Chapter XXXII…

Chapter XXXII

RETURN OF JAY'S TREATY--IT IS PROCLAIMED TO BE THE LAW OF THE LAND--THE OPPOSITION OFFENDED--HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CALL UPON THE PRESIDENT FOR ALL PAPERS RELATING TO THE TREATY--DEBATES THEREON--ACTION OF THE CABINET--THE PRESIDENT'S REPLY--HE REFUSES TO ACCEDE TO THE CALL OF THE HOUSE--CONSIDERATION OF HIS REFUSAL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--BLOUNT'S RESOLUTIONS--DEBATES ON THE TREATY--SPEECHES OF MADISON, GALLATIN, AND AMES--EFFECT OF AMES'S SPEECH--DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE--FINAL VOTE.

The treaty with Great Britain, ratified by King George, was returned to the United States government in February, much to the relief of its friends, and indeed of all parties. "We are wasting our time in the most insipid manner, waiting for the treaty," wrote John Adams to his wife on the tenth of January. "Nothing of any consequence will be done till that arrives, and is mauled and abused, and then acquiesced in. For the antis must be more numerous than I believe them, and made of sterner stuff than I conceive, if they dare hazard the surrender of the posts and the payment for spoliations, by any resolution of the house that shall render precarious the execution of the treaty on our part."

The federal constitution declaring a treaty, when duly ratified by the contracting powers, to be the law of the land, Washington, on the last day of February, issued a proclamation announcing the one just concluded with Great Britain, as such. This had been a mooted point. The president's proclamation decided that the treaty was law without further action of Congress; and it now remained for that body to make provision for carrying it into effect. The president sent it to both houses on the first day of March, with the following brief message:--

"The treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation concluded between the United States and his Britannic majesty having been duly ratified, and the ratifications having been exchanged at London on the twenty-eighth of October, one thousand, seven hundred and ninety-five, I have directed the same to be promulgated, and herewith transmit a copy thereof for the information of Congress."

This action was the signal for both parties to prepare for a great struggle. The opposition, who had openly denied the right of the president to even negotiate a treaty of commerce, because, they said, it practically gave to the executive and senate the power to regulate commerce, were highly offended because the president had ventured to issue this proclamation before the sense of the house of representatives had been declared on the obligations of the instrument. This feeling assumed tangible form when, on the seventh of March, Edward Livingston, of New York, offered a resolution calling upon the president for copies of all papers relating to the treaty. This resolution, as modified on motion of Madison, was as follows:--

"Resolved, That the president of the United States be requested to lay before this house a copy of the instructions given to the minister of the United States, who negotiated the treaty with Great Britain, communicated by his message of the first instant, together with the correspondence and documents relating to the said treaty, excepting such of said papers as any existing negotiation may render improper to be disclosed."

A warm debate immediately arose, and speedily took the form of a discussion on the nature and extent of the treaty-making power. "The friends of the administration maintained," says Marshall, "that a treaty was a contract between two nations, which, under the constitution, the president, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, had a right to make; and that it was made when, by and with such advice and consent, it had received his final act. Its obligations then became complete on the United States, and to refuse to comply with its stipulations was to break the treaty and to violate the faith of the nation.

"The opposition contended that the power to make treaties, if applicable to every object, conflicted with powers which were vested exclusively in Congress. That either the treaty-making power must be limited in its operations, so as not to touch objects committed by the constitution to Congress, or the assent and co-operation of the house of representatives must be required to give validity to any compact, so far as it might comprehend those objects. A treaty, therefore, which required an appropriation of money or any act of Congress to carry it into effect, had not acquired its obligatory form until the house of representatives had exercised its powers in the case. They were at full liberty to make, or to withhold, such appropriation, or other law, without incurring the imputation of violating any existing obligation, or breaking the faith of the nation."[91]

At the outset, a member had inquired the object of Mr. Livingston's motion, since on that would depend its propriety. It was contended, that if the impeachment of either Mr. Jay or the president was intended, it was a proper motion; but not so if the constitutionality of the treaty was to be questioned, because that must depend on the treaty itself. It was further inquired whether the house proposed to consider whether a better treaty might not have been made. Mr. Livingston did not disavow either of the objects suggested, but stated as his principal reason, a firm conviction that the house was vested with a discretionary power, allowing it to carry the treaty into execution or not. This consideration was made the chief point in the debate, in which Albert Gallatin took a leading part in favor of the resolution, well supported by Madison, Livingston, Giles, and Baldwin, and others of less note. It was opposed by Smith, of South Carolina, Murray, Harper, Hillhouse, and others. About thirty speeches on either side were made, and the debate did not terminate until the twenty-fourth of the month.

During this debate, the eloquent Fisher Ames was a member of the house, but was compelled by ill health to be silent. It was a great trial for the patriot, for he saw the need of soldiers for the contest. He had been, from the beginning, a warm friend of the government; and now, at what he deemed a crisis, he wished to lift up his voice in defence of its measures. To a friend in Springfield he wrote on the ninth of March, saying:--

"I sit now in the house; and, that I may not lose my temper and my spirits, I shut my ears against the sophisms and rant against the treaty, and divert my attention by writing to you.

"Never was there a time when I so much desired the full use of my faculties, and it is the very moment when I am prohibited even attention. To be silent, neutral, useless, is a situation not to be envied. I almost wish ***** was here, and I at home, sorting squash and pumpkin seeds for planting.

"It is a new post for me to be in. I am not a sentry, not in the ranks, not in the staff. I am thrown into the wagon as part of the baggage. I am like an old gun that is spiked or the trunnions knocked off, and yet am carted off, not for the worth of the old iron, but to balk the enemy of a trophy. My political life is ended, and I am the survivor of myself, or rather the troubled ghost of a politician, that am condemned to haunt the field of battle where I fell. Whether the government will long outlive me is doubtful. I know it is sick, and, many of the physicians say, of a mortal disease. A crisis now exists, the most serious I ever witnessed, and the more dangerous because it is not dreaded. Yet, I confess, if we should navigate the federal ship through this strait, and get out again into the open sea, we shall have a right to consider the chance of our government as mended. We shall have a lease for years--say four or five; not a freehold--certainly not a fee simple.

"How will the Yankees feel and act when the day of trial comes? It is not, I fear, many weeks off. Will they let the casuists quibble away the very words, and adulterate the generous spirit of the constitution? When a measure passes by the proper authorities, shall it be stopped by force? Sophistry may change the form of the question, may hide some of the consequences, and may dupe some into an opinion of its moderation when triumphant; yet the fact will speak for itself. The government can not go to the halves. It would be another, a worse government, if the mob, or the leaders of the mob in Congress,[92] can stop the lawful acts of the president, and unmake a treaty. It would be, either no government, or instantly a government of usurpation and wrong.... I think we shall beat our opponents in the end, but the conflict will light up a fierce war."

Ames grew stronger; and at length, in the final debate in Congress upon the subject of the treaty, his eloquence was heard, like the tones of a trumpet, and with great effect, as we shall presently observe.

Livingston's motion was carried, on the twenty-fourth of March, by the decisive vote of sixty-two to thirty-seven. A committee of the house, deputed for the purpose, carried the vote to the president, who replied that he would take the request into consideration. He immediately summoned a cabinet council, and laid the matter before them in the form of two queries; first, on the right of the house, under the circumstances, to make such a call; and secondly, whether it would be expedient to furnish the papers, even though the belief might be entertained that the house had no right to call for them. He also referred the matter to Colonel Hamilton for his opinion.

The cabinet members were unanimous in opinion, that he ought not to comply with the requisitions of the house. Each of them stated, in writing, the grounds of his opinion; and Chief-Justice Ellsworth, who had lately been appointed to the bench of the supreme court of the United States, had, while the debate was in progress, drawn up an opinion coincident with the views of Washington and his cabinet. Hamilton also transmitted to the president a long and able paper, in which, with his usual force of unanswerable logic, he sustained the action of the cabinet, and fortified the president's views. In acknowledging the receipt of this paper on the thirty-first of March, the president said:--

"I had from the first moment, and from the fullest conviction in my own mind, resolved to resist the principle, which was evidently intended to be established by the call of the house of representatives; and only deliberated on the manner in which this could be done with the least bad consequences. To effect this, three modes presented themselves. First, a denial of the papers in toto, assigning concise but cogent reasons for that denial; secondly, to grant them in whole; or, thirdly, in part; accompanied in both the last-mentioned cases with a pointed protest against the right of the house to control treaties, or to call for papers without specifying their object, and against the compliance being drawn into a precedent.

"I had as little hesitation in deciding that the first was the most tenable ground; but, from the peculiar circumstances of the case, it merited consideration, if the principle could be saved, whether facility in the provision might not result from a compliance. An attentive examination of the subject and papers, however, soon convinced me that to furnish all the papers would be highly improper, and that a partial delivery of them would leave the door open for as much calumny as a refusal of them altogether; perhaps more, as it might, and I have no doubt would, be said that all such as were essential to the purposes of the house were withheld.

"Under these impressions, I proceeded, with the heads of departments and the attorney-general, to collect materials, and to prepare an answer, subject, however, to revision and change according to circumstances. This was ready on Monday, and proposed to be sent in on Tuesday; but it was delayed until I should hear from you, which happened on that day about noon. This induced a further postponement until yesterday, notwithstanding the apparent and anxious solicitude, which was visible in all quarters, to learn the result of the application.

"Finding that the draft which I had prepared embraced the most if not all the principles, which were detailed in yours of yesterday, though not the reasonings; that it would take considerable time to copy yours; and, above all, having understood that if the papers were refused, a fresh demand with strictures on my conduct was to be expected, I sent in the answer, which was ready, and have reserved yours, as a copious resource, in case the matter should go any further."[93]

Washington gave a decided negative to the request of the house. It appears to have been unexpected. The opposition were not prepared for such boldness and firmness on the part of the executive, and it "appeared to break," says Marshall, "the last cord of that attachment which had theretofore bound some of the active leaders of the opposition to the person of the president." Amid all the excitements of party contests, there was real affection and respect for Washington on the part of those who were politically opposed to him; but this act, so much like defiance of the popular will as expressed by the house of representatives, in the eyes of the unreflecting, seemed, for the moment, to extinguish every lingering spark of affection in the bosom of his old friends, now his political enemies.

After a week's delay, the president's message was taken up in committee of the whole, with two resolutions offered by Blount, of North Carolina, declaratory of the sense of the house respecting its own power on the subject of treaties. These embodied doctrines contrary to those expressed in the message. The first, after disclaiming any pretensions on the part of the house to "any agency in making treaties," asserted, that "when a treaty stipulated regulations on any of the subjects submitted by the constitution to the power of Congress, it must depend for its execution, as to such stipulations, on a law to be passed by Congress," and that the house had a right to deliberate on the expediency or inexpediency of such law, and pass or reject it as they might determine. The second resolution asserted, that in applications to the president for information, the house was not bound to specify for what purpose such information was wanted.

These resolutions took a rather less untenable position than had been maintained in argument, and were quite inexplicit on an essential part of the question. After a brief debate, in which Madison was chief speaker in favor of the resolutions, they were adopted by a vote of fifty-seven to thirty-five.

While this exciting subject was before Congress, the treaties with the Indians, with the dey of Algiers, and with Spain respecting the navigation of the Mississippi, had been ratified by the president and senate, and communicated to the house of representatives. It was moved to refer them to the committee of the whole house; but, for several days in succession, the motion was voted down. It was finally carried; and on the thirteenth of April, the moment the committee of the whole was organized by the chairman taking his seat, Mr. Sedgwick, of Massachusetts, arose and moved "that provision ought to be made by law for carrying into effect, with good faith, the treaties lately concluded with the dey and regency of Algiers, the king of Great Britain, the king of Spain, and certain Indian tribes northwest of the Ohio." The opposition were completely surprised by this unexpected movement, and an angry altercation ensued. They complained loudly of the manner in which an attempt was made to force action upon the four treaties together, and resented what they deemed the ungenerous sharp practice of their opponents, because it was in contravention of the solemn vote of the house lately recorded upon their journals, declaratory of their right to exercise a free discretion over the subject. It was contended, on the other hand, that, as the four treaties formed part of one system, if one was rejected, it might be expedient to reject the others also. After a warm debate, it was agreed to dispose of the other treaties before taking up that with Great Britain. In accordance with this determination, the action of the house on the other treaties was such as not to contradict the claim set up by Blount's resolutions, and they were disposed of without any difficulty.

The treaty with Great Britain was taken up on the fifteenth of April. Its friends, in and out of Congress, supposing that on a subject which had so long agitated the community, the mind of every member was settled, and that an attempt to make converts by either party through debates would be futile, urged an immediate decision of the matter. They felt confident that the majority would not dare to meet the country on such an issue as the withholding of means for the execution of the treaty; but that majority, though knowing they had the power to break the treaty, were unwilling to do so without first embracing an opportunity for giving satisfactory reasons for their action. They therefore called for discussion. "The expectation," says Marshall, "might not unreasonably be entertained, that the passions belonging to the subject would be so inflamed by debate as to produce the expression of a public sentiment favorable to their wishes; and if in this they should be disappointed, it would be certainly unwise, either as a party or as a branch of the legislature, to plunge the nation into embarrassments in which it was not disposed to entangle itself, and from which the manner of extricating it could not be distinctly perceived."

The friends of the treaty did not shrink from discussion; and the debate, which lasted a fortnight, was opened by Madison with a speech, elaborate in its details and carefully prepared. He maintained that there was the grossest want of reciprocity exhibited in that part of the treaty that related to the settlement of disputes growing out of the compact of 1783. The British, he asserted, got all they asked--the debts due their merchants with damages in the shape of interest. We got nothing, he said, for the valuable negroes carried away, and we received nothing for damages accruing from the long detention of the western posts. And they, he said, were received with conditions respecting the Indian trade which made them almost useless to us, as to influence over the savage tribes, in which alone their greatest value consisted; and he considered the agreement to pay the American claims for spoliations as no offset for the loss of the negroes.

The same want of reciprocity, he said, prevailed in the portion of the treaty respecting neutral rights and the law of nations. By it we yielded the favorite principle, long ago enunciated, that "free ships make free goods," and had actually added naval stores and even provisions to the list of contraband articles. He severely animadverted upon the provisions which conceded to British subjects the right to hold lands within the territory of the United States; the stipulation concerning the navigation of the Mississippi; and the permission to open all American ports to British shipping, while our own vessels were excluded from the colonial harbors.

The latter measure, allowing Great Britain to retain her colonial monopoly and preserve intact her colonial system, he denounced as "a phenomenon which had filled him with more surprise than he knew how to express." And more vehement than all, because it interfered with his favorite scheme of commercial coercion, was Madison's denunciations of the provisions which prevented the Americans from retaliating upon the British, in the event of their making commercial restrictions to our disadvantage by further discriminations. He concluded with scouting the idea that war would ensue if the treaty should be rejected, because the hostilities England were then waging with France were quite as much as she was able to manage at that time.

Madison's speech alarmed the country, especially the sensitive mercantile classes, for whose losses, by spoliations, the treaty made provision, and those who were dependant upon trade, because they feared its influence in causing the inexecution of the treaty, and consequent war with Great Britain, by which their interests would be seriously effected. Other classes were also alarmed; indeed, all who loved peace and deprecated quarrels, much less physical contests, with other nations, trembled for the fate of the treaty. The country was violently agitated. Public meetings were held in all parts of the United States, and the strength of parties was once more fully tried. Petitions were sent in to Congress from all the great marts of business in the country in favor of ratification; while counter meetings were held and counter petitions were sent in from various places. Insurance against captures on the high seas could no longer be obtained for vessels or goods; and a sudden blow was given to commerce, which threatened financial ruin.

To add to the confusion, Bond, the British chargé des affaires, had intimated, that if the house of representatives, refused the necessary appropriation to carry the treaty into effect, the western posts would not be given up at the stipulated time, now near at hand. He also took that occasion to insist upon an explanatory article concerning a clause in Wayne's treaty with the Indians, by which they had agreed to allow no trader to reside among them, unless licensed by the authorities of the United States; for it seemed to be in contradiction with the provisions of the treaty under consideration, a mutual free-trade with the Indian tribes being guarantied thereby. This menace and this demand created much irritation; yet it did not in the least affect the tide of popular sentiment in favor of the treaty which was continually rising. This fact was clearly discerned by both parties, and the friends of the treaty protracted the debate, in order that, before the vote should be taken, public opinion might be so expressed, as to have an omnipotent effect in its favor.

At this moment, when the debate had been going on for several days and the spirit of the opposition began to flag, Albert Gallatin came to the support of his party, in a speech which at once gave him the position of republican leader in the house, the honor of which had been divided between Madison and Giles, of Virginia. Gallatin was a native of Geneva, in Switzerland, and then only thirty years of age. He had been only eleven years in the country, two of which he had served the people of his adoption in a military capacity. After the Revolution he established himself on the Monongahela, in western Pennsylvania, where his talents soon caused him to be called into public life. He was engaged, as we have seen, in the Whiskey Insurrection, but with patriotic intentions, as he alleged; and by a large popular vote he was elected to a seat in the house of representatives. Although a foreign accent was plainly visible when he spoke, he was so fluent in language, so earnest in manner, and so logical in argument, that his youth and foreign birth were forgotten for the moment, and he was listened to with the greatest pleasure.

Gallatin had heard the speeches on both sides with marked attention, and was prepared to take new ground in his own. Quoting from Vattel on the law of nations, he went on to show that slaves, being real estate, were not a subject of booty, but, on the restoration of peace, fell back to their former owners, like the soil to which they were attached. He attempted to excite, evidently for party purposes, sectional hatred by declaring that while the rights of the South and West had been sacrificed by the treaty, in respect to negroes, the Indian trade, and the navigation of the Mississippi, means had been found to protect the commercial interests of the North. With the same breath, however, he denounced the commercial articles of the treaty as utterly worthless, and adroitly charged the senate, by insinuation, with ignorance respecting the East Indian trade, falsely assuming that because the treaty did not, by express provisions, secure the East Indian coasting trade, and the direct voyage from India to Europe by American vessels, that these privileges had been relinquished.

