Talk:Cyrus Griffin

Untitled
Some people consider the Presidents of the Congress to be the predecessors of the Presidents of the United States under the present Constitution. Therefore a link should be noted... -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:22, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * But they're wrong. They're distracted by the "bright shiny object" and can't see that there's no continuity of position, because they are fascinated by the superficial resemblance of name. There should be no link that implies succession of a relatively unimportant legislative position by an important executive position. - Nunh-huh 04:25, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I disagreee, since the power of the Congress was transmuted into the current constitution as it is today by that very same assembly. -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:26, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Then that's a point of view (a wrong one, but a point of view). Put it in the article if you must, but don't force that point of view onto us by putting it in a succession box. - Nunh-huh 04:28, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but NH is correct. The connection would be more likely to be from President in Congress Assembled to Speaker of the House.  RickK | Talk 04:27, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Very well, nevertheless the link showing the transition should be mentioned since the positions cover a similar title and some historians prefer to consider the Articles of Confederation's presidents the true first 10 presidents. -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:30, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Similar title, completely different responsibilities. What "historians" would they be? - Nunh-huh 04:31, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Quite a few actually complain that history books don't recognize that the first 10 Congress Presidents were leaders of the United States at one point. -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:32, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Name them in the article and attribute that viewpoint to them then, don't oversimplify by sticking it in a box. It would be truer to say Cyrus Griffin was succeeded in his powers by Frederick Augustus Conrad Muhlenberg, 1st Speaker of the House and John Langdon, first president pro tempore of the Senate than it is to say he was succeeded by George Washington. - Nunh-huh 04:36, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Very well remove then, I just thought it would be useful to show the transition... -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:38, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * It would be if there WERE a transition. We really shouldn't mislead people into thinking George Washington succeeded Cyrus Griffin: I think the current box isn't anything anyone would disagree with. - Nunh-huh 04:42, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * OK, I just want to make sure we cover all the possible angles for this information... I have undone my change at George Washington as well. -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:44, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Position is now characterized in the article... not that I technically agree with it anyway, but rather that we should have an NPOV. -- EmperorBMA / &#12502;&#12522;&#12452;&#12450;&#12531; 04:50, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Isn't the entire concept of the 1st and 2nd continental Congress confusing? In actuality using the period of 1775 to 1781 as the 2nd Contintental Congress is inaccurate. This Congress disbanded and was re-elected several times during this period creating a 3rd, 4th and even 5th Continental Congresses. What you really have is a 1st (Peyton and Middletn) and second Continental Congress (Randolph and Hancock) of the United Colonies that lasted until July 1, 1776. Then you have the Continental Congress of the United States from July 2, 1776 until February 28, 1781. Finally there is the United States in Congress Assembled from March 1, 1781 until 1789. This concept that the 2nd Continental Congress lasted 6 years is incorrect. --97.97.197.9 (talk) 01:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.97.197.9 (talk)

