| Resolved, That George Mason, Edmund Randolph, James
Madison, jun., and Alexander Henderson, Esquires, be appointed
commissioners; and that they, or any three of them, do meet such
commissioners as may be appointed on the part of Maryland; and,
in concert with them, frame such liberal and equitable regulations
concerning the said river, as may be mutually advantageous to the
two States; and that they make report thereof, to the General
Assembly.-9
The conference did not take place until March 1785, nine months later.
1784-1785: Virginia and Maryland Charter the Potomac Company
Between the time Virginia appointed commissioners and the actual meeting in March
1785, Maryland and Virginia aggressively pursued efforts to improve the navigation of the
Potomac River above the Little Falls to the furthest extent practicable.
Origins of the Project
George Washington had wished for many years to make the Potomac River a commercial
highway to the Ohio River in the west, thus directly linking the Atlantic to the Mississippi River
and the Gulf of Mexico." Washington had written as early as 1754 (when he was 22 years old)
'9 Journal of the House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia at 84 (1784)
(White Ed. 1828) [hereinafter "Journal of Virginia House ofDelegates (1784)"]; 2 Rutland,
supra note 1, at 813. Note that this Resolution did not deal with the Chesapeake Bay or the
Pocomoke. Scharf misreported the text of the Resolution in his History of Maryland. See
Scharf, supra note 22, at 530.
so See generally Washington Irving, George Washington: A Biography 625-26 (1994)
[hereinafter "Irving"] ; Walter S. Sanderlin, The Great National Project: a History of the
Chesapeake & Ohio Canal 30 (1946) ("The successful launching of the company was primarily
the result of one man's efforts and influence. George Washington had long been interested in the
improvement of the Potomac, and was completely convinced of the practicability and superiority
of the route it provided. Indeed, it has been said with considerable justification that the project
had become almost an obsession, second only perhaps to his interest in the future of the
Union.'"); Edward S. Delaplaine, The Life of Thomas Johnson 62 (1927) [hereinafter
"Delaplaine"].
12
|
