Yale i

(diversity i Ibrary

39002005669420

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

'Q» - l&>\

LETTERS AND OTHER WRITINGS

JAMES MADISON,

VOL. II.

LETTERS
AND OTHEB WRITINGS
OF
JAMES MADISON
FOURTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
IN FOUR VOLUMES.
PUBLISHED BY ORDER OP CONGRESS.
VOL. II.
1794-1815.

PHILADELPHIA:
J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.
1865.

Entered according to act of Congreas, in the year 1865, by
J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania.

2-

CONTENTS OF VOL. II.

1794.— [P. 1—30.]
To George Washington. February 8th 1
Return of pamphlets - ... 1
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, 2 March 1
Jefferson's commercial Report. Resolutions of Virginia. The Brit
ish party. Calumnies - - - - 2
Public meetings in Boston and New York. Scheme of frigates to
block up the Mediterranean. Genet superseded by Fauchfit 2, 3
La Forest. Petry. Anglicism of aristocratic party. Genet's future
movements. Fate of Brissot. Alleged charter of American vessels
for supplying the British armament in the West Indies - - 4
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, March 9 - - - 5
Commercial propositions. Public meeting in Philadelphia. Fitzsim-
mons, Bingham, Swanwick. Arrogant action of the minority. Pro
gress of British outrages. Idea of an Embargo - -- 5
Fauchet's conciliatory plan. Project of a squadron of frigates. Burn
ing of French ships at Toulon - 6
To Thomas Jefferson. March 12 - - 6
British seizure of vessels in the West Indies. Supposed policy of
Great Britain. The remedy - - 6, 7
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, March 14 - 1
Sedgewick. Provisional army. Commercial propositions - - 7
To Thomas Jefferson. March 24 - 8
Embargo negatived. Fauchet - - - 8
To Thomas Jefferson. March 26 - 8
Renewed proposition for an embargo. Commercial propositions.
Pinch of the inquiry into the Treasury. Hamilton's endeavour to
parry the difficulty. Origination of Taxes. Small-pox in Richmond.
Excitement at Charleston - - -8,9
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, March 31 9
Reference of the ways and means. Tb<? f °ffl) V1*! Mercer - 9, 10
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, April 14 - - 10
Propositions in H. of R. to sequester British debts; for a lien on Brit
ish merchandise, &c; for suspending imports from Great Britain
and Ireland. Rumored project of an extraordinary mission to G.
B. Hamilton talked of to fill it. Issue of his trial. Letter of the
President. Committee on Ways and Means. Expected tax reports.

jT CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
PAGE.
1794. — Continued.
Embargo. French triumphs on the Rhine. Edition of Milton.
chet. Expected recall of G. Morris
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, April 28
Non-importation bill in H. of R. Hamilton. Nomination of Jay as
Envoy, &c. Objections, since his confirmatiQn,./onjthe, ground of
his continuing Judiciary character 11
The English prints and the war with France. The Minister's contin
ued domination in Parliament. Miscarriages at Toulon, &c. Taking
of Martinique. Accounts from the West Indies. French affairs 12
To Joshua Barney, Frederick Folger, and Wm. Mclntire. Philadelphia,
May 1 - 12
Sentiments of American masters of vessels detained at Jamaica on the
writer's resolutions. Acknowledgments - 12, 13
To Mr. Jefferson. May 9 - - _J3_
Howell. Van Staphorst. Aristo cracv . AngUcism,-aBd-MeEcantilism
in the New England States. Boston. Supposed popular delusion.
Weather - - 13
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, May 11 - - 14
Taxes. Practice in H. R. of copying items from British revenue laws.
Excises. Tax on carriages as an indirect tax. Avenue to direct
taxes. Efficacy of a watchful standing corps in dividing adversa
ries. Idea of sumptuary regulations. Luxury and a great estate.
Tax on transfers of stock. Appointment of Jay and the Democratic
Societies - - 14
Its effect on Legislative measures; on the President's popularity. Non
importation bill. Embargo. Motion of Smith, of S. C. Conjectures
as to his motives. Accounts from the W. Indies - 15
To James Madison. Philadelphia, May 19 18
Agricultural, &c. Contemplated sale of land. Discontent as to the
excise. Other excises in agitation. A land tax. Embargo. Price
of flour - - 16
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, May 25 17
Correspondence of E. Randolph and Hammond on continuance of em
bargo negatived. Policy which now triumphs. Discouragements 17
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, June 1 - 18
Stamp act. The "sentinels of stock." Carriage tax. Attempts to
get a powerful military establishment. Bill for punishing certain
crimes. Bill of H. R. for complying with Fauchet's application for
a million of dollars. Monroe - - 18
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, November 16 - - IS
Hamilton. Innovation of a standing army to enforce the laws. C.o.n-_^"r"
ggessio'nal elections. Prospects. Ames. Dexter. Clarke. Swan
wick. Fitzsimmons. Patton. Smith. Tucker - 18, 19
Gillon. Barnwell. Hunter. Harper. Prospects for the Senate.
Langdon. Payne. Bradley. King. R. Morris. Potts. Henry.

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. v
PAGE.
1794. — Continued.
Izard. Gun. Telfair. Posture of things in Europe. England.
Jay's humiliating memorial. Monroe. Prices
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, November 30
^Democratic societies. President's speech. Answer of the Senate.
Answer of H. R. Sedgwick. Scott. Fitzsimmons. Report of the
Committee .... - 21
Nicholas. President's reply. Dangerous game against Republican
ism. Its objects. Monroe. Jay. - 22, 23
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, December 4 - „~^ -""-} 23
Monroe's address to the convention. Jay's mission. Western insur-> \
rection v ->«*_-,  ^_—-~ - * - 23
'¦¦Djmuncjation of the "self-created societies.'!- Political, error of the
President^ Party game" DangeF to the President's popularity.
Arbitrary denunciations, &c. Elections in New England and Penn
sylvania - - 24, 25
In N. York, Maryland, Virginia, and N. Carolina. Griffin. R. B. Lee.
S. Carolina. Gillon. Barnwell. Delaware. Patton. Latimer.
Philadelphia. Swanwick. Fitzsimmons. Senate. Tazewell. S.
T. Mason. Dawson. Brooke Governor. Wood. Jefferson. T. M.
Randolph. Jones. Carter. Wilkinson. Vermont - - - 25, 26
Monroe's farm in Albemarle. Hamilton. Knox. Burr - 27
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, December 21 - <$&)
Post. Weather. Prices. Blow levelled at the" self-created societies."
an attack on the right .of ihe citizen. - -Appeals, to public sentiment. .
TJTLivingston - 28
Watts. Boston. Elections in Massachusetts. Ames. Sedgwick. Good
hue. Dexter. Gerry. N. York. N. Jersey. Hamilton. Knox.
Project to disfranchise the insurgent counties in Pennsylvania.
Bingham. Fitzsimmons. Gallatin 29
1795.— [P. 30—70.]
To Edmund Pendleton. Philadelphia, January 8 - - - 30
European news. Jay's negotiations. His former opinion on the Car
riage tax. Naturalization Bill. Giles. Clause requiring renuncia
tion of nobility. Conditions having reference to the present state
of Europe. Two exjyemes to be guarded against. Fublic debt.
Increase of impost/Exclusion vote in the Pennsylvania Legislature
against representatrw*) &c, from counties lately in insurrectiooJKSO, 31
To Mr. Jefferson. Philadelphia, January 11 - - - 31
Requirements of the Naturalization bill. Nobility clause. Dexter's
set off. Increase of revenue from trade. Excises. Reports of Com
mittees. French victories. Stadtholder. Duke of York. Prussia.
The Emperor. Jay. Monroe - - - - 31, 32
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, January 26 - - - 33
French victories, &c. Naturalization bill. Military establishment.

vi CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1795. — Continued.
Public debt. Motion to call on the President for an estimate. Dis
cussions. Hamilton's valedictory report - - 33, 34
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, February 15 - 34
Jay's treaty. Western posts. Elections in N. York, Massachusetts,
Delaware, N. Carolina. E. Livingston. Dexter. Varnum. Lati
mer. Bloodworth. Clinton. Yates. Floyd. Jay. Van Rensse
laer. Hamilton - " 34, 35
Western military establishment. Public debt. Indian treaty. Wayne.
Power claimed for the Executive. Hamilton's arrogant valedictory
report. New irredeemabilities. Christie - - - 35, 36
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, March 11 - 37
Jjicobjn_SaUeiii!&__Ajxivjl^^ <|j>
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, March 23 - - 38
Suggestion concernmg a scientific body. Personal 38
Books. Boardly's " Sketches on rotations." JayisJtceaty. Monroe. ^^^
Jacobin clubs. Yates and Jay. Speeches of Pitt and Fox Oft!--'
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, March 26 40
Swan. Prices. Jay's treaty. Surmised stipulation. Rumored par
ticulars - - 41, 42
To Thomas Jefferson. August 6 43
Meetings in N. York, Portsmouth, Boston, and Philadelphia. Rich
mond. Wythe. Andrews. The Bishop. Dr. Stuart. The Lees.
Chancellor Livingston ----- ^43
To R. R. Livingston. August 10 - .... ^*4Q
Qloomy pjciaire of Jay's treaty. Strictures. Lord Grenville. Jay's
former pamphlet. The Federalist. Nn.. 11 - Richmond meeting.
Wythe. Alexandria. Situation of the President. Doubt as to the
propriety of uninvited communications from the writer. Appre
hended application of Jefferson's doctrine - 43, 44
To  • [Semb. Tench Coxe, or Dallas.] Orange, August 23 46
Publications relating to Jay's treaty. The "Features." Camillus.
Resolutions of the N. York Chamber of Commerce. Jay's former
language. Federalist, No. 11 - 47
Important characteristics of the treaty. 1. Ruinous tendency as to
the carrying trade. 2. Insidious hostility to France. 3. Spirit in
which every point of the law of nations is regulated - 48, 49
Unequal execution of the Treaty of Peace. Provisions as to spolia
tions and vexations. Omissions. Admission as to contraband.
British pretext, and pretension to intercept trade of neutrals in ar
ticles not contraband - 50, 51, 52
New articles of contraband. Stipulation against freedom of enemy's
property in neutral bottoms. Principle of the maritime States of
Europe, except G. B., that free ships give freedom to their cargoes.
Her accession, in some treaties, to the principle - - 53, 54
Reasons why the U. S. should not unite in a retrograde effort on this

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. v}i
PAGE.
1 7 95. — Continued.
subject. Illustrations of the unequal operation of the Treaty, in
reference to the law of nations - - 54,55,56
Objections to the footing on which the Treaty places? Commerce 56, 57, 58
Existing circumstances do not dictate the acceptance of a treaty thus
unequal, &c, &c. - - - 58, 59
To Thomas Jefferson. August 24 - 59
Monroe's correspondence with Pickering. Committee on Blount's and
Liston's conspiracy. Dawson. "Large fish" 59
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, October 18 - 60
Letter from Monroe. New England men trading to France on Brit
ish capital. Swan. E. Randolph. State elections in Pennsylvania
and Delaware. French Constitution. Rumor of war between Eng
land and Spain - - 60, 61
To Thomas Jefferson. Fredericksburg, Nov. 8 61
Papers. Wheat. E. Randolph's publication. Diary of a friend in
North Carolina - - 61
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, December 6 62
Postage. Muhlenburg. Dayton. Cabinet. Secretaryship of State
offered to Henry. Agitations in Paris. Decree of two-thirds. E.
Randolph - - 62
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, December 13 - - 63
Presidja&s .speech. Answer of H. R. Open doors. Senate Commit
tee on the answer. Sedgewick. Sitgreaves. Jaj's Treaty. E. Ran
dolph. Flour - - 63, 64
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, December 20 - 64
Jay's treaty. Injunction of secrecy removed and restored. Treaty
sent to the press by Mason. First impression. N. York and Boston
Chambers of Commerce. The President. Fauchet's intercepted let
ter. Address from merchants of Philadelphia. Public sentiment.
Expunged clause in answer of H. R. Prospect - - 64,65,66
Disposition of France. E. Randolph's pamphlet. Pickering. C. Lee.
J. Jones - - - - 67
To Robert Simms, (of S. C.) Philadelphia, December - - 68
Memorial asking an Impeachment of the Senate - - - 68
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, December 27 - - - 69
E. Randolph's pamphlet. President's speech. Jay's Treaty. French
affairs. Monroe's opinion of the Treaty. Reversal of Bermuda de
crees - - - - 69, 70
1796.— [P. 70—110.]
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, January 10 - 70
Contract of Detroit traders, &c, for obtaining the peninsula formed
by Lakes Huron and Michigan. Efforts to work the project through
Congress. Warrant. Privilege - - 71
The Treaty. Giles. French affairs. T. Paine's rancor against the

viii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1796. — Continued.
President. Its supposed cause. French flag. President's speech
to Adet. Attack on Randolph's Vindication - 72, 73
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, Jan. 26 73
Jay's Treaty. Spanish Treaty. S. Smith. French flag. Adet. Ran
dolph's Vindication, and attack on it. Bond. " Political Observa
tions " acknowledged. Paine. C.Lee. J. Rutledge. Blair 73,74,75
To Thomas Jefferson. Philadelphia, Jan. 31 .. 75
Jay's Treaty. Spanish Treaty. Debate on employment of a stenog
rapher. Revenues and wants. Excise. Direct taxes. Jj illuiliin ^^^
Hamilton. Gov. Adams. Massachusetts. S. Smith - 7Jj£26
To Edmund Pendleton. Phila., Feb. 7 77
Pendleton's observations on the Carriage Tax. British Treaty. Forms.
New Hampshire. Massachusetts and Virginia. Treaties with Spain
and Algiers. English and French affairs. Flour - 77, 78
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Feb. 7 79
Weekly history, &c. Cypher. " Jay and Jefferson." Dohrman. Maz-
zei. England. France. Exportations of the bread articles. Scanty
crops in N. Carolma, Virginia, Pennsylvania, &o. Flour. Embargo.
" Spell within the Government." Jefferson's " historical task." J.
Rutledge. Cushing. Chase. Blair. McHenry - 79, 80
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Feb. 21 81
De Grasse's daughters. Mad. de Chastelleux's son. Western lands.
British, Spanish, and Algerine treaties. Case of payments into the
Virginia Treasury. Marshall. Campbell. Lewis. Tilghman. In-
gersoll. Hamilton. C. Lee - ££~)
To James Monroe. Phila., Feb. 26 - Csjj'
British, Algerine, and_§panish treaties. Pickering. C.Lee., Dr. Mc-
Henry. J. Rutledge. Cushing. Chase. Blair. Judicial vacancy.
Virginia amendments. Legislatures of N. Hampshire, Massachu
setts, Rhode Island, N. Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Presi
dent will not serve beyond his present term. Conjectures as to the
suecessorshig\ Jay. J. Adams. H. Lee. JeffersonN Loan on mort
gage of publicists. Western lands. New taxesr Wolcott - 82, 83
Constitutionality of the carriaggJax-airgneA^jtC. Lee, Hamilton, In-
gersoll, and Campbefbj»Jiidg£,s on the benchA Payments into the
Virginia Treasury, argueliTty MttTsllall, UaJilp'oell, Lewis, and Tilgh
man. Bingham. Pickering. Bache - - 84
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Feb. 29 - 85
Treaty with Spain. Curious features of the Algerine Treaty. The
President's birthday - gg
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., March 6 - gg
Algerine and Spanish Treaties. King. Pinckney. British treaty
laid before H. R., and proclaimed. Livingston's motion. Back
lands. Federal city. Carriage tax. Hamilton, C. Lee, Campbell,
Ingersoll. Foreign affairs. Prices - - - 86 87

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. jx

1796. — Continued.
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., March 13 88
Rittenhouse. Kitchen stoves. Discussion of the British Treaty.
Flour - 88
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., April 4 89
Dohrman. Bringhurst. Sharpless. Howell. Lownes. Post roads.
Call for the Treaty papers. President's refusal. Camillus. Mur
ray. Hamilton. Loan for the Federal city. French affairs. Truce
with Austria. Forced loan. British armament in W. I. Journal
of the Convention 89,90,91
To James Monroe. Phila., April 7 91
Paine's letter to the President. Caution. Bache. Yard - 91, 92
Base insinuations. Swan. Skipwith. Suspicion of meditated recall. *?^
Books, &c. Economy. Elections in Boston. Congressional pro- '
ceedings - - 92, 93
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., April 11 94
President's refusal of papers. Propositions. Question under rules of
H. R. Proposed Embargo on Indian corn. Bache. Treaty De
bates 94
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., April 18 95
Dohrman. Spanish, Indian, and Algerine treaties. Proposition of
opponents of the British Treaty. Expedients of its friends. Coun
ter movements. Iredell's charge, &e. 95
To James Monroe. Phila., April 18- 96
Fulton. British Treaty laid before H. R. Livingston's motion for
call on the President for instructions, &c. Amendment. Debate
of several weeks. Message refusing papers. Stratagem contrived
in N. York. The writer's speech. No reply. Attempt to lump all
the treaties. McClay's motion. Efforts for and against the Treaty.
Ross's manoeuvre - - 96, 97, 98
To Thomas Jefferson. April 23 98
The British Treaty. A melting majority. Extraordinary manoeuvres.
Bank influence - 98
To Thomas Jefferson. May 1 99
Butler. Senate Journals. Vote on the treaty question. Dearborn's
motion. Wrongheads. Faults of friends. Influence. Character
of an appeal to the people on any pending measure 99, 100
To Thomas Jefferson. May 9 - - 100
The British Treaty. Influences of Aristocracy, Anglicism, and Mer>-»"' ""*
TcaHrnsmTName of Washington ~"-"~ "*^ ~-"*7'"lOO, 101
To James Monroe. Phila.7lStay-r4'^^" - 101
Fulton. British Treaty. Muhlenberg. Patton. Varnum. Dearborn's
proposition. Vote. Influences. President's appeal to the smaller
States. Effect. Bond and Pickering. Adet 101, 102
England and France. Hint. Bill prohibiting sales of prizes. The
next Presidency. Jefferson. Adams. General result doubtful. N.

x CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1796. — Continued.
York. General ticket in Pennsylvania. A decision by H. R. Fitz-
simmons. Innes. Pinckney. Gore. Cypher 102, 103
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., May 22 ^-*tfh
-j£ri;tishjr^e££yi_iiip^^ News —
from Europe. French dispositions towards U. S. Forced loan.
French Executive. The " Minerve." King. Humphreys. Pinck
ney. Short 104, 105
To Thomas Jefferson. May 30 - 105
Expected peace between France and England, and fall of provisions.
Moneyed distresses, &c, in England - 105
To George Washington. Phila., Dec. 1 106
Treatise on small canals, &c. 106
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Dec. 5 106
Doubt whether the electors will leave Jefferson to repose. Conjec
ture as to Pinckney. Suspected jockeyship. J. Adams inimical to
Banks, and headstrong. Chance of a devolution of the business on
H. R. Indiscretion and unhappy effect of Adet's note. Impudent
pretence founded on it 106, 107
To Thomas Jefferson. Dec. 10 - f^%>
The Presidential election. " Exitus in dubio." Jefferson must recon- ^—^
cile himself to the Vice Presidency, as well as to Presidency, if
that should be his lot. ^Prevailing idea as to Pinckney and J. Ad
ams. Committee on answer of H. R. to President's speech 107
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Dec. 19 - 108
Presidential election. Returns. Doubt as to result. Probability that
Jefferson will be called to the Vice Presidency. His duty to accept
it. His probable influence in Adams's Councils. Answer to Presi
dent's speech - - 108, 109
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Dec. 25 - - 109
Uncertainty as to Presidential election. Vermont, Georgia, Tennes
see, and Kentucky. Pinckney. N. Hampshire. Foreign relations.
France. Spain. The British party. Banks - 109, no
1797.— [P. 110—121.]
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Jan. 8 - 1 10
Presidential election. Vermont votes. J. Adams. Jefferson's sup
posed election to the Vice Presidency. Affairs with France. Mon
roe. Pinckney. Malmesbury. Spain. G.Britain- - 110,111
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Jan. 15 . (ffh
_Dfiliefiuy-to,J.A.dams.Qf Jefferson'sletter suspendedrand why. French
affairs. Direct taxes. Hamilton. Deceptive statement. Treachery
to Adams - U1; 112> U3
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Jan. 22 . 113
Message on French affairs. Rumor denied. Dr. Logan. Direct tax.
Eastern members ... 2j3 ^.