Washington's name reverted
You're being far too dogmatic about the silly template. Putting "position abolished" in large bold letters, with Washington's name and title in small letters below it, meets with precedent (see George Washington), is a handy compromise in this very silly conflict, and accurately reflects the realities: the position was abolished, but it was also replaced. The new title certainly didn't have the same responsibilities, but the position of POTUS did in a sense replece the position of POTUSICA. Besides, what happened to consensus building and discussion? Reversion is seldom a good action. Fishal (talk) 02:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You want to change the template, so demonstrate consensus! It's not a silly conflict; it's prevention of misinformation. The position of President of the United States in Congress Assembled (i.e., president of Congress) has nothing to do with the position of President of the United States. In no sense whatsoever did the latter replace the former. - Nunh-huh 02:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The positions are not at all the same, which the old Washington template (just changed by you) reflected with the words "position created". However, the names appearing in smaller type demonstrate continuity: the position was abolished, but there was still a United States, and its greatly-altered government had a person at the head of its government.  The sort of job held by that person was different, but there was a true continuity that your version leaves out.  For similar situations, look at the templates at the bottom of Augustus ("preceded by" Julius Caesar), Oliver Cromwell ("preceded by" the Commonwealth of England, which was "preceded by" Charles I of England), Louis XVI of France ("succeeded by National Convention, eventually Napoleon I), and State President Frederik Willem de Klerk ("succeeded by Nelson Mandela (as President of South Africa)".  All of these transitions involved a change in the name of the title and of the duties and powers thereof, but they reflect the continuity of the states involved.  Finally, I could demonstrate consensus by pointing out that Washington's article is, I daresay, scrutinized more carefully and frequently than Griffin's, and no one had any problem with the old template.  Fishal (talk) 02:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Cyrus Griffin was not head of state; George Washington was. There's no continuity of position, which is why your counterexamples are not pertinent. We're not here to purvey misinformation. Your confusion on this issue illustrates why we should be extremely careful on this point. - Nunh-huh 03:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There is no need to be patronizing. The POTUS is Head of Government as well as Head of State.  That's what I mentioned in my last post.  Furthermore, there was continuity between the positions, as much as several of the above counterexamples that you brushed aside, simply because the USA existed both before and after the implementation of the US Constitution.  I fail to see how a link to Washington's name conveys misinformation if it is clear that the position was abolished and replaced with a new one.  Fishal (talk) 03:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * All over the internet, silly websites list Cyrus Vance as a President of the United States. Where there is so much misinformation available, it is for us to be perfectly clear that this is an error. I don't see why you want to add to the confusion. Quite simply, there's nothing to be gained from cramming George Washington's name where it doesn't belong, and much to be lost. - Nunh-huh 03:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It reflects the basic continuity of the system. Both the article and the template are quite clear that Griffin was not POTUS, so someone else's website shouldn't influence what goes on here.  Fishal (talk) 03:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So far, you're alone in your assertion of this continuity. There was no continuity between the position of president of congress and president of the U.S. We're here to convey accurate information rather than to confuse the facts, and that's particularly important where others have been misinformative. - Nunh-huh 03:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No, there was no actual continuity between the positions, but they were analogous as one position replaced the other as head of government-- which is exactly what the template said! Honestly I cannot understand the supposed harm you are convinced it would do when both the article and the template are quite clear what the relationship was between the two "presidencies". Fishal (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * One might as justifiably say that Cyrus Griffin, as president of congress, was succeeded by John Adams as president pro tempore of the Senate. There's no continuity between someone who presides over congress and the executive head of state, and a template that suggests there is is clearly harmful. - Nunh-huh 04:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Head of Government, like I said. The President of the US is both.  Fishal (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a sort of meaningless term in non-parliamentary systems. People won't be able to infer from your template that the sense in which George Washington "succeeded" Cyrus Griffin was as "head of government". Your insistence on this point is perplexing. I've pointed out that it's misleading, and yet you still insist it must be added. The article is better off without it. Save "succession" templates for instances in which there clearly was a succession. This is a template for "President of the United States in Congress Assembled", not for "Head of Government". - Nunh-huh 04:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll move this to the article's talk page. Fishal (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

A bit of a different question
I read somewhere that Griffin remained in office until March 4th 1789 and that he never actually resigned.


 * Finally, some eagle food - excellent question because the opening paragraph's text "holding office from January 22, 1788, to November 2, 1788. He resigned after the ratification of the United States Constitution rendered the old Congress obsolete" is absolutely incorrect.


 * President Griffin was elected President of the United States in Congress Assembled on January 22, 1788. Article IX of the Articles of Confederation limited the Presidency to one year: "-- to appoint one of their members to preside, provided that no person be allowed to serve in the office of president more than one year in any term of three years; "


 * Additionally Article V of the Articles of Confederation called for a new congress each year on the first Monday of each November: "V. For the most convenient management of the general interests of the United States, delegates shall be annually appointed in such manner as the legislatures of each State shall direct, to meet in Congress on the first Monday in November, in every year, with a power reserved to each State to recall its delegates, or any of them, at any time within the year, and to send others in their stead for the remainder of the year."


 * The USCA, however, was unable to form a quorum in November 1788 and elect a new USCA President. Additionally, Virginia reelected Griffin to the USCA and he remained in NY as the state's representative in the new USCA Congress. Griffin, therefore, held the office as USCA President until his one year term limit under the Articles of Confederation expired on January 21, 1789. He never resigned the office.


 * The USCA continued to try and form a quorum after his term as President expired as evidenced by Tench Coxe letter to James Madison on January 27th, 1789:


 * "I have been here about a Fortnight during which time we have not made a Congress. So. Carolina, Virga, Pennsa, N. Jersey, & Massachussets are represented. There is one Member from each of the States of Rhode Island, N. Carolina & Georgia, but none from New Hampshire, Connecticut, N. York, Delaware or Maryland. I very much wish we may make a house in a week or ten days, as I think the Appearance in Europe, & perhaps even here, of the old Congress being in full operation and tranquilly yielding the seats to the new would have a good effect. The misrepresentations in Europe have been extremely gross, and must have an unfavorable effect upon Emigration in the poorer ranks of life. Col. Wadsworth has been mentiond as President. I respect him much, but I wish to give appearance to the old System by a Character of rather more celebrity. Mr. Adams would meet my Judgment better than any member of the present house. The principal Objection is his Absence, which I fear will deprive him of his chance."


 * A quorum never formed and the USCA Presidency ended with Griffin on January 21, 1789. From January 22, 1789 until George Washington took office under the Constitution of 1787 on April 30th, 1789, there was no one serving as "President" in the United States of America Republic.