Like Madison, he regarded the provision respecting neutrals as yielding everything to the semi-piratical policy of Great Britain. He contended strenuously for the dishonest measure of sequestration of private debts due to British subjects, as a means of coercion, and condemned that most just provision of the treaty, bearing upon that subject, without stint. While we have promised full indemnity to England, he said, for every possible claim against us, we had abandoned every claim of a doubtful nature, and agreed to receive the western posts under the most degrading restrictions concerning the trade with the Indians. We had gained nothing, he said, by the arrangements respecting trade and navigation, while we had parted with "every pledge in our hands, every power of restriction, every weapon of self-defence."

He admitted that if this treaty should be rejected, another as favorable might not be obtained; but he argued, that while the United States would lose the western posts and the indemnity for spoliations, they would be pecuniary gainers by escaping the payment of the British debts. He did not wish, nor did his party, an utter rejection of the treaty, but a suspension or postponement of it, until the British should cease their encroachments, and reparations for such wrongs might be obtained. He scouted as utterly chimerical, the idea that war would necessarily follow such postponement, or even a positive rejection; and he treated the menaces of the dissolution of the Union with scorn. He significantly asked, Who will dissolve the government? The opposition majority had no motive for doing it, and he did not believe that the federalists would, at the first failure of their power, revenge themselves by overthrowing the government. He expressed his belief that the people, from one end of the Union to the other, were strongly attached to the constitution, and that they would punish any party or set of men who should attempt to subvert it. He rested in full security on the people, against any endeavor to destroy the Union or the government. He regarded the cry of disunion and of war as designed only to work upon the fears of Congress, and force an acquiescence in the treaty. "It was the fear of being involved in a war," he said, "that the negotiations with Great Britain had originated; under the impression of fear the treaty had been negotiated and signed; fear had promoted its ratification; and now, every imaginary mischief was conjured up to frighten the house, to deprive it of that discretion which it had the right to exercise, to force it to carry this treaty into effect." He also charged the merchants of Philadelphia and other seaports[94] with having formed a combination to produce alarm, and to make their efforts more effectual, had also combined to cease insuring vessels, purchasing produce, or transacting any business, to induce the people to join in the attempt to force the house to pass laws for carrying the treaty into effect.

"To listen calmly to this denunciation of Washington and Jay," says Hildreth, "as having pusillanimously surrendered the honor of their country--Washington in setting on foot and in ratifying, and Jay in having negotiated, the treaty--coming as it did from the mouth of one whose evident youth and foreign accent might alone serve to betray him as an adventurer, whose arrival in the country could hardly have been long anterior to the termination of the Revolutionary struggle, was somewhat too much for human nature to bear. There was also something a little provoking in the denunciation of the merchants as having conspired to terrify the house, coming from a man who had first obtained general notoriety, it was now hardly four years since, by the publication of his name at the bottom of a series of resolutions, of which the avowed object was to frighten public officers from the discharge of their duty by threats of a social interdict and non-intercourse--a method of proceeding which had ended in violent resistance to the laws and armed insurrection. Nor is it very surprising, all things considered, that many of the federalists were inclined to look on Gallatin as a foreign emissary, a tool of France, and employed and paid to make mischief."[95]

Tracy, of Connecticut, replied to the most prominent points of Gallatin's speech. He denied that Vattel gave any such opinion as to slaves, as set forth by Gallatin; and called attention to the fact that the British did not refuse to restore them as booty, but because they were men set free by having joined the British standard, that freedom being the chief inducement held out to them. Other points he commented upon with equal force. He warmed with his theme, and at length became severely personal. The opposition, he said, ask, with an air of triumphant complacency, How is there to be war, if we are not disposed to fight, and Great Britain has no motive for hostilities? "But look at the probable state of things," he continued: "Great Britain is to retain the western posts, and with them, the confidence of the Indians; she makes no compensation for the millions spoliated from our commerce, but adds new millions to our already heavy losses. Would Americans quietly see their government strut, look big, call hard names, repudiate treaties, and then tamely put up with new and aggravated injuries? Whatever might be the case in other parts of the Union, his constituents were not of a temper to dance round a whiskey-pole one day, cursing the government, and to sneak, the next day, into a swamp, on hearing that a military force was marching against them. They knew their rights, and, if the government were unable, or unwilling, to give them protection, they would find other means to secure it. He could not feel thankful to any gentleman for coming all the way from Geneva to accuse Americans of pusillanimity."

This allusion to Gallatin elicited cries of order from many of the opposition, and for awhile the excitement in the house was intense. The chairman decided that Mr. Tracy was in order, and desired him to go on. He disclaimed any intention to be personal, asked pardon for any improprieties of which he might have been guilty in the heat of debate, and excused himself with the plea, that such charges against the American government and people, from such a source, were naturally very offensive.

Fourteen days had now been occupied with this debate, when Fisher Ames, of Massachusetts, whose feebleness of health had kept him away from the house a part of the session, and made him a quiet spectator until now, arose in his place, and addressed the assemblage on the great subject. It was known that he was to speak on that day (twenty-eighth of April), and the house was crowded with an audience eager to hear the orator. He was pale, tottering, hardly able to stand on his feet, when he first arose, but as he became warmed with the subject, his whole being seemed to gather strength every moment, and he delivered a speech which was never forgotten by those who heard it. It was the great speech of the session, exhibiting a wonderful comprehension of human nature and the springs of political action; logic the most profound; the most biting ridicule, and pathetic eloquence. His speech exhibits such a summary, in its allusions, to the scope of the arguments of the opposition, and throws such light upon the growth and state of parties, that we make long extracts from it.

"The suggestion a few days ago," he said, "that the house manifested symptoms of heat and irritation, was made and retorted as if the charge ought to create surprise, and would convey reproach. Let us be more just to ourselves and the occasion. Let us not effect to deny the existence and the intrusion of some portion of prejudice and feeling into the debate, when, from the very structure of our own nature, we ought to anticipate the circumstance as a probability; and when we are admonished by the evidence of our senses that it is a fact, how can we make professions for ourselves, and offer exhortations to the house, that no influence should be felt but that of duty, and no guide respected but that of the understanding, while the peal to rally every passion of man is continually ringing in our ears? Our understandings have been addressed, it is true, and with ability and effect; but, I demand, has any corner of the heart been unexplored? It has been ransacked to find auxiliary arguments; and, when that attempt failed, to awaken the sensibility that would require none. Every prejudice and feeling has been summoned to listen to some peculiar style of address; and yet we seem to believe and to consider a doubt as an affront, that we are strangers to any influence but that of unbiassed reason.... It is very unfairly pretended, that the constitutional right of this house is at stake, and to be asserted and preserved only by a vote in the negative. We hear it said, that this is a struggle for liberty, a manly resistance against the design to nullify the existence of this assembly, and to make it a cypher in the government; that the president and senate, the numerous meetings in the cities, and the influence of the general alarm of the country, are the agents and instruments of a scheme of coercion and terror, and in spite of the clearest convictions of duty and conscience.

"It is necessary to pause here, and inquire whether suggestions of this kind be not unfair in their very texture and fabric, and pernicious in all their influences. They oppose an obstacle in the path of inquiry, not simply discouraging, but absolutely insurmountable. They will not yield to argument; for, as they were not reasoned up, they can not be reasoned down. They are higher than a Chinese wall in truth's way, and built of materials that are indestructible. While this remains, it is vain to say to this mountain, be thou cast into the sea. For I ask of the men of knowledge of the world, whether they would not hold him for a blockhead, that should hope to prevail in an argument, whose scope and object is to mortify the self-love of the expected proselyte? I ask further, when such attempts have been made, whether they have not failed of success? The indignant heart repels the conviction that is believed to debase it.... Let me expostulate with gentlemen to admit, if it be only by way of supposition, and for a moment, that it is barely possible they have yielded too suddenly to their own alarms for the powers of this house; that the addresses which have been made with such variety of forms, and with so great dexterity in some of them, to all that is prejudice and passion in the heart, are either the effects or the instruments of artifice and deception, and then let them see the subject once more in its singleness and simplicity....

"The doctrine has been avowed, that the treaty, though formally ratified by the executive power of both nations, though published as a law for our own by the president's proclamation, is still a mere proposition submitted to this assembly, no way distinguishable, in point of authority or obligation, from a motion for leave to bring in a bill, or any other original act of ordinary legislation. This doctrine, so novel in our country, yet so dear to many precisely for the reason, that in the contention for power, victory is always dear, is obviously repugnant to the very terms, as well as the fair interpretation of our own resolution (Mr. Blount's). We declare, that the treaty-making power is exclusively vested in the president and senate, and not in the house. Need I say that we fly in the face of that resolution, when we pretend that the acts of that power are not valid until we have concurred in them. It would be nonsense, or worse, to use the language of the most glaring contradiction, and to claim a share in a power which we at the same time disclaim, as exclusively vested in other departments. What can be more strange than to say, that the compacts of the president and senate with foreign nations are treaties without our agency, and yet, that those compacts want all power and obligation until they are sanctioned by our concurrence. It is not my design, in this place, if at all, to go into a discussion of this part of the subject. I will, at least for the present, take it for granted that this monstrous opinion stands in little need of remark, and, if it does, lies almost out of the reach of refutation."

After discussing the subject of bad faith on the part of the United States, in refusing to execute the treaty, with a clear and comprehensive view of the obligations of nations, Mr. Ames continued:--

"I shall be asked, why a treaty so good in some articles, and so harmless in others, has met with such unrelenting opposition? and how the clamors against it, from New Hampshire to Georgia, can be accounted for? The apprehensions so extensively diffused on its first publication, will be vouched as proof that the treaty is bad, and that the people held it in abhorrence.

"I am not embarrassed to find an answer to this insinuation. Certainly a foresight of its pernicious operation could not have created all the fears that were felt or effected: the alarm spread faster than the publication of the treaty; there were more critics than readers. Besides, as the subject was examined, those fears have subsided. The movements of passion are quicker than those of the understanding: we are to search for the causes of first impressions, not in the articles of this obnoxious and misrepresented instrument, but in the state of the public feeling.

"The fervor of the Revolutionary war had not entirely cooled, nor its controversies ceased, before the sensibility of our citizens was quickened with a tenfold vivacity, by a new and extraordinary subject of irritation. One of the two great nations of Europe underwent a change which has attracted all our wonder, and interested all our sympathy. Whatever they did, the zeal of many went with them, and often went to excess. These impression met with much to inflame, and nothing to restrain them. In our newspapers, in our feasts, and some of our elections, enthusiasm was admitted a merit, a test of patriotism; and that made it contagious. In the opinion of party, we could not love or hate enough. I dare say, in spite of all the obloquy it may provoke, we were extravagant in both. It is my right to avow, that passions so impetuous, enthusiasm so wild, could not subsist without disturbing the sober exercise of reason, without putting at risk the peace and precious interests of our country. They were hazarded. It will not exhaust the little breath I have left, to say how much, nor by whom, or by what means they were rescued from the sacrifice. Shall I be called upon to offer my proofs? They are here. They are everywhere. No one has forgotten the proceedings of 1794. No one has forgotten the capture of our vessels, and the imminent danger of war. The nation thirsted, not only for reparation, but vengeance. Suffering such wrongs, and agitated by such resentments, was it in the power of any words of compact, or could any parchment, with its seals, prevail at once to tranquillize the people? It was impossible. Treaties in England are seldom popular, and least of all, when the stipulations of amity succeed to the bitterness of hatred. Even the best treaty, though nothing be refused, will choke resentment, but not satisfy it. Every treaty is as sure to disappoint extravagant expectations, as to disarm extravagant passions; of the latter, hatred is one that takes no bribes; they who are animated by a spirit of revenge, will not be quieted by the possibility of profit.

"Why do they complain that the West Indies are not laid open? Why do they lament that any restriction is stipulated on the commerce of the East Indies? Why do they pretend, that if they reject this, and insist upon more, more will be accomplished? Let us be explicit--more would not satisfy. If all was granted, would not a treaty of amity with Great Britain still be obnoxious? Have we not this instant heard it urged against our envoy, that he was not ardent enough in his hatred of Great Britain? A treaty of amity is condemned because it was not made by a foe, and in the spirit of one. The same gentleman, at the same instant, repeats a very prevailing objection, that no treaty should be made with the enemy of France. 'No treaty,' exclaim others, 'should be made with a monarch or a despot; there will be no naval security while those sea-robbers prevail on the ocean; their den must be destroyed; that nation must be extirpated.'

"I like this, sir, because it is sincerity. With feelings such as these we do not pant for treaties. Such passions seek nothing, and will be content with nothing, but the destruction of their object. If a treaty left King George his island it would not answer, not if he stipulated to pay rent for it. It has been said, the world ought to rejoice if Great Britain was sunk in the sea; if, where there are now men, and wealth, and laws, and liberty, there were no more than a sandbank, for the sea-monsters to fatten on--a space for the storms of the ocean to mingle in conflict.

"I object nothing to the good sense or humanity of all this. I yield the point that this is a proof that the age of reason is in progress. Let it be philanthropy, let it be patriotism, if you will; but it is no indication that any treaty would be approved. The difficulty is not to overcome the objections to the terms; it is to restrain the repugnance to any stipulations of amity with the party.

"Having alluded to the rival of Great Britain, I am not unwilling to explain myself. I effect no concealment, and I have practised none. While those two great nations agitate all Europe with their quarrels, they will both equally endeavor to create an influence in America; each will exert all its arts to range its strength on its own side. How is this to be effected? Our government is a democratical republic; it will not be disposed to pursue a system of politics, in submission to either France or England, in opposition to the general wishes of the citizens; and if Congress should adopt such measures, they would not be pursued long, nor with much success. From the nature of our government, popularity is the instrument of foreign influence. Without it, all is labor and disappointment. With that auxiliary, foreign intrigue finds agents, not only volunteers, but competitors for employment, and anything like reluctance is understood to be a crime. Has Britain this means of influence? Certainly not. If her gold could buy adherents, their becoming such would deprive them of all political power and importance. They would not wield popularity as a weapon, but would fall under it. Britain has no influence, and, for reasons just given, can have none. She has enough; and God forbid she ever should have more. France, possessed of popular enthusiasm, of party attachments, has had, and still has, too much influence on our politics. Any foreign influence is too much, and ought to be destroyed. I detest the man, and disdain the spirit, that can bend to a mean subserviency to the views of any nation. It is enough to be American; that character comprehends our duties, and ought to engross our attachments.

"But I would not be misunderstood. I would not break the alliance with France. I would not have the connection between the two countries even a cold one. It should be cordial and sincere; but I would banish that influence, which, by acting on the passions of the citizens, may acquire a power over the government."

The speaker then drew a picture of the national disgrace, in the eyes of the world, that would be caused by a breach of national faith; and he appealed with inexpressible power to the hearts and understandings of the members, on this all-important consideration. He probed, with keen and searching precision, the Jesuitical position assumed by the house, in disclaiming any participation in the treaty-making power, and yet claiming the right to decide upon the merits of a treaty, and to defeat its execution. He then dwelt upon the evils that would accrue, in the form of a loss to the mercantile community, of five millions of dollars promised in payment for spoliations; and the renewal of Indian wars on the frontier, if the western posts should not be given up.

"On this theme," he said, "my emotions are unutterable. If I could find words for them, if my powers bore any proportion to my zeal, I would swell my voice to such a note of remonstrance, it should reach every log-house beyond the mountains. I would say to the inhabitants, wake from your false security--your cruel dangers; your more cruel apprehensions are soon to be torn open again. In the daytime your path through the woods will be ambushed; the darkness of midnight will glitter with the blaze of your dwellings. You are a father--the blood of your sons shall fatten your cornfields. You are a mother--the war-whoop shall waken the sleep of the cradle.

"On this subject you need not expect any deception on your feelings. It is a spectacle of horror which can not be overdrawn. If you have nature in your hearts, they will speak a language, compared with which, all I have said, or can say, will be poor and frigid.... By rejecting the posts, we light the savage fires--we bind the victims. This day we undertake to render account to the widows and orphans our decision will make--to the wretches that will be roasted at the stake--to our country--and I do not deem it too serious to say, to conscience and to God. We are answerable; and if duty be anything more than a word of imposture, if conscience be not a bugbear, we are preparing to make ourselves as wretched as our country....

"The idea of war has been treated as a bugbear. This levity is, at least, unseasonable, and, most of all, unbecoming some who resort to it. Who has forgotten the philippics of 1794? The cry then was, reparation--no envoy--no treaty--no tedious delays. Now, it seems, the passion subsides, or, at least, the hurry to satisfy it. Great Britain, they say, will not wage war upon us.

"In 1794, it was urged by those who now say, no war, that if we built frigates, or resisted the piracies of Algiers, we could not expect peace. Now they give excellent comfort truly. Great Britain has seized our vessels and cargoes to the amount of millions; she holds the posts; she interrupts our trade, say they, as a neutral nation; and these gentlemen, formerly so fierce for redress, assure us, in terms of the sweetest consolation, Great Britain will bear all this patiently. But let me ask the late champions of our rights, will our nation bear it? Let others exult because the aggressor will let our wrongs sleep for ever. Will it add, it is my duty to ask, to the patience and quiet of our citizens, to see their rights abandoned? Will not the disappointment of their hopes, so long patronized by the government, now in the crisis of their being realized, convert all their passions into fury and despair?...

"Look again at this state of things. On the seacoast, vast losses uncompensated; on the frontier, Indian war and actual encroachment on our territory; everywhere discontent; resentments tenfold more fierce because they will be more impotent and humbled; national discord and abasement. The disputes of the old treaty of 1783, being left to rankle, will revive the almost extinguished animosities of that period. Wars in all countries, and most of all in such as are free, arise from the impetuosity of the public feelings. The despotism of Turkey is often obliged by clamor to unsheathe the sword. War might, perhaps, be delayed, but could not be prevented. The causes of it would remain, would be aggravated, would be multiplied, and soon become intolerable. More captures, more impressments would swell the list of our wrongs, and the current of our rage. I make no calculation of the arts of those whose employment it has been, on former occasions, to fan the fire; I say nothing of the foreign money and emissaries that might foment the spirit of hostility, because this state of things will naturally run to violence. With less than their former exertion they would be successful.