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. x[
PAGE.
1797. — Continued.
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Jan. 29 ... _, 114 j,
Answer to Adet's note. Bjafefe-paity. J. Adams - '<A14^ 115
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., "SeBTS"™ - - l^T?
French and British depredations. Pickering's corrosive letter. Diffi
culties. Bill for collecting taxes. Suspected policy. J. Adams.
Abortive negotiations at Paris. Rumor as to the Spaniards 115, 116
To Thomas Jefferson. Phila., Feb. 11 - - 116
Notice of .election. A rumored intimation of J. Adams. Inferences.
Pinckney. Monroe. Buonaparte. Bloodworth - 116, 117
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, August 5 ... ng
Monroe's letter. President Washington's action concerning spurious
letters. J. Adams. Jefferson's letter to Mazzei. Petition concern
ing Grand Juries, &c. ... 118
To Thomas Jefferson. October 20 - 119
A pamphlet of complaints, insinuations, &c. - - 119
To James Monroe. Orange, Dec. 17 -. - - - 119
J. Adams's speech and political tenets. Domestic - - 119, 120
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, Dec. 25 - 120
Weather. Liston's plot. Envoyship to France. Monroe's publication.
President's arrogation of prerogative for proroguing the Legisla
ture. Reflections - 121
1798.— [P. 121—150.] _„
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, Jan. 21 - - 121
Bell. Attack on Monroe's publication. Amherst Memorial. Pre
sentment by a Grand Jury. Accounts as to Ministers to France.
Weather ... - . 121, 122
To James Monroe. Feb. 5 - - 123
Domesja&Jillej?tan<L_j3ournonville. The Spanish Minister and the^
Executive. Privateering avidity. Jay. Potatoes, &c. 123, 124
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, Feb. 12 - 124
Negotiation at Paris. Prospects. A war with Spain. Liston. Agri
cultural. Monroe. Scipio. P.'s malice - 124, 125, 126
To Thomas Jefferson. February 126
Hot-headed Execatfoia. Managers for Blount's impeachment. Con
trast between characters of Washington -and 'J.Adams. Affair of
Lyon and Griswold. Mail. Weather - - -(126) 127, 128
To Thomas Jefferson. March 4 - 128
Tazewell's speech. Impeachments and Juries. Present Constitution
of the Senate. Countervailing act of Great Britain. Comparative
tonnage." Jay. Griswold's deliberate riot. Sewall. Harper.
Snow - ... 128, 429, 130
To Thomas Jefferson. March 12 130
IieJWMgMW*WEashin£^^ Non-attendance of the Ad7 -
amsites. Stamp Act. Books. Weather - faQ,)l31

xii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1798. — Continued. /*~~"
To Thomas Jefferson. April 2 - - ^ /
President's Message. Violent passions and heretical politics. Prin- k_ -
ciple asserted by H. R. Waxjpiri t , nf . J,hg-EKeairiM^.raBCh_gup-
jipsed by the CensMi&tion, and^aacded-agaiiwt. Doctrines lately
advanced. Suggestions. Duty of Congress. Executive usurpation.
Expedient of adjournment for consulting constituents. A mistake of
Jefferson - - 131, 132, 133
To Thomas Jefferson. April 15 - 133
Muhlenberg. EfiBfitiBJiaaCfi.Pf -PjesidenVs^paech. Depravity and
stupidity of Talleyrand's conduct. Partisan use of it. Motive for
communicating papers. Jay and his treaty. Spriggs's proposition.
Generally ineligible. Exceptional cases - 134, 135
President's dislike to the city of Washington. Differs in 'opinion as to
two papers. [" Marcellus," in Fenno's paper, attributed to Hamil
ton.] Declines answering them. Crops. Weather, &c. 136
To Thomas Jefferson. April 22 - - 137
Instructions and despatches. Their impolicy 137
To Thomas Jefferson. April .29 - /f§|)
Despatches. Probable public sentiment. Manju>f- the details a libel
.on the French Government. Monroe's opinion. Naval bill. Pri
vate affairs. J. Bringhurst 138, 139
To Thomas Jefferson. May 5 - 139
Success in turning the Despatches to inflammatory uses. Sidney's
Analysis. Spirit and fate of Robespierre. Jay's contrivance for
reproducing Hamilton. His treaty. Weather. Dawson. Carey's
paper - - 139, 140
To Thomas Jefferson. May 13 - 140
Uses made of the Despatches. Solemn lessons. Management of for
eign delations peculiarly susceptible of abuse. A maxim. The
President. Weather. Threshing machine on Martin's plan - 141
To Thomas Jefferson. — May~2a^.__ - - 142
Align .Ml .ffr^Qaej|JLn jtheSenate^i The President's principles and
views. Censure on his language to the young men at Philadelphia.
J^'^ " His denial of any one common principle between ihe American and
v French Revolutions,,, Elections in New York. Meeting in Freder^
Icksburg. Last despatch from the Envoys. Weather it^\43
To Thomas Jefferson. May 27 J ^*'**l43
PimcJJiajUull-~Su£c^s^^^ Tgmper of the Envoys.
Policy of. the Executive. Piesident^»nl<<yrT>n-the.Bnt,jsh Onnsii. ^^^
jjjSii©B> View of it enclosed. CaUender • - 14£H*
To Thomas Jefferson. June 3 "i'44
S. Bourne. Inconsistent conduct of the war party. Rumor that the
President's proceedings are not approved by Washington. Weather,
&c. - - - . i44> 145
To James Monroe. June 9 - ..... j^g

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. x}ii
PAGE.
1 7 98. — Continued.
Addison's base attack. Dr. Edwards. Whitesides. J. Adams's sortie.
Difficulties as to treating it. Suggestion. Jefferson's opinion. A
seat in Congress .... i46; 147
To Thomas Jefferson. June 10 - - - 147
Law for capturing French privateers. Bill for suspending commerce
with the French dominions. Flour. Doubtful effects. President's
answers to his addressers. Franklin's character of him. " The Sen
atorial muse." J. Adams's assault on Monroe. Doubt how to ad
vise ..... 147, 148
To Thomas Jefferson. Dec. 29 - - 149
Gen. Moylan. Draught, nails, &c. President's speech. Answers of
the two houses. ' Discussions at Richmond on the alienjind sedition
JaffiSj. Apprehended intemperance. Point for consideration. Mc- .  .,
Gehee - "' - —-:——-'_-  . ,149,150.
1799.— [P. 150—153 ]
To Thomas Jefferson. January 12 - (^50 ~S
Observations enclosed. * Qordon's history and alien bill. Sedgwick.
Lyon. Wilkes's case - 150, 151
To Thomas Jefferson. Feb. 8 15.1
Gerrv. Pickering. The President (5Jp
To Tnomas Jefferson. Richmond, Dec. 29 151
Sickness. Vindication of Virginia Resolutions. Giles's Resolutions.
Report. H. Nelson. Andrews. Saunders. N. Carolina. Pay of
members. Foreign events. France. Dawson 151, 152, 153
1800— [P. 153—165.]
To Thomas Jefferson. Richmond, Jan. 4 - - . 153
Giles's Resolutions. Report. State interference. Amendment. Com- _^
mon law. Priestley - '" - "•t—" —--—'-" "T° ^53, 194
To Thomas Jefferson. Jan. 9 - - - 154
Report. Debate. Constitutionality, &c. Common law 154
To Thomas Jefferson. Richmond, Jan. 12 ... 154
Giles's Resolutions. Abuse«.Sedi±ion. Tobacco. Common law. Gen^
eral ticket - 154, 155
To Thomas Jefferson. Richmond, Jan. 18 ... 155
Vote on Report and Resolution. General ticket. Pay of members 155, 156
To Thomas Jefferson. Feb. 14 - 156
Jury bill. Destiny of the French Revolution. Military authority.
Issue to U. States. Snow. Trumbull's prints 156, 157
To Thomas Jefferson. March 15 - - 157
Bill concerning Electors. Ramsay. Report on ways and means.
Danger of legislative interference, &c. General ticket law. Snow
""  — 7* 157>158
To Thomas Jefferson. April 4 - 158
[* See Jefferson's Letter, Jan. 30, 1799, to Madison. Writings, iv., 278.]

X[Y CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1800. — Continued.
Nicholson's motion. French defection from liberty. Encrusting
brick - - 159
To Thomas Jefferson. April 20 - 159
Posture of Europe. France and U. States. General ticket law of
Virginia. Dupont - ... 159
To James Monroe. Orange, May 23 -- ~ ^23^'
Pnflffl'h1" °affffriiWBt.nft-tlwiiiggdit,MHi twt JSeadeace-imp'orlxint. Camp
at Warwick - - 160
To James Monroe .... 160
Alston. Burr. Gelston. Caution against a division of the Republi
can votes - - - - 160
To Thomas Jefferson. September ... 161
Mission to France. Conjectures. Treaty of 1778 - - 161
To Thomas Jefferson. October 21 - 162
Alston. Burr. Gelston. Rhode Island. Observator. Hamilton 162
To James Monroe. November 10 162
Erwin. Jefferson. Elections in Charleston and in parts of Virginia 162, 163
To James Monroe. November 10 - - 163
Erwin. Prospects of the Presidential election. The " secondary "
candidate ... - - - 163
To Thomas Jefferson. November - ... 164
Erwin. Monroe. France. S. Carolina. Pennsylvania. Maryland.
Duval. Elections in some counties of Virginia - - 164, 165
To James Monroe. December - .... 165
Election reports. Newton. State Bank - - - 165
To Thomas Jefferson. Orange, Dec. 20 .... 165
Choice of electors in S. Carolina. Elections in other States. Pros
pect. H. R. Gelston. Davie .... 165, 166
1801.— [P. 166—175.]
To Thomas Jefferson. January 10 - - - - - 166
Vote of Kentucky making a tie between Jefferson and Burr. Consid
erations. President Adams. Coke. Pickering. Hamilton's pam
phlet. ["Quere: Letter on J. Adams?"] Contingency of a suspen
sion or usurpation of the Executive authority - - 166, 167, 168
French convention. Ellsworth. Davie. Murray. Hamilton. The
Senate. G. Britain. Prospect of a Northern Confederacy of neu
trals. Health. Allusion to offer of official appointment - 168, 169, 170
To Thomas Jefferson. February 28 - - - 171
Death of James Madison, Senior. President Adams. Result of con
test in H. R. Committee on the late fires. Expected step of new
Administration. Page. Dr. Tucker. CaUender - - 171, 172
To James Monroe. May 6- - . . . . . 172
Callender's fine - - - - . . . -172

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xy
PAGE.
1801. — Continued.
To James Monroe. Washington, June 1 .... 173
Callender's solicitations for office, His love, and fine. E. Randolph.
Mediterranean trade. Portugal. Rumored cession of Louisiana to * ,,
France - - - - 173, 174
To James Monroe. Washington, July 25 - ... 174
Dawson. King. Hawkesbury. Friendly proceedings of the British
Government. Jefferson .... 174, 175
To James Monroe. Washington, Oct. 24 - - 175
Negotiation for settling difficulties under 6th article of British treaty.
Spanish seizures. Elections in N. Jersey and Pennsylvania 175
1802.— [P. 176—177.]
To James Monroe. Washington, January 8 - - - - 176
President's message. Inquiries as to qualifications. [Qu. ?] - - 176
To James Monroe. Washington, January 19 - - - 176
Dawson. British relations ... 175
To  Van Polaren. Virginia, August 13 ... 177
Batavian Republic. Mutual recalls, &c. ... 177
1803.— [P. 177—191.]
To James Monroe. Washington, March 1 - - 177
N, Orleans. Yrujo. Ross's proposition. Breckenridge's motion.
France. Spain. The Mississippi. Proposed grant of land to La
Fayette. Beaumarchais' claim ... 177, 17s, 179
Extract of a letter from Albert Gallatin to James Madison - 179, 180
To James Monroe. Washington, April 20 - ^s-- - 180
Relations to France and Spain. Suspension of the deposit. Allevia
tions of the injury. Elections in New England and Virginia. Brent.
Lewis. Affair between the President and J. W. Grant of land to
La Fayette  180, 181, 182
To James Monroe. Washington, May 1 - - - 182
Expected rupture between England and France. Order for restoring
the deposit. Cession of Louisiana to France. Laussat. CasaCalvo.
Pichon. Yrujo. Elections in New York, Virginia, New England.
Bright prospects - ... 132, 183
To James Monroe. Washington, July 30 - ... ig3
Mr. Hughes. Purchase of Louisiana. Its uses. R. R. Livingston. /
Swan. Gallatin. Gov. Mercer's project 183, 184, 185 K" n
To Thomas Paine. Orange Court-House, Va., Aug. 20 - 185
False report concerning the British Government, and the cession of
Louisiana to U. States - - ... 185, 186
To James Monroe. Washington, October 10 - - - 186
Yrujo's further remonstrance. Cavils of Spain. Pichon. Baring.
Impressments. Jurisdictional rights of U. S. Public feeling. R.
King. Purveyance. [Qu.?] .... 186, 187 ... J
To Barbe Marbois. Department of State, Nov. 4 - - - - 187 » "H"

xvi CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1803. — Continued.
The late Treaty. Pichon. Interposition of Spain. Interest of
France- - ... - 187,188
To Mr. Marbois, (but not sent) - ... - 188
Statue of Henry 4. His character .... 188, 189
To James Monroe. Washington, Dec. 26 - - 189
1 Mr. and Mrs. Merry. Etiquette. Outline of intended negotiation with
England. Impressments. Visits and searches. Colonial trade.
Surrender of deserters. Contraband. Violations of maritime rights.
Remedial bill before Congress. Public sensibility. General desire
for an accommodation of all differences with England. Delivery of
Louisiana. Laussat. Claiborne. Wilkinson, Spanish idea of the
extent of the territorial cessions - -189,190,191/' 0 t>
1804.— [P. 192—211.]
To James Monroe. Washington, January 18 192
Baring. Instructions. Louisiana. Outfit. Expenses to Madrid. Merry.
St. Domingo. Jamaica. Livingston's memorial. Impressments and
surrender of deserting seamen - 192, 193 '
To R. R. Livingston. Washington, February 7 - - - 193
Disposition made of Livingston's correspondence with Monroe. Con
gress. Armstrong. Letter of leave - 193, 194
To James Monroe. Washington, February 16 195
Baring. A case of etiquette. "Diplomatic superstition." Merry.
British relations. Diplomatic ceremonies. Precedent under the old
Congress. Yrujo. Pichon 195, 196, 197
Correspondence concerning an invitation to dinner - 197, 198, 199 /
To Governor Claiborne. Washington, Feb. 20 - - 199 1 0
Morales. Mischiefs of his residing at New Orleans - - 199
To James Monroe. Washington, March 8 - - - 200
England and the Louisiana Treaty. Livingston's Memorial. Bills in
Senate and H. R. on impressment. Error of British functionaries.
Public feeling. Temper of British ministry towards U. S. Merry's
intimation. Jay's negotiation. E. and W. India trade. French
prisoners taken in American vessels. Monroe's contemplated trip
to Madrid. Probable call to N. Orleans. Outfit. G. W. Erving 200, 201, 202
To Governor Claiborne. Virginia, August 28 - 203
Spanish officers. Objections to their longer stay at N. Orleans. Morales.
Granger. Casa Calvo. Yrujo ... 203, 204 »
To Governor Claiborne. Virginia, August 30 204V*
Commissions enclosed . . 204
To Monsieur Pichon. Virginia, Sept. 3 ... 204 ¦'
French official documents. Armstrong. Precaution - 205' ^
To Mr. Merry, British Plenipotentiary . . 206
Irregularities practised by British ships of war in the" harbour of New

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xvii
PAGE.
1804. — Continued.
York. Impressment. Charge against French ships of war - 206, 207
To John Tyler. Washington, November 3 - - 207
Deposit for payment in France for a sword to Gen. Campbell - 207
To James Monroe. Washington, Nov. 9 - - - 208
Monroe's negotiations with England, and probable journey to Madrid.
West Florida. Claim for French injuries. Ojligations of Spain.
France. South American claims. Convention of 1802. Yrujo. Bow
doin. Godoy. President's Message. Certainty of his re-election.
Clinton- - 208,209
Congress. Chase's trial. Memorial from N. Orleans. E. Livingston.
Mortality at N. O. Deaths of Trist and Gelston. Gov. Claiborne Y.
209,210
To James Monroe. Washington, Dec. 3 .... 210
Spanish relations. Bowdoin. Graham. Purviance ... 210
1805.— [P. 211—216.]
To General Turreau. Department of State, April 4 211
Gen. Ferrand's edict. Piracy and its penalties defined by the law of
nations. Enormity of the edict. Napoleon's indignation at it is ex
pected; but a prompt interposition is necessary - - 211, 212
To R. R. Livingston. Washington, July 5 .... 212
Arrival in U. S. Armstrong. Spanish and French relations. Author
ity of France over the Spanish Cabinet - - 212, 213
To James Monroe. Philadelphia, Sept. 24 - - 213
Admiralty decision in England. Case of the Aurora. Case in Black-
stone's Reports. Rule stated by Lord Mansfield. Correspondence
with the British Government in 1801. Is investigating the principle
that " a trade not open in peace is not lawful in war." Requests
publications bearing on " the imposture " ... 213,214
To G. W. Erving. Washington, Nov. 1 - - 214
" Proud and perverse " conduct of Spain. England. Contrast be
tween the conduct of U. S. and that of certain great European na
tions. Books wanted ------ 215
1806.— [P. 216—391.]
To Mr. Merry, British Plenipotentiary. Department of State, January - 216
Information of the discontinuance of a blockade. The communication
regarded as being friendly, and why, &c. - - - - 216
To James Monroe. Washington, Jan. 13 - ... 216
Pamphlet on the principle in question between U.,S. and G. B. Re
call of copies which had been sent .... 216
To Gen. La Fayette. Washington, Feb. 21 - - - - - 217
__, Waddell. Toussard. Gallatin. Difficulty in obtaining a loan here.
Banks. Du Plantier. Gov. Claiborne. Skipwith. Marigny 217, 218
To James Monroe. Washington, March 10 - - - 218
British relations. Campaign in Germany. Congress. Spain. Arm-

xviii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1806. — Continued.
strong. Bowdoin. Case of the ship N. Jersey. British case. Zeal
of merchants for an extraordinary commission. Monroe's desire to
return. Yrujo. Miranda. W. Smith. Unexceptionable course of
the Executive - 218, 219, 220
Weather. Crops. Prices. President's sickness. Weight of busi
ness - - ¦ 220, 221
Letter from Monroe. London, March 7 - - - 221, 222
To James Monroe. Washington, May 17 - 223
Fox. Grey. W. Pinkney. Vices of the commercial convention of
1794. James Maury. Spanish relations. Schisms among the Re
publicans 223, 224
To James Monroe. Washington, June 4 - - 224
W. Pinkney. Indian trade. Merry. Blockade of German rivers. Fox.
George IH's good will towards U. S. Island of Grand-Chenan. Re
publican majority in the Legislature of Massachusetts. Strong.
Sullivan. Violent schism among the Republicans in N. York. Gov.
Lewis. The Clintonian family. New York politics in general 224, 225
To Pierrepont Edwards. Washington, August 4 - - 225
Case of Smith and Ogden. Objections to the attendance of Heads of
Departments in court as witnesses, to offer inadmissible testimony.
Interviews of Miranda with the Executive. Difficulty as to a dis
closure --- - 225, 226
A Memoir, containing an Examination op the British doctrine, which sub
jects TO CAPTURE A NEUTRAL TRADE NOT OPEN IN TIME OP PEACE 227 — 39]
Authorities ....... 233 — 259
Treaties ..---... 260
Examples to which Great Britain is not a party ... 264
Treaties to which England first, and then G. Britain, was a party - 268
The conduct of other nations - ... 289
Conduct of Great Britain ... . . . . 290
Review of the reasons urged in defence of the British principle - 349
1807.— [P. 393—410.]
Substance op a communication made on the 23d op January, 1807, by Db.
bollman, to the president - - - . 393
To James Monroe. Washington, March 20 - - - - 403
Pinkney. Purviance. Terms insisted on by G. Britain. Fox. Im
pressments. Note of Lords Holland and Auckland. Difficulties of
the negotiation - ... 403 404
To George Joy. Washington, May 22 - . . 404
Allusions to a former letter. President's disapprobation of the Treaty.
Impressments. Enormity of the British pretension. Instructions
for resuming the negotiation. Outrages of British Naval Com
manders - - . 404,405
To James Monroe. Washington, May 25 .... 4Qg

