The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 3 (of 9) / Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private

FOOTNOTES (2)

[23] [This letter was in cypher, but a literal copy of it preserved.]

[24] [This is in the handwriting of General Washington.]

TO MR. DUMAS.

Philadelphia, March 24, 1793.

Dear Sir,—I have to acknowledge the receipt of your favors of September 20, March 13, and Jan. 9. I shall hope your continuance to send us the Leyden Gazette as usual, but all the other gazettes which you have hitherto usually sent, may be discontinued. The scene in Europe is becoming very interesting. Amidst the confusion of a general war which seems to be threatening that quarter of the globe, we hope to be permitted to preserve the line of neutrality. We wish not to meddle with the internal affairs of any country, nor with the general affairs of Europe. Peace with all nations, and the right which that gives us with respect to all nations, are our object. It will be necessary for all our public agents to exert themselves with vigilance for securing to our vessels all the rights of neutrality, and from preventing the vessels of other nations from usurping our flag. This usurpation tends to commit us with the belligerent power, to draw on those vessels truly ours, vigorous visitations to distinguish them from the counterfeits, and to take business from us. I recommend these objects to you. I have done the same to Mr. Greenleaf, lately appointed our Consul at Amsterdam. Be so good as to remember to send your account immediately after the 30th of June. I forward for you to Mr. Pinckney a copy of the laws of the late session of Congress; and am, with sincere esteem, dear Sir, your most obedient humble servant.

TO COLONEL HAMILTON.

Philadelphia, March 27, 1793.

Sir,—In compliance with the desire you expressed, I shall endeavor to give you the view I had of the destination of the loan of three millions of florins, obtained by our bankers in Amsterdam, previous to the acts of the 4th and 12th of August, 1790, when it was proposed to adopt it under those acts. I am encouraged to do this by the degree of certainty with which I can do it, happening to possess an official paper wherein I had committed to writing some thoughts on the subject, at the time, that is to say, on the 26th of August, 1790. The general plan presented to view, according to my comprehension of it, in your report and draught of instructions, was, 1, to borrow, on proper terms, such a sum of money as might answer all demands for principal and interest of the foreign debt due to the end of 1791; 2, to consider two of the three millions of florins already borrowed as if borrowed under the act of August 4, and so far an execution of the operation before mentioned; 3, to consider the third million of florins so borrowed as if borrowed under the act of the 12th of August, and so far an execution of the powers given to the President to borrow two millions of dollars for the purchase of the public debt. I remember that the million of dollars surplus of the domestic revenues, appropriated to the purchase of the public debt, appeared to me sufficient for that purpose here, for probably a considerable time. I thought, therefore, if any part of the three millions of florins were to be placed under the act of the 12th of August, that it should rather be employed in purchasing our foreign paper at the market of Amsterdam. I had myself observed the different degrees of estimation in which the paper of different countries was held at that market, and wishing that our credit there might always be of the first order, I thought a moderate sum kept in readiness there to buy up any of our foreign paper, whenever it should be offered below par, would keep it constantly to that mark, and thereby establish for us a sound credit, where, of all places in the world, it would be most important to have it.

The subject, however, not being with my department, and therefore having no occasion afterwards to pay attention to it, it went out of my mind altogether, till the late inquiries brought it forward again. On reading the President's instructions of August 28, 1790 (two days later than the paper before mentioned), as printed in your report of February 13, 1793, in the form in which they were ultimately given to you, I observed that he had therein neither confirmed your sentiment of employing a part of the money here, nor mine of doing it there, in purchases of the public debt: but had directed the application of the whole to the foreign debt; and I inferred that he had done this on full and just deliberation, well knowing he would have time enough to weigh the merits of the two opinions, before the million of dollars would be examined here, or the loans for the foreign debt would overrun their legal measure there. In this inference, however, I might be mistaken; but I cannot be in the fact that these instructions gave a sanction to neither opinion.

I have thus, Sir, stated to you the view I had of this subject in 1790, and I have done it because you desired it. I did not take it up then as a volunteer, nor should now have taken the trouble of recurring to it, but at your request, as it is one in which I am not particularly concerned, which I never had either the time or inclination to investigate, and on which my opinion is of no importance.

I have the honor to be, with respect, Sir, your most obedient humble servant.

TO J. MADISON.

Philadelphia, April 7, 1793.

We may now, I believe, give full credit to the accounts that war is declared between France and England. The latter having ordered Chauvelen to retire within eight days, the former seemed to consider it as too unquestionable an evidence of an intention to go to war, to let the advantage slip of her own readiness and the unreadiness of England. Hence, I presume, the first declaration from France. A British packet is arrived; but as yet we have nothing more than that she confirms the accounts of war being declared. Genett not yet arrived. An impeachment is ordered here against Nicholson, their Comptroller General, by a vote almost unanimous of the House of Representatives. There is little doubt, I am told, that much mala fides will appear; but E. R. thinks he has barricaded himself within the fences of the law.

* * * * *

Yours affectionately.

TO MR. HAMMOND.

Philadelphia, April 18, 1793.