"Will our government be able to temper and restrain the turbulence of such a crisis? The government, alas! will be in no capacity to govern. A divided people, and divided councils! Shall we cherish the spirit of peace, or show the energies of war? Shall we make our adversary afraid of our strength, or dispose him, by the measures of resentment and broken faith, to respect our rights? Do gentlemen rely on the state of peace because both nations will be more disposed to keep it? because injuries and insults still harder to endure, will be mutually offered?...

"Is there anything in the prospect of the interior state of the country, to encourage us to aggravate the dangers of a war? Would not the shock of that evil produce another, and shake down the feeble and then unbraced structure of our government? Is this a chimera? Is it going off the ground of matter of fact to say, the rejection of the appropriation proceeds upon the doctrine of a civil war of the departments? Two branches have ratified a treaty, and we are going to set it aside. How is this disorder in the machine to be rectified? While it exists its movements must stop; and when we talk of a remedy, is that any other than the formidable one of a revolutionary interposition of the people? And is this, in the judgment even of my opposers, to execute, to preserve the constitution, and the public order? Is this the state of hazard, if not of convulsion, which they can have the courage to contemplate and to praise; or beyond which their penetration can reach and see the issue? They seem to believe, and they act as if they believed, that our union, our peace, our liberty, are invulnerable and immortal; as if our happy state was not to be disturbed by our dissentions, and that we are not capable of falling from it by our unworthiness. Some of them have, no doubt, better nerves and better discernment than mine. They can see the bright aspects and happy consequences of all this array of horrors. They can see intestine discords, our government disorganized, our wrongs aggravated, multiplied, and un-redressed, peace with dishonor, or war without justice, union, or resources, in 'the calm lights of mild philosophy....'

"Let me cheer the mind, weary, no doubt, and ready to despond on this prospect, by presenting another which it is in our power to realize. Is it possible for a real American to look at the prosperity of this country without some desire for its continuance, without some respect for the measures which, many will say, produced, and all will confess, have preserved it? Will he not feel some dread that a change of system will reverse the scene? The well-grounded fears of our citizens, in 1794, were removed by the treaty, but are not forgotten. Then they deemed war nearly inevitable, and would not this adjustment have been considered, at that day, as a happy escape from the calamity? The great interest and the general desire of our people was to enjoy the advantages of neutrality. This instrument, however misrepresented, affords Americans that inestimable security. The cause of our disputes are either cut up by the roots, or referred to a new negotiation after the end of the European war. This was gaining everything. This, alone, would justify the engagements of the government. For, when the fiery vapors of war lowered in the skirts of our horizon, all our wishes were concentrated in this one, that we might escape the desolation of the storm. This treaty, like a rainbow on the edge of the cloud, marked to our eyes the space where it was raging, and afforded, at the same time, the sure prognostic of fair weather. If we reject it the vivid colors will grow pale; it will be a baleful meteor, portending tempest and war.

"Let us not hesitate, then, to agree to this appropriation to carry it into faithful execution. Thus we shall save the faith of our nation, secure its peace, and diffuse the spirit of confidence and enterprise that will augment its prosperity. The progress of wealth and improvement is wonderful, and some will think, too rapid. The field for exertion is fruitful and vast; and if peace and good government should be preserved, the acquisitions of our citizens are not so pleasing as the proofs of their industry, as the instruments of their future success. The rewards of exertion go to augment its power. Profit is every hour becoming capital. The vast crop of our neutrality is all seed-wheat, and is sown again, to swell, almost beyond calculation, the future harvest of prosperity. In this progress what seems to be fiction is found to fall short of experience.... When I come to the moment of deciding the vote, I start back with dread from the edge of the pit into which we are plunging. In my view, even the minutes I have spent in expostulation, have their value, because they protract the crisis, and the short period in which alone we may resolve to escape it.

"I have thus been led by my feelings to speak more at length than I had intended. Yet I have, perhaps, as little personal interest in the event as any one here. There is, I believe, no member who will not think his chance to be a witness of the consequences greater than mine. If, however, the vote should pass to reject, and a spirit should rise, as it will, with the public disorders, to make 'confusion worse confounded,' even I, slender and almost broken as my hold upon life is, may outlive the government and constitution of my country."

With this touching peroration Mr. Ames closed his remarkable speech, and sat down. For a brief moment there was perfect silence in the house. "Judge Iredell and I happened to sit together," wrote Vice-President Adams, describing the scene. "Our feelings beat in unison. 'My God! how great he is,' says Iredell; 'how great he has been!'--'Noble!' said I. After some time Iredell breaks out, 'Bless my stars! I never heard anything so great since I was born.'--'Divine!' said I; and thus we went on with our interjections, not to say tears, to the end. Tears enough were shed. Not a dry eye, I believe, in the house, except some of the jackasses who had occasioned the necessity of the oratory. These attempted to laugh, but their visages 'grinned horribly ghastly smiles.' They smiled like Foulon's son-in-law when they made him kiss his father's dead and bleeding hand. Perhaps the speech may not read as well. The situation of the man excited compassion, and interested all hearts in his favor. The ladies wished his soul had a better body."[96]

The vote was about to be taken, immediately after the conclusion of Ames's speech, when the opposition, alarmed on account of the effect it had probably produced, carried an adjournment. There was a little speaking upon the subject the next day, but no one dared to attempt an answer to Ames's words, or assail his positions. The vote stood forty-nine to forty-nine, when General Muhlenburg, chairman of the committee of the whole, decided the matter by casting his vote for the resolution. It was reported to the house on the thirteenth of May, and, after some delay, the resolution, unamended, declaring that it was expedient to pass laws necessary for carrying the treaty into effect, was adopted, fifty-one to forty-eight, the northern members voting for and the southern against it.

FOOTNOTES:

[91] Life of Washington.

[92] He referred to Livingston, the author of the resolutions before the house, who was one of the leaders of the populace in New York when Hamilton and King were stoned, while speaking in favor of the treaty, at a public meeting.

[93] The following is a copy of Washington's message to the house of representatives on the thirtieth of March, 1796, assigning his reasons for not complying with their resolution of the twenty-fourth:--

"With the utmost attention I have considered your resolution of the twenty-fourth instant, requiring me to lay before your house a copy of the instructions to the minister of the United States who negotiated the treaty with the king of Great Britain, together with a correspondence and other documents relative to that treaty, excepting such of the said papers as any existing negotiation may render improper to be disclosed.

"In deliberating upon this subject, it was impossible to lose sight of the principle, which some have avowed in its discussion, or to avoid extending my views to the consequences which must flow from the admission of that principle.

"I trust that no part of my conduct has ever indicated a disposition to withhold any information which the constitution has enjoined upon the president as a duty to give, or which could be required of him by either house of Congress as a right; and with truth I affirm that it has been, as it will continue to be while I have the honor to preside in the government, my constant endeavor to harmonize with the other branches thereof, so far as the trust delegated to me by the people of the United States, and my sense of the obligation it imposes to 'preserve, protect, and defend the constitution,' will permit.

"The nature of foreign negotiations requires caution, and their success must often depend on secrecy; and, even when brought to a conclusion, a full disclosure of all the measures, demands, or eventual concessions, which may have been proposed or contemplated, would be extremely impolitic; for this might have a pernicious influence on future negotiations, or produce immediate inconveniences, perhaps danger and mischief, in relation to other powers. The necessity of such caution and secrecy was one cogent reason for vesting the power of making treaties in the president, with the advice and consent of the senate; the principle on which that body was formed confining it to a small number of members. To admit, then, a right in the house of representatives to demand, and to have, as a matter of course, all the papers respecting a negotiation with a foreign power, would be to establish a dangerous precedent.

"It does not occur that the inspection of the papers asked for can be relative to any purpose under the cognizance of the house of representatives, except that of an impeachment, which the resolution has not expressed. I repeat, that I have no disposition to withhold any information which the duty of my situation will permit, or the public good shall require, to be disclosed; and, in fact, all the papers affecting the negotiation with Great Britain were laid before the senate when the treaty itself was communicated for their consideration and advice.

"The course which the debate has taken on the resolution of the house, leads to some observations on the mode of making treaties under the constitution of the United States.

"Having been a member of the general convention, and knowing the principles on which the constitution was formed, I have ever entertained but one opinion on this subject; and, from the first establishment of the government to this moment, my conduct has exemplified that opinion--that the power of making treaties is exclusively vested in the president, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, provided two thirds of the senators present concur; and that every treaty, so made and promulgated, thenceforward became the law of the land. It is thus that the treaty-making power has been understood by foreign nations; and, in all the treaties made with them, we have declared, and they have believed, that when ratified by the president, with the advice and consent of the senate, they became obligatory. In this construction of the constitution, every house of representatives has heretofore acquiesced; and, until the present time, not a doubt or suspicion has appeared, to my knowledge, that this construction was not the true one. Nay, they have more than acquiesced; for, till now, without controverting the obligations of such treaties, they have made all the requisite provisions for carrying them into effect.

"There is also reason to believe that this construction agrees with the opinions entertained by the state conventions, when they were deliberating on the constitution; especially by those who objected to it because there was not required, in commercial treaties, the consent of two thirds of the whole number of the members of the senate, instead of two thirds of the senators present; and because, in treaties respecting territorial and certain other rights and claims, the concurrence of three fourths of the whole number of both houses respectively was not made necessary.

"It is a fact decided by the general convention, and universally understood, that the constitution of the United States was the result of a spirit of amity and mutual concession.

"And it is well known that, under this influence, the smaller states were admitted to an equal representation in the senate with the larger states, and that this branch of the government was invested with great powers; for on the equal participation of those powers the sovereignty and political safety of the smaller states were deemed essentially to depend.

"If other proofs than these, and the plain letter of the constitution itself, be necessary to ascertain the point under consideration, they may be found in the journals of the general convention, which I have deposited in the office of the department of state. In those journals it will appear that a proposition was made, 'that no treaty should be binding on the United States which was not ratified by a law,' and that the proposition was explicitly rejected.

"As, therefore, it is perfectly clear to my understanding that the assent of the house of representatives is not necessary to the validity of a treaty; as the treaty with Great Britain exhibits, in itself, all the objects requiring legislative provision, and on these the papers called for can throw no light; and as it is essential to the due administration of the government that the boundaries fixed by the constitution between the different departments should be preserved, a just regard to the constitution and to the duty of my office, under all the circumstances of this case, forbids a compliance with your request. GEORGE WASHINGTON."

[94] Earnest petitions from these had been sent in to Congress, representing that the property of merchants of the United States, to the amount of five millions of dollars, had been taken from them by the subjects of Great Britain, for which they wanted restitution, and, for that purpose, prayed for measures to execute the provisions of the treaty.

[95] History of the United States, second series, i, 603.

[96] Letter to Mrs. Adams, April 30, 1796.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Chapter XXXIII

JEFFERSON'S APPREHENSIONS CONCERNING JAY'S TREATY--HIS OPINION OF GALLATIN--OF THE TREATY-MAKING POWER--HIS LETTER TO MAZZEI--ITS EFFECTS--DISCLOSURE OF A CONFIDENTIAL PAPER--JEFFERSON DISCLAIMS ANY PARTICIPATION IN THE ACT--HIS LETTER TO WASHINGTON, AND THE REPLY--UNGENEROUS ATTACKS ON WASHINGTON'S CHARACTER--PROVISION FOR CARRYING THE TREATY INTO EFFECT--DIPLOMATIC CHANGES--WASHINGTON AT MOUNT VERNON--EFFORTS TO PROCURE THE LIBERATION OF LAFAYETTE--WASHINGTON'S LETTER TO THE EMPEROR OF GERMANY--WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS--ITS AUTHORSHIP.

According to the prediction of Vice-President Adams, the British treaty, after having been "mauled and abused," was "acquiesced in." "The treaty will go into operation, and be supported by a great majority of the people," wrote Jay on the first of May; "a majority comprising the greater part of the men most distinguished by talents, worth, and weight."[97]

But there were many honest men--men who loved their country, were jealous of its honor, and ready to make personal sacrifices, if necessary, for the commonwealth--who regarded the triumph of the government party, on this occasion, as a public calamity. Among these was Mr. Jefferson, who, from his retirement at Monticello, sent forth, now and then, the thunderbolts of his wrath against political opponents and their measures. He had watched the progress of the treaty in every stage of the ordeal to which it was subjected in Congress, and occasionally gave his views to his friends. He was deeply enamored of Gallatin, and with acute perception, as time demonstrated, he foresaw the value of the young Genevese to his adopted country. "If Mr. Gallatin," he said, in a letter to Madison on the sixth of March, concerning the operations of the treasury, "would undertake to reduce this chaos to order, present us with a clear view of our finances, and put them into a form as simple as they will admit, he will merit immortal honor."

After Gallatin's speech on the treaty, Mr. Jefferson again wrote to Madison, saying, "It is worthy to be printed at the end of the Federalist, as the only rational commentary on the part of the constitution to which it relates." In reference to the power of the house of representatives, in the matter of treaties, Mr. Jefferson remarked in the same letter, "I see no harm in rendering their sanction necessary, and not much harm in annihilating the whole treaty-making power, except as to making peace. If you decide in favor of your right to refuse your co-operation in any case of treaty, I wonder on what occasion it is to be used, if not in one where the rights, the interest, the honor, and faith of our nation are so grossly sacrificed; when a faction has entered into a conspiracy with the enemies of their country, to chain down the legislature at the feet of both; when the whole mass of your constituents have condemned this work in the most unequivocal manner, and are looking to you as their last hope to save them from the effects of the avarice and corruption of the first agent, the revolutionary machinations of others, and the incomprehensible acquiescence of the only honest man [the president] who has assented to it. I wish that his honesty and his political errors may not furnish a second occasion to exclaim--'curse on his virtues, they have undone his country.'"[98]

On the twenty-fourth of April, in a letter to his friend, Philip Mazzei,[99] then in Florence--a letter which afterward drew down upon the author the most severe comments--he said, "The aspect of our politics has wonderfully changed since you left us. In place of that noble love of liberty and republican government which carried us triumphantly through the war, an Anglican monarchical and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is, to draw over us the substance, as they have already done the form, of the British government. The main body of our citizens, however, remain true to their republican principles; the whole landed interest is republican, and so is a great mass of talent. Against us are the executive; the judiciary; two out of three branches of the legislature; all the officers of the government; all who want to be officers; all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty; British merchants, and Americans trading on British capital; speculators and holders in the banks and public funds, a contrivance invented for the purposes of corruption, and for assimilating us in all things to the rotten as well as the sound parts of the British model. It would give you a fever were I to name to you the apostates who have gone over to these heresies; men who were Samsons in the field and Solomons in the council, but who have had their heads shorn by the harlot England. In short, we are likely to preserve the liberty we have obtained, only by unremitting labors and perils. But we shall preserve it; and our mass of weight and wealth on the good side is so great, as to leave no danger that force will ever be attempted against us. We have only to awake and snap the Lilliputian cords with which they have been entangling us during the first sleep which succeeded our labors."[100]

A little later, when the government had triumphed in the matter of the treaty, and the public acquiesced, Mr. Jefferson wrote to Monroe, in Paris; "You will have seen, by their proceedings, the truth of what I have always observed to you, that one man outweighs them all in influence over the people, who have supported his judgment against their own, and that of their representatives. Republicanism must lie on its oars, resign the vessel to its pilot, and themselves to the course he thinks best for them." In this manner the professedly retired statesman, deceived by demagogues, taking Bache's abusive and unscrupulous "Aurora" as his compass in current politics, and with his judgment sadly warped by his prejudices, he threw out, in various directions, ungenerous insinuations against Washington, who, at that moment, was confiding implicitly in Jefferson's integrity, justice, sincerity, and personal friendship. He would not allow himself to be even suspicious of any duplicity or dishonor on the part of his late secretary, even when that gentleman himself supposed Washington had reason to suspect him.

In Bache's "Aurora," on the ninth of June, were disclosed, by an anonymous writer, a series of questions submitted by Washington, in strict confidence, to the cabinet in 1793, concerning the reception of Genet, and the force of the treaty with France. These were published with the evident design to prejudice the executive in the public mind. This startled Jefferson, and he thought it necessary to put in an immediate disclaimer of all participation in the matter. He wrote to Washington on the nineteenth of June, saying, in reference to the document, "It having been confided to but few hands, makes it truly wonderful how it should have got there. I can not be satisfied as to my own part, till I relieve my mind by declaring--and I attest everything sacred and honorable to the declaration--that it has got them, neither through me nor the paper confided to me. This has never been from under my own lock and key, or out of my own hands. No mortal ever knew from me that these questions had been proposed." Mr. Jefferson then expressed his belief, that one who had been their mutual friend "thought it worth while to sow tares" between the president and himself, and denounced him as an "intriguer, dirtily employed in sifting the conversations of his table, where, alone, he could hear him."[101] The person here alluded to was General Henry Lee, of Virginia, who had lately become attached to the federal party, and incurred the political enmity of Jefferson.

This letter drew from Washington a most noble reply. On the sixth of July he wrote: "If I had entertained any suspicions before, that the queries, which have been published in Bache's paper, proceeded from you, the assurances you have given of the contrary would have removed them; but the truth is, I harbored none. I am at no loss to conjecture from what source they flowed, through what channel they were conveyed, and for what purpose they and similar publications appear. They were known to be in the hands of Mr. Parker in the early part of the last session of Congress. They were shown about by Mr. Giles during the session, and they made their public exhibition about the close of it.

"Perceiving and, probably, hearing, that no abuse in the gazettes would induce me to take notice of anonymous publications against me, those who were disposed to do me such friendly offices, have embraced, without restraint, every opportunity to weaken the confidence of the people; and, by having the whole game in their hands, they have not scrupled to publish things that do not, as well as those which do exist, and to mutilate the latter, so as to make them subserve the purposes which they have in view.

"As you have mentioned the subject yourself, it would not be frank, candid, or friendly, to conceal, that your conduct has been represented as derogating from that opinion I had conceived you entertained of me; that, to your particular friends and connections you have described, and they have denounced, me as a person under a dangerous influence; and that, if I would listen more to some other opinions, all would be well. My answer invariably has been, that I had never discovered anything in the conduct of Mr. Jefferson to raise suspicion in my mind of his insincerity; that, if he would retrace my public conduct while he was in the administration, abundant proofs would occur to him, that truth and right decisions were the sole objects of my pursuit; that there were as many instances, within his own knowledge, of my having decided against, as in favor, of the opinions of the persons evidently alluded to; and, moreover, that I was no believer in the infallibility of the politics or measures of any man living. In short, that I was no party man myself, and the first wish of my heart was, if parties did exist, to reconcile them."

