use all the means in their power for restoring prizes of this last
description, found within their ports. Though they will, of course, take
measures to be informed of them, and the General Government has given
them the aid of the Custom House officers for this purpose, yet you
will be sensible of the importance of multiplying the channels of their
information, as far as shall depend on yourself or any person under your
direction, in order that the government may use the means in their power,
for making restitution. Without knowledge of the capture, they cannot
restore it. It will always be best to give the notice to them directly;
but any information which you shall be pleased to send to me also, at any
time, shall be forwarded to them as quickly as the distance will permit.
Hence you will perceive, Sir, that the President contemplates restitution
or _compensation_, in the cases _before_ the seventh of August, and,
_after_ that date, _restitution_, if it can be effected by any means in
our power; and that it will be important that you should substantiate the
fact that such prizes are in our ports or waters.
Your list of the privateers illicitly armed in our ports, is, I believe,
correct.
With respect to losses by detention, waste, spoliation, sustained by
vessels taken as before mentioned between the dates of June the 5th
and August the 7th, it is proposed, as a provisional measure, that the
collector of the customs of the district, and the British consul, or any
other person you please, shall appoint persons to establish the value of
the vessel and cargo, at the times of her capture and of her arrival in
the port into which she is brought, according to their value in that port.
If this shall be agreeable to you, and you will be pleased to signify it
to me, with the names of the prizes understood to be of this description,
instructions will be given accordingly, to the collectors of the customs
where the respective vessels are.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and
most humble servant.
TO MR. PINCKNEY.
PHILADELPHIA, September 7, 1793.
SIR,--We have received, through a channel which cannot be considered as
authentic, the copy of a paper, styled "Additional Instructions to the
Commanders of his Majesty's Ships of War and Privateers," &c., dated
at St. James's, June 8, 1793. If this paper be authentic, I have little
doubt but that you will have taken measures to forward it to me. But as
your communication of it may miscarry, and time in the mean will be lost,
it has been thought better that it should be supposed authentic; that on
that supposition I should notice to you its very exceptionable nature, and
the necessity of obtaining explanations on the subject from the British
government; desiring at the same time, that you will consider this letter
as provisionally written only, and as if never written, in the event that
the paper which is the occasion of it be not genuine.
The first article of it permits all vessels, laden wholly or in part
with corn, flour or meal, bound to any port in France, to be stopped and
sent into any British port, to be purchased by that government, or to
be released only on the condition of security given by the master, that
he will proceed to dispose of his cargo in the ports of some country _in
amity with his Majesty_.
This article is so manifestly contrary to the law of nations, that nothing
more would seem necessary than to observe that it is so. Reason and usage
have established that when two nations go to war, those who choose to
live in peace retain their natural right to pursue their agriculture,
manufactures, and other ordinary vocations, to carry the produce of their
industry for exchange to all nations, belligerent or neutral, as usual,
to go and come freely without injury or molestation, and in short, that
the war among others shall be, for them, as if it did not exist. One
restriction on their natural rights has been submitted to by nations at
peace, that is to say, that of not furnishing to either party implements
merely of war for the annoyance of the other, nor anything whatever to a
place blockaded by its enemy. What these implements of war are, has been
so often agreed and is so well understood as to leave little question
about them at this day. There does not exist, perhaps, a nation in our
common hemisphere, which has not made a particular enumeration of them in
some or all of their treaties, under the name of contraband. It suffices
for the present occasion, to say, that corn, flour and meal, are not
of the class of contraband, and consequently remain articles of free
commerce. A culture which, like that of the soil, gives employment to such
a proportion of mankind, could never be suspended by the whole earth, or
interrupted for them, whenever any two nations should think proper to go
to war.
The state of war then existing between Great Britain and France, furnishes
no legitimate right either to interrupt the agriculture of the United
States, or the peaceable exchange of its produce with all nations; and
consequently, the assumption of it will be as lawful hereafter as now, in
peace as in war. No ground, acknowledged by the common reason of mankind,
authorizes this act now, and unacknowledged ground may be taken at any
time, and at all times. We see then a practice begun, to which no time,
no circumstances prescribe any limits, and which strikes at the root of
our agriculture, that branch of industry which gives food, clothing and
comfort to the great mass of the inhabitants of these States. If any
nation whatever has a right to shut up to our produce all the ports of
the earth except her own and those of her friends, she may shut up these
also, and so confine us within our own limits. No nation can subscribe
to such pretensions; no nation can agree, at the mere will or interest
of another, to have its peaceable industry suspended, and its citizens
reduced to idleness and want. The loss of our produce destined for foreign
markets, or that loss which would result from an arbitrary restraint of
our markets, is a tax too serious for us to acquiesce in. It is not enough
for a nation to say, we and our friends will buy your produce. We have a
right to answer, that it suits us better to sell to their enemies as well
as their friends. Our ships do not go to France to return empty. They go
to exchange the surplus of one produce which we can spare, for surplusses
of other kinds which they can spare and we want; which they can furnish on
better terms, and more to our mind, than Great Britain or her friends. We
have a right to judge for ourselves what market best suits us, and they
have none to forbid to us the enjoyment of the necessaries and comforts
which we may obtain from any other independent country.
This act, too, tends directly to draw us from that state of peace in which
we are wishing to remain. It is an essential character of neutrality to
furnish no aids (not stipulated by treaty) to one party, which we are
not equally ready to furnish to the other. If we permit corn to be sent
to Great Britain and her friends, we are equally bound to permit it to
France. To restrain it would be a partiality which might lead to war with
France; and between restraining it ourselves, and permitting her enemies
to restrain it unrightfully, is no difference. She would consider this as
a mere pretext, of which she would not be the dupe; and on what honorable
ground could we otherwise explain it? Thus we should see ourselves plunged
by this unauthorized act of Great Britain into a war with which we meddle
not, and which we wish to avoid if justice to all parties and from all
parties will enable us to avoid it. In the case where we found ourselves
obliged by treaty to withhold from the enemies of France the right of
arming in our ports, we thought ourselves in justice bound to withhold the
same right from France also, and we did it. Were we to withhold from her
supplies of provisions, we should in like manner be bound to withhold them
from her enemies also; and thus shut to ourselves all the ports of Europe
where corn is in demand, or make ourselves parties in the war. This is a
dilemma which Great Britain has no right to force upon us, and for which
no pretext can be found in any part of our conduct. She may, indeed, feel
the desire of starving an enemy nation; but she can have no right of doing
it at our loss, nor of making us the instruments of it.
The President therefore desires, that you will immediately enter into
explanations on this subject with the British government. Lay before
them in friendly and temperate terms all the demonstrations of the injury
done us by this act, and endeavor to obtain a revocation of it, and full
indemnification to any citizens of these States who may have suffered by
it in the meantime. Accompany your representations by every assurance of
our earnest desire to live on terms of the best friendship and harmony
with them, and to found our expectations of justice on their part, on a
strict observance of it on ours.
It is with concern, however, I am obliged to observe, that so marked has
been the inattention of the British court to every application which has
been made to them on any subject, by this government, (not a single answer
I believe having ever been given to one of them, except in the act of
exchanging a minister) that it may become unavoidable, in certain cases,
where an answer of some sort is necessary, to consider their silence as
an answer. Perhaps this is their intention. Still, however, desirous of
furnishing no color of offence, we do not wish you to name to them any
term for giving an answer. Urge one as much as you can without commitment,
and on the first day of December be so good as to give us information
of the state in which this matter is, that it may be received during the
session of Congress.
The second article of the same instruction allows the armed vessels
of Great Britain to seize for condemnation all vessels, on their first
attempt to enter a blockaded port, except those of Denmark and Sweden,
which are to be prevented only, but not seized, on their first attempt. Of
the nations inhabiting the shores of the Atlantic ocean, and practising
its navigation, Denmark, Sweden and the United States alone are neutral.
To declare then all _neutral_ vessels (for as to the vessels of the
_belligerent_ powers no order was necessary) to be legal prize, which
shall attempt to enter a blockaded port, except those of _Denmark and
Sweden_, is exactly to declare _that the vessels of the United States_
shall be lawful prize, and those of Denmark and Sweden shall not. It
is of little consequence that the article has avoided naming the United
States, since it has used a description applicable to them, and to them
alone, while it exempts the others from its operation by name. You will be
pleased to ask an explanation of this distinction; and you will be able to
say, in discussing its justice, that in every circumstance, we treat Great
Britain on the footing of the most favored nation where our treaties do
not preclude us, and that even these are just as favorable to her, as hers
are to us. Possibly she may be bound by treaty to admit this exception in
favor of Denmark and Sweden. But she cannot be bound by treaty to withhold
it from us. And if it be withheld merely because not established with us
by treaty, what might not we, on the same ground, have withheld from Great
Britain during the short course of the present war, as well as the peace
which preceded it?
Whether these explanations with the British government shall be verbal or
in writing, is left to yourself. Verbal communications are very insecure;
for it is only to deny them or to change their terms, in order to do
away their effect at any time. Those in writing have as many and obvious
advantages, and ought to be preferred, unless there be obstacles of which
we are not apprized.
I have the honor to be, with great and sincere esteem, dear Sir, your most
obedient humble servant.
TO J. MADISON.
September 8, 1793.
I have received and am charmed with No. 5. I thought the introduction
an useful lesson to others as I found it to myself, for I had really,
by constantly hearing the sound, been led into a pretty free use of it
myself. I struck out the passage you desired in the page. I struck out
also the words "and neutrality" in the following passage, "taking the
proclamation _in its proper sense_ as reminding all concerned, that as the
United States were at peace, the laws of peace _and neutrality_ were still
obligatory," also a paragraph of four lines that a minister from France
was hourly expected when the proclamation issued. There was one here at
the time; the other did not arrive in six weeks. To have waited that time
should have given full course to the evil.
