nov., n. 1, and 3 Dec.).

pp. 87-88, Ed. Note: In the meantime, Madison had received GW's letter of 28 Nov. with the enclosed draft of a bill, and a committee of the house of delegates had begun work on a Potomac River bill, presumably based upon the (missing) bill drawn up by the Alexandria meeting on 15 November. The house canceled a scheduled debate on the committee's bill (also missing) after Madison received GW's letter of 3 Dec., and on 13 Dec. the delegates adopted GW's suggestion that the legislature appoint commissioners to meet with Maryland commissioners and draft a Potomac River bill that could be immediately enacted by both legislatures (see GW to Madison, 28 Nov., n. 1, and GW to Madison, 3 Dec., and notes).

p. 88, Ed. Note: The acting governor of Virginia, Beverly Randolph, wrote GW on 15 Dec. sending him resolutions of the Virginia legislature supporting the establishment of a Potomac River company and naming GW one of three commissioners to meet with Maryland commissioners to draft a Potomac River company bill (see note 1 in Beverly Randolph's letter). On 19 Dec. GW forwarded a letter to Gov. William Paca of Maryland about the proposed meeting, which Randolph had enclosed in his letter. GW also informed the other Virginia commissioners that the meeting with their Maryland counterparts in Annapolis had been set for 22 Dec. (see GW to Paca, 19 Dec., n. 2, GW to Beverly Randolph, 20 Dec., and Thomas Blackburn to GW, 20 Dec.). GW met, alone for most of the time, with the four Marylanders, and in six days they drafted a Potomac River bill which GW forwarded to James Madison on 28 Dec. (see GW to Madison, 28 Dec., and its three enclosures and notes).

Ed. Note: GW's report of the proceedings in Annapolis and the drafted bill were given to the Virginia house of delegates on 31 Dec., and the next day William Grayson introduced in the house GW's Potomac River Company bill. The bill received its final passage on 4 Jan. (see Madison to GW, 1 Jan. 1785, and notes). An identical bill had been introduced on 27 Dec. in the Maryland legislature where it passed on 28 Dec. (see GW to Madison, 28 Dec., n. 6). On 9 Jan., Madison wrote GW to inform him of the passage of the act creating the Potomac River Company and of a similar act creating the James River Company. He also enclosed a copy of the Potomac River Company act and copies of "several kindred measures" adopted by the Virginia legislature (see Madison's letter and notes and enclosures).

pp. 88-89, Ed. Note: Upon the receipt on 17 Jan. of Madison's copy of the Potomac River Company act, GW had the two men who were named in the act to serve as managers in Alexandria; they were to compare the texts of the Virginia and Maryland acts and to have one hundred copies of the act printed (see GW to John Fitzgerald and William Hartshorne, 18 Jan. 1785, and Fitzgerald and Hartshorne to GW, 21 Jan. 1785). GW by this time also had received, to his dismay, notice from Speaker Benjamin Harrison and from Gov. Patrick Henry that the Virginia legislature had voted to give him fifty shares in the Potomac River Company and one hundred in the James River Company (see note 1 and its references, Harrison to GW, 6 Jan. 1785). Before the end of the month, fearing that Gov. William Paca of Maryland had not been properly informed of the actions taken by Virginia with regard to the Potomac River Company, GW took it upon himself to write Paca and to send him a copy of the Virginia act (see GW to Paca, 31 Jan.).

p. 89, Ed. Note: At its first meeting in Alexandria on 17 May 1785, the Potomac River Company elected GW its president, a position he held until his election to the presidency of the United States under the new constitution in 1789. (An account of the meeting of May 1785 and of the action that its shareholders took is printed in note 1, GW to Thomas Johnson and Thomas Sim Lee, 18 may 1785). GW was to devote a great deal of time and attention for the next four years to the management of the company, the actual work of which got underway in the summer of 1785 (see GW to James Rumsey, 3 Aug. 1785, and Diaries, 4:170-
81, and references).

p. 89: "I shall take the liberty now, my dear sir, to suggest a matter, which would (if I am not too shortsighted a politician) mark your administration as an important œra in the Annals of this Country, if it should be recommended by you, & adopted by the Assembly."

p. 89: "It has long been my decided opinion, that the shortest, easiest & least expensive communication with the invaluable & extensive Country back of us, would be by one, or both of the rivers [the Potomac and the James] of this State which have their sources in the apalachian mountains."

p. 90: "But that this may not stand as mere matter of opinion or assertion, unsupported by facts (such at least as the best maps now extant, compared with the oral testimony, which my opportunities in the course of the war have enabled me to obtain); I shall give you the different routs & distances from Detroit, by which all the trade of the North Western parts of the United territory, must pass; unless the Spaniards, contrary to their present policy, should engage part of it; or the British should attempt to force nature by carrying the trade of the upper Lakes by the river Outawaies into Canada, which I scarsely think they will or could effect. Taking Detroit then (which is putting ourselves in as unfavourable a point of view as we can be well placed, because it is upon the line of the British territory) as a point by which, as I have already observed, all that part of the trade must come, it appears from the statement enclosed, that the tide waters of this State are nearer to it by 168 miles than that of the river St Lawrence; or than that of the Hudson at Albany by 176 miles."

"Maryland stands upon similar ground with Virginia. Pennsylvania altho' the Susquehanna is an unfriendly water, much impeded it is said with rocks & rapids, & nowhere communicating with those which lead to her capital; have it in contemplation to open between Toby's Creek (. . . 95 miles above Fort Pitt) & . . . the Schuylkill; the expense of which is easier to be conceived than estimated or described by me. A people however, who are possessed of the spirit of Commerce– who see, & who will pursue their advantages, may atchieve almost anything. In the meantime, under the uncertainty of these undertakings, they are smoothing the roads & paving the ways for the trade of that Western World. That New York will do the same so soon as the British Garrisons are removed; which are at present insurmountable obstacles in their way, no person who knows the temper, genius & policy of those people as well as I do, can harbour the smallest doubt."

[At this point in his letter, GW discusses some objections that may be made to the project (the states tend to be jealous of one another), why Virginia should want to "do our part" towards opening trade with the western lands, and how the back country of the U.S. is surrounded by other powers, leading to the possibility that settlers there will ally themselves with those foreign powers.]

pp. 92-93: "The Western settlers, (I speak now from my own observation) stand as it were upon a pivot–the touch of a feather, would turn them any way–They have look'd down the Mississippi, until the Spaniards (very impoliticly I think, for themselves) threw difficulties in their way; & they looked that way for no other reason, than because they could glide gently down the stream; without considering perhaps, the fatigues of the voyage back again, & the time necessary to perform it in: & because they have no other means of coming to us but by a long Land transportation & unimproved roads. These causes have hitherto checked the industry of the present settlers; for except the demand for provisions, occasioned by the increase of population, & a little flour which the necessities of Spaniards compel them to buy, they have no excitements to labour. But smooth the road once, & make easy the way for them, & then see what an influx of articles will be poured in upon us–how amazingly our exports will be encreased by them, & how amply we shall be compensated for any trouble and expence we may encounter to effect it."

p. 93: "A combination of circumstances makes the present conjuncture more favourable for Virginia, than for any other State in the Union, to fix these matters. The jealous & untoward disposition of the Spaniards on one hand, & the private views of some individuals, coinciding with the general policy of the Court of Great Britain, on the other, to retain as long as possible the Posts of Detroit, Niagara, Oswego, &c. (which, tho' they are done under the letter of the Treaty, is certainly an infraction of the spirit of it, & injurious to the union) may be improved to the greatest advantage by this State; if she would open her avenues to the trade of that Country, & embrace the present moment to establish it–It only wants a beginning–the Western Inhabitants wou'd do their part towards its execution. . . . The preliminary steps to the attainment of this great object, would be attended with very little expence; . . ."

pp. 93-94: "These [steps], in my opinion, are; to appoint Commissioners, who from their situation, integrity & abilities, can be under no suspicion of prejudice or predilection to one part more than to another. Let these Commissioners make an actual survey of James River & Potowmack from tide water to their respective sources–Note with great accuracy the kind of navigation, & the obstructions in it; the difficulty & expence attending the removal of these obstructions; the distances from place to place thro' the whole extent; and the nearest & best Portages between these waters & the Streams capable of improvment which run into the Ohio; traverse these in like manner to their junction with the Ohio, & with equal accuracy–The navigation of this river (i.e. the ohio) being well known, they will have less to do in the examination of it; but nevertheless, let the courses & distances of it be taken to the mouth of the Muskingum, & up that river (notwithstanding it is in the ceded lands) to the carrying place with Cayahoga–down Cayahoga to Lake Erie, & thence to Detroit. Let them do the same with big Bever creek, although part of it is in the State of Pennsylvania; and with the Scioto also–In a word, let the Waters East & West of the Ohio, which invite our notice by their proximity, & the ease with which Land transportation may be had between them & the Lakes on one side, & the rivers Potomac & James on the other, be explored–accurately delineated, & a correct & connected Map of the whole be presented to the public. These things being done, I shall be mistaken if prejudice does not yield to facts; jealousy to candor–& finally, that reason & nature thus aided, will dictate what is right & proper to be done."

p. 94: "In the mean while, if it should be thought that the lapse of time which is necessary to effect this work, may be attended with injurious consequences, could not there be a sum of money granted towards opening the best, or if it should be deemed more eligible, two of the nearest communications, one to the Northward & another to the Southward, with the settlements to the westward? And an act be passed (if there should not appear a manifest disposition in the Assembly to make it a public undertaking) to incorporate, & encourage private Adventurers if any should associate & sollicit the same, for the purpose of extending the navigation of Potomac or James river? and, in the former case, to request the concurrence of Maryland in the measure–It will appear from my statement of the different routs [included with GW's letter, but not transcribed here] (and as far as my means of information have extended, I have done it with the utmost candour) that all the prudence of the settlements about Fort Pitt, can be brought to Alexandria by the Yohoghaney in 304 Miles; whereof only 31 is land transportation. And by the Monongahela and Cheat river in 360 miles; 20 only of which are land carriage. Whereas the common road from Fort Pitt to Philadelphia is 320 Miles, all Land transportation. . . ."

p. 95: "For my own part, I think it highly probable, that upon the strictest scrutiny (if the Falls of the Great Kanhawa can be made navigable, or a short portage had there)–it will be found of equal importance & convenience to improve the navigation of both the James & Potomac. The latter I am fully persuaded affords the nearest communication with the Lakes; but James river may be more convenient for all the settlers below the mouth of the Gt Kanhawa, & for some distance perhaps above, & west of it: for I have no expectation that any part of the trade above the falls of the Ohio will go down that river & the Mississippi, much less that the returns will ever come up them; unless our want of foresight & good management is the occasion of it. Or upon trial, if it should be found that these rivers [Ohio & Mississippi], from the before-mentioned Falls, will admit the decent of Sea vessels; in which case, & the navigation of the former's becoming free [from Spain], it is probable that both vessels and cargoes will be carried to foreign markets & sold; but the returns for them will never in the natural course of things, ascend the long & rapid current of that river; which with the Ohio to the falls, in their meanderings, is little if any short of 2000 miles. Upon the whole, the object, in my estimation is of vast commercial and political importance: in these lights I think posterity will consider it, & regret (if our conduct should give them cause) that the present favourable moment to secure so great a blessing for them, was neglected."

pp. 95-96: "One thing more remains, which I had like to have forgot, and that is the supposed difficulty of obtaining a passage thro' the State of Pennsylvania. How an application to its Legislature would be relished, in the first instance, I will not undertake to decide; but of one thing I am most certain, such an application would place that body in a very delicate situation. There is in the State of Pennsylvania at least 100,000 souls west of the Laurel hill, who are groaning under the inconveniencies of a long land transportation; they are wishing, indeed they are looking for the improvement & extension of inland navigation; & if this cannot be made easy for them, to Philada (at any rate it must be lengthy), they will seek a Mart elsewhere–the consequence of which would be, that the State, tho' contrary to the policy & interests of its Sea-ports, must submit to the loss of so much of its trade, or hazard not only the trade but the loss of the settlement also: for an opposition of the part of Government to the extension of water transportation, so consonant with the essential interests of a large body of people, or any extraordinary impositions upon the exports or imports to, or from another State, would ultimately bring on a separation between its Eastern & Western Settlements–towards which there is not wanting a disposition at this moment in that part of it, which is beyond the mountains."

p. 96: "I consider Rumsey's discovery for working Boats against stream, by mechanical powers (principally) as not only a very fortunate invention for these States in general, but as one of those circumstances which have combined to render the present epocha favourable above all others for fixing, if we are disposed to avail ourselves of them, a large portion of the trade of the Western Country in the bosom of this State irrevocably."