Sir,—I have now the honor to enclose you the answer of the Attorney General to my letter covering yours of March the 12th, on the case of Hooper and Pagan, wherein he has stated the proceedings of Pagan for obtaining a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States, for revisal of the judgment of the inferior court pronounced against him; and also, his opinion on the merits of the question, had the writ of error been procured, and the merits thereby been brought into question. From this statement you will be able to judge whether Pagan has, bona fide, complied with the rule which requires that a foreigner, before he applies for extraordinary interposition, should use his best endeavors to obtain the justice he claims from the ordinary tribunals of the country. You will perceive also, that had the writ been pressed for and obtained, and the substantial justice of Pagan's claim thereby brought into discussion, substantial justice would have been against him, according to the opinion of the Attorney General, according to the uniform decisions of the courts of the United States, even in the cases of their own citizens, and according to the decision of this very case in the British provincial court, where the evidence was taken and the trial first had. This does not appear then to be one of those cases of gross and palpable wrong, ascribable only to wickedness of the heart, and not to error of the head, in the judges who have decided on it, and founding a claim of national satisfaction. At least, that it is so, remains yet to be demonstrated.

The readiness with which the government of the United States has entered into inquiries concerning the case of Mr. Pagan, even before that case was ripe for their interposition, according to ordinary rules, will, I hope, satisfy you that they would, with equal readiness, have done for the redress of his case whatever the laws and Constitution would have permitted them to do, had it appeared in the result that their courts had been guilty of partiality or other gross wrong against Mr. Pagan. On the contrary, it is hoped, that the marked attentions which have been shown to him by the government of Massachusetts, as well as by that of the United States, have evinced the most scrupulous dispositions to patronize and effectuate his right, had right been on his side. I have the honor to be, with due respect, Sir, your most humble servant.

[The letter of the Attorney General, referred to in the preceding.]

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

Philadelphia, April 12, 1793.

Sir,—You will perceive from the two letters marked A. and B. of which I enclose copies, that the subject of Mr. Pagan has been for some time in my view. The former of those letters being intended for you, and containing a summary of facts, I determined to show it to Mr. Tilghman, who was Pagan's counsel, before it was sent to you, in order that he might correct any misstatement. This produced the latter letter from him to me; and I have thought it more advisable to forward both of them to you, even in the unfinished state of my own, than to reduce the case into a form which might be supposed to be less accurate.

As I do not discover an essential difference between Mr. Tilghman and myself, I shall not discuss any seeming variance, but proceed upon his ideas.

It is too obvious to require a diffusive exposition, that the application for a writ of error was not only prudent, but a duty in Pagan. To this Mr. Tilghman explicitly assents, when he says that he was perfectly "satisfied of the prudence of applying for the writ of error, as Pagan could not complain of a defect of justice, until he had tried the writ of error and found that mode ineffectual." This remark becomes the more important, as it manifests that the process was not suggested as an expedient for shifting any burthen from the government. Indeed I may with truth add, that the proceedings, taken collectively, appeared to me to present a sufficient intimation of the main question, to serve as a ground of decision.

However, take the case under either aspect; as excluding the consideration of the main question by an omission in the pleadings and record; or as exhibiting it fully to the cognizance of the court.

It never was pretended that a writ of error ought to have been granted, unless the matter was apparent on the record. Whose office was it to make it thus apparent? Of the attorney who managed the pleadings. If, therefore, he has failed to do so, we may presume that he considered the ground untenable, or was guilty of inattention. Either presumption would be fatal to a citizen of the United States; and the condition of a foreigner cannot create a new measure in the administration of justice. It is moreover certain, that those who have been consulted on Pagan's behalf, as well as others, have seriously doubted whether a cause, which has been pursued to the extent which his had reached before the commencement of our new government, was susceptible of federal relief.

The last observation opens the inquiry, what remedy ought the Supreme Court of the United States to have administered, even if the question had been fairly before them? My opinion is, that the very merits are against Mr. Pagan. In America, the construction of the armistice has been almost universally to compute the places, within which different times were to prevail, by latitude only. Am I misinformed, that such an interpretation has been pressed by our ministers, and not denied by those of London? A second mode has been adopted, by describing a circle, and thereby comprehending longitude as well as latitude; now let either rule be adopted, and the position of the capture in this case will be adverse to Pagan's pretensions.

But what can be exacted from our government, after repeated trials, before various jurisdictions, none of which can be charged with any symptom of impropriety, and upon a subject, which, to say no more, is at least equipoised? Nothing; and I appeal to the British reasoning on the Silesia loan, as supporting this sentiment, in the following passage: "The law of nations, founded upon justice, equity, convenience and the reason of the thing, and confirmed by long usage, does not allow of reprisals, except in case of violent injuries directed and supported by the State, and justice absolutely denied, in re minime dubia, by all the tribunals, and afterwards by the prince." Where the judges are left free, and give sentence according to their consciences, "though it should be erroneous, that would be no ground for reprisals. Upon doubtful questions, different men think and judge differently; and all a friend can desire is, that justice should be as impartially administered to him, as it is to the subjects of that prince, in whose courts the matter is tried." Under such circumstances, a citizen must acquiesce. So therefore must Pagan; against whom even the court of Nova Scotia, within the dominions of his sovereign, has once decided.