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. XJX
PAGE.
1807. — Continued.
The Treaty. Importance of an adjustment with G. Britain. New
British administration. D. M. Erskine. Purviance - - 406, 407
To James Monroe. Washington, July 25 - - 407
Disregard by a British squadron of the President's Proclamation.
Question whether captives, said to be from the Leopard, ^ere to be
considered as prisoners of war - - 407
Public sentiment on the Proclamation. Disavowal and reparation,
in the case of the Chesapeake, must be made by a special min
ister - 407, 408
To Judge Peters. September 5 - - 408
Desertions of seamen from merchantmen and from ships of war con
tradistinguished - - - 408, 409, 410
1808.— [P. 410—428.]
To James Monroe. Washington, Jan. 5 ... 410
Detention of George H. Rose, British Minister, &c. ... 410
To Thomas Jefferson. Department of State, Jan. 7 - - 410
Official statement relating to the public property at New Orleans 410, 411
Negotiations with Mr. Rose. 1st to 25th February - 411 — 421
To James Monroe. Washington, February 6 422
Transcripts of official papers, &c. - ... 422
To James Monroe. Washington, March 18 - - - 422
Treaty of December, 1806. Rose's mission abortive; and why - 422
To James Monroe. Washington, March 21 - 423
Project concerning impressments referred to, but not found. Regret
•that Monroe could not aid in making proper selections from his
correspondence. Difficulties - - - 423
To James Monroe. Washington, March 30 - 424
List of communications to Congress. Return of papers. Correspond
ence with Rose - - - - 424
To James Monroe. Washington, April 18 - 424
Correspondence communicated to Congress. Explanation as to two
withheld letters - 424, 425
To William Pinkney. Washington, November 9 - - 425
Evidence of the determined enmity of the British cabinet, and of its
confidence in expected events in the U. States, as shown in its con
duct. Miscalculations. Why a private letter of Pinkney was, ex
cept some small passages, communicated confidentially to Congress.
Armstrong's private letter. Explanation of a passage, relating to
French affairs, in the President's message. Turreau - - 426
To William Pinkney. Washington, December 5 - 427
Disposition of Congress towards the two belligerents. The question
of war. Conversation with a foreign minister. [Quere ? ]
Discredits reports that the Eastern States will prefer disunion to a
longer suspension of their commerce. Projects of a junto distin-

xx CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1808. — Continued.
guished from the dispositions of the body of the people. The pat
ronage by the United States of the maritime rights and interests of
the Eastern States the chief obstacle to a commercial treaty be
tween the U. States and G. Britain 427, 428
1809.— [P. 428—363.]
To Joel Barlow. Washington, February 7 - - 428
A person already fixed on to fill the approaching vacancy in the De
partment of State. Fulton. Respect for Barlow's talents, confidence
in his principles, &c, &c. - - 428
To William Pinkney. Washington, February 11 - - 429
Expectations from Congress. Last vote. Effects of the proposed non-
intercourse. Reasons, as to the other Continental powers sev
erally, why they were not included with France. Notice of the
British arrest of the trade of the U. States with Russia and Den
mark in particular - - - 429, 430
Causes and probable effects of the repeal of the Embargo. Apparent
decline, and its causes, of the disorganizing spirit in the East. Un
certainty as to the mode in which Canning's letter got to the press 431
To Messrs. Rochester and Brent. March 17 - - 431
Pledges of support to the public authority and public measures, ten
dered by citizens of Washington county, Maryland - 431, 432
To Thomas D. Kenney. Washington, March 18 - - - - 432
Address of Republican citizens of Essex county, New Jersey. Duty
to cherish peace, and importance of cordial and general support to
the " Government in its necessary authorities, and the promoting *
the execution of the laws with exemplary vigilance." The invoking
of sectional interests denounced 432, 433
To Edward Hall and Thomas Yarrow. Washington, March 18 - 433
Proceedings of Republican Delegates of Salem county, New Jersey.
Injustice of foreign Powers; its domestic encouragement; approval
of counteracting measures; the writer's part in establishing our pol
ity, and presumed solicitude for its success, &c. - - 433, 434
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, March 19 ... 434
Coles. Mails. Armstrong. Spain. National Intelligencer. Short 434
To William Hayward. Washington, March 21 ... 434
Address of Democratic Republican citizens of Talbot county, Mary
land. War vs. National degradation. The Union - - 434, 435
To Cornelius Comegys. Washington, March 21 - - - - 435
Proceedings of Democratic citizens of Kent county ... 436
To Timothy Skinner. Washington, March 22 - - - 436
Resolutions of Republicans of Litchfield. Injuries and insults of the
belligerent powers. Duties of the Government and of its constitu
ents. The Union, Constitution, and laws - - 436 437
To Thomas Jefferson. March 28 ..... 435

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxj

1809. — Continued.
F. Page. Apprehensions as to Erving's course. Yrujo and his mills 436, 437
To Thomas Jefferson. April 9 - - - - 437
Despatches from England for Erskine. The new policy as to Spain.
The Embargo. Erskine's faux pas. Quasi Simoniacal contract be
tween Izuardi and Hackley. Its bearing on the contemplated ap
pointment of Erving at Cadiz. Jarvis - 438, 439
To Governor Snyder. Washington, April 13 - - 439
Resolutions of the Legislature of Pennsylvania. Want of authority in
the Federal Executive to prevent the execution of a decree sanc
tioned by the Supreme Court of the U. States - 438, 439
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 24 ... 439
Advances made by G. Britain. Disingenuous attempts. Change of
British policy. Motives and calculations. France. Russia. Span
ish America. Napoleon. The Floridas - - 439, 440
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 1 - ... 440
Gelston. Gallatin. Turreau. Relations with France. Napoleon and
Cuba. Possible change in the tone of England towards the U.
States. Prospect, in the case of impressments, of an adjustment 440, 441
To Thomas Evans. Washington, May - 441
Meeting at Accomac Court House. Foreign relations. G. Britain 441, 442
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 30 - 442
New-fangled policy of the Federal party. The Essex Cabinet. Ers
kine. Recent elections ... 442, 443
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 12 ... 443
Return of the Pacific. Pinkney. New British orders: a crooked pro
ceeding - - 443
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 20 - 443
Erskine's arrangement. Extraordinary explanation. Conjectured
course of the British Government. Bill in Congress for opening
ports to French as well as British ships of war - - 444
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 27 - 444
Private letter from Armstrong. Plough. New machine for the man
ufacture of flax, &c, &c. Favorable regulations of the French
Government. Reported arrival of the Mentor. Proceedings in
Congress. Bill of non-intercourse with France, &c. - 445
To Thomas Jefferson. July 4 - - 445
Skin of an animal belonging to the region of the Rocky Mountains.
Renomination of J. Q. Adams confirmed. Short's letter of cre
dence - - 445, 446
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, July 7 - 446
Letter from Short. Coles. Armstrong. Gallatin. Possible relaxa
tion of Napoleon's commercial policy. Arrival of Dashkoff 446
To the City Council of New Orleans. July 23 - - 447
Peace and plenty distinguishing the Country. Advantages, and their

xxjj CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1809. — Continued.
political cause, to the Territory and City of N. Orleans from their f
incorporation with U. S. The connexion pointed out by nature. Its /
reciprocal benefits 447T( "
To the Representatives of the Mississippi Territory. July - - - 448
Patriotic attachment of the inhabitants of the Territory to the Consti
tution of the U. States • - 448
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, July 23 - - - 448
Letters from Short and Warden. Objections to Short's idea of leaving
commerce to shift for itself. Dashkoff's conversation. J. Q. Ad
ams's acceptance of his appointment - - - 448, 449
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, August 3 - - 449
Immediate return to Washington. Instructions to Erskine, as pub
lished by Canning. Other instructions. Canning's statement as to
conversations, &c. Gallatin. R.Smith. Pinkney. Coles. Expected
return of Gelston - ... 450
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, August 16 - - 451
Return from Washington. Enforcement of the non-intercourse act
against G. Britain. Reasons against and for the measure. Galla
tin's Circular. Erskine's ticklish situation with his Government.
His strong case against Canning - 451, 452
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, August 23 - 452
R. Smith. Pinkney. Accounts from Europe - - 452, 453
To William Eustis, Secretary of War - 453
The Commander-in-Chief to be called to the seat of Government.
Correspondence between the Navy Department and Capt. Porter - 453
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, September 11 - - 453
Jackson, (British Envoy.) Letters from Pinkney. Canning's slipperi-
ness - ... 453; 454
To Dr. David Ramsay. September 20 - 454
Public meeting at Charleston, S. C. Duty of union of all citizens on
questions affecting the sovereignty, &c, &c, of the nation. British
disavowal of the arrangement with Erskine - - . 454 455
To the General Republican Committee of the city and county of N. York.
September 24 ... 455
Present situation of the Country. Wrongs committed by the belliger
ent nations. Remedy in a firm and patriotic support of the consti
tuted authorities . . ±~r
To the Washington and Jefferson Artillery, at Richmond, Va., commanded
by John H. Price - . Ana
Tender of their services. Confidence in the public spirit - - 456
To Matthew Walton. September 27 . ^gg
Resolutions of the inhabitants of Washington Co., Ky. - 456 457
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 6 - 457
Letter from Dupont de Nemours. His project of education. Turgot's
works. F. J. Jackson presented. Presumption of his deficiency in

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxjij PAGE.
1809. — Continued.
instructions - - .... 457
To John M. Creyon. October 17 - - 457
Resolution of citizens of Columbia. British disavowal of Erskine's
arrangement. General and increasing disposition to unite in sup
port of the public authorities. Importance and efficacy of such a
union - - - 457, 458
To Col. John Mcintosh. Washington, October 28 - - 458
Resolution of a meeting of the inhabitants of Mcintosh county. State
of external affairs. British refusal to fulfil the arrangement with
Erskine. Duty of patriotism - 458
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 30 - 459
Digest of the City Code and business. Coles. Return of Onis to Phil
adelphia. Spanish relations. View of Jackson unchanged 459
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, November 6 459
The Attorney General. The Governor of Illinois. Letters from
France. Short. G. Britain and Austria. Speculation as to the ef
fect on French and English relations of the disavowal of Erskine's
arrangement. Change in the British Ministry. Quackeries and cor
ruptions of Perceval's administration. Jackson, and his patron,
Canning 459, 460
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, December 11 - 460
Monroe's dispositions. His willingness to have taken a seat in the
Cabinet. Major Neely. Governor Lewis. Fayette's land titles. Mis
carriage of instructions from Gallatin. Remittance to Holland.
Party politics - - 460, 461
To Thomas Hertell, N. Y. December 20 - 461
Hertell's Exposfe of the causes and effects of intemperance. Difficulty
of a complete suppression of stimulating indulgence. The experi
ence of nations. Suggested advantage of making ardent spirits give
way to malt liquors, cider, &c. - 461, 462
To the Rev. William Bentley. Washington, December 27 - - - 462
Letter to General Stark - - 462, 463
1810.— [P. 463—489.]
To Plantagenet Eccleston. 1810 ...... 453
Medallion of General Washington .... 4g3
To the General Assembly of the State of North Carolina. January 463
Their Address. Injustice of foreign powers. Confidence in the spirit
and faculties of the nation and the co-operating patriotism of the
States - - - 463, 464
To the Surviving Military Characters of the late Revolutionary Army and
Navy residing in the City and County of Philadelphia. January 464
Injustice of foreign Governments. Preservation of peace uncertain.
Reliance on the patriotism of a free People. Revolutionary cham
pions ....... 464, 465

xxjv CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1810. — Continued.
To George Joy. Washington, January 17 - - 465
Query as to manifestations of patience under injuries and indignities.
Temper of G. Britain. Disavowal of Erskine. F. J. Jackson 465
Orders of April. Canning's conversation with Pinkney. Case of the
Chesapeake. Illicit commerce. Error as to the cause of the rejec
tion of Monroe's and Pinkney's treaty. Disposition of the U. States
as to deserting seamen and impressments. Sources of contention
and ill-humor - 466, 467
To William Pinkney. January 20 - 468
Letters from Dr. Logan. Perplexity of our situation. Discussions in
Congress. Macon's bill. Prospects and contingencies 468
Proposition in H. R. Military preparations under consideration.
Giles's resolution concerning Jackson. Expected crisis in the Brit
ish policy towards U. S. Instructions. Reparation for the insult
on the Chesapeake, a preliminary, &c. Orders in Council. Com
munication to Congress of confidential conversations with Canning.
Answer to Dr. Logan. Debates on the case of Jackson. Pamphlet
copy of a particular speech. [?] 469, 470
To  . Washington, January 31 - - 471
Public meeting at Hagerstown, Md., approving the course of the Ex
ecutive in Jackson's case 471
To the Republican citizens of the First Congressional District of the State
of Pennsylvania. Washington, Feb. 21 471
Their assurances of approbation and attachment, &c. Impartiality in
exercising our neutral rights, and in fulfilling our neutral obliga
tions. Multiplied aggressions. National patriotism 471, 472
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 23 472
" Unhinged state " of Congress. Proceedings. Information from G.
Britain and France. Bonaparte's inattention to the distinction be
tween the external and internal character of his decrees. Wellesley.
His Anti-American colleagues supported by speeches and pro
ceedings in Congress. Voluntary embargo; its causes, and proba
ble effect, &c. - 472 473
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 7 - - 473
Jarvis. Merinos. Doherty. English and French relations. Domes
tic politics. New England, N. York, N. Jersey, Massachusetts. Fed
eral artifice of pushing the Federal towns to their maximum of rep
resentation. Boston - - 473 474
To William Pinkney. Washington, May 23- ... 474
Wellesley's answer to P. in Jackson's case. Explanation. Subsequent
elections. Inference from the appointment of a Charge" to fill the
vacancy left by Jackson. Contingent instructions to P. Relations
to the belligerent powers as placed by the Act of Congress of
Appeal to the policy of G. Britain and France. Speculations, con
jectures, prospects. Passive spirit of Congress at the late session.

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxv
PAGE.
1810. — Continued.
Possibility of its being roused to the opposite point. Cotton. To
bacco - ..... 475, 476
Hostile feeling towards U. States, lurking in the British Cabinet, prob
ably co-existent with the present reign. Distrust with respect to
the French Government. Calculations and conjectures. True pol
icy of France. Parish - ... 477
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 25 - 477
Supernumerary Merino rams. National Intelligencer. Character of
Bonaparte's late confiscations. "What is called Free trade, fool
ishly by some, and wickedly by others." Negotiations at Paris.
Conjecture as to views of England. Change in Wellesley's tone, in
part produced by a fallacious reliance on the British party here 477, 478
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 4 - - 478
The Batture. Gallatin. Moreau de Lislet. Rodney. Poydras. Suit
against Jefferson. E. Livingston. Probable consequence of the
Court's entertaining jurisdiction - - - - 479
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 15 - - 479
Communications from France and G. Britain in the National Intelli
gencer. An omission - - 479, 480
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 22 - - - 480
Armstrong's picture of the French robbery. Correspondence between
Pinkney and Wellesley. Commendation of Judge Cooper's opinion
on the domestic effect of the sentence of a foreign Admiralty Court 480
To Governor Snyder. Washington, July 5 .... 480
Resolutions of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania - 480, 481
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpellier, July 17 ... 481
Inquiry, &c, concerning Hamilton's plan of a Constitution - - 481
To Thomas Jefferson - - ..... 481
Moreau's Memoir ....... 481
To Albert Gallatin. Montpellier, August 29 - - - - 482
Transfer of Treasury Deposits to State Banks. Bank of Columbia.
Two Spaniards. Reputed French decree ... - 482
To Judge Toulmin. Montpellier, Sept. 5 - 482
Proposed enterprise on Florida. Its unlawfulness, and the duty of
the Executive -  482, 483
To John Quincy Adams. Washington, Oct. 16 - - - 483
His anxiety, communicated by his mother, to leave St. Petersburg.
Leave to retire granted, but a wish expressed for his remaining
there. Particular considerations. His valuable services - 483, 484
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 19 - 484
Rumored step taken by France toward a reconciliation. G. Britain's
orders and mock blockades. Dispositions of Congress and the Na
tion. Questions presented by the crisis in West Florida. Expected
invocation of the aid of either the U. States or Great Britain. Oc
cupation of West Florida. Vacancy in the Judiciary. Lincoln 484, 485

xxvi CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1810. — Continued.
To William Pinkney. Washington, October 30 ... 485
Letter and conduct of Wellesley. P.'s letter to R. Smith. Jackson - 485
P.'s qualifications and services. Criticisms of the press on some of
his intercourse with the British Government. Sole question on
which his return depends. Course pursued in relation to Jackson
and a successor. Jackson's insolence. Case of the Chesapeake.
Intended proclamation. Duke of Cadore's letter. Wellesley's let
ter. Blockade of May, 1806. Effect on British interests of the non-
intercourse, as now to be reviewed - 486, 487, 488
Occupancy of West Florida as far as the Perdido. East Florida. Cuba.
Spanish America. British movements. Treaty at Caraccas. French
policy at the epoch of Independence. Elections for Congress.
French and English relations - - - - 488, 489
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, December 7 - - - - 489
Pinkney. British party here puzzled. Lincoln ... 489
1811.— [P. 490—522.]
To the Society of Arts. Philadelphia, January 28 - - - - 490
Appointment as Patron of the Institution ... 490
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, March 18 490
Reported Cabinet of the Prince Regent. Calculations. Fox. Lord
Holland. Grenville. Bonaparte's want of money and ignorance of
commerce. His distrust of U. States. Prospects. Warden and Arm
strong - ... 490, 49i; 492
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 1 - - 492
Armstrong's denunciations of Warden. Monroe. R. Smith's expected
hostility. Wilkinson. Clarke's book. French and English rela
tions. Pinkney's diplomatic scourging of Wellesley - 492, 493
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 19 - . 493
Armstrong's letter relating to Warden. His gross inconsistencies,
and enmity to Jefferson and Madison. His conflict with Fulton.
Expected arrival of Pinkney. Foster. Rose. Convalescence of
George 3rd. English and French relations. Symptoms of approach
ing war between France and Russia. Letter signed "A Man."
Lyman - - . 493) 494
Memorandum as to Robert Smith, Ex-Secretary of State - 495  506
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 3 - - 507
Gallatin. Duane's want of candor and of temperance. R. Smith.
Comments of the Aurora. Duane a friend of liberty, but a slave of
his passions. No account of the departure of either Pinkney or Fos
ter from G. Britain. Conjectures. French relations 507,508
To the Inhabitants of the town of New Haven. Washington, May 24 508
Petition concerning the non-importation law, &c. Edicts of the bel
ligerent powers, and policy of Congress. Provision in the Act, &c,
for the case of a repeal by one, and a non-repeal by the other bel-

