THE NORTHERN DISUNION MOVEMENT AMONG THE FEDERALISTS.
It is a painful thing to have to record that the closing act in a great
statesman's career not only compares ill with what went before, but is
actually to the last degree a discreditable and unworthy performance.
Morris's bitterness and anger against the government grew apace; and
finally his hatred for the administration became such, that, to hurt it,
he was willing also to do irreparable harm to the nation itself. He
violently opposed the various embargo acts, and all the other
governmental measures of the decade before the war; and worked himself
up to such a pitch, when hostilities began, that, though one of the
founders of the Constitution, though formerly one of the chief exponents
of the national idea, and though once a main upholder of the Union, he
abandoned every patriotic principle and became an ardent advocate of
Northern secession.
To any reasoning student of American history it goes without saying that
there was very good cause for his anger with the administration. From
the time the House of Virginia came into power, until the beginning of
Monroe's administration, there was a distinctly anti-New England feeling
at Washington, and much of the legislation bore especially heavily on
the Northeast. Excepting Jefferson, we have never produced an executive
more helpless than Madison, when it came to grappling with real dangers
and difficulties. Like his predecessor, he was only fit to be President
in a time of profound peace; he was utterly out of place the instant
matters grew turbulent, or difficult problems arose to be solved, and he
was a ridiculously incompetent leader for a war with Great Britain. He
was entirely too timid to have embarked on such a venture of his own
accord, and was simply forced into it by the threat of losing his second
term. The fiery young Democrats of the South and West, and their
brothers of the Middle States, were the authors of the war; they
themselves, for all their bluster, were but one shade less incompetent
than their nominal chief, when it came to actual work, and were
shamefully unable to make their words good by deeds.
The administration thus drifted into a war which it had neither the
wisdom to avoid, nor the forethought to prepare for. In view of the fact
that the war was their own, it is impossible to condemn sufficiently
strongly the incredible folly of the Democrats in having all along
refused to build a navy or provide any other adequate means of defense.
In accordance with their curiously foolish theories, they persisted in
relying on that weakest of all weak reeds, the militia, who promptly ran
away every time they faced a foe in the open. This applied to all,
whether eastern, western, or southern; the men of the northern states in
1812 and 1813 did as badly as, and no worse than, the Virginians in
1814. Indeed, one of the good results of the war was that it did away
forever with all reliance on the old-time militia, the most expensive
and inefficient species of soldiery that could be invented. During the
first year the monotonous record of humiliations and defeats was only
relieved by the splendid victories of the navy which the Federalists had
created twelve years previously, and which had been hurt rather than
benefited in the intervening time. Gradually, however, the people
themselves began to bring out leaders: two, Jackson and Scott, were
really good generals, under whom our soldiers became able to face even
the English regulars, then the most formidable fighting troops in the
world; and it must be remembered that Jackson won his fights absolutely
unhelped by the administration. In fact, the government at Washington
does not deserve one shred of credit for any of the victories we won,
although to it we directly owe the greater number of our defeats.
Granting, however, all that can be said as to the hopeless inefficiency
of the administration, both in making ready for and in waging the war,
it yet remains true that the war itself was eminently justifiable, and
was of the greatest service to the nation. We had been bullied by
England and France until we had to fight to preserve our national
self-respect; and we very properly singled out our chief aggressor,
though it would perhaps have been better still to have acted on the
proposition advanced in Congress, and to have declared war on both.
Although nominally the peace left things as they had been, practically
we gained our point; and we certainly came out of the contest with a
greatly increased reputation abroad. In spite of the ludicrous series of
failures which began with our first attempt to invade Canada, and
culminated at Bladensburg, yet in a succession of contests on the ocean
and the lakes, we shattered the charmed shield of British naval
invincibility; while on the northern frontier we developed under Scott
and Brown an infantry which, unlike any of the armies of continental
Europe, was able to meet on equal terms the British infantry in pitched
battle in the open; and at New Orleans we did what the best of
Napoleon's marshals, backed by the flower of the French soldiers, had
been unable to accomplish during five years of warfare in Spain, and
inflicted a defeat such as no English army had suffered during a quarter
of a century of unbroken warfare. Above all, the contest gave an immense
impetus to our national feeling, and freed our politics forever from any
dependence on those of a foreign power.
The war was distinctly worth fighting, and resulted in good to the
country. The blame that attaches to Madison and the elder
democratic-republican leaders, as well as to their younger associates,
Clay, Calhoun, and the rest, who fairly flogged them into action,
relates to their utter failure to make any preparations for the contest,
to their helpless inability to carry it on, and to the extraordinary
weakness and indecision of their policy throughout; and on all these
points it is hardly possible to visit them with too unsparing censure.
Yet, grave though these faults were, they were mild compared to those
committed by Morris and the other ultra-Federalists of New York and New
England. Morris's opposition to the war led him to the most extravagant
lengths. In his hatred of the opposite party he lost all loyalty to the
nation. He championed the British view of their right to impress seamen
from our ships; he approved of peace on the terms they offered, which
included a curtailment of our western frontier, and the erection along
it of independent Indian sovereignties under British protection. He
found space in his letters to exult over the defeats of Bonaparte, but
could spare no word of praise for our own victories.
He actually advocated repudiating our war debt,[3] on the ground that it
was void, being founded on a moral wrong; and he wished the Federalists
to make public profession of their purpose, so that when they should
come back to power, the holders might have no reason to complain that
there had been no warning of their intention. To Josiah Quincy, on May
15th, he wrote: "Should it be objected, as it probably will to favor
lenders and their associates, that public faith is pledged, it may be
replied that a pledge wickedly given is not to be redeemed." He thus
advanced the theory that in a government ruled by parties, which come
into power alternately, any debt could be repudiated, at any time, if
the party in power happened to disapprove of its originally being
incurred. No greenback demagogue of the lowest type ever advocated a
proposition more dishonest or more contemptible.