"Lengthy as this letter is, I intended to have written a fuller & more digested one, upon this important subject, but have met with so many interruptions since my return home, as almost to have precluded my writing at all–what I now give is crude; but if you are in sentiment with me, I have said enough; if there is not an accordance of opinion I have said too much, & all I pray in the latter case is, that you will do me the justice to believe my motives are pure, however erroneous my judgment may be on this matter. . . ."

p. 96, Ed. Note: In the weeks and months that follow, GW often repeats, modifies, or elaborates upon the points that he makes here, to the governor of Virginia, regarding his vision of the role that the Potomac should play in the future of the transmontane West. See, in particular, his letters to a member of Congress, Jacob Read, 3 Nov.; to the president of the Maryland senate, George Plater, 25 Oct., and to the old financier Robert Morris, 1 Feb. 1785.

15 October 1784 From Stephen Sayre (in Georgetown), pp. 99-100.

p. 99: "It is my wish, that every Idea, leading to accomplish the great Object [of "opening this River"] may be made public, and have reason to beleive the money may sooner be raised by Tontine [a plan involving shares], than in any other way, not only from the success such a mode has generally met with in Europe, but from the approbation of every Individual I have conversed with on the subject. Nor is there any other method which so fairly discharges posterity from the Toll, doing equal Justice to Creditors. I conceive also, that the early profits or enviable payments which the Toll will make to the Lenders will create an ardent disposition in the public to see Inland navigation extended to its utmost stage of improvement. It is reported, and I hope truly, that your Excellency will be at Annapolis; about the 1t of novr [see first note below] I propose being there also at the same time, when I shall, unreservedly communicate my Ideas, and I trust, prove to conviction, that as to work, nothing is more practicable than a good, safe, & convenient navigation thro the great & Little Falls, without a single Lock–to my understanding, all Idea of Locks ought to be renounced& exploded forever–perhaps in all cases of navigation; but surely in this River. The single difficulty, in case the two States agree, is to raise the Funds. I am clearly persuaded that £50000 Maryland Cury would make a good navigation, & upon a plan that would never require repairs."

pp. 99-100, Ed. Note: GW accompanied Lafayette to Annapolis at the end of November, at which time he consulted with members of the Maryland legislature about forming a company to improve navigation on the Potomac. See particularly GW to Joseph Jones and James Madison, 3 Dec. 1784. Although there is no diary record of his movements after his return from his journey to the West, it is almost certain that GW did not make an earlier trip to Annapoplis in the fall (see his cash accounts, Ledger B, 201).

p. 100, Ed. Note: In hopes of adding "Vigor to the great Design of improving our inland Navigation," the Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser on 16 Dec. 1784 printed an "Extract of a Letter from London, dated September 20, to Stephen Sayre . . . from a Character, who is consulted in all Europe on all Objects of public Improvements." The letter begins: "I like your Description of America–What am amazing Country–what noble Rivers–I am glad you recommended, and pray insist in advising G. W. to sink or deepen upper levels . . . Discourage Locks–Encourage Ballast Work–deepening Shallows, and removing Rocks. . . ."

18 Oct 1784	Enclosure II of George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 December 1784: An Act for Opening and Extending the Navigation of Potowmack River, pp. 240-245.

pp. 240-241: "Richmond, 18 October 1784. I. Whereas the extension of the navigation of Potowmack river, from tide water to the highest place practicable on the North branch, will be of great public utility, and many persons are willing to subscribe [surely this date is too early?! See the same entry under 28 December 1784.]

19 Oct 1784	James Rumsey to George Washington, p. 101.

"The honor you Did me at Bath by giveing me So ample a certificate I Shall Eve[r] most greatfully acknowledge[.] It Convicts almost Every person that Sees it and puts Quite a new face on my Scheme[.]"

20 Oct 1784	George Plater to George Washington, pp. 102-103.

"Since I had the Honor of visiting you I have been revolving in my Head the Subject of our Conversation respecting the opening [of] the Potowmack, Advancing the Trade of the back & new settled Countries [in] this these middle States & the more I consider it, the more I am impressed with the Utility & Advantages resulting therefrom–So much so, that I am determined to press the Measure in our Assembly, which will soon meet, & I hope we shall be joined by Virginia–To enable me to do it with more Effect, I take the Liberty to entreat the Favor of you, in some Leisure Moment, to give me as concisely as you please, some Description of the Waters in the back Country, the Land Carriage unavoidably necessary, & what other Information you may deem important. . . ."

p. 103, Ed. Note: George Plater (1735-1792) of Sotterly, St. Mary's County, Md., was married to Elizabeth Frisby (d. 1789), stepdaughter of GW's friend William Fitzhugh. Plater at this time was president of the Maryland senate, and at the time of his death he was governor of the state.

Ed. Note: It is not known when Plater visited Mount Vernon, but the tone and content of GW's lengthy response of 25 Oct. suggest that the visit was perhaps made before rather than after GW's western journey in September.

Ed. Note: Plater was active in support of GW's successful efforts to secure the passage of his Potomac River Company bill by the Maryland legislature in January 1785.

22 Oct 1784	Jacob Read (in New York) to George Washington, pp. 104-105.

"I hope Your late Tour Westward has been Attended with every pleasure & advantage you promised Yourself and as I conclude you are by this time returned home may I expect the pleasure of hearing from You & be favoured with Any observations that may be essential towards my forming a proper Judgment in Any Measures Congress may have in View respecting the Western Territory, Posts, or in General on Indian Affairs." [see GW to Read, 3 November.]

p. 105, Ed. Note: Jacob Read . . . was a member of Congress from South Carolina. . . .

25 Oct 1784	George Washington to George Plater, pp. 106-110.

p. 106: "To describe the usefulness of water transportation, would be a mere waste of time, every man who has considered the difference of expense between it, & land transportation, and the prodigeous saving in the article of draught cattle, requires no arguments in proof of it. and to point out the advantages which the back Inhabitants of Virginia and Maryland would derive from an extension of inland navigation of the river Potomk, (even supposing our views did not extend beyond the Apalachian Mountains) would be equally nugatory."

[From this point, GW repeats many of his points from his 10 October letter to Benjamin Harrison.]

p. 106: "It has long been my opinion, that the shortest, easiest, and least expensive communication with the invaluable and extensive Country back of us, would be by the river Potomack; and in this opinion I am not singular. [He mentions geographers Evans and Hutchins in support.]

p. 106-107: "But that this may not appear a European scheme, or as an opinion unsupports [sic] by facts, I will give you the different routs & distances from Detroit, by which the Fur & Peltry trade of the lakes, even as far as that of the Wood [Lake of the Woods], must pass; unless the Spaniards contrary to their present policy should open their Ports to it–or Great Britain, to divert it from us, should endeavor to force nature by carrying it along the river Outawaies into Canada, which I scarcely think they will attempt, or could effect if they did, as the Lakes are as open to our Traders as theirs, and the way easier from them."

p. 107: "Taking Detroit then (which is putting ourselves in as distant a point of view as we can be placed, because it is upon the Northwestern line of the United territory) it appears from the enclosed statement, that the tide water of the Potomack is nearer to it, by 168 Miles than that of the river St Lawrence–or than that of the Hudson at Albany, by 176 miles."

p. 107: "Maryland as it respects the navigation of the Potomack stands upon similar ground with Virginia–Pennsylvania, altho' the Susquehanna is said to be an unfriendly water, much impeded by rocks & rapids, and disgorging itself into Chesapeak bay, have it, I am told, in contemplation to open a communication between Toby's Creek (. . . 95 Miles above Fort Pitt) and . . . the Schuylkill–the expense of which is more easy to be conceived than estimated or described. but a people possessed of the spirit of Commerce–who see–and who will resolve to pursue advantages, may atchieve almost any thing. In the meanwhile, under the uncertainty of these undertakings, they are smoothing (as I have been informed) the roads, and paving the ways for the trade of that western world, to their capitol–That New York will do the same, so soon as the British Garrisons are removed, which at present are insuperable obstacles in their way, none who are as well acquainted with the genious & policy of those people as I am, can harbour the smallest doubt–any more than they will of the difficulty of diverting trade, after connections are once formed, & it has flowed for any length of time in one channel into that of another."

pp. 107-108: "I am not for discouraging the exertion of any State to draw the Commerce of the Western Country to its Seaports. The more communications are opened to it, the closer we bind that rising world (for indeed it may be so called) to our interests; and the greater strength shall we acquire by it. Those to whom nature affords the best communication, will, if they are wise & politic, enjoy the greatest share of the trade. all I would be understood to mean therefore, is, that the gifts of Providence may not be neglected, or slighted. These when viewed upon a commercial scale, are alone sufficient to excite our endeavors; but the political object is, in my estimation, immense."

[At this point in his letter, GW discusses how the back country of the U.S. is surrounded by other powers, leading to the possibility that settlers there will ally themselves with those foreign powers.]

p. 108: "The Western settlers–I speak now from my own observations–stand as it were upon a pivet; the touch of a feather would almost incline them any way–They looked down the Mississipi until the Spaniards (very impoliticly I think for themselves) threw difficulties in their way; & for no other reason that I can devise, than because they glided gently down the stream without considering perhaps the length of the voyage, & the time necessary to perform it in. & because they had no other means of coming to us, but by a long land transportation, and unimproved roads."

