CHAPTER IX

THE PERSONAL RULE OF JOHN ADAMS

The narrow majority by which John Adams was elected did not accurately

reflect the existing state of party strength. The electoral college

system, by its nature, was apt to distort the situation. Originally the

electors voted for two persons without designating their preference for

President. There was no inconvenience on that account while Washington was

a candidate, since he was the first choice of all the electors; but in

1796, with Washington out of the field, both parties were in the dilemma

that, if they voted solidly for two candidates, the vote of the electoral

college would not determine who should be President. To avert this

situation, the adherents of a presidential candidate would have to scatter

votes meant to have only vice-presidential significance. This explains the

wide distribution of votes that characterized the working of the system

until it was changed by the Twelfth Amendment adopted in 1804.

In 1796, the electoral college gave votes to thirteen candidates. The

Federalist ticket was John Adams and Thomas Pinckney of South Carolina.

Hamilton urged equal support of both as the surest way to defeat

Jefferson; but eighteen Adams electors in New England withheld votes from

Pinckney to make sure that he should not slip in ahead of Adams. Had they

not done so, Pinckney would have been chosen President, a possibility

which Hamilton foresaw because of Pinckney's popularity in the South. New

York, New Jersey, and Delaware voted solidly for Adams and Pinckney as

Hamilton had recommended, but South Carolina voted solidly for both

Jefferson and Pinckney, and moreover Pinckney received scattering votes

elsewhere in the South. The action of the Adams electors in New England

defeated Pinckney, and gave Jefferson the vice-presidency, the vote for

the leading candidates being 71 for Adams, 68 for Jefferson, and 59 for

Pinckney. The tendency of such conditions to inspire political feuds and

to foster factional animosity is quite obvious. This situation must be

borne in mind, in order to make intelligible the course of Adams's

administration.

Adams had an inheritance of trouble from the same source which had plagued

Washington's administration,--the efforts of revolutionary France to rule

the United States. In selecting Monroe to succeed Morris, Washington knew

that the former was as friendly to the French Revolution as Morris had

been opposed to it, and hence he hoped that Monroe would be able to impart

a more friendly feeling to the relations of the two countries. Monroe

arrived in Paris just after the fall of Robespierre. The Committee of

Public Safety then in possession of the executive authority hesitated to

receive him. Monroe wrote to the President of the National Convention then

sitting, and a decree was at once passed that the Minister of the United

States should "be introduced in the bosom of the Convention." Monroe

presented himself on August 15, 1794, and made a glowing address. He

descanted upon the trials by which America had won her independence and

declared that "France, our ally and friend, and who aided in the contest,

has now embarked in the same noble career." The address was received with

enthusiasm, the President of the Convention drew Monroe to his bosom in a

fraternal embrace; and it was decreed that "the flags of the United States

of America shall be joined to those of France, and displayed in the hall

of the sittings of the Convention, in sign of the union and eternal

fraternity of the two peoples." In compliance with this decree Monroe soon

after presented an American flag to the Convention.

When the news of these proceedings reached the State Department, a sharp

note was sent to Monroe "to recommend caution lest we be obliged at some

time or other to explain away or disavow an excess of fervor, so as to

reduce it down to the cool system of neutrality." The French Government

regarded the Jay treaty as an affront and as a violation of our treaties

with France. Many American vessels were seized and confiscated with their

cargoes, and hundreds of American citizens were imprisoned. Washington

thought that Monroe was entirely too submissive to such proceedings;

therefore, on August 22, 1796, Monroe was recalled and soon after Charles

Cotesworth Pinckney was appointed in his stead.

The representation of France in the United States had been as mutable as

her politics. Fauchet, who succeeded Genet, retired in June, 1795, and

was succeeded by Adet, who like his predecessors, carried on active

interference with American politics, and even attempted to affect the

presidential election by making public a note addressed to the Secretary

of State complaining of the behavior of the Administration. In Adams's

opinion this note had some adverse effect in Pennsylvania but no other

serious consequences, since it was generally resented. Meanwhile Pinckney

arrived in France in December, 1796, and the Directory refused to receive

him. He was not even permitted to remain in Paris; but honors were

showered upon Monroe as he took his leave. In March, 1797, Adet withdrew,

and diplomatic relations between the two countries were entirely

suspended. By a decree made two days before Adams took office, the

Directory proclaimed as pirates, to be treated without mercy, all

Americans found serving on board British vessels, and ordered the seizure

of all American vessels not provided with lists of their crews in proper

form. Though made under cover of the treaty of 1778, this latter provision

ran counter to its spirit and purpose. Captures of American ships began at

once. As Joel Barlow wrote, the decree of March 2, 1797, "was meant to be

little short of a declaration of war."

The curious situation which ensued from the efforts made by Adams to deal

with this emergency cannot be understood without reference to his personal

peculiarities. He was vain, learned, and self-sufficient, and he had the

characteristic defect of pedantry: he overrated intelligence and he

underrated character. Hence he was inclined to resent Washington's

eminence as being due more to fortune than to merit, and he had for

Hamilton an active hatred compounded of wounded vanity and a sense of

positive injury. He knew that Hamilton thought slightingly of his

political capacity and had worked against his political advancement, and

he was too lacking in magnanimity to do justice to Hamilton's motives. His

state of mind was well known to the Republican leaders, who hoped to be

able to use him. Jefferson wrote to Madison suggesting that "it would be

worthy of consideration whether it would not be for the public good to

come to a good understanding with him as to his future elections."