[3] As, for instance, in a letter to David R. Ogden, April 5, 1813.
He wrote that he agreed with Pickering that it was impious to raise
taxes for so unjust a war. He endeavored, fortunately in vain, to induce
Rufus King in the Senate to advocate the refusal of supplies of every
sort, whether of men or money, for carrying on the war; but King was far
too honorable to turn traitor. Singularly forgetful of his speeches in
the Senate ten years before, he declared that he wished that a foreign
power might occupy and people the West, so as, by outside pressure, to
stifle our feuds. He sneered at the words union and constitution, as
being meaningless. He railed bitterly at the honest and loyal majority
of his fellow-Federalists in New York, who had professed their devotion
to the Union; and in a letter of April 29th, to Harrison Gray Otis,--who
was almost as bad as himself,--he strongly advocated secession, writing
among other things that he wished the New York Federalists to declare
publicly that "the Union, being the means of freedom, should be prized
as such, but that the end should not be sacrificed to the means." By
comparing this with Calhoun's famous toast at the Jefferson birthday
dinner in 1880, "The Union; next to our liberty the most dear; may we
all remember that it can only be preserved by respecting the rights of
the states and distributing equally the benefit and the burden of the
Union," it can be seen how completely Morris's utterances went on all
fours with those of the great nullifier.
To Pickering he wrote, on October 17th, 1814: "I hear every day
professions of attachment to the Union, and declarations as to its
importance. I should be glad to meet with some one who could tell me
what has become of the Union, in what it consists, and to what useful
purpose it endures." He regarded the dissolution of the Union to be so
nearly an accomplished fact that the only question was whether the
boundary should be "the Delaware, the Susquehanna, or the Potomac"; for
he thought that New York would have to go with New England. He nourished
great hopes of the Hartford convention, which he expected would formally
come out for secession; he wrote Otis that the convention should declare
that the Union was already broken, and that all that remained to do was
to take action for the preservation of the interests of the Northeast.
He was much chagrined when the convention fell under the control of
Cabot and the moderates. As late as January 10, 1815, he wrote that the
only proceeding from which the people of his section would gain
practical benefit would be a "severance of the Union."
In fact, throughout the war of 1812 he appeared as the open champion of
treason to the nation, of dishonesty to the nation's creditors, and of
cringing subserviency to a foreign power. It is as impossible to
reconcile his course with his previous career and teachings as it is to
try to make it square with the rules of statesmanship and morality. His
own conduct affords a conclusive condemnation of his theories as to the
great inferiority of a government conducted by the multitude, to a
government conducted by the few who should have riches and education.
Undoubtedly he was one of these few; he was an exceptionally able man,
and a wealthy one; but he went farther wrong at this period than the
majority of our people--the "mob" as he would have contemptuously called
them--have ever gone at any time; for though every state in turn, and
almost every statesman, has been wrong upon some issue or another, yet
in the long run the bulk of the people have always hitherto shown
themselves true to the cause of right. Morris strenuously insisted upon
the need of property being defended from the masses; yet he advocated
repudiation of the national debt, which he should have known to be quite
as dishonest as the repudiation of his individual liabilities, and he
was certainly aware that the step is a short one between refusing to pay
a man what _ought_ to be his and taking away from him what actually _is_
his.
There were many other Federalist leaders in the same position as
himself, especially in the three southern New England states, where the
whole Federalist party laid itself open to the gravest charges of
disloyalty. Morris was not alone in his creed at this time. On the
contrary, his position is interesting because it is typical of that
assumed by a large section of his party throughout the Northeast. In
fact, the Federalists in this portion of the Union had split in three,
although the lines of cleavage were not always well marked. Many of them
remained heartily loyal to the national idea; the bulk hesitated as to
whether they should go all lengths or not; while a large and influential
minority, headed by Morris, Pickering, Quincy, Lowell and others, were
avowed disunionists. Had peace not come when it did, it is probable that
the moderates would finally have fallen under the control of these
ultras. The party developed an element of bitter unreason in defeat; it
was a really sad sight to see a body of able, educated men, interested
and skilled in the conduct of public affairs, all going angrily and
stupidly wrong on the one question that was of vital concern to the
nation.
It is idle to try to justify the proceedings of the Hartford convention,
or of the Massachusetts and Connecticut legislatures. The decision to
keep the New England troops as an independent command was of itself
sufficient ground for condemnation; moreover, it was not warranted by
any show of superior prowess on the part of the New Englanders, for a
portion of Maine continued in possession of the British till the close
of the war. The Hartford resolutions were so framed as to justify
seceding or not seceding as events turned out; a man like Morris could
extract comfort from them, while it was hoped they would not frighten
those who were more loyal. The majority of the people in New England
were beyond question loyal, exactly as in 1860 a majority of Southerners
were opposed to secession; but the disloyal element was active and
resolute, and hoped to force the remainder into its own way of thinking.
It failed signally, and was buried beneath a load of disgrace; and New
England was taught thus early and by heart the lesson that wrongs must
be righted within, and not without the Union. It would have been well
for her sister section of the South, so loyal in 1815, if forty-five
years afterwards she had spared herself the necessity of learning the
same lesson at an infinitely greater cost.
The truth is that it is nonsense to reproach any one section with being
especially disloyal to the Union. At one time or another almost every
state has shown strong particularistic leanings; Connecticut and
Pennsylvania, for example, quite as much as Virginia or Kentucky.