I went through Franklin with enchantment; and what peculiarly pleased
me was, that there was not a sentence from which it could be conjectured
whether it came from north, south, east or west. At last a whole page of
Virginia flashed on me. It was in the section on the state of parties,
and was an apology for the continuance of slavery among us. However, this
circumstance may be justly palliated, it had nothing to do with the state
of parties, with the bank, encumbered a good cause with a questionable
argument. Many readers who would have gone heart and hand with the author
so far, would have flown off in a tangent from that paragraph. I struck
it out. Justify this if you please to those concerned, and if it cannot
be done, say so, and it may still be re-established. I mentioned to you
in my last that a French consul at Boston had rescued a vessel out of the
hands of a Marshal by military force. Genet has, at New York, forbidden
a Marshal to arrest a vessel, and given orders to the French squadron to
protect her by force. Was there ever an instance before of a diplomatic
man overawing and obstructing the course of the law in a country by an
armed force? The yellow fever increases. The week before last about three
a day died. This last week about eleven a day have died; consequently,
from known data about thirty-three a day are taken, and there are about
three hundred and thirty patients under it. They are much scattered
through the town, and it is the opinion of the physicians that there is
no possibility of stopping it. They agree it is a nondescript disease, and
no two agree in any one part of their process of cure. The President goes
off the day after to-morrow, as he had always intended. Knox then takes
flight. Hamilton is ill of the fever, as is said. He had two physicians
out at his house the night before last.
TO MR. HAMMOND.
PHILADELPHIA, September 9, 1793.
SIR,--I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your two memorials of
the 4th and 6th instant, which have been duly laid before the President of
the United States.
You cannot be uninformed of the circumstances which have occasioned the
French squadron now in New York to seek asylum in the ports of the United
States. Driven from those where they were on duty, by the superiority
of the adverse party in the civil war which has so unhappily afflicted
the colonies of France, filled with the wretched fugitives from the same
scenes of distress and desolation, without water or provisions for the
shortest voyage, their vessels scarcely in a condition to keep the sea
at all, they were forced to seek the nearest ports in which they could
be received and supplied with necessaries. That they have ever been out
again to cruise, is a fact we have never learned, and which we believe
to be impossible, from the information received of their wants and other
impediments to active service. This case has been noted specially, to show
that no inconvenience can have been produced to the trade of the other
belligerent powers, by the presence of this fleet in our harbors. I shall
now proceed to more general ground.
France, England and all other nations have a right to cruise on our
coasts; a right not derived from our permission, but from the law of
nature. To render this more advantageous, France has secured to herself,
by a treaty with us, (as she has done also by a treaty with Great Britain,
in the event of a war with us or any other nation) two special rights.
1. Admission for her prizes and privateers into our ports. This, by the
seventeenth and twenty-second articles, is secured to her exclusively
of her enemies, as is done for her in the like case by Great Britain,
were her present war with us instead of Great Britain. 2. Admission for
her public vessels of war into our ports, in cases of stress of weather,
pirates, enemies, or other urgent necessity, to refresh, victual, repair,
&c. This is not exclusive. As then we are bound by treaty to receive the
public armed vessels of France, and are not bound to exclude those of
her enemies, the executive has never denied the same right of asylum in
our ports to the public armed vessels of your nation. They, as well as
the French, are free to come into them in all cases of weather, piracies,
enemies, or other urgent necessity, and to refresh, victual, repair, &c.
And so many are these urgent necessities, to vessels far from their own
ports, that we have thought inquiries into the nature as well as the
degree of the necessities which drive them hither, as endless as they
would be fruitless, and therefore have not made them. And the rather,
because there is a third right, secured to neither by treaty, but due to
both on the principles of hospitality between friendly nations, that of
coming into our ports, not _under the pressure of urgent necessity_, but
whenever their comfort or convenience induces them. On this ground, also,
the two nations are on a footing.
As it has never been conceived that either would detain their ships of
war in our ports when they were in a condition for action, we have never
conceived it necessary to prescribe any limits to the time of their stay.
Nor can it be viewed as an injury to either party, to let their enemies
lie still in our ports from year's end to year's end, if they choose
it. Thus, then, the public ships of war of both nations enjoy a perfect
equality in our ports; first, in cases of urgent necessity; secondly, in
cases of comfort or convenience; and thirdly, in the time they choose to
continue; and all a friendly power can ask from another is, to extend to
her the same indulgences which she extends to other friendly powers. And
though the admission of the prizes and privateers of France is exclusive,
yet it is the effect of treaty made long ago, for valuable considerations,
not with a view to the present circumstances, nor against any nation in
particular, but all in general, and may, therefore, be faithfully observed
without offence to any; and we mean faithfully to observe it. The same
exclusive article has been stipulated, as was before observed, by Great
Britain in her treaty with France, and indeed is to be found in the
treaties between most nations.
With respect to the usurpation of admiralty jurisdiction by the consuls of
France, within these States, the honor and rights of the States themselves
were sufficient motives for the executive to take measures to prevent its
continuance, as soon as they were apprized of it. They have been led by
particular considerations to await the effect of these measures, believing
they would be sufficient; but finding at length they were not, such others
have been lately taken as can no longer fail to suppress this irregularity
completely.
The President is duly sensible of the character of the act of opposition
made to the serving of legal process on the brig William Tell, and he
presumes the representations made on that subject to the minister of
France, will have the effect of opening a free access to the officer
of justice, when he shall again present himself with the precept of his
court.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and
most humble servant.
TO MR. GENET.
PHILADELPHIA, September 9, 1793.
SIR,--In my letter of June the 25th, on the subject of the ship William,
and generally of vessels suggested to be taken within the limits of the
protection of the United States by the armed vessels of your nation, I
undertook to assure you it would be more agreeable to the President, that
such vessels should be detained under the orders of yourself or the consul
of France, than by a military guard, until the government of the United
States should be able to inquire into and decide on the fact. In two
separate letters of the 29th of the same month, I had the honor to inform
you of the claims lodged with the executive for the same ship William and
the brig Fanny, to enclose you the evidence on which they were founded,
and to desire that if you found it just, you would order the vessels to
be delivered to the owners; or, if overweighed in your judgment by any
contradictory evidence which you might have or acquire, you would do me
the favor to communicate that evidence; and that the consuls of France
might retain the vessels in their custody, in the meantime, until the
executive of the United States should consider and decide finally on the
subject.
When that mode of proceeding was consented to for your satisfaction, it
was by no means imagined it would have occasioned such delays of justice
to the individuals interested. The President is still without information,
either that the vessels are restored, or that you have any evidence to
offer as to the place of capture. I am, therefore, Sir, to repeat the
request of early information on this subject, in order that if any injury
has been done those interested, it may be no longer aggravated by delay.
The intention of the letter of June the 25th having been to permit such
vessels to remain in the custody of the consuls, instead of that of a
military guard (which, in the case of the ship William, appeared to have
been disagreeable to you), the indulgence was of course to be understood
as going only to cases which the executive might take, or keep possession
of, with a military guard, and not to interfere with the authority of
the courts of justice in any case wherein they should undertake to act.
My letter of June the 29th, accordingly, in the same case of the ship
William, informed you that no power in this country could take a vessel
out of the custody of the courts, and that it was only because they
decided not to take cognizance of that case, that it resulted to the
executive to interfere in it. Consequently, this alone put it in their
power to leave the vessel in the hands of the consul. The courts of
justice exercise the sovereignty of this country in judiciary matters;
are supreme in these, and liable neither to control nor opposition from
any other branch of the government. We learn, however, from the enclosed
paper, that the consul of New York, in the first instance, and yourself
in a subsequent one, forbid an officer of justice to serve the process
with which he was charged from his court, on the British brig William
Tell, taken by a French armed vessel within a mile of our shores, as has
been deposed on oath, and brought into New York, and that you had even
given orders to the French squadron there to protect the vessel against
any person who should attempt to take her from their custody. If this
opposition were founded, as is there suggested, on the indulgence of the
letters before cited, it was extending that to a case not within their
purview; and even had it been precisely the case to which they were to be
applied, is it possible to imagine you might assert it within the body of
the country by force of arms?
I forbear to make the observations which such a measure must suggest, and
cannot but believe that a moment's reflection will evince to you the depth
of the error committed in this opposition to an officer of justice, and
in the means proposed to be resorted to in support of it. I am therefore
charged to declare to you expressly, that the President expects and
requires that the officer of justice be not obstructed in freely and
peaceably serving the process of his court, and that in the meantime the
vessel and her cargo be not suffered to depart till the judiciary, if it
will undertake it, or himself if not, shall decide whether the seizure has
been made within the limits of our protection.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and
most humble servant.
TO MR. COXE.
September 10, 1793.
Thomas Jefferson presents his compliments to Mr. Coxe. He directed a
census to be sent him in the moment of receiving his note of the 5th. With
respect to the placing consuls in the British Islands, we are so far from
being permitted that, that a common mercantile factor is not permitted by
their laws. The experiment of establishing consuls in the colonies of the
European nations has been going on for some time, but as yet we cannot
say it has been formally and fully admitted by any. The French colonial
authority has received them, but they have never yet been confirmed by the
national authority.
TO MR. MORRIS.
PHILADELPHIA, September 11, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--My late letters to you have been of August 16, 23, and 26, and
a duplicate of the two first will accompany this. Yours lately received
are April 4, 5, 11, 19, May 20, and June 1, being Nos. 26 to 31. I have
little particulars to say to you by this opportunity which may be less
certain than the last.
The north-western Indians have refused to meet our commissioners, unless
they would agree to the Ohio as our boundary by way of preliminary
article; and this being impossible on account of the army locations
and particular sales on that side the river, the war will go on. We may
shortly expect to hear that General Wayne is in motion. An infectious
and mortal fever is broke out in this place. The deaths under it the week
before last were about forty, the last week about fifty, this week they
will probably be about two hundred, and it is increasing. Every one is
getting out of the city who can. Colonel Hamilton is ill of the fever, but
is on the recovery. The President, according to an arrangement of some
time ago, set out for Mount Vernon on yesterday. The Secretary of War
is setting out on a visit to Massachusetts. I shall go in a few days to
Virginia. When we shall reassemble again may perhaps depend on the course
of this malady, and on that may depend the date of my next letter.
I have the honor to be, with great and sincere esteem and respect, dear
Sir, your most obedient servant.
TO MR. GENET.
September 15, 1793.