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxvii PAGE.
1811 . — Continued.
ligerent, of its unlawful edicts. Declaration of France. Failure of
G. Britain to revoke its edicts. Consequent shutting of our ports
to British ships, &c. Impartiality of the Executive- 508, 509
Objections to the non-importation Act answered - 609, 510
Importance of a united support of the constituted authorities, &c. 510, 511
To the Baptist Churches on Neal's creek and on Black creek, North Caro
lina. June 3 511
Address approving objections to a bill granting land to a Baptist
church. Importance and Constitutional guaranty of the practical
distinction between Religion and Civil Government. Maintained
by the Baptists. Proof of their sincerity and integrity 511,512
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 7 - - 512
Duane incorrigible. Misled as to the character and conduct of R.
Smith. Rodgers and the British ship of war. State of parties in
Massachusetts. Pickering. Hillhouse, and the remonstrance from
New Haven. Delay of the Essex. Great Britain and Bonaparte.
Blockade of England - - 512, 513
To Edward Tiffin, Grand Sachem. Washington, June 23 - 513
Letter in the name of a Taminy [Tammany?] Society in Ohio. Patri
otic sentiments and determinations - 513
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, July 8 - . 513
National Intelligencer. R. Smith's wicked publication. Case of Er-
ving. Clearness and exactness of his official transactions. French
and English relations. Probable character of Foster's mission. In
creasing rigor towards this country. Suspension of cases under the
orders in council ... 513, 514, 515
To Jonathan Russell. Washington, July 24 515
Remarks on the convention with Almanara - - 515
To John Quincy Adams. Washington, Nov. 15 - - 515
New allotment of his services which had been contemplated. His
continuance at St. Petersburg. His fidelity and ability. Count
Pahler. " Adjustment of the rusty and corrosive affair of the Ches
apeake." Apparent determination of G. Britain to make her orders
in council co-durable with the war. Question for Congress. Pos
sible licence to merchantmen to arm in self-defence. Delay and
time of reparation in the case of the Chesapeake. Crops 515, 516, 517
To Jonathan Russell. Washington, November 15 - 517
Reports of Pinkney's unfriendly language probably unfounded or ex
aggeratory. Delicacy of R.'s situation. Mixed character of French
decrees. Case of the N. O. packet - - - 517, 518
To Joel Barlow. Washington, November 17 - - 518
Ground now avowed for British orders in Council. Extravagant re
quirement from a neutral power. Dispositions in Congress. Prob
able permission to merchant vessels to arm in self-defence, and con-

xxviii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGH.
1811. — Continued.
sequent maritime reprisals. French management of the repeal of
the Decrees, evasions, &c. Sarcastic comments of the British Gov
ernment 518, 519
Craft, cupidity, folly, and iniquity of France. French and Danish
depredations. Deserved remedy. British convoy. Reparation in the
case of the Chesapeake. Napoleon for the Independence of Span
ish America, and for the possession of East as well as West Florida
by the U. States. Reasons against an attempt to extract money 519, 520
Keene. Masked views of Independence in Spanish America. Vene
zuela. Mexico. Conjectures as to British policy. East Florida.
Cuba - - - - - 521
To  . Washington, December 10 - 522
Address from the Tennessee Legislature. Patriotic sentiments. Ne
cessity for war. Manner of securing to U. States the navigable
streams proceeding from the neighbourhood of Tennessee. Future
action of Congress - .... 523
1812.— [P. 523—556.]
To Governor Hawkins. Washington, Jan. 4 ... 523
Resolutions of the General Assembly of North Carolina. Approval
of the message of Nov. 5, and pledge of co-operation. United ex
ertions - ... 523
To the House of Representatives of the State of South Carolina. Jan
uary 8--------- 523
Address of the House. United convictions and feelings of the great
body of the nation. Persistent pacific efforts. Official declaration
of the repeal of the French edicts. Evasive conduct of G. Britain.
Extravagant condition now made for the repeal of her orders in
Council. Acquiescence in her practice and pretensions forbidden
by every view, &c, &c. Abnegation of neutral guaranty. Recolo-
nizing of commerce .... 523, 524
Commerce unrestricted with G. Britain, and restricted by her else
where. Disproportion of exports to imports. Draining of the pre
cious metals. Effect on moneyed institutions, internal improve
ments, and manufactures. Ship-owners, ship-builders, mariners.
Carrying trade. Tendency of acquiescence to perpetuate the de
structive policy - - .... 525
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, February 7 - - - - 525
Adherence of G. Britain to her mad policy towards U. S. Measures
of Congress. Dilatory and inadequate provision of military forces.
Case of Wilkinson. Its " colossal " dimensions. Weather. Earth
quakes in the State of New York, West, and South Westwardly,
and in Washington - .... 525 526
To Joel Barlow. Washington, February 24 - - . 526
Question of a commercial treaty with France. B.'s intercourse with

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. Xx;x PAGE.
1812. — Continued.
the French Government. Circumstances of encouragement and of
distrust. Paper presented by B. Unfavorable inferences from the
reception it had 526, 527
Doubts as to a commercial treaty. Desirable regulations on the part
of France. Reduced tariff. Transit through French ports. Licenses.
Commerce between U. S. and France, a barter of food and raw ma
terials for superfluities in great part. Suggested substitute for li
censes. Gallatin. Lee 527, 528
Joseph's usurpation of the Spanish throne. Its bearings on American
questions. Public sentiment in U. S. on the conduct of the French
Government 528, 529
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, March 6 530
Inference from proceedings of H. R. concerning taxes. Liverpool.
Perceval. French affairs. National Intelligencer. Gimbrede 530
To Thomas Jefferson. March 9 - 530
Message and documents as to John Henry. Credential. and instruc
tions from the Governor of Canada. Liverpool's despatch. Eastern
Junto and the British Cabinet - - 530
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 3 - - 530
Memoir on the Batture. Books, &c. British Cabinet prefer war with
U. S. to a repeal of the Orders in Council. Embargo bill passed by
H. R. Equivocal temper of the Senate. Peninsular system of the
British Cabinet. Speculations. Liverpool. Castlereagh. Welles
ley. Perceval. The Grenville party. Delay of the Hornet. French
affairs - - ... 53^ 532
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, April 24 - - - 532
The Batture case. Produce in hands of the farmers - 532
Embargo extended to 90 days. Different opinions as to time and form
of beginning hostilities. Suggested adjournment. Wheat and flour.
Probability of a neutral cover. Objections to licenses - - 533
Delay of the Hornet. Apprehension that Barlow is "burning his fin
gers," &c. Extravagances of Matthews in East Florida 533, 534
To the Inhabitants of the town of Milton, Mass. May 18 - 534
Vaccination. Precautions already adopted. Patriotic sentiments - 534
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, May 25 - - 535
Arrival of the Hornet. French relations. Nothing done by France.
Address played off on Barlow. Puzzling calculations. Federalists,
Republicans, and Quids. Views of a triangular war - - 635
To Thomas Jefferson. June 22 ... 535
Declaration of war. Expected protest of the Federalists in Congress.
Assassination of Perceval. Doubts concerning Wellesley. Prince
of Wales. LadyH. - 536
To  . Washington, July 25 - - 536
Address from a Convention of Republican Delegates, N. Jersey.
Their patriotic sentiments. The war made necessary by the con-

xxx CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1812. — Continued.
duct of G. Britain. Her outrages. Impressments, &c. Blockading
Orders in Council. Progress of the pretensions connected with
them. Revival of an absurd and exploded doctrine - ^ _ 536, 537
Right of U. S. in a common sovereignty on the high seas, &c. British
pretensions degrading to them as an Independent power. Share of
N. Jersey in the Revolution 537> 538
To General Dearborn. Washington, August 9 538
The campaign. A plan frustrated. Hull's operations. Expedition
against Montreal. Prospects. The volunteer act. Resource in the
militia. Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut.
Suggestion of a demonstration towards Quebec. Monroe. State
of health " 538, 539, 540
To Joel Barlow. Washington, August 11 - 540
Shameful conduct of the French Government. Castlereagh. Infor
mal communication of an intended repeal of the British orders.
Conjectures. Contingent indignation against France. Possible war
with her. Possibility of B.'s sudden return. J. Graham. La Fay
ette and locations near Point Coupee - 540, 541, 542
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, August 17 - - 542
Higginbotham. Consulate at Lisbon. Seditious opposition in Massa
chusetts and Connecticut. Its effect on military operations. Dis
couragements. Hull's expedition. Michilimackinac. Hoped re
duction of Fort Maiden. Probable cause of the sudden change in
relation to the Orders in council. Doubtful prospects. Informal
and erroneous communication of the intended change, hurried over.
Proposal of the local authorities at Halifax to suspend hostilities
sanctioned by Foster. Prevost's message to Dearborn. Objections
to the proposal - - 543, 544
To the Rev. S. Spring. Montpelier, Sept. 6 - - 544
Collegial friendship. Civil war indicated as the consequence of en
forcing measures resulting from the National will, constitutionally
pronounced. Such a course illegitimate, and inconsistent with the
duration or efficacy of any Government. Unfounded and uncandid
presumption of a French connexion. Advantage to the public en
emy from internal divisions - 544, 545
To Major General Dearborn. Washington, Oct. 7 - 545
Military operations. Gen. Harrison. Loss of Hull's army. Impor
tance of command of the Lakes. Canada. Indians. Necessity of
essential improvement in the volunteer system - 545, 546, 547
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of South Caro
lina. October 10 ... 543
Their patriotic determination. Origin and object of the war. Its ne
cessity. Personal ... 543
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 14 ... 543
Meigs. Mansfield. Exchange of places. Faronde's lucubrations.

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxxi PAGE.
1812. — Continued.
Military crisis near Fort Defiance. Winchester. Brock. Dearborn.
Best hopes on Harrison. Accounts from Europe. Foster and Rus
sell. Current elections. Experimentum crucis. Prospects in Mary
land. Pennsylvania and N. Jersey shaken, but safe. N. Jersey
and N. Hampshire doubtful. North Carolina vibrating - 648, 549, 550
To Governor Galusha. Washington, Nov. 30 - 650
Resolution of the General Assembly of Vermont, pledging support to
the General Government. Sacred duty of all citizens. The enemy
encouraged by appearances of internal discord, &c. Patriotism of
Vermont - - 550, 551
To William Eustis, Secretary of War. Washington, Dec. 4 - 551
His resignation of office. Zeal and constancy of his exertions for the
public good, &c. - 551
To Paul Hamilton, (Secretary of the Navy.) Dec. 31 551
His resignation of office. His patriotic merits, private virtues, &c,
&c. - - 551,552
Talk op the President or the United States to the Deputies from sev
eral tribes who accompanied Gen. Clarke to Washington. 1812 - 553-5
1813.— [P. 557— 580.J
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, January 27 - - 557
Congress. Changes in the Executive Department. Bonaparte's dan
ger, and that of his army. Prospect. The Regent's speech. Wel
lesley's party. The Peninsular war. Wellington. Harvest. Ex
penditures. Bank paper. Cooper's Justinian - 557
To John Binns and others. Washmgton, February 11 - 557
Naturalized citizens. Prince Regent's Proclamation as inconsistent
with British laws and practice as repugnant to reason and human
ity. Determination and duty of the Executive Department of the
Government of U. S. to protect, according to its just means, natural
ized citizens, &c. - ... 557, 558
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, March 10 558
Late commander at Niagara. Sympathizers with R. Smith. Mili
tary appointment of one of them. T. M. Randolph nominated to
the Senate for a Colonelcy. His qualifications. Russian account
of the catastrophe of the French army. Calculations as to Napo
leon's surmounting his difficulties. Exultation in England. Rus
sian tender of mediating friendship. The Emperor Alexander 558, 559, 560
To Col. David Humphreys. Washington, March 23 . 560
Perkins. ' ' An alliance with France and a systematic exclusion of
commerce " alleged to be within the views of the Administration.
Extreme improbability of the first supposition. Repeated dis
avowals, official and otherwise. Barlow's letter to Monroe. Ab
surdity of the supposition as to commerce. Incredulous that the

xxxii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1813. — Continued.
Union is in danger. Affinities. Common interest in its preserva
tion. The Eastern portion would be the greatest losers by its dis
solution - 560, 561
Commercial jealousy on the part of G. Britain the real cause of the
American Revolution - ... 562
To John Nicholas. Washington, April 2 - - - 562
Impossibility of avoiding or delaying the war. Unpreparedness for
it. Discord and variety of opinions and views in the public coun
cils. Calculations of the Executive. How defeated. Present reg
ular force, and that at first recommended - 562
Expedition under Hull. Importance of command of the Lakes. Can
ada. Lake Ontario. Calculations as to effect of the Russian medi
ation. Russia in its zenith. Known friendship of Alexander to U.
S. Affinity between Baltic and American ideas of maritime law - 563
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, June 6 - - 563
Dr. Waterhouse's abilities and learning. His virhies must be his
present reward. Dr. J. Rush. Dr. Tilton. Protection of the Chesa
peake by gun-boats. Their utility and disadvantages. Lynhaven
bay. Cruisers on the outside of the Capes. Commodore Barry.
Row galleys - - - - 564
To the Senate of the U. States. Washington, July 6 - - 565
Declines to confer with a Committee on the subject of a nomination.
Constitutional view .... 555
Analogy from the relation between the two Houses in the passage of
laws. Tender of all suitable information .... 566
To Albert Gallatin. Washington, August 2 - - 566
Mutilated mission to St. Petersburg. Proceedings connected with the
nomination of G., and its rejection. Suggestion of a renomination
founded on a vacancy in the Secretaryship of the Treasury. Diffi
culties and objections. Project, if the Treasury Department should
be vacated, that the vacancy should be forthwith filled, in order to
prevent its being kept open for G.'s return. Impossibility of pur
chasing the consent of the Senate to a renomination to the mission,
by a pledge of a concurrent nomination to the Treasury. Degrada
tion of the Executive; and introduction of a species of barter, &c.
The negative of the Senate grounded on the opinion of official in
compatibility. Tacit acknowledgment of personal fitness. Whole
proceeding favorable, in its effect, to G.'s standing with the nation.
Recovery from sickness - . 5g7 5gg ggg
To Major General Henry Dearborn. Washington, August 8 - 569
State of things connected with D.'s retirement Motion in H. of R.
comprehending an investigation. Consolatory - - 569 570
To Governor Shelby. Montpelier, August 8 - - . -570
Patriotism and bravery of the citizens of Kentucky. Provision by
her Legislature for a call on them and their Governor. Gen. Har-

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxxiii PAGE.
1813. — Continued.
rison. Effect of naval preparations on the Lakes - 570, 571
To John Graham. Montpelier, August 28 - - - 571
Turreau's offensive letter to R. Smith. Examples with other For
eign ministers of a letter being taken back. Conjectures as to R.
Smith and the publication of a translation of the letter. Folly which
has marked his career. Copies of other papers carried by him from
the Department of State. Time when the translated letter was re
ceived; before the rejection of Erskine's arrangement was known.
Burning of a French ship near the shore of N. Carolina. Monroe's
sickness. The writer's health - 571, 572
To William Wirt. Montpelier, Sept. 30 - 573
Discontent, &c, gaining ground with respect to the war on Canada.
Success the test by which public opinion decides. Exertions making.
Causes of past failure - - 573
Original plan of the Executive for giving effect to the war. Difficulty
of raising a large army for a long term of service. Limit proposed
to first attempts. Reduction of Canada, &c. Recommendations to
Congress. Hull's expedition. Plan preferred by Congress. De
lays ?.nd difficulties - - ... 574
Inadequate provision for Commissary's and Quartermaster's Depart
ments. Inexperience of the new officers. This inconvenience in
separable necessarily from the blessings of the country. The future.
Anxieties and hopes 575
To Morris Birkbeck - - 575
Coles. Good wishes for emigrants. Neither a provision of law nor
the practice of the Government to give encouragement to them, un
less in certain specified cases. The want of power in the Executive,
and probably of a disposition in Congress, to dispose of the public
land in a mode different from the ordinary one. Invitation 575, 576
To William Eustis. Washington, Nov. 12 - 576
Difficulty of acting on, and incompetency of the Executive to consum
mate alone, an arrangement suggested by E. Usage in certain cases
of appointments. Collectors in towns having banks 576, 577
To the Senate and House of Commons of the General Assembly of the
State of North Carolma - 577
Their memorial on the exposure of their State to danger on the sea
coast. Protection by the General Government proportioned to the
aggregate means applicable thereto. Rule for distributing them.
Occasional attempts. The States considered as parts of one whole 577
The particular case. The U. S. partitioned into military Districts.
Instructions to the officer allotted to that including N. Carolina.
Gun-boats and other armed boats. Auxiliary provisions which N.
Carolina may make on her own account - - - 578
To the Legislature of the State of South Carolina. Dec. - - 579
Sensibility to the rights and honor of the nation. Efforts of U. S. to

xxxiT CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1813. — Continued.
preserve peace. The only alternatives, degradation or war. Hu
manity and bravery of the American character. Any instance of a
seeming departure from humanity extorted by the cruel policy of
the adversary, &c. Personal - - - 579, 580
1814.— [P. 580-612.]
To Governor Tompkins. Washington, January 25 - - 580
Unexpected and distressing events on the Niagara frontier. Appre
hended diversion of a part of the enemy's force to Presque Isle or
Detroit. Precautions. Sickness in the regular army. Suggested
provision for the station, &c, &c, adjoining Sackett's Harbor. Lake
Champlain. Kingston. Lake Ontario. T.'s solicitude for the safety
of his State, and his readiness to co-operate with the measures of
the General Government - 580
To William Pinkney. Washington, January 29 581
His resignation of the office of Attorney General. Bill requiring res
idence at Washington - - - 581
To William Jones. April - - - - 581
His purpose to resign the office of Secretary of the Navy. His talents,
exertions, &c. ... 58i; 582
To Thomas Jefferson. Montpelier, May 10 - - - 582
Influence in England of events in Europe and occurrences in U. S. on
the war. Junto faction crushed by the election in N. York. New
fallacies. Supposed odium of taxes. Suggested armistice. Canada 582, 583
To Governor James Barbour. Washington, June 16 - 583
Prospect as to the future course of G. Britain. Necessity of prepara
tion to meet an augmented force. Regular troops and militia. Ob
jections to an immediate call of militia. Duty of the State Gov
ernments - 583, 584
To Charles J. Ingersoll. Washington, July 28 - - 585
R. Rush. Armed neutrality in 1780. American pretension to a share
in bringing it about. Question of "free ships, free goods." Treaty
with Prussia. Dr. Franklin the father of a provision in it, that un
armed merchant vessels, the property of one belligerent, should be
unmolested by the other. U. S. heretofore took the negative side
of question, whether, under the law of nations, as it stands de
facto, "free ships make free cargoes." Practical admission of the
British doctrine. Weight of authority in favor of the affirmative on
the question as an open one. Croker's treatise 585
Intrinsic merit of the rule. Supported by the authority of jurists and
of Treaties, to some of which treaties G. Britain is a party. Her
Treaties prior to the Treaty of Utrecht. That Treaty. Successive
Treaties in 1748, 1763, 1783. Treaty of 1786 between G. Britain
and France - - . ggg

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxxv
PAGE.
1814. — Continued.
To Governor Tompkins. September 28 - - - - - 587
Monroe. Offer of the Secretaryship of War ... 587,588
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 10 - - - - 588
Sale of his library to Congress. [Samuel Harrison] Smith. J.'s com
munication to Monroe on the subject of Finance. Mass of paper
kept afloat in England. Cause of the difference in value between
the circulating notes and the metals. Despatches from Ghent.
British sine qua non. Fishing, &c, and the cession of a part of
Maine. Direct communication between Quebec and Halifax. Pas-
samaquoddy islands. Indian allies of G. B. Treaty of Greenville.
Prohibition of an armed U. S. force on the Lakes. Substitution for
the present N. W. limit of U. S. Our ministers unanimous on the
arrogance of such demands. Probable rupture of the negotiation.
Changes in the Cabinet. Sackett's Harbour 588, 589
To Governor Tompkins. Washington, October 18 - 590
Acquiescence in his reasons for declining the offered Secretaryship of
War ... - 590
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, October 23 ... 590
Probable quantity of circulating medium. Effect of an annual aug
mentation of it. The two great absorbents of money. Contingent
calculations. Gloomy inferences. Possible remedy. Efficacy, to
a certain extent, of paper as a circulating medium. Increase of
taxes. Prospect of a domestic capital. The foreign money market.
No important news from abroad. Sackett's Harbour. Izard and
Brown. Drummond. Utmost hope as to the campaign - 590, 591
To George W. Campbell. Washington, November 2 - 591
Call on the members of the Cabinet for information concerning late
military events in the District of Columbia. Anxious for the widest
range of inquiry. Statement of the late Secretary of War, [Arm
strong.] C.'s memory as to a particular conversation. Winder 591, 592
To Governor Tompkins. Washington, November 12 - - 593
Resolution of the N. York Legislature on the terms of peace proposed
by the British Commissioners. Patriotism and just sentiments of the
State - - - 593
To Wilson Carey Nicholas, (Governor of Virgmia.) Nov. 25 - - 593
Conduct of the Eastern States. Political leaders and priests. Witch
craft. Factiousness. Desperation. Profligate experiment of foreign
co-operation. Embarrassment of the Government. Tardiness of
Congress. Importance of vigorous support from the well-disposed
States. Virginia - ... 593, 594
To William Eustis. Washington, December 15 - - 594
Changion. Nomination of E. as Envoy, &c, to the Netherlands - 594
To Benjamin W. Crowninshield. Washington, Dec. 15 - - - 595
His nomination as Secretary of the Navy .... 595
To John Adams. Washington, Dec. 17 - - - - - 595