"These causes have hitherto checked the industry of the present Settlers, for except the demand for provisions, occasioned by the encrease of population; and the little flour which the necessities of the Spaniards have compelled them to buy; they have no excitements to labour–But open the road once, & make easy the way for these, and see what an influx of articles will be poured in upon us. how amazingly our exports will be encreased by them, and how amply we shall be compensated for any trouble and expence we may encounter to effect it."

pp. 108-109: "A combination of circumstances make the present conjuncture more favourable than any other, to fix these matters–The crusty & untoward disposition of the Spaniards on one side, and the private views of some individuals coinciding with the policy of the Court of G. Britain on the other, to retain the Posts of Oswego, Niagara, Dretroit [sic] &ca (which though they are done under the letter of the treaty, is certainly an infraction of the spirit of it, and injurious to the Union) may be improved to the greatest advantage by the States of Virginia & Maryland if they would open their arms, and embrace the means which are necessary to establish the trade–It wants but a beginning–the Western Inhabitants would do their part towards its execution. Weak as they are at present, they would meet us half way rather than be driven into the arms of, or be dependent upon, foreigners; the consequence of which would be, a separation or a war–the way to avoid both, fortunately for us, is, to do that, which our most essential interests prompts us to do; and which, at a very small comparitive expence, is to be effected. that is, to open a wide door to their commerce, & make the communication as easy as possible for their produce."

p. 109: "I consider Rumseys discovery for working Boats against the stream, by mechanical powers principally, as not only a very fortunate invention for these States in general, but as one of those circumstances which have combined to render the present epocha favorable above all others, for fixing, if we are disposed to avail ourselves of them, a large portion of the Peltry & Fur trade of the lakes, and the commerce within, irrecoverably, to these two states."

[Note how GW subtly changed the wording of his earlier letter to Benjamin Harrison so that this letter to a Marylander would not seem favorable to Virginia alone.]

3 Nov 1784	George Washington to Jacob Read, pp. 118-123.

pp. 121-122: "There is a matter which tho' it does not come before Congress wholly, is in my opinion, of great political importance, and ought to be attended to in time. It is to prevent the trade of the Western territory from settling in the hands, wither of the Spaniards or British. if either of these happen, there is a line of separation at once drawn between the Eastern & Western Country. The consequences of which may be fatal. . . . It may be asked how are we to prevent this? Happily for us the way is plain–and our immediate Interests, as well as remote political advantages, points to it; whilst a combination of circumstances renders the present Epocha more favorable than any other, to accomplish them–Extend the inland navigation of the Eastern waters–communicate them as near as possible (by excellent Roads) with those which run to the Westward. Open those to the Ohio–and such others as extend from the Ohio towards Lake Erie; and we shall not only draw the produce of the Western Settlers, but the Fur & peltry trade of the lakes also, to our Ports (being the nearest, & easiest of transportation) to the amazing encrease of our Exports, while we bind those people to us by a chain which can never be broken."

p. 123, Ed. Note: The first public move toward creating a company for extending navigation up the Potomac and to the Ohio had already been taken in Virginia. The following announcement dated at Alexandria, 2 Nov. 1784, appeared in the Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser on 4 November. Whether the meeting was called at GW's instigation or only with his blessing has not been determined.

"A Meeting is proposed of the Gentlemen of the States of Virginia and Maryland, especially those who live contiguous to Potomack, and wish to see an attempt made to open and extend the navigation of that River.–The objects of this meeting will be to form a company, and determine on the propriety of preferring a petition to their respective Assemblies, praying to be incorporated and favoured with such immunities, as to them may seem proper for such an undertaking–The advantages which both States must derive from the completion of this work, are so numerous and so obvious, that it is hoped this notice will be generally attended to, and that Gentlemen will come prepared to offer such advice and support, as the importance of the plan requires.–The meeting is to be at Mr. LOMAX's on Monday, the 15th inst. at 10 o'clock, A.M."

For an account of the meeting at Alexandria on 15 Nov., see Henry Lee to GW, 18 Nov., n. 1. For a summary account of GW's role in the establishment of the Potomac River Company, see the editorial note in GW to Benjamin Harrison, 10 October.

13 Nov 1784	Normand Bruce (in Washington Co., Va.) to George Washington, pp. 126-133.

pp. 127-128: "As it seems impracticable under our present circumstances to procure Specie either by Loan or other ways, . . . Paper seems the only resource left us. . . . As therefore we have but little hopes left of seeing Public Emissions the following proposition for Circulating a very small Sum on Private Security, and for Establishing a Bank is submited to your private consideration wether it may admit of such amendment or additions as to be rendered practicable and of Service to the Comunity."

p. 128: "Proposal, That provided the Legislatures of Virginia & Maryland will Emit the Sum of 500,000 Dollars, which they will grant upon Loan to the Subscribers or otherways Vest them with the Priveledge of Emitting and of Circulating such a Sum for and during the term of Ten Years from the date of the Grant or Emission–In consideration whereof they will engage to expend the Sum of [ ] Dollars within the Space of [ ] Years from the date of such Grant towards rendering Potowmack River Navigable from Tide Water, towards its Source, or as far up, as to the nearest convenient Landing for the Westren [sic] Waters."

"That the said Sum of 500,000 dollars shall be subscribed for and divided into (either 125 or 250) Shares (which will make each share amount to 4000 or 2000 Dollars) and that no Subscription shall be received for more than [ ] Shares nor for less than 1/4 Share."

"That every Subscriber shall be entitled to a Loan of one half of the Sum Subscribed by him, upon giving Bond with Sufficient Security for the repayment thereof with Interest Annually."

"That the other Moiety or Residue of the Money excepting a Sum not exceeding [ ] Dollars shall be lent out upon Satisfactory Security in Sums not exceeding [ ] Dollars to any one Person at the Annual Interest of 5 prCt."

"That one half of the Amount of the Proposed Emissions shall be redeemed and paid off in the year 179[ ] and the other Moiety in the year following; and for the certain and effectual redemption whereof the Subscribers &c. to be liable."

"That the Subscribers &c. shall be incorporated by the name of the Potowmack Company with such other further necessary Priveledges as the respective Legislatures may judge proper for their encouragement and for the effectual securing the repayment of Money lent by them."

pp. 128-129: "That the Proprietors shall meet on the [ ] day of [ ] next and on the same day annually at Alexandria there to Elect by Ballot a Governour [ ] Directors [ ] Treasurer & Secratary."

p. 129: "That the Governour with a Majority of the Directors shall meet Quarterly and be empowered to make such further Appointments as may be found necessary, make Contracts fix the Price of wages, Draw on the Treasurer and give such directions from time to time as may be necessary for executing with Dilegence & frugality, the intended Navigation in a manner which shall be deemed of the greatest Public Utility."

[The proposal continues in this vein.]

p. 131: ". . . should you However deem the proposal in consistant I have inclosed the outlines of another mode of Executing this important Business upon the same principles, that Works of this kind are most commonly undertaken and executed.[see Note 1 below]

p. 131, Ed. Note: Normand Bruce (d. 1811), a Scot by birth, lived in Frederick County, Maryland. He had large landholdings in that county and also in Montgomery, Prince George's, and Washington counties, Maryland. In 1783 the Maryland legislature had him and Charles Beatty look into and report on the feasibility of "opening, clearing, and making navigable the River Potomack" to the Maryland line (Md. Senate Proceedings, 443; see also GW's notes on the Bruce-Beatty report in note 1 [next below]). When at Bath in September 1784, GW talked at length with Bruce about connecting the upper reaches of the Potomac to the Ohio River by means of other streams and short land portages. GW also had access to the Bruce-Beatty report of 1783, on which he made notes (see I 4:11-14).

[What did the Maryland legislature mean by "to the Maryland line"? The Potomac's source? Below, Washington says the report covers the stretch of the Potomac from Fort Cumberland to the Tidewater.]

Ed. Note: 1. The test of Bruce's alternate plan is: "Proposals of opening the Navigation of Potowmack for which purpose the Sum of 150,000 dollars shall be subscribed & divided into Seventy five Shares of 2000 dollars each."

"No Subscription shall be taken for more than [ ] Shares nor less than 1/4 of a Share."

"The Subscribers to be incorporated by Acts of the Vigra and Maryld Legislatures by name of the Potomack Company with an Exclusive right to them, their Heirs, Assigns &c. to all the Water they may think propper to collect into their Canals and the lands through which the same may run shall be condemned for their use and that they shall have power to Levy on all Boats Rafts &c. Passing thru their Cannals a Toll not exceeding [ ] pr Ton."

[The alternate proposal continues in that vein.]

p. 132. Ed. Note. To compare Bruce's two alternate plans for a Potomac River company with the one adopted by the Virginia and Maryland legislatures in December 1784 and January 1785, see Enclosure I in Beverly Randolph to GW, 15 December.

It is not known whether it was before of after receiving Bruce's letter that GW made the following notes on the report that Bruce and Charles Beatty made to the Maryland legislature in 1783, which GW heads "Taken from Messrs Charles Beatty, and Normd Bruces report & estimate, respecting the opening the Navigation of the River Patomack from Fort Cumberland to tide water":

[GW's notes from the report then follow. They consist mostly of details about the various falls along the Potomac, and do not need to be transcribed here for our present purposes.]

13 Nov 1784	Benjamin Harrison to George Washington, pp. 134-135.

p. 134: "I was in great hopes of seeing you here before this that I might have acknowledged the rect of your favor of the 10th of last month in person, and have told you how much I approve your plan for opening the navigation of the western waters. The letter was so much more explicit than I could be that I took the liberty to lay it before the assembly, who appear so impress'd with the utility of the measure that I dare say they will order the survey you propose immediately and will at their next sitting proceed to carry the plan into execution."

p. 134, Ed. Note: 1. Governor Harrison wrote the Virginia house of assembly early in the session, on both 1 and 2 Nov., enclosing "sundry letters and papers." There is no indication in the assembly's journal that GW's proposals for opening up the Potomac were discussed on the floor of the house before his arrival in Richmond on 14 November. For GW's role in the enactment of the Potomac River Company bill in both the Virginia and Maryland legislatures, see editorial note: GW and the Potomac River Company, in GW to Harrison, 10 October.

18 Nov 1784	Henry Lee, Jr (in Alexandria) to George Washington, pp. 139-141.

p. 139: "I did myself the pleasure of writing to you on the 15th Since which the meeting have concluded their business.<1> they determined to send the petition to the representatives of this county, I beleive, & to trouble you with their bill for perusal, & then to place it in the proper hands. However the express who will deliver this, is sent purposely by the meeting with our papers, & will bear a letr to you from the chairman.<2> Thus you will receive the matter fully explained. This would have superceded the necessity of any communication from me, did I not think it proper to suggest to you two changes in the bill which appear to many, unsurmountable objections–if they strike you so, it would be well to communicate them, that they may be altered–the one is, the taxing the company with recompensing individuals for all new damages which may arise from or by means of the canal locks, &c.–the 2d is the authorizing the company to purchase & erect mill seats water works &c.–the first of these will prevent subscriptions–the 2d permits monopoly, which is disgusting–as the tolls are in the first of the bills decided to be adequate compensation for the expence & in accomplishing the object, it appears mercenary to pray the addition of extra privileges–However the changes will speak for themselves.<3>

p. 140, Ed. Note: Henry Lee (1756-1818), known as Light-Horse Harry, was deeply interested in the Potomac River Company from its inception.