SIR,--The correspondence which has taken place between the Executive
and yourself, and the acts which you have thought proper to do, and to
countenance, in opposition to the laws of the land, have rendered it
necessary, in the opinion of the President, to lay a faithful statement
of them before the government of France, to explain to them the reasons
and the necessity which have dictated our measures, to renew assurances
of that sincere friendship which has suffered no intermission during the
course of these proceedings, and to express our extreme anxiety that none
may be produced on their part. This has accordingly been directed to be
done by the Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris, in a
letter, a copy of which I now enclose to you;[2] and, in order to bring to
an end what cannot be permitted to continue, there could be no hesitation
to declare in it the necessity of their having a representation here,
disposed to respect the laws and authorities of the country, and to do
the best for their interest which these would permit. An anxious regard
for those interests, and a desire that they may not suffer, will induce
the executive in the meantime to receive your communications in writing,
and to admit the continuance of your functions so long as they shall be
restrained within the limits of the law, as heretofore announced to you,
or shall be of the tenor usually observed towards independent nations by
the representative of a friendly power residing with them.
The President thought it respectful to your nation as well as yourself,
to leave to yourself the restraining certain proceedings of the consuls
of France within the United States, which you were informed were contrary
to the laws of the land, and therefore not to be permitted. He has seen
with regret, however, that you have been far from restraining these
proceedings, and that the duty has devolved on him of suppressing them
by the authority of the country. I enclose to you the copy of a letter
written to the several consuls and vice-consuls of France, warning them
that this will be done if any repetition of these acts shall render it
necessary. To the consul of France at Boston, no such letter has been
written. A more serious fact is charged on him, which, if proved as there
is reason to expect, will render the revocation of his Exequatur an act of
immediate duty.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient
servant.
FOOTNOTE:
[2] See p. 31.
TO MR. GENET.
MONTICELLO, October 3, 1793.
SIR,--In a former letter which I had the honor of writing you, I mentioned
that information had been received that M. Duplaine, vice-consul of
France, at Boston, had been charged with an opposition to the laws of the
land, of such a character, as if true would render it the duty of the
President immediately to revoke the Exequatur, whereby he is permitted
to exercise the functions of vice-consul in these United States. The
fact has been since inquired into, and I now enclose you copies of the
evidence establishing it; whereby you will perceive how inconsistent
with peace and order it would be, to permit, any longer, the exercise of
functions in these United States by a person capable of mistaking their
legitimate extent so far, as to oppose, by force of arms, the course
of the laws within the body of the country. The wisdom and justice of
the government of France, and their sense of the necessity in every
government, of preserving the course of the laws free and unobstructed,
render us confident that they will approve this necessary arrestation of
the proceedings of one of their agents; as we would certainly do in the
like case, were any consul or vice-consul of ours to oppose with an armed
force, the course of their laws within their own limits. Still, however,
indispensable as this act has been, it is with the most lively concern,
the President has seen that the evil could not be arrested otherwise than
by an appeal to the authority of the country.
I have the honor to be, with great esteem and respect, your most obedient,
and most humble servant.
TO ----.
MONTICELLO, October 17, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--I have carefully considered the question whether the President
may call Congress to any other place than that to which they have
adjourned themselves, and think he cannot have such a right unless it
has been given him by the Constitution, or the laws, and that neither of
these has given it. The only circumstance which he can alter as to their
meeting, is that of _time_ by calling them at an _earlier day_ than that
to which they stand adjourned, but no power to change the place is given.
Mr. Madison happened to come here yesterday, after the receipt of your
letter. I proposed the question to him, and he thinks there was particular
caution intended and used in the direction of the Constitution, to avoid
giving the President any power over the place of meeting; lest he should
exercise it with local partialities. With respect to the Executive, the
Residence law has fixed our office at Philadelphia till the year 1800,
and therefore it seems necessary that we should get as near them as we
may with safety. As to the place of meeting for the Legislature, were we
authorized to decide that question, I should think it right to have it
in some place in Pennsylvania, in consideration of the principles of the
Residence bill, and we might furnish no pretext to that state to infringe
them hereafter. I am quite unacquainted with Reading and its means of
accommodation. Its situation is perhaps as little objectionable as that
of Lancaster, and less so than Trenton or perhaps Wilmington. However, I
think we have nothing to do with the question, and that Congress must meet
in Philadelphia, even if it be in the open fields, to adjourn themselves
to some other place. I am extremely afraid something has happened to Mr.
Bankson, on whom I relied for continuance at my office. For two posts past
I have not received any letter from him, nor dispatches of any kind. This
involves new fears for the duplicates of those to Mr. Morris. I have the
honor to be, with sentiments of the most perfect esteem and attachment,
dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.
TO ----.[3]
GERMANTOWN, November 2, 1793.
I overtook the President at Baltimore, and we arrived here yesterday,
myself fleeced of seventy odd dollars to get from Fredericksburg here, the
stages running no further than Baltimore. I mention this to put yourself
and Monroe on your guard. The fever in Philadelphia has so much abated as
to have almost disappeared. The inhabitants are about returning. It has
been determined that the President shall not interfere with the meeting
of Congress. R. H. and K. were of opinion he had a right to call them
to any place, but that the occasion did not call for it. I think the
President inclined to the opinion. I proposed a proclamation notifying
that the Executive business would be done here till further notice,
which I believe will be agreed. H. R. Lewis, Rawle &c., all concur in the
necessity that Congress should meet in Philadelphia, and vote there their
own adjournment. If it shall then be necessary to change the place, the
question will be between New York and Lancaster. The Pennsylvania members
are very anxious for the latter, and will attend punctually to support
it, as well as to support much for Muhlenburg, and oppose the appointment
of Smith (S. C.) speaker, which is intended by the Northern members.
According to present appearances this place cannot lodge a single person
more. As a great favor, I have got a bed in the corner of the public room
of a tavern; and must continue till some of the Philadelphians make a
vacancy by removing into the city. Then we must give him from four to six
or eight dollars a week for cuddies without a bed, and sometimes without
a chair or table. There is not a single lodging house in the place. Ross
and Willing are alive. Hancock is dead. Johnson of Maryland has _refused_
Rec. L. and McE. in contemplation; the last least. You will have seen
Genet's letters to Moultree and to myself. Of the last I know nothing but
from the public papers; and he published Moultree's letter and his answer
the moment he wrote it. You will see that his inveteracy against the
President leads him to meditate the embroiling him with Congress. They say
he is going to be married to a daughter of Clinton's. If so, he is afraid
to return to France. Hamilton is ill, and suspicious he has taken the
fever again by returning to his house. He of course could not attend here
to-day; but the President had showed me his letter on the right of calling
Congress to another place. Adieu.
FOOTNOTE:
[3] [Probably to Mr. Madison.]
TO MR. GENET.
GERMANTOWN, November 8, 1793.
SIR,--I have now to acknowledge and answer your letter of September the
13th, wherein you desire that we may define the extent of the line of
territorial protection on the coasts of the United States, observing that
governments and jurisconsults have different views on this subject.
It is certain that, therefore, they have been much divided in opinion,
as to the distance from their sea coast to which they might reasonably
claim a right of prohibiting the commitment of hostilities. The greatest
distance to which any respectable assent among nations has been at any
time given, has been the extent of the human sight, estimated at upwards
of twenty miles; and the smallest distance, I believe, claimed by any
nation whatever, is the utmost range of a cannon ball, usually stated at
one sea league. Some intermediate distance have also been insisted on, and
that of three sea leagues has some authority in its favor. The character
of our coast, remarkable in considerable parts of it for admitting no
vessels of size to pass the shores, would entitle us in reason to as broad
a margin of protected navigation as any nation whatever. Not proposing,
however, at this time, and without a respectful and friendly communication
with the powers interested in this navigation, to fix on the distance to
which we may ultimately insist on the right of protection, the President
gives instructions to the officers acting under his authority, to consider
those heretofore given them as restrained, for the present, to the
distance of one sea league, or three geographical miles, from the sea
shore. This distance can admit of no opposition, as it is recognized by
treaties between some of the powers with whom we are connected in commerce
and navigation, and is as little or less than is claimed by any of them on
their own coasts.
Future occasions will be taken to enter into explanations with them, as to
the ulterior extent to which we may reasonably carry our jurisdiction. For
that of the rivers and bays of the United States, the laws of the several
States are understood to have made provision, and they are moreover, as
being land-locked, within the body of the United States.
Examining by this rule the case of the British brig Fanny, taken on the
8th of May last, it appears from the evidence that the capture was made
four or five miles from the land; and consequently, without the line
provisionally adopted by the President, as before mentioned.
I have the honor to be, with sentiments of respect and esteem, Sir, your
most obedient, and most humble servant.
TO MR. HAMMOND.
GERMANTOWN, November 10, 1793.
SIR,--As in cases where vessels are reclaimed by the subjects or citizens
of the belligerent powers as having been taken within the jurisdiction
of the United States, it becomes necessary to ascertain that fact by
testimony taken according to the laws of the United States. The Governors
of the several States to whom the application will be made in the first
instance, are desired immediately to notify thereof the Attorney's of
their respective districts. The Attorney is thereupon instructed to
give notice to the principal agent of both parties who may have come in
with the prize, and also to the consuls of the nations interested, and
to recommend to them to appoint, by mutual consent, arbiters to decide
whether the capture was made within the jurisdiction of the United States,
as stated to you in my letter of the 8th instant; according to whose
award the Governor may proceed to deliver the vessel to the one or the
other party. But in case the parties or consuls shall not agree to name
arbiters, then the Attorney, or some person substituted by him, is to
notify them of the time and place, when and where he will be, in order to
take the depositions of such witnesses as they may cause to come before
him, which depositions he is to transmit for the information and decision
of the President.
It has been thought best to put this business into such a train as that
the examination of the fact may take place immediately, and before the
witnesses may have again departed from the United States, which would too
frequently happen, and especially in the distant States, if it should be
deferred until information is sent to the Executive, and a special order
awaited to take the depositions.
I take the liberty of requesting that you will be pleased to give such
instructions to the consuls of your nation as may facilitate the object
of this regulation. I urge it with the more earnestness because as
the attorneys of the districts are for the most part engaged in much
business of their own, they will rarely be able to attend more than one
appointment, and consequently the party who should fail from negligence or
other motive to produce his witnesses, at the time and place appointed,
might lose the benefit of their testimony altogether. This prompt
procedure is the more to be insisted on, as it will enable the President,
by an immediate delivery of the vessel and cargo to the party having
title, to prevent the injuries consequent on long delay.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and
most humble servant.