Jefferson himself called on Adams and showed himself desirous of cordial

relations. Mrs. Adams responded by expressions of pleasure at the success

of Jefferson, between whom and her husband, she said, there had never been

"any public or private animosity." Such rejoicing over the defeat of the

Federalist candidate for Vice-President did not promote good feeling

between the President and the Federalist leaders.

The morning before the inauguration, Adams called on Jefferson and

discussed with him the policy to be pursued toward France. The idea had

occurred to Adams that a good impression might be made by sending out a

mission of extraordinary weight and dignity, and he wanted to know whether

Jefferson himself would not be willing to head such a mission. Without

checking Adams's friendly overtures, Jefferson soon brought him to agree

that it would not be proper for the Vice-President to accept such a post.

Adams then proposed that Madison should go. On March 6, Jefferson reported

to Adams that Madison would not accept. Then for the first time, according

to Adams's own account, he consulted a member of his Cabinet, supposed to

be Wolcott although the name is not mentioned.

Adams took over Washington's Cabinet as it was finally constituted after

the retirement of Jefferson and Hamilton and the virtual expulsion of

Randolph. The process of change had made it entirely Federalist in its

political complexion, and entirely devoted to Washington and Hamilton in

its personal sympathies. That Adams should have adopted it as his own

Cabinet has been generally regarded as a blunder, but it was a natural

step for him to take. To get as capable men to accept the portfolios as

those then holding them would have been difficult, so averse had prominent

men become to putting themselves in a position to be harried by Congress,

with no effective means of explaining and justifying their conduct.

Congress then had a prestige which it does not now possess, and its

utterances then received consideration not now accorded. Whenever

presidential electors were voted for directly by the people, the poll was

small compared with the vote for members of Congress. Moreover, there was

then a feeling that the Cabinet should be regarded as a bureaucracy, and

for a long period this conception tended to give remarkable permanence to

its composition.

When the personal attachments of the Cabinet chiefs are considered, it is

easy to imagine the dismay and consternation produced by the dealings of

Adams with Jefferson. By the time Adams consulted the members of his

Cabinet, they had become suspicious of his motives and distrustful of his

character. Before long they were writing to Washington and Hamilton for

advice, and were endeavoring to manage Adams by concerted action. In this

course they had the cordial approval of leading Federalists, who would

write privately to members of the Cabinet and give counsel as to

procedure. Wolcott, a Federalist leader in Connecticut, warned his son,

the Secretary of the Treasury, that Adams was "a man of great vanity,

pretty capricious, of a very moderate share of prudence, and of far less

real abilities than he believes himself to possess," so that "it will

require a deal of address to render him the service which it will be

essential for him to receive."

The policy to be pursued was still unsettled when news came of the

insulting rejection of Pinckney and the domineering attitude assumed by

France. On March 25, Adams issued a call for the meeting of Congress on

May 15, and then set about getting the advice of his Cabinet. He presented

a schedule of interrogatories to which he asked written answers. The

attitude of the Cabinet was at first hostile to Adams's favorite notion of

a special mission, but as Hamilton counseled deference to the President's

views, the Cabinet finally approved the project. Adams appointed John

Marshall of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts to serve in

conjunction with Pinckney, who had taken refuge in Holland.

Strong support for the Government in taking a firm stand against France

was manifested in both Houses of Congress. Hamilton aided Secretary

Wolcott in preparing a scheme of taxation by which the revenue could be

increased to provide for national defense. With the singular fatality that

characterized Federalist party behavior throughout Adams's Administration,

however, all the items proposed were abandoned except one for stamp taxes.

What had been offered as a scheme whose particulars were justifiable by

their relation to the whole was converted into a measure which was

traditionally obnoxious in itself, and was now made freshly odious by an

appearance of discrimination and partiality. The Federalists did improve

their opportunity in the way of general legislation: much needed laws were

passed to stop privateering, to protect the ports, and to increase the

naval armament; and Adams was placed in a much better position to maintain

neutrality than Washington had been. Fear of another outbreak of yellow

fever accelerated the work of Congress, and the extra session lasted only

a little over three weeks.

Such was the slowness of communication in those days that, when Congress

reassembled at the regular session in November, no decisive news had

arrived of the fate of the special mission. Adams with proper prudence

thought it would be wise to consider what should be done in case of

failure. On January 24, 1798, he addressed to the members of his Cabinet a

letter requesting their views. No record is preserved of the replies of

the Secretaries of State and of the Treasury. Lee, the Attorney-General,

recommended a declaration of war. McHenry, the Secretary of War, offered a

series of seven propositions to be recommended to Congress: 1. Permission

to merchant ships to arm; 2. The construction of twenty sloops of war; 3.

The completion of frigates already authorized; 4. Grant to the President

of authority to provide ships of the line, not exceeding ten, "by such

means as he may judge best." 5. Suspension of the treaties with France; 6.

An army of sixteen thousand men, with provision for twenty thousand more

should occasion demand; 7. A loan and an adequate system of taxation.

