The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-05-10

in her always consistent effort to secure
~ harmonious union of the States. In her
grant Of right In this territory, phrased
her grants as a transfer of territory with
In the limits OF the Virginia charter; and
it may be conceded to DR.. Mowry that
the northern limit OF the virginia charter
was the 41st parallel.
Perhaps IL DR.. Mowry ever examined this
grant and the authority therefor con.
ferred In Virginia legislation. he would
have found that It was based upon pre-
cedent conditions which did assert Vtr-
ginih's right Of conquest in nn1mperious
exaction that the obligations she had IN
CURED to her soldiers In making that
conquest should be discharged, and that
the right acquired by her loyal citizens
under her sovereign protection as con-
queror should be fully recognized and ac-
copied. And he would have found, fur
Their. that the tender OF Virginia. as ac-
cepted by Congress, and its acceptance
with Congressional qualifications APPROX.
ed by Virginia, pledged transfer of "all
her rights, title and claims to The lands
northwest of the river Ohio"
It Is true, therefore. as the reviewer
frankly comedies, that Or. Mowry did
have some warrant Of authority from the
deed Of her representatives In Congress
for saying that Virginia did limit her
grant to the 4lst parallel. assuming that
to be the northern boundary OF the Vir-
ginia charter. But the substance OF the
criticism was that the omission In the
text Of any credit to Virginia for her un-
aided conquest Of the Cis-Mississippi
forts and expulsion of British control
with It's sequence Of the abandonment of
the British claim that this Northwest
Territory was part and parcel OF Canada
and recognition Of our Mississippi ana
Lake shore boundaries did the grossest
~ Jnto ID fy,tt, tCaS UNA
punctuated and enforced In DR.. Mowry's
map. placing within geographical lines
the muniflcent bounty Of Virginia upon
the same plane MS the grants Of Connectl-
out and New York of their claims, and
even OF Massachusetts, in REIMBURSEMENT
of her shadowy pretensions to some por-
ton of tho Northern and Lake Shore
Territory.
DR.. Mowry complains that It was cap
tious exception OF the Reviewer to his
dates of tho grant of New York and yir-
GINA. His own now recital OF dates
shows that tho reviewer was right in re-
polling the imputation upon Virginia OF
three years of tardiness by showing that
virginIa's tender antedated tho consum-
mated grant OF New York and her grant
was delayed by no default OF hers.
The other objection of Dr.. Mowry Is to
the criticism OF his teaching n
palpable Misrepresentation OF his
torjc truth in asserting tho nationality OF
the United States alb ovo This matter
was stated by the reviewer as having
pronounced sectional twang, and neces.
objection to the false ideas OF history,
which. among his uniformed people. were
to no little extent prevalent. The re-
viewer did not impute this reckless
phraseology to the well-informed people,
even OF his own State. who cherish with
Tiiial pride the names and memories Of
Josiah Quincy and Harrison Gray Otis
and their confreres of tho Hartford Con-
vcnti0n.
Tho reviewer criticised DR.. Mowry's
statement that ono state after another
agreed to cede to the national govern
rnent all claims and tito to the western
lands. That no did not misconstrue tho
meaning OF this statement Ia made con-
spcuously clear by DR.. Mowry's now
statement that most Of their land
grants from Individual States were made
to the general government under the Ar-
ticlas OF Confederation; but one at least
was not made till after the Constitution
went into effect when Washington was
President" There we're but four Of these
individual states. New York and Viz
ginia were certainly two out OF the three
states that made grants under the Ar
ticles OF Confederation. Now this his
Etoric record shows that both OF these
States In the letter. of their grants, repu-
dated the Idea which DR.. Mowry at
tributes to them. New York provided
that her cesson should enure for the
use and benefit OF such of the United
states as shall become members OF the
Federal alliance Of the said states, and
for no other use or purpose whatsoever"
90 Hening's Street 5G0-56l) Virginia, In
her deed Of transfer. conveyed to the
United States In Congress assembled, for
the benefit OF tho said states. Virginia
Included. I'll Hen. P. 5T4a
DR.. Mowry now frankly acknowledges
that the purpose of his book was to teach
that the United States was nation
from the beginning" nationality com
,nencng on July 4. 1776, when each OF
the thirteen colonies. severally acting
through its own representatives. united
in a conjoint assertion of the independ-
ence Of the American States. It was
against this prcposterous idea that the
reviewer protested and In DR.. MoWry's
complaint that injustice was done him in
THIS protest, he will find little sympathy
among well-inforned students of AmeriT
can history even In Ills own school of po-
litical thought. In this class OF students
and historians there are very many who.
recognizing as indlsputable facts that
all revolutionary and post Revolutionary
history emphasizes the text Of the Ar
ticles OF Confederation affirming the In
dividual sovereignty of each of the Con-
decorating States. earnestly insist that
the adoption of the United States Consti-
tuition created nation. Their opinions
and views challenge dehate-but discus
sion of their contention, though the re-
viewer believes It to be utterly untenable,
is not involved In DR., Mowry's complaint.
B, r. w.
Richmond Va.