Fortunately the outbursts were never simultaneous in a majority. It is
as impossible to question the fact that at one period or another of the
past, many of the states in each section have been very shaky in their
allegiance as it is to doubt that they are now all heartily loyal. The
secession movement of 1860 was pushed to extremities, instead of being
merely planned and threatened, and the revolt was peculiarly abhorrent,
because of the intention to make slavery the "corner-stone" of the new
nation, and to reintroduce the slave-trade, to the certain ultimate ruin
of the Southern whites; but at least it was entirely free from the
meanness of being made in the midst of a doubtful struggle with a
foreign foe. Indeed, in this respect the ultra-Federalists of New York
and New England in 1814 should be compared with the infamous Northern
copperheads of the Vallandigham stripe rather than with the gallant
confederates who risked and lost all in fighting for the cause of their
choice. Half a century before the "stars and bars" waved over Lee's last
intrenchments, perfervid New England patriots were fond of flaunting
"the flag with five stripes," and drinking to the health of
the--fortunately stillborn--new nation. Later on, the disunion movement
among the Northern abolitionists, headed by Garrison, was perhaps the
most absolutely senseless of all, for its success meant the immediate
abandonment of every hope of abolition.
In each one of these movements men of the highest character and capacity
took part. Morris had by previous services rendered the whole nation his
debtor; Garrison was one of the little band who, in the midst of general
apathy, selfishness, and cowardice, dared to demand the cutting out of
the hideous plague spot of our civilization; while Lee and Jackson were
as remarkable for stainless purity and high-mindedness as they were for
their consummate military skill. But the disunion movements in which
they severally took part were wholly wrong. An Englishman of to-day may
be equally proud of the valor of Cavalier and Roundhead; but, if
competent to judge, he must admit that the Roundhead was right. So it is
with us. The man who fought for secession warred for a cause as evil and
as capable of working lasting harm as the doctrine of the divine right
of kings itself. But we may feel an intense pride in his gallantry; and
we may believe in his honesty as heartily as we believe in that of the
only less foolish being who wishes to see our government strongly
centralized, heedless of the self-evident fact that over such a vast
land as ours the nation can exist only as a Federal Union; and that,
exactly as the liberty of the individual and the rights of the states
can only be preserved by upholding the strength of the nation, so this
same localizing of power in all matters not essentially national is
vital to the wellbeing and durability of the government.
Besides the honorable men drawn into such movements there have always
been plenty who took part in or directed them for their own selfish
ends, or whose minds were so warped and their sense of political
morality so crooked as to make them originate schemes that would have
reduced us to the impotent level of the Spanish-American republics.
These men were peculiar to neither section. In 1803, Aaron Burr of New
York was undoubtedly anxious to bring about in the Northeast[4] what
sixty years later Jefferson Davis of Mississippi so nearly succeeded in
doing in the South; and the attempt in the South to make a hero of the
one is as foolish as it would be to make a hero of the other in the
North. If there are such virtues as loyalty and patriotism, then there
must exist the corresponding crime of treason; if there is any merit in
practicing the first, then there must be equal demerit in committing the
last. Emasculated sentimentalists may try to strike from the national
dictionary the word treason; but until that is done, Jefferson Davis
must be deemed guilty thereof.
[4] People sometimes forget that Burr was as willing to try sedition in
the East as in the West.
There are, however, very few of our statesmen whose characters can be
painted in simple, uniform colors, like Washington and Lincoln on the
one hand, or Burr and Davis on the other. Nor is Morris one of these
few. His place is alongside of men like Madison, Samuel Adams, and
Patrick Henry, who did the nation great service at times, but each of
whom, at some one or two critical junctures, ranged himself with the
forces of disorder.
After the peace Morris accommodated himself to the altered condition
with his usual buoyant cheerfulness; he was too light-hearted, and, to
say the truth, had too good an opinion of himself, to be cast down even
by the signal failure of his expectations and the memory of the by no
means creditable part he had played. Besides, he had the great virtue of
always good-humoredly yielding to the inevitable. He heartily wished the
country well, and kept up a constant correspondence with men high in
influence at Washington. He disliked the tariff bill of 1816; he did not
believe in duties or imposts, favoring internal, although not direct,
taxation. He was sharp-sighted enough to see that the Federal party had
shot its bolt and outlived its usefulness, and that it was time for it
to dissolve. To a number of Federalists at Philadelphia, who wished to
continue the organization, he wrote strongly advising them to give up
the idea, and adding some very sound and patriotic counsel. "Let us
forget party and think of our country. That country embraces both
parties. We must endeavor, therefore, to save and benefit both. This
cannot be effected while political delusions array good men against each
other. If you abandon the contest, the voice of reason, now drowned in
factious vociferation, will be listened to and heard. The pressure of
distress will accelerate the moment of reflection; and when it arrives
the people will look out for men of sense, experience, and integrity.
Such men may, I trust, be found in both parties; and if our country be
delivered, what does it signify whether those who operate her salvation
wear a federal or democratic cloak?" These words formed almost his last
public utterance, for they were penned but a couple of months before his
death; and he might well be content to let them stand as a fit closing
to his public career.
He died November 6, 1816, when sixty-four years old, after a short
illness. He had suffered at intervals for a long time from gout; but he
had enjoyed general good health, as his erect, commanding, well-built
figure showed; for he was a tall and handsome man. He was buried on his
own estate at Morrisania.
There has never been an American statesman of keener intellect or more
brilliant genius. Had he possessed but a little more steadiness and
self-control he would have stood among the two or three very foremost.