These recommendations are substantially identical with those made by

Hamilton in a letter to Pickering, and the presumption is strong that

McHenry's paper is a product of Hamilton's influence, and that it had the

concurrence of Pickering and Wolcott. The suggestion that the President

should be given discretionary authority in the matter of procuring ships

of the line contemplated the possibility of obtaining them by transfer

from England, not through formal alliance but as an incident of a

coöperation to be arranged by negotiation, whose objects would also

include aid in placing a loan and permission for American ships to join

British convoys. This feature of McHenry's recommendations could not be

curried out Pickering soon informed Hamilton that the old animosities were

still so active "in some breasts" that the plan of cooperation was

impracticable.

Meanwhile the composite mission had accomplished nothing except to make

clear the actual character of French policy. When the envoys arrived in

France, the Directory had found in Napoleon Bonaparte an instrument of

power that was stunning Europe by its tremendous blows. That instrument

had not yet turned to the reorganization of France herself, and at the

time it served the rapacious designs of the Directory. Europe was looted

wherever the arms of France prevailed, and the levying of tribute both on

public and on private account was the order of the day. Talleyrand was the

Minister of Foreign Affairs, and he treated the envoys with a mixture of

menace and cajolery. It was a part of his tactics to sever the Republican

member, Gerry, from his Federalist colleagues. Gerry was weak enough to be

caught by Talleyrand's snare, and he was foolish enough to attribute the

remonstrances of his colleagues to vanity. "They were wounded," he wrote,

"by the manner in which they had been treated by the Government of France,

and the difference which had been used in respect to me." Gerry's conduct

served to weaken and delay the negotiations, but he eventually united with

his colleagues in a detailed report to the State Department, which was

transmitted to Congress by the President on April 3, 1798. In the original

the names of the French officials concerned were written at full length in

the Department cipher. In making a copy for Congress, Secretary Pickering

substituted for the names the terminal letters of the alphabet, and hence

the report has passed into history as the X.Y.Z. dispatches.

The story, in brief, was that on arriving in Paris the envoys called on

Talleyrand, who said that he was busy at that very time on a report to the

Directory on American affairs, and in a few days would let them know how

matters stood. A few days later they received notice through Talleyrand's

secretary that the Directory was greatly exasperated by expressions used

in President Adams's address to Congress, that the envoys would probably

not be received until further conference, and that persons might

be appointed to treat with them. A few more days elapsed, and then

three persons presented themselves as coming from Talleyrand. They

were Hottinguer, Bellamy, and Hauteval, designated as X.Y.Z. in the

communication to Congress. They said that a friendly reception by the

Directory could not be obtained unless the United States would assist

France by a loan, and that "a sum of money was required for the pocket of

the Directory and Ministers, which would be at the disposal of M.

Talleyrand." This "douceur to the Directory," amounting to approximately

$240,000, was urged with great persistence as an indispensable condition

of friendly relations. The envoys temporized and pointed out that their

Government would have to be consulted on the matter of the loan. The

wariness of the envoys made Talleyrand's agents the more insistent about

getting the "douceur." At one of the interviews Hottinguer exclaimed:--

"Gentlemen, you do not speak to the point; it is money; it is expected

that you will offer money." The envoys replied that on this point their

answer had already been given. "'No,' said he, 'you have not: what is your

answer?' We replied, 'It is no; no; not a sixpence.'" This part of the

envoys' report soon received legendary embellishment, and in innumerable

stump speeches it rang out as, "Not one cent for tribute; millions for

defense!"

The publication of the X.Y.Z. dispatches sent rolling through the country

a wave of patriotic feeling before which the Republican leaders quailed

and which swept away many of their followers. Jefferson held that the

French Government ought not to be held responsible for "the turpitude of

swindlers," and he steadfastly opposed any action looking to the use of

force to maintain American rights. Some of the Republican members of

Congress, however, went over to the Federalist side, and Jefferson's party

was presently reduced to a feeble and dispirited minority. Loyal addresses

rained upon Adams. There appeared a new national song, _Hail Columbia_,

which was sung all over the land and which was established in lasting

popularity. Among its well-known lines is an exulting stanza beginning:

"Behold the chief who now commands,

Once more to serve his country stands."

This is an allusion to the fact that Washington had left his retirement to

take charge of the national forces. The envoys had been threatened that,

unless they submitted to the French demands, the American Republic might

share the fate of the Republic of Venice. The response of Congress

was to vote money to complete the frigates, the _United States_, the

_Constitution_, and the _Constellation_, work on which had been suspended

when the Algerine troubles subsided; and further, to authorize the

construction or purchase of twelve additional vessels. For the management

of this force, the Navy Department was created by the Act of April 30,

1798. By an Act of May 28, the President was authorized to raise a

military force of ten thousand men, the commander of which should have the

services of "a suitable number of major-generals." On July 7, the treaties

with France that had so long vexed the United States were abrogated.