Ed. Note: <1> Lee's letter written on 15 Nov., which was the day interested gentlemen from Maryland and Virginia met at Alexandria to lay plans for forming a company to improve the navigation of the Potomac (see GW to Jacob Read, 3 Nov., n. 4), has not been found. See also the editorial note in GW to Benjamin Harrison, 10 October. The following report of the meeting appeared in the Alexandria newspaper on 25 Nov.: "On Monday the 15th Instant, at a very numerous and respectable Meeting of the Gentlemen of this State and Maryland, convened by public Advertisement at Mr Lomax's Tavern, to deliberate and consult on the vast, great, political and commercial Object, the rendering navigable the River Potomack from Tide Water–It was unanimously Resolved, That every possible Effort ought to be exerted to render these waters navigable to their utmost Sources. In consequence Petitions to the respective Honorable Assemblies were prepared, praying to form a Company, with such Immunities as might seem meet to them to grant. The Patriotism and Zeal of the Meeting, make it a Matter of little Doubt, but that the respective Honorable Assemblies will most cheerfully grant the Prayer of the Petitions, and render every possible Assistance to complete so great a national Concern."

"The opening of the Navigation of the Potomack is, perhaps, a Work of more political than commercial Consequence, as it will be one of the grandest Chains for preserving the federal Union, the Western world will have free Access to us, and we shall be one and the same People, whatever System of European Politics may be adopted.–In short, it is a Work so big, that the intellectual Faculties cannot take it at a View."

"The Company in their Plan, have engaged to accomplish the Navigation from the Source to the Upper Falls in Three Years, about Two Hundred Miles from us, and to make it complete to Tide-Water in Ten Years.–The Commerce and Riches that must of Necessity pour down upon us, are too obvious to mention" (Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser). More or less the same account appeared in the Virginia Gazette, or, the American Advertiser (Richmond) on 4 December.

p. 140, Ed. Note: <2> GW went from Mount Vernon to Richmond shortly before the meeting was held in Alexandria, arriving in the capital on Sunday, 14 Nov., and remaining there until he and Lafayette departed for Mount Vernon about a week later. One of the Fairfax County representatives, Thomas West, did not take his seat in the house of delegates in Richmond until 10 Nov., and he had left by 6 Dec.; the other delegate, Alexander Henderson, did not arrive at the capitol until 18 December. Most of the important decisions regarding the proposed Potomac River Company were made when neither of these men were present. The draft of the bill for creating the Potomac River company with a covering letter and probably a copy of the petition of the Alexandria meeting for the two state legislatures did not reach GW until after his return to Mount Vernon from Richmond. He at that time, on 28 Nov., forwarded the documents to James Madison (see GW to Madison, 28 Nov.).

p. 141, Ed. Note: <3> One may infer from Lee's discussion hereof the original draft of the Potomac River bill, as is in any case most likely, that GW had already been made familiar with the bill's contents, or even participated in its drafting, before he left Richmond.

28 Nov 1784	George Washington to James Madison (& Joseph Jones) at Richmond, pp. 155-157.

p. 155: "After the several conversations we have had on the subject of inland navigation; and the benefits which would, probably, be derived from a commercial intercourse with the Western territory; I shall make no apology for giving you the trouble of the enclosed.<1>

"It is a matter of regret to me, howver, that I cannot accompany them with some explanations & observations. It was intended these Papers should have met me at Richmond. They missed me on the road thither–travelled back to Baltimore–returned–and were put into my hands at the moment I was setting off for Annapolis; to which place I mean to accompany the Marqs de la Fayette on his return to New York where he expects to embark, about the middle of next month, for France.<2>

p. 156: "I could not think of withholding these Papers until my return, as I shall probably accompany the Marquis from Annapolis to Baltimore. Therefore, in the order I receive, I send them to you. Your own judgments in this business will be the best guide. but in one word, it should seem to me, that if the public cannot take it up with efficient funds, & without those delays which might be involved by a limping conduct, it had better be placed in the hands of a corporate Company–What encouragements, and what powers, to give this Company, deserves all that consideration which I persuade myself you, Gentlemen, will bestow."

"The Maryland Assembly is now sitting–If I should return in time, I will have the honor of writing you again on this Subject.<3>–in the meanwhile, if your leizure will permit, I should be glad to know your Sentimts on, and what will be the issue of, this business."

p. 156, Ed. Note: Joseph Jones (1727-1805), delegate from King George County, was shortly after this elected to the council of state and so was not active in the house of delegates when the Potomac River Company was under consideration and finally incorporated in December.

pp.156-157, Ed. Note: <1> The "conversations" took place while GW was in Richmond the week of 15 November. GW enclosed both a draft of a bill for creating a Potomac River company, which the meeting at Alexandria adopted on 15 Nov., and a covering letter from the chairman of the meeting, along with, perhaps, a copy of the petition that the Alexandria meeting drew up to present to the legislatures of Virginia and Maryland. See Henry Lee to GW, 18 Nov., and note 1 of that document. None of these enclosures has been found, but on 4 Dec. the clerk of the house of delegates noted in the house journals: "A petition of sundry inhabitants of the State of Maryland, and also of this State, was presented to the House, and read; setting forth, that they conceive it would greatly contribute to the extension of commerce, and the improvement of agriculture, if the river Potomac was made navigable from the falls, and a communication opened by that means with the western country; and praying that an act may pass establishing a company, to be invested with full powers for that purpose" (House of Delegates Journal, 1781-1785). The Virginia ordered that the petition be referred to "the committee of the whole House on the state of the Commonwealth" for its consideration on 7 December. On the seventh, the committee of the whole reported and the house agreed: "That an act ought to pass, for opening and extending the navigation of the river Potomac." Two days later, a committee composed of Carter Henry Harrison, Thomas Matthews, and William Grayson reported to the house a bill for "establishing a company for opening and extending the navigation of the river Potomac." The committee had access to the drafted bill that GW sent to Madison in his letter and to a greater or lesser extent based its bill on it, but as no copy of either the Alexandria draft of the bill or the delegates' bill has been found, it cannot be determined just how closely the house bill followed the wording of the Alexandria bill. However, Madison wrote Richard Henry Lee on 11 Dec.: "The scheme for opening the navigation of the Potomac, which has been settled between the Maryland and [the Virginia] gentlemen, is before the House of Delegates, and will be favoured, as far as the objectionable amount of tolls will admit. As the concurrence of Maryland in this scheme is necessary, some difficulties will attend its progress" (Rutland and Rachal, Madison Papers, 8:180-81). Madison also wrote GW a letter on 11 Nov., which has not been found. Madison in his missing letter may have been responding to GW's letter of 3 Dec. [How? 3 Dec. is later than 11 Nov.!] , which see, and he undoubtedly reported on these developments with regard to the Potomac River Company bill. In any case, the house bill, which was scheduled for debate in the committee of the whole on 14 Dec., was dropped; on 13 dec. the house of delegates adopted the suggestion GW made in his letter to Madison of 3 Dec. that the Virginia assembly appoint commissioners of the Maryland legislature to draft a single bill for creating a Potomac River company acceptable to both state bodies. See GW to Madison, 3 Dec., n. 5.

p. 157, Ed. Note: See Henry Lee to GW, 18 Nov., and note 2 of that document. It was probably on this day, 28 Nov., that GW and Lafayette left Mount Vernon for Annapolis. For the duration of their stay in Annapolis, see GW to Madison, 3 Dec., n. 1.

Ed. Note: <3> See GW to Madison, 3 December.

3 Dec 1784	George Washington to James Madison (& Joseph Jones), pp. 165-168.

p. 165: "Gentlemen: I returned yesterday from Annapolis, having conducted the Marquis La Fayette that far on his way to New York, and left him proceeding on the road to Baltimore, on Wednesday last.<1>

"This trip afforded me opportunities of conversing with some of the leading characters in the different branches of the Legislature of Maryland, on the subject of inland navigation, and the benefits which might arise from a commercial intercourse with the Western territory.–I was happy to find them so forcibly struck with the importance of these objects; and that there appeared the most favorable disposition to give encouragement to them."<2>

pp. 165-166: "Like us, they have two interests prevailing in their assembly–or rather in the present instance like ourselves have two ways by which the same interest is to be effected. The ill-
grounded jealousies arising therefrom serves in some degree to embarrass this measure of public utility. The Baltimore interest has already obtained an act to encourage, and to empower a corporate company to remove the obstructions in that part of the Susquehanna, which lie within the territory of Maryland.–And this, I perceive, is all that can be obtained in behalf of Potomac, from that quarter.<3>

p. 166: "As no public money, therefore, is likely to be obtained from that State, and as little chance perhaps of getting it from this–should not the wisdom of both assemblies be exerted without delay to hit upon such a happy medium as will not on the one hand, vest two much power and profit in a private company;–and on the other to hold out sufficient inducements to engage men to hazard their fortunes in an arduous undertaking?–If the act does not effect this the object of it is defeated; and the business of course is suspended; which, in my opinion, would be injurious; as the present moment is important, favorable, and critical; and the spirit for enterprize greater now than it may ever be hereafter."

pp. 166-167: "The bill I sent you is exceptionable in some parts, and gives discontent in others–so I am informed,–for it came to my hands at a moment when I could not read, much less consider it.<4> Would it not be highly expedient, therefore, as the session of both assemblies must soon draw to a close, for each to depute one or more members to meet at some intermediate place, and agree, (first knowing the sentiments of the respective assemblies,) upon an adequate bill to be adopted by both States? This would prevent dissimilar proceedings, as unproductive as no bill–save time–and bring matters at once to a point. A measure of this kind is consonant, I know, with the ideas of some of the leading members of the Maryland Assembly, who requested me to suggest it to my friends in our assembly, and to inform them of the result.<5>

p. 167: "From what I can learn, there was in the meeting held at Alexandria too great a leaning to local advantages on one part, and too much compliance on the other part, to obtain general approbation of the bill which proceeded from it–I shall not pronounce on either side, but imperfections, if they really exist, at the meetings proposed, may be rectified; and a liberal plan adopted which will have no eye to the interested views of a few individuals to the prejudice of the majority; who rather than damp the spirit which was up, resolved, it is said, to submit, to any plan, rather than impede the undertaking.<6>

p. 167: "At such a meeting as has been suggested, of delegates from the two assemblies of Virginia and Maryland, might it not prove a politic step for them to agree upon a representation to be made by their respective Assemblies to the State of Pennsylvania, of the political advantages which would flow from a close connection with the Western Territory; and to request their concurrence to make the communication through their State AS EASY AND AS DIFFUSIVE AS POSSIBLE?–pointing to the consequences which in the course of things must follow, if we do not open doors for their produce and trade. That State has many Delegates in the Assembly who would relish such a proposition highly.–It would on our parts, appear attentive and respectful; and if rejected on theirs, place them (at least in the eyes of those people) in the wrong–and excite their reiterated applications, which most assuredly would effect it.<7>

"Another thing, in my opinion, should also be the object of this meeting, and that is to agree upon a sum, to be advanced by the States of Virginia and Maryland, for the purpose of opening a road between the Eastern and Western Waters.–The Company, (if one should be formed,) and the bill, having nothing to do with this–and the Western settlers are not in circumstances to effect it themselves."<8>

pp. 167-168, Ed. Note: <1> Wednesday last was 1 December. On 28 Nov. GW wrote Madison that he was "at the moment" of "setting off for Annapolis" with Lafayette. GW arrived back at Mount Vernon on 2 December. On 8 Dec. GW wrote Lafayette that he got home before dinner on the day after they parted, indicating that they left Annapolis on 1 December.

p. 168, Ed. Note: <2> For GW's role in the forming of the Potomac River Company by the states of Virginia and Maryland, see editorial note in GW to Benjamin Harrison.