There are many smaller points, arising from the controversy, which might be relied on. But I pass them over, from a hope that the observations already made will induce you to think with me, that government is not bound to interpose farther in the behalf of Pagan. I have the honor, Sir, to be, with respect and esteem, your most obedient servant,

Edmond Randolph.

TO MR. PINCKNEY.

Philadelphia, April 20, 1793.

Dear Sir,—In a postscript to my letter of the 12th, I acknowledged the receipt of yours of January the 3d; since which, those of January the 30th and February the 5th have been received by the William Penn.

With respect to our negotiation with Mr. Hammond, it is exactly in the state in which it was when you left America, not one single word having been received in reply to my general answer, of which you had a copy. He says, he waits for instructions, which he pretends to expect from packet to packet. But sometimes the ministers are all in the country, sometimes they are absorbed in negotiations nearer home, sometimes it is the hurry of impending war, or attention to other objects, the stock of which is inexhaustible, and can therefore never fail those who desire nothing but that things shall rest as they are. Perhaps, however, the present times may hasten justice.

We shall be glad to receive the assayer you hope to procure, as soon as possible, for we cannot get one in this country equal to the business in all its parts. With respect to Mr. Drost, we retain the same desire to engage him, but we are forced to require an immediate decision, as the officer employed in the interim, and who does tolerably well, will not continue much longer under an uncertainty of permanent employment. I must therefore desire you to press Mr. Morris to bring Drost to an immediate determination; and we place the matter on this ground with him, that if he is not embarked by the first day of July next, we shall give a permanent commission to the present officer, and be free to receive no other. We are likely to be in very great distress for copper for the mint, and must therefore press your expediting what we desired you to order from Sweden.

You may, on every occasion, give assurances which cannot go beyond the real desires of this country, to preserve a fair neutrality in the present war, on condition that the rights of neutral nations are respected in us, as they have been settled in modern times, either by the express declarations of the powers of Europe, or their adoption of them on particular occasions. From our treaties with France and Holland, and that of England and France, a very clear and simple line of conduct can be marked out for us, and I think we are not unreasonable in expecting that England shall recognize towards us the same principles which she has stipulated to recognize towards France, in a state of neutrality.

I have the honor to be, with great and sincere esteem, dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO MR. VAN BERCKEL.

Philadelphia, April 23d, 1793.

Sir,—As far as the public gazettes are to be credited, we may presume that war has taken place among several of the nations of Europe, in which France, England, Holland and Russia, are particularly engaged. Disposed, as the United States are, to pursue steadily the ways of peace, and to remain in friendship with all nations, the President has thought it expedient, by Proclamation, of which I enclose you a copy, to notify this disposition to our citizens, in order to intimate to them the line of conduct for which they are to prepare; and this he has done without waiting for a formal notification from the belligerent Powers. He hopes that those Powers and your nation in particular, will consider this early precaution as a proof, the more candid, as it has been unasked, for the sincere and impartial intentions of our country, and that what is meant merely as a general intimation to our citizens, shall not be construed to their prejudice in any Courts of Admiralty, as if it were conclusive evidence of their knowledge of the existence of war, and of the Powers engaged in it. Of this we could not give them conclusive information, because we have it not ourselves; and till it is given us in form, and so communicated to them, we must consider all their acts as lawful, which would have been lawful in a state of peace. I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

CIRCULAR TO MESSRS. MORRIS, PINCKNEY AND SHORT.

Philadelphia, April 26, 1793.

Sir,—The public papers giving us reason to believe that the war is becoming nearly general in Europe, and that it has already involved nations with which we are in daily habits of commerce and friendship, the President has thought it proper to issue the proclamation of which I enclose you a copy, in order to mark out to our citizens the line of conduct they are to pursue. That this intimation, however, might not work to their prejudice, by being produced against them as conclusive evidence of their knowledge of the existence of war and of the nations engaged in it, in any case where they might be drawn into courts of justice for acts done without that knowledge, it has been thought necessary to write to the representatives of the belligerent powers here, the letter of which a copy is also enclosed, reserving to our citizens those immunities to which they are entitled, till authentic information shall be given to our government by the parties at war, and be thus communicated, with due certainty, to our citizens. You will be pleased to present to the government where you reside, this proceeding of the President, as a proof of the earnest desire of the United States to preserve peace and friendship with all the belligerent powers, and to express his expectation that they will in return extend a scrupulous and effectual protection to all our citizens, wheresoever they may need it, in pursuing their lawful and peaceable concerns with their subjects, or within their jurisdiction. You will, at the same time, assure them that the most exact reciprocation of this benefit shall be practised by us towards their subjects, in the like cases.

I have the honor to be, with great esteem and respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO M. DE TERNANT.

Philadelphia, April 27, 1793.

Sir,—Your letter of the 13th instant, asking moneys to answer the expenses and salaries of the consular offices of France, has been duly laid before the President, and his directions thereon taken.

I have in consequence to observe to you, that before the new government of France had time to attend to things on this side the Atlantic, and to provide a deposit of money for their purposes here, there appeared a degree of necessity that we, as the friends and debtors of that nation, should keep their affairs from suffering, by furnishing money for urgent purposes. This obliged us to take on ourselves to judge of the purpose, because, on the soundness of that, we were to depend for our justification. Hence we furnished moneys for their colonies and their agents here, without express authority, judging from the importance and necessity of the case, that they would approve of our interference.