TO THE MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY TO GREAT BRITAIN.
GERMANTOWN, November 14th, 1793.
SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 7th
instant, on the subject of the British ship Rochampton, taken and sent
into Baltimore by the French privateer the Industry, an armed schooner of
St. Domingo, which is suggested to have augmented her force at Baltimore
before the capture. On this circumstance a demand is granted that the
prize she has made shall be restored.
Before I proceed to the matters of fact in this case, I will take the
liberty of calling your attention to the rules which are to govern it.
These are, I. That restitution of prizes has been made by the Executive
of the United States only in the two cases, 1st, of capture within their
jurisdiction, by armed vessels, originally constituted such without the
limits of the United States; or 2d, of capture, either within or without
their jurisdiction, by armed vessels, originally constituted such within
the limits of the United States, which last have been called proscribed
vessels.
II. That all _military equipments_ within the ports of the United States
are forbidden to the vessels of the belligerent powers, even where they
have been constituted vessels of war before their arrival in our ports;
and where such equipments have been made before detection, they are
ordered to be suppressed when detected, and the vessel reduced to her
original condition. But if they escape detection altogether, depart and
make prizes, the Executive has not undertaken to restore the prizes.
With due care, it can scarcely happen that military equipments of any
magnitude shall escape discovery. Those which are small may sometimes,
perhaps, escape, but to pursue these so far as to decide that the
smallest circumstance of military equipment to a vessel in our ports shall
invalidate her prizes through all time, would be a measure of incalculable
consequences. And since our interference must be governed by some general
rule, and between great and small equipments no practicable line of
distinction can be drawn, it will be attended with less evil on the whole
to rely on the efficacy of the means of prevention, that they will reach
with certainty equipments of any magnitude, and the great mass of those
of smaller importance also; and if some should in the event, escape all
our vigilance, to consider these as of the number of cases which will at
times baffle the restraints of the wisest and best-guarded rules which
human foresight can devise. And I think we may safely rely that since
the regulations which got into a course of execution about the middle of
August last, it is scarcely possible that equipments of any importance
should escape discovery.
These principles showing that no demand of restitution holds on the
ground of a mere military alteration or an augmentation of force, I will
consider your letter only as a complaint that the orders of the President
prohibiting these, have not had their effect in the case of the Industry,
and enquire whether if this be so, it has happened either from neglect or
connivance in those charged with the execution of these orders. For this
we must resort to facts which shall be taken from the evidence furnished
by yourself and the British vice-consul at Baltimore, and from that which
shall accompany this letter.
About the beginning of August the Industry is said to have arrived at
Baltimore with the French fleet from St. Domingo; the particular state of
her armament on her arrival is lately questioned, but it is not questioned
that she was an armed vessel of some degree. The Executive having received
an intimation that two vessels were equipping themselves at Baltimore for
a cruise, a letter was on the 6th of August addressed by the Secretary
of War to the Governor of Maryland, desiring an inquiry into the fact.
In his absence the Executive Council of Maryland charged one of their
own body, the honorable Mr. Killy, with the inquiring. He proceeded to
Baltimore, and after two days' examination found no vessel answering
the description of that which was the object of his inquiring. He then
engaged the British vice-consul in the search, who was not able, any
more than himself, to discover any such vessels. Captain Killy, however,
observing a schooner, which appeared to have been making some equipments
for a cruise, to have added to her guns, and made some alteration in
her waist, thought these circumstances merited examination, though the
rules of August had not yet appeared. Finding that his inquiries excited
suspicion, and fearing the vessel might be withdrawn, he had her seized,
and proceeded in investigation. He found that she was the schooner
Industry, Captain Carver, from St. Domingo: that she had been an armed
vessel for three years before her coming here, and as late as April last
had mounted 16 guns; that she now mounted only 12, and he could not learn
that she had procured any of these, or done anything else, essential to
her as a privateer, at Baltimore. He therefore discharged her, and on the
23d of August the Executive Council made the report to the Secretary of
War, of which I enclose you a copy. About a fortnight after this (Sep.
6) you added to a letter on other business a short paragraph, saying that
you had lately received information that a vessel named the Industry had,
within the last five or six weeks, been armed, manned and equipped in the
port of Baltimore. The proceedings before mentioned having been in another
department, were not then known to me. I therefore could only communicate
this paragraph to the proper department. The separation of the Executive
within a few weeks after, prevented any explanations on this subject,
and without them it was not in my power to either controvert or admit the
information you had received under these circumstances. I think you must
be sensible, Sir, that your conclusion from my silence, that I regard the
fact as proved, was a very necessary one.
New inquiries at that time could not have prevented the departure of the
privateer, or the capture of the Rochampton; for the privateer had then
been out some time. The Rochampton was already taken, and was arriving at
Baltimore, which she did about the day of the date of your letter. After
her arrival, new witnesses had come forward to prove that the Industry
had made some military equipments at Baltimore before her cruise. The
affidavits taken by the British vice-consul, are dated about nine or ten
days after the date of your letter and arrival of the Rochampton, and we
have only to lament that those witnesses had not given their information
to the vice-consul when Mr. Killy engaged his aid in the enquiries he
was making, and when it would have had the effect of our detaining the
privateer till she should have reduced herself to the condition in which
she was when she arrived in our ports, if she had really added anything
to her then force. But supposing the testimony just and full, (though
taken _ex parte_, and not under the legal sanction of our oath,) yet the
Governor's refusal to restore the prize was perfectly proper, for, as has
been before observed, restitution has never been made by the Executive,
nor can be made on a mere clandestine alteration or augmentation of
military equipments, which was all that the new testimony tended to prove.
Notwithstanding, however, that the President thought the information
obtained on the former occasion had cleared this privateer from any
well-grounded cause of arrest, yet that which you have now offered
opens the possibility that the former was defective. He has therefore
desired new inquiry to be made before a magistrate legally authorized
to administer an oath, and indifferent to both parties; and should the
result be that the vessel did really make any military equipments in our
ports, instructions will be given to reduce her to her original condition,
whenever she shall again come into our ports.
On the whole, Sir, I hope you will perceive that on the first intimation
through their own channel, and without waiting for information on
your part, that a vessel was making military equipments at Baltimore,
the Executive took the best measures for inquiring into the fact, in
order to prevent or suppress such equipments; that an officer of high
respectability was charged with the inquiry, and that he made it with
great diligence himself, and engaged similar inquiries on the part of
your vice-consul; that neither of them could find that the privateer
had made such equipments, or, of course, that there was any ground for
reducing or detaining her; that at the date of your letter of Sep. 6,
(the first information received from you,) the privateer was departed,
had taken her prize, and that prize was arriving in port; that the new
evidence taken ten days after that arrival can produce no other effect
than the institution of a new inquiry, and a reduction of the force of
the privateer, should she appear to have made any military alterations or
augmentation, on her return into our ports, and that in no part of this
proceeding is there the smallest ground for imputing either negligence or
connivance to any of the officers who have acted in it.
I have the honor to be, with much respect, Sir, your most obedient and
most humble servant.
TO MR. CIRACCHI, AT MUNICH.
PHILADELPHIA, November 14, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--I have received the favor of your letter of May 29, at Munich,
and it was not till then that I knew to what place or through what channel
to direct a letter to you. The assurances you receive that the monument
of the President would be ordered at the new election, were founded
in the expectation that he meant then to retire. The turbid affairs of
Europe, however, and the intercessions they produced, prevailed on him
to act again, though with infinite reluctance. You are sensible that the
moment of his retirement, kindling the enthusiasm for his character, the
affections for his person, the recollection of his services, would be
that in which such a tribute would naturally be resolved on. This, of
course, is now put off to the end of the next bissextile; but whenever it
arrives, your title to the execution is engraved in the minds of those who
saw your works here. Your purpose, with respect to my bust, is certainly
flattering to me. My family has entered so earnestly into it, that I must
gratify them with the hope, and myself with the permission, to make a just
indemnification to the author. I shall be happy at all times to hear from
you, and to learn that your successes in life are as great as they ought
to be. Accept assurances of my sincere respect and esteem.
TO MR. MADISON.
GERMANTOWN, November 17, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--I have got good lodgings for Monroe and yourself, that is
to say, a good room with a fireplace and two beds, in a pleasant and
convenient position, with a quiet family. They will breakfast you, but
you must mess in a tavern; there is a good one across the street. This is
the way in which all must do, and all I think will not be able to get even
half beds. The President will remain here, I believe, till the meeting of
Congress, merely to form a point of union for them before they can have
acquired information and courage. For at present there does not exist
a single subject in the disorder, no new infection having taken place
since the great rains of the 1st of the month, and those before infected
being dead or recovered. There is no doubt you will sit in Philadelphia,
and therefore I have not given Monroe's letter to Sehal. I do not write
to him, because I know not whether he is at present moving by sea or by
land, and if by the latter, I presume you can communicate to him. Wayne
has had a convoy of twenty-two wagons of provisions, and seventy men cut
off fifteen miles in his rear by the Indians. Six of the men were found
on the spot scalped, the rest supposed taken. He had nearly reached Fort
Hamilton. R. has given notice that he means to resign. Genet, by more and
more denials of powers to the President and ascribing them to Congress,
is evidently endeavoring to sow tares between them, and at any event to
curry favor with the latter, to whom he means to turn his appeal, finding
it was not likely to be well received by the people. Accept both of you my
sincere affection.
TO MR. SODERSTROM, CONSUL OF SWEDEN.
GERMANTOWN, November 20, 1793.
SIR,--I received last night your favor of the 16th. No particular rules
have been established by the President for the conduct of Consuls with
respect to prizes. In one particular case where a prize is brought
into our ports by any of the _belligerent_ parties, and is reclaimed
of the Executive, the President has hitherto permitted the Consul of
the captor to hold the prize until his determinations is known. But in
all cases respecting a neutral nation, their vessels are placed exactly
on the same footing with our own, entitled to the same remedy from our
courts of justice and the same protection from the Executive, as our own
vessels in the same situation. The remedy in the courts of justice, the
only one which they or our own can have access to, is slower than where
it lies with the Executive, but it is more complete, as damages can be
given by the Court but not by the Executive. The President will gladly
avail himself of any information you can at any time give him where
his interference may be useful to the vessels or subjects of his Danish
Majesty, the desire of the United States being to extend to the vessels
and subjects of that crown, as well as to those of his Swedish Majesty,
the same protections as is given to those of our own citizens.