This portion of Washington's letter must have been felt by Mr. Jefferson as a severe rebuke of his real insincerity, in throwing out precisely such insinuations as Washington here alludes to. Washington continued:--

"To this I may say, and very truly, that, until within the last year or two, I had no conception that parties would, or even could, go the length I have been witness to; nor did I really believe, until lately, that it was within the bounds of probability, hardly within those of possibility, that, while I was using my utmost exertions to establish a national character of our own, independent, as far as our obligations and justice would permit, of every nation of the earth, and wished, by steering a steady course, to preserve this country from the horrors of a desolating war, I should be accused of being the enemy of one nation, and subject to the influence of another; and, to prove it, that every act of my administration would be tortured, and the grossest and most insidious misrepresentations of these be made, by giving one side only of a subject, and that, too, in such exaggerated and indecent terms as could scarcely be applied to a Nero, a notorious defaulter, or even to a common pickpocket. But enough of this, I have already gone further in the expression of my feelings than I intended."[102]

When Congress had disposed of the treaty by voting appropriations for the purpose of executing it, nothing remained to complete the business but the appointment of the several officers to carry out its provisions. These were immediately made. David Howell, of Rhode Island, was made commissioner for ascertaining the true river St. Croix; Messrs. Fitzsimons and Innes (the latter soon succeeded by Mr. Sitgreaves) were appointed commissioners on the subject of British debts; and Messrs. Gore and Pinckney commissioners for settling claims for British spoliations.

Some diplomatic changes were made at about this time; Rufus King was appointed minister to England, in place of Thomas Pinckney, who wished to return home; Colonel Humphreys was appointed minister to Spain, in place of Mr. Carmichael, deceased; John Quincy Adams, son of the vice-president, left the Hague, to which he had been accredited, and succeeded Humphreys at Lisbon; and Mr. Murray took Adam's place in Holland. The president was authorized to appoint two or more agents, one to reside in Great Britain, the others at such points as the executive might choose, to investigate and report concerning all impressments of American seamen by British cruisers.

The interesting session of Congress during which Jay's treaty had been the chief topic of debate, was now drawing to a close, and Washington looked to the brief period of repose from public duties, at Mount Vernon, that would succeed the legislative turmoil, with the greatest pleasure. That moment of release came on the first day of June, when the Congress adjourned.

The president's thoughts now turned toward his long-tried friends, and the sweet enjoyments of private life toward which he was hastening. Among the former, the Marquis de Lafayette held a prominent place in his heart. He was yet a prisoner in a far-off dungeon, and his family in exile. Feeble was the arm of any man to give him liberty, especially one stretched toward him from the new republic beyond the sea. Yet Washington left no means untried to liberate his friend. Compelled by circumstances and state policy to be cautious, he was, nevertheless, persevering in his efforts. He well knew that his formal interposition in behalf of the illustrious captive would be unavailing. But he employed the American ministers at European courts in expressing, on every convenient opportunity, unofficially, the interest which the president took in the fate of his friend, and to use every fair means in their power to obtain his release.

While Lafayette was in the hands of the Prussian authorities, James Marshall was sent to Berlin as a special and confidential agent to solicit his discharge. Before Marshall's arrival, Lafayette had been delivered by the king of Prussia into the hands of the emperor of Germany. Mr. Pinckney, the United States minister in London, was then instructed to indicate the wishes of the president concerning the prisoner, to the Austrian minister in England, and to solicit the powerful mediation of the British cabinet. These efforts failed, and Washington, disdaining to make further application to the deputies of sovereignty, whose petty tyranny was proverbial, determined to go to the fountain-head of power in the dominion where his friend was suffering, and, on the fifteenth of May, he wrote as follows to the emperor of Germany:--

"It will readily occur to your majesty, that occasions may sometimes exist, on which official considerations would constrain the chief of a nation to be silent and passive in relation even to objects which affect his sensibility, and claim his interposition as a man. Finding myself precisely in this situation at present, I take the liberty of writing this private letter to your majesty, being persuaded that my motives will also be my apology for it.

"In common with the people of this country, I retain a strong and cordial sense of the services rendered to them by the Marquis de Lafayette; and my friendship for him has been constant and sincere. It is natural, therefore, that I should sympathize with him and his family in their misfortunes, and endeavor to mitigate the calamities which they experience; among which, his present confinement is not the least distressing.

"I forbear to enlarge on this delicate subject. Permit me only to submit to your majesty's consideration, whether his long imprisonment, and the confiscation of his estates, and the indigence and dispersion of his family, and the painful anxieties incident to all these circumstances, do not form an assemblage of sufferings which recommend him to the mediation of humanity? Allow me, sir, on this occasion to be its organ, and to entreat that he may be permitted to come to this country, on such conditions, and under such restrictions, as your majesty may think it expedient to prescribe.

"As it is a maxim with me not to ask what, under similar circumstances, I would not grant, your majesty will do me the justice to believe, that this request appears to me to correspond with those great principles of magnanimity and wisdom which form the basis of sound policy and durable glory.

"May the Almighty and Merciful Sovereign of the universe keep your majesty under his protection and guidance."

This letter was transmitted to Mr. Pinckney, and by him sent to the emperor, through his minister in Great Britain. "How far it operated," says Marshall, "in mitigating immediately the rigor of Lafayette's confinement, or in obtaining his liberation, remains unascertained."

Washington left Philadelphia for Mount Vernon on the thirteenth of June, accompanied by his family, and remained there about two months. During that retirement he made his final arrangements for leaving public life for ever at the close of his term of office, which would occur in March following. We have observed his great reluctance to consent to a second nomination for the chief-magistracy of the republic. The best interests of the commonwealth seemed to require the sacrifice on his part, and it was given, but with a full determination not to yield again, unless there appeared greater danger hovering over his beloved country, which his instrumentality might avert. To this determination he had adhered; and it was always with inexpressible satisfaction that he looked forward to the day when his public labors should cease. But, for cogent reasons, he never made this declaration publicly, until within the last few months of his second administration. His confidential friends well knew his determination, however, and the people generally suspected it. "Those who dreaded a change of system," says Marshall, "in changing the person of the chief-magistrate, manifested an earnest desire to avoid this hazard, by being permitted once more to offer to the public choice a person, who, amidst all the fierce conflicts of party, still remained the object of public veneration." But his resolution was fixed. The safety of the nation did not, at that time, seem to require him to remain at its head, notwithstanding there were many and great perils besetting it; and while he was at Mount Vernon he completed the final draft of a "Farewell Address to the people of the United States," to be published in time for them to choose his successor at the appointed season.

That address had been the subject of deep and anxious thought; and, at the special request of the president, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Jay, and perhaps others, had given him suggestions in writing, topical and verbal. These he took with him to Mount Vernon, and in the quiet of his library he arranged the address in proper form, using the suggestions of Madison and Hamilton very freely. In the form in which it finally appeared, it remains the noblest production of Washington's mind and heart; and has been pronounced by Alison, the eminent British historian, unequalled by any composition of uninspired wisdom. It is a political legacy which not only the countrymen of Washington, but the inhabitants of the civilized world ought to value as one of the most precious gifts ever bestowed by man upon his race. It is permeated with the immortal spirit of a true MAN, a true PATRIOT, and a true CHRISTIAN.[103]

FOOTNOTES:

[97] Letter to Lord Grenville.

[98] Jefferson's Memoirs and Correspondence, iii., 330.

[99] Mazzei was an Italian, who came to Virginia just before the War for Independence commenced, bringing with him about a dozen experienced grape culturists of his own country, for the purpose of attempting that business in America, and the manufacture of wine. He formed a stock company, of whom Mr. Jefferson was one, and a considerable sum was raised for the undertaking. An estate adjoining Mr. Jefferson's was purchased for the experiment, but the scheme failed. Mazzei went to Europe as an agent of some kind for the state of Virginia, leaving his family in America, and did not return. His wife died, and Mazzei wrote to Mr. Jefferson for legal evidence of her death, and other important information. In his reply, the strong language concerning political affairs in America, which we have quoted, was incidentally used in the conclusion. Mazzei was an ardent republican. He translated that portion of the letter into Italian, and without asking Jefferson's permission to do so, published it in a Florentine journal. It was republished in the French journals, translated into English, and, about a year after it was written, it appeared in the American federal newspapers, with, it was alleged, many errors and interpolations. It placed Jefferson in an unpleasant dilemma, yet he had such faith in Washington's confidence in him, that he conceived that that great and good man would not construe any portion of his remarks as aimed at the president, and, by the advice of his friends, he kept silent, neither avowing or disavowing the letter as his. It became the subject of fierce attacks for a long time, even through the canvass in 1800, which resulted in the election of Mr. Jefferson to the presidency of the United States.

I have before me a caricature, published as a frontispiece to Robert G. Harper's "Observations on the Dispute between the United States and France," printed in 1798, in which is represented Mr. Jefferson on bended knee before an altar, on which is a flame, fed by papers bearing the names of Age of Reason, Godwin, Aurora, Chronicle, J. J. Rousseau, Voltaire, Ruins of Volney, Helvetius, &c. On the short shaft is inscribed, "ALTAR TO GALLIC DESPOTISM." It is entwined by a serpent, who seems to be the instrument of the devil, whose horned head is seen rising behind the platform of the altar, upon which lies sacks for consumption, marked, American spoliations, Dutch restitution, Sardinia, Flanders, Venice, Spain, Plunder, &c. Over the flame on the altar hovers an angry American eagle, gazed upon by the all-seeing eye. The eagle has just snatched from the hand of Mr. Jefferson a scroll, on which is written Constitution and Independence, U. S. A., that he was about to commit to the flames. From his other hand is falling another scroll, inscribed, To Mazzei. The composition is entitled, "THE PROVIDENTIAL DETECTION."

[100] Jefferson's Memoirs and Correspondence, iii., 333.

[101] Jefferson's Memoirs and Correspondence, iii., 336.

[102] Sparks's "Life and Writings of Washington," xi., 137. In a note to this letter, Mr. Sparks says: "No correspondence, after this date, between Washington and Jefferson appears in the letter-books, except a brief note the month following, upon an unimportant matter. It has been reported and believed, that letters and papers, supposed to have passed between them, or to relate to their intercourse with each other at subsequent dates, were secretly withdrawn from the archives of Mount Vernon, after the death of the former."

Washington's unlimited confidence in Mr. Jefferson's sincerity appears to have been finally shaken. In a letter to John Nicholson, in March, 1798, he said, "Nothing short of the evidence you have adduced, corroborative of intimations which I had received long before through another channel, could have shaken my belief in the sincerity of a friendship which I had conceived was possessed for me by the person to whom you allude."

[103] The following is a copy of Washington's "Farewell Address." It was first published in the "Philadelphia Advertiser," in September, 1796. It occupied, in manuscript, thirty-two pages of quarto letter-paper, sewed together as a book.

"FRIENDS AND FELLOW-CITIZENS:--The period for a new election of a citizen, to administer the executive government of the United States, being not far distant, and the time actually arrived, when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprize you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

"I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured, that this resolution has not been taken, without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that, in withdrawing the tender of service which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest; no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness; but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

"The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me, have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty, and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped, that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

"I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty, or propriety; and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

"The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust, were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say, that I have with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government, the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious, in the outset, of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and, every day, the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe, that while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

"In looking forward to the moment, which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country, for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not infrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and the guaranty of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that Heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these states, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation, and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection and the adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

"Here, perhaps I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which can not end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments, which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all important to the permanency of your felicity as a People. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motives to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion. Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

"The unity of Government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union, to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

"For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of AMERICAN, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and successes. But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here, every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the Union of the whole.

"The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter, great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find, a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort; and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as ONE NATION. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

"While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in Union, all the parties combined can not fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from Union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments; which their own rivalships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which, opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to Republican Liberty. In this sense it is, that your Union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

"These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the UNION as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole, with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue of the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to Union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those, who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

"In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as a matter of serious concern, that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by Geographical discriminations, northern and southern, Atlantic and western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts, is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You can not shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heart-burnings which spring from these misrepresentations: they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head: they have seen in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic states, unfriendly to their interests in regard to the MISSISSIPPI: they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the UNION by which they were procured? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren, and connect them with aliens?

"To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliances, however strict, between the parts, can be an adequate substitute: they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a Constitution of Government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This Government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is, the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish Government, presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established Government.

"All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans, digested by common councils, and modified by mutual interests. However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominions.

"Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what can not be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty, is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is indeed little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

"I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled or repressed; but in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissention, which, in different ages and countries, has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

"Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party, are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

"It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

"There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of a popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warning, it should consume.

"It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding, in the exercise of the powers of one department, to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the Guardian of the Public Weal against invasions of the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern: some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be, in any particular, wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way, which the constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can, at any time, yield.

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice; and let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure; reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeeds, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

"Promote, then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened. As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is, to use it as sparingly as possible; avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering, also, that timely disbursements to prepare for danger, frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding, likewise, the accumulations of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertions in time of peace to discharge the debts, which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burthen, which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential you should practically bear in mind, that toward the payment of debts there must be Revenue; that to have Revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassments inseparable from the selection of the proper object (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and Morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and, at no distant period, a great Nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt, that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages, that might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be, that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a Nation with its Virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

"In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation, which indulges toward another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some decree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity, or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another, disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts, through passion, what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

"So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the allusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads, also, to concessions to the favorite Nation, of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

"As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, toward a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter. Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens), the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike for another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests. The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

"Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she most be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities. Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off, when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality, we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

"Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand on foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my own opinion, it is unnecessary, and would be unwise to extend them. Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing, with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view, that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

"In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course, which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself, that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigues, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated. How far in the discharge of my official duties, I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.

"In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my Proclamation of the twenty-second of April, 1793, is the index to my Plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it. After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.

"The considerations, which respects the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary, on this occasion, to detail. I will only observe, that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the Belligerent Powers, has been virtually admitted by all. The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity toward other nations. The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflection and experience. With me, a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.

"Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error: I am, nevertheless, too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope, that my Country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty-five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest. Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man, who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations; I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat, in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.

"GEORGE WASHINGTON. "UNITED STATES, "September 17, 1796."

There has been some discussion, within a few years past, concerning the authorship of Washington's Farewell Address, it having been claimed for General Hamilton, because a draught of it, varying but little in form and substance from the document under that title which we have given in the preceding pages, was found, in Hamilton's handwriting, among his papers, soon after his death in 1804.

The subject has been thoroughly examined by Horace Binney, Esq., of Philadelphia, in a volume of two hundred and fifty pages, published in the autumn of 1859. After a most searching analysis of every fact bearing upon the subject to be found in the writings of Washington, Madison, Hamilton, and others, he arrives at an inevitable conclusion, which he gives in the following words:--

"Washington was, undoubtedly, the original designer of the Farewell Address; and not merely by general or indefinite intimations, but by the suggestion of perfectly definite subjects, of an end or object, and of a general outline, the same which the paper now exhibits. His outline did not appear so distinctly in his own plan, because the subjects were not so arranged in it as to show that they were all comprehended within a regular and proportional figure; but when they came to be so arranged in the present Address, the scope of the whole design is seen to be contained within the limits he intended, and to fill them. The subjects were traced by him with adequate precision, though without due connection, with little expansion, and with little declared bearing of the parts upon each other, or toward a common centre; but they may now be followed with ease in their proper relations and bearing in the finished paper, such only excepted as he gave his final consent and approbation to exclude.

"In the most common and prevalent sense of the word among literary men, this may not, perhaps, be called authorship; but in the primary etymological sense--the quality of imparting growth or increase--there can be no doubt that it is so. By derivation from himself, the Farewell Address speaks the very mind of Washington. The fundamental thoughts and principles were his; but he was not the composer or writer of the paper.

"Hamilton was, in the prevalent literary sense, the composer and writer of the paper. The occasional adoption of Washington's language does not materially take from the justice of this attribution. The new plan, the different form, proceeded from Hamilton. He was the author of it. He put together the thoughts of Washington in a new order, and with a new bearing; and while, as often as he could, he used the words of Washington, his own language was the general vehicle, both of his own thoughts, and for the expansion and combination of Washington's thoughts. Hamilton developed the thoughts of Washington, and corroborated them--included several cognate subjects, and added many effective thoughts from his own mind, and united all into one chain by the links of his masculine logic.

"The main trunk was Washington's; the branches were stimulated by Hamilton; and the foliage, which was not exuberant, was altogether his: and he, more than Washington, pruned and nipped off, with severe discrimination, whatever was excessive--that the tree might bear the fruits which Washington desired, and become his full and fit representative....

"We have explicit authority for regarding the whole Man as compounded of BODY, SOUL, and SPIRIT. The Farewell Address, in a lower and figurative sense, is likewise so compounded. If these were divisible and distributable, we might, though not with full and exact propriety, allot the SOUL to Washington, and the SPIRIT to Hamilton. The elementary body is Washington's, also; but Hamilton has developed and fashioned it, and he has symmetrically formed and arranged the members, to give combined and appropriate action to the whole. This would point to an allotment of the soul and the elementary body to Washington, and of the arranging, developing, and informing spirit, to Hamilton--the same characteristic which is found in the great works he devised for the country, and are still the chart by which his department of the government is ruled.

"The Farewell Address itself, while in one respect--the question of its authorship--it has had the fate of the Eikon Basilike, in another it has been more fortunate; for no Iconoclasts has appeared, or ever can appear, to break or mar the image and superscription of Washington, which it bears, or to sully the principles of the moral and political action in the government of a nation, which are reflected from it with his entire approval, and were, in fundamental points, dictated by himself."--"An Inquiry into the Formation of Washington's Farewell Address," by Horace Binney, page 169.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Chapter XXXIV

WASHINGTON AT MOUNT VERNON--PUBLIC MATTERS CLAIM HIS ATTENTION--MONROE AND THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT--HIS PUBLIC RECEPTION AS MINISTER--THE DISPLAY DISAPPROVED OF AT HOME--HIS CONCESSIONS TO THE FRENCH--HIS INDISCREET PROMISE OF PECUNIARY AID--JAY'S MISSION--MONROE ASKS JAY FOR A COPY OF HIS TREATY FOR THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT--JAY'S REFUSAL--MONROE OFFENDED--MISAPPREHENSION AND RESENTMENT OF THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT--MONROE RECALLED--MR. PINCKNEY HIS SUCCESSOR--MONROE'S DEFENCE--WASHINGTON'S JUSTIFICATION OF HIS OWN COURSE.