But this kind of necessity is now at an end; the government has established a deposit of money in the hands of their minister here, and we have nothing now to do but to furnish the money, which we are in the course of doing, without looking into the purposes to which it is to be applied. Their minister is to be the judge of these, and to pay it to whom and for what he pleases.

If it be urged that they have appropriated all the money we are furnishing to other objects, that you are not authorized to divert any of it to any other purpose, and therefore that you need a further sum, it may be answered that it will not lessen the stretch of authority to add an unauthorized payment by us to an unauthorized application by you, and that it seems fitter that their minister should exercise a discretion over their appropriations, standing, as he does, in a place of confidence, authority, and responsibility, than we who are strangers, and unamenable to them. It is a respect we owe to their authority to leave to those acting under that, the transactions of their affairs, without an intermeddling on our part which might justly appear officious.

In this point of light, I hope you will view our conduct, and that the consular officers will be sensible that in referring them to your care, under which the national authority has placed them, we do but conform ourselves to that authority. I have the honor to be, with sentiments of great respect and esteem, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.

Philadelphia, May 1, 1793.

Sir,—When you mentioned to me yesterday that M. de Ternant proposed to apply for a sum of money, and founded himself on a letter of mine which gave him reason to expect it, I thought I could not have written such a letter, because I did not recollect it, and because it was out of the plan which you know had been adopted, that when we furnished one sum of money we should avoid promising another. I have now most carefully examined all my letters to M. de Ternant, as far back as March 7, 1792, the date of the first on the subject of furnishing money, and can assure you there is not a word in one of them which can be construed into a promise, expressed or implied, relative to the present subject, or which can have committed the government in the smallest degree to a departure from the rules it has laid down. I am equally confident that I have never said a word which could do it. Upon the ground, therefore, of any such commitment by me, the proposition will not be supported. With respect to these applications in general, they were of course to pass through me; but I have considered them as depending too much on the arrangements of your department to permit myself to take and be tenacious of any particular ground other than that, whatever rule we adopt, it be plain and persevered in uniformly in all cases where the material circumstances are the same, so that we never refuse to one what has been done for another. It is and ever has been my opinion and wish that we should gratify the diplomatic gentlemen in every way in which we can do it without too great inconvenience or commitment of our own government. I think it our interest to do so; and am under this impression in the present case so much, that I should readily concur, if it be the pleasure of the President, in reconsidering the rule adopted on a late occasion, and substituting any other consistent with our public duties, more adapted to the gratification of the diplomatic gentlemen, and uniformly to be applied where the material circumstances shall be the same; for it would reverse our aim were we to put ourselves in the case of disobliging one by refusing what we have done to gratify another. In these sentiments, I will hand to the President any application which M. de Ternant shall think proper to communicate to me in writing. I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient humble servant.

TO M. DE TERNANT.

Philadelphia, May 3, 1793.

Sir,—The Minister Plenipotentiary of his Britannic Majesty has represented to the government of the United States, that on the 25th of April last, the British ship Grange, while lying at anchor in the bay of Delaware, within the territory and jurisdiction of the United States, was taken possession of by the Embuscade, a frigate of the French Republic, has been brought to this port, where she is now detained as prize, and the crew as prisoners, and has made a requisition in form, for a restoration of the vessel and liberation of the crew. I have the honor to furnish you with copies of the evidence given in by the British minister, and to observe, that the United States being at peace with all parties, cannot see with indifference its territory or jurisdiction violated by either; that the government will therefore proceed to inquire into the facts, and for that purpose will receive with pleasure, and consider with impartiality, any evidence you will be pleased to have them furnished with on the subject; and the President hopes that you will take effectual measures for detaining here the vessel taken, her crew and cargo, to abide the decision which will be made thereon, and which is desired to be without delay.

I have the honor to be, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO COLONEL MONROE.

Philadelphia, May 5, 1793.

Dear Sir,—The expectation that you are always from home prevents my writing to you with regularity; a matter of little consequence to you, as you probably receive Freneau's paper regularly, and consequently all the news of any importance.

