the whiskey insurrection in western pennsylvania—a glance at its progress—washington's proclamation—his opinion of the influence of the democratic societies—a military force called out—their leaders—peace commissioners and the result of their mission—washington joins the military at carlisle—the veteran morgan in the field—his correspondence with washington—insurgents alarmed—washington at fort cumberland and bedford—lee the commander-in-chief of the army—washington returns to philadelphia—march of the army over the mountains—the insurrection quelled without bloodshed.
While the inhabitants of Kentucky were talking of insurrection, those of some of the western counties of Pennsylvania actually lifted the arm of defiance against the general government. In August, 1794, acts were committed in opposition to the ministers of the law, which called for the interference of the powers of the federal executive, and the episode in our history known as “The Whiskey Insurrection” was inaugurated. Properly to understand its character, we must take a brief glance at its antecedents. Some of these have already been alluded to in our consideration of the revenue system of the new government.
Among other taxes recommended by Secretary Hamilton for the support of the government, and authorized by a bill reported in the house of representatives in January, 1791, was one upon domestic distilled spirits and distilleries. As whiskey was almost entirely a luxury, and not a necessity, it seemed a just subject for levying a duty upon. And the College of Physicians of Philadelphia advocated it as desirable both to the morals and bodily health of the people. The bill was passed and received Washington's signature. It imposed a tax of from nine to twenty-six cents a gallon upon spirits distilled from grain. Regulations for the collection of these duties were made and officers appointed to collect them. Opposition to the law manifested itself in various parts of the Union immediately after its passage, but nowhere so prominently as in Pennsylvania. In July, 1791, a public meeting on the subject was held at Red Stone (Brownsville), when it was arranged that county committees should be convened at the different shire towns of Alleghany, Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland counties. In August, at a meeting of another committee already alluded to,[66] one of the resolutions adopted, as we have seen, declared, after condemning the law, that whosoever should accept office under it should be considered an enemy to his country, should be treated with contempt, and all intercourse with him be dissolved. These resolutions were published in a Pittsburgh paper and produced a feverish excitement.
Early in September another meeting was held in Pittsburgh. Twelve delegates were present, and many complaints against the government, in connection with the excise law, were recited. They adopted a representation to Congress, and a remonstrance to the legislature of Pennsylvania, against the excise on whiskey. Not long after this, a collector of the revenue for two of the counties before-named was seized, tarred and feathered, and deprived of his horse, by some armed men in disguise. The perpetrators were known, however, and processes were issued against them from the district court of Pennsylvania; but the public feeling was so strongly against the law, west of the Alleghany mountains, that, as a marshal to whom the writ was committed for execution said, “any attempt to serve it would have occasioned the most violent opposition from a greater portion of the inhabitants;” and he declared that if he had attempted it, he believed he would not have returned alive.
The resistance to law now assumed most alarming aspects. The meetings, said Secretary Hamilton in a report upon the subject, “composed of very influential persons, and conducted without moderation and prudence, were justly chargeable with the excesses which have from time to time been committed, serving to give consistency to an opposition, which had at length matured to a point that threatened the foundations of the government and the Union, unless speedily and effectually subdued.”
The working of the federal government was then merely experimental, and those who had charge of the complicated and precious machine, and regarded it as the very ark of freedom, used its powers with wise caution. Therefore, while occasional outrages in connection with the excise laws were perpetrated, it was thought best to let coercive measures against the law-breakers remain untried, until at the next session of Congress some modifications of the law might be made to allay excitement.
In May, 1792, an act of Congress became a law which materially modified the provisions of the excise act. The duty on whiskey and stills was so reduced as to silence all complaints on that head. All serious objections to the old law were considered, and the act was so amended as to promise peace; but there were men of influence who would not accept these concessions, and they kept up the opposition excitement. The well-disposed citizens were intimidated by the violent ones of the opposition. In August, 1792, a meeting of the malcontents was held at Pittsburgh, at which resolutions were passed no less objectionable than those adopted the year before. After denouncing the tax on spirituous liquors, they concluded by declaring that they considered it their duty to “persist in remonstrances to Congress and every other legal measure that might obstruct the operations of the law.” Almost daily outrages were committed, and three or four counties of western Pennsylvania assumed many of the features of openly rebellious communities. It was then that Washington, under the advice of Hamilton and others, issued his proclamation of September the sixteenth, 1792, warning all persons to desist from such unlawful combinations, et cetera.[67] Some legal steps were taken against the malcontents, but these and the proclamation were of little effect toward subduing the rebellious and quieting the excitement. The officers of the law were still defied, denounced, insulted, and abused.
At the next session of Congress (1792-'93) inefficient efforts were made to amend the excise laws. The forbearance of the federal government was construed by the ringleaders of the opposition as weakness, and they became more bold. Distillers who were willing to comply with the law were abused. Finally, the Congress passed an act, which became a law in 1794, calculated to strengthen the executive arm in enforcing obedience. This law made the opposition still more earnest and bold; and few men in the district of country where they exercised a sort of reign of terror dared openly to dissent from their views. So general was the combined influence of actual disaffection upon one portion of the community, and dread of the violence of the turbulent, among the others, that out of the family connection of General Neville, inspector of revenues, the employées of the government, and two others, there were none in Pittsburgh who dared to condemn these lawless proceedings, for fear of personal harm. Mails were robbed; Neville's house was twice attacked and finally burned by an armed party of lawless men; and preparations were made to seize Fort Fayette, in that region. Among the leaders of the insurgents was one Bradford, who, by common consent, appears to have assumed the position of commander-in-chief. At this time the insurrectionary spirit had spread into adjoining counties of Maryland and Virginia, and Bradford and his associate leaders issued a call for the assembling of the militia on Braddock's field, on the first of August, with arms and accoutrements, and provisions for four days. Within three days seven thousand men were assembled, some of them out of curiosity, but a greater part with the determination to follow, in resistance to the federal and state governments, wherever Bradford and others might lead.