As we have observed, Washington enjoyed the pleasures of retirement and partial repose at Mount Vernon, for about two months in the summer of 1796. Yet he was not wholly free from the cares and anxieties incident to his official station. His Farewell Address to his countrymen, as we have seen, was then carefully prepared for the public consideration; but subjects of more immediate importance, connected with national affairs, demanded and received his attention.

Jay's treaty had relieved the country from all apprehension of immediate war with Great Britain, and, at the same time, it had increased the unfriendly feeling between the government of the United States and that of France. The latter had discovered that Washington's original proclamation of neutrality, and his efforts to preserve that position for his government, were sincere, and not, as had been hoped, mere tricks to deceive the British cabinet; and the French Directory, and their partisans in America, were disappointed and greatly chagrined.

For a long time the administrators of government in France, exercising a most intolerant and relentless despotism, had been jealous of every act of friendship, or even of leniency performed toward Great Britain by the Americans; and Mr. Monroe, an avowed partisan of France, was received, at first with distrust. But with singular adroitness, discretion, and good judgment, Monroe managed to place himself, very speedily, high in the estimation of the government to which he was accredited. We have already noticed, incidentally, his presentation of the American flag to the National Convention of France, and the reciprocity of the compliment by M. Adet, almost a year afterward. The inauguration of these courtesies by Monroe at Paris, had been immediately followed by a public display of national amity, in which the representative of the United States so thoroughly committed his government to a political alliance with France, as to make Washington's plan of neutrality appear like a piece of diplomatic finesse. It was ordained that the American minister should be formally received by the French government, in a public manner. He was, accordingly, introduced into the National Convention, where he presented a written address, glowing with the warmest expressions of friendship for France and the French people, and admiration of their magnanimity, their fortitude, their valor, and their wisdom.

To this the president of the convention replied, with even greater enthusiasm. He alluded to the union of the two governments, as "not merely a diplomatic alliance," but as "the sweetest, the most frank fraternity"--"for ever indissoluble--for ever the dread of tyrants, the safeguard of the liberties of the world, and the preserver of all the social and philanthropic virtues.

"In bringing to us, citizen," continued the president, "the pledge of this union, so dear to us, you could not fail to be received with the liveliest emotions. Five years ago, a usurper of the sovereignty of the people would have received you with the pride which belongs to vice, thinking it much to have given to the minister of a free people some token of an insolent protection. But to-day, the sovereign people themselves, by the organ of their faithful representatives, receive you; and you see the tenderness, the effusion of soul, that accompanies the simple and touching ceremony! I am impatient to give you the fraternal embrace, which I am ordered to give in the name of the French people. Come and receive it in the name of the American people, and let this spectacle complete the annihilation of an impious coalition of tyrants."

At this affectionate appeal Monroe stepped forward, and received the president's "national embrace," and afterward, the warm congratulations of the assembly. He was offered the confiscated house of one of the nobility as a place of residence; and, for a few days, he was the idol of the French people. Then came the less ethereal operations of the grave business of his office; and when the pageant was all over--the apotheosis completed--Mr. Monroe found himself afflicted with many cares, and assailed by many annoyances. Clamorous American ship-masters and merchants flocked to his diplomatic residence, and preferred urgent claims; some for cargoes which they had been compelled to sell to the French government, and some asking the liquidation of dishonored bills, drawn by French agents in America, in payment for provision shipped to France, or the French West Indies. In many forms complaints and claims were made by Monroe's countrymen upon the French government, and the minister found a host of unpleasant duties to perform, for he did not wish to break the charm of that "sweetest, most frank fraternity," to the preservation of which he had so recently pledged his constituents. He, therefore, made some extraordinary concessions in relation to claims founded on breaches of the French treaty, in the seizure of enemy's goods in American vessels. He asked the French government to rescind the order authorizing such seizures, not because it would be just--be in accordance with treaty provisions--but because it would be for the pecuniary and commercial interests of France to do so. He was even so careful not to wound French pride, as to assure that government that he had no instructions to complain of that order as a breach of the treaty; and that, should it be thought productive of real benefit to France, the American government and people would bear it, not only with patience, but with pleasure.

When intelligence of Monroe's theatrical performances at his reception reached his government, it produced much mortification, and the secretary of state, in an official letter, suggested to him that the American cabinet expected nothing more than a private reception, and an oral speech; and reminded him that the government he was sent to represent was neutral, and that such a display might be offensive to other governments, especially to those of England and Spain, with both of whom important negotiations were then in progress. He was also reminded that circumstances might arise, when it would be necessary "to explain away or disavow an excess of fervor, so as to reduce it down to the cool system of neutrality."

The French government, evidently insincere in their "national embraces," and believing the other party to be equally so, determined to test the friendship of their allies. At that time the republic was heavily pressed with pecuniary embarrassments, and the United States were asked for a loan to relieve that pressure. Monroe, without the least particle of authority, unhesitatingly expressed his opinion, that his government would give to their dear ally any aid in their power to bestow; and he suggested three sources whence money might be obtained, namely: the separate states, the general government, and individuals. He went so far as to enter into a formal agreement concerning the equivalent in services, which France should give for such pecuniary aid, the most important of which was an active alliance in seizing the western posts still held by the British, and the conquest of the Louisiana country, inhabited by the French and Spanish, west of the Mississippi. France was also to assist the United States through a war with England and Spain, if one should occur. This would practically place the American republic in the position of an entire dependent upon the European one--a position utterly unnecessary, and incompatible with the interests and dignity of a free and independent nation.

Mr. Monroe urged his government to loan France five millions of dollars, in order to secure her good will and active alliance. But his proposition met with no favor at home, except among the ultra partisans of the French republic; and he was officially reminded that it had been, and still was, the invariable policy of the president to have his country as independent as possible of every nation upon the face of the earth--a policy which he had pursued from the beginning; "not assumed now for the first time, but wise at all times, and certain, if steadily pursued, to protect his country from the effects of commotions in Europe."

Jay's mission, from the beginning, had produced uneasiness and distrust in the diplomatic circles of France and Spain, and perplexed Monroe and his political friends. Giving greater latitude to the spirit of his instructions than their letter could possibly warrant, Monroe assured the French government that Jay's authority was strictly limited to a demand of reparation for injuries; and this assurance produced the impression that Jay had no authority to conclude a treaty of navigation and commerce. Not more than a fortnight after Monroe made these assurances, intelligence came that a treaty of commerce had actually been negotiated with the British government, and signed by the contracting parties.

Mr. Monroe's imprudence, and his zeal in the cause of France, now placed him in an unpleasant dilemma. He received from Mr. Jay the assurance that he would soon send him, in cipher, the principal heads of the treaty. But that would not be sufficient to appease the offended French government, and Mr. Monroe immediately sent a confidential person to Mr. Jay for a complete copy of the document. "'Tis necessary to observe," he said, "that as nothing will satisfy this government but a copy of the instrument itself, and which, as our ally, it thinks itself entitled to, so it will be useless for me to make to it any communication short of that. I mention this that you may know precisely the state of my engagements here, and how I deem it my duty to act under them, in relation to this object."

Mr. Jay, as in duty bound, civilly declined to send a copy of the treaty; and in his reply to Mr. Monroe's letter, took the occasion to give that gentleman his views on national independence and the duties of ministers.

"You must be sensible," he said, "that the United States, as a free and independent nation, have an unquestionable right to make any pacific arrangements with other powers which mutual convenience may dictate, provided those arrangements do not interdict or oppugn their prior engagements with other states.

"Whether this adjustment was consistent with our treaty with France? struck me as being the only question which would demand or receive the consideration of that republic; and I thought it due to the friendship subsisting between the two countries, that the French government should have, without delay, the most perfect satisfaction on that head." He then referred to his former communications, and gave him the following exact and literal extract from the treaty:--

"Nothing in this treaty contained, shall, however, be construed or operate contrary to former and existing public treaties with other sovereigns or states."

After speaking of his former intention to communicate to Mr. Monroe some of the most interesting particulars of the treaty, "but in the most perfect confidence," Mr. Jay continued:--

"As that instrument has not yet been ratified, nor received the ultimate forms necessary to give it validity; as further questions respecting parts of it may yet arise, and give occasion to further discussions and negotiations, so that, if finally concluded at all, it may then be different from what it now is, the impropriety of making it public at present is palpable and obvious; such a proceeding would be inconvenient and unprecedented. It does not belong to ministers who negotiate treaties to publish them, even when perfected, much less treaties not yet completed, and remaining open to alteration or rejection. Such acts belong exclusively to the governments who form them.

"I can not but flatter myself, that the French government is too enlightened and reasonable to expect that any consideration ought to induce me to overleap the bounds of my authority, or to be negligent of the respect which is due to the United States. That respect, and my obligations to observe it, will not permit me to give, without the permission of their government, a copy of the instrument in question to any person, or for any purpose; and by no means for the purpose of being submitted to the consideration and judgment of the councils of a foreign nation, however friendly."[104]

Soon after this, John Trumbull, Mr. Jay's secretary of legation, was about to pass through Paris, and he was authorized to make to Mr. Monroe a confidential communication concerning the provisions of the treaty. But the incensed minister refused to receive this or any communication in a form that he could not instantly lay before the French government. He afterward attempted to obtain a copy of the treaty from Thomas Pinckney, who passed through Paris on his way to Spain, but that gentleman would not betray Jay's confidence, and Monroe and the French government were compelled to wait until the authorized publication of the treaty the following summer.

Mr. Monroe felt himself aggrieved by what he deemed the want of confidence in him by the president and his cabinet, who had appointed him. He felt that the administration had injured him; and that the honor and credit of the United States were compromised by their refusal to redeem his promises of aid to the French republic, their "ally and friend." His first and natural impulse was to resign his post, but alleged patriotic, as well as personal considerations, induced him to remain. He held the most intimate private relations with the members of the Committee of Public Safety and other officers of the French government, and appears to have enjoyed their confidence while he remained there. But, whether from his undue attachment to the French republic, his opposition to Jay's treaty, or his mistaken notions of American interests, Mr. Monroe appears to have done little, after his correspondence with Mr. Jay, to allay ill feeling toward his country on the part of the French government. He had been specially instructed, when sent envoy to France, to explain the views and conduct of the government of the United States in forming the treaty with England; and for this purpose ample documents were furnished him. But it appears from his own letters (published in his defence after his return, in 1796),[105] that he omitted to use them. Uninstructed in the truths which should have been given them, the French government utterly misinterpreted the actions and misconceived the views of the United States; and when informed that the house of representatives would execute the treaty made by Jay, they became very bitter in their resentment, and exhibited their animosity by allowing a French privateer to capture an American merchant-vessel.

Washington and his cabinet were satisfied that the amity between the two nations would be wholly destroyed, if Mr. Monroe should remain longer in France, as the accredited representative of his government, and his recall was resolved upon.[106] To choose a proper person required great caution, sagacity, and discretion. It was the duty of the president to make the choice, and to take the responsibility of his appointment, the Congress not being in session. With great care, after consultation, he contemplated the character of his contemporaries in public life, and fixed upon two--John Marshall and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney--either of whom he considered well fitted for the responsible and delicate station. Marshall was the first choice, but private considerations compelled him to decline, when the president addressed the following letter to Mr. Pinckney:--

"The situation of affairs, and the interests of this country, as they relate to France, render it indispensably necessary that a faithful organ near that government, able and willing to explain its views, and to ascertain those of France, should immediately fill the place of our present minister plenipotentiary in Paris. Policy requires that this character, to be essentially serviceable, should be well attached to the government of his own country, and not obnoxious to the one to which he is sent. Where, then, can a man be found that would answer this description better than yourself?

"It is a fact too notorious to be denied, that the greatest embarrassments under which the administration of this government labors, proceed from the counteraction of people among ourselves, who are more disposed to promote the views of another nation, than to establish a national character of their own; and that, unless the virtuous and independent men of this country will come forward, it is not difficult to predict the consequences. Such is my decided opinion....

"Had not the case been important and urgent, I might have hesitated longer; but, in finding a character of the description I have mentioned, you will be at no loss to perceive the difficulty which occurs. He must be a man whose abilities and celebrity of character are well known to the people of this country, whose honor and integrity are unimpeached, and who ought, as far as the nature of the case will admit, to be acceptable to all parties. Doubtless many such there are; but those who have been either in the legislative or executive departments of the general government, and are best known to me, have been so decisive in their politics, and, possibly, so frank and public in their declarations, as to render it very difficult to choose from among them one in whom the confidence of this country could be placed, and the prejudices of the others not excited."

Mr. Pinckney accepted the appointment, and made immediate preparations for his departure for France. "Though my affairs have not, hitherto, been arranged as I could wish them," he said in his letter of acceptance, "the manner in which you state our political situation, and the interests of this country as they relate to France, oblige me to accept your appointment without hesitation. I am only apprehensive that your friendship has been too partial to the little merit I may possess, and that matters intrusted to me may fail through my want of ability."

Monroe had the misfortune to lose the confidence of his own government and that of the French republic at about the same time. Hoping that the house of representatives would refuse to execute the British treaty, and thus appease the French Directory, he had been quiet for some time, when, in February, 1796, he received a communication from De La Croix, the French minister for foreign affairs, informing him, that since the ratification of Jay's treaty, the Directory considered the alliance between France and the United States at an end; that Adet was to be recalled, and a special minister was to be sent out to make the announcement, and act as agent for his government. It was intimated, too, that Monroe could not fulfil the promises he had made, and that all the assurances of his inaugural as minister were fallacious. Monroe remonstrated, and in a special interview with the Directory, professed his willingness to answer all objections that might be made against the treaty. He was soon afterward furnished with a report on the subject of American relations, signed by De La Croix, in which the government was charged with the non-execution of treaty obligations, in several particulars. To these charges Monroe made a reply, which Washington considered very satisfactory: but it did not change the course of the Directory; and in the autumn they issued an "arret," ordering the seizure of British property found on board American vessels, and of provisions bound for England. This was a direct violation of the provisions of the treaty between the United States and France, and exhibited a disposition decidedly hostile.

This correspondence reached the president soon after his appointment of Pinckney as Monroe's successor; and a little later he received a letter from Mr. Monroe, written in cipher, on the twenty-fourth of March, which had been unaccountably delayed in its transmission. In that communication Monroe took occasion to say, that a long, private letter, written by Washington to Gouverneur Morris toward the close of December, 1795, had got into the hands of the French Directory, and produced an ill effect. Washington replied to this letter on the twenty-fifth of August. He acknowledged the genuineness of the letter; "but," he said, "I deny that there is anything contained in it that the French government could take exception to, unless the expression of an ardent wish that the United States might remain in peace with all the world, taking no part in the disputes of any part of it, should have produced this effect. I also gave it as my further opinion, that the sentiments of the mass of citizens in this country were in unison with mine.

"Confidential as this letter was expected to be, I have no objection to its being seen by anybody; and there is some mistake in saying I had no copy thereof, when there is a press one now before me, in which I discover no expression that in the eye of liberality and candor would be deemed objectionable."

After summing up the substance of his letter, Washington said, in conclusion: "My conduct in public and private life, as it relates to the important struggle in which the latter nation is engaged, has been uniform from the commencement of it, and may be summed up in a few words: that I have always wished well to the French Revolution; that I have always given it as my decided opinion, that no nation had a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they like best to live under themselves; and that, if this country could, consistently with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality, and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration that ought to actuate a people situated as we are, already deeply in debt, and in a convalescent state from the struggle we have been engaged in ourselves.

"On these principles I have steadily and uniformly proceeded, bidding defiance to calumnies calculated to sow seeds of distrust in the French nation, and to excite their belief of an influence possessed by Great Britain in the councils of this country, than which nothing is more unfounded and injurious."

FOOTNOTES:

[104] Letter of Jay to Monroe, dated February 5, 1795.--Life and Writings of John Jay, vol. i., page 336.

[105] Entitled "A View of the Conduct of the Executive of the United States, connected with the Mission to the French Republic, during the Years 1794, '5, & '6."

[106] Washington asked the opinion of his cabinet on the subject of a change of ministers, and at a meeting on the second of July, the three secretaries, Pickering, Wolcott, and M'Henry, addressed a letter to him, in which they said:--

"On the expediency of this change we are agreed. We think the great interests of the United States require, that they have near the French government some faithful organ to explain their real views, and to ascertain those of the French. Our duty obliges us to be explicit. Although the present minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris has been amply furnished with documents, to explain the views and conduct of the United States, yet his own letters authorize us to say, that he has omitted to use them, and thereby exposed the United States to all the mischiefs which could flow from jealous and erroneous conceptions of their views and conduct. Whether this dangerous omission arose from such an attachment to the cause of France as rendered him too little mindful of the interests of his own country, or from mistaken views of the latter, or from any other cause, the evil is the same. We, therefore, conceive it to be indispensably necessary, that the present minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris should be recalled, and another American citizen appointed in his stead.... In confirmation of our opinion of the expediency of recalling Mr. Monroe, we think the occasion requires that we communicate a private letter from him, which came to our hands since you left Philadelphia. This letter corresponds with other intelligence of his political opinions and conduct. A minister who has thus made the notorious enemies of the whole system of government his confidential correspondents in matters which affect that government, can not be relied on to do his duty to the latter. This private letter we received in confidence. Among other circumstances that will occur to your recollection, the anonymous letters from France to Thomas Blount and others are very noticeable. We know that Montflorence was the writer, and that he was the chancellor of the consul Skipwith; and, from the connection of Mr. Monroe with those persons, we can entertain no doubt the anonymous letters were written with his privity.

"These anonymous communications from officers of the United States in a foreign country, on matters of a public nature, and which deeply concern the interests of the United States in relation to that foreign country, are proofs of sinister designs, and show that the public interests are no longer safe in the hands of such men."