The fiscal party having tricked the House of Representatives out of the negative vote they obtained, seem determined not to lose the ground they gained by entering the lists again on matters of fact and reason; they therefore preserve a triumphant silence, notwithstanding the attack of the pamphlet entitled "An Examination Se-and-of-Timon." They show their wisdom in this, if not their honesty. The war between France and England seems to be producing an effect not contemplated. All the old spirit of 1776, rekindling the newspapers from Boston to Charleston, proves this; and even the monocrat papers are obliged to publish the most furious philippics against England. A French frigate took a British prize off the capes of Delaware the other day, and sent her up here. Upon her coming into sight, thousands and thousands of the yeomanry of the city crowded and covered the wharves. Never before was such a crowd seen there; and when the British colors were seen reversed, and the French flying above them, they burst into peals of exultation. I wish we may be able to repress the spirit of the people within the limits of a fair neutrality. In the meantime, H. is panic-struck, if we refuse our breach to every kick which Great Britain may choose to give it. He is for proclaiming at once the most abject principles, such as would invite and merit habitual insults; and indeed every inch of ground must be fought in our councils to desperation, in order to hold up the face of even a sneaking neutrality, for our votes are generally two and a half against one and a half. Some propositions have come from him which would astonish Mr. Pitt himself with their boldness. If we preserve even a sneaking neutrality, we shall be indebted for it to the President, and not to his counsellors. Immense bankruptcies have taken place in England. The last advices made them amount to eleven millions sterling, and still going on. Of the houses connected with America, they have fallen only on those who had dealt in American paper. The beginning of the business was from the alarm occasioned by the war, which induced cautious people to withdraw their money from the country banks. This induced the Bank of England to stop discounting, which brought on a general crush, which was still going on. It is said that two millions of manufacturers would be put out of employ by these failures. This is probably exaggerated. The stocks are very low here now, and an immense mass of paper is expected to be returned immediately from England, so that they will be still lower. Notwithstanding this, the sinking fund is idle, not having had a shilling to lay out (except the interest of the part sunk). You will see in Freneau's next paper, a most advantageous decree of the French National Assembly in our favor. They have lately sustained some severe checks. The papers will confuse you on the subject. The truth is, that in a combination of three operations, Clairfayt killed and wounded 1,400, took 600. Saxe Cobourg killed and wounded 4,000, and took 1,600. Brunswick killed and wounded 1,300, and took 700. This is the sum. Their defects are as sensibly felt at Philadelphia as at Paris, and I foresee we are to have a trying campaign of it. Great Britain has as yet not condescended to notice us in any way. No wish expressed of her neutrality, no answer of any kind to a single complaint for the daily violations committed on our sailors and ships. Indeed, we promise beforehand so fast that she has not time to ask anything. We expect Genet daily. When Ternant received certain account of his appointment, thinking he had nothing further to hope from the Jacobins, he that very day found out something to be offended at in me (in which I had been made ex officio the ostensible agent in what came from another quarter, and he has never been undeceived), attached himself intimately to Hamilton, put on mourning for the King, and became a perfect counter revolutioner. A few days ago, he received a letter from Genet, giving him a hope that they will employ him in the army. On this, he tacked about again, became a Jacobin, and refused to present the Viscount Noailles, and some French aristocrats arrived here. From what I learn from Noailles, La Fayette has been more imprudent than I expected, but certainly innocent.

Present my best affections to Mrs. Monroe, and accept them for yourself also. Yours sincerely.

TO MR. PINCKNEY.

Philadelphia, May 7, 1793.

Dear Sir,—Since my letter of April the 16th, yours have been received of March the 12th, 12th, 13th, 13th, and 19th. Before the receipt of these, one of which covered the form of your passports, it had been determined here, that passports should be issued in our own ports only, as well to secure us against those collusions which would be fraudulent towards our friends, and would introduce a competition injurious to our own vessels, as to induce these to remain in our own service, and thereby give to the productions of our own soil the protection of its own flag in its passage to foreign markets. As our citizens are free to purchase and use foreign-built vessels, and these, like all their other lawful property, are entitled to the protection of their government, passports will be issued to them as freely as to home-built vessels. This is strictly within our treaties, the letter of which, as well as their spirit, authorizes passports to all vessels belonging to citizens of the United States. Our laws, indeed, indulge home-built vessels with the payment of a lower tonnage, and to evidence their right to this, permit them alone to take out registers from our own offices; but they do not exclude foreign-built vessels owned by our citizens from any other right. As our home built vessels are adequate to but a small proportion of our transportation, if we could not suddenly augment the stock of our shipping, our produce would be subject to war insurance in the vessels of the belligerent powers, though we remain at peace ourselves.

In one of your letters of March the 13th, you express your apprehension that some of the belligerent powers may stop our vessels going with grain to the ports of their enemies, and ask instructions which may meet the question in various points of view, intending, however, in the meantime, to contend for the amplest freedom of neutral nations. Your intention in this is perfectly proper, and coincides with the ideas of our own government in the particular case you put, as in general cases. Such a stoppage to an unblockaded port would be so unequivocal an infringement of the neutral rights, that we cannot conceive it will be attempted. With respect to our conduct as a neutral nation, it is marked out in our treaties with France and Holland, two of the belligerent powers; and as the duties of neutrality require an equal conduct to both parties, we should, on that ground, act on the same principles towards Great Britain. We presume that this would be satisfactory to her because of its equality, and because she too has sanctioned the same principles in her treaty with France. Even our seventeenth article with France, which might be disagreeable, as from its nature it is unequal, is adopted exactly by Great Britain in her fortieth article with the same power, and would have laid her, in a like case, under the same unequal obligations against us. We wish then, that it could be arranged with Great Britain, that our treaties with France and Holland, and that of France and Great Britain (which agree in what respects neutral nations), should form the line of conduct for us all, in the present war, in the cases for which they provide. Where they are silent, the general principles of the law of nations must give the rule, as the principles of that law have been liberalized in latter times by the refinement of manners and morals, and evidenced by the declarations, stipulations, and practice of every civilized nation. In our treaty with Prussia, indeed, we have gone ahead of other nations, in doing away restraints on the commerce of peaceful nations, by declaring that nothing shall be contraband. For in truth, in the present improved state of the arts, when every country has such ample means of procuring arms within and without itself, the regulations of contraband answer no other end than to draw other nations into the war. However, as other nations have not given sanction to this improvement, we claim it, at present, with Prussia alone.