He was gallant and fearless. He was absolutely upright and truthful; the
least suggestion of falsehood was abhorrent to him. His extreme,
aggressive frankness, joined to a certain imperiousness of disposition,
made it difficult for him to get along well with many of the men with
whom he was thrown in contact. In politics he was too much of a free
lance ever to stand very high as a leader. He was very generous and
hospitable; he was witty and humorous, a charming companion, and
extremely fond of good living. He had a proud, almost hasty temper, and
was quick to resent an insult. He was strictly just; and he made open
war on all traits that displeased him, especially meanness and
hypocrisy. He was essentially a strong man, and he was an American
through and through.
Perhaps his greatest interest for us lies in the fact that he was a
shrewder, more far-seeing observer and recorder of contemporary men and
events, both at home and abroad, than any other American or foreign
statesman of his time. But aside from this he did much lasting work. He
took a most prominent part in bringing about the independence of the
colonies, and afterwards in welding them into a single powerful nation,
whose greatness he both foresaw and foretold. He made the final draft of
the United States Constitution; he first outlined our present system of
national coinage; he originated and got under way the plan for the Erie
Canal; as minister to France he successfully performed the most
difficult task ever allotted to an American representative at a foreign
capital. With all his faults, there are few men of his generation to
whom the country owes more than to Gouverneur Morris.
INDEX.
Adams, John, 52;
appointed commissioner, 119;
repudiates command of Congress, 120;
share in most important treaty, 124;
absent from National Convention, 133;
nominated for the Presidency, 328;
signs judiciary bill, 331;
appoints new judges, 332.
Adams, Samuel, 77, 79, 128.
Allen, Ethan, 46.
America, successful, 117, 118, 131, 132, 144.
American army, suffering of, 76, 77;
commissioners, 119, 120, 121, 123, 124;
Constitutional Convention, delegates in, 133;
contrasted with States General of France, 134, 135, 136;
independence, 122, 123;
leaders compared with European, 82, 83;
navy, 196, 291;
triumph, 123, 124.
Americans, in Revolutionary War, 5;
of 1776, compared with those of Civil War, 49, 50.
Ames, Fisher, 327.
Assembly, 33, 36, 37, 44.
Bank of North America, 103.
Bastile, the, 211, 225, 226.
Battle of Bennington, 69;
Brandywine, 75;
Princeton, 48;
Trenton, 48, 49;
Guilford Court House, 113.
Battles on soil of New York, 3, 4.
British allies, 49, 50, 68, 119;
war-ships, 43, 47.
Brunswick, Duke of, 284, 285.
Burgoyne, 49, 68, 72, 74, 78;
breach of faith with, 125.
Burke, Edmund, 39.
Burr, Aaron, 329, 330, 360;
and Jefferson Davis, 361.
Butler, 147, 157.
Calhoun, famous toast of, 354.
Canada, 45, 89, 90.
Carolinas, the, 8, 11, 30, 45, 50.
Carroll, 40.
Church of Rome, 65.
Churches, 9, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19.
Civil War, people in the, 49, 50.
Clermont-Tonnerre, Count de, 179, 203.
Clinton, George, 10;
chosen governor, 68, 327;
as a politician, 97, 128.
Clintons, the, 10, 20, 68.
Colonial contests, 3;
legislature, 20, 21, 33.
Colonies, 11.
Confederation, condition of, after the war, 126.
Congress. _See_ Continental;
_see_ Provincial.
Connecticut, 45, 46.
Constitution, its character, 136, 141, 142;
opposition to its adoption, 165, 167.
Continental Congress, the, 36;
dishonorable acts, 73, 78, 79, 80;
its condition at end of 1779, 99;
establishes four departments, 103;
instructions to commissioners, 119, 120.
Convention, New York, 59, 65;
national, 133-139.
Cornwallis, 114, 116.
Council of appointment, 64, 155;
of revisions, 64, 155;
of safety, 67, 68, 71.
Cruger, 14, 45.
Currency, condition of, 105;
table proposed, 107.
Dalrymple, General, 125.
Danton, 270, 287, 296.
Davis, Jefferson, 361.
D'Artois, Count (Charles X.), 217, 306.
Deane, Silas, 93.
Decimal system, 104, 107.
Declaration, of Independence, 47, 53;
of Rights, 178.
De Lanceys, 16, 21, 45.
D'Estaing, Count, 264.
De Flahaut, Madame, 204-207.
Democracy, 145.
Democrats, 137, 138.
Departments, 103.
De Stael, 203;
Madame, 179, 199;
vanity of, 200, 201;
want of delicacy, 202, 203;
her estimate of the Abbe Sieyes, 247;
grief for Lafayette, 317.
Disunion movements, 358, 359, 360.
Dollar, the Spanish, 106, 107.
Dumouriez, 269-272.
Dutch, descendants of, 9;
language, 13;
republicans, 17;
battle with English, 115;
in war with Spain, 132.
Ellsworth, Oliver, 160.
England, treatment of her American subjects, 4, 5;
grounds of complaint, 5;
courage, 116;
insolence, 323.
English, stock, people of, 5, 126;
language, 12, 13;
historians, 117;
hostile feeling, 228, 229;
society, 230, 231;
climate, 342.
Episcopalians, 13, 16, 18, 21, 60.
Esterhazy, 311, 312.
Extremists, 20.
Federalism, 138, 322, 323.
Federalist party, leaders of, 92, 137, 138.
Federalists, 141, 156, 321, 323, 331, 334, 335.
Foreign or non-English elements, 11, 12, 13, 34.
Foreigners, movement against, 157.
Fox, 123, 233, 236.
France, treaty with, 88;
would have Americans dependent allies, 121, 122, 123;
contrasted with America, 184;
destitute of statesmen, 241.