The attorney-general, in his letter to the president, said: "I have formed an opinion that our minister plenipotentiary at Paris ought not to be permitted to continue there any longer, than until the arrival of his successor; and that it is not only expedient, but absolutely necessary, that he should be immediately recalled, and another minister appointed. Upon this subject I concur in sentiment with the heads of departments, as expressed in their letter of the second instant."

The attorney-general then gave, as reasons for his opinion--First, that "from his letters in the office of the department of state, it appears he has neglected or failed to justify, or truly represent, to the republic of France the conduct and motives of his own country, relative to the treaty with Great Britain." Secondly, that "his correspondence with the executive of the United States has been, and is, infrequent, unsatisfactory, reserved, and without cordiality or confidence on his part."

"I might add other reasons, if they were necessary," continued the attorney-general; "for instance, that he corresponds less confidentially with the executive of the United States, than with the opposers and libellers of his administration; and that there is too much reason to believe he is furthering the views of a faction in America, more than the peace and happiness of the United States."

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Chapter XXXV

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION APPROACHING--METHOD OF ELECTION--MEASURES OF POLITICAL PARTIES--SPURIOUS LETTERS REPUBLISHED--WASHINGTON'S FAREWELL ADDRESS PUBLISHED--RECEPTION OF THE ADDRESS--AFFECTION OF THE PEOPLE--CANDIDATES FOR THE PRESIDENCY--COCKADE PROCLAMATION--ADET'S CHARGES AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT--APPEAL TO THE PASSIONS--MEETING OF CONGRESS--THE PRESIDENT'S LAST ANNUAL MESSAGE--ITS RECOMMENDATIONS--MILITARY ACADEMY--WEST POINT--RELATIONS WITH FRANCE--ANSWER OF THE TWO HOUSES OF CONGRESS--PRAISE OF WASHINGTON AND HIS ADMINISTRATION OPPOSED--HIS FRIENDS IN A LARGE MAJORITY--PERSONAL ABUSE--MALIGNANT LETTER FROM THOMAS PAINE, AND ADET'S PAMPHLET--WASHINGTON'S REMARKS ON THEIR PUBLICATION.

The appointed hour for a new presidential election was now drawing near. At that time no nomination for chief-magistrate was formally made, nor officially announced. The letter of the constitution was adhered to, and the people were called upon to choose electors only, who, when they should meet at the time specified by the constitution, should ballot for whomsoever they pleased for president. Yet the politicians and the leaders of parties in the Congress usually held up to the view of the people candidates who afterward received the consideration of the electoral college. The electors were therefore chosen in reference, first, to their partisan character, and secondly, to their partiality to some particular man prominent in the political field.

It was well known to Washington's more intimate friends, that he would not consent to re-election. His reserve on that subject, and the long delay in making a public announcement of his intention to retire to private life puzzled the politicians. The president's political enemies were more active than ever. We have already noticed the publication of certain queries proposed by Washington to his cabinet, respecting the reception of Genet, by which it was hoped to prejudice him in the public mind by proving, by implication, his hostility to France. Another weapon used by his unscrupulous enemies, for the purpose of degrading him in the eyes of the American people, was the republication of a series of spurious letters, purporting to have been written by Washington. They were first published in London, in 1777, and republished in Rivington's Royal Gazette, in February, 1778. These letters, it was charged, were written by Washington from the army to members of his family, in which he expressed private views of public affairs quite inconsistent with his acts as commander-in-chief, or his professions as a patriot. It was alleged that Billy, his body-servant, had been captured, and that these letters, or copies of them, were found in a portmanteau in the servant's possession. But the original fabricator of the letters missed his aim. It was well known that Billy had never been in the hands of the enemy;[107] and, in a short time, this attempt to injure Washington was forgotten, and the letters were buried in oblivion. But the hyena of political partisanship dragged them from the grave almost twenty years later, and they were republished with a new title,[108] and put forth as genuine, very soon after the appearance of two volumes of Washington's official letters, which had been copied, by permission, in the office of the secretary of state, carried to London, and there printed.

In order to give more force to the intended effect of these spurious letters, a preface to the new edition was carefully written, which contained the following paragraph:--

"Since the publication of the two volumes of General Washington's 'Original Letters to the Congress,' the editor has been repeatedly applied to for the general's 'Domestic and Confidential Epistles,' first published soon after the beginning of the American war. These epistles are here offered to the public, together with a copious appendix, containing a number of official letters and papers, not to be found in the general's original letters above noticed; but the collection must certainly be looked upon as in a mutilated state, so long as it remains unaccompanied with the epistles, etc., which are now respectfully submitted to the patronage of the public, and which form a supplement absolutely necessary to make the work complete. That this collection of 'Domestic and Confidential Epistles' will be regarded as a valuable acquisition by a very great majority of the citizens of the United States, is presumable from the prevailing taste of all well-informed people. Men not precluded by ignorance from every degree of literary curiosity, will always feel a solicitude to become acquainted with whatever may serve to throw light on illustrious personages. History represents them acting on the stage of the world, courting the applause of mankind. To see them in their real character we must follow them behind the scenes, among their private connections and domestic concerns."

Nothing in our modern political warfare has equalled, in meanness and moral turpitude, this assassin-stab at the character of a public man. Washington, with proper dignity, treated it as he had done other slanders, with that contemptuous silence which it deserved. But that very silence was construed into an acknowledgment of the truth of the words of the calumny. "The malignant commentators on this spurious text," says Marshall, "would not admit the possibility of its being apocryphal."

While political and partisan abuse was pouring most copiously upon the head of the president, his Farewell Address appeared. It was published, as we have seen, at about the middle of September, and produced a great sensation throughout the country. The ribald voice of party-spirit was for a moment subdued in tone, if not silenced, for it was deprived of the theme of Washington's renomination, which had been a convenient excuse for attacks upon his character. In every part of the Union sentiments of veneration for the author were manifested. Some of the state legislatures directed the address to be entered at large upon their journals. It was published in every newspaper in the land, and in many of those in foreign countries; and in legislative bodies and social and diplomatic circles abroad, it was for some time a fruitful topic of remark. From the time of its publication until the expiration of the term of his presidency, Washington received public addresses from all the state legislatures which were convened within that period. Many public bodies, also, addressed him with affectionate words, expressing cordial approbation of his conduct during the eight years that he had filled the office of chief-magistrate of the nation.[109]

Already the strong hold which his person and character had taken of the affections of his countrymen had been fully evinced. Names of men having great political influence had been held up to the people in several states as his successor, but were not satisfactory. "In districts where the opposition to his administration was most powerful," says Marshall, "where all his measures were most loudly condemned; where those who approved his system possessed least influence; the men who appeared to control public opinion on every other subject found themselves unable to move it on this. Even the most popular among the leaders of the opposition were reduced to the necessity of surrendering their pretensions to a place in the electoral body, or of pledging themselves to bestow their suffrages on the actual president. The determination of his fellow-citizens had been unequivocally manifested, and it was believed to be apparent that the election would again be unanimous, when he announced his resolution to withdraw from the honors and the toils of office."

"The president declining to be again elected," wrote Oliver Wolcott, "constitutes a most important epoch in our national affairs. The country meet the event with reluctance, but they do not feel that they can make any claim for the further services of a man who has conducted their armies through a successful war; has so largely contributed to establish a national government; has so long presided over our councils and directed the public administration, and in the most advantageous manner settled all national differences, and who can leave the administration when nothing but our folly and internal discord can render the country otherwise than happy."

The federalists and republicans now marshalled their forces for the election. Their respective chiefs were brought forward. John Adams, whose official station placed him in the line of promotion, and whose public services, ability, and sterling integrity were well known to the nation, was the choice of the federalists for the presidency, and Thomas Pinckney, the accomplished diplomat, for the vice-presidency. The republican party chose Mr. Jefferson, to use a modern political phrase, as their standard-bearer. With these names as watchwords, the party leaders went into the contest for presidential electors in November. That contest was warm in every doubtful state. The parties seemed equally balanced, and the final result of the action of the electoral college, unlike the operations of the canvass in our day, could not be determined beforehand.

While the canvass was in progress, Adet, the French minister, imitating Genet, attempted to influence the political action of the American people. The British treaty, the recall of Monroe, and the appointment of Pinckney as his successor at Paris, offended him, and a few weeks after the departure of Pinckney, he made a formal communication of the decree of his government, already mentioned, which evinced a spirit of hostility. In his accompanying letter he entered into an elaborate defence of the decree, and renewed complaints which he had before urged, that British ships-of-war were allowed to recruit their crews by pressing into their service sailors from American vessels. Further imitating Genet, by appealing to the people, Adet sent his communication to be printed in the Aurora, at the same time that it was forwarded to the state department. This was followed, in the course of a few days, by a proclamation, signed by Adet, calling upon all Frenchmen residing in America, in the name of the French Directory, to wear the tri-colored cockade, which he termed "the symbol of a liberty the fruit of eight years' toil and five years' victories;" and assured those he addressed, that any Frenchman who should hesitate to comply, should not be allowed the aid of French consular chanceries, or the national protection. Immediately after this "cockade proclamation" was issued, that token of attachment to the French republic abounded. It was worn by many Americans as well as Frenchmen, and it became the badge of party distinction for several years.

Adet followed up his proclamation by another missile, sent simultaneously to the state department and the Aurora, demanding "the execution of that contract [treaty of 1778] which assured to the United States their existence, and which France regarded as the pledge of the most sacred union between two people, the freest upon earth." He assumed that his government was "terrible to its enemies, but generous to its allies," and prefaced his summary of alleged violations of the international compact, by a flourish of rhetoric intended to impress the American people.

"When Europe rose up against the republic, at its birth," he said, "and menaced it with all the horrors of famine; when on every side France could not calculate on any but enemies, their thoughts turned toward America, and a sweet sentiment then mingled itself with those proud feelings which the presence of danger, and the desire of repelling it, produced in their hearts. In Americans they saw friends. Those who went to brave tempests and death upon the ocean, forgot all dangers in order to indulge the hope of visiting that American continent where, for the first time, the French colors had been displayed in favor of liberty. Under the guaranty of the law of nations, under the protecting shade of a solemn treaty, they expected to find in the ports of the United States an asylum as sure as at home; they thought, if I may use the expression, there to find a second country. The French government thought as they did. O hope worthy of a faithful people, how hast thou been deceived! So far from offering the French the succors which friendship might have given without compromising itself, the American government, in this respect, violated the obligations of treaties."

This exordium was followed by a summary of instances of bad faith on the part of the United States, beginning, as he said, with the president's "insidious proclamation of neutrality," and aggravated by the late treaty with Great Britain. Adet announced the fact that the French Directory, as an expression of their dissatisfaction with what they considered equivalent to a treaty of alliance between the United States and Great Britain, had given him orders to suspend his ministerial functions, and to return home. "But the cause," he added, "which had so long restrained the just resentment of the executive directory from bursting forth, now tempered its effects. The name of America, notwithstanding the wrongs of its government, still excited sweet emotions in the hearts of Frenchmen; and the executive directory wished not to break with a people whom they loved to salute with the appellation of a friend." Therefore, the suspension of his functions was not to be regarded as a rupture between France and the United States, but as a mark of just discontent, which was to last until the government of the United States "returned to sentiments and to measures more conformable to the interests of the alliance, and to the sworn friendship between the two nations."

This extraordinary letter closed with the following peroration, intended to stimulate the anti-British feeling among the Americans, and to influence the action of the electoral college in their choice of chief-magistrate of the republic:--

"Alas! time has not yet demolished the fortifications with which the English roughened this country, nor those the Americans raised for their defence; their half-rounded summits still appear in every quarter, amid plains, on the tops of mountains. The traveller need not search for the ditch which served to encompass them; it is still open under his feet. Scattered ruins of houses laid waste, which the fire had partly respected, in order to leave monuments of British fury, are still to be found. Men still exist who can say, 'Here a ferocious Englishman slaughtered my mother; there my wife tore her bleeding daughter from the hands of an unbridled Englishman!' Alas! the soldiers who fell under the sword of the Britons are not yet reduced to dust; the laborer, in turning up his fields, still draws from the bosom of the earth their whitened bones, while the ploughman, with tears of tenderness and gratitude, still recollects that his fields, now covered with rich harvests, have been moistened with French blood; while everything around the inhabitants of this country animates them to speak of the tyranny of Great Britain, and of the generosity of Frenchmen; when England had declared a war of death, to revenge herself on France for having consecrated with her blood the independence of the United States; at such a moment their government makes a treaty of amity with their ancient tyrant, the implacable enemy of their ancient ally! O Americans! covered with noble scars! O you, who have so often flown to death and to victory with French soldiers! you who know those genuine sentiments which distinguish the true warrior! whose hearts have always vibrated with those of your companions in arms! consult them to-day to know what they experience. Recollect, also, that magnanimous souls, if they resent an affront with liveliness, know also how to forget one. Let your government return to itself, and you will still find in Frenchmen faithful friends and generous allies!"

The second session of the fourth Congress convened on the fifth of December, and Washington met both houses, for the last time, on the seventh. His message was short, but comprehensive, dignified, and temperate. He took a general view of the condition of the country, in which he adverted to the existing relations with the Indians; the delay in delivering up the western posts, according to the provisions of Jay's treaty; the proceedings of the commissioners to determine the northeastern boundary of the United States; the action of other commissioners under the treaty; the appointment of agents to reside in Great Britain and the West Indies, "for the protection and relief of American seamen;" and the relations with Algiers. He urged an increase of the naval force of the United States as indispensable. "It is in our own experience," he said, "that the most sincere neutrality is not a sufficient guard against the depredations of nations at war. To secure respect to a neutral flag requires a naval force, organized and ready to vindicate it from insult or aggression. This may even prevent the necessity of going to war, by discouraging belligerent powers from committing such violations of the rights of the neutral party, as may, first or last, leave no other option." He advised them to "begin, without delay, to provide and lay up the materials for the building and equipping of ships-of-war," and to be prepared for all future contingencies.

He urged upon them the importance of measures for fostering and encouraging domestic manufactures, especially those articles which might be needed in the event of war. "Ought our country," he said, "to remain in such cases dependent on foreign supply, precarious, because liable to be interrupted? If the necessary articles should, in this mode, cost more in time of peace, will not the security and independence thence arising form an ample compensation?"

He also recommended the fostering care of the government in promoting agriculture, the predominant interest of the country. "In proportion as nations advance in population and other circumstances of maturity," he said, "this truth becomes more apparent, and renders the cultivation of the soil more an object of public patronage. Institutions grow up supported by the public purse; and to what object can it be dedicated with greater propriety?"

He again urged the expediency of establishing a national university and a military academy. "However pacific the general policy of the nation may be," he said, in reference to the military school, "it ought never to be without an adequate stock of military knowledge for emergencies. The first would impair the energies of its character, and both would hazard its safety, or expose it to greater evils when war could not be avoided. Besides, that war might not depend upon its own choice. In proportion as the observance of pacific maxims might exempt a nation from the necessity of practising the rules of the military art, ought to be its care in preserving and transmitting, by proper establishments, the knowledge of that art. Whatever argument may be drawn from particular examples, superficially viewed, a thorough examination of the subject will evince, that the art of war is at once comprehensive and complicated; that it demands much previous study; and that the possession of it in its most improved and perfect state, is always of great moment to the security of a nation. This, therefore, ought to be a serious care of every government." These and former suggestions on this subject made by Washington, were finally acted upon by the Congress, and in March, 1802, an act was passed for the establishment of such an institution at West Point, in the Hudson Highlands.[110] But little was done, however, until the breaking out of war, in 1812, when a corps of professors was appointed, and the institution was organized.

Washington made the following temperate remarks, in his message, concerning the disputes with France: "While, in our external relations, some serious inconveniences and embarrassments have been overcome, and others lessened, it is with much pain and deep regret I mention, that circumstances of a very unwelcome nature have lately occurred. Our trade has suffered, and is suffering, extensive injuries in the West Indies, from the cruisers and agents of the French republic; and communications have been received from its minister here, which indicate the danger of a further disturbance of our commerce by its authority; and which are, in other respects, far from agreeable. It has been my constant, sincere, and earnest wish, in conformity with that of our nation, to maintain cordial harmony, and a perfect friendly understanding with that republic. The wish remains unabated; and I shall persevere in the endeavor to fulfil it, to the utmost extent of what shall be consistent with a just and indispensable regard to the rights and honor of our country; nor will I easily cease to cherish the expectation, that a spirit of justice, candor, and friendship, on the part of the republic, will eventually insure success. In pursuing this course, however, I can not forget what is due to the character of our government and nation; or to a full and entire confidence in the good sense, patriotism, self-respect, and fortitude of my countrymen."

In conclusion Washington observed: "The situation in which I now stand, for the last time, in the midst of the representatives of the people of the United States, naturally recalls the period when the administration of the present form of government commenced; and I can not omit the occasion to congratulate you, and my country, on the success of the experiment, nor to repeat my fervent supplication to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and Sovereign Arbiter of Nations, that his providential care may still be extended to the United States; that the virtue and happiness of the people may be preserved; and that the government which they have instituted for the protection of their liberties may be perpetual."

The answer of the senate to this speech embraced all of its topics, and approved every sentiment it contained. After alluding to the prosperous condition of the United States, especially in their domestic relations, the senate said: "While contemplating the causes that produce this auspicious result, we must acknowledge the excellence of the constitutional system, and the wisdom of the legislative provisions; but we should be deficient in gratitude and justice, did we not attribute a great portion of these advantages to the virtue, firmness, and talents of your administration, which have been conspicuously displayed in the most trying times, and on the most critical occasions: it is, therefore, with the sincerest regrets that we now receive an official notification of your intentions to retire from the public employments of your country.

"When we review the various scenes of your public life, so long and so successfully devoted to the most arduous services, civil and military, as well during the struggles of the American Revolution as the convulsive periods of a recent date, we can not look forward to your retirement without our warmest affections and most anxious regards accompanying you; and without mingling, with our fellow-citizens at large, in the sincerest wishes for your personal happiness that sensibility and attachment can express. The most effectual consolation that can offer for the loss we are about to sustain, arises from the animating reflection that the influence of your example will extend to your successors, and the United States will thus continue to enjoy an able, upright, and energetic administration."