The operations of the Navy Department soon showed that American sailors

were quite able and willing to defend the nation if they were allowed the

opportunity. In December, 1798, the Navy Department worked out a plan of

operations in the enemy's waters. To repress the depredations of the

French privateers in the West Indies, a squadron commanded by Captain John

Barry was sent to cruise to the windward of St. Kitts as far south as

Barbados, and it made numerous captures. A squadron under Captain Thomas

Truxtun cruised in the vicinity of Porto Rico. The flagship was the

frigate _Constellation_, which on February 9, 1799, encountered the French

frigate, _L'Insurgente_, and made it strike its flag after an action

lasting only an hour and seventeen minutes. The French captain fought

well, but he was put at a disadvantage by losing his topmast at the

opening of the engagement, so that Captain Truxtun was able to take a

raking position. The American loss was only one killed and three wounded,

while _L'Insurgente_ had twenty-nine killed and forty-one wounded. On

February 1, 1800, the _Constellation_ fought the heavy French frigate

_Vengeance_ from about eight o'clock in the evening until after midnight,

when the _Vengeance_ lay completely silenced and apparently helpless. But

the rigging and spars of the _Constellation_ had been so badly cut up that

the mainmast fell, and before the wreck could be cleared away the

_Vengeance_ was able to make her escape. During the two years and a half

in which hostilities continued, the little navy of the United States

captured eighty-five armed French vessels, nearly all privateers. Only one

American war vessel was taken by the enemy, and that one had been

originally a captured French vessel. The value of the protection thus

extended to American trade is attested by the increase of exports from

$57,000,000 in 1797 to $78,665,528 in 1799. Revenue from imports increased

from $6,000,000 in 1797 to $9,080,932 in 1800.

The creation of an army, however, was attended by personal disagreements

that eventually wrecked the Administration. Without waiting to hear from

Washington as to his views, Adams nominated him for the command and then

tried to overrule his arrangements. The notion that Washington could be

hustled into a false position was a strange blunder to be made by anyone

who knew him. He set forth his views and made his stipulations with his

customary precision, in letters to Secretary McHenry, who had been

instructed by Adams to obtain Washington's advice as to the list of

officers. Washington recommended as major-generals, Hamilton, C.C.

Pinckney, and Knox, in that order of rank. Adams made some demur to the

preference shown for Hamilton, but McHenry showed him Washington's letter

and argued the matter so persistently that Adams finally sent the

nominations to the Senate in the same order as Washington had requested.

Confirmation promptly followed, and a few days later Adams departed for

his home at Quincy, Massachusetts, without notice to his Cabinet. It soon

appeared that he was in the sulks. When McHenry wrote to him about

proceeding with the organization of the army, he replied that he was

willing provided Knox's precedence was acknowledged, and he added that the

five New England States would not patiently submit to the humiliation of

having Knox's claim disregarded.

From August 4 to October 13, wrangling over this matter went on. The

members of the Cabinet were in a difficult position. It was their

understanding that Washington's stipulations had been accepted, but the

President now proposed a different arrangement. Pickering and McHenry

wrote to Washington explaining the situation in detail. News of the

differences between Adams and Washington of course soon got about and

caused a great buzz in political circles. Adams became angry over the

opposition he was meeting, and on August 29 he wrote to McHenry

that "there has been too much intrigue in this business, both with

General Washington and with me"; that it might as well be understood that

in any event he would have the last say, "and I shall then determine it

exactly as I should now, Knox, Pinckney, and Hamilton." Washington stood

firm and, on September 25, wrote to the President demanding "that he might

know at once and precisely what he had to expect." In reply Adams said

that he had signed the three commissions on the same day in the hope "that

an amicable adjustment or acquiescence might take place among the

gentlemen themselves." But should this hope be disappointed, "and

controversies shall arise, they will of course be submitted to you as

commander-in-chief."

Adams, of course, knew quite well that such matters did not settle

themselves, but he seems to have imagined that all he had to do was to sit

tight and that matters would have to come his way. The tricky and

shuffling behavior to which he descended would be unbelievable of a man of

his standing were there not an authentic record made by himself. The

suspense finally became so intolerable that the Cabinet acted without

consulting the President any longer on the point. The Secretary of War

submitted to his colleagues all the correspondence in the case and asked

their advice. The Secretaries of State, of the Treasury, and of the Navy

made a joint reply declaring "the only inference which we can draw

from the facts before stated, is, that the President consents to the

arrangement of rank as proposed by General Washington," and that therefore

"the Secretary of War ought to transmit the commissions, and inform the

generals that in his opinion the rank is definitely settled according to

the original arrangement." This was done; but Knox declined an appointment

ranking him below Hamilton and Pinckney. Thus, Adams despite his

obstinacy, was completely baffled, and a bitter feud between him and his

Cabinet was added to the causes now at work to destroy the Federalist

party.

The Federalist military measures were sound and judicious, and the

expense, although a subject of bitter denunciation, was really trivial

in comparison with the national value of the enhanced respect and

consideration obtained for American interests. But these measures were

followed by imprudent acts for regulating domestic politics. By the Act of

June 18,1798, the period of residence required before an alien could be

admitted to American citizenship was raised from five years to fourteen.

By the Act of June 25, 1798, the efficacy of which was limited to two

years, the President might send out of the country "such aliens as he

shall judge dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, or

shall have reasonable grounds to suspect are concerned in any treasonable

or secret machinations against the government thereof." The state of

public opinion might then have sanctioned these measures had they stood

alone, but they were connected with another which proved to be the weight

that pulled them all down. By the Act of July 14, 1798, it was made a

crime to write or publish "any false, scandalous, and malicious"

statements about the President or either House of Congress, to bring them

"into contempt or disrepute," or to "stir up sedition within the United

States."