Franklin appointed commissioner, 119, 120, 124;
delegate to National Convention, 133;
advocate of weak central government, 137.
French, motives, 89, 90;
struggles with England, 115;
navy, 116;
admirals, 117;
government, 121;
character, 186-189;
noblesse and common people, 212;
Revolution, 170-175, 244, 258-263.
Gates, 71, 72, 73, 74.
Generals, of Revolution, 52, 116;
in Civil War, 52.
Genet, 292.
George III., 8, 228, 231.
Georgia, 8, 11, 50, 160.
Gerard, 89, 90, 122.
German auxiliaries, 119.
Germany, 144, 145, 165.
Gibraltar, 115, 116, 122.
Government, 130, 131, 144, 145.
Governor, name obnoxious, 62, 63.
Gower, Lord, 276.
Great Britain and American subjects, 4, 6;
odds against, 115;
hostility to American trade, 128.
Greene, 45, 52, 86, 113, 115, 116, 117.
Hamilton, Alexander, 10, 52, 92, 102, 104, 111;
delegate to National Convention, 133;
advocate of strong government, 137, 138;
in favor of domestic manufactures, 156;
proposes basis of representation, 158;
assisted in writing the "Federalist," 166;
procures ratification of the Constitution, 167;
passing coolness with Morris, 320;
his haughtiness, 326;
defeat by Democrats, 329.
Hancock, John, 79.
Hartford Convention, 357.
Henry, Patrick, 128, 324.
Herkomer, 10.
Holland, 116.
Huguenots, 9, 10, 65.
Impressment of American sailors, 233, 234.
Independence, 55, 56, 88.
India, 115, 116.
Indian warfare, 3, 4, 8, 74.
Infidels, 289.
Irish, in New England, 12;
of 1776, 21;
in Revolutionary armies, 34;
in Civil War, 35.
Jackson, General, 349, 350.
Jay, John, admitted to the bar, 23;
in Continental Congress, 41, 42;
resolution indorsing Declaration of Independence, 58;
plan for state constitution, 62, 63;
article on toleration, 65;
would abolish slavery, 66, 67;
on committee to organize state government, 67;
defends Schuyler's cause, 72;
reinforcements for Gates, 73;
chief justice, 75;
wishes well to Old England, 92;
of Puritanic morality, 110;
friendship with Morris, 111;
minister to Spain, 111;
views on education of children, 111;
affection for America, 112;
commissioner, 119;
repudiates command of Congress, 120;
true policy summed up, 123;
his the chief part in treaty, 124;
secretary for foreign affairs, 133;
helps Hamilton on the "Federalist," 166;
a strong Federalist, 301, 326;
appointed to negotiate treaty in England, 301, 302, 327;
governor, 327, 328, 329;
visits to and from Morris, 340, 341.
Jefferson, 52, 104, 107, 108, 129, 131, 133;
important truth taught by him, 138;
American minister to France, 176, 177;
treatment of Morris, 292;
incompetence when President, 334, 335, 348.
Johnsons, the, 17, 38, 45.
Judiciary bill, 331-334.
King, Rufus, 252, 353.
King's College, 3, 18.
Lafayette, 85, 86, 117, 176, 177, 178, 180, 181, 184, 187;
his character, 221, 222, 273;
ideas impracticable, 240, 241;
proclaimed and imprisoned, 273, 274;
released, 317.
Lafayette, Madame de, 181, 274, 275.
Lake Champlain, 4, 68.
Lake George, 3.
Leaders, 52;
loyalist, 16, 45;
revolutionary, 16, 49.
Lecky, 117, 118.
Leeds, Duke of, 231, 233, 237.
Lincoln, 52, 133, 138.
Lineage, 10, 34.
Livingston, Robert, 10, 59;
on committee to organize state government, 67;
chancellor, 75;
secretary of foreign affairs, 103.
Livingstons, the, 21, 326.
Louis XVI., 216, 250, 254, 255, 256, 286.
Louis XVII., 307.
Louis Philippe, 317, 318.
Louisiana, 336, 337, 339.
Loyalists, 16, 29, 45, 119, 167.
Luzerne, 236.
Madison, 129;
delegate to National Convention, 133;
during formation of Constitution, 139, 140, 145, 150, 153, 162;
compliment to Morris, 165;
assists Hamilton in writing the "Federalist," 166;
as President, 348.
Manorial families, 14, 15, 19.
Marie Antoinette, 225, 288.
Marmontel, 247.
Marshall, 325.
Mason, George, 160.
Merchants, 15, 19, 21.
Militia, 69, 70, 72, 113, 114.
Mirabeau, 136, 174, 200, 222, 223.
Mississippi, 90, 91, 95, 112, 113, 148.
Money, 24, 37, 128.
Monroe, 293;
recalled and rebuked, 300;
a foolish minister, 301, 302.
Montmorin, Count de, 218, 249.
Moreau, General, 341, 342.