The reply of the house was equally warm in personal compliments. "We have ever concurred with you," they said, "in the most sincere and uniform disposition to preserve our neutral relations inviolate, and it is, of course, with anxiety and deep regret we hear that any interruption of our harmony with the French republic has occurred; for we feel, with you and with our constituents, the cordial and unabated wish to maintain a perfect friendly understanding with that nation. Your endeavors to fulfil that wish, and by all honorable means to preserve peace, and to restore that harmony and affection which have heretofore so happily subsisted between the French republic and the United States, can not fail, therefore, to interest our attention. And while we participate in the full reliance you have expressed in the patriotism, self-respect, and fortitude of our countrymen, we cherish the pleasing hope that a mutual spirit of justice and moderation will insure the success of your perseverance.

"When we advert to the internal situation of the United States," they continued, "we deem it equally natural and becoming to compare the present period with that immediately antecedent to the operation of the government, and to contrast it with the calamities in which the state of war still involves several of the European nations, as the reflections deduced from both tend to justify as well as to excite a warmer admiration of our free constitution, and to exalt our minds to a more fervent and grateful sense of piety toward Almighty God for the beneficence of his providence, by which its administration has been hitherto so remarkably distinguished.

"And while we entertain a grateful conviction that your wise, firm, and patriotic administration has been signally conducive to the success of the present form of government, we can not forbear to express the deep sensations of regret with which we contemplate your intended retirement from office.

"As no other suitable occasion may occur, we can not suffer the present to pass without attempting to disclose some of the emotions which it can not fail to awaken. The gratitude and admiration of your countrymen are still drawn to the recollection of those resplendent virtues and talents which were so eminently instrumental to the achievements of the Revolution, and of which that glorious event will ever be the memorial. Your obedience to the voice of duty and your country, when you quitted, reluctantly, a second time, the retreat you had chosen, and accepted the presidency, afforded a new proof of the devotedness of your zeal in its service, and an earnest of the patriotism and success which have characterized your administration. As the grateful confidence of the citizens in the virtues of their chief-magistrate has essentially contributed to that success, we persuade ourselves that the millions whom we represent participate with us in the anxious solicitude of the present occasion.

"Yet we can not be unmindful that your moderation and magnanimity, twice displayed, by retiring from your exalted stations, afford examples no less rare and instructive to mankind, than valuable to a republic. Although we are sensible that this event, of itself, completes the lustre of a character already conspicuously unrivalled by the coincidence of virtue, talents, success, and public estimation; yet we conceive we owe it to you, sir, and still more emphatically to ourselves, and to our nation (of the language of whose hearts we presume to think ourselves, at this moment, the faithful interpreters), to express the sentiments with which it is contemplated.

"The spectacle of a free and enlightened nation offering, by its representatives, the tribute of unfeigned approbation to its First Citizen, however novel and interesting it may be, derives all its lustre (a lustre which accident or enthusiasm could not bestow, and which adulation would tarnish) from the transcendent merit of which it is the voluntary testimony.

"May you long enjoy that liberty which is so dear to you, and to which your name will ever be so dear; may your own virtues and a nation's prayers obtain the happiest sunshine for the decline of your days, and the choicest of future blessings. For our country's sake, for the sake of republican liberty, it is our earnest wish that your example may be the guide of your successors; and thus, after being the ornament and safeguard of the present age, become the patrimony of our descendants."

When the committee presented this address to the house, some of the more zealous of the opposition, among whom was Mr. Giles, of Virginia, warmly opposed it. He moved that the whole of it in which the character and influence of the president were eulogized should be expunged. He expressed his belief that the want of "wisdom and firmness" in the administration had conducted the affairs of the nation to a crisis which threatened greater calamities than any that had before occurred. He did not regret the president's retiring from office. He hoped he would do so, and enjoy the happiness that awaited him in retirement. He believed that it would more conduce to that happiness that he should retire, than if he should remain in office. He believed that the government of the United States, founded on the broad basis of the people, required no single man to administer it. The people were competent to manage governmental affairs; and they would be in a calamitous situation indeed, if one man were essential to the existence of the government. He believed that there were a thousand men in the United States capable of filling the presidential chair, and he was willing to trust to the discernment of the people in making a proper choice. Though the voice of all America should declare the president's retiring a calamity, he could not join in the declaration, because he did not conceive it to be a misfortune. He had always, he said, disapproved of the measures of the administration in regard to foreign relations, and so had many members of the house, and he should not now disavow former opinions, without being first convinced of having been in error. He perceived more cause than ever for adhering to his old opinions. The course of events had pointed out their propriety; and, if he was not much mistaken, a crisis was at hand which would confirm them. He desired gentlemen who were willing to compliment the president to have some respect for the feelings of others.

The administration party in the house strenuously opposed the motion to expunge. They admitted that there might be many who were able to fill the presidential chair with equal ability with Washington, but there was not one who possessed, in a similar degree, the confidence of the people. The regrets of his constituents, because of his proposed retirement, had been expressed in every part of the Union, and the voice of the people coincided with the sentiments of the address. The motion to expunge was lost by a large majority. Only twelve members recorded themselves in the affirmative, among whom was Andrew Jackson, who had just taken his seat in the house, as a representative of Tennessee.

While Adet was fulminating his thunders against the administration, and the opposition in the house were doing all in their power to injure the president, the Aurora newspaper was pouring out its venom with increased malignity. "If ever a nation was debauched by a man," said a correspondent of that paper, on the twenty-third of December, "the American nation has been debauched by Washington. If ever a nation was deceived by a man, the American nation has been deceived by Washington. Let his conduct, then, be an example to future ages. Let it serve to be a warning that no man may be an idol. Let the history of the federal government instruct mankind, that the mask of patriotism may be worn to conceal the foulest designs against the liberties of the people."

At about the same time, a malignant pamphlet, in the form of a letter from Thomas Paine to Washington, was issued from the office of the Aurora. Paine had been a member of the National Assembly of France, and thrown into prison. Application had been made to the United States government for his release, but, as in the case of Lafayette, it could do nothing. This seeming neglect kindled the ire of Paine, who had, at this time, become an habitual drunkard. He had, in consequence, also become morose in disposition, and dogmatical in his opinions to an insufferable degree. Monroe sympathized with him; and under his roof, in Paris, Paine wrote the virulent letter alluded to, and sent it to Bache, of the Aurora, to print and disseminate. The following extract will be sufficient to exhibit its tone and temper:--

"The part I acted in the American Revolution is well known; I shall not here repeat it. I know, also, that had it not been for the aid received from France in men, money, and ships, that your cold and unmilitary conduct (as I shall show in the course of this letter) would, in all probability, have lost America; at least she would not have been the independent nation she now is. You slept away your time in the field till the finances of the country were completely exhausted, and you have but little share in the glory of the final event. It is time, sir, to speak the undisguised language of historical truth.

"Elevated to the chair of the presidency, you assumed the merit of everything to yourself, and the natural ingratitude of your constitution began to appear. You commenced your presidential career by encouraging and swallowing the grossest adulation; and you travelled America, from one end to the other, to put yourself in the way of receiving it. You have as many addresses in your chest as James the Second. As to what were your views (for if you are not great enough to have ambition, you are little enough to have vanity) they can not be directly inferred from expressions of your own; but the partisans of your politics have divulged the secret."

How false and malignant are the assertions in this paragraph (which is a fair specimen of the whole letter), the readers of these volumes well know. It appears strange that a gentleman like Monroe, who was afterward an honored chief-magistrate of the republic, should have been so infatuated as to allow such a libel to go from under his roof.

The Aurora press also issued a pamphlet at this time, entitled "Notes from Citizen Adet, Minister Plenipotentiary of the French Republic near the United States of America, to the Secretary of State of the United States." It was printed in French, with an English translation facing each page. It contained the correspondence to which we have alluded, and occupied, in the two languages, ninety-five pages. In reference to this pamphlet, Washington wrote to his friend, Doctor Stuart, early in January:--

"As to what effect M. Adet's conduct has had, or will have, on the public mind, you can form a better opinion than myself. One of the objects which he had in view, in timing the publication, is too apparent to require explanation. Some of his own zealots do not scruple to confess that he has been too precipitate, and thereby injured the cause he meant to enforce; which is to establish such an influence in this country as to sway the government, and to control its measures. Evidences of this design are abundant, and new proofs are exhibiting themselves to illustrate the fact; and yet, lamentable thought! a large party, under real or pretended fears of British influence, are moving heaven and earth to aid him in his designs. It is a fact well known, for history proves it, that from the restless temper of the French, and the policy of that nation, they attempt openly or covertly, by threats or soothing professions, to influence the conduct of most governments. That they have attempted it with us a little time will show. But, finding that a neutral conduct had been adopted, and would not be relinquished by those who administered the government, the next step was to try the people; and to work upon them, several presses and many scribblers have been employed to emblazon the improper acts of the British government and its officers, and to place them in all the most exaggerated and odious points of view of which they were susceptible; to complain that there was not only a deficiency of friendship, but a want of justice also, in the executive toward France, the cause of which, say they, is to be found in a predilection for Great Britain. This not working so well as was expected, from a supposition that there was too much confidence in, and, perhaps, personal regard for, the present chief-magistrate and his politics, the batteries latterly have been levelled at him particularly and personally. Although he is soon to become a private citizen, his opinions are to be knocked down, and his character reduced as low as they are capable of sinking it, even by resorting to absolute falsehoods. As an evidence whereof, and of the plan they are pursuing, I send you a letter from Mr. Paine to me, printed in this city, and disseminated with great industry. Others of a similar nature are also in circulation.

"To what lengths the French Directory will ultimately go, it is difficult to say; but, that they have been led to the present point by our own people, I have no doubt. Whether some, who have done this, would choose to accompany them any further or not, I shall not undertake to decide. But I shall be mistaken if the candid part of my countrymen, although they may be under a French influence, do not see and acknowledge that they have imbibed erroneous impressions of the conduct of this government toward France, when the communication which I promised at the opening of the session, and which will be ready in a few days, comes before the public. It will be seen, if I mistake not, also, that country has not such a claim upon our gratitude as has been generally supposed; and that this country has violated no engagement with it, been guilty of no act of injustice toward it, nor been wanting in friendship when it could be rendered without departing from the neutral station we had taken and resolved to maintain."

FOOTNOTES:

[107] "Although I never wrote, nor even saw one of these letters until they issued from New York in print," wrote Washington to a friend, in January, 1797, "yet the author of them must have been tolerably well acquainted in, or with some person of my family, to have given the names and some circumstances, which are grouped in the mass of erroneous details. But, of all the mistakes which have been committed in this business, none is more palpable, or susceptible of detection, than the manner in which it is said they were obtained, by the capture of my mulatto, Billy, with a portmanteau. All the army under my immediate command could contradict this, and I believe most of them know, that no attendant of mine, nor a particle of my baggage, ever fell into the hands of the enemy during the whole course of the war."

[108] The title was "Epistles, Domestic, Confidential, and Official, from General Washington; written about the commencement of the American Contest, when he entered on the Command of the Army of the United States. New York, printed by G. Robinson and J. Bull. London, reprinted by F. H. Rivington, No. 62 St. Paul's Churchyard, 1796." In order to give the affair the appearance of genuineness, and to make a volume of respectable size, several important public despatches, which actually passed between Washington and the British commanders; and also, a selection from several of his addresses, orders, and instructions, were added.

[109] A selection from Washington's replies to these addresses may be found in the twelfth volume of Sparks' "Life and Writings of Washington."

[110] For a notice of a general plan of a military academy at West Point, prepared by Washington, see Sparks's "Life and Writings of Washington," viii., 417.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

Chapter XXXVI

FRIENDLY OVERTURES TO FRANCE--PICKERING'S HISTORICAL AND EXPLANATORY LETTER TO PINCKNEY--WASHINGTON'S SUGGESTIONS--FRENCH OUTRAGES UPON AMERICAN COMMERCE--RESULTS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION--JOHN ADAMS THE NATION'S CHOICE--HIS FOREBODINGS RESPECTING HIS HOUSEHOLD--WASHINGTON'S SALE OF SUPERFLUITIES--MRS. WASHINGTON'S LAST DRAWING-ROOM--BIRTHDAY FESTIVITIES--WASHINGTON'S EMOTIONS--LETTERS TO HIS FRIENDS ON HIS RETIREMENT--FAREWELL DINNER--HIS DECLARATIONS RESPECTING THE SPURIOUS LETTERS--INAUGURATION OF ADAMS--WASHINGTON'S PARTING WORDS--ADAMS'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS--A TINGE OF JEALOUSY--ELEGANT ENTERTAINMENT GIVEN TO WASHINGTON--VIOLENT ATTACKS UPON HIM BY THE "AURORA"--THE EDITOR BEATEN AND HUMBLED.

Sincerely desirous of maintaining a good understanding with the French, the president, early in January, requested Mr. Pickering, the secretary of state, to address a letter to Mr. Pinckney, the United States minister in France, stating in full the causes of difficulty between the two governments, examining and reviewing the same, and submitting, with his letter, a mass of relative documents, by which the whole matter might be fully understood. Pickering's letter and the documents were laid before Congress on the nineteenth of January, accompanied by a message from the President, in which he said that the immediate object of Mr. Pinckney's mission to France was, "to make to that government such explanations of the principles and conduct of our own, as by manifesting our good faith, might remove all jealousy and discontent, and maintain that harmony and good understanding with the French republic which it had been his constant solicitude to preserve. A government which required only a knowledge of the truth to justify its measures, could but be anxious to have this fully and frankly displayed."

Previous to the completion of the letter to Pinckney, Washington wrote to Pickering, suggesting that some such summing up as the following might be proper:--

"That the conduct of the United States toward France has been, as will appear from a foregoing statement, regulated by the strictest principles of neutrality.

"That there has been no attempt in the government to violate our treaty with that country, to weaken our engagements therewith, or to withhold any friendship we could render, consistent with the neutrality we had adopted.

"That peace has been our primary object; but, so far has it been from inducing us to acquiesce silently in the capturing of our vessels, impressing our seamen, or in the misconduct of the naval or other officers of the British government, that no instance can be produced of authenticated facts having passed unnoticed, and, where occasion required it, without strong remonstrances.

"That this government, seeing no propriety in the measure, nor conceiving itself to be under any obligation to communicate to the ministers of the French republic all the unpleasant details of what had passed between it and the British minister here, or with the minister of foreign affairs at the court of London on these accounts, conscious of its fair dealing toward all the belligerent powers, and wrapped up in its own integrity, little expected, under the circumstances which have been enumerated, the upbraidings it has met with; notwithstanding, it now is, as it always has been, the earnest wish of the government to be on the best and most friendly footing with the republic of France; and we have no doubt, after giving this candid exposition of facts, that the Directory will revoke the orders under which our trade is suffering, and will pay the damages it has sustained thereby."

This allusion to depredations upon American commerce by French cruisers, hinted at a state of things which the United States government could not long endure in silence. According to a report made by the secretary of state toward the close of the session, in which he made a full exhibit of the wrongs inflicted by the French on American commerce, it appears that enormous depredations had been committed in the West Indies. All vessels having contraband articles on board, no matter whither bound, were decreed to be good prizes; and the cargoes of neutral vessels bound to or from British ports, or even to Dutch or French settlements in the possession of the British, or cleared out for the West Indies generally, were seized and confiscated. The crews of American vessels captured were generally treated with indignity, and frequently with cruelty. "Bitter complaints," says Hildreth, "were made of Commodore Barney, then in the West Indies with his two frigates. He was accused of treating with contemptuous indifference and neglect his fellow-citizens brought in as prisoners by the French privateers, and even of having shown his contempt for his country by hoisting the American ensign union down. Yet, when he arrived in the Chesapeake for the purpose of learning and carrying to France the result of the presidential election, though he boasted of having in his pocket the orders of the French Directory to capture all American vessels, and declared that if Jefferson was not chosen president war would be declared by France within three months, he was not the less, on that account, honored and feasted by infatuated politicians who read the Aurora, and believed Washington to be a traitor!"[111]

The votes of the electoral college for president of the United States were opened and counted in the senate on the eighth of February. The result showed a very close balance of political parties. The whole number of votes was one hundred and thirty-eight, making seventy necessary to a choice. Of these, John Adams, the incumbent vice-president, received seventy-one, and Thomas Jefferson sixty-nine votes. Thomas Pinckney, late minister to Great Britain, received fifty-nine votes, Aaron Burr thirty, Samuel Adams fifteen, Oliver Ellsworth eleven, George Clinton seven, John Jay five, James Iredell three, George Washington two, John King two, Samuel Johnson two, and Charles C. Pinckney, then in France, one. At that time the person who received the highest number of the electoral votes was declared to be president, and the person who had the next highest number was declared to be vice-president.

After reading the result, Mr. Adams sat down for a moment, and then rising, said:--

"John Adams is elected president of the United States for four years, to commence with the fourth day of March next; and Thomas Jefferson is elected vice-president of the United States for four years, to commence with the fourth day of March next. And may the Sovereign of the Universe, the Ordainer of civil government on earth, for the preservation of liberty, justice, and peace, among men, enable both to discharge the duties of these offices conformably to the constitution of the United States, with conscientious diligence, punctuality, and perseverance."[112]

"The die is cast," wrote the new president elect to his wife, on the following day, "and you must prepare yourself for honorable trials. I must wait to know whether Congress will do anything or not to furnish my house. If they do not, I will have no house before next fall, and then a very moderate one, with very moderate furniture." He had written to Mrs. Adams a few days before, saying: "I hope you will not communicate to anybody the hints I give you about our prospects; but they appear every day worse and worse. House-rent at twenty-seven hundred dollars a year, fifteen hundred dollars for a carriage, one thousand for one pair of horses, all the glasses, ornaments, kitchen furniture, the best chairs, settees, plateaus, &c., all to purchase; all the china, delph [Delft] or Wedgewood, glass and crockery, of every sort to purchase."

Washington now prepared, with feelings of the most exquisite pleasure, to retire from public life. Everything which would be unnecessary at Mount Vernon he offered for sale. "The president," wrote Mr. Adams to his wife, "has a pair of horses to sell; one nine, the other ten years old, for which he asks a thousand dollars.... He must sell something to enable him to clear out. When a man is about retiring from public life, and sees nothing but a ploughshare between him and the grave, he naturally thinks most upon that.