There were plenty of precedents in English history for legislation of such

character. Robust examples of it were supplied in England at that very

time. There were also strong colonial precedents. According to Secretary

Wolcott, the sedition law was "merely a copy from a statute of Virginia in

October, 1776." But a revolutionary Whig measure aimed at Tories was a

very different thing in its practical aspect from the same measure used by

a national party against a constitutional opposition. Hamilton regarded

such legislation as impolitic, and, on hearing of the sedition bill, he

wrote a protesting letter, saying, "Let us not establish tyranny. Energy

is a very different thing from violence."

But in general the Federalist leaders were so carried away by the

excitement of the times that they could not practice moderation. Their

zealotry was sustained by political theories which made no distinction

between partisanship and sedition. The constitutional function of

partisanship was discerned and stated by Burke in 1770, but his definition

of it, as a joint endeavor to promote the national interest upon some

particular principle, was scouted at the time and was not allowed until

long after. The prevailing idea in Washington's time, both in England and

America, was that partisanship was inherently pernicious and ought to be

suppressed. Washington's _Farewell Address_ warned the people "in the most

solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party." The

idea then was that government was wholly the affair of constituted

authority, and that it was improper for political activity to surpass the

appointed bounds. Newspaper criticism and partisan oratory were among the

things in Washington's mind when he censured all attempts "to direct,

control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the

constituted authorities." Hence judges thought it within their province to

denounce political agitators when charging a grand jury. Chief Justice

Ellsworth, in a charge delivered in Massachusetts, denounced "the French

system-mongers, from the quintumvirate at Paris to the Vice-President and

minority in Congress, as apostles of atheism and anarchy, bloodshed, and

plunder." In charges delivered in western Pennsylvania, Judge Addison

dealt with such subjects as Jealousy of Administration and Government, and

the Horrors of Revolution. Washington, then in private life, was so

pleased with the series that he sent a copy to friends for circulation.

Convictions under the sedition law were few, but there were enough of them

to cause great alarm. A Jerseyman, who had expressed a wish that the wad

of a cannon, fired as a salute to the President, had hit him on the rear

bulge of his breeches, was fined $100. Matthew Lyon of Vermont, while

canvassing for reëlection to Congress, charged the President with

"unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and a selfish

avarice." This language cost him four months in jail and a fine of $1000.

But in general the law did not repress the tendencies at which it was

aimed but merely increased them.

The Republicans, too weak to make an effective stand in Congress, tried to

interpose state authority. Jefferson drafted the Kentucky Resolutions,

adopted by the state legislature in November, 1798. They hold that the

Constitution is a compact to which the States are parties, and that "each

party has an equal right to judge for itself as well of infractions as of

the mode and measure of redress." The alien and sedition laws were

denounced, and steps were proposed by which protesting States "will concur

in declaring these Acts void and of no force, and will each take measures

of its own for providing that neither these Acts, nor any others of the

general Government, not plainly and intentionally authorized by the

Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories." The

Virginia Resolutions, adopted in December, 1798, were drafted by Madison.

They view "the powers of the federal Government as resulting from the

compact to which the States are parties," and declare that, if those

powers are exceeded, the States "have the right and are in duty bound to

interpose." This doctrine was a vial of woe to American politics until it

was cast down and shattered on the battlefield of civil war. It was

invented for a partisan purpose, and yet was entirely unnecessary for that

purpose.

The Federalist party as then conducted was the exponent of a theory of

government that was everywhere decaying. The alien and sedition laws were

condemned and discarded by the forces of national politics, and state

action was as futile in effect as it was mischievous in principle. It

diverted the issue in a way that might have ultimately turned to the

advantage of the Federalist party, had it possessed the usual power of

adaptation to circumstances. After all, there was no reason inherent

in the nature of that party why it should not have perpetuated its

organization and repaired its fortunes by learning how to derive authority

from public opinion. The needed transformation of character would have

been no greater than has often been accomplished in party history. Indeed,

there is something abnormal in the complete prostration and eventual

extinction of the Federalist party; and the explanation is to be found in

the extraordinary character of Adams's administration. It gave such

prominence and energy to individual aims and interests that the party was

rent to pieces by them.

In communicating the X.Y.Z. dispatches to Congress, Adams declared: "I

will never send another Minister to France without assurance that he will

be received, respected, and honored, as the representative of a great,

free, powerful, and independent nation." But on receiving an authentic

though roundabout intimation that a new mission would have a friendly

reception, he concluded to dispense with direct assurances, and, without

consulting his Cabinet, sent a message to the Senate on February 18, 1799,

nominating Murray, then American Minister to Holland, to be Minister to

France. This unexpected action stunned the Federalists and delighted the

Republicans as it endorsed the position they had always taken that war

talk was folly and that France was ready to be friendly if America would

treat her fairly. "Had the foulest heart and the ablest head in the

world," wrote Senator Sedgwick to Hamilton, "been permitted to select the

most embarrassing and ruinous measure, perhaps it would have been

precisely the one which has been adopted." Hamilton advised that

"the measure must go into effect with the additional idea of a commission

of three." The committee of the Senate to whom the nomination was referred

made a call upon Adams to inquire his reasons. According to Adams's own

account, they informed him that a commission would be more satisfactory to

the Senate and to the public. According to Secretary Pickering, Adams was

asked to withdraw the nomination and refused, but a few days later, on

hearing that the committee intended to report against confirmation, he

sent in a message nominating Chief Justice Ellsworth and Patrick Henry,

together with Murray, as envoys extraordinary. The Senate, much to Adams's

satisfaction, promptly confirmed the nominations, but this was because

Hamilton's influence had smoothed the way. Patrick Henry declined, and

Governor Davie of North Carolina was substituted. By the time this

mission reached France, Napoleon Bonaparte was in power and the envoys

were able to make an acceptable settlement of the questions at issue

between the two countries. The event came too late to be of service to

Adams in his campaign for reëlection, but it was intensely gratifying to

his self-esteem.