Morris, Gouverneur, birth, 1;
descent, 2;
boyhood, 3;
college career, 20, 22;
takes part in public affairs, 23, 24;
desire for foreign travel, 25;
narrow means, 26;
in society, 27;
little faith in extreme democracy, 30, 31;
dislike for mobs, 31, 32;
plans for reunion with Great Britain, 32, 33;
delegate to Provincial Congress, 35, 36;
report and speech, 37, 38;
objects to eighth article of report, 41;
at head of patriotic party, 46, 47, 53;
able speech in favor of new governments, 53-58;
member of committees, 59;
position in regard to the Tories, 60, 61;
formation of State Constitution, 62-67;
at Schuyler's headquarters, 68-71;
efforts in behalf of Schuyler, 72;
secures reinforcements for Gates, 73;
letters to Schuyler, 74, 75;
elected to Continental Congress, 76;
visits Valley Forge, 77;
a good financier, 78, 80, 86;
endeavors to secure approval of Washington's plans, 78, 79, 83, 85;
letter to Washington, 84;
friendship with Greene, 86;
report on Lord North's conciliatory bills, 88;
prepares "Observations on the American Revolution," 88;
drafts instructions to Franklin, 89;
reply to French minister, 91;
"Observations on the Finances of America," 91;
his loyalist relatives, 92, 93;
controversy with Thomas Paine, 93, 94;
drafts instructions to our foreign ministers, 94, 95;
dispute of New York with Vermont, 96, 97;
fails of reelection, 98;
life in Philadelphia, 99;
publishes essays on the finances, 100, 101, 102;
assistant financier, 103;
founder of national coinage, 104, 105, 106, 107;
enjoyment in society, 108, 110;
serious injury, 109;
want of insight into the future, 112, 113;
foresees final success of Greene, 113;
letters to Jay, 118, 120, 127;
advocates a firmer Union, 129, 130;
in Constitutional Convention, 133, 139, 140;
has no regard for States-rights, 142-145;
jealousy of the West, 146, 147;
views on the suffrage, 149-153;
on the power of the President, 153, 154;
on the judiciary, 155;
on Congress, 156;
speeches on the slavery question, 158, 159;
a warm advocate of the Constitution, 166;
return to New York, 167;
acts in behalf of loyalists, 167;
residence in France, 169;
letters and diary, 170, 175, 176, 183;
hostile to spirit of French Revolution, 170-175;
at home in Parisian society, 176;
opinion of Jefferson, 177;
of Lafayette, 178, 181;
views on French politics, 183-186;
distrust of French character, 185, 186, 188, 189;
National Assembly, 190, 191;
a true republican and American, 193, 194;
minor services to Washington, 195;
correspondence with Paul Jones, 196;
life in Paris, 197, 198, 199;
opinion of Madame de Stael, 199-204;
intimacy with Madame de Flahaut, 204-207;
acquaintance with the Duchess of Orleans, 207-211, 245, 246;
literary life of the salon, 213-215;
judgment of his contemporaries, 216, 219-223;
of French people, 224;
advice to a certain painter, 226;
mission to British government, 227, 228;
English not congenial, 229, 230;
impatience at delay, 233;
interview with Pitt, 234;
is blamed for failure of negotiations, 236;
trip through Netherlands and up the Rhine, 237;
speculations of various kinds, 238, 239;
advice to Lafayette, 240-243, 260;
letter to Washington, 243-245;
fondness for the theatre, 247;
dislike to priesthood, 248, 249;
interest in home affairs, 250;
made minister to France, 252;
is advised by Washington, 252, 253;
plans for escape of the king and queen, 254, 255, 256;
his, a brilliant chapter in American diplomacy, 257, 258;
horror of the mob, 260, 261;
his house a place of refuge, 263, 264;
picture of the French, 265-268;
generosity to Lafayette family, 274, 275;
remains in Paris, 276, 277;
spirited conduct when harassed, 278, 279;
payment of American debt, 280, 281;
irritates the executive council, 281, 282;
French privateers, 283;
commentary on passing events, 283-291;
is recalled, 292, 293;
as foreign minister to be honored, 264, 294;
accurate forecast of events, 295;
clear views of French Revolution, 298;
journeys in Europe, 302;
no longer an impartial judge, 303;
estimate of Napoleon, 303, 304;
in Switzerland, 304;
in Great Britain, 305;
opinion of royalist refugees, 306, 307;
in Berlin, 308, 315;
in Vienna, 310-315;
dealings with Louis Philippe, 317, 318;
return to New York, 320;
elected to Senate, 328;
disapproves of Burr, 330;
opinion of Jefferson, 331;
speech in favor of occupying Louisiana, 337, 338;
fails of reelection, 339;
leader in project of Erie canal, 339, 340;
life at Morrisania, 340;
marriage, 340;
formality, 341;
compares America and England, 342;
loses his satisfaction with the people and the government, and
becomes soured, 345;
advocates northern secession, 347;
loses his loyalty to the nation, 352-359;
closing acts of his career unworthy of him, 352-355;
after the peace, 361;
gives sound and patriotic counsel, 362, 363;
death, 363;
character and services, 363, 364.
Morris, Robert, 102, 103, 133.
Morris, Staats Long, 15, 61, 167.
Morrisania, 1, 167, 340.
Morrises, the, 2.
Narbonne, Chevalier de, 202, 203.
National Union, 126, 140.
Nationalists, 141.
Necker, 199, 200, 218, 219, 220.
New England, 11, 161, 324;
Puritans, 5;
militia, 69;
members of Continental Congress, 71, 79, 80.
New Rochelle, 3.
New York city, 1;
society in, 26;
exposed positions, 43;
entered by Continental forces, 46;
left by peaceable citizens, 48;
held by British, 116.
New York colony, 1, 3;
battles in, 3, 4;
claim of liberty as a right, 6;
loyalty, 7, 8;
many nationalities, 9, 10;
churches, 9;
ethnic type, 11;
rivalries, 14;
government, 14;
three parties, 19;
in debt, 23;
not in full sympathy with the patriots, 35, 36;
soldiers in royal armies, 44;
famous Tory leaders, 45;
second Provincial Congress, 46;
third Provincial Congress, 47;
Declaration of Independence ratified, and State Constitution
organized,47;
adoption of the national Constitution, 165, 167.
New York State, 48;
party contests, 326.
New Yorkers, 13, 33, 96.
