1 Massachusetts Historical Society, vol. 11., p. 171.

How can this ignorance of an astute man, Secretary of State under

Washington and Adams, be explained? Had Washington hidden the letters

showing on their face that he _had_ "officially interposed" for Paine by

two Ministers?

Madison, writing to Monroe, April 7, 1796, says that Pickering had

spoken to him "in harsh terms" of a letter written by Paine to the

President. This was a private letter of September 20, 1795, afterwards

printed in Paine's public Letter to Washington. The Secretary certainly

read that letter on its arrival, January 18, 1796, and yet Washington

does not appear to have told him of what had been officially done in

Paine's case! Such being the secrecy which Washington had carried from

the camp to the cabinet, and the morbid extent of it while the British

Treaty was in negotiation and discussion, one can hardly wonder at his

silence under Paine's private appeal and public reproach.

Much as Pickering hated Paine, he declares him the only man who ever

told the simple truth about Washington. In the lapse of time historical

research, while removing the sacred halo of Washington, has revealed

beneath it a stronger brain than was then known to any one. Paine

published what many whispered, while they were fawning on Washington for

office, or utilizing his power for partisan ends. Washington, during his

second administration, when his mental decline was remarked by

himself, by Jefferson, and others, was regarded by many of his eminent

contemporaries as fallen under the sway of small partisans. Not only

was the influence of Jefferson, Madison, Randolph, Monroe, Livingston,

alienated, but the counsels of Hamilton were neutralized by Wolcott and

Pickering, who apparently agreed about the President's "mental powers."

Had not Paine previously incurred the _odium theologicum_, his pamphlet

concerning Washington would have been more damaging; even as it was, the

verdict was by no means generally favorable to the President, especially

as the replies to Paine assumed that Washington had indeed failed to

try and rescue him from impending death.(1) A pamphlet written by Bache,

printed anonymously (1797), Remarks occasioned by the late conduct of

Mr. Washington, indicates the belief of those who raised Washington to

power, that both Randolph and Paine had been sacrificed to please Great

Britain.

The _Bien-informe_ (Paris, November 12, 1797) published a letter from

Philadelphia, which may find translation here as part of the history of

the pamphlet:

"The letter of Thomas Paine to General Washington is read here with

avidity. We gather from the English papers that the Cabinet of St James

has been unable to stop the circulation of that pamphlet in England,

since it is allowable to reprint there any English work already

published elsewhere, however disagreeable to Messrs. Pitt and Dundas.

We read in the letter to Washington that Robespierre had declared to

the Committee of Public Safety that it was desirable in the interests

of both France and America that Thomas Paine, who, for seven or eight

months had been kept a prisoner in the Luxembourg, should forthwith be

brought up for judgment before the revolutionary tribunal. The proof of

this fact is found in Robespierre's papers, and gives ground for strange

suspicions."

1 The principal ones were "A Letter to Thomas Paine. By an

American Citizen. New York, 1797," and "A Letter to the

infamous Tom Paine, in answer to his Letter to General

Washington. December 1796. By Peter Porcupine" (Cobbett).

Writing to David Stuart, January 8,1797, Washington,

speaking of himself in the third person, says: "Although

he is soon to become a private citizen, his opinions are to

be knocked down, and his character traduced as low as they

are capable of sinking it, even by resorting to absolute

falsehoods. As an evidence whereof, and of the plan they are

pursuing, I send you a letter of Mr. Paine to me, printed in

this city and disseminated with great industry. Enclosed you

will receive also a production of Peter Porcupine, alias

William Cobbett. Making allowances for the asperity of an

Englishman, for some of his strong and coarse expressions,

and a want of official information as to many facts, it is

not a bad thing." The "many facts" were, of course, the

action of Monroe, and the supposed action of Morris in

Paris, but not even to one so intimate as Stuart are these

disclosed.

"It was long believed that Paine had returned to America with his friend

James Monroe, and the lovers of freedom [there] congratulated themselves

on being able to embrace that illustrious champion of the Rights of Man.

Their hopes have been frustrated. We know positively that Thomas Paine

is still living in France. The partizans of the late presidency [in

America] also know it well, yet they have spread a rumor that after

actually arriving he found his (really popular) _principles no longer

the order of the day_, and thought best to re-embark.

"The English journals, while repeating this idle rumor, observed that it

was unfounded, and that Paine had not left France. Some French journals

have copied these London paragraphs, but without comments; so that at

the very moment when Thomas Paine's Letter on the 18th. Fructidor is

published, _La Clef du Cabinet_ says that this citizen is suffering

unpleasantness in America."

Paine had intended to return with Monroe, in the spring of 1797, but,

suspecting the Captain and a British cruiser in the distance, returned

from Havre to Paris. The packet was indeed searched by the cruiser

for Paine, and, had he been captured, England would have executed the

sentence pronounced by Robespierre to please Washington.

The Writings Of Thomas Paine, Volume III. 1791-1804 · 第 102 / 189 题