XXXVI CONTENTS OF VOL. II. PAGE.
1 814. — Continued.
The negotiation for peace, and the Fisheries. J. Q. Adams's inquiry.
Original views of Congress. Negotiations and instructions. Dis
cussions at Ghent. Gambling procrastinations of G. Britain. Su
perior ability distinguishing the notes of our Envoys. Approach
ing revolution in the public opinion on the Continent of Europe,
on the cause they are pleading. G. Britain sensible of the change.
Tardiness of Congress - - 595> 596
Extract of a letter from John Quincy Adams to his father - - 597
To Governor Early, of Georgia. December 18 - 597
Resolutions of the Legislature on the extravagant terms of peace de
manded by the enemy. Zeal and public spirit of Georgia. The
disproportionate extent of frontier presented to the pressures of
war, &c. - . - - - 597
1815.— [P. 598—612.]
To General Dearborn. Washington, March 4 - - 598
Nomination of him as Secretary to succeed Monroe, who was called
back to Department of State. Opposition. Nomination withdrawn.
Course of the Senate. Regret and consolation 598, 599
To the Republican Members of the Legislature of Massachusetts. March 7 599
Their address on the Peace. Result of the contest. Its advantages
to the national character and interests. Duties of the People. Ad
herence to the policy, &c. Fidelity to the Union; discountenance
of local, &c, prejudices; promotion of family concord, &c. - 599, 600
To Thomas Jefferson. Washington, March 12 - 600
Dallas's Expose of the causes and character of the war. Printed, but
publication suppressed, and why. A copy sent to J. Plan and cast
of the publication. European affairs. France, and the peace be
tween G. Britain and U. S. Spain. Affair at N. Orleans 600, 601
[Samuel Harrison] Smith. Transportation of Library - 602
To the Committee of a meeting of citizens in Baltimore. April 10 - 602
Their congratulations on the peace. Trials of the Country. Its love
of peace and its energies in war. Stability of its political institu
tions. Public spirit, &c, &c. The present generation has emulated
that of the Revolutionary era. The present situation of the Country.
Degradation in which non-resistence would have left it. Praise
due to the warriors on both elements, and to the great body of the
citizens. Eulogy on Baltimore. Personal - - 602
To Benjamin W. Crowninshield. Washington, June 12 - - 603
Law establishing the Commissioners of the Navy Board. Constitu
tional principles of the Executive Department. The Secretary of
each Department the regular organ of the President. His official
acts carry with them the authority of the Executive of U. States,
except in cases in which independent powers are specially vested
in him by law. In general, the Executive is presumed to speak and

CONTENTS OF VOL. II. xxxvii PAGE.
1815. — Continued.
act through him. Relation between the Board of Commissioners
and the Executive not direct, but through the Secretary of the
Navy. Their duties ministerial, and under his superintendence.
They have no substantive power independent of him 603, 604
Construction of the phrase "shall discharge." Import of the term
"superintendence." The Secretary, as to certain duties, restricted
to the intermediary functions of the Board. Restriction on his
power of appointment. Exclusive powers of the Board to adopt
rules and regulations for the government of their meetings - - 605
Special authority in the Board to prepare rules, &c, as to vessels,
&c, subject to consent of the Secretary, and approval by the Pres
ident. Duty of those charged with the execution of the new law.
One advantage of this exposition. Hope of candid and cordial co
operation, &c, &c. 606
To  Charlton, Mayor of Savanna. Washington, June 19 - 606
Friendly and favorable sentiments of the Mayor and Aldermen. Uni
form and zealous patriotism of Savanna. Necessity and dignity of
the late war. The Peace. Lessons to those who did not emulate
the general example of patriotism - - 606, 607
To William Plumer, Jr. Washington, July 14 - 607
His purpose of writing a history of the late war - 607
Danger of early and deceptive publications. Readiness of Depart
ments or officers of the Government to furnish proper information - 608
To Col. Monroe. [Semble. Montpellier] - - 609
Return of Napoleon from Elba. Probability of a renewal of war in
Europe. Contingencies favorable to the Bourbons, or to Napoleon,
and to a speedy restoration of peace. On other suppositions, a pro
tracted war and doubtful issue. Probable recurrence of embar
rassments to U. States. Possible change in Napoleon's anti-com
mercial and anti-neutral policy. Speculations. Vexations to our
commerce and navigation to be apprehended. Councils of G. Brit
ain. Use of the ports of France. Canada. Considerations discour
aging to the hope of a just and conciliatory conduct on the part of
G. Britain. Plea already prepared, that Napoleon has no claim to
the benefit of public law. The rule of 1756. Two questions for
the U. S. to decide - - 609, 610, 611
Reduction of the army. Contingent instruction to the Secretary of
War. Consultation with respect to G. Britain, France, and Spain.
Considerations that may affect the question of an extraordinary
mission. Orders for the sailing of Commodore Decatur. Algiers.
W. H. Crawford. Baker  611, 612

WORKS OF MADISON.

LETTERS, ETC.

TO GEORGE WASHINGTON.
J. Madison presents his apologies to the President for not
sending the pamphlets, &c, from Sir J. Sinclair sooner, for the
use of Mr. Peters, as was intimated when he last had the honor
of seeing the President. He had hopes of being able, prior to
this, to have looked a little into them, and have complied with
the desire of the President expressed when the papers were put
into J. M.'s hands. It has been impossible for him to do this
hitherto. To-day and to-morrow he had contemplated an effort
for the purpose; but it will be even more convenient for him
after Mr. Peters shall have had the requisite use of them.
Febt 8th, 1794.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, March 2d, 1794.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 15th Ult. came to hand two
days ago. It was not my intention that my first to you should
have been procrastinated to the present date, but several causes
have concurred in producing the effect. Among others, I was
in hopes every week to be able to furnish you with the proceed-
VOL. II. 1

2 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
ings on the subject grounded on your commercial Report* and
particularly with such of them as related to yourself. It has so
happened that I never could find leisure to make out for the press
the share I had in them till very lately. The earlier part of my
observations were sent to the Printer several weeks ago, but never
made their appearance till Thursday evening last. The latter
part is following, as you will find, as fast as I can write it out,
which, from the extreme length of it, the brevity of my notes,
and the time that has run since the observations were delivered,
is a task equally tedious and laborious. The sequel will be
forwarded to you as soon as it gets into print. As you are so
little supplied with the current information, it may be necessary
to apprise you that after the general discussions on the measure
proposed by me had been closed, and the first general resolu
tion agreed to by a majority of 5 or 6, several of the Eastern
members, friendly to the object, insisted on a postponement till
the first Monday in March. It was necessary to gratify them,
and the postponement was carried by a small majority against
the efforts of the adverse party, who counted on the votes of the
timid members, if forced, before they could learn the sense of
their constituents. The ' interval has produced vast exertions
by the British party to mislead the people of the Eastern States.
No means have been spared. The most artful and wicked cal
umnies have been propagated with all the zeal which malice
and interest could invent. The blackest of these calumnies, as
you may imagine, have fallen to the lot of the mover of the
Resolutions. The last Boston paper contains a string of charges,
framed for the purpose of making the Eastern people believe
that he has been the counsellor and abettor of Genet in all his
extravagances, and a corrupt tool of Prance ever since the em
bassy of Gerard. It appears, however, that in spite of all these
diabolical manoeuvres, the town of Boston has been so far awa
kened as to have a meeting in the town-house, and a pretty
unanimous vote for a committee to consider the subject, and re-
* Resolutions of Virgmia, or Madison's Resolutions. See his Speeches printed
in pamphlet.

1794. LETTERS. 3
port proper instructions for their member in Congress. The
Committee consists of men of weight, and, for the most part, of
men of the right sort. There are some, however, who will en
deavour to give a wrong turn to the business. I see by a paper
of last evening that even in New York a meeting of the people
has taken place, at the instance of the Republican party, and
that a committee is appointed for the like purpose. As far as
I know the names, the majority is on the right side. One mo
tive for postponing the question so long was the chance of hear
ing from England, and the probability that the intelligence
would strengthen the arguments for retaliation. Letters from
Pinckney have accordingly arrived. As yet they are under the
seal of confidence, but it is in universal conversation that they
mark precisely, and more strongly than ever, the unjust and un
friendly features which have characterized the British policy
towards the United States. Soon after the arrival of the
Packet, Mr. Randolph wrote to Hammond, desiring to know
whether an answer had been received to your letter of May,
1792. His reply was simply that it had not.
The scheme of Frigates to block up the Mediterranean has
been pushed slowly, but successfully, to the stage of resolutions,
on which a Bill is to be reported. The majority, has never ex
ceeded two or three votes. Whether the scheme will finally
take effect is not certain. It probably will, unless accounts
from Europe furnish hopes that Spain or Portugal, particularly
the latter, which is friendly and interested in our trade, may
interfere. Genet has been superseded by Fauchet, the Secretary to the
Executive Council. The latter has not been here long enough
to develope his temper and character. He has the aspect of
moderation. His account of things in France is very favorable
on the whole. He takes particular pains to assure all who talk
with him of the perseverance of France in her attachment to us,
and her anxiety that nothing which may have taken place may
lessen it on our side. In his interview with the President he
held the same language; and I am told by E. Randolph, that
the President not only declared explicitly his affectionate solici-

4 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
tude for the success of the Republic, but after he had done so,
with great emphasis, desired, in order to be as pointed as possi
ble, that his expressions might be repeated by E. Randolph, who
acted as Interpreter. Fauchet does not speak our language.
La Forest comes over with the Minister as Consul General, and
Petry, formerly Consul of S. Carolina, as Consul for this place.
The political characters of these gentlemen, as heretofore un
derstood, give some uneasiness to the Republican party; and
the uneasiness has been increased by the homage paid by the
leaders of the other party to the new Minister. They may
probably aim at practising on him by abusing the madness of
Genet, and representing the Republicans as rather his partizans
than the friends of the French cause. But if he is not an un
common fool, or a traitor, it is impossible he can play into their
hands, because the Anglicism stamped on the Aristocratic fac
tion must warn him of its hostility to his objects. ¦ Genet has
not taken any decided step in relation to his future movements.
He is said to be poor, and, by some, to meditate a return to
France, with a view to join the army; by others, a settlement in
this Country as a farmer. If he is prudent, he will not venture
to France in her present temper, with all the suspicions and
follies with which he is loaded. You must have seen that Bris-
sot and his party have been cut off by the Guillotine.
I am informed, by an anonymous letter from N. York, that
large purchases are making there, and in the Eastern States,
for supplying the British armaments in the West Indies, and
that American vessels are chartering for the conveyance of them.
This is really horrible. Whilst we allow the British to stop
our supplies to the French Dominions, we allow our citizens to
carry supplies to hers, for the known purpose of aiding her in
taking from France the Islands we have guarantied to her, and
transferring these valuable markets from friendly to unfriendly
hands. What can be done? The letter writer suggests an Em
bargo. Perhaps the best step would be to declare that so long
as Great Britain will not allow the French to be supplied by
us, we will not allow our supplies to go to her. It is not clear,
however, that such a measure could stand the clamor of the

1794. LETTERS. 5
Merchants, seconded by the interest of the farmers and Ship

owners.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, March 9th, 1794,
Dear Sir, — The commercial propositions were postponed for
one week longer, on the arrival of the appointed day. To-mor
row they will again come on, unless precluded by debates on
other business, or again postponed. You will see by the in
closed in what manner the meeting at Boston issued, and the
course the subject is taking at New York. There was a large
mercantile meeting last night in this city, for obtaining a vote
of remonstrance against the propositions. A paper was accord
ingly introduced by Fitzsimmons, Bingham, &c. It was warmly,
and I am told ably, attacked by Swanwick, who explained and
defended the propositions. He was clapped, and, on the ques
tion, there were three or four noes for one aye to the paper.
The minority had the arrogance, notwithstanding, to sign the
paper individually, and will recruit all the names they can to
day, among the Quakers and others not present at the meeting,
in order to deliver in the paper with more effect to-morrow
morning. What the fate of the propositions will be is more
uncertain than ever. Some of the friends of them begin to say
that more vigorous measures are rendered necessary by the
progress of British outrages. The additional instruction of
November 6, which you will find in the inclosed papers, is so
severely felt by the Merchants, that some of them, also, without
relinquishing their opposition to what is proposed, talk of meas
ures more congenial with the crisis. An Embargo on Ameri
can vessels, on those and British also, and even a seizure of
British property, are in the mouths of some of them. The ad
ditional instruction is questioned by some as inauthentic, but it
is infinitely probable that it is genuine. The doubt is founded
on the earliness of its date, compared with that of our last intel
ligence from Europe, which is silent as to that matter. But it

6 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
may have been decreed in the Cabinet and not put in force, or
given into the hands of officers clandestinely, that the American
prey might not escape. Our situation is certainly ripening to
a most serious crisis. It does not appear, however, that in any
event the commercial retaliation can be improper; but, on the
contrary, that in every event it will be advantageous.
You will perceive that Fauchet is going on in the concilia
tory plan of reversing the errors of his predecessor.
The project of a squadron of Frigates is pursued with unre
mitting ardor. In the course of the Bill, the two 20-gun ships
have been turned into two of 36 guns, so that the force is to
consist of 6 in the whole, 4 of which will be of 40 guns. As
the danger of a war has appeared to increase, every considera
tion rendering them at first unwise now renders them absurd;
yet the vague idea of protecting trade when it most needs it
misleads the interested who are weak, and the weak who are
not interested.
I have thisj moment received a note informing me that there
are letters from New York containing definitive intelligence
concerning Toulon. The British burnt sixteen French sail of
the Line in their escaping out of the Harbour. Many of the
Toulonese were drowned in attempting to get on board the
British Ships. All the remaining Inhabitants were drawn up
in the public square, and underwent military execution. The
information comes by a vessel frQm Carthagena.
Adieu. Yours affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 12th, 1794.
Dear Sir,— The Merchants, particularly of New England,
have had a terrible slam in the West Indies. About a hundred
vessels have been seized by the British for condemnation, on the
pretext of enforcing the laws of the Monarchy with regard to
the Colony trade. The partisans of England, considering a

1794. LETTERS. 7
war as now probable, are endeavoring to take the lead in defen
sive preparations, and to acquire merit with the people by an
ticipating their wishes. This new symptom of insolence and
enmity in Britain shews either that she meditates a formal war,
as soon as she shall have crippled our marine resources, or that
she calculates on the pusillanimity of this Country, and the in
fluence of her party, in a degree that will lead her into aggres
sions which our love of peace can no longer bear. The com
mercial propositions are, in this state of things, not the precise
remedy to be pressed as first in order; but they are in every
view, and in any event, proper, to make part of our standing
laws, till the principle of reciprocity be established by mutual
arrangements.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, March 14, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The paper of yesterday inclosed will give you a
clue to the designs of the party which has used Sedgwick for
its organ. His immediate prompter will be seen both in his
speech and in his propositions. Whether more be seriously
aimed at than to embarrass the others, which have been long
depending, is by some doubted. Perhaps this may be one of
the objects; but you understand the game behind the curtain too
well not to perceive the old trick of turning every contingency
into a resource for accumulating force in the Government. It
would seem, however, that less subtlety has prevailed in this
than in some other instances. The ostensible reason for the
provisional army is not only absurd, but remote from the pres
ent sensations of the public; and at the same time disarms the
projectors of the cavil and calumny used with most success
against the commercial propositions, to wit, that they tended to
•rovoke war by an unnecessary alarm and irritation to Great
Britain. The commercial propositions were the subject of yes
terday, and will probably be resumed to-day. We admit that
the change of appearances may require something further, but

WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.

we contend that they ought to make part of our Code until the
end be obtained, and that they will be proper, whether we are
to be at peace or war. In the former case, they will have their
intended operation. In the latter, they will put our Executive
on the right ground for negotiation.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 24th, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The past week has been spent chiefly on the ques
tion of an Embargo. It was negatived on Friday by 48 against
46, the former composed chiefly of Eastern, the latter of South
ern members. The former are now for giving the power to the
Executive, even during the session of Congress. In France,
everything is in a state of vigor beyond what has been seen
there. Fauchet proceeds with great circumspection and pru
dence here.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 26th, 1794.
Dear Sir, — My last informed you that an embargo had been
proposed and negatived. You will see by the inclosed that, on
a renewal of the proposition yesterday, it went through the
House of Representatives by a very large majority. The change
took place among the Eastern members, whose constituents
were growing so clamorous under their losses in the West In
dies as to alarm the Representatives. The Senate will have
the subject before them to-day, and will probably concur. It
is said that some further measures are to be discussed in that
House. The commercial propositions have not yet received a
vote. The progress of the evils which they were to remedy,
having called for more active medicine, it has not been deemed
prudent to force them on the attention of the House during
more critical discussions. They will, however, notwithstanding

1794. LETTERS. 9
a change of circumstances, co-operate with other measures as
an alterative system, and will be pressed to a vote at the first
favorable moment. Whether they can be carried into a law at
the present session is doubtful, on account of the lateness of the
day, and the superior urgency of other questions. The point
immediately depending is the discrimination between Great
Britain and other nations as to the proposed duties on manu
factures. If this should succeed, the future parts will, I think,
meet with little difficulty. The enquiry into the Treasury is
going on, though not very rapidly. I understand that it begins
to pinch where we most expected — the authority for drawing
the money from Europe into the Bank. Hamilton endeavoured
to parry the difficulty by contesting the right of the Committee
to call for the authority. This failing, he talks of constructive
written authority from the President, but relies on parol au
thority, which I think it impossible the President can support
him in.* The old question of referring the origination of Taxes
comes on to-day, and will, in some degree, test the present char
acter of the House. I have written an abundance of letters of
late, but fear they are stopped by the small-pox at Richmond.
The people of Charleston are taking a high tone. Their
memorial, which is signed by Ramsay, the Gadsdens, Young,
Rutledge, and a very great number of respectable Citizens,
marks the deliberate sense of her people. The more violent has
been expressed by hanging and burning the effigies of Smith,
Ames, Arnold, Dumouriez, and the Devil, en groupe.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. .Philadelphia, March 31, 1794.
Dear Sir, — I forgot to mention in my last that the question
whether the ways and means should be referred to the Secretary
of the Treasury, as heretofore, or to a Committee, lately came
on, and decided the sense of the House to be regenerated on that
* See E. Randolph's explanation of the enigma.