North Carolina, 165.
North, Lord, conciliatory bills of, 87.
Officers, in trade, 81;
foreign, 85;
French, in American Revolution, 264.
Oriskany, fight at, 10, 12, 72.
Orleans, Duchess of, 207, 208, 209, 245, 246.
Orleans, Duke of (Egalite), 207, 216, 275, 288.
Otis, Harrison Gray, 353.
Paine, Thomas, 93, 208, 289.
Paris, 266, 267;
factions in, 269;
changed, 270.
Paul Jones, 196.
Pennsylvania, 28, 157, 166, 324.
Philadelphia, 110.
Pinckney, 145, 326, 328, 329.
Pitt, 233, 234, 237.
Presbyterians, 14, 18, 21.
Prisoners, exchange of, 125.
Provincial Congress, 34, 35, 38, 39, 43, 46, 47, 53, 58.
Proviso regarding toleration, 66.
Prussia, 308, 309.
Quebec, 10;
bill, 41.
Queen's County, 44, 46.
Randolph, 292.
Representation of slave states, 157, 158, 164.
Republican party, 141.
Republicanism, extreme, 20.
Revolution, enemies in, 49, 68;
two sides of, 30;
officers of, 79;
men of, 81, 82;
influence of, compared with that of French, 298, 299.
Revolutionary armies compared with those in Civil War, 50, 51, 81.
Rhode Island, 126, 165, 189.
Riedesel, "America," 308;
General, 316.
Rodney, 116, 117.
Rohan, Cardinal de, 249.
Roman Catholics, 9, 39, 64, 65.
Royalist party, 19, 20.
Rumford, Count, 316.
Russia, 168.
Schuyler, Philip, 10, 68, 69, 71;
replaced by Gates, 71, 72, 73;
his noble behavior, 74.
Scott, General, 349.
Sherman, Roger, 71.
Sieyes, the Abbe, 136, 246.
Six Nations, 3.
Slavery, question of, 66, 67, 157-165.
Sons of Liberty, 31, 43.
South Carolina, 80, 145, 160, 325.
Southern States, 115, 147, 148, 158, 161, 162, 163.
Spain, 90, 91, 112, 115, 120, 121, 122, 123, 148.
Spanish-Americans, 131, 132.
St. Clair, General, 69.
St. Patrick's Day, 21.
Stamp Act, 4.
Stark, 69.
States General, 134, 184, 224.
Statesmen, 51, 52, 134.
Suffrage not an inborn or natural right, 149, 150, 157.
Taine, 183.
Talleyrand, 204, 221, 247, 277.
Tarleton, Colonel, 247.
Tesse, Comtesse de, 181, 182.
Toleration, 39, 64, 65, 66.
Tories, 35, 44, 50, 60, 61, 68, 92, 167.
Tory leaders, 45.
Treaty, 124;
obligations of, unfulfilled, 227, 228;
Jay's, 327.
Trio, great American, 133.
Tryon, royal governor, 44.
Valley Forge, 49, 76.
Vergennes, 121, 237.
Vermont, 70, 96, 98.
Virginia, 114, 160, 161, 165;
her statesmen and warriors, 325.
War of 1812, 148, 349, 350.
Warriors, 51, 52, 325.
Washington, 33, 44, 47, 48;
statesman, soldier, patriot, 52;
difficulties, 78, 79;
confidence in Morris, 83;
dislike to foreign officers, 85;
letter to Jay, 118;
delegate in National Convention, 133;
letter to Morris, 189, 190;
views with regard to French Revolution, 191, 192, 252, 292, 293;
a watch for, 195;
statue by Hudon, 196;
kind advice, 252, 253;
recalls Monroe, 300;
reply to letter of Morris, 306;
distrust of Jefferson, and Madison, 321.
West, the, 146, 147, 148.
Whig families, 20, 21.
White Plains, 53.
Wisdom of many worth more than wisdom of one, 136, 137.
Yorktown, 76, 116.
American Statesmen.
A Series of Biographies of Men famous in the Political History of
the United States. Edited by JOHN T. MORSE, Jr. Each volume, 16mo,
gilt top, $1.25; half morocco, $2.50.
_JOHN QUINCY ADAMS_. _By John T. Morse, Jr_.
_ALEXANDER HAMILTON_. _By Henry Cabot Lodge_.
_JOHN C. CALHOUN_. _By Dr. H. Von Holst_.
_ANDREW JACKSON_. _By W. G. Sumner_.
_JOHN RANDOLPH_. _By Henry Adams_.
_JAMES MONROE_. _By D. C. Gilman_.
_THOMAS JEFFERSON_. _By John T. Morse, Jr_.
_DANIEL WEBSTER_. _By Henry Cabot Lodge_.
_ALBERT GALLATIN_. _By John Austin Stevens_.
_JAMES MADISON_. _By Sydney Howard Gay_.
_JOHN ADAMS_. _By John T. Morse, Jr_.
_JOHN MARSHALL_. _By Allan B. Magruder_.
_SAMUEL ADAMS_. _By James K. Hosmer_.
_THOMAS H. BENTON_. _By Theodore Roosevelt_.
_HENRY CLAY_. _By Carl Schurz_. 2 vols.
_PATRICK HENRY_. _By Moses Coit Tyler_.
_GOUVERNEUR MORRIS_. _By Theodore Roosevelt_.
_MARTIN VAN BUREN_. _By Edward M. Shepard_.
_GEORGE WASHINGTON_. _By Henry Cabot Lodge_. 2 vols.
_BENJAMIN FRANKLIN_. _By John T. Morse, Jr_.
_JOHN JAY_. _By George Pellew_.