Ed. Note:<3> On 9 Dec. George Digges of Prince George's County introduced in the Maryland legislature a bill "to prevent the obstruction of the navigation of the eastern and north-west branches of the river Patowmack" (Md. House of Delegates Proceedings), which the governor signed into law on 22 Jan. 1785.

[This act has to do with weirs obstructing the "eastern and north-west branches of Patowmack river, near the town of Bladensburg, to the great injury of the navigation of the said river, and of the trade of the said town." The river referred to is now known as the Anacostia, whose two branches do unite just below Bladensburg. So this act has nothing whatever, as far as I can see, to do with what Washington was writing to Madison about. See the Maryland Archives web page:

http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/megafile/msa/speccol/sc4800/sc4872/003180/html/m3180-1291.html]

Ed. Note: <4> For the disposition of the bill drafted by the Alexandria meeting of 15 Nov. and forwarded to Madison by GW on 28 Nov., see GW to Madison, 28 Nov., n. 1.

Ed. Note: <5> On 13 Dec. the Virginia house adopted GW's suggestion that it appoint commissioners to meet with the Marylanders, and it named GW to be one of the three to act for Virginia. See Beverly Randolph to GW, 15 Dec., and note 1 of that document.

Ed. Note: <6> For Henry Lee's analysis of the bill's weakness as amended and adopted by the Alexandria meeting, see his letter to GW of 18 November. See also GW to Madison 28 Nov., n. 1

.

Ed. Note: <7> The Virginia house of delegates on 28 dec. voted to join with Maryland to inform Pennsylvania of their plans for the Potomac and to ask that the state of Pennsylvania place no impediment on measures that Virginia and Maryland might take to link the Potomac and the Ohio by means of navigable streams and roads through Pennsylvania. See Enclosure I in James Madison to GW, 9Jan. 1785.

Ed. Note: <8> When on 13 Dec. the Virginia house of delegates voted to send three commissioners to confer with the Marylanders to form a Potomac River company, it also voted to have the Virginia commissioners "concert" with the Marylanders about the opening of a proper road from the head of navigation on the Potomac to "the most convenient western waters." See Beverly Randolph to GW, 15 Dec. 1784, n. 1; Enclosure III in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 Dec. Dec. 1784; and Enclosure II in James Madison to GW, 9 Jan. 1785.

5 Dec 1784	George Washington to Henry Knox, pp. 170-172.

p. 170: "When your letter of the 26th of July came here, I was upon the eve of a tour to the Westward which ended in the neighbourhood of Fort Pit, altho' my original plan took in the Great Kanhawa."

p. 171: "I am now endeavoring to stimulate my Countrymen to the extension of the inland navigation of the rivers Potomac and James–thereby, & a short land transportation, to connect the Western Territory by strong commercial bands with this–I hope I shall succeed, more on account of its political importance–than the commercial advantages which would result from it, altho' the latter is an immense object: for if this Country, which will settle faster than any other ever did (and chiefly by foreigners who can have no particular predilection for us), cannot, by an easy communication be drawn this way, but are suffered to form commercial intercourses (which lead well know to others) with the Spaniards on their right & rear, or the British on their left, they will become a distinct people from us–have different views–different interests, & instead of adding strength to the Union, may in case of a rupture with either of those powers, be a formidable & dangerous neighbour."

11 Dec 1784	George Washington to George Plater, CCC, John Cadwalader, and Samuel Chase, pp. 178-179.

[Why was this letter not selected for Patriarch?]

11 Dec 1784	James Madison to George Washington, p. 178.

[Not found.]

14 Dec 1784	George Washington to Richard Henry Lee, pp. 181-183.

p. 181: "The letter which you did me the honor to write to me on the 20th of last Month, only came to my hands by the Post preceeding the date of this."

p. 182: "The Assemblies of Virginia and Maryland have now under consideration the extension of the inland navigation of the rivers Potomack & James; and opening a communication between them, and the Western Waters. They seem fully impressed with the political, as well as the commercial advantages which would result from the accomplishment of these great objects; & I hope will embrace the present moment to put them in a train for execution–Would it not at the same time, be worthy the wisdom, & attention of Congress to have the Western Waters well explored; the Navigation of them fully ascertained; accurately laid down; and a complete & perfect Map made of the Country. . . ?"

15 Dec 1784	George Washington to Richard Claiborne, pp. 184-185.

[Has to do with the portage at Fort Cumberland. Claiborne became associated with James Rumsey's efforts to develop mechanical boats. Transcribe later.]

15 Dec 1784	Beverly Randolph (in Council) to George Washington, pp. 185-187.

pp. 185-186: "I have the Honour to Inclose you Several Resolutions of the General Assembly, relative to the Opening the Navigation of the River Potomack; by which you are Appointed One of the Commissioners on the part of this State to meet those who may be Appointed on the Part of Maryland to Concert Such regulations as may be best Adapted to Attain this important Object:<1> the Letter Addressed to the Governor of Maryland is inclosed Open to you with a Blank which the Executive request you will fill up with the time at which it will be Convenient for yourself and the Other Commissioners to meet at Annapolis.<2> It may be requisite to Observe that the Day shou'd be as early a One as Possible, the Assembly being Anxious to receive your report so that they may Adopt the Necessary Measures During their Present Session. you will be Pleased after filling up the Blank, to forward the Letter to Mr Paca by the Express who will Deliver you this."

p. 186, Ed. Note: Although Patrick Henry's new term as governor of Virginia began on 30 Nov., he did not appear in the council to assume office until 21 December. Until then, Beverly Randolph (1734-1797) as lieutenant governor acted in his stead.

Ed. Note: <1> These particular copies of the resolutions implementing GW's suggestions to Madison of 3 Dec. regarding cooperation between Virginia and Maryland to form a Potomac River company and to build a road in Pennsylvania from the Potomac to the waters of the Ohio have not been found. The texts of the resolutions, however, are printed in the journal of the Virginia house of delegates for 13 Dec.: "Whereas, the opening and extending the inland navigation of this Commonwealth, will greatly contribute to the interest of individuals, and to the prosperity of the whole State; and a memorial has been presented to the present General Assembly, by sundry inhabitants of this State and of the State of Maryland, representing the particular advantages which would flow from the establishment of a company under the authority of two States, for the purpose of opening and improving the navigation of the river Potomac, from tide water, up the said river, as far as the same can be carried; and praying that an act may be passed by the present General Assembly, for establishing such a company: And whereas, the prayer of the said memorial is deemed reasonable; but it appearing to this House, that acts passed without previous communication between the two States, may be dissimilar and productive of much delay.;"

"Resolved, That George Washington, Horatio Gates and Thomas Blackburne, Esquires, or any two of them be, and they are hereby appointed, forthwith to meet such persons as may be appointed by the State of Maryland, and to concert with them the regulations under which a company ought to be established for the purpose aforesaid; and that they immediately report the result of such conference to the General Assembly."

"And whereas, one material advantage to be derived to the two States. from the opening and improving the navigation of the river Potomac as aforesaid, will consist in the progress and facility it will afford towards a commercial intercourse with the western country;"

"Resolved, That the said commissioners, or any two of them be, and they are hereby authorised and instructed to concert with the persons who may be appointed on the part of Maryland, a plan, for opening a proper road between the waters of the Potomac and the most convenient western waters, together with the just proportions of money which ought to be supplied by the two States for that purpose; and that the said commissioners also report the result of their proceedings herein, to the General Assembly."

"Resolved, That these resolutions be transmitted by express to the State of Maryland, by the Executive, with propositions for the time and place of meeting the persons who may be deputed on the part of Maryland" (House of Delegates Journal, 1781-1785).

Ed. Note: <2> GW forwarded Lieutenant Governor Randolph's letter to Gov. William Paca under cover of a letter dated 19 December. For the text of Randolph's letter to Pace, see note 1 in GW to Paca, 19 December. GW set the date for the meeting with the Marylanders at Annapolis on 22 Dec. (see GW to Randolph, 20 Dec., and Enclosure I in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 Dec., printed below). Thomas Blackburn did not go to Annapolis and General gates became ill during the meeting, leaving GW to act alone for Virginia (see Blackburn to GW, 20 Dec., Gates to GW, 24 Dec., and GW to James Madison, 28 Dec.).

19 Dec 1784	George Washington to Thomas Blackburn, p. 195.

"The Express who brought me the resolves of our Assembly, & is going to Annapolis with dispatches for Govr Paca, informs me that he deliver'd others to you.<1>–It only remains therefore for me to add, that Thursday next, the 23d is the day appointed for the commissioners to meet at Annapolis.<2> I shall go to our Court tomorrow, & proceed from thence."

Ed. Note: <1> Blackburn was one of the three men chosen by the Virginia assembly to go to Maryland and secure the passage of a bill creating the Potomac River Company, but he did not accompany GW and Horatio Gates. See Beverly Randolph to GW, 15 Dec. 1784, and notes 1 and 2 of that document.

Ed. Note: <2> See Blackburn's response of 20 December. GW set 22 Dec., not 23 Dec., as the date for the meeting. Perhaps it was the copyist who wrote "23" by mistake.

19 Dec 1784	George Washington to William Paca, pp. 195-196.

p. 195: "The enclosed letter came under cover to me, after Sun-down this evening; I have the honor to inform your Excellency that I propose to be at Annapolis at the time appointed. Genl Gates will also attend, & I will give Colo. Blackburn notice of the appointed time."

p. 195, Ed. Note: William Paca (1740-1799), a well-to-do Maryland lawyer and planter, at this time governor of the state.

pp. 196-196, Ed. Note: The text of the enclosed letter from Lt. Gov. Beverley Randolph, 15 Dec., as it appears in the [Virginia] governor's letter book is: "I do myself the honor to enclose to your Excy several resolutions of the general assembly of this State, which I request you will lay before the Legislature of Maryland. The importance of the object will I flatter myself insure the earliest attention of yr Excy."

"The Commissioners appointed on the part of this State will meet those that may be appointed by your Satte at Annapolis on the [ ] Day of [ ] in order to concert the most effectual measures for obtang the end proposed" (Vi).

20 Dec 1784	George Washington to Beverley Randolph, p. 223.

"The letter you did me the honor to write to me the 15th Inst. was not delivered until late yesterday Evening–I filled the Blank in the letter to Govr Paca and forwarded it; and am now on my way to annapolis. I names the 22d, which at the rate your Express travels,<1> is as soon as the Govr can lay your letter before the Assembly of Maryland and Commrs be appointed to meet those from this State–Genl Gates will attend; & I have given Colo. Blackburne notice of the time & place."

"As soon as the business of the meeting is finished a report shall be made."

Ed. Note: <1> Randolph's messenger, Daniel Thompson, signed with his mark at Annapolis, 25 Dec.: "Received from G. Washington two Guineas to defray my expenses in this place & back to Richmond" (Vi).