Some feelers were put forth to ascertain whether Washington could not be

induced to be a candidate again, but the idea had hardly developed before

all hopes in that quarter were abruptly dashed by his death on December

14, 1799, from a badly treated attack of quinsy. Efforts to substitute

some other candidate for Adams proved unavailing, as New England still

clung to him on sectional grounds. News of these efforts of course reached

Adams and increased his bitterness against Hamilton, whom he regarded as

chiefly responsible for them. Adams had a deep spite against members of

his Cabinet for the way in which they had foiled him about Hamilton's

commission, but for his own convenience in routine matters he had retained

them, although debarring them from his confidence. In the spring of 1800

he decided to rid himself of men whom he regarded as "Hamilton's spies."

The first to fall was McHenry, whose resignation was demanded on May 5,

1800, after an interview in which--according to McHenry--Adams reproached

him with having "biased General Washington to place Hamilton in his list

of major-generals before Knox." Pickering refused to resign, and he was

dismissed from office on May 12. John Marshall became the Secretary of

State, and Samuel Dexter of Massachusetts, Secretary of War. Wolcott

retained the Treasury portfolio until the end of the year, when he

resigned of his own motion.

The events of the summer of 1800 completed the ruin of the Federalist

party. That Adams should have been so indifferent to the good will of his

party at a time when he was a candidate for reëlection is a remarkable

circumstance. A common report among the Federalists was that he was no

longer entirely sane. A more likely supposition was that he was influenced

by some of the Republican leaders and counted on their political support.

In biographies of Gerry it is claimed that he was able to accomplish

important results through his influence with Adams. At any rate, Adams

gave unrestrained expression to his feelings against Hamilton, and finally

Hamilton was aroused to action. On August 1, 1800, he wrote to Adams

demanding whether it was true that Adams had "asserted the existence of a

British faction in this country" of which Hamilton himself was said to be

a leader. Adams did not reply. Hamilton waited until October 1, and then

wrote again, affirming "that by whomsoever a charge of the kind mentioned

in my former letter, may, at any time, have been made or insinuated

against me, it is a base, wicked, and cruel calumny; destitute even of a

plausible pretext, to excuse the folly, or mask the depravity which must

have dictated it."

Hamilton, always sensitive to imputations upon his honor, was not

satisfied to allow the matter to rest there. He wrote a detailed account

of his relations with Adams, involving an examination of Adams's public

conduct and character, which he privately circulated among leading

Federalists. It is an able paper, fully displaying Hamilton's power of

combining force of argument with dignity of language, but although

exhibiting Adams as unfit for his office it advised support of his

candidacy. Burr obtained a copy and made such use of parts of it that

Hamilton himself had to publish it in full.

In this election the candidate associated with Adams by the Federalists

was Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina. Though one Adams

elector in Rhode Island cut Pinckney, he would still have been elected had

the electoral votes of his own State been cast for him as they had been

for Thomas Pinckney, four years before; but South Carolina now voted

solidly for both Republican candidates. The result of the election

was a tie between Jefferson and Burr, each receiving 73 votes, while Adams

received 65 and Pinckney 64. The election was thus thrown into the

House, where some of the Federalists entered into an intrigue to give Burr

the Presidency instead of Jefferson, but this scheme was defeated largely

through Hamilton's influence. He wrote: "If there be a man in this

world I ought to hate, it is Jefferson. With Burr I have always been

personally well. But the public good must be paramount to every private

consideration."

The result of the election was a terrible blow to Adams. His vanity was so

hurt that he could not bear to be present at the installation of his

successor, and after working almost to the stroke of midnight signing

appointments to office for the defeated Federalists, he drove away from

Washington in the early morning before the inauguration ceremonies began.

Eventually he soothed his self-esteem by associating his own trials and

misfortunes with those endured by classical heroes. He wrote that

Washington, Hamilton, and Pinckney formed a triumvirate like that of

Antony, Octavius, and Lepidus, and "that Cicero was not sacrificed to the

vengeance of Antony more egregiously than John Adams was to the unbridled

and unbounded ambition of Alexander Hamilton in the American triumvirate."

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Abundant materials are available for the period covered by this work.

Chief among them are the Annals of Congress, the State Papers, and the

writings of statesmen to be found in any library index under their names.