_LEWIS CASS_. _By Andrew C. McLaughlin_.
_Others to be announced hereafter_.
CRITICAL NOTICES.
_JOHN QUINCY ADAMS_. That Mr. Morse's conclusions will in the main be
those of posterity we have very little doubt, and he has set an
admirable example to his coadjutors in respect of interesting narrative,
just proportion, and judicial candor.--_New York Evening Post_.
_HAMILTON_. The biography of Mr. Lodge is calm and dignified throughout.
He has the virtue--rare indeed among biographers--of impartiality. He
has done his work with conscientious care, and the biography of Hamilton
is a book which cannot have too many readers. It is more than a
biography; it is a study in the science of government.--_St. Paul
Pioneer-Press_.
_CALHOUN_. Nothing can exceed the skill with which the political career
of the great South Carolinian is portrayed in these pages. The work is
superior to any other number of the series thus far, and we do not think
it can be surpassed by any of those that are to come. The whole
discussion in relation to Calhoun's position is eminently philosophical
and just.--_The Dial_ (Chicago).
_JACKSON_. Professor Sumner has ... all in all, made the justest long
estimate of Jackson that has had itself put between the covers of a
book.--_New York Times_.
_RANDOLPH_. The book has been to me intensely interesting.... It is rich
in new facts and side lights, and is worthy of its place in the already
brilliant series of monographs on American Statesmen.--Prof. MOSES COIT
TYLER.
_MONROE_. In clearness of style, and in all points of literary
workmanship, from cover to cover, the volume is well-nigh perfect. There
are also a calmness of judgment, a correctness of taste, and an absence
of partisanship which are too frequently wanting in biographies, and
especially in political biographies.--_American Literary Churchman_
(Baltimore).
_JEFFERSON_. The book is exceedingly interesting and readable. The
attention of the reader is strongly seized at once, and he is carried
along in spite of himself, sometimes protesting, sometimes doubting, yet
unable to lay the book down.--_Chicago Standard_.
_WEBSTER_. It will be read by students of history; it will be invaluable
as a work of reference; it will be an authority as regards matters of
fact and criticism; it hits the keynote of Webster's durable and
ever-growing fame; it is adequate, calm, impartial; it is
admirable.--_Philadelphia Press_.
_GALLATIN_. It is one of the most carefully prepared of these very
valuable volumes, ... abounding in information not so readily accessible
as is that pertaining to men more often treated by the biographer....
The whole work covers a ground which the political student cannot afford
to neglect.--_Boston Correspondent Hartford Courant_.
_MADISON_. The execution of the work deserves the highest praise. It is
very readable, in a bright and vigorous style, and is marked by unity
and consecutiveness of plan.--_The Nation_ (New York).
_JOHN ADAMS_. A good piece of literary work.... It covers the ground
thoroughly, and gives just the sort of simple and succinct account that
is wanted.--_Evening Post_ (New York).
_MARSHALL_. Well done, with simplicity, clearness, precision, and
judgment, and in a spirit of moderation and equity. A valuable addition
to the series.--_New York Tribune_.
_SAMUEL ADAMS_. Thoroughly appreciative and sympathetic, yet fair and
critical.... This biography is a piece of good work--a clear and simple
presentation of a noble man and pure patriot; it is written in a spirit
of candor and humanity.--_Worcester Spy_.
_BENTON_. An interesting addition to our political literature, and will
be of great service if it spread an admiration for that austere public
morality which was one of the marked characteristics of its chief
figure.--_The Epoch_ (New York).
_CLAY_. We have in this life of Henry Clay a biography of one of the
most distinguished of American statesmen, and a political history of the
United States for the first half of the nineteenth century. In each of
these important and difficult undertakings, Mr. Schurz has been
eminently successful. Indeed, it is not too much to say that, for the
period covered, we have no other book which equals or begins to equal
this life of Henry Clay as an introduction to the study of American
politics.--_Political Science Quarterly_ (New York).
_HENRY_. Professor Tyler has not only made one of the best and most
readable of American biographies; he may fairly be said to have
reconstructed the life of Patrick Henry, and to have vindicated the
memory of that great man from the unappreciative and injurious estimate
which has been placed upon it.--_New York Evening Post_.
_MORRIS_. Mr. Roosevelt has produced an animated and intensely
interesting biographical volume.... Mr. Roosevelt never loses sight of
the picturesque background of politics, war-governments, and
diplomacy.--_Magazine of American History_ (New York).
_VAN BUREN_. No more generous, appreciative, or just biography, and no
more interesting or philosophical piece of political history has
appeared in this valuable series ... than this absorbing book.... To
give any adequate idea of the personal interest of the book, or its
intimate bearing on nearly the whole course of our political history
would be equivalent to quoting the larger part of it.--_Brooklyn Eagle_.
_WASHINGTON_. Mr. Lodge has written an admirable biography, and one
which cannot but confirm the American people in the prevailing estimate
concerning the Father of his Country; but its deepest and most important
significance appears to us to consist in its testimony to the exaltation
and the uniqueness of a character whose like comes seldom to the world,
and only in periods of great stress and crisis.--_New York Tribune_.
_FRANKLIN_. He has managed to condense the whole mass of matter gleaned
from all sources into his volume without losing in a single sentence the
freedom or lightness of his style or giving his book in any part the
crowded look of an epitome. He has plenty of time and plenty of room for
all he wishes to say, and says it in the very best and most interesting
manner.--_The Independent_ (New York).
*** _For sale by all Booksellers. Sent, post-paid, on receipt of price
by the Publishers_,
HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY, 4 PARK ST., BOSTON; 11 EAST 17TH ST., NEW
YORK.