I have the honor to be, with much respect, Sir, your most obedient
servant.
TO MR. GENET.
GERMANTOWN, November 22, 1793.
SIR,--In my letter of October the 2d, I took the liberty of noticing
to you, that the commission of consul to M. Dannery, ought to have been
addressed to the President of the United States. He being the only channel
of communication between this country and foreign nations, it is from him
alone that foreign nations or their agents are to learn what is or has
been the will of the nation, and whatever he communicates as such, they
have a right and are bound to consider as the expression of the nation,
and no foreign agent can be allowed to question it, to interpose between
him and any other branch of government, under the pretext of either's
transgressing their functions, nor to make himself the umpire and final
judge between them. I am, therefore, Sir, not authorized to enter into
any discussions with you on the meaning of our Constitution in any part
of it, or to prove to you that it has ascribed to him alone the admission
or interdiction of foreign agents. I inform you of the fact by authority
from the President. I had observed to you, that we were persuaded in
the case of the consul Dannery, the error in the address had proceeded
from no intention in the Executive Council of France to question the
functions of the President, and therefore no difficulty was made in
issuing the commissions. We are still under the same persuasion. But in
your letter of the 14th instant, you _personally_ question the authority
of the President, and in consequence of that, have not addressed to him
the commission of Messrs. Pennevert and Chervi. Making a point of this
formality on your part, it becomes necessary to make a point of it on
ours also; and I am therefore charged to return you those commissions,
and to inform you, that bound to enforce respect to the order of things
established by our Constitution, the President will issue no Exequatur to
any consul or vice-consul, not directed to him in the usual form, after
the party from whom it comes has been apprized that such should be the
address.
I have the honor to be, with respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most
humble servant.
TO MR. PINCKNEY.
GERMANTOWN, November 27, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--My last letters to you were of the 11th and 14th of September,
since which I have received yours of July 5, 8, August 1, 15, 27, 28.
The fever, which at that time had given alarm in Philadelphia, became
afterwards far more destructive than had been apprehended, and continued
much longer, from the uncommon drought and warmth of the autumn. On
the first day of this month the President and heads of the department
assembled here. On that day, also, began the first rains which had fallen
for some months. They were copious, and from that moment the infection
ceased, no new subject took it, and those before infected either died or
got well, so that the disease terminated most suddenly. The inhabitants
who had left the city, are now all returned, and business going on again
as briskly as ever. The President will be established there in about a
week, at which time Congress is to meet.
Our negotiations with the North-Western Indians have completely failed,
so that war must settle our difference. We expected nothing else, and had
gone into negotiations only to prove to all our citizens that peace was
unattainable on terms which any one of them would admit.
You have probably heard of a great misunderstanding between Mr. Genet and
us. On the meeting of Congress it will be made public. But as the details
of it are lengthy, I must refer for them to my next letter, when possibly
I may be able to send you the whole correspondence in print. We have kept
it merely personal, convinced his nation will disapprove him. To them we
have with the utmost assiduity given every proof of inviolate attachment.
We wish to hear from you on the subject of Marquis de La Fayette, though
we know that circumstances do not admit sanguine hopes.
The copper by the Sigon and the Mohawk is received. Our coinage of silver
has been delayed by Mr. Cox's inability to give the security required by
law.
I shall write to you again immediately after the meeting of Congress. I
have the honor to be, with sentiments of great esteem and respect, dear
Sir, your friend and servant.
TO MR. GENET.
PHILADELPHIA, November 30, 1793.
SIR,--I have laid before the President of the United States your letter
of November 25th, and have now the honor to inform you, that most of its
objects being beyond the powers of the Executive, they can only manifest
their dispositions by acting on those which are within their powers.
Instructions are accordingly sent to the district attorneys of the United
States, residing within States wherein French consuls are established,
requiring them to inform the consuls of the nature of the provisions
made by the laws for preventing, as well as punishing, injuries to their
persons, and to advise and assist them in calling these provisions into
activity, whenever the occasions for them shall arise.
It is not permitted by the law to prohibit the departure of the emigrants
to St. Domingo, according to the wish you now express, any more than it
was to force them away, according to that expressed by you in a former
letter. Our country is open to all men, to come and go peaceably, when
they choose; and your letter does not mention that these emigrants meant
to depart armed, and equipped for war. Lest, however, this should be
attempted, the Governors of the States of Pennsylvania and Maryland are
requested to have particular attention paid to the vessels named in your
letter, and to see that no military expedition be covered or permitted
under color of the right which the passengers have to depart from these
States.
Provisions not being classed among the articles of contraband, in time
of war, it is possible that American vessels may have carried them to
the ports of Jeremie and La Mole, as they do to other dominions of the
belligerent Powers; but, if they have carried arms also, these, as being
contraband, might certainly have been stopped and confiscated.
In the letter of May 15th, to Mr. Ternant, I mentioned, that, in answer
to the complaints of the British minister, against the exportation of arms
from the United States, it had been observed that the manufacture of arms
was the occupation and livelihood of some of our citizens; that it ought
not to be expected that a war among other nations should produce such
an internal derangement of the occupations of a nation at peace, as the
suppression of a manufacture which is the support of some of its citizens;
but that, if they should export these arms to nations at war, they would
be abandoned to the seizure and confiscation which the law of nations
authorized to be made of them on the high seas. This letter was handed to
you, and you were pleased, in yours of May 27th, expressly to approve of
the answer which had been given. On this occasion, therefore, we have only
to declare, that the same conduct will be observed which was announced on
that.
The proposition to permit all our vessels destined for any port in the
French West India islands to be stopped, unless furnished with passports
from yourself, is so far beyond the powers of the Executive, that it will
be unnecessary to enumerate the objections to which it would be liable. I
have the honor to be, &c.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
December 2, 1793.
Thomas Jefferson, with his respects to the President, has the honor to
send him the letters and orders referred to in Mr. Morris' letter, except
that of the 8th of April, which must be a mistake for some other date, as
the records of the office perfectly establish that no letters were written
to him in the months of March and April but those of March 12 and 15, and
April 20 and 26, now enclosed. The enigma of Mr. Merlino is inexplicable
by anything in his possession.
He encloses the message respecting France and Great Britain. He first
wrote it fair as it was agreed the other evening at the President's. He
then drew a line with a pen through the passages he proposes to alter,
in consequence of subsequent information, (but so lightly as to leave the
passages still legible for the President,) and interlined the alterations
he proposes. The overtures mentioned in the first alteration, are in
consequence of its having been agreed that they should be mentioned in
general terms only to the two houses. The numerous alterations made the
other evening in the clause respecting our corn trade, with the hasty
amendments proposed in the moment, had so much broken the tissue of the
paragraph, as to render it necessary to new mould it. In doing this, care
has been taken to use the same words as nearly as possible, and also to
insert a slight reference to Mr. Pinckney's proceedings.
On a severe review of the question, whether the British communication
should carry any such mark of being confidential, as to prevent the
Legislature from publishing them, he is clearly of opinion they ought not.
Will they be kept secret if secrecy is enjoined? certainly not, and all
the offence will be given (if it be possible any should be given) which
would follow their complete publication. If they would be kept secret,
from whom would it be? from our own constituents only, for Great Britain
is possessed of every tittle. Why, then, keep it secret from them? no
ground of support for the Executive will ever be so sure as a complete
knowledge of their proceedings by the people; and it is only in cases
where the public good would be injured, and _because_ it would be injured,
that proceedings should be secret. In such cases it is the duty of the
Executive to sacrifice their personal interests (which would be promoted
by publicity) to the public interest. If the negotiations with England
are at an end, if not given to the public now, when are they to be given?
and what moment can be so interesting? If anything amiss should happen
from the concealment, where will the blame _originate_ at last? It may be
said, indeed, that the President _puts it in the power_ of the Legislature
to communicate these proceedings to _their constituents_; but is it more
their duty to communicate them to their constituents, than it is the
President's to communicate them to _his constituents_? and if they were
desirous of communicating them, ought the President to restrain them by
making the communication confidential? I think no harm can be done by the
publication, because it is impossible England, after doing us an injury,
should _declare war_ against us, merely because we tell our constituents
of it; and I think good may be done, because while it puts it in the
power of the Legislature to adopt peaceable measures of doing ourselves
justice, it prepares the minds of our constituents to go cheerfully into
an acquiescence under the measures, by impressing them with a thorough and
enlightened conviction that they are founded in right. The motive, too, of
proving to the people the impartiality of the Executive between the two
nations of France and England, urges strongly that while they are to see
the disagreeable things which have been going on as to France, we should
not conceal from them what has been passing with England, and induce a
belief that nothing has been doing.
TO MR. GENET.
PHILADELPHIA, December 9, 1793.
SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3d instant,
which has been duly laid before the President.
We are very far from admitting your principle, that the government
on either side has no other right, on the presentation of a consular
commission, than to certify that, having examined it, they find it
according to rule. The governments of both nations have a right, and that
of yours has exercised it as to us, of considering the character of the
person appointed; the place for which he is appointed, and other material
circumstances; and of taking precautions as to his conduct, if necessary;
and this does not defeat the general object of the convention, which, in
stipulating that consuls shall be permitted on both sides, could not mean
to supersede reasonable objections to particular persons, who might at
the moment be obnoxious to the nation to which they were sent, or whose
conduct might render them so at any time after. In fact, every foreign
agent depends on the double will of the two governments, of that which
sends him, and of that which is to permit the exercise of his functions
within their territory; and when either of these wills is refused or
withdrawn, his authority to act within that territory becomes incomplete.
By what member of the government the right of giving or withdrawing
permission is to be exercised here, is a question on which no foreign
agent can be permitted to make himself the umpire. It is sufficient for
him, under our government, that he is informed of it by the executive.