20 Dec 1784	Thomas Blackburn (on Occoquan Creek) to George Washington, p. 196.

"Your Favor of Yesterday's Date came to hand this Morning."

"I am sorry to inform You, that it is not in my power to attend the Meeting of the Commrs on the day You mention, being engaged, as an Administrator, in the Sale of the late revd James Scott's personal Estate, in a few Days after; which I must, of Necessity, attend."

"I am informed that Genl gates is with You, and can have no Doubt of his Attendance on this Business; I am happy to think it will not be retarded by my Inability to attend."

23 Dec 1784	George Washington to Lafayette (from Annapolis), pp. 228-229.

pp. 228-229: "You would scarcely expect to receive a letter from me at this place: a few hours before I set out for it, I as little expected to cross the Potomac again this winter, . . . as I did to make you a visit in an air Balloon in France."

p. 229: "I am here however, with Genl Gates, at the request of the Assembly of Virginia, to fix matters with the Assembly of this State [Maryland] respecting the extension of the inland navigation of Potomac, & the communication between it and the Western waters; & hope a plan will be agreed upon to the mutual satisfaction of both States, & to the advantage of the Union at large.

[24 Dec 1784]	Horatio Gates (in Richmonds, Md.) to George Washington, pp. 229-
230.

"Believe me Sir were I in Health fit to attend the Committee this Evening I would on no account fail to do it but I feel I must go to bed instead of going to Mans.<1> You are so perfectly Master of the Business, that my Assent to your Opinions is all I have to say upon the Subject; this you may be sure of having, whenever that is called for–when a Vote must Decide, I will get a Coach, & come at all Hazzards to Mans."

p. 230, Ed. Note: <1> See note 2, Beverley Randolph to GW, 15 December. George Mann (1753-1795) operated Mann's tavern in Annapolis.

26 Dec 1784	Richard Henry Lee (in Trenton) to George Washington, pp. 230-231.

p. 230: "I had the honor to receive your obliging letter, of the 14th instant"

"Much time hath been taken up in debate upon the permanent and temporary residence of Congress, and finally it is determined that the former shall be on the banks of the Delaware, not exceeding eight miles above or below this place, and on either side of the river that may be fixt upon by commissioners to be appointed for the purpose of superintending the fœderal buildings. New York is to be the temporary residence, and Congress now stands adjourned to meet in that City on the 11th of January next–when I hope we shall diligently put forward the public business.<1> Spain seems determined to possess the exclusive navigation of the Mississippi, which, with the bickerings that appear already on that quarter, will oblige Congress to send an able Minister to Madrid.

p. 231, Ed. Note: <1> After considerable debate Congress on 23 Dec., the day before it adjourned, adopted an ordinance providing for the appointment of three commissioners "to lay out a district, of not less than two nor exceeding three miles square, on the banks of either side of the Delaware, not more than eight miles above or below the lower falls thereof, for a fœderal town" (JCC, 27:704).

28 Dec 1784	George Washington (in Annapolis) to James Madison, pp. 231-235.

p. 231: "I have been favored with your letter of the 11th.<1>"

pp. 231-232: "The proceedings of the conference, and the Act & resolutions of this Legislature [Maryland's] consequent thereupon (herewith transmitted to the Assembly)<2> are so full, & explanatory of the motives which governed in this business, that it is scarcely necessary for me to say any thing in addition to them; except that, this State seem highly impressed with the importance of the objects wch we have under consideration, and are very desirous of seeing them accomplished."

p. 232: "We have reduced most of the Tolls from what they were in the first Bill, and have added something to a few others.<3> upon the whole, we have made them as low as we conceived from the best information before us, and such estimates as we had means to calculate upon, as they can be fixed, without hazarding the plan altogether. We made the value of the commodity the governing principle in the establishment of the Tolls; but having had an eye to some bulky articles of produce, & to the encouragement of the growth & Manufacture of some others, as well as to prevent a tedeous enumeration of the different species of all, we departed from the genl rule in many instances."

"The Rates of tollage as now fixed, may still appear to high to some of the southern Gentlemen, when they compare them with those on James River; but as there is no comparison in the expence & risk of the two undertakings, so neither ought there to be in the Tolls. I am fully perswaded that the Gentlemen who were appointed, and have had this matter under consideration, were actuated by no other motives than to hit (if they could do so) upon such a happy medium as would not be burthensome to indivs or give jealousy to the public on one hand, nor discouragement to adventurers on the other. To secure success, and to give vigor to the undertaking, it was judged advisable for each State to contribute (upon the terms of private subscribers) to the expence of it;<4> especially as it might have a happy influence on the Minds of the western settlers. and it may be observed here, that only part of this money can be called for immediately, provided the work goes on–and afterwards, only in the proportion of its progression."

pp. 232-233: "Though there is no obligation upon the State to adopt this (if it is inconvenient, or repugnant to their wishes) yet I should be highly pleased to hear that they had done so–(our advantages will, most assuredly, be equal to those of Maryland and our public spirit ought not, in my opinion, to be less)–as also the resolutions respecting the roads of Communication;<5> both of which, tho they look in some degree to different objects, are both very important; that by the Yohiogany (thro' Pensylvania) is particularly so for the Fur & Peltry of the Lakes, because it is the most direct rout by which they can be transported; whilst it is exceedingly convenient to the people who inhabit the Ohio (or Alligany) above Fort Pitt–the lower part of the Monongahela–and all the Yohiogany."

p. 233: "Matters might perhaps have been better digested if more time had been taken, but the fear of not getting the report to Richmond before the Assembly would have risen, occasioned more hurry than accuracy–or even real dispatch. But to alter the Act now, further than to accomodate it to circumstances where it is essential; or to remedy an obvious error if any should be discovered will not do. The Bill passed this Assembly with only 9 dissenting voices–and got thro' both Houses in a day, so earnest were the members of getting it to you in time.<6>

"It is now near 12 at night, and I am writing with an Aching head, having been constantly employed in this business since the 22d without assistance from my Colleagues–Genl Gates having been sick the whole time, & Colo. Blackburn not attending–But for this I would be more explicit."

p. 233, Ed. Note: <1> Letter not found. In a letter of 11 Dec. Madison wrote Richard Henry Lee about the Potomac River Company bill. See GW to Madison, 28 Nov., n. 1.

Ed. Note: <2> The proceedings, the act, and the resolutions are printed below as enclosures I, II, and III in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 December. The journals of the Virginia house of delegates record on 31 Dec. that the governor gave the speaker GW's report, which included the three enclosures. No letter from GW transmitting his report to Gov. Beverley Randolph and none from the governor acknowledging its receipt has been found.

pp. 233-234, Ed. Note: <3> When the commissioners began their deliberations, they had before them the schedule of tolls contained in the bill that the Virginia and Maryland gentlemen had drafted at Alexandria on 15 November. See Henry Lee to GW, 18 Nov., and notes. If the Virginia house of delegates in its consideration of their Potomac River Company bill in early December made changes in the toll charges, the commissioners may have had that schedule of tolls as well. On at least two separate occasions, GW himself drew up schedules of tolls. In one of these, which is labeled "Memo of Tolls" (ICU), he ;lists most of the same items in roughly the same order, often using similar or identical language, as appears in the schedule in the bill adopted at the Annapolis conference and subsequently enacted into law by both the Maryland and Virginia legislatures.[Details follow.] . . . The second schedule of tolls in GW's hand represents his attempt to compare the rates of the "Potomac Compa. Bill" with those that had been projected before the war for collection on the Potomac, James, and Susquehanna rivers. For GW's involvement in earlier efforts to improve the navigation of the Potomac, see the source note in GW to a Participant in the Potomac River Enterprise, 1762. The high rates set for the new Potomac River Company in both these schedules, far higher than those set in the acts passed by the Maryland and Virginia legislatures in late December or early January, indicate that GW drew up the two schedules earlier, in the process of either of drafting or of promoting the original Potomac River bill of 15 November. The fact that labels on the cover of all three of these memoranda seem to be in Madison's hand suggests that GW either gave them to Madison when he went from Mount Vernon to Richmond in mid-November or sent them along to Madison with the copy of the proposed Potomac River Company bill on 28 November.

p. 234, Ed. Note: <4> Article XX in the act provided in the one instance that the state of Maryland would purchase fifty shares and in the other that Virginia would buy fifty. See Enclosure II in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, this date.

Ed. Note: <5> At the same time that the Maryland legislature passed the act to create the Potomac River Company, it adopted a resolution calling for the building of a road in Pennsylvania to help connect the Potomac and Ohio. Its resolution is printed as Enclosure III in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 December.

Ed. Note: <6> The Potomac River Company bill was introduced in the Maryland house on 27 Dec. and passed both houses on 28 December. After adopting the bill and the resolution regarding the Pennsylvania road, the house approved the following resolution received from the Maryland senate: "RESOLVED, that an attested copy of the act to establish a company for opening and extending the navigation of the river Patowmack, and of the resolves respecting the opening a road to form a communication with the western country, be transmitted to general Washington and general Gates, commissioners for Virginia; and that the president and speaker, by a joint letter, inform those gentlemen, that the form of affixing the seal of the state, and signing by the governor, follows of course, to acts passed by the two houses, and that this will be complied with when the governor returns to town" (Md. House of Delegates Proceedings).

28 Dec 1784	George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, pp. 235-246.

p. 235: "Pursuant to the resolves of the Honble the Senate & House of Delegates, and conformably to the direction of the Executive authority of the State, we repaired to the City of Annapolis, and held a Conference with Gentlemen appointed by the Legislature of Maryland–the result of which is contained in the Inclosure, No. 1. In consequence of the opinion given by the Conferrees, the Legislature of Maryland have passed the Act inclosed, No. 2 and the Resolves No. 3."

pp. 235-236: "It may be necessary for us to explain the reason for the provision in the Act "that if Subscriptions should be taken in, or a meeting of Subscribers directed by the Legislature of Virginia at times different from those in the Act, then there should be a meeting at the time appointed by Virginia; and Subscriptions made at times by them appointed, should be received"–It was thought by Conferrees to be most proper to appoint certain times in the Act, but as it was doubtful whether the Act would get to Virginia in time to be adopted at the present Session of the Assembly, it was judged necessary to make a provision to accomodate the Scheme to an Act to be passed by Virginia, at the next Session of their Assembly, without the necessity of having recourse again to the Legislature of Maryland; but it is the opinion of the Conferrees, that an Act upon similar principles to that passed by Maryland ought, if possible, to be passed by the Assembly of Virginia at this Session. This would give a speedy beginning to the work, and an opportunity of embracing the present favorable state of things for accomplishing the views of the two States."

p. 237: "The Act appears to us from every consideration we can give it to be founded on just & proper principles, and to be calculated to answer in every respect the purpose for which it is designed–we conceive it our duty therefore to declare, that it meets our entire approbation."

"The reasons why this Act has not the Signature of the chief Magistrate are, because he is not present–and because it wants not this formality to give it validity."

"We should do injustice to our feelings, were we not to add that, we have been happy in meeting Gentlemen of liberallity & candour–impressed with the importance of accelerating the purposes of the Legislature of Virginia of opening a free and easy intercourse with the Western territory, and the extension of the inland Navigation of the Eastern Waters–and that, there has been a perfect accordance of Sentiment in the Legislature of the State."