The style maintained by Washington early became a subject of party

controversy and to this may be attributed a noticeable variation in

accounts given by different authors. For instance, Washington Irving, who

as a child witnessed the first inauguration parade, says in his _Life of

Washington_ that the President's coach "was drawn by a single pair of

horses." But the detailed account given in the _New York Packet_ of May 1,

1789, the day after the ceremony, says that "the President joined the

procession in his carriage and four." The following authorities may be

consulted on the point:

B.J. Lossing, article in _The Independent_, vol. xli, April 25, 1889.

Martha J. Lamb, article in _Magazine of American History_, vol. xx,

December, 1888.

For details of official etiquette during Washington's administration, the

following may be consulted:

GEORGE WASHINGTON, _Diary_, from 1789 to 1791. Edited by B.J. Lossing

(1860).

WILLIAM MACLAY, _Journal_, 1789-1791 (1890).

GEORGE W. P. CUSTIS, _Memoirs of Washington_ (1859).

JAMES G. WILSON, _The Memorial History of New York_ (1893).

ANNE HOLLINGSWORTH WHARTON, _Martha Washington_ (1897).

Works of special importance for their documentary matter and for their

exhibition of the personal aspect of events are:

J. C. HAMILTON, _History of the Republic of the United States_, 7 vols.

(1860).

H. S. RANDALL, _Life of Thomas Jefferson_, 3 vols. (1858).

GEORGE GIBBS, _Administrations of Washington and John Adams_, 2 vols.

(1846).

Some economic aspects of the struggle over Hamilton's financial measures

are exhibited by:

CHARLES A. BEARD, _Economic Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy_ (1915).

New light has been cast upon Genet's mission, causing a great change in

estimates of his character and activities, by materials drawn from the

French archives by Professor F.J. Turner, and presented in the following

articles:

"The Origin of Genet's Projected Attack on Louisiana and the Floridas,"

_American Historical Review_, vol. iii.

"The Policy of France toward the Mississippi Valley," _American Historical

Review_, vol. x.

"The Diplomatic Contest for the Mississippi Valley," _Atlantic Monthly_,

vol. xciii.

Further references will be found appended to the articles on _Washington,

Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Jay_, and _John Adams_ in _The Encyclopaedia

Britannica_, 11th Edition.

INDEX

Adams, John, favors making government impressive through ceremony,

attitude toward Genet affair, reelected Vice-president, elected

President, personal characteristics, relations with Jefferson, Cabinet,

defeat at election of 1800,

Addison, Alexander, Judge,

Algiers, relations with, treaty with,

Alien and Sedition laws,

Ames, Fisher, of Massachusetts,

Bacri, the Jew,

Barclay, Thomas,

Baldwin, Abraham, of Georgia,

Barlow, Joel,

Barry, John, Captain,

Beard, C.A., _Economic Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy_, Benson, Egbert,

of New York,

Boudinot, Elias, of New Jersey,

Bradford, William, of Rhode Island,

Burke, Edanus, of South Carolina,

Burr, Aaron,

Butler, Pierce, of South Carolina,

Cabinet, President's, a development after Washington's administration,

status of,

Campbell, William, Major,

Carmichael, William,

Church, Edward, U. S. consul at Lisbon,

Clark, Abraham, of New Jersey,

Clark, George Rogers,

Clinton, George, of New York,

_Constellation_, The, ship,

_Constitution_, The, ship,

Constitutional amendments adopted,

_Daily Advertizer_,

_Dauphin_, The, ship,

Dayton, Jonathan, of New Jersey,

Dexter, Samuel, of Massachusetts,

District of Columbia, exact site to be selected by the President,

Ellsworth, Oliver, of Connecticut,

Federal Hall,

_Federalist_,

Federalist party,

Finance, National, Tariff bill, debt of United States (1790), Assumption

bill, national bank established, mint established,

Fishbourn, Benjamin,

Fitzsimmons, Thomas, of Pennsylvania,

France, relations with United States, treaties of 1778, representation in

United States, special mission to, treaties abrogated (1798), maritime

troubles with, second mission to,

Fraunces, A.G.,

Freneau, Philip, editor of _National Gazette_,

Genet, Edmond, appointed French minister to United States; a trained

diplomatist, audacious mission, reception in United States, policy

toward Louisiana, argues for treaty rights, public opinion for, arrest

by French Government, success, United States becomes his asylum,

bibliography,

Germantown, Proposal to place capital at,

Gerry, Elbridge, of Massachusetts,

Giles, W.B., of Virginia,

_Grange_, The, ship,

Grayson, William, of Virginia,

Great Britain, lays down contraband regulations, retains Western posts in

America, treaty with (1795),

Greenville, Treaty of (1795),

Gwinnett, Button,

_Hail Columbia_,

Hamilton, Alexander, personal appearance, aid in finance sought by

Washington, advises Washington as to deportment, appointed Secretary of

Treasury, rivalry between Madison and, opinion as to establishment of

courts, report to Congress (1790), stand on the question of security of

transfer, interest in site for national capital, report on manufactures,

appreciation of, author of interrogatories to the cabinet (1793),

opinion on French treaty obligations; stands against Jefferson, calmness

in regard to Genet affair, "Pacificus,", "No Jacobin,", resigns as

Secretary of Treasury (1793), party warfare against, requests a Treasury

investigation, opinion as to enforcing law, remains trusted adviser,

aids Wolcott in preparing scheme of taxation, appointed major-general,

relations with Adams, bibliography,

Hammond, George, British minister to United States,

Hancock, John,

Harmar, Josiah, Lieutenant-Colonel,

Hazard, Ebenezer, Postmaster-General,

Henry, Patrick,

Humphreys, David, Colonel,

Indian troubles in the West,

Jackson, Andrew,

Jackson, James, of Georgia,

Jay, John, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, appointed envoy extraordinary to