On an examination of the commissions from your nation, among our records,
I find that before the late change in the form of our government, foreign
agents were addressed sometimes to the United States, and sometimes to the
Congress of the United States, that body being then executive as well as
legislative. Thus the commissions of Messrs. L'Etombe, Holker, Daunemanis,
Marbois, Creve-coeur, and Chateaufort, have all this clause: "Prions
et requerons nos tres chers et grands amis et allies, les Etat Unis de
l'Amerique septentrionale, leurs gouverneurs, et autres officiers, &c. de
laisser jouir, &c. le dit sieur, &c. de la charge de notre consul," &c. On
the change in the form of our government, foreign nations, not undertaking
to decide to what member of the new government their agents should be
addressed, ceased to do it to Congress, and adopted the general address
to the United States, before cited. This was done by the government of
your own nation, as appears by the commissions of Messrs. Mangourit and La
Forest, which have in them the clause before cited. So your own commission
was, not as M. Gerond's and Luzerne's had been, "a nos tres chers, &c.
le President et membres du Congres general des Etats Unis," &c., but "a
nos tres chers, &c. les Etats Unis de l'Amerique," &c. Under this general
address, the proper member of the government was included, and could take
it up. When, therefore, it was seen in the commission of Messrs. Dupont
and Hauterieve, that your executive had returned to the ancient address
to Congress, it was conceived to be an inattention, insomuch that I do
not recollect (and I do not think it material enough to inquire) whether
I noticed it to you either verbally or by letter. When that of M. Dannery
was presented with the like address, being obliged to notice to you an
inaccuracy of another kind, I then mentioned that of the address, not
calling it an _innovation_, but expressing my satisfaction, which is still
entire, that it was not from any design in your Executive Council. The
Exequatur was therefore sent. That they will not consider our notice of
it as an innovation, we are perfectly secure. No government can disregard
formalities more than ours. But when formalities are attacked with a view
to change principles, and to introduce an entire independence of foreign
agents on the nation with whom they reside, it becomes material to defend
formalities. They would be no longer trifles, if they could, in defiance
of the national will, continue a foreign agent among us whatever might
be his course of action. Continuing, therefore, the refusal to receive
any commission from _yourself_, addressed to an improper member of the
government, you are left free to use either the general one to the United
States, as in the commissions of Messrs. Mangourit and La Forest, before
cited, or the special one, to the President of the United States.
I have the honor to be, with respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most
humble servant.
TO THE PRESIDENT.
December 11, 1793.
The President doubtless recollects the communications of Mr. Ternant
expressing the dissatisfaction of the Executive Council of France with
Mr. Morris, our Minister there, which, however, Mr. Ternant desired
might be considered as informal; that Col. Smith also mentioned that
dissatisfaction, and that Mr. Le Brun told him he would charge Mr. Genet
expressly with their representations on this subject; and that all further
consideration thereon lay over therefore for Mr. Genet's representations.
Mr. Genet, some time after his arrival (I cannot now recollect how long,
but I think it was a month or more), coming to my house in the country
one evening, joined me in a walk near the river. Our conversation was
on various topics, and not at all of an official complexion. As we were
returning to the house, being then I suppose on some subject relative
to his country (though really I do not recall to mind what it was), he
turned about to me, just in the passage of the gate, and said, "but I
must tell you, we all depend on you to send us a good minister there,
with whom we may do business confidentially, in the place of Mr. Morris."
These are perhaps not the identical words, yet I believe they are nearly
so; I am sure they are the substance, and he scarcely employed more in
the expression. It was unexpected, and, to avoid the necessity of an
extempore answer, I instantly said something resuming the preceding thread
of conversation, which went on, and no more was said about Mr. Morris.
From this, I took it for granted, he meant now to come forth formally
with complaints against Mr. Morris, as we had been given to expect, and
therefore I mentioned nothing of this little expression to the President.
Time slipped along; I expecting his complaints, and he not making them.
It was undoubtedly his office to bring forward his own business himself,
and not at all mine, to hasten or call for it; and if it was not my duty,
I could not be without reasons for not taking it on myself officiously.
He at length went to New York, to wit, about the * * * * * of * * * * *
without having done anything formally on this subject. I now became
uneasy lest he should consider the little sentence he had uttered to me as
effectually, though not regularly, a complaint; but the more I reflected
on the subject, the more impossible it seemed that he could have viewed
it as such; and the rather, because, if he had, he would naturally have
asked from time to time, "Well, what are you doing with my complaint with
Mr. Morris?" or some question equivalent. But he never did. It is possible
I may, at other times, have heard him speak unfavorably of Mr. Morris,
though I do not recollect any particular occasion; but I am sure he never
made to me any proposition to have him recalled. I believe I mentioned
this matter to Mr. Randolph before I left Philadelphia: I know I did after
my return; but I did not to the President till the receipt of Mr. Genet's
letter of September 30, which, from some unaccountable delay of the post,
never came to me in Virginia, though I remained there till October 25
(and received there three subsequent mails), and it never reached me in
Philadelphia, till December 2.
The preceding is the state of this matter, as nearly as I can recollect it
at this time, and I am sure it is not materially inaccurate in any point.
TO MR. CHURCH.
PHILADELPHIA, December 11, 1793.
SIR,--The President has received your letter of August 16, with its
enclosures. It was with deep concern that he learnt the unhappy fortunes
of M. de La Fayette, and that he still learns his continuance under them.
His friendship for him could not fail to impress him with the desire of
relieving him, and he was sure that in endeavoring to do this, he should
gratify the sincere attachments of his fellow citizens. He has accordingly
employed such means as appeared the most likely to effect his purpose;
though, under the existing circumstances, he could not be sanguine in
their obtaining very immediately the desired effect. Conscious, however,
that his anxieties for the sufferer flow from no motives unfriendly
to those who feel an interest in his confinement, he indulges their
continuance, and will not relinquish the hope that the reasons for this
security will at length yield to those of a more benign character.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and
most humble servant.
TO MR. HAMMOND, MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY OF GREAT BRITAIN.
PHILADELPHIA, December 15, 1793.
SIR,--I am to acknowledge the honor of your letter of November 30th, and
to express the satisfaction with which we learn, that you are instructed
to discuss with us the measures, which reason and practicability may
dictate, for giving effect to the stipulations of our treaty, yet
remaining to be executed. I can assure you, on the part of the United
States, of every disposition to lessen difficulties, by passing over
whatever is of smaller concern, and insisting on those matters only, which
either justice to individuals or public policy render indispensable; and
in order to simplify our discussions, by defining precisely their objects,
I have the honor to propose that we shall begin by specifying, on each
side, the particular acts which each considers to have been done by the
other, in contravention of the treaty. I shall set the example.
The provisional and definitive treaties, in their 7th article, stipulated
that his "Britannic Majesty should, with all convenient speed, and
without causing any destruction, or _carrying away any negroes, or
other property_, of the American inhabitants, _withdraw all his armies,
garrisons, and fleets, from the said United States_, and from every port,
place, and harbor, within the same."
But the British garrisons were not withdrawn with all convenient speed,
nor have ever yet been withdrawn from Machilimackinac, on Lake Michigan;
Detroit, on the strait of Lakes Erie and Huron; Fort Erie, on Lake Erie;
Niagara, Oswego, on Lake Ontario; Oswegatchie, on the river St. Lawrence;
Point Au-fer, and Dutchman's Point, on Lake Champlain.
2d. The British officers have undertaken to exercise a jurisdiction over
the country and inhabitants in the vicinities of those forts; and
3d. They have excluded the citizens of the United States from navigating,
even on our side of the middle line of the rivers and lakes established as
a boundary between the two nations.
By these proceedings, we have been intercepted entirely from the commerce
of furs with the Indian nations, to the northward--a commerce which had
ever been of great importance to the United States, not only for its
intrinsic value, but as it was the means of cherishing peace with those
Indians, and of superseding the necessity of that expensive warfare we
have been obliged to carry on with them, during the time that these posts
have been in other hands.
On withdrawing the troops from New York, 1st. A large embarkation
of negroes, of the property of the inhabitants of the United States,
took place before the commissioners on our part, for inspecting and
superintending embarkations, had arrived there, and without any account
ever rendered thereof. 2d. Near three thousand others were publicly
carried away by the avowed order of the British commanding officer, and
under the view, and against the remonstrances of our commissioners. 3d.
A very great number were carried off in private vessels, if not by the
express permission, yet certainly without opposition on the part of the
commanding officer, who alone had the means of preventing it, and without
admitting the inspection of the American commissioners; and 4th. Of other
species of property carried away, the commanding officer permitted no
examination at all. In support of these facts, I have the honor to enclose
you documents, a list of which will be subjoined, and in addition to
them, I beg leave to refer to a roll signed by the joint commissioners,
and delivered to your commanding officer for transmission to his court,
containing a description of the negroes publicly carried away by his
order as before mentioned, with a copy of which you have doubtless been
furnished.
A difference of opinion, too, having arisen as to the river intended by
the plenipotentiaries to be the boundary between us and the dominions of
Great Britain, and by them called the St Croix, which name, it seems, is
given to two different rivers, the ascertaining of this point becomes
a matter of present urgency; it has heretofore been the subject of
application from us to the Government of Great Britain.
There are other smaller matters between the two nations, which remain to
be adjusted, but I think it would be better to refer these for settlement
through the ordinary channel of our ministers, than to embarrass the
present important discussions with them; they can never be obstacles to
friendship and harmony.
Permit me now, sir, to ask from you a specification of the particular
acts, which, being considered by his Britannic Majesty as a non-compliance
on our part with the engagement contained in the 4th, 5th, and 6th
articles of the treaty, induced him to suspend the execution of the
7th, and render a separate discussion of them inadmissible. And accept
assurances, &c.
TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES.
PHILADELPHIA, December 18, 1793.
SIR,--The Minister Plenipotentiary of France has enclosed to me a copy of
a letter of the 16th instant, which he addressed to you, stating that some
libellous publications had been made against him by Mr. Jay, Chief Justice
of the United States, and Mr. King, one of the Senators for the State of
New York, and desiring that they might be prosecuted. This letter has been
laid before the President, according to the request of the minister; and
the President, never doubting your readiness on all occasions to perform
the functions of your office, yet thinks it incumbent on him to recommend
it specially on the present occasion, as it concerns a public character
peculiarly entitled to the protection of the laws. On the other hand, as
our citizens ought not to be vexed with groundless prosecutions, duty
to them requires it to be added, that if you judge the prosecution in
question to be of that nature, you consider this recommendation as not
extending to it; its only object being to engage you to proceed in this
case according to the duties of your office, the laws of the land, and the
privileges of the parties concerned.