You are desired to persevere till you obtain a regulation to guard our vessels from having their hands impressed, and to inhibit the British navy officers from taking them under the pretext of their being British subjects. There appears but one practical rule, that the vessel being American, shall be conclusive evidence that the hands are so to a certain number, proportioned to her tonnage. Not more than one or two officers shall be permitted to visit a vessel. Mr. Albion Coxe has just arrived.

I have the honor to be, with great and sincere esteem, dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO E. RANDOLPH.

May 8, 1793.

I have been still reflecting on the draft of letter from the Secretary of the Treasury to the custom house officers, instructing them to be on the watch as to all infractions or tendencies to infraction of the laws of neutrality by our citizens, and to communicate the same to him. When this paper was first communicated to me, though the whole of it struck me disagreeably, I did not in the first moment see clearly the improprieties but of the last clause. The more I have reflected, the more objectionable the whole appears. By this proposal the collectors of the customs are to be made an established corps of spies or informers against their fellow citizens, whose actions they are to watch in secret, inform against in secret to the Secretary of the Treasury, who is to communicate it to the President. If the action and evidence appear to justify a prosecution, a prosecution is to be set on foot on the secret information of a collector. If it will not justify it, then the only consequence is that the mind of government has been poisoned against a citizen, neither known nor suspecting it, and perhaps too distant to bring forward his justification. This will at least furnish the collector with a convenient weapon to keep down a rival, draw a cloud over an inconvenient censor, or satisfy mere malice and private enmity. The object of this new institution is to be to prevent infractions of the laws of neutrality, and preserve our peace with foreign nations. Acts involving war, or proceedings which respect foreign nations, seem to belong either to the department of war, or to that which is charged with the affairs of foreign nations; but I cannot possibly conceive how the superintendence of the laws of neutrality, or the preservation of our peace with foreign nations, can be ascribed to the department of the treasury, which I suppose to comprehend merely matters of revenue. It would be to add a new and a large field to a department already amply provided with business, patronage, and influence. It was urged as a reason that the collectors of the customs are in convenient positions for this espionage. They are in convenient positions too for building ships of war; but will that business be transplanted from its department, merely because it can be conveniently done in another? It seemed the desire that if this means was disapproved, some other equivalent might be adopted. Though we consider the acts of a foreigner making a captive within our limits, as an act of public hostility, and therefore to be turned over to the military, rather than the civil power; yet the acts of our own citizens infringing the laws of neutrality or contemplating that, are offences against the ordinary laws and cognisable by them. Grand juries are the constitutional inquisitors and informers of the country, they are scattered everywhere, see everything, see it while they suppose themselves mere private persons, and not with the prejudiced eye of a permanent and systematic spy. Their information is on oath, is public, it is in the vicinage of the party charged, and can be at once refuted. These officers taken only occasionally from among the people, are familiar to them, the office respected, and the experience of centuries has shown that it is safely entrusted with our character, property and liberty. A grand juror cannot carry on systematic persecution against a neighbor whom he hates, because he is not permanent in the office. The judges generally, by a charge, instruct the grand jurors in the infractions of law which are to be noticed by them; and our judges are in the habit of printing their charges in the newspapers. The judges, having notice of the proclamation, will perceive that the occurrence of a foreign war has brought into activity the laws of neutrality, as a part of the law of the land. This new branch of the law they will know needs explanation to the grand juries more than any other. They will study and define the subjects to them and to the public. The public mind will by this be warned against the acts which may endanger our peace, foreign nations will see a much more respectable evidence of our bona fide intentions to preserve neutrality, and society will be relieved from the inquietude which must forever be excited by the knowledge of the existence of such a poison in it as secret accusation. It will be easy to suggest this matter to the attention of the judges, and that alone puts the whole machine into motion. The one is a familiar, impartial and precious instrument, the other, not popular in its present functions, will be odious in the new ones, and the odium will reach the Executive, who will be considered as having planted a germ of private inquisition absolutely unknown to our laws. I am not quite certain what was considered as agreed upon yesterday; it cannot be too late, however, to suggest the substitution of the judges and grand jurors in place of the collectors of the customs.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.

Philadelphia, May 8, 1793.