10 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
point. The fiscal party, perceiving their danger, offered a sort
of compromise, which took in Mercer, and, with him, sundry
others in principle against them. Notwithstanding the success
of the stratagem, the point was carried by 49 against 46. If
the question had divided the House fairly, there would have
been a majority of ten or a dozen, at least.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, April 14, 1794.
Dear Sir, — Three propositions levelled at Great Britain
have latterly occupied the House of Representatives: 1. To
sequester British debts. 2. To establish a lien on British Mer
chandize, or the value of it, as it arrives. 3. To suspend im
ports from Great Britain and Ireland till the spoliations be re
dressed, and the Treaty of Peace be executed. The last has
taken the pas in discussion. A majority are apparently in favor.
Delay is consequently one of the arts of opposition. It is un
certain, therefore, when a vote will be obtained. It is probable,
also, that much will depend on the state of foreign intelligence,
which is hourly changing in some of its circumstances. ' The
Executive is said to meditate an Envoy Extraordinary to Great
Britain, preferring further negociation to any Legislative opera
tion of a coercive nature. Hamilton is talked of, is much
pressed by those attached to his politics, and will probably be
appointed, unless overruled by an apprehension from the dis
gust to Republicanism and to France. His trial is not yet con
cluded. You will see the issue it will have in the inclosed
papers. The letter from the President is inexpressibly morti
fying to his friends, and marks his situation to be precisely what
you always described it to be. The Committee on Ways and
Means was unfortunately composed of a majority infected by
the fiscal errors which threaten so ignominious and vexatious a
system to our Country. A land tax will be reported, but along
with it excises on articles imported and manufactured at home,
a stamp tax pervading almost all the transactions of life, and a

b

1794. LETTERS. \\
tax on carriages, as an indirect tax. The embargo will soon be
a subject of deliberation again, as its continuance, if proper,
ought to be decided some time before its expiration. Whether
this will be the case cannot now be foretold.
The French continue to triumph over their enemies on the
Rhine. We learn nothing from the West Indies, except that
Martinique had not surrendered on the 25th ult.
I put into the hands of your cabinet workman here the edi
tion of Milton sent you from France. He was packing up
things for you, which afforded a commodious berth for it.
Fauchet has informally intimated the distaste to Gouvemeur
Morris, whose recall will follow of course.
Yours always and affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, April 28th, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The non-importation bill has passed the House
of Representatives by 59 against 34. It will probably miscarry
in the Senate. It prohibits all articles of British or Irish pro
duction after the 1st November, till the claims of the United
States be adjusted and satisfied. The appointment of Hamil
ton as Envoy Extraordinary was likely to produce such a sen
sation, that, to his great mortification, he was laid aside, and
Jay named in his place. The appointment of the latter would
have been difficult in the Senate,' but for some adventitious
causes. There were 10 votes against him in one form of the op
position, and 8 on the direct question. As a resignation of his
Judiciary character might, for anything known to the Senate,
have been intended to follow his acceptance of the Executive
trust, the ground of incompatibility could not support the ob
jections which, since it has appeared that such a resignation
was no part of the arrangement, are beginning to be pressed in
the Newspapers. If animadversions are undertaken by skilful

12 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
hands, there is no measure of the Executive administration, per
haps, that will be found more severely vulnerable.
The English prints breathe an unabated zeal for the war
against France. The Minister carries everything, as usual, in
Parliament, notwithstanding the miscarriages at Toulon, &c. ;
and his force will be much increased by the taking of Marti
nique, and the colouring it will give to the West India prospects.
Nothing further appears as to the views prevailing in relation
to us. The latter accounts from the West Indies since the new
Instruction of January 8 are rather favorable to the Merchants,
and alleviate their resentments; so that Great Britain seems to
have derived from the excess of her aggressions a title to com
mit them in a less degree with impunity. The French arms
continue to prosper, though no very capital event is brought by
the latest arrivals.

JOSHUA . BARNEY, FREDERICK FOLGER, AND WILLIAM MCINTIRE,
ESQra- Philadelphia, May 1 , 1794.
Genltemen, — I have been favored with your letter of March
13th, from Jamaica, with its enclosure, in which the American
masters of vessels detained in that Island have been pleased to
express their sentiments on the Resolutions proposed by me in
the House of Representatives on the 3d of January last. Hav
ing long regarded the principles on which those Resolutions
were founded as the basis of a policy most friendly to the just
interests of our country, and most honorable to its public
councils, I cannot be insensible to the approbation they may
obtain from my fellow-citizens, and particularly from those
more immediately attached to the prosperity of our commerce
and navigation. Under this impression, I have received the
communication transmitted by you in such polite and friendly
terms, and I hope it will be believed that I mingle with it
all the sympathy which is due to the distresses of those who
have been the victims of depredation. With the sincerest

1794. LETTERS. 13
wishes that their unfortunate situation may speedily be ex
changed for one which will correspond with their rights and
their merits,
I remain, Gentlemen, with great respect and regard.

TO MR. JEFFERSON. May 9, 1794.
Dear Sir, — I have your letter on the subject of Mr. Howell,
and have seen the old gentleman who interests himself in it. I
think it probable you will find reason to be satisfied with the
change you have made in your merchant. I have not yet been
able to procure Bills on Amsterdam for Van Staphorst. They
can be got, I am told, but not with so much ease or choice as
on London. I shall not intermit my attention to that object.
We have had a calm ever since the decision on the Treaty.
Petitions, however, continue to arrive, chiefly in favor of the
Treaty. The New England States have been ready to rise in
mass against the House of Representatives. Such have been
the exertions and influence of Aristocracy, Anglicism, and
Mercantilism, in that quarter, that Republicanism is perfectly
overwhelmed, even in the town of Boston. I hope it will prove
but a transitory calamity, and that the discovery of the delu
sion will ultimately work a salutary effect. The people have
been everywhere made to believe that the object of the House
of Representatives in resisting the Treaty was war; and have
thence listened to the summons " to follow where Washington
leads." Nothing late from abroad. We expect to adjourn
about the 20 or 25 inst.
We have just had a most plentiful rain, after a drought nearly
as severe as that with you.
Adieu. Yours affectionately.

14 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Philadelphia, May 11th, 1794.
Dear Sir,— Col. Monroe wrote you last week, and I refer to
his letter for the state of things up to that date. The House
of Representatives has been since employed chiefly on the new
taxes. The Report of the Committee, which was the work of
a sub-committee in understanding with the Fiscal Department,
was filled with a variety of items, Copied, as usual, from the
British revenue laws. It particularly included, besides stamp
duties, excises on Tobacco and sugar manufactured in the
United States, and a tax on carriages, as an indirect tax. The
aversion to direct taxes, which appeared by a vote of seventy
odd for rejecting them, will saddle us with all those pernicious
innovations, without ultimately avoiding direct taxes in addi
tion to them. All opposition to the new excises, though en
forced by memorials from the manufacturers, was vain. And
the tax on carriages succeeded, in spite of the Constitution, by
a majority of twenty, the advocates for the principle being
reinforced by the adversaries to luxury. Six of the North
Carolina members were in the majority. This is another proof
of the facility with which usurpation triumphs where there is
a standing corps always on the watch for favorable conjunc
tures, and directed by the policy of dividing their honest but
undiscerning adversaries. It is very possible, however, that
the authors of these precedents may not be the last to lament
them. Some of the motives which they decoyed to their support
ought to premonish them of the danger. By breaking down
the barriers of the Constitution, and giving sanction to the
idea of sumptuary regulations, wealth may find a precarious
defence in the shield of justice. If luxury, as such, is to be
taxed, the greatest of all luxuries, says Payne, is a great estate.
Even on the present occasion, it has been found prudent to
yield to a tax on transfers of stock in the funds, and in the
Banks. The appointment of Jay continues to undergo the animadver
sions of the press. You will see that the Democratic Societies

1794. LETTERS. 15
are beginning to open their batteries upon it. The measure,
however, has had the effect of impeding all legislative measures
for extorting redress from Great Britain. The non-importation
bill, which passed the House of Representatives by a great
majority, was so instantly and peremptorily rejected in the
Senate, as an interference with the proposed mission, that no
further efforts of the same type have been seriously contem
plated. Clarke did, indeed, move to insert among the new
ways and means an additional duty of 10 per cent, on British
manufactures, but the symptoms of desertion soon induced him
to withdraw it. A member from N. Carolina afterwards was
incautious enough to try a discriminating duty on British ton
nage, and, by pushing it to a question with the yeas and nays,
placed us in a very feeble minority. Notwithstanding this
effect of the Executive measure, there is little serious confi
dence in its efficacy; and, as involving the appointment of Jay,
is the most powerful blow ever suffered by the popularity of the
President. The embargo is still in force. A member from Connecticut
moved a few days ago to abridge its term a few days, as a noti
fication that it would not be continued. A large majority was
against taking up the proposition; but how far with a view to
adhere to the embargo, I know not. Yesterday, a motion was
laid on the table by Smith (of S. Carolina) for continuing the
embargo to June 25. The motion from that quarter excited
surprise, and must be either a fetch at popularity, an insidious
thing, or suggested by an idea that the balance of the effects of
the embargo is in favor of Great Britain.
There are no late accounts of moment from Europe. Those
from the West Indies, as well with respect to the treatment of
our vessels as the effects of the embargo, are so various and
contradictory, that it is impossible to make anything of them.

jg WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.

TO JAMES MADISON, ESQ.
Philadelphia, May 19, 1794.
Honored Sir, — Your favor of the 5th came to hand a few
days ago. I hope you will have secured me the corn, and a
plenty of it. I am at a loss to give directions concerning the
laths and plank. If M. C. can conveniently spare the horses
to bring it from my brother's, it will no doubt be best to get it
from him, otherwise it will cost less in the end to take it of Mr.
C. I will attend to the Forte-piano and the Dictionary for my
sister. As I have not yet sold my land, and probably shall not
at present, it will be convenient to receive a bill for about 200
dollars, or more if you can spare it. No time should be lost in
remitting it. Mr. Dunbar will probably be able to accommo
date you. I am offered 3,600 dollars for the land, but am ad
vised by good judges not to listen to anything like that price.
The discontent as to the excise has probably been stirred up
for some electioneering purpose, and will subside, of course, un
less fostered by other excises now in agitation here, to wit, on
manufactured tobacco and refined sugar. I oppose these, and
wish it were possible to get rid of the principle altogether, with
out a worse alternative. A land tax, though far preferable to
excises in my judgment, and, as appears, in that also of my Con
stituents, is yet viewed in a very unfavorable light generally. It
was lately proposed by a Committee of ways and means, and
rejected in the House by a vast majority. You will have seen
by the papers that the Embargo is not to be continued. The
price of flour is, in consequence, at 50s., Pa currency.
There are no late accounts of importance from abroad. The
adjournment of Congress will probably, though not certainly,
take place in 15 or 20 days. I hope M. C. and Sawney will
make ready for harvest without waiting for my presence, as I
cannot be sure of being there in time.
My dutiful regards to my Mother and yourself.

1794. LETTERS. 17

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, May 25, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The enclosed paper will give you the correspond
ence of Edmund Randolph and Hammond on an occurrence par
ticularly interesting. You will be as able to judge as we are
of the calculations to be founded on it. The embargo expires
to-day. A proposition some days ago for- continuing it was
negatived by a vast majority, all parties in the main concurring.
The Republican was assured that the Embargo, if continued,
would be considered by France as hostility. The other had,
probably, an opposite motive. It now appears that throughout
the Continent the people were anxious for its continuance, and
it is probable that its expiration will save the West Indies from
famine, without affording any sensible aid to France. A mo
tion was put on the table yesterday for re-enacting it. Meas
ures of this sort are not the fashion. To supplicate for peace,
and, under the uncertainty of success, to prepare for war by
taxes and troops, is the policy which now triumphs. Every at
tack on Great Britain through her commerce is at once discom
fited, and all the taxes, that is to say, excises, stamps, &c, are
carried by decided majorities. The plan for a large army has
failed several times in the House of Representatives. It is now
to be sent from the Senate, and being recommended by the Mes
sage of the President, accompanying the intelligence from the
Miami, will probably succeed. The influence of the Executive
on events, the use made of them, and the public confidence in
the President, are an overmatch for all the efforts Republican
ism can make. The party of that sentiment in the Senate is
compleatly wrecked, and, in the House of Representatives, in a
much worse condition than at an earlier period of the Session.
vol. n. 2

18 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
¦PHrLABBM»H6wJune 1. IJT94— ¦
Dear Sir, — The stamp act was poisoned by the ingredient
of the tax on transfers. The sentinels of stock, uniting with the
adversaries of the general plan, formed a large majority. The
Carriage tax, which only struck at the Constitution, has passed
the House of Representatives, and will be a delicious morsel to
the Senate. The attempt of this Branch to give the President
power to raise an army of 10,000, if he should please, was stran
gled more easily in the House of Representatives than I had
expected. This is the 3d or 4th effort made in the course of the
Session to get a powerful military establishment, under the pre
text of public danger, and under the auspices of the President's
popularity. The bill for punishing certain crimes, &c, inclu
ding that of selling prizes, has been unexpectedly called up at
the last moment of the session. It is pretended that our citi
zens will arm under French colors, if not restrained. You will
be at no loss for the real motive, especially as explained by the
circumstances of the present crisis. The bill for complying
with Fauchet's application for a million of dollars passed the
House of Representatives by a large majority. The Senate will
certainly reject it. Col. Monroe is busy in preparing for his
embarkation. He is puzzled as to the mode of getting to France.
He leans towards an American vessel, which is to sail from Bal
timore for Amsterdam. A direct passage to France is scarcely
to be had, and is incumbered with the risk of being captured
and carried into England.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, November 16, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The Senate having not yet a Quorum, I cannot
send you the President's speech. You will have seen by the
papers that the Western scene is closed. Hamilton is still with
the army. You will perceive his colouring to all the Docu-

1794. LETTERS. 19
ments which have been published during his Mentorship to the
Commander-in-Chief. When I first arrived here, the conversa
tion ran high for a standing army to enforce the laws. It is
said the Militia will all return with the same doctrine in their
mouths. I have no doubt that such an innovation will be at
tempted in earnest during the session, if circumstances should
be favorable. It is probable, however, that the President will
not embark in the measure, and that the fear of alarming New
England will be another obstacle. ^
The elections for the next Congress are generally over, except
in Virginia, and N. Carolina, and New York. In New Hamp
shire, the choice is much the same. In Massachusetts, there has
been a violent contest in most of the Districts. All that will
probably be gained is, a spirit of enquiry and competition in
that quarter. Ames is re-elected, after the most unparalleled
exertions and calumnies in his favor, and, according to report,
by the additional aid of bad votes. Dexter is to run a second
heat, but will probably succeed. Sedgwick's fate is not known.
The chance is said to be in his favor, but it is agreed that he
will be well sweated. As he has not yet appeared, he is prob
ably nursing his declining popularity during the crisis. From
New York, we are promised at least half of the new Repre
sentatives for the Republican scale. New Jersey has lost old
Clarke, who will no doubt be replaced by ,a successor of other
sentiments. In this State, the election, notwithstanding its in
auspicious circumstances, is more republican than the last. Nine,
at least, out of thirteen, are counted on the right side; among
them Swanwick in the room of Fitzsimmons — a stunning change
for the aristocracy. Maryland pretty much as heretofore. I
should have first noted that in Delaware, Patton, the republican
ex-member, is chosen by a large majority. The representation
of Maryland will vary little from the present. In S. C, Smith
has been carried by the British merchants in Charleston, and
their debtors in the country, in spite of the Rutiedges and Pinck
ney, who set up against him John Rutledge, Jr. Tucker was
also a candidate. Smith had a majority of all the votes. In
general, the changes also in that State will be for the worse.

20 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
The death of Gillon has made way for Barnwell, if he chooses
to step in. Hunter also is out; but it is said his successor (a
Mr. Harper) will be a valuable acquisition, being sound, able,
and eloquent. The prospects for the Senate are the re-election
of Langdon for N. H.; the election of Paine, an incognitum, in
place of Bradley, for Vermont, who appears to have been out
of favor with both parties; the re-election of King in N. Y.,
owing to the death of two Repub" members of the State Legis
lature; the chance of a republican successor to R. Morris, said
to be a good one; a like chance in Delaware. In Maryland,
the chance is bad, but nothing more than the present Delega
tion is to be apprehended. Potts has resigned, and Henry, it
is supposed, will either withdraw or be rejected. The event in
Virginia you will know. The information from N. C. is not
decisive, but favorable; the same as to S. C. Izard has relin
quished his pretensions. In Georgia, the question lies between
Gunn and Telfair; the former, it is thought, will be re-chosen.
I must refer to newspapers, which I suppose you occasionally
see from Richmond, for the posture of things in Europe. In
general, they are extremely favorable to France, and alarming
to all the sovereigns of Europe. England seems still bent, not
withstanding, on the war. She is now to subsidize the Empe
ror, as well as the King of Prussia. According to the intelli
gence handed to the public, it would seem that the humiliating
memorial of Jay inspires less contempt than the French victo
ries do terror, and that the tone towards this Country will be
much changed. It is even intimated that satisfactory arrange
ments will be made on most, if not all the points in question.
Not a line, official or private, from Monroe. His enthusiastic
reception you will have seen.
Prices here are very different from those you mention. Wheat
at 12s. Corn at 6s. 6d. Beef at 8d., and other things in pro
portion. House rent is 50 pr cent, higher than last winter.
Mrs. M. offers her best returns to you.
Always and affectionately yours.

1794. LETTERS. 21
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Nov 30, 1794.
Dear Sir, — The attack on the most sacred principle of our
Constitution and of Republicanism, through the Democratic So
cieties, has given rise to much discussion in the House of Rep
resentatives, and has left us in a critical situation. You will
have seen the President's speech. The answer of the Senate
was hurried through with the most full and emphatic echo of
the denunciation of the Societies. In the mean time, the answer
of the House of Representatives, though prepared and reported
without any loss of time, was, contrary to usage, printed for
consideration, and put off from Friday till Monday. On the
intervening Saturday the Senate presented theirs, which, with
the President's reply, was immediately out in the newspapers.
I refer for both to the Richmond Newspapers, which you will
probably have seen. The answer of the House of Representa
tives, both as reported and as agreed to, is inclosed. The
Committee consisted of Sedgwick, Scott, and myself. The
draught was made as strong as possible on all proper points, in
order the better to get it through without the improper one.
This succeeded in the Committee, Scott concurring in the expe
diency of silence on that; though, in the House, he changed his
ground. When the report was taken up on Monday, Fitzsim
mons moved " to reprobate the self-created societies, &c, which,
though in strictness not illegal, contributed by their proceedings
to mislead the weak and ignorant." This opened the debate,
which you will no doubt have an opportunity of reading in the
Virginia papers, if you choose. It so happens that I cannot
send them by the mail. The arguments in favor of the motion
fell with equal weight on the press and every mode of animad
verting on public men and measures. After some time the prop
osition was new-modelled, and, in a less pointed shape, under
went discussion for several days. On the first question, which
tried the sense of the House, the division was 47 against 45 for
the usurped power. This was in a Committee of the whole. On
a renewal of the same question in the House, the decision was

22 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
reversed by 47 in the affirmative and 45 in the negative. A
motion was then made to limit the censure to the Societies within
the scene of insurrection, which was carried by the casting vote
of the Speaker. In this form the whole proposition was aban
doned. This was on Thursday; on Friday, it being foreseen that
some evil accommodation would come from the other side and
succeed, it was proposed by Mr. Nicholas to insert the sentence
which distinguishes the first paragraph of the answer agreed
to from the Report. An attempt was made to add " and self-
created societies" after "combinations," but it had so little
prospect of success that it was withdrawn. The answer was
presented on Saturday, and received the reply in the inclosed
paper, which you will be at no loss to understand. The Repub
licans were considered by their opponents as rather victorious
by the result in the House. The reply of the President is
claimed by the latter as a final triumph on their side; and it is
probable that so it will prove. You will easily conceive my
situation through this whole business. It was obvious that a
most dangerous game was playing against Republicanism. The
insurrection was universally and deservedly odious. The Dem
ocratic Societies were presented as in league with it. The Re
publican part of Congress were to be drawn into an ostensible
patronage of those societies, and into an ostensible opposition
to the President. And by this artifice the delusion of New
England was to be confirmed, and a chance afforded of some
new turn in Virginia before the elections in the Spring. What
the success of this game will really be, time must decide. If
the people of America are so far degenerated already a3 not to
see, or to see with indifference, that the citadel of their liberties
is menaced by the precedent before their eyes, they require abler
advocates than they now have to save them from the conse
quences. Lengthy as the debate was, I took but little part in
it; and that little is very erroneously, as well as defectively,
stated in the newspapers. No private letters from Monroe. An
official one of September 15th speaks of the utmost prosperity
at home, of the irresistible discipline and enthusiasm of their
armies, and of the most unalterable affection to this Country.