"When Charles the Fifth resigned his empire and crown, he went to building his coffin. When I contemplated a retirement, I meditated the purchase of Mr. Vesey's farm; and thought of building a tomb in my own ground, adjoining to the burying-yard. The president is now engaged in his speculations upon a vault which he intends to build for himself, not to sleep but to lie down in.... Our friend says she is afraid President Washington will not live long. I should be afraid, too, if I had not confidence in his farm and his horse. He must be a fool, I think, who dies of chagrin when he has a fine farm and a Narragansett mare that paces and canters. But I don't know but all men are such fools. I think a man had better wear than rust."

In February, when he could begin to count the days and hours that lay between him and that retirement he so much coveted, Washington wrote to his old and dear friends upon the subject with much feeling; and every day brought him new proofs of the love and veneration in which he was held by the people. His birthday was celebrated in Philadelphia in a manner unequalled before. A grand ball was given at the Amphitheatre, in the evening, at which Washington and his lady were present. Mrs. Washington held a "drawing-room" in the afternoon, at which there was a crowd of people. "It was rendered affecting beyond all expression," said an eye-witness, "by its being, in some degree, a parting scene. Mrs. Washington was moved even to tears, with the mingled emotions of gratitude for such strong proofs of public regard, and the new prospect of the uninterrupted enjoyment of domestic life: she expressed herself something to this effect. I never saw the president look better, or in finer spirits, but his emotions were too powerful to be concealed. He could sometimes scarcely speak. Three rooms of his house were almost entirely full from twelve to three, and such a crowd at the door it was difficult to get in.

"At the Amphitheatre, at night, it is supposed there were at least twelve hundred persons. The show was a very brilliant one; but such scrambling to go to supper that there was some danger of being squeezed to death. The vice-president handed in Mrs. Washington, and the president immediately followed. The applause with which they were received is indescribable. The same was shown on their return from supper. The music added greatly to the interest of the scene. The president staid until between twelve and one; the vice-president till near two. Both were serenaded with repeated huzzas long after they had been in bed. The latter slept so soundly that he knew nothing of it till next morning, though it is said 'Yankee Doodle' was one of the tunes played."[113]

The eight years of Washington's administration of public affairs, as chief-magistrate of the republic, were now drawing to a close. They had been years of toil, anxiety, and vexation. They had been stormy years; yet, like a rock in the ocean, or the mountain rising from the plain, he had stood unshaken by the surges or the winds. With that serenity of mind which arises from the consolations of a conscience void of offence toward God and man, he took a retrospective view; and with the eagerness of a prisoner about to be released from his cell, to breathe the free air of heaven and repose in peace in the bosom of his home, he approached the hour when he should bid adieu to the incessant labor and turmoil of political life. To his long-tried and dearly-loved friend, General Knox, he wrote as follows two days before his retirement:--

"To the wearied traveller who sees a resting-place, and is bending his body to lean thereon, I now compare myself; but to be suffered to do this in peace is too much to be endured by some. To misrepresent my motives, to reprobate my politics, and to weaken the confidence which has been reposed in my administration, are objects which can not be relinquished by those who will be satisfied with nothing short of a change in our political system. The consolation, however, which results from conscious rectitude, and the approving voice of my country, unequivocally expressed by its representatives, deprive their sting of its poison, and place in the same point of view the weakness and malignity of their efforts....

"The remainder of my life, which in the course of nature can not be long, will be occupied in rural amusements; and, though I shall seclude myself as much as possible from the noisy and bustling crowd, none would, more than myself, be regaled by the company of those I esteem at Mount Vernon; more than twenty miles from which, after I arrive there, it is not likely that I ever shall be.

"As early in next week as I can make arrangements for it, I shall commence my journey for Mount Vernon. To-morrow, at dinner, I shall, as a servant of the public, take my leave of the president elect, of the foreign embassadors, the heads of departments, &c., and the day following, with pleasure, I shall witness the inauguration of my successor to the chair of government."

There was a large company of ladies and gentlemen at the dinner, on the third of March, when Washington, in a somewhat informal manner, bade them all farewell. "During the dinner," wrote Bishop White, who was one of the guests, "much hilarity prevailed; but, on the removal of the cloth, it was put an end to by the president--certainly without design. Having filled his glass, he addressed the company, with a smile on his countenance, saying, 'Ladies and gentlemen, this is the last time I shall drink your health as a public man. I do it with sincerity, and wishing you all possible happiness.' There was an end to all hilarity, and the cheeks of Mrs. Liston, wife of the British minister, were wet with tears."

On that morning Washington performed an act of justice to himself, which he had refrained from doing while in office. It was in the form of a letter to Mr. Pickering, the secretary of state, giving his own statement concerning the spurious letters which we have already noticed--their dates, addresses, and signatures, and all the facts in the case, the chief of which we have already noted. "These well-known facts," he said, "made it unnecessary, during the war, to call the public attention to the forgery by any express declaration of mine; and a firm reliance on my fellow-citizens, and the abundant proofs which they gave of their confidence in me, rendered it alike unnecessary to take any formal notice of the revival of the imposition during my civil administration. But as I can not know how soon a more serious event may succeed to that which will this day take place, I have thought it a duty that I owed to myself, to my country, and to truth, now to detail the circumstances above recited; and to add my solemn declaration that the letters herein described[114] are a base forgery, and that I never saw or heard of them until they appeared in print.

"The present letter I commit to your care, and desire that it may be deposited in the office of the department of state, as a testimony of the truth to the present generation and to posterity."

On the fourth of March, John Adams, Washington's successor, was inaugurated the second president of the United States. The event took place in the hall of the representatives, which was densely crowded with spectators. Mr. Jefferson, the new vice-president, had just taken his seat as president of the senate. That body had been convened by Washington for the occasion; and now, with their presiding officer, they went into the representatives' hall, where a large audience of ladies and gentlemen were collected to witness the inaugural ceremonies. In front of the speaker's chair sat chief-justice Ellsworth, who was to administer the oath, with three other judges of the supreme court of the United States (Cushing, Wilson, and Iredell). The new vice-president and secretary of the senate took their seats on the right; and on the left sat the speaker and clerk of the late house of representatives. At a signal the doors were thrown open, and a crowd rushed in and filled the galleries. Very soon loud cheering was heard in the streets, and a few moments afterward Washington entered, followed by the president elect. The whole audience arose and greeted them with enthusiastic cheers.

When the two dignitaries were seated perfect silence prevailed. Washington then arose, and with the most commanding dignity and self-control, proceeded to read, in a firm, clear voice, a brief valedictory. An eye-witness yet (1860) living,[115] has made the following interesting record of this portion of the scene:--

"When General Washington delivered his farewell address, in the room at the southeast corner of Chestnut and Sixth streets, I sat immediately in front of him. It was in the room Congress occupied. The table of the speaker was between the two windows on Sixth street. The daughter of Doctor C----,[116] of Alexandria, the physician and intimate friend of Washington, Mrs. H----,[117] whose husband was the auditor, was a very dear friend of mine. Her brother Washington was one of the secretaries of General Washington. Young Dandridge, a nephew of Mrs. Washington, was the other. I was included in Mrs. H----'s party to witness the august, the solemn scene. Mr. H---- declined going with Mrs. H----, as she had determined to go early, so as to secure the front bench. It was fortunate for Miss C----[118] (afterward Mrs. L----)[119], that she could not trust herself to be so near her honored grandfather. My dear father stood very near her. She was terribly agitated. There was a narrow passage from the door of entrance to the room, which was on the east, dividing the rows of benches. General Washington stopped at the end to let Mr. Adams pass to the chair. The latter always wore a full suit of bright drab, with lash or loose cuffs to his coat. He always wore wrist ruffles. He had not changed his fashions. He was a short man, with a good head. With his family he attended our church twice a day. General Washington's dress was a full suit of black. His military hat had the black cockade. There stood the 'Father of his Country,' acknowledged by nations--the first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen. No marshals with gold-colored scarfs attended him--there was no cheering--no noise; the most profound silence greeted him, as if the great assembly desired to hear him breathe, and catch his breath in homage of their hearts. Mr. Adams covered his face with both his hands; the sleeves of his coat, and his hands, were covered with tears. Every now and then there was a suppressed sob, I can not describe Washington's appearance as I felt it--perfectly composed and self-possessed till the close of his address: then, when strong nervous sobs broke loose, when tears covered the faces, then the great man was shaken. I never took my eyes from his face. Large drops came from his eyes. He looked to the youthful children who were parting with their father, their friend, as if his heart was with them, and would be to the end."

When Washington concluded his brief valedictory, Mr. Adams arose, took the oath of office, and then delivered his inaugural address, which he had prepared with much care--an address that had the rare good fortune of pleasing all parties. He sketched, with a few brief touches of a master's pencil, an outline history of the federal constitution, defined his own position in regard to it from the beginning, and then thus feelingly alluded to the retiring president:--

"Such is the amiable and interesting system of government (and such are some of the abuses to which it may be exposed), which the people of America have exhibited to the admiration and anxiety of the wise and virtuous of all nations, for eight years, under the administration of a citizen, who, by a long course of great actions, regulated by prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude, conducted a people inspired with the same virtues, and animated with the same ardent patriotism and love of liberty, to independence and peace, to increasing wealth and unexampled prosperity, has merited the gratitude of his fellow-citizens, commanded the highest praises of foreign nations, and secured immortal glory with posterity.

"In that retirement which is his voluntary choice, may he long live to enjoy the delicious recollection of his services, the gratitude of mankind, the happy fruits of them to himself and the world, which are daily increasing; and that splendid prospect of the future fortunes of his country which is opening from year to year. May his name be still a rampart, and the knowledge that he lives a bulwark against all open or secret enemies of his country's peace!"

The hearts of the audience had already been made tender by the farewell words of Washington; and this allusion to him, in the inaugural address of his successor, made tears flow copiously--"Scarcely a dry eye but Washington's, whose countenance was as serene and unclouded as the day," wrote Adams to his wife.

With a little tinge of evident jealousy, Adams again wrote to the same correspondent, a few days afterward, saying: "It is the general report that there was more weeping than there has ever been at the representation of any tragedy. But whether it was from grief or joy, whether from the loss of their beloved president, or from the accession of an unbeloved one, or from the pleasure of exchanging presidents without tumult, or from the novelty of the thing, or from the sublimity of it arising from the multitude present, or whatever other cause, I know not. One thing I know, I am a being of too much sensibility to act any part well in such an exhibition. Perhaps there is little danger of my having such another scene to feel or behold.

"The stillness and silence astonishes me. Everybody talks of the tears, the full eyes, the streaming eyes, the trickling eyes, &c., but all is enigma beyond. No one descends to particulars to say why or wherefore; I am, therefore, left to suppose that it is all grief for the loss of their beloved."

When Washington left the hall and entered his carriage, the great audience followed, and were joined by an immense crowd in the streets, who shouted long and loud as the retiring president and his suite moved toward his dwelling. The new president and all others were forgotten in that moment of veneration for the beloved friend, upon whose face few in that vast assemblage would ever look again. "I followed him in the crowd to his own door," said the late President Duer, of Columbia college, "where, as he turned to address the multitude, his countenance assumed a serious and almost melancholy expression, his voice failed him, his eyes were suffused with tears, and only by his gestures could he indicate his thanks, and convey his farewell blessing to the people."

The merchants of Philadelphia, to testify their love for Washington, gave to him a splendid banquet and other entertainments that evening, in the Amphitheatre, which had been decorated with appropriate paintings by Charles Willson Peale, who, twenty-five years before, had painted, at Mount Vernon, the first portrait ever drawn of Washington, in the costume of a Virginia colonel. One of the newspapers of the day thus describes a compliment that was paid to the first president on that occasion, which had been suggested and executed by Mr. Peale:--

"Upon entering the area the general was conducted to his seat. On a signal given the band played 'Washington's March,' and a scene, which represented simple objects in the rear of the principal seat, was drawn up and discovered emblematical paintings. The principal was a female figure as large as life, representing America, seated on an elevation composed of sixteen marble steps. At her left side stood the federal shield and eagle, and at her feet lay the cornucopia; in her right hand she held the Indian calumet of peace supporting the cap of liberty; in the perspective appeared the temple of fame; and, on her left hand, an altar dedicated to public gratitude, upon which incense was burning. In her left hand she held a scroll inscribed 'Valedictory;' and at the foot of the altar lay a plumed helmet and sword, from which a figure of General Washington, large as life, appeared retiring down the steps, pointing with his right hand to the emblems of power which he had resigned, and with his left to a beautiful landscape representing Mount Vernon, in front of which oxen were seen harnessed to the plough. Over the general appeared a Genius, placing a wreath of laurels on his head."

The heads of departments, foreign ministers, and distinguished strangers in Philadelphia, were present on that gala occasion; and with that display of taste, fashion, gayety, and refinement, ended the public life of Washington.

These honors paid to the retiring chief-magistrate with the most heartfelt sincerity, excited the jealousy, enmity, and malignity of his political enemies in a most remarkable degree. Nothing was too base for them to employ in attempts to injure his character, and lower him in the esteem of his countrymen. A pamphlet written by "Jasper Dwight, of Vermont," and published in December, 1796, which contained most severe strictures upon the Farewell Address, was circulated with increased zeal.[120]

The Aurora overflowed with gall. Its columns were filled with the most virulent attacks upon him. His denunciation of the spurious letters made the calumniators writhe, and, with the fiendish malice of assassins, they thrust his character with weapons of foulest form. Three days after his retirement one of the most violent of these attacks appeared in the Aurora, attributed to Doctor Lieb, a republican member of the Pennsylvania assembly. It was dated on the day of Adams's inauguration. He said:--

"'Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation,' was the pious ejaculation of a man who beheld a flood of happiness rushing upon mankind. If ever there was a time that would license the reiteration of the exclamation, that time is now arrived; for the man, who is the source of all the misfortunes of our country, is this day reduced to a level with his fellow-citizens, and is no longer possessed of power to multiply evils upon the United States. If ever there was a period for rejoicing, this is the moment; every heart in unison with the freedom and happiness of the people, ought to beat high with exultation that the name of WASHINGTON, from this day, ceases to give a currency to political iniquity, and to legalize corruption. A new era is now opening upon us, an era which promises much to the people; for public measures must now stand upon their own merits, and nefarious projects can no longer be supported by a name. When a retrospect is taken of the Washingtonian administration for eight years, it is a subject of the greatest astonishment that a single individual should have cankered the principles of republicanism in an enlightened people, just emerged from the gulf of despotism, and should have carried his designs against the public liberty so far, as to have put in jeopardy its very existence. Such, however, are the facts, and, with these staring us in the face, this day ought to be a jubilee in the United States."

These and similar articles excited the public indignation to the highest endurable pitch; and Bache, the publisher of the Aurora, was severely beaten, when, a few days afterward, he, with some friends, visited the frigate United States, then on the stocks at the Philadelphia navy-yard. A son of the contractor gave the flagellation. The public clamor became so great, that Bache, in mortal fear of further personal violence, thought it prudent to state, in his paper, that Doctor Lieb's article was not written by the editor, but came from a correspondent.

FOOTNOTES:

[111] History of the United States, Second Series, i., 703.

[112] Journals of Congress, February 8, 1797.

[113] Letter of Honorable James Iredell to his wife, February 24, 1797.

[114] The following is Washington's description of the letters:--

"New York, June 12th, 1776. To Mr. Lund Washington, at Mount Vernon, Fairfax county, Virginia.--G. W."

"To John Parke Custis, Esq., at the Hon. Benedict Calvert's, Esq., Mount Airy, Maryland, June 18th, 1776.--GEORGE WASHINGTON."

"New York, July 8th, 1776. To Mr. Lund Washington, at Mt. Vernon, Fairfax county, Virginia.--G. W."

"New York, July 15, 1776. To Mr. Lund Washington.--G. W."

"New York, July 16, 1776. To Mr. Lund Washington.--G. W."

"New York, July 22d, 1776. To Mr. Lund Washington--G. W."

"June 24th, 1776. To Mrs. Washington.--G. W."

[115] Mrs. Susan R. Echard, daughter of Colonel Read, now (1860) living in Philadelphia, at the age of eighty-four years. The venerable Rembrandt Peale, of the same city, who, two years before, painted Washington's portrait from life, and now in his eighty-third year, was also present in the gallery on that occasion, and his recollection agrees with that of Mrs. Echard.

[116] Craik.

[117] Harrison.

[118] Custis.

[119] Lewis.

[120] It was in the form of a "Letter to George Washington, President of the United States." Dwight was a violent republican, and an uncompromising advocate for the immediate and total abolition of slavery in the United States. Because Washington was a slaveholder, he considered him extremely vulnerable on that point, and in his "Letter" he twice alludes to the fact.

"Had the French Revolution," he said, "commenced ten years later, or you retired to the shades of Mount Vernon four years ago, the friends of public virtue would still proudly boast of one great man free from the breath of public dispraise, and your fondly partial country, forbearing to inquire whether or not you were chargeable with mental aberrations, would vaunt in you this possession of the phoenix." After making strictures on the events of the past four years, he said: "Would to God! you had retired to a private station four years ago, while your public conduct threw a veil of sanctity round you, which you have yourself rashly broken down. Your fame would have been safe, your country without reproach, and I should not have the mortifying task of pointing out the blind temerity with which you come forward to defend the religion of Christ, who exist in the violation of its most sacred obligations, of the dearest ties of humanity, and in defiance of the sovereign calls of morality and liberty--by dealing in HUMAN SLAVES." Again, after asserting that "posterity will in vain search for the monuments of wisdom" in his administration, he says they will, on inquiry, find that had he obtained promotion, as he expected, for the services rendered after Braddock's defeat, his sword would have been drawn against his country; and that they would discover "that the great champion of American freedom, the rival of Timoleon and Cincinnatus, twenty years after the establishment of the republic, was possessed of FIVE HUNDRED of the HUMAN SPECIES IN SLAVERY, enjoying the fruits of their labor without remuneration, or even the consolations of religious instruction--that he retained the barbarous usages of the feudal system, and kept men in livery--and that he still affected to be the friend of the Christian religion, of civil liberty, and moral equality--and to be, withal, a disinterested, virtuous, liberal, and unassuming man."

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us