I have the honor to be, with great respect and esteem, Sir, your most
obedient, and most humble servant.
TO THE GOVERNOR OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
PHILADELPHIA, December 23, 1793.
SIR,--It is my duty to communicate to you a piece of information, although
I cannot say I have confidence in it myself. A French gentleman, one
of the refugees from St. Domingo, informs me that two Frenchmen, from
St. Domingo also, of the names of Castaing and La Chaise, are about
setting out from this place for Charleston, with a design to excite an
insurrection among the negroes. He says that this is in execution of a
general plan, formed by the Brissotine party at Paris, the first branch
of which has been carried into execution at St. Domingo. My informant
is a person with whom I am well acquainted, of good sense, discretion
and truth, and certainly believes this himself. I inquired of him the
channel of his information. He told me it was one which had given them
many pre-admonitions in St. Domingo, and which had never been found to be
mistaken. He explained it to me; but I could by no means consider it as
a channel meriting reliance; and when I questioned him what could be the
impulse of these men, what their authority, what their means of execution,
and what they could expect in result; he answered with conjectures
which were far from sufficient to strengthen the fact. However, were
anything to happen, I should deem myself inexcusable not to have made the
communication. Your judgment will decide whether injury might not be done
by making the suggestion public, or whether it ought to have any other
effect than to excite attention to these two persons, should they come
into South Carolina. Castaing is described as a small dark mulatto, and La
Chaise as a Quarteron, of a tall fine figure.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, your Excellency's most
obedient, and most humble servant.
TO DR. EDWARDS.
PHILADELPHIA, December 30, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your two favors of July
30th and August 16th, and thank you for the information they contained.
We have now assembled a new Congress, being a fuller and more equal
representation of the people, and likely, I think, to approach nearer
to the sentiments of the people in the demonstration of their own. They
have the advantage of a very full communication from the Executive of
the ground on which we stand with foreign nations. Some very unpleasant
transactions have taken place here with Mr. Genet, of which the world will
judge, as the correspondence is now in the press; as is also that with Mr.
Hammond on our points of difference with his nation. Of these you will
doubtless receive copies. Had they been out yet, I should have had the
pleasure of sending them to you; but to-morrow I resign my office, and
two days after set out for Virginia, where I hope to spend the remainder
of my days in occupations infinitely more pleasing than those to which
I have sacrificed eighteen years of the prime of my life; I might rather
say twenty-four of them. Our campaign with the Indians has been lost by
an unsuccessful effort to effect peace by treaty, which they protracted
till the season for action was over. The attack brought on us from the
Algerines is a ray from the same centre. I believe we shall endeavor to
do ourselves justice in a peaceable and rightful way. We wish to have
nothing to do in the present war; but if it is to be forced upon us, I am
happy to see in the countenances of all but our paper men a mind ready
made up to meet it, unwillingly, indeed, but perfectly without fear. No
nation has strove more than we have done to merit the peace of all by the
most rigorous impartiality to all. Sir John Sinclair's queries shall be
answered from my retirement. I am, with great esteem, dear Sir, your most
obedient servant.
TO MR. GENET.
PHILADELPHIA, December 31, 1793.
SIR,--I have laid before the President of the United States your letter
of the 20th instant, accompanying translations of the instructions given
you by the Executive Council of France to be distributed among the members
of Congress, desiring that the President will lay them officially before
both houses, and proposing to transmit successively other papers, to be
laid before them in like manner; and I have it in charge to observe, that
your functions as the missionary of a foreign nation here, are confined
to the transactions of the affairs of your nation with the Executive of
the United States; that the communications, which are to pass between
the Executive and Legislative branches, cannot be a subject for your
interference, and that the President must be left to judge for himself
what matters his duty or the public good may require him to propose to the
deliberations of Congress. I have therefore the honor of returning you the
copies sent for distribution, and of being, with great respect, Sir, your
most obedient, and most humble servant.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
PHILADELPHIA, December 31, 1793.
DEAR SIR,--Having had the honor of communicating to you in my letter of
the last of July, my purpose of returning from the office of Secretary
of State, at the end of the month of September, you were pleased, for
particular reasons, to wish its postponement to the close of the year.
That term being now arrived, and my propensities to retirement becoming
daily more and more irresistible, I now take the liberty of resigning the
office into your hands. Be pleased to accept with it my sincere thanks for
all the indulgences which you have been so good as to exercise towards me
in the discharge of its duties. Conscious that my need of them has been
great, I have still ever found them greater, without any other claim on
my part, than a firm pursuit of what has appeared to me to be right, and
a thorough disdain of all means which were not as open and honorable, as
their object was pure. I carry into my retirement a lively sense of your
goodness, and shall continue gratefully to remember it. With very sincere
prayers for your life, health and tranquillity, I pray you to accept the
homage of the great and constant respect and attachment with which I have
the honor to be, dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.
TO E. RANDOLPH.
MONTICELLO, February 3, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--I have to thank you for the transmission of the letters
from General Gates, La Motte, and Hauterieve. I perceive by the latter,
that the partisans of the one or the other principle (perhaps of both)
have thought my name a convenient cover for declarations of their own
sentiments. What those are to which Hauterieve alludes, I know not,
having never seen a newspaper since I left Philadelphia (except those
of Richmond), and no circumstances authorize him to expect that I should
inquire into them, or answer him. I think it is Montaigne who has said,
that ignorance is the softest pillow on which a man can rest his head.
I am sure it is true as to everything political, and shall endeavor to
estrange myself to everything of that character. I indulge myself on one
political topic only, that is, in declaring to my countrymen the shameless
corruption of a portion of the Representatives to the first and second
Congresses, and their implicit devotion to the treasury. I think I do
good in this, because it may produce exertions to reform the evil, on the
success of which the form of the government is to depend.
I am sorry La Motte has put me to the expense of one hundred and forty
livres for a French translation of an English poem, as I make it a
rule never to read translations where I can read the original. However,
the question now is, how to get the book brought here, as well as the
communications with Mr. Hammond, which you were so kind as to promise me.
* * * * *
This is the first letter I have written to Philadelphia since my arrival
at home, and yours the only ones I have received.
Accept assurances of my sincere esteem and respect. Yours affectionately.
TO JAMES MADISON.
MONTICELLO, April 3, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--Our post having ceased to ride ever since the inoculation began
in Richmond, till now, I received three days ago, and all together, your
friendly favors of March the 2d, 9th, 12th, 14th, and Colonel Monroe's of
March the 3d and 16th. I have been particularly gratified by the receipt
of the papers containing yours and Smith's discussion of your regulating
propositions. These debates had not been seen here but in a very short
and mutilated form. I am at no loss to ascribe Smith's speech to its true
father. Every tittle of it is Hamilton's except the introduction. There
is scarcely anything there which I have not heard from him in our various
private though official discussions. The very turn of the arguments is the
same, and others will see as well as myself that the style is Hamilton's.
The sophistry is too fine, too ingenious, even to have been comprehended
by Smith, much less devised by him. His reply shows he did not understand
his first speech; as its general inferiority proves its legitimacy,
as evidently as it does the bastardy of the original. You know we had
understood that Hamilton had prepared a counter report, and that some of
his humble servants in the Senate were to move a reference to him in order
to produce it. But I suppose they thought it would have a better effect
if fired off in the House of Representatives. I find the report, however,
so fully justified, that the anxieties with which I left it are perfectly
quieted. In this quarter, all espouse your propositions with ardor, and
without a dissenting voice.
The rumor of a declaration of war has given an opportunity of seeing, that
the people here, though attentive to the loss of value of their produce
in such an event, yet find in it a gratification of some other passions,
and particularly of their ancient hatred to Great Britain. Still, I hope
it will not come to that; but that the proposition will be carried, and
justice be done ourselves in a peaceable way. As to the guarantee of
the French islands, whatever doubts may be entertained of the moment at
which we ought to interpose, yet I have no doubt but that we ought to
interpose at a proper time, and declare both to England and France that
these islands are to rest with France, and that we will make a common
cause with the latter for that object. As to the naval armament, the land
armament, and the marine fortifications which are in question with you, I
have no doubt they will all be carried. Not that the monocrats and paper
men in Congress want war; but they want armies and debts; and though we
may hope that the sound part of Congress is now so augmented as to insure
a majority in cases of general interest merely, yet I have always observed
that in questions of expense, where members may hope either for offices
or jobs for themselves or their friends, some few will be debauched, and
that is sufficient to turn the decision where a majority is, at most, but
small. I have never seen a Philadelphia paper since I left it, till those
you enclosed me; and I feel myself so thoroughly weaned from the interest
I took in the proceedings there, while there, that I have never had a wish
to see one, and believe that I never shall take another newspaper of any
sort. I find my mind totally absorbed in my rural occupations.
* * * * *
Accept sincere assurances of affection.
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
MONTICELLO, April 25, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--I am to thank you for the book you were so good as to transmit
me, as well as the letter covering it, and your felicitations on my
present quiet. The difference of my present and past situation is such as
to leave me nothing to regret, but that my retirement has been postponed
four years too long. The principles on which I calculated the value of
life, are entirely in favor of my present course. I return to farming with
an ardor which I scarcely knew in my youth, and which has got the better
entirely of my love of study. Instead of writing ten or twelve letters
a day, which I have been in the habit of doing as a thing in course,
I put off answering my letters now, farmer-like, till a rainy day, and
then find them sometimes postponed by other necessary occupations. The
case of the Pays de Vaud is new to me. The claims of both parties are
on grounds which, I fancy, we have taught the world to set little store
by. The rights of one generation will scarcely be considered hereafter
as depending on the paper transactions of another. My countrymen are
groaning under the insults of Great Britain. I hope some means will turn
up of reconciling our faith and honor with peace. I confess to you I have
seen enough of one war never to wish to see another. With wishes of every
degree of happiness to you, both public and private, and with my best
respects to Mrs. Adams, I am, your affectionate and humble servant.
TO TENCH COXE.