1794. LETTERS. 23
All that is given out from Jay's negociation is in favor of some
advantageous result.

TO JAMES MONROE. Piuladelphu., Dec 4th, 1794.
Dear Sir, — I did not receive your favor of September 2d, the
only one yet come to hand, till yesterday. The account of your
arrival and reception had some time ago found its way to us
through the English Gazettes. The language of your address
to the Convention was certainly very grating to the ears of
many here; and would no doubt have employed the tongues,
and the pens too, of some of them, if external as well as inter
nal circumstances had not checked them; but more particularly
the appearance about the same time of the President's letter,
and those of the Secretary of State. Malicious criticisms, if now
made at all, are confined to the little circles which relish that
kind of food. The sentiments of the President will be best
communicated by Mr. Randolph. You are right in your con
jecture, both as to the facility given to the Envoy Extraordi
nary by the triumphs of France, and the artifice of referring it
to other causes. The prevailing idea here is that the Mission
will be successful, though it is scarcely probable that it will
prove so in any degree commensurate to our rights, or even to
the expectations which have been raised. Whilst no industry
is spared to prepare the public mind to echo the praises which
will be rung to the address of the negociator, and the policy of
defeating the commercial resolutions proposed at the last ses
sion. It will not be easy, however, to hide from the view of
the judicious and well-disposed part of the community, that
every thing that may be obtained from Great Britain will have
been yielded by the fears inspired by those retaliating measures,
and by the state of affairs in Europe.
You will learn from the newspapers and official communica
tions the unfortunate scene in the Western parts of Pennsylva
nia which unfolded itself during the recess. The history of its

24 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
remote and immediate causes, the measures produced by it, and
the manner in which it has been closed, does not fall within the
compass of a letter. It is probable, also, that many explana
tory circumstances are yet but imperfectly known. I can only
refer to the printed accounts, which you will receive from the
Department of State, and the comments which your memory
will assist you in making on them. The event was, in several
respects, a critical one for the cause of liberty, and the real
authors of it, if not in the service, were, in the most effectual
manner, doing the business of Despotism. You well know the
general tendency of insurrections to increase the momentum of
power. You will recollect the particular effect of what hap
pened some years ago in Massachusetts. Precisely the same
calamity was to be dreaded on a larger scale in this case.
There were enough, as you may well suppose, ready to give the
same turn to the crisis, and to propagate the same impressions
from it. It happened most auspiciously, however, that, with a
spirit truly Republican, the people every where, and of every
description, condemned the resistance to the will of the major
ity, and obeyed with alacrity the call to vindicate the authority
of the laws. You will see, in the answer of the House of Rep
resentatives to the President's speech, that the most was made
of this circumstance, as an antidote to the poisonous influence
to which Republicanism was exposed. If the insurrection had
not been crushed in the manner it was, I have no doubt that a
formidable attempt would have been made to establish the prin
ciple that a standing army was necessary for enforcing the la.ws.
When I first came to this City, about the middle of October,
this was the fashionable language. Nor am I sure that the at
tempt would not have been made, if the President could have
been embarked in it, and particularly if the temper of New
England had not been dreaded on this point. I hope we are
over that danger for the present. You will readily understand
the business detailed in the newspapers relating to the denun
ciation of the "self-created Societies." The introduction of it
by the President was, perhaps, the greatest error of his politi
cal life. For his sake, as well as for a variety of obvious rea-

1794. LETTERS. 25
sons, I wished it might be passed over in silence by the House
of Representatives. The answer was penned with that view,
and so reported. This moderate course would not satisfy those
who hoped to draw a party advantage out of the President's
popularity. The game was to connect the Democratic Societies
with the odium of the insurrection ; to connect the Republicans
in Congress with those Societies; to put the President ostensi
bly at the head of the other party, in opposition to both, and
by these means prolong the illusions in the North, and try a
new experiment on the South. To favor the project, the answer
of the Senate was accelerated, and so framed as to draw the
President into the most pointed reply on the subject of the So
cieties. At the same time, the answer of the House of Repre
sentatives was procrastinated, till the example of the Senate
and the commitment of the President could have their full ope
ration. You will see how nicely the House was divided, and
how the matter went off. As yet, the discussion has not been
revived by the newspaper combatants. If it should, and equal
talents be opposed, the result cannot fail to wound the Presi
dent's popularity more than anything that has yet happened.
It must be seen that no two principles can be either more inde
fensible in reason, or more dangerous in practice, than that — 1 .
Arbitrary denunciations may punish what the law permits, and
what the Legislature has no right by law to prohibit; and that,
2. The Government may stifle all censure whatever on its mis
doings; for if it be itself the Judge, it will never allow any
censures to be just; and if it can suppress censures flowing from
one lawful source, it may those flowing from any other — from
the press and from individuals, as well as from Societies, &c.
The elections for the House of Representatives are over in
New England and Pennsylvania. In Massachusetts, they have
been contested so generally as to rouse the people compleatly
from their lethargy, though not sufficiently to eradicate the
errors which have prevailed there. The principal members
have been all severely pushed; several changes have taken
place, rather for the better, and not one for the worse. In Penn
sylvania, Republicanism claims 9 out of 13, notwithstanding the

og WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.
very disadvantageous circumstances under which the election
was made. In New York, it is expected the proportion of sound
men will be increased. In Maryland, the choice has been much
as heretofore. Virginia and North Carolina will probably
make no changes for the worse. In the former, Mr. Griffin re
signs his pretensions. Mr. Lee will probably either do so, or
be dropped by his Constituents. In South Carolina, the death
of Gillon will probably let in Mr. Barnwell. In Delaware, Pat-
ton is elected, in lieu of Lattimer. On the whole, the prospect
is rather improved than otherwise. The election of Swanwick,
as a Republican, by the Commercial and political Metropolis
of the United States, in preference to Fitzsimmons, is, of itself,
of material consequence, and is so felt by the party to which
the latter belongs. For what relates to the Senate, I trust to
the letters which you will receive from Brown and Langdon,
whom I have apprized of this opportunity of answering yours.
I shall observe, only, that Tazewell and S. T. Mason were
elected by the most decided majorities to fill your vacancy and
that of Col. Taylor, who gave in his resignation. Not a single
Anti-republican was started. Mr. Dawson was a candidate, and
got 40 votes against 122. Brooke is also Governor by a pretty
decided vote. He had 90 odd, against 60 odd given to Wood,
his only competitor.
I had a letter lately from Mr. Jefferson. He has been con
fined by the rheumatism since August, and is far from being en
tirely recovered. Mr. T. M. Randolph has also been in a tick
lish situation; what it is at present, I cannot say. Mr. Jones
was well a few days ago; he was then setting out to Loudoun,
where he has made a great purchase of land from Col. Chs.
Carter. I infer from his letters to me that you are included in
it. He will no doubt write you fully on that subject, or more
probably has written already.
I have not received anything from Wilkinson, nor from Ver
mont; nor heard anything relating to your interests in New
York. I have given notice to Mr. Yard and Doctor Stephens
of this conveyance, and expect both will write. Mrs. Heilager
is also here, on her way to St. Croix, and will no doubt write

1794. LETTERS. 27
to Mrs. Monroe. She tells me all friends are well in New
York. I hope her letter will give all the particulars, which
may be interesting.
When in Albemarle last fall, I visited your farm along with
Mr. Jefferson, and viewed the sites out of which a choice is to
be made for your house. The one preferred by us is that which
we favored originally, on the east side of the road, near the field
not long since opened. All that could be suggested by way of
preparation was, that trees be planted promiscuously and pretty
thickly in the field adjoining the wood. In general, your farm
appeared to be as well as was to be expected. Your upper farm
I did not see, being limited in my stay in that quarter.
I have just seen Mr. Ross, who tells me he has received your
letter. He would write by this opportunity, but wishes to be
more full than the time will permit. We expect another will
offer in a few weeks, when we shall ail continue our communi
cations. I should say more to you now, if I could say it in
cypher. Present my best respects to Mrs. Monroe and Eliza, and tell
them I shall be able on their return to present them with a new
acquaintance, who is prepared, by my representations, to receive
them with all the affection they merit, and who, I flatter myself,
will be entitled to theirs. The event which put this in my
power took place on the 15th of Septr. We are at present in
habitants of the house which you occupied last winter, and shall
continue in it during the session.
With my sincerest wishes for your happiness and that of your
amiable family, I remain, affectionately.

Hamilton has given notice that he means to resign. Knox
means to do the same. It is conjectured that the former will
contend for the Government of New York. Burr will be the
competitor.

28 WORKS OF MADISON. 1794.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, December 21, 1794.
Dear Sir,— Your favor of the 9th, by the Orange Post, ar
rived here on the 18th; that of the 12, by the Richmond Post,
on the 20th; so that it appears the latter was one day less on
the way. It is to be remarked, however, that as the Orange
post leaves Charlottesville on Tuesday, he might easily be in
Fredericksburg on Thursday, in time for the mail which passes
through it on that day to Dumfries. If this despatch is not re
quired of him, it ought to be. It would make a difference of
two days in the journey. Or, at least, the post might wait a
day in Charlottesville, and be in time for the Saturday's mail at
Fredericksburg. Our weather here has been as fine as you describe yours. Yes
terday there was a change. It was cold, cloudy, and inclined
to snow. To-day we have a bright day, and not very cold.
Prices here are very different from yours. Wheat is at 13s.
or 14s., and flour in proportion. In general, things are 50 pr
cent, beyond the prices of last winter.
The phenomenon you wish to have explained is as little un
derstood here as with you; but it would be here quite unfash
ionable to suppose it needed explanation. It is impossible to
give you an idea of the force with which the tide has set in a
particular direction. It has been too violent not to be soon
followed by a change. In fact, I think a change has begun al
ready. The danger will then be of as violent a reflux to the
opposite extreme.
The attack made on the essential and constitutional right of
the Citizen, in the blow levelled at the " self-created Societies,"
does not appear to have had the effect intended. It is and must
be felt by every man who values liberty, whatever opinions he
may have of the use or abuse of it by those institutions. You
will see that the appeal is begun to the public sentiment by the
injured parties. The Republican society of Baltimore set the
example. That of Newark has advertised a meeting of its
members. It is- said that if Edwa Livingston, as is generally

1794. LETTERS. 29
believed, has outvoted Watts for the House of Representatives,
he is indebted for it to the invigorated exertions of the Dem
ocratic society of that place, of which he is himself a mem
ber. In Boston, the subject is well understood, and handled
in the newspapers, on the republican side with industry and
address. The elections in Massachusetts have turned out rather better
than was of late expected. The two republican members have
stood their ground, in spite of the most unexampled operations
against them. Ames is said to owe his success to the votes of
Negroes and British sailors, smuggled under a very lax mode
of conducting the election there. Sedgwick and Goodhue have
bare majorities. Dexter is to run another heat, but will suc
ceed; Gerry, his only considerable competitor, and who would
outvote him, refusing to be elected. There are several changes
in the remainder of the delegation, and some of them greatly
for the better. In New York there will be at least half repub
licans, perhaps more. It has unluckily happened that in two
Districts two republicans set up against one Anti. The conse
quence is, that a man is re-elected who would not otherwise
have taken the field; and there is some danger of a similar con
sequence in the other district. In New Jersey, it is said that
not more than one of the old members will be returned. The
people all over the State are signing with avidity a remon
strance against the high salaries of the Government
Hamilton is to resign, according to his own notification, the
last of February. His object is not yet unfolded. Knox, as the
shadow, follows the substance. Their successors are not yet
designated by any circumstance that has escaped.
What think you of a project to disfranchise the insurgent
Counties by. a bill of exclusion against their Representatives in
the State Legislature? The object is to pave the way for Bing
ham or Fitzsimmons as Senator, and to give an example for re
jecting Gallatin in the House of Representatives at the next
Congress, of which he is a member. The proposition has been
laid on the table, and the event is uncertain. There is some
probability the violence of the measure may defeat it; nor is it

30 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
certain, I am told, that, if carried through, it would answer the
purpose of its authors.

TO EDMUND PENDLETON. Philadelphia, January 8, 1795.
My dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 30 ult., and
am joined by my partner in the sincerest returns for your con
gratulations and friendly wishes. I hope this will find you in
more confirmed health, and enjoying the commencement of a
new year with every prospect that can make it a happy one.
One of the papers inclosed gives you the latest news from
Europe. It is to be hoped that the dawn of peace may not be
overcast. We have nothing of late date either from Jay or
Monroe. No communications whatever as to the negociations
of the former have yet been laid before Congress. The accounts
which circulate through private channels have flattered, in gen
eral, the wishes entertained by all for his success. In the other
paper you will see the opinion of this gentleman, when an advo
cate for the Constitution, on the nature of the tax on carriages.
If it remains the same when he is to decide as Chief Justice,
we may yet hope to see this breach in the Constitution repaired.
The House of Representatives have been engaged in revising
the naturalization law, which has been found not duly guarded
against intrusions and evasions. The new bill, as passed the
House, requires of the candidate for Citizenship residence for
five years, an oath of abjuration as well as of allegiance, satis
faction to the Court of good Character, attachment to the prin
ciples of the Constitution, and of being well disposed to the good
order and happiness of the United States. On the motion of
Mr. Giles, a clause was added requiring of all who may have
belonged to the order of Nobility, or borne any hereditary title,
to make an express renunciation on these points in court and
upon record. You will think it strange, perhaps, that this
should have met with opposition,; and yet it became a question
of some heat, tho' opposed rather as unimportant than improper.

1795. LETTERS. 31
Several of the conditions have reference to the present State of
Europe, and the danger of an influx to this country both of
aristocracy and licentiousness. It seems not amiss that we
should be on our guard against both extremes. There will be
a serious effort made to begin an effectual operation for paying
off the public debt. The increase of the impost presents a fund
that will of itself, if not diverted, answer the purpose. The
Legislature of this State has just passed an exclusion vote in
each House against the Representatives and Senators from the
Counties lately in insurrection. I am not able to say on what
principle. I wish it may not have been too much a work of
party. If they proceed to any business not urgent, before the
vacant seats can be refilled, it will wear so much of that appear
ance as to threaten a revival of discontents, which ought to be
buried as much as possible.
How is Col. Taylor, and how employed? Offer him, if you
please, my best and sincerest wishes for his health and happi
ness. With the truest esteem and affection, I am, dear sir, yours.

Tazewell has been here a short time only, and Mason has not
been heard of.

TO MR. JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, January 11, 1795.
Dear Sir, — The last subject before the House of Representa
tives was a Bill revising the naturalization law, which, from its
defects and the progress of things in Europe, was exposing us
to very serious inconveniences. The Bill requires — 1. A proba
tionary residence of 5 instead of 2 years, with a formal declara
tion on oath of the intention 3 years, at least, prior to the ad
mission. 2. An oath of abjuration, as well as of allegiance. 3.
Proof of good character, attachment to the principles of our
Government, and of being well disposed to the good order and

32 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
happiness of the United States. 4. Where the candidate has
borne any title, or been of any order of Nobility, he is to re
nounce both on record. This last raised some dust. The East
ern members were weak enough to oppose it; and Dexter, as a
set off, moved a correspondent clog on emigrants attached to
slaveholding. Whether they will be able to throw the dust they
have raised into the eyes of their constituents, I know not. It
will not be easy, I think, to repair the blunder they have com
mitted, if it reaches the people. On the ayes and nays, there
were 60 for and little more than 30 against the clause. The
Bill is gone to the Senate.
Our revenue from trade is so increased as to supply a fund
for commencing the discharge of the public debt. The excises
laid at the last session will probably be left as they stand. The
Treasury bench have attempted to make them perpetual, and
brought about a report of a Committee to prolong them till the
year 1801. Another Committee, after conferring with the
sugar-bakers and snuff-makers, have agreed on a counter Re
port, which will probably defeat the project. The French gain
victories faster than we can relate them. In Spain, Sardinia,
and Holland, they are equally sweeping everything before them.
They were not in Amsterdam, but expected in a few days. The
patriotic party was openly revived, and it was not doubted that
the Stadtholder would move off to England for his personal
safety. The Duke of York has been well drubbed again at
Nimeguen. It was said to be agitated in the British Cabinet
whether he should not, with all his troops, have withdrawn from
the Continent. It is surmised that Prussia has actually treated
with France, and that the Emperor is taking the same course.
It is, indeed, agreed that France can dictate peace to all her
enemies, except England, and that she will probably do so, in
order to have a fair campaign with England alone. Nothing
final yet from Jay. It is expected here that he will accomplish
much, if not all he aims at. It will be scandalous if we do not,
under present circumstances, get all that we have a right to de
mand. Not a word from Monroe.

1795. LETTERS. 33
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, January 26, 1795.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of December 28, but
not till three weeks after the date of it. It was my purpose to
have answered it particularly, but I have been robbed of the
time reserved for the purpose. I must, of consequence, limit
myself to a few lines, and to my promise given to the Fresco
painter to forward you the enclosed letter.
Nothing since my last from Jay or Monroe. The Newspapers,
as usual, teem with French victories, and rumors of peace.
There seem to be very probable indications of a progress made
to this event, except in relation to Great Britain, with whom a
Duet campaign is the cry of France. The naturalization has
not yet got back from the Senate. I understand, however, it
will suffer no material change. They have the prudence not to
touch the nobility clause. The House of Representatives are
on the Military establishment and the public debt. The diffi
culty and difference of opinion, as to the former, produced a
motion to request the President to cause an estimate of the
proper defence, &c. It was, in its real meaning, saying, we do
not know how many troops ought to be provided by our Legis
lative duty, and ask your direction. It was opposed as open
ing the way for dragging in the weight of the Executive for
one scale on all party questions; as extorting his opinion, which
he should reserve for his negative; and as exposing his unpopu
lar opinions to be extorted at any time by an unfriendly major
ity. The prerogative men chose to take the subject by the
wrong handle, and being joined by the weak men, the resolution
passed. I fancy the Cabinet are embarrassed on the subject.
On the subject of the Debt, the Treasury faction is spouting on
the policy of paying it off as a great evil, and laying hold of two
or three little excises, past last session under the pretext of war,
are claiming more merit for their zeal than they allow to the
opponents of their puny resources. Hamilton has made a long
valedictory Report on the subject. It is not yet printed, and I
have not read it. It is said to contain a number of improper
vol. 11. 3

34 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
things. He got it in by informing the Speaker he had one
ready, (on the actual revenues,) for the House, when they should
please to receive it.
*********

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Feb? 15, 1795.
Dear Sir,— ******
Although nearly three months have passed since the signing
of the Treaty by Jay, the official account of it has not been re
ceived, and the public have no other knowledge of its articles
than are to be gleaned from the imperfect scraps of private let
ters. From these it is inferred that the bargain is much less
in our favour than might be expected from the circumstances,
which co-operated with the justice of our demands. It is even
conjectured that on some points, particularly the Western posts,
the arrangements will be inadmissible. I find that in New
York there are accounts, which are credited, that the posts,
after the surrender, are to be thoroughfares for the traders and
merchandize of both parties. The operation of this will strike
you at once, and the sacrifice is the greater, if it be true, as is
stated, that the former regulation on the subject secured to the
United States the monopoly of the fur trade, it being impossi
ble for the Canadian traders to get to and from the markets
without using our portages, and our parts of the lakes. It is
wrong, however, to prejudge; * * * but I suspect that Jay
has been betrayed by his anxiety to couple us with England,
and to avoid returning with his finger in his mouth. * * *
* * It is apparent that those most likely to be in the secret
of the affair do not assume an air of triumph.
The elections in New York give six republicans, instead of
the former three. E. Livingston had in the city 205 votes more
than Watts, the present member. In Massachusetts, the elec
tions are, in several instances, still to be repeated. Dexter is
to run a third heat. In the last his rival outvoted him, but was