President of the United States in Congress Assembled
It is specious to label Cyrus Griffin as a President of the Continental Congress. Although you have changed my edits of Cyrus Griffin back to a Continental Congress President, perhaps you can leave this post on the talk page to help your readers discern which listing - President of the Continental Congress or President of the United States in Congress Assembled is correct. A brief case that the Continental Congress expired with the ratification of the Articles of Confederation and the offices had significant differences is as follows:

Although the Articles of Confederation was passed by the U.S. Continental Congress on November 15th, 1777, this Constitution of 1777 required the unanimous ratification by all the 13 states. Maryland was the last state to adopt the Articles of Confederation, completing its ratification on February 2, 1781. On February 22, 1781, it was unanimously resolved by Congress that:

The delegates of Maryland having taken their seats in Congress with powers to sign the Articles of Confederation: "Ordered, That Thursday next [March 1, 1781] be assigned for compleating the Confederation; and that a committee of three be appointed, to consider and report a mode for announcing the same to the public: the members, [Mr. George] Walton, Mr. [James] Madison, Mr. [John] Mathews."

The March 1st, 1781, enacted Constitution of 1777 provided for a unicameral governing body called the United States in Congress Assembled (USCA) to govern the United States of America. The USCA was charged " .. to appoint one of their members to preside, provided that no person be allowed to serve in the office of president more than one year in any term of three years."

On March 2nd, 1781, the Delegates, who were duly elected after each State had ratified the Articles of Confederation, convened in Philadelphia as the United States in Congress Assembled with Samuel Huntington presiding as the first USCA President. Additionally, George Washington continued to serve as General and Commander-in-Chief of the United States Continental Army.

The Constitution of 1777 Presidency, although similar to its predecessor, was a different and weaker office then that of the U.S. Continental Congress Presidency.

For instance, the Continental Congress Presidents, who served from September 5, 1774 to February 28, 1781, presided over a government that could enact legislation binding all 13 States with only a seven state quorum as opposed to the nine state minimum required by the Constitution of 1777. Additionally, Continental Congress Presidents, who decided what legislation came before Congress, often found themselves as the sole vote for their state, giving them a 1/7th to 1/13th vote over crucial legislation, appointments, judicial decisions, and even military orders enacted during the Revolutionary War. After March 1, 1781, the Constitution of 1777 mandated that two or more delegates must be present from each state for that delegation to be marked present and be eligible to vote in the new USCA government. Therefore, on March 2nd, 1781, the first act of the USCA was to disqualify both New Hampshire and Rhode Island from voting in the new assembly because they each had only one delegate present.

On May 4, 1781, to further weaken presidential powers, Congress passed the "Rules for conducting business in the United States in Congress assembled." that stripped the President of his power to control the congressional agenda which, was a tactic that the presiding officers (especially Henry Laurens) had expertly wielded as Continental Congress Presidents. These new USCA rules even went so far as to eliminate the President's prerogative to continue the debate, before a second to the motion was brought to the floor.

"Rule 10. When a motion is made and seconded it shall be repeated by the President or If he or any other member desire being in writing it shall be delivered to the President in writing and read aloud at the table before it, shall be debated."

There are numerous other examples on the differences between the two offices that range from the USCA's Committee of the States experiment to govern the USA by a "Board of Directors" without the USCA President at its head to John Hanson's success in championing the congressional resolution that moved the bulk of his presidential correspondence duties to USCA Secretary Charles Thomson. Moreover, USCA Foreign Secretaries Robert R. Livingston and John Jay took over most of the U.S. Presidential duties of entertaining foreign diplomats and dignitaries under the Articles of Confederation government.

Cyrus Griffin served as the President of the United States in Congress Assembled and not as President of the Continental Congress. To view the primary sources supporting this fact go to http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-c_Pu5PAiP_g/UOX0C4AiqhI/AAAAAAAADe0/tvVawnkqk5M/s1600/AA+AC.jpg and for documents signed by Cyrus Griffin as President of the United States in Congress Assembled please go here -- www.cyrusgriffin.com --Stas.klos (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

First "true" president of the united states?
Did George Washington himself consider Cyrus Griffin as technically the first U.S. President? I ask because the History Channel's America: Fact or Fiction? said so. --173.51.221.24 (talk) 19:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Alas, beyond the title of the channel, there's not much history there, and you're probably better off ignoring them, unless you're particularly interested in "Bible Secrets", Cajun Pawn Stars, and "Swamp Beasts" unknown to actual science. - Nunh-huh 04:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cyrus Griffin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120617123913/http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/index1630.htm to http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/index1630.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:38, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

missing in 1787 Virginia tax census
Although there are more than three dozen entries for people with the Griffin surname, including his brother Samuel, there is no entry for Cyrus Griffin, only a mention of a Griffin whose first name is illegible.Jweaver28 (talk) 18:27, 5 June 2021 (UTC)