[28 Dec 1784]	Enclosure I: Report of the Maryland and Virginia Commissioners, pp. 236-240.

p. 236: "At a meeting, at the City of Annapolis on the 22d day of December 1784, of the Commissioners appointed by the Commonwealth of Virginia to confer with persons authorised on the part of the State of Maryland upon the subject of opening and improving the Navigation of the River Potomack and concerting a plan for opening a proper Road between the Waters of the Potomack and the most convenient Western Waters."

p. 237: "And a Committee appointed by the Senate and House of Delegates of Maryland to meet the Commissioners of Virginia for the purposes aforesaid. Were present[:] General Washington and General Gates from Virginia. The Honble Thomas Stone, Samuel Hughes, and Charles Carroll of Carrollton, of the Senate. And John Cadwallader, Samuel Chase, John Debutts, George Digges, Philip Key, Gustavus Scott, and Joseph Dashiell Esquires, of the House of Delegates. General Washington in the Chair. Randolph B. Latimer appointed Clerk."

"The Conference proceeded to take the Subject Matters to them referred into their considerations, and thereupon came to the following resolutions."

"That it is the Opinion of this Conference, That the removing the obstructions in the River Potomack and the making the same capable of Navigation from Tide Water as far up the North Branch of the said River as may be convenient and practicable will increase the Commerce of the Commonwealth of Virginia and State of Maryland, and greatly promote the political Interests of the United States, by forming a free and easy Communication and Connexion with the people settled on the Western Waters, already very considerable in their Numbers. . . ."

"That it is the Opinion of the Conference, That the proposal to establish a Company for opening the River Potomack merits the Approbation of, and deserves to be patronised by Virginia and Maryland, and that a similar Law ought to be passed by the Legislatures of the two Governments to promote and encourage so laudable an Undertaking."

"That it is the Opinion of this Conference that it would be proper for Virginia and Maryland each to become Subscribers to the Amount of Fifty Shares, and that such subscription would evince to the Public the opinion of the Legislatures of the practicability and great Utility of the Plan, and that the example would encourage Individuals to embark in the Measure, give Vigor and Security to so important an Undertaking and be a substantial proof to our Brethren of the Western Territory of our disposition to connect ourselves with them by the strongest Bonds of Friendship and mutual Interest."

p. 238: "That it is the Opinion of this Conference, That an Act of Assembly of Virginia for opening and extending the Navigation of the River Potomack from Fort Cumberland to Tide Water ought to be repealed."<1>

"That it is the Opinion of this Conference, from the best information they have obtained, That a Road to begin about the Mouth of Stoney river may be carried in about 20 or 22 Miles to the Dunker Bottom on Cheat River, from whence this Conference are of the opinion, That Batteau Navigation may be made, thought perhaps at considerable expence: that if such navigation cannot be effected, by continuing the road about 20 Miles further, it would intersect the Monongahela where the Navigation is good and has long been practiced."

[Note: a "bateau" is a "light river boat; esp. the long, tapering boats with flat bottoms used by the French Canadians (from 1759: OED).]

"That a Road from Fort Cumberland to Turkey Foot would be about thirty three Miles from whence an Improvement of the Youghigeny River would be necessary, though probably it might be done at less expence than the Navigation of the Cheat River could be rendered convenient from the Dunker Bottom."

"That it is a general Opinion, that the navigation of Potomack may be extended to the most convenient point below or even above the Mouth of Stoney River, from whence to set off a road to Cheat River; and this Conference is satisfied that the road from the Nature of the Country through which it may pass, wholly through Virginia and Maryland will be much better than a Road can be made at any reasonable expence from Fort Cumberland to the Youghigeny which must be carried partly through Pennsylvania."

pp. 238-239: "That it is the Opinion of this Conference, That if the Navigation on Potomack should be carried to about the Mouth of Stoney River, a communication with the Western Waters through a roads from thence extended even to the Monongahela would be preferable in most points of view to that, by road from Fort Cumberland to Turkey Foot, the only other Way practicable, and in any great degree useful. That the Communication by a Road from Fort Cumberland to the present navigable part of the Youghigeny and thence through that river; though in the opinion of this Conference a second Object only would facilitate the Intercourse with a very respectable Number of the Western Settlers, contribute much to their convenience and accomodation, and that the Benefits resulting therefrom to these States would compensate the expence of improving that road."

p. 239: "This Conference therefore recommend that the Legislatures of Virginia and Maryland appoint skilful persons to view and accurately examine and survey Potomack from Fort Cumberland to the Mouth of the Stoney River, and the River Cheat, from about the Dunker Bottom to the present navigable part thereof, and if they judge the navigation can be extended to a convenient distance above Fort Cumberland that they from thence survey, lay off, and mark a road to the Cheat river, or continue the same to the navigation as they may think will most effectually establish the communication between the said Eastern and Western Waters. [Details of the road follow.] And your Conferees beg leave to recommend that each State appropriate three thousand three hundred and thirty three Dollars and one third for the purpose; And this Conference are further of Opinion, that the States of Virginia and Maryland request permission of the State of Pennsylvania to lay out and improve a Road through such part of that State as may be necessary in the best and most proper direction from Fort Cumberland to the navigable part of the Youghigeny and on such permission being obtained that proper persons be appointed to survey, mark, clear and improve such Road at the equal expence of Virginia and Maryland.<2> Which are submitted to the Consideration of the Legislatures of Virginia and Maryland."

pp. 239-240, Ed. Note: This is the first of five documents from the Minnesota Historical Society dated either 28dec. 1784 or 1 Jan. 1785 which are printed here. For the other four, see Enclosure III below and enclosures I, II, and III in Madison to GW, 9 January. They are among a number of documents of GW's relating to the various Potomac River companies that came into the hands of George mason's son John. John Mason lent them to a Pennsylvania congressman named Andrew Stewart for his use in preparing a report on the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal (House Report, 19th Congress, 1st session, no. 228); see "Washington and the Potomac: Manuscripts of the Minnesota Historical Society, 1769-1796," American Historical Review, 28 (1923), 499-519, 705-22.

p. 240, Ed. Note: On 22 Dec. Charles Carroll of Carrollton from the Maryland senate delivered to the speaker of the Maryland house of delegates GW's letter of 19 Dec. to William Pace and the letter from Gov. Beverley Randolph of 15 Dec. which GW had forwarded, "enclosing sundry resolutions of the general assembly of the commonwealth of Virginia" (Md. House of Delegates Proceedings). The initial resolutions of the Virginia legislature regarding the Potomac River Company and the road in Pennsylvania are printed in note 1, Beverley Randolph to GW, 15 December. Upon receiving the letters and the enclosed resolutions, the Maryland house adopted the following resolution: "WE consider the petition for opening and extending the navigation of the rivers Patowmack, and the resolution of the general assembly of Virginia on that subject, to be of great importance, and worthy [of] the immediate consideration of this government, and therefore we wish the senate would appoint some of its members to join the gentlemen nominated by this house, to meet and confer with the commissioners by the state of Virginia, respecting the regulations and provisions under which a company ought to be established for the purpose of carrying into execution a plan for opening the navigation of Patowmack, and a road between the said river and the most convenient western waters. This house have appointed Mr [John] Cadwalder, Mr [Samuel] Chase, Mr [John] De Butts, Mr [George] Digges, Mr [Phillip] Key, Mr G[ustavus] Scott, and Mr Joseph Dashiell, to join such members of the senate as they may be pleased to appoint" (ibid.). The commissioners, who met at Mann's tavern in Annapolis, began work on 22 Dec., and Cadwalader delivered this report to the Maryland house of delegates on 27 December.

Ed. Note: <1> At the time the Virginia house of delegates voted to send GW and the two other men to consult with the Marylanders about the Potomac River Company, its original bill creating the company had already had its second reading and was scheduled to be committed to the committee of the whole for debate. The house journal gives no indication that any further action was taken on this earlier bill.

Ed. Note: <2> For the actions taken by the Maryland and Virginia legislatures to initiate action on building a road from the Potomac in Pennsylvania, see Enclosure III below and Enclosure II in James Madison to GW, 9 Jan. 1785.

18 Oct 1784	Enclosure II of George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 December 1784: An Act for Opening and Extending the Navigation of Potowmack River, pp. 240-245.

pp. 240-241: "Richmond, 18 October 1784. I. Whereas the extension of the navigation of Potowmack river, from tide water to the highest place practicable on the North branch, will be of great public utility, and many persons are willing to subscribe [etc. will transcribe later]

[28 Dec 1784]	Enclosure III: Resolutions of the Maryland Legislature, pp. 245-246.

p. 245: "By the House of Delegates Decr 28th 1784. Resolved That three thousand three hundred and thirty three and one third Dollars be appropriated to defray one half of the expence of examining surveying cutting clearing improving and keeping in repair a proposed road from the Waters of Potomack river to the River Cheat, and if necessary to the Monongahela, and that the Intendant of the revenue be authorised and directed to pay the said Money to the Use aforesaid, And that Mr Francis Deakins be appointed to join and act with such person or persons as may be nominated by the Common Wealth of Virginia to execute the Trust, and that the Money aforesaid be subject to their Order, and if the said Francis Deakins shall decline to act that his Excellency the Governor be authorised and requested to appoint another in his place."

"Resolved, That his Excellency the Governor be requested to write to the Legislature of Pennsylvania to request permission to lay out and improve a Road through such part of that State as may be necessary in the best and most proper direction from Fort Cumberland to the navigable part of the Youghigeny.<1>

pp. 245-246, Ed. Note: <1> For GW's suggestion that Virginia and Maryland make preparations to build a road in Pennsylvania, see GW to James Madison, 3 December. For the Virginia legislature's initial resolution advocating the building of the road, see Beverley Randolph to GW, 15 Dec., n. 1. For the actions the Virginia legislature took in this matter, see Enclosure II in Madison to GW, 9 Jan. 1785.