Sir,—I had wished to have kept back the issuing passports for sea vessels till the question should be decided whether the treaty with France should be declared void, lest the issuing the passports presented by that treaty might be considered as prejudging the question. The importunities, however, of the owners obliging me to give out a few, I had them printed in the Dutch form only. Not then having sufficiently considered on the best mode of distributing them, I took the liberty, as an expedient of the moment, of sending seven (the number of vessels then waiting in this port) to Mr. Delaney, asking the favor of him to fill them up and deliver them for me. Application for another parcel coming, and the applicant not being able to wait himself till I could send them to be signed by the President, he desired I would lodge them with Mr. Cox, on whom it would be convenient for him to call for them. I did so; and afterwards sent a second parcel of a dozen, which were pressingly requested. The President having now decided that the French passport may also be used, it is at this time in the press, and the whole instrument completed with the two passports. Letters and certificate in its final form, will be ready for signature to-morrow. It has therefore now become necessary to determine on the ultimate channel of distributing them. I am not the judge whether the task of distribution might interfere too much with the other duties of the collectors of the customs. If it would not, their position seems best accommodated to that distribution. I took the liberty, therefore, to-day, of proposing to the President that, if you should think there would be no inconvenience in charging them with the distribution, the blanks might be lodged with them; of which he approved, and I have now the honor of submitting that question to you. If you find no inconvenience in it, I will send 500 blanks, as soon as they shall be signed, either to your office or to that of the commissioners of the revenue, whichever you shall prefer, to be forwarded to the collectors of the different ports; and from time to time afterwards will keep up a supply. Should it, however, in your opinion, interfere too much with the other duties of those officers, I will submit to the President the depositing them with the deputy marshals appointed, or to be appointed in every port.

I will ask the favor of your answer, as the applications are numerous and pressing, and I am unwilling to be further troublesome to the gentlemen who have hitherto been so kind as to fill up and deliver them for me till some arrangement would be made which might relieve me personally from a business with the details of which I was not acquainted. I have the honor to be, with great respect. Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO J. MADISON.

May 13.

I wrote you on the 5th covering an open letter to Colonel Monroe, since that I have received yours of April 29. We are going on here in the same spirit still. The Anglophobia has seized violently on three members of our council. This sets almost every day on questions of neutrality. H. produced the other day the draft of a letter from himself to the collector of the customs, giving them in charge to watch over all proceedings in their district, contrary to the laws of neutrality or tending to impair our peace with the belligerent powers, and particularly to observe if vessels pierced for guns should be built, and to inform him of it. This was objected to, 1st. As setting up a system of espionage, destructive of the peace of society. 2d. Transferring to the treasury department the conservation of the laws of neutrality and peace with foreign nations. 3d. It was rather proposed to intimate to the judges that the laws respecting neutrality being now come into activity, they should charge grand juries with the observance of them; these being constitutional and public informers, and the person accused knowing of what they should do, and having an opportunity of justifying themselves. E. R. found out a hair to split, which, as always happens, became the decision. H. is to write to the collectors of the customs, who are to convey their information to the attorney of the district, to whom E. R. is to write, to receive their information and proceed by indictment. The clause respecting the building vessels pierced for guns is to be omitted; for, though three against one, thought it would be a breach of neutrality; yet they thought we might defer giving a public opinion on it as yet. Everything, my dear Sir, hangs upon the opinion of a single person, and that the most indecisive one I ever had to do business with. He always contrives to agree in principle with one, but in conclusion with the other. Anglophobia, secret anti-gallomany, a federalisme outree, and a present ease in his circumstances not usual, have decided the complexion of our dispositions, and our proceedings towards the conspirators against human liberty, and the asserters of it, which is unjustifiable in principle, in interest, and in respect to the wishes of our constituents. A manly neutrality, claiming the liberal rights ascribed to that condition by the very persons at war, was the part we should have taken, and would I believe have given satisfaction to our allies. If anything prevents its being a mere English neutrality, it will be that the penchant of the President is not that way, and above all, the ardent spirit of our constituents. The line is now drawn so clearly as to show on one side, 1. The fashionable circles of Philadelphia, New York, Boston and Charleston, (natural aristocrats.) 2. Merchants trading on British capital. 3. Paper men, (all the old tories are found in some one of the three descriptions.) On the other side are, 1. Merchants trading on their own capital. 2. Irish merchants. 3. Tradesmen, mechanics, farmers, and every other possible description of our citizens. Genett is not yet arrived though hourly expected. I have just heard that the workmen I had desired from Europe were engaged and about to embark. Another strong motive for making me uneasy here. Adieu.

TO MR. HAMMOND.

Philadelphia, May 15, 1793.

Sir,—Your several memorials of the 8th instant have been laid before the President, as had been that of the 2d, as soon as received. They have been considered with all the attention and the impartiality which a firm determination to do what is equal and right between all the belligerent powers, could inspire.

In one of these, you communicate, on the information of the British consul at Charleston, that the consul of France at the same place had condemned as legal prize, a British vessel, captured by a French frigate, and you justly add that this judicial act is not warranted by the usage of nations, nor by the stipulations existing between the United States and France. I observe further, that it is not warranted by any law of the land. It is consequently a mere nullity; as such it can be respected in no court, can make no part in the title to the vessel, nor give to the purchaser any other security than what he would have had without it. In short, it is so absolutely nothing as to give no foundation of just concern to any person interested in the fate of the vessel; and in this point of view, Sir, I am in hopes you will see it. The proceeding, indeed, if the British consul has been rightly informed, and we have no other information of it, has been an act of disrespect towards the United States, to which its government cannot be inattentive; a just sense of our own rights and duties, and the obviousness of the principle, are a security that no inconveniences will be permitted to arise from repetitions of it.

