What was the danger of disunion?

1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (1779-09-13): John Jay believed that the danger of disunion was not due to a lack of unity among the people, as they were 'never so cordially united as at this day,' and that their union was bound by common interest, mutual affection, and other factors. He argued that the Union was not kept together only by a sense of present danger, but by enduring ties. "But we are persuaded, and our enemies will find, that our Union is not to end here. They are mistaken when they suppose us kept together only by a sense of present danger." [1]
• BELIEF (1779-09-13): John Jay believed that the danger of disunion was that the Continental bills of credit, created and supported by the Union, would die with it. He argued that if the Union were dissolved and each state resumed its delegated powers, the bills of credit would no longer be valid. (key quote above) [2]
• BELIEF (1782-01-09): John Jay believed that disputes over state lines could threaten union and weaken courage and confidence necessary for liberty. He argued that such matters should not be postponed until after the war, as peace might lead to disputes that harm unity. "In my opinion few things demand more immediate care than this subject, and I differ from those who think that such matters had better be postponed till after the war... without finding ourselves exposed to differences and litigations which never fail to make impressions injurious to that courage and confidence which both our interest and our duty call upon us to cultivate and cherish." [3]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that weakness and divisions at home would invite dangers from abroad, and that disunion would make the nation vulnerable to enemies. He argued that disunion would prevent the nation from resisting its enemies and securing its present and future happiness. (key quote above) [4]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that disunion would increase the likelihood of wars and hostilities from abroad, thus endangering the safety and peace of the American people. He argued that a united America would give fewer just causes for war compared to a disunited America, making the Union the best security against foreign hostilities. (key quote above) [5]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that disunion would lead to the spread of 'seeds of discord and danger' that would 'poison our gardens and our fields' and that their growth was increasing while people were 'wasting the season' in disputes over how to address them. "That such seeds of discord and danger have been disseminated and begin to take root in America as, unless eradicated, will soon poison our gardens and our fields, is a truth much to be lamented;" [6]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that the danger of disunion lay in the influence of those who advocated dividing the nation into two or three parts, as this would prevent the institution of a national government and encourage divisions rather than unity. "This doctrine, however mischievous in its tendency and consequences, has its advocates; and should any of them be sent to the Convention, it will be naturally their policy rather to cherish than to prevent divisions; for, well knowing that the institution of any national government would, blast their favorite system, no measures that lead to it can meet with their aid or approbation." [7]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that disunion among the proposed confederacies would lead to discord, jealousy, and mutual injuries, making them formidable only to each other and not to foreign enemies. "From these considerations it appears that those gentlemen are greatly mistaken who suppose that alliances offensive and defensive might be formed between these confederacies, and would produce that combination and union of wills of arms and of resources, which would be necessary to put and keep them in a formidable state of defense against foreign enemies." [8]
• BELIEF (undated): John Jay believed that the danger of disunion was that it would make the people of America more vulnerable to foreign hostility and invite conflict, because a united national government would be better at avoiding just causes of war and accommodating disputes than individual states or small confederacies. "the safety of the people would be best secured by union against the danger it may be exposed to by JUST causes of war given to other nations" [9]
• BELIEF (1796-01-19): John Jay believed that the United States should preserve peace and union by cultivating friendship with all nations while maintaining self-respect and independence from foreign influence, as he argued in a letter to Robert Goodloe Harper on 19 January 1796. He did not directly address the danger of disunion, but he emphasized the importance of peace and union as essential to the nation's respectability and stability. "By treating them all with justice and kindness, and by preserving that self-respect which forbids our yielding to the influence or policy of any of them, we shall, with the Divine blessing, secure peace, union, and respectability." [10]

What cuts against it

• ACTION (1812-07-28): John Jay expressed that he believed the declaration of war was neither necessary nor expedient, and he thought it was the duty of citizens to express such sentiments, indicating a willingness to critique actions that could threaten national unity. "In my opinion, the declaration of war was neither necessary, nor expedient, nor seasonable; and I think that they who entertain this opinion do well in expressing it, both individually and collectively, on this very singular and important occasion." [11]

• ACTION (1788-05-29): John Jay noted the possibility of the southern part of New York State adhering to the Union while seeking separation from the northern part, indicating a concern about regional divisions. "An idea has taken air that the southern part of the State will at all events, adhere to the Union; and, if necessary to that end, seek a separation from the northern." [12]

• ACTION (1811-03-29): John Jay believed that the nation faced danger and distress from confusion in its affairs, and that it required a more efficient government to prevent disunion. "When, at a subsequent and alarming period, the nation found that their affairs had gone into confusion, and that clouds, portending danger and distress, were rising over them from every quarter..." [13]

• OTHERS' VIEW (1800-05-07): Alexander Hamilton expressed concern that the transfer of executive authority to 'hands hostile to the system heretofore pursued' would be dangerous to the peace, happiness, and order of the country, implying a risk of disunion. "the executive authority of the General Government would be transferred to hands hostile to the system heretofore pursued with so much success and dangerous to the peace, happiness and order of the country" [14]

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. John Jay believed that disunion would lead to internal discord and weaken the nation's ability to resist external threats. "weakness and divisions at home would invite dangers from abroad" [4].

2. He argued that disunion would result in the loss of the economic and political benefits of a unified nation, such as the invalidation of Continental bills of credit. "the Continental bills of credit, created and supported by the Union, would die with it" [2].

3. Jay also warned that disunion would lead to the spread of discord and danger, which could poison the nation's progress. "That such seeds of discord and danger have been disseminated and begin to take root in America as, unless eradicated, will soon poison our gardens and our fields" [6].

4. He believed that disunion would increase the likelihood of wars and hostilities from abroad, thus endangering the safety and peace of the American people. "Let us therefore proceed to examine whether the people are not right in their opinion that a cordial Union, under an efficient national government, affords them the best security that can be devised against HOSTILITIES from abroad" [5].

5. Jay also noted that disunion could lead to regional divisions and conflicts, as seen in the possibility of the southern part of New York State adhering to the Union while seeking separation from the northern part. "An idea has taken air that the southern part of the State will at all events, adhere to the Union; and, if necessary to that end, seek a separation from the northern." [12] (inference)

3. HIS TAKE

Record coverage: PARTIAL

The record is silent on the specific mechanisms or policies that could prevent disunion, and on the long-term consequences of disunion beyond the immediate dangers of war and economic instability.

Extrapolation: John Jay likely believed that the danger of disunion was multifaceted, encompassing internal discord, economic instability, and vulnerability to foreign threats. He would have argued that a strong, unified national government was essential to maintaining peace, security, and prosperity.

Competing readings: One reading is that Jay's belief in the necessity of union was grounded in practical considerations, such as economic and military strength. Another reading is that his belief was also influenced by a moral and philosophical commitment to unity and the common good. The record itself supports both readings, as he often cited both practical and moral arguments for union.

Confidence: Moderate, as the record provides a range of arguments and concerns related to disunion, but does not specify the relative weight of each.