1 Jan 1785	James Madison (in Richmond) to George Washington, pp. 248-250.

pp. 248-249: "I was yesterday honored with your favor of the 28 Ult. [December] accompanying the report of the Conferees &c. &c. The latter have been laid before the H. of Delegates, and a Com[mitte]e app[ointe]d to report a bill & Resolutions corresponding with those of Maryland.<1> The only danger of miscarriage arises from the impatience of the members to depart, & the bare competency of the present number. By great efforts only they have been detained thus long. I am not without hopes however that the business of the Potowmac at least will be provided for before the adjournment, and sone provision now depending be compleated in favor of James River. Before the rec[eip]t of your dispatches a bell had been passed by the H. of D. for surveying the former as well as the latter river on a plan, which we shall endeavor by concert with the Senate, to accomodate to the provisions of Maryland.<2> A Resolution has passed both Houses instructing the Commissrs appd in June last to settle with Maryd Commissrs the jurisdiction & navigation of the Potowmac, to join in a representation to Pen[nsylvani]a on the subject of the Waters of the Ohio within her limits[.] This instruction ought rather to have been committed to the late Conference; but when the Commission under which you attended it passed, I was confined to my room & it did not occur to any other member. And indeed if I had been well the haste which necessarily prevailed might have precluded me from comprehending the object within your Mission, especially as I had not previously digested my ideas on the subject nor accurately examined the text of the Confederation.<3> It were to be wished too I think that the application to P[ennsylvani]a on the subject of the Road c[oul]d have been blended with that of the River. As it is it will I think be best to refer it after the example of Maryld to the Executive.(4) I beg you Sir to excuse the brevity which our hurry has imposed on me. As soon as I have leisure I will endeavor to make amends for it by a fuller communication on this subject. . . ."

p. 249: Ed. Note: In this letter of 1 Jan., Madison is writing to GW of measures relating to the proposed Potomac River Company that the Virginia legislature adopted during GW's absence in Annapolis and before it received his report on 31 January. These are: (1) "an act, for opening and extending the navigation of James River," passed on 24 Dec.; (2) a resolution to join with Maryland in arranging with Pennsylvania for the free passage of goods and traffic on the Ohio and other streams to and from the Potomac, adopted on 28 Dec.; and (3) a bill "for taking the survey of the rivers James and Potomac, and of the nearest western waters to the head branches of the same, that may be rendered navigable," passed by the house on 30 Dec. (House of Delegates Journal, 1781-1785). Numbers 2 and 3 in particular were consequences of GW's urging (see GW to Madison, 28 Nov. and 3 Dec.); but as Madison indicates in both this letter and the one of 9 Jan., adjustments had to be made in these measures to bring them into conformity with the provisions of Maryland's Potomac River Company act and other measures adopted in Annapolis, about which GW had informed them in his report of 28 December. After receiving GW's report on 31 Dec., the Virginia legislature not only brought in a new James River Company bill to replace the one that had just passed, but the house, refusing to accept the senate's amendments to its bill providing for a survey of the upper reaches of the James and Potomac rivers, also substituted for its bill a resolution calling for a survey only of the James and Elizabeth rivers. The senate approved the resolution, and it is printed below as Enclosure III in James Madison to GW, 9. Jan. 1785.

pp. 249-250, Ed. Note: <1> GW's letter of 28 Dec. covered the letter of that date from him and Horatio Gates to the Virginia legislature with its three enclosures, one of which was the Potomac River Company act. On 31 Dec. the speaker "laid before the [Virginia] House a letter from the Governor, enclosing the report of the commissioners appointed to confer with commissioners appointed by the Legislature of Maryland, respecting the opening and extending the navigation of the river Potomac." The Maryland bill was read and referred to a committee composed of William Grayson, James Madison, ans Mann Page, with orders to bring in a bill. Grayson brought in a bill identical to the Maryland bill on 1 January. The bill received final passage in both houses on 4 Jan., without amendment.

p. 250, Ed. Note: <2> This bill was dropped in favor of a resolution adopted on 1 January. See source note.

p. 250, Ed. Note: <3> On 9 Jan., Madison sent GW a copy of this resolution of the Virginia assembly out of which came the Mount Vernon conference in March 1785, which in turn led to the Annapolis Convention of 1786 and the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The resolution is printed as Enclosure I in Madison to GW, 9 January.

p. 250, Ed. Note: <4> The house of delegates on this day adopted a resolution regarding the building of a road in Pennsylvania from the Potomac to a navigable "part of the River Cheat or of the River Monongalia" similar to that adopted by the Maryland legislature. The Virginia resolution is printed as Enclosure II in Madison to GW, 9 Jan., and the Maryland resolution is Enclosure III in George Washington and Horatio Gates to the Virginia Legislature, 28 Dec. 1784.

28 Jan 1785	Thomas Stone (in Annapolis) to George Washington, p. 297.

"It gives me much pleasure to know that our Act for opening the Navigation of Potomack arrived in time to be adopted by the Assembly of Virginia. If the scheme is properly executed I have the most sanguine expectation that it will fully succeed to the wishes of those who are anxious to promote the wellfare of these States and to form a strong chain of connection between the Western & atlantic governments. Mr. Jenifer[,] Johnson[,] Chase & myself are appointed Commissioners to Settle the Jurisdiction and Navigation of the bay & the Rivers Potomack & Pocomoke with the Commissioners of Virginia. We have also instructions to make application to Pennsylva. for leave to clear a Road from Potomack to the Western Waters–Our Assembly propose the Meeting of the Commissioners to be on the 21st of March at Alexandria, if agreable to the Commissioners of Virginia.<1> I have no doubt but the Subjects of our Mission will be setled to mutual satisfaction & it will add much to the satisfaction I shall feel in discharging this trust that I shall have an Opportunity of paying my respects to You at Mount Vernon. . . ."

Ed. Note: Thomas Stone (1743-1787) was the nephew of Daniel St. Thomas Jenifer (1723-1790) and as a young man had studied law under Thomas Johnson (1732-1819). He at this time was a member of the Maryland senate.

Ed. Note: <1> See James Madison to GW, 1 Jan., n. 3, and Enclosure I in Madison to GW, 9 January. On 20 Mar., Stone, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, and Samuel Chase (1741-1811) arrived at Mount Vernon with Alexander Henderson to join George Mason and GW and bring to a conclusion their Potomac (or Mount Vernon) conference. Documents relating to the Mount Vernon conference of March 1785 are conveniently printed in The Mount Vernon Compact, in Rutland, Mason Papers, 2:812-23.

[The editor makes here the common error of assuming that GW took part in the Mount Vernon conference just because he hosted it.]

[Stone expects to visit Washington at Mount Vernon after attending the meeting on the Potomac. Had he been invited already?]

28 Feb 1785	Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer (in Annapolis) to George Washington, pp. 397-398.

p. 397: "The Certificates you mentiond signed by Mr Hiligas & Mr Hopkinson & countersigned by Mr Harwood This State cannot without a special direction from Congress I believe pay. . . . I hope to have the pleasure of being at Mount Vernon on the 19th of March when this transaction may be further explained. . . ."

pp. 397-398, Ed. Note: At some short time before this, GW had, either by mail or in person, consulted Jenifer in his capacity of intendant of the revenue for the state of Maryland about fifty-
four Continental loan office certificates. . . . In any case, GW and Jenifer had an opportunity to talk further when Jenifer was at Mount Vernon on 20 and 21 Mar. as one of the Maryland commissioners meeting with the Virginia commissioners about Potomac River matters.

[Note: at this date, Jenifer seems to have expected to visit Mount Vernon the day after the scheduled meeting with the Virginia commissioners.]

19 Mar 1785	George Washington to John Harvie, pp. 442-447.

[This letter deals a dispute over some land of Washington's near Fort Pitt.]

19 Mar 1785	Patrick Henry (in Richmond) to George Washington, pp. 447-449.

p. 447: "The Honor you are pleased to do me in your Favor of the 27th ulto, desiring my Opinion in a friendly Way on the Subject of the Act for vesting the Shares in the Patowmack & James River Navigation, is very flattering to me. . . . I will freely own to you that I am embarrassed to reconcile the Law taken in its full Extent, with the Declarations you mention, & a fixed purpose of refusing pecuniary Rewards. If this was the sole Object of the Act, I should not hesitate to dissent to its propriety. The united States seem most properly constituted to take into Consideration a Matter of that Nature, for a Variety of Reasons, which I need not enumerate. But the Preamble of the Law, compared with a few facts that preceded the enacting of it, will present it in a View different from that of rewarding past military Services. The Facts I allude to are these.

"The great Business of opening the Navigation of Patowmack & James River, & connecting it with that of the western Waters, was taken up by you, & pressed with that Earnestness so interesting a Matter deserved. The Difficultys which nature had interposed, were encreased by a Combination of Interests, hard to develope & explain, & stil harder to reconcile. To all these was added another Impediment arising from the Scarcity of Money & the exhausted condition of the Country. The Time however was critical; & your Observations sent to the Assembly, proved that it was good policy to encounter every Obstacle & begin the Work.<1> The patronage of it seemed naturally to devolve on you Sir, & the Assembly desiring to give Efficacy to that patronage vested the Shares in you."

pp. 447-448: "This Navigation depends upon private Subscription for Success: So that unless you had subscribed, you could not have been concerned. You will forgive me for supposing that your Finances could not have made it desirable, to risque a Sum of Money on the Success of an Enterprize like this. For your estate could not have been exempted from that Loss in its produce experienced by other Gentlemens Estates throughout the Country during the War. . . . it would seem at Least, that you ought to be secured against the Chance of loosing by subscribing. And this is all the Law can be said to do, inasmuch as it must remain uncertain whether the Shares are worth any thing 'til the Business is compleated. . . ."

p. 448: "Your Acceptance of it, will prevent that Shock which you justly observe will be given by a Refusal–And I submit to your Reflection how far your resignation of the Shares may throw a damp on that Ardor, which I have the pleasure to hear prevails at present, to promote the Undertaking. I must beleive, that at least a temporary Check would be given to its progress 'til the Means of replacing so many Shares can be found, & I am really not able to find out the Way to do it."

"Your Acceptance will avoid this embarrassing Circumstance. And if after reviewing the whole Matter you shall think it inadmissable to hold the Shares in the Manner the Law gives them, You will be at Liberty to make such alteration in the Interest, or Disposition of the Use, as shall be most agreable to your self."

19 Mar 1785	Lafayette (in Paris) to George Washington, pp. 449-451.

p. 449: "Your letter december the 23rd Has safely Come to Hand, and Nothing short of the pottowmack plan Could Have Accounted with me for Your leaving Mount Vernon. I am glad to Hear You are likely to succeed, as it seems to me a Matter of Great Moment–and the part You Have taken in the Business Cannot fail, still more particularly to interest me in its success–I thank you, my dear General, for your information Respecting the Act of Maryland."

p. 450: "on my Arrival, I Have Repeated what I Had writen Respecting the Mississipy–viz.–the idea, either to get New orleans, or to advise the spaniards to make it a free port–the former is impossible–as to the second I Had no positive Answer–But I am sure my opinion Was not thrown a Way–I Have Requested a Conference with the duke de La Vauguion who is going to spain as an Ambassador–it will Be very difficult to get that point, and altho I would not advise America to deviate from firmness, I think they must act with Moderation in this affair."

20 Mar 1785	George Washington to Patrick Henry, p. 452.

Ed. Note: <2> It was on this day that the men who were participating in what came to be known as the Mount Vernon conference left Alexandria and came to Mount Vernon to conclude their deliberations. See Thomas Stone to GW, 28 Jan. 1785, n. 2.

22 Mar 1785	John Craig (in Philadelphia) to George Washington. 455-456.

pp. 455-456: "The Discouraging Prospect of Trade in General here . . . has induced me to turn my thoughts towards a Country Life. . . . My Father has Some Lands on Cheat River which I mean to Explore this Spring, but I think the Susquehanna which will Communicate with the Potomack promises to yield the most Profitable Settlements & Could I Procure (on tollerable easy Terms) a healthy fruitfull Place with the Advantages of Navigation & one or two Mill seats, I would Gladly Employ what little Capital I have in the purchase & Cultivation of it."

p. 456: "I have not yet mentioned my Plan to any Person, not shall I till I am determined by your Excellencys Advice on what part of the Country you would think it most advantageous to settle."

p. 456, Ed. Note: John Craig (c.1754-1807) was merchant in business with his father . . . [in] Philadelphia. He did not pursue the plans expressed here of moving westward but remained in the city.