The purchase of arms and military accoutrements by an agent of the French government, in this country, with an intent to export them to France, is the subject of another of the memorials. Of this fact we are equally uninformed as of the former. Our citizens have been always free to make, vend and export arms. It is the constant occupation and livelihood of some of them. To suppress their callings, the only means perhaps of their subsistence, because a war exists in foreign and distant countries, in which we have no concern, would scarcely be expected. It would be hard in principle, and impossible in practice. The law of nations, therefore, respecting the rights of those at peace, does not require from them such an internal derangement in their occupations. It is satisfied with the external penalty pronounced in the President's proclamation, that of confiscation of such portion of these arms as shall fall into the hands of any of the belligerent powers on their way to the ports of their enemies. To this penalty our citizens are warned that they will be abandoned; and that even private contraventions may work no inequality between the parties at war, the benefits of them will be left equally free and open to all.

The capture of the British ship Grange by the French frigate l'Embuscade, has on inquiry been found to have taken place within the bay of Delaware and jurisdiction of the United States, as stated in your memorial of the 2d instant. The government is, therefore, taking measures for the liberation of the crew and restitution of the ship and cargo.

It condemns in the highest degree the conduct of any of our citizens who may personally engage in committing hostilities at sea against any of the nations, parties to the present war, and will exert all the means with which the laws and Constitution have armed them to discover such as offend herein, and bring them to condign punishment. Of these dispositions I am authorized to give assurances to all the parties, without reserve. Our real friendship for them all, our desire to pursue ourselves the path of peace, as the only one leading surely to prosperity, and our wish to preserve the morals of our citizens from being vitiated by courses of lawless plunder and murder, may assure you that our proceedings in this respect, will be with good faith, fervor and vigilance. Instructions are consequently given to the proper law officer, to institute such proceedings as the laws will justify, for apprehending and punishing certain individuals of our citizens, suggested to have been concerned in enterprises of this kind, as mentioned in one of your memorials of the 8th instant.

The practice of commissioning, equipping and manning vessels in our ports, to cruise on any of the belligerent parties, is equally and entirely disapproved; and the government will take effectual measures to prevent a repetition of it. The remaining point in the same memorial is reserved for further consideration.

I trust, Sir, that in the readiness with which the United States have attended to the redress of such wrongs as are committed by their citizens, or within their jurisdiction, you will see proofs of their justice and impartiality to all parties; and that it will insure to their citizens pursuing their lawful business by sea or by land, in all parts of the world, a like efficacious interposition of governing powers to protect them from injury, and redress it, where it has taken place. With such dispositions on both sides, vigilantly and faithfully carried into effect, we may hope that the blessings of peace on the one part, will be as little impaired, and the evils of war on the other, as little aggravated, as the nature of things will permit; and that this should be so, is, we trust, the prayer of all.

I have the honor to be, with sentiments of respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

Philadelphia, May 15, 1793.

Sir,—Having received several memorials from the British minister on subjects arising out of the present war, I take the liberty of enclosing them to you, and shall add an explanation of the determinations of the government thereon. These will serve to indicate the principles on which it is meant to proceed; and which are to be applied, with impartiality, to the proceedings of both parties. They will form, therefore, as far as they go, a rule of action for them as for us.

In one of these memorials, it is stated, that arms and military accoutrements are now buying up by a French agent in this country, with an intent to export them to France. We have answered, &c.

* * * * *

Another of these memorials complains that the consul of France at Charleston, has condemned as legal prize, a British vessel captured by a French frigate, observing that this judicial act is not warranted by the usage of nations nor by the stipulations existing between the United States and France. It is true, &c.

* * * * *

Our information is not perfect on the subject matter of another of these memorials, which states that a vessel has been fitted out at Charleston, manned there, and partly too with citizens of the United States, received a commission there to cruise against nations at peace with us, and has taken and sent a British vessel into this port. Without taking all these facts for granted, we have not hesitated to express our highest disapprobation of the conduct of any of our citizens who may personally engage in committing hostilities at sea against any of the nations, parties to the present war, and to declare, that if the case has happened, or that should it happen, we will exert all the measures with which the laws and Constitution have armed us, to discover such offenders and bring them to condign punishment. And that the like conduct shall be observed, should the like enterprises be attempted against your nation, I am authorized to give you the most unreserved assurances.

* * * * *

The capture of the British ship Grange, by the French frigate l'Embuscade, within the Delaware, has been the subject of a former letter to you. On full and mature consideration, the government deems the capture to have been unquestionably within its jurisdiction, and that according to the rules of neutrality and the protection it owes to all persons while within its limits, it is bound to see that the crew be liberated, and the vessel and cargo restored to their former owners. The Attorney General of the United States has made a statement of the grounds of this determination, a copy of which I have the honor to enclose you. I am, in consequence, charged by the President of the United States to express to you his expectation, and at the same time his confidence, that you will be pleased to take immediate and effectual measures for having the ship Grange and her cargo restored to the British owners, and the persons taken on board her set at liberty.

I am persuaded, Sir, you will be sensible, on mature consideration, that in forming these determinations, the government of the United States has listened to nothing but the dictates of immutable justice; they consider the rigorous exercise of that virtue as the surest means of preserving perfect harmony between the United States and the powers at war.

I have the honor to be, with sentiments of great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

Clyx.com