MONTICELLO, May 1, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--Your several favors of February the 22d, 27th, and March the
16th, which had been accumulating in Richmond during the prevalence of
the small pox in that place, were lately brought to me, on the permission
given the post to resume his communication. I am particularly to thank you
for your favor in forwarding the Bee. Your letters give a comfortable view
of French affairs, and later events seem to confirm it. Over the foreign
powers I am convinced they will triumph completely, and I cannot but hope
that that triumph, and the consequent disgrace of the invading tyrants, is
destined, in order of events, to kindle the wrath of the people of Europe
against those who have dared to embroil them in such wickedness, and to
bring at length, kings, nobles and priests to the scaffolds which they
have been so long deluging with human blood. I am still warm whenever I
think of these scoundrels, though I do it as seldom as I can, preferring
infinitely to contemplate the tranquil growth of my lucerne and potatoes.
I have so completely withdrawn myself from these spectacles of usurpation
and misrule, that I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month;
and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it.
We are alarmed here with the apprehensions of war; and sincerely anxious
that it may be avoided; but not at the expense either of our faith or
honor. It seems much the general opinion here, the latter has been too
much wounded not to require reparation, and to seek it even in war, if
that be necessary. As to myself, I love peace, and I am anxious that
we should give the world still another useful lesson, by showing to
them other modes of punishing injuries than by war, which is as much a
punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer. I love, therefore, Mr.
Clarke's proposition of cutting off all communication with the nation
which has conducted itself so atrociously. This, you will say, may bring
on war. If it does, we will meet it like men; but it may not bring on
war, and then the experiment will have been a happy one. I believe this
war would be vastly more unanimously approved than any one we ever were
engaged in; because the aggressions have been so wanton and bare-faced,
and so unquestionably against our desire. I am sorry Mr. Cooper and
Priestly did not take a more general survey of our country before they
fixed themselves. I think they might have promoted their own advantage
by it, and have aided the introduction of improvement where it is more
wanting. The prospect of wheat for the ensuing year is a bad one. This
is all the sort of news you can expect from me. From you I shall be glad
to hear all sort of news, and particularly any improvements in the arts
applicable to husbandry or household manufacture.
I am, with very sincere affection, dear Sir, your friend and servant.
TO THE PRESIDENT.
MONTICELLO, May 14, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--I am honored with your favor of April the 24th, and received,
at the same time, Mr. Bertrand's agricultural prospectus. Though he
mentions my having seen him at a particular place, yet I remember nothing
of it, and observing that he intimates an application for lands in
America, I conceive his letter meant for me as Secretary of State, and
therefore I now send it to the Secretary of State. He has given only the
heads of his demonstrations, so that nothing can be conjectured of their
details. Lord Kaims once proposed an essence of dung, one pint of which
should manure an acre. If he or Mr. Bertrand could have rendered it so
portable, I should have been one of those who would have been greatly
obliged to them. I find on a more minute examination of my lands than
the short visits heretofore made to them permitted, that a ten years'
abandonment of them to the ravages of overseers, has brought on them a
degree of degradation far beyond what I had expected. As this obliges me
to adopt a milder course of cropping, so I find that they have enabled
me to do it, by having opened a great deal of lands during my absence. I
have therefore determined on a division of my farm into six fields, to
be put under this rotation: first year, wheat; second, corn, potatoes,
peas; third, rye or wheat, according to circumstances; fourth and fifth,
clover where the fields will bring it, and buckwheat dressings where they
will not; sixth, folding, and buckwheat dressings. But it will take me
from three to six years to get this plan underway. I am not yet satisfied
that my acquisition of overseers from the head of Elk has been a happy
one, or that much will be done this year towards rescuing my plantations
from their wretched condition. Time, patience and perseverance must be the
remedy; and the maxim of your letter, "slow and sure," is not less a good
one in agriculture than in politics. I sincerely wish it may extricate
us from the event of a war, if this can be done saving our faith and our
rights. My opinion of the British government is, that nothing will force
them to do justice but the loud voice of their people, and that this
can never be excited but by distressing their commerce. But I cherish
tranquillity too much, to suffer political things to enter my mind at all.
I do not forget that I owe you a letter for Mr. Young; but I am waiting
to get full information. With every wish for your health and happiness,
and my most friendly respects for Mrs. Washington, I have the honor to be,
dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.
TO MR. MADISON.
MONTICELLO, May 15, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--I wrote you on the 3d of April, and since that have received
yours of March 24, 26, 31, April 14 and 28, and yesterday I received
Colonel Monroe's of the 4th instant, informing me of the failure of the
Non-importation Bill in the Senate. This body was intended as a check on
the will of the Representatives when too hasty. They are not only that,
but completely so on the will of the people also; and in my opinion are
heaping coals of fire, not only on their persons, but on their body, as a
branch of the Legislature. I have never known a measure more universally
desired by the people than the passage of that bill. It is not from my
own observation of the wishes of the people that I would decide what they
are, but from that of the gentlemen of the bar, who move much with them,
and by their intercommunications with each other, have, under their view,
a greater portion of the country than any other description of men. It
seems that the opinion is fairly launched into public that they should
be placed under the control of a more frequent recurrence to the will
of their constituents. This seems requisite to complete the experiment,
whether they do more harm or good. I wrote lately to Mr. Taylor for the
pamphlet on the bank. Since that I have seen the "Definition of Parties,"
and must pray you to bring it for me. It is one of those things which
merits to be preserved. The safe arrival of my books at Richmond, and some
of them at home, has relieved me from anxiety, and will not be indifferent
to you. It turns out that our fruit has not been as entirely killed as was
at first apprehended; some latter blossoms have yielded a small supply of
this precious refreshment. I was so improvident as never to have examined
at Philadelphia whether negro cotton and oznaburgs can be had there; if
you do not already possess the information, pray obtain it before you
come away. Our spring has, on the whole, been seasonable; and the wheat
as much recovered as its thinness would permit; but the crop must still
be a miserable one. There would not have been seed made but for the
extraordinary rains of the last month. Our highest heat as yet has been
83, this was on the 4th instant. That Blake should not have been arrived
at the date of your letter, surprises me; pray inquire into that fact
before you leave Philadelphia. According to Colonel Monroe's letter this
will find you on the point of departure. I hope we shall see you here soon
after your return. Remember me affectionately to Colonel and Mrs. Monroe,
and accept the sincere esteem of, dear Sir, your sincere friend and
servant.
TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
MONTICELLO, September 7, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--Your favor of August the 28th finds me in bed, under a paroxysm
of the rheumatism which has now kept me for ten days in constant torment,
and presents no hope of abatement. But the express and the nature of the
case requiring immediate answer, I write to you in this situation. No
circumstances, my dear Sir, will ever more tempt me to engage in any thing
public. I thought myself perfectly fixed in this determination when I left
Philadelphia, but every day and hour since has added to its inflexibility.
It is a great pleasure to me to retain the esteem and approbation of
the President, and this forms the only ground of any reluctance at being
unable to comply with every wish of his. Pray convey these sentiments,
and a thousand more to him, which my situation does not permit me to go
into. But however suffering by the addition of every single word to this
letter, I must add a solemn declaration that neither Mr. J. nor Mr. ----
ever mentioned to me one word of any want of decorum in Mr. Carmichael,
nor anything stronger or more special than stated in my notes of the
conversation. Excuse my brevity, my dear Sir, and accept assurances of
the sincere esteem and respect with which I have the honor to be, your
affectionate friend and servant.
TO WILSON NICHOLAS, ESQ.
MONTICELLO, November 22, 1794.
SIR,--I take the liberty of enclosing for your perusal and consideration
a proposal from a Mr. D'Ivernois, a Genevan, of considerable distinction
for science and patriotism, and that, too, of the republican kind, though
you will see that he does not carry it so far as our friends of the
National Assembly of France. While I was at Paris, I knew him as an exile
from his democratic principles, the aristocracy having then the upper
hand in Geneva. He is now obnoxious to the democratic party. The sum of
his proposition is to translate the academy of Geneva in a body to this
country. You know well that the colleges of Edinburgh and Geneva, as
seminaries of science, are considered as the two eyes of Europe; while
Great Britain and America give the preference to the former, and all other
countries give it to the latter. I am fully sensible that two powerful
obstacles are in the way of this proposition. 1st. The expense: 2d. The
communication of science in foreign languages; that is to say, in French
and Latin; but I have been so long absent from my own country as to be
an incompetent judge either of the force of the objections or of the
dispositions of those who are to decide on them. The respectability of
Mr. D'Ivernois' character, and that, too, of the proposition, require an
answer from me, and that it should be given on due inquiry. He desires
secrecy to a certain degree for the reasons which he explains. What I
have to request of you, my dear Sir, is, that you will be so good as to
consider his proposition, to consult on its expediency and practicability
with such gentlemen of the Assembly as you think best, and take such other
measures as you shall think best to ascertain what would be the sense of
that body, were the proposition to be hazarded to them. If yourself and
friends approve of it, and there is hope that the Assembly would do so,
your zeal for the good of our country in general, and the promotion of
science, as an instrument towards that, will, of course, induce you to aid
them to bring it forward in such a way as you shall judge best. If, on the
contrary, you disapprove of it yourselves, or think it would be desperate
with the Assembly, be so good as to return it to me with such information
as I may hand forward to Mr. D'Ivernois, to put him out of suspense. Keep
the matter by all means out of the public papers, and particularly, if
you please, do not couple my name with the proposition if brought forward,
because it is much my wish to be in nowise implicated in public affairs.
It is necessary for me to appeal to all my titles for giving you this
trouble, whether founded in representation, patriotism or friendship. The
latter, however, as the broadest, is that on which I wish to rely, being
with sentiments of very cordial esteem, dear Sir, your sincere friend and
humble servant.
TO JAMES MADISON.
MONTICELLO, December 28, 1794.
DEAR SIR,--I have kept Mr. Jay's letter a post or two, with an intention
of considering attentively the observation it contains; but I have
really now so little stomach for anything of that kind, that I have
not resolution enough even to endeavor to understand the observations.
I therefore return the letter, not to delay your answer to it, and beg
you in answering for yourself, to assure him of my respects and thankful
acceptance of Chalmers' Treaties, which I do not possess, and if you
possess yourself of the scope of his reasoning, make any answer to it you
please for me. If it had been on the rotation of my crops, I would have
answered myself, lengthily perhaps, but certainly _con gusto_.