Great Britain (1794), mission to England, elected Governor of New York,

Jay treaty, terms of, agitation over, French attitude toward,

Jefferson, Thomas, appointed Secretary of State, attitude on question of

assumption of state debts, importance of public service, report on the

Algerine question, as minister to Paris, opinion on French treaty

obligations, "The Anas," disturbs the administration, resigns as

Secretary of State (1793), for the principle "free ships, free goods,"

opponent of Hamilton, drafts Kentucky Resolutions (1798), elected

President, bibliography,

Johnson, Thomas, of Maryland,

Jones, John Paul, Admiral,

Judiciary, Establishment of the,

Kentucky Resolutions,

Knox, Henry, Secretary of War since 1785, Secretary of War and of the

Navy, submits plan for militia, supports Hamilton in question of treaty

obligations, recommended as major-general by Washington, question of

precedence of rank, declines appointment,

_La Carmagnole_, ship,

_L'Ambuscade_, ship,

_L'Ami de la Point à Petre_, ship,

_La Montagne_, ship,

_L'Amour de la Liberté_, ship,

_La Vengeance_, ship,

_Le Cassius_, ship,

_Le Citoyen Genet_, ship,

Lee, Arthur,

Lee, Charles, of Virginia,

Lee, R.H., of Virginia,

l'Enfant, P.C.,

_Le Petit Démocrate_, ship,

_L'Espérance_, ship,

_Le Vainqueur de Bastille_, ship,

_Little Sarah_, ship,

Livermore, Samuel, of New Hampshire,

Livingston, Walter,

Louisiana territory,

McGillivray, Alexander, Head chief of the Creeks,

McHenry, James, of Maryland,

McIntosh, Lachlan,

Maclay, William, of Pennsylvania, Diary of,

Madison, James, cooperates with Hamilton in government organization,

personal appearance, introduces scheme for raising revenue, upholds

President's power of removal, acts as advisor to Washington, opinion

as to system of federal courts, stand on question of security of

transfer, opinion on creation of a navy, "Helvidius," attitude toward

non-intercourse, drafts Virginia Resolutions (1798),

Marshall, John, opinion on neutrality of United States (1793), appointed

commissioner to France, becomes Secretary of State,

Military preparedness, Policy of,

Monroe, James,

Morris, Gouverneur,

Morris, Robert,

Moultrie, William, General,

Murray, W.V., Minister to Holland,

Napoleon Bonaparte,

_National Gazette_,

Naval policy of the United States,

Neutrality, Question of (1793),

New York, desires to be capital of nation, Washington's home in,

Nicholas, W.C., of Virginia,

Non-intercourse bill,

North Carolina admitted to the Union (1789),

O'Brien Richard, Captain,

O'Fallon, James, Dr.,

Osgood, Samuel, Postmaster-General,

Page, John, of Virginia,

Paine, Thomas,

Paterson, William, of New Jersey,

Philadelphia club,

Pickering, Timothy of Massachusetts,

Pinckney, C.C.,

Pinckney, Thomas,

President of the United States, social position and duties, official

title, power of removal by,

Putnam, Rufus, General,

Randolph, Edmund, appointed Attorney-General, opinion on question of

French treaty obligations, divides influence between factions in

cabinet, transferred to State Department, letter to Washington,

opinion as to enforcing law, applies to French minister for funds,

retires,

Republican party,

Residence act,

Rhode Island admitted to the Union (1790),

St. Clair, Arthur, General,

_Sans Pareil_, ship,

Sedgwick, Theodore, of Massachusetts,

Senate, privy council function of,

Short, William,

Smith, Samuel, of Maryland,

Smith, William, of South Carolina,

Spain, Treaty with (1795),

Stone, M.J., of Maryland,

Story, Joseph, Justice,

Talleyrand,

Tariff, _see_ Finance.

Taylor, John,

Treasury Department, established by Congress, rights and duties of

Secretary defined, Secretary's report,

Trenton, proposal to place capital at,

Truxtun, Thomas, Captain,

_United States_, The, ship

Virginia Resolutions

Wadsworth, Jeremiah, of Connecticut

War Department, Opposition to

Washington, George, reluctant to reassume public responsibilities,

installed as President (1789), personal characteristics; his

magnificence, his levees; first message to Congress; first cabinet,

message to Senate (1789), differences with the Senate, tours,

church-going habits, receives news of St. Clair's defeat, concern about

Genet affair, opinion as to validity of French treaty, dependence upon

Hamilton, address of Dec. 3, 1793, reëlected President, party spirit

against, Farewell Address (1796), death (1799), bibliography,

Washington, Martha, arrival in New York, her entertainments

Wayne, Anthony, General

West Indies, trade with

Whiskey insurrection,

White, Alexander, of Virginia

Willett, Marinus, Colonel

Wolcott, Oliver, of Connecticut

"X.Y.Z." dispatches

Washington and his colleagues; a chronicle of the rise and fall of federalism · 第 9 / 9 章