1795. LETTERS. 35
disappointed by a few scattering votes, which prevented his
having a majority of the whole. It is said that if nothing now
turns up, Varnum will be sure to succeed on the next trial.
The choice of Senators continues to run on the wrong side. In
Delaware, where we were promised of late a Republican, it was
contrived, by a certain disposition of offices, as some tell us, or,
according to others, occasioned by particular sicknesses, that
Latimer, of the House of Representatives, lately dropped by the
people, has been appointed by the Legislature. N. Carolina
has appointed Bloodworth, whom you may recollect. His coun
trymen here do not augur favorably of his political course.
Clinton has declined a re-election to the Government of New
York. His party set up Yates and Floyd against Jay and Van
Rennsselaer. Hamilton does not interfere with Jay. It is pom
pously announced in the newspapers that poverty drives him
back to the Bar for a livelihood.
The session has produced, as yet, but few acts of consequence.
Several important ones are depending; on the subject of the
Militia, of the Mili'tary Establishment, and the discharge of the
public debt. On the first, little more will probably be done
than to digest some regulations, which will be left for public
consideration till the next session. On the second, the present
Military Establishment will be continued and compleated; not
withstanding the late Treaty with the six Nations, the success
of Wayne against the other tribes, and the disappearance of
ominous symptoms in the aspect of Great Britain. I am ex
tremely sorry to remark a growing apathy to the evil and dan
ger of standing armies. And a vote passed two days ago, which
is not only an evidence of that, but, if not, the effect of unpar
donable inattention, indicates a temper still more alarming.
In the Military acts now in force, there are words limiting the
use of the army to the protection of the Frontiers. The Bill
lately brought in revised the whole subject, and omitted this
limitation. It was proposed to reinstate the words. This was
rejected by a large majority. It was then proposed to substi
tute another phrase, free from the little criticisms urged against
the first proposition. The debate brought out an avowal that

36 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
the Executive ought to be free to use the regular troops, as well
as the Militia, in support of the laws against our own citizens.
Notwithstanding this, the amendment was lost by 8 votes.
The House was very thin, and it is supposed that the majority
would have been in favor of the amendment if all the members
had been present. The mischief, however, is irremediable, as
the Senate will greedily swallow the Bill in its present form.
This proceeding is the more extraordinary when the President's
Speech and the answer of the House of Representatives are rec
ollected and compared with it. The third subject is the reduc
tion of the public debt. Hamilton has, in an arrogant valedic
tory Report, presented a plan for the purpose. It will require
about 30 years of uninterrupted operation. The fund is to con
sist of the surpluses of impost and excise, and the temporary
taxes of the last session, which are to be prolonged till 1817.
You will judge of the chance of our ever being out of debt, if
no other means are to be used. It is to be lamented that the
public are not yet better reconciled to direct taxes, which alone
can work down the debt faster than new emergencies will prob
ably add to it. Of this dislike the partizans of the Debt take
advantage, not only to perpetuate it, but to make a merit of the
application of inadequate means to the discharge of it. The
plan of Hamilton contained a number of new irredeemabilities,
among the remodifications proposed by him. All these have
been struck out.
Mr. Christie, of the House of Representatives, intends to visit
England in the interval between the present and next session.
He is ambitious of a line from you introducing him to Mr.
Pinckney, and has made me his solicitor for it. He is a man of
good sense, and second to none in a decided and systematic de
votion to Republicanism. Will you oblige us both by inclosing
me such a letter? You need not fear its [not?] reaching me, as I
shall be detained here some time after the adjournment.
Adieu.

1795. LETTERS. 37

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, March 11, 1795.
Dear Sir,— *****
I have not yet received a single line from you except yours
of September 2d, long since acknowledged. Your last letters
of the official kind were duplicates of Octr 16, Novr 7, and 20.
You will perceive in the newspapers that the parts of them re
lating to the Jacobin societies have been extracted and printed.
In New York they have been republished, with your name pre
fixed. The question agitated in consequence of the President's
denunciation of the Democratic societies will account for this
use of your observations. In New York, where party contests
are running high in the choice of a successor to Clinton, who
declines, I perceive the use of them is extended, by adroit com
ments, to that subject also. It is proper you should be apprized
of these circumstances, that your own judgment may be the
better exercised as to the latitude or reserve of your communi
cations. The Treaty concluded with Great Britain did not arrive be
fore the adjournment and dispersion of Congress. The Senators
received a summons to reassemble on the 8th of June, on the
calculation that the Treaty could not fail to be received by that
time. It arrived a few days after. It is a circumstance very
singular that the first knowledge of its contents, as finally set
tled, should not have come to the Executive till more than three
months after the date of it. What its contents are, the Execu
tive alone as yet know, the most impenetrable secrecy being
observed. You will easily guess the curiosity and disappoint
ment of the public. Complaints, however, are repressed, by the
confidence that some adequate reasons exist for the precaution.
The arrival of this Treaty and the delicate relations in which
we stand to France are beginning to turn the public attention
to the prospect of meliorating the Treaty with her, and the ar
rangements that may have been taken on either side for the pur
pose. It is certainly much to be desired that the crisis should
not be suffered to elapse without securing to this Country the

38 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
previous advantages in commerce which we now enjoy from the
indulgence or temporary embarrassments of that Nation; and
still more, that the possibility should be precluded of any col
lisions that may endanger the general friendship already stipu
lated between them.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, March 23, 1795.
Dear Sir, — Your two last favors contained, one of them, the
letter for Mr. Christie, which has been sent to him; the other
accompanied the letters to the President and Mr. Randolph.
The two latter were duly delivered also. The President
touched on the subject the other day in conversation with me,
and has no doubt written to you on it. There are difficulties,
I perceive, in the way of your suggestion, besides the general
one arising from the composition of the Scientific body wholly
out of foreign materials. Notwithstanding the advantages
which might weigh in the present case against this objection, I
own that I feel its importance. It was not sufficient, however,
to induce me to withhold your remarks from the President, as
your letter would have authorized me to do. Whilst I am ac
knowledging your favors, I am reminded of a passage in a for
mer one,* which I had proposed to have answered at some
length. Perhaps it will be best, at least for the present, to say,
in brief, that reasons of every kind, and some of them of the
most insuperable as well as obvious kind, shut my mind against
the admission of any idea such as you seem to glance at. I for
bear to say more, because I can have no more to say with re
spect to myself; and because the great deal that may and ought
to be said beyond that restriction will be best reserved for some
other occasion; perhaps for the latitude of a free conversation.
You ought to be preparing yourself, however, to hear truths
which no inflexibility will be able to withstand.
* Dec 28, 1794. Jefferson's Correspondence.

1795. LETTERS. 3g
I have already told you of my failure to get from Edmund
Randolph one of your books, which has slipped out of his mem
ory as well as his hands. I have since, after repeated applica
tions, got from Wilson Flandon, [?] Fleta, Bracton, &c. Mably,
he says, he lent to Gallatin, with your permission. This was
not mentioned, however, till very lately; and Gallatin is at pres
ent in New York. As soon as he returns I will renew my
efforts. I have procured for you the " sketches on rotations," which I
find to be truly a good thing. It was written by Mr. Boardly.
The other publications referred to in page 43 are not to be had
at the booksellers. I propose, if an opportunity offers, to get
them through some friend, who can carry the enquiry to the au
thor himself. I have also procured you the correspondences
with Hammond, &c. All these, with some other things deemed
worth your possessing, I shall pack up for a conveyance by
water to Richmond, addressing them to the merchant there from
Staunton, whose name I cannot at this moment recollect.
The Treaty with England arrived soon after the adjourn
ment. It is kept an impenetrable secret by the Executive. The
Senate are summoned to meet it the 8th of June. I wish it
may not be of a nature to bring us into some delicacies with
France, without obtaining fully our objects from Great Britain.
The French, it is said, are lately much less respectful than here
tofore to our rights on the seas.
We have no private letters from Monroe. His last public
ones were no later than November. They contained a history
of the Jacobin clubs, in the form of an apology for the Conven
tion. Extracts on that subject were immediately put into the
newspapers, and are applied to party purpose generally, par
ticularly in New York, where the election of Governor is • on
the anvil. Yates and Jay are the candidates. The last accounts
from Amsterdam foretell in the next the capture of that place
by the French. The enclosed speeches of Pitt and Fox will
give you the English politics, and a general view of the crisis
in Europe.
I have been detained here by a sick family, and am so at

40

WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.

present by the state of the roads, which are kept bad by the
rains and the frosts. I am extremely anxious to be on the jour
ney, and shall set out as soon as I can prudently venture.
Yours always, and most affectionately.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, March 26, 1795.
Dear Sir,— My last was written about ten days ago, for a
conveyance intimated to be in the view of the office of State. I
have since that received yours committed to Mr. Swan, and two
hours ago that of December 18, covering the private one for
Mr. Randolph. The other, referred to as sent by the way of
Havre, is not yet come to hand.
Mr. Swan is much embarrassed in his operations by the enor
mous price of Wheat and flour. The latter has been above ten
dollars a barrel, and is now at that price. The former has been
as high as 15s. 3d., and is now very little below that. Mr.
Swan is apprehensive that he will be compelled to direct his at
tention to some other quarter of the world. It is a matter of
double regret that such a necessity should happen. The causes
of this extraordinary rate of produce are differently explained.
The deficiency of the last harvest is certainly a material one.
The influence of the Bank credits on mercantile enterprize and
competition may be another, though this cause cannot at this
moment operate, as the Banks are in another paroxysm of dis
tress, and have for some time discontinued their discounts. The
idea of great demands from Europe, particularly from France,
has no doubt contributed to the effect; though this cannot
particularly refer to the object of Mr. Swan, because the high
prices preceded his operation, and, in fact, are not peculiar to
the articles he wants, or limited to articles having any relation
to them. In general, prices are exorbitantly high, and in this
place incredibly so. The markets have been nearly 100 per
cent, advanced in some, and fifty in most instances, beyond the

1795. LETTERS. 41
state of them prior to your departure. House Rents have kept
the same course. These circumstances denote some general and
deeplyrrooted cause.
From as near a view as I have yet been able to take of your
letter to Mr. R., I see no reason why I should hesitate to deliver
it. I cannot forbear believing that the Report of stipulations,
offensive and defensive, is quite without foundation; but your
view of things, on the contrary supposition, involves a variety
of interesting ideas; and your communications and reflections
in general with regard to the Treaty, as proceeding from one
in your position and of your sentiments, merit too much atten
tion in the Executive Department to be withheld altogether
from it. I mentioned in my last that the Treaty was come, but
kept a profound secret. In that state it remains. Its contents
have produced conjectural comments without number. As I am
as much out of the secret as others, I can say nothing that goes
beyond that character. I should hope it to be impossible that
any stipulation, if any should be attempted, inconsistent with
the Treaties with France, can ever be pursued into effect. I
cannot even believe that any such stipulation would be hazarded.
The President, to say nothing of the people, would so certainly
revolt at it, that more than wickedness would be requisite in the
authors. At the same time, it is possible that articles may be
included that will be ominous to the confidence and cordiality
of France towards the United States, not to mention that any
arrangements with Great Britain, (beyond the simple objects
you mention,) made at the present juncture and extorted by the
known causes, must naturally appear in the light you represent.
How the instructions to Jay may square with what he may have
done, or both or either with the language you were authorized
to hold, must await future lights. As I do not know how far
official communications may or may not put you in possession
of the contents of the Treaty before this arrives, and as it ap
pears you had no previous or contemporary knowledge of the
particulars, I ought not to decline the task of giving you what
appears to me to be the most probable account of them; pre
mising that I speak without the least clue or hint from the offi-

42 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
cial quarter, and what is truly to be taken for conjecture, or, at
most, for inferences from circumstances mostly of newspaper
publicity: 1. It is generally agreed that the posts are to be
surrendered, but not before June, 1796; and it is among the
reports, that they are afterwards to be a sort of thoroughfare
for both parties. This would be a very disagreeable and a very
unpopular ingredient. 2. The Compensations for losses are
supposed to be in a train primarily judicial, eventually diplo
matic. The sufferers, I believe, are very little sanguine, but
they are, in general, silent, from causes which you will readily
imagine. 3. I should have mentioned the other stipulations' in
the treaty of peace, besides the delivery of the posts. On this,
little is said, except, in general, that they are to be executed on
both sides. Perhaps the question of interest during the war,
and complaints on the British side from State laws affecting
their debts, may be referred, along with some of the American
losses from privateers and Admiralty Courts, to Commissioners.
This, however, is purely conjectural. 4. A footing of reci
procity with respect to the trade directly with Great Britain,
so far as to put British and American vessels on the same foot
ing in American ports, and American and British on the same
footing in British ports. As this would take from our vessels
the advantage they now enjoy, particularly with respect to the
difference of ten per cent, in the duties, it would be injurious,
and, if not countervailed, unpopular. 5. An admission of Amer
ican vessels to the British West Indies, if under 100, or, perhaps,
75 tons. Whether the right be renounced of reducing British
vessels to the same size, is a question of some consequence in
relation to this point. 6. The Treaty in relation to the com
merce with Great Britain to continue for 12 years; to that with
the West Indies, for 4 years. I should be led, from some partic
ular circumstances, not to doubt the latter limitation, if the as
pect and effect of it were not so strikingly revolting. Having
had but a few moments' notice of this opportunity, I am obliged
to conclude a very hasty letter with abrupt assurances of the
affection with which I am, dear sir, your friend and serv".

1795. LETTERS. 43

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. August 6, 1795.
Dear Sir, — I return the paper covered by your favor of the
third, which was handed me by a gentleman who picked it up
in Charlottesville. I find that the meeting in New York was
not exactly as represented to you. The Republicans were never
outnumbered, and the vote of a very full meeting was finally
unanimous in remonstrating against the Treaty. The Chamber
of Commerce has had a separate meeting, and has passed some
counteracting Resolutions. In Portsmouth, Boston, and Phil
adelphia, unanimous Remonstrances have also issued from Town
Meetings, and been sent by express to the President. The silence
of the disaffected minorities is easily explained. I understand
that Mr. Wythe presided at the Richmond meeting, a circum
stance which will not be without its weight, especially as he pre
sided at the former meeting in support of the Proclamation. A
gentleman who was present says he was told two individuals
only in the City openly espoused the Treaty. Even Andrews
joins in the general denunciation of it. I have a letter from
the Bishop, which is a philippic on the subject. In short, from
all quarters, the public voice seems to proclaim the same detest
ation, except from Alexandria, and its neighbourhood, where
there is some division. Doctor Stuart and the Lees take the
side of the Treaty. I have a letter from Chancellor Livingston,
which tells me he has taken the liberty of writing a free letter
to the President, with a view to impress on him the public sen
timent, and the consequences of ratifying an act so hostile to
the opinions and interests of the people, and to the good under
standing with France. The inclosed papers contain some re
marks on the Treaty from a hand which will claim attention.
They are borrowed, and you may, therefore, return them by
Mr. Jones, or any other convenient opportunity.

44 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.

TO ROBT. R. LIVINGSTON.
August 10, 1795.
DE Sir, — Your favour of July 6 having been addressed to
Williamsburg, instead of Orange Court House, did not come to
hand till two days ago. Your gloomy Picture of the Treaty
does not exceed my ideas of it. After yielding terms which
would have been scorned by this* Country in the moment of its
greatest embarrassments, and of Great Britain's full enjoyment
of peace and confidence, it adds to the ruinous bargain with this
Nation a disqualification to make a good one with any other.
In all our other Treaties it has been carefully stipulated that
the Nation to be treated as the most favored Nations, and to
come in for all new privileges that may be granted by the Uni
ted States, must pay for them the same, or an equivalent price,
with the grantee. The proposed Treaty with Great Britain,
disregarding this obvious rule of justice and equality, roundly
agrees that no duty, restriction, or prohibition, with respect to
Ships or Merchandize, shall be applied to Great Britain, which
do not operate on all other nations. [See Art. XV.] Should
any other Nation, therefore, be disposed to give us the most
precious and peculiar advantages in their trade, in exchange for
the slightest preferences in ours, this Article gives Great Britain
a negative on the transaction, unless it be so modified as to let
her in for the favour without paying the price of it. But what
Nation would be willing to buy favours for another, especially
when the inducement to buy and the value of the purchase might
depend on the peculiarity of the favour ? It must be seen at
once that this extraordinary feature would monopolize us to
Great Britain, by precluding any material improvement of our
existing Treaties, or the hope of any new ones that would be
of much advantage to us. That so insidious an Article should
have occurred to Lord Grenville's jealousy of the United States,
and his policy of barring their connection with other Countries,
and particularly with the French Republic, can surprise no one.
The concurrence of the American Envoy may not be so easily
explained; but it seems impossible to screen him from the most

1795. LETTERS. 45
illiberal suspicions, without referring his conduct to the blind
est partiality to the British Nation and Government, and the '
most vindictive sensations towards the French Republic. In- \
deed, the Treaty, from one end to the other, must be regarded
as a demonstration that the party to which the Envoy belongs,
and of which he has been more the organ than of the United
States, is a British party, systematically aiming at an exclusive
connection with the British Government, and ready to sacrifice
to that object, as well the dearest interests of our commerce, as
the most sacred dictates of National honour. This is the true
Key to this unparalleled proceeding, and can alone explain it
to the impartial and discerning part of the public. The leaders
of this party stand self -condemned in their efforts to palliate the —
Treaty, by magnifying the necessity of the British Commerce
to the United States, and the insufficiency of the United States
to influence the regulation of it. You will find, on turning to
a pamphlet addressed to your people by Mr. Jay, when the Fed
eral Constitution was before them, that he then could see our
power under such a Constitution to extort what we justly
claimed from Great Britain, and particularly to open the West
India ports to us. As an Agent for the Constitution, he now
voluntarily abandons the very object which, as an advocate
for the Constitution, he urged as an argument for adopting it.
Read, also, the paper N°. XI, in the publication entitled the Fed
eralist, for the view of the subject then inculcated by another
advocate. It is with much pleasure, I assure you, that the sen-
; timents and voice of the people in this State, in relation to the *
attempt to prostrate us to a foreign and unfriendly Nation, are
as decided and as loud as could be wished. Many, even of those
who have hitherto rallied to the most exceptionable party meas
ures, join in the general indignation against the Treaty. The
few who hold out will soon be under the dilemma of following
the example, or of falling under imputations which must disarm
them of all injurious influence. You will see by the Newspapers
that the City of Richmond has trodden in the steps of the other
Cities by an unanimous address to the President. You will re
mark that our Chancellor, Mr. Wythe, presided in the Meeting;

46 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
a circumstance which will draw the more attention to it, as he
is not only distinguished for his moderation of character, but
was President of the Meeting which addressed the President in
support of his proclamation of neutrality. How far the other
Towns and Counties will imitate Richmond is uncertain. If
they should be silent, it will assuredly be the effect, in the for
mer, of a supposed notoriety of their harmony in opposition;
and in the latter, to the same cause, added to the dispersed sit
uation of the people. I think it certain that there is not a Town
or County in this State, except, perhaps, Alexandria, where an
appeal to the inhabitants would be attended with any show of
opposition. You will readily conclude, therefore, that here,
the public do not need the measure which you suggest. With
respect to the President, his situation must be a most delicate
one for himself as well as for his Country; and there never was,
as you observe, a crisis where the friends of both ought to feel
more solicitude, or less reserve. At the same time, I have rea
sons, which I think good, for doubting the propriety, and of
course utility, of uninvited communications from myself. He
cannot, I am persuaded, be a stranger to my opinion on the
merits of the Treaty; and I am equally persuaded that the state
of the public opinion within my sphere of information will suf
ficiently force itself on his attention.
It is natural enough for the apologists of the Treaty to lay
hold of the doctrine maintained by Mr. Jefferson; but whether
that doctrine be right or wrong, they might be reminded that
he expressly urges the policy of guarding against it, instead of
establishing it by Treaty. The appeal to him, therefore, must
add to their condemnation. See his letter to Mr. G. Morris, ex
plaining the discussions with Mr. Genet.

TO

Orange, August 23d, 1795.
Dear Sir,— Your favor of the 3d instant did not come to
hand till a few days ago, having been probably retarded by the

1795. LETTERS. 47
difficulty the post met with in passing the water-courses, which
have been much swelled of late by excessive rains. It gives me
much pleasure to learn that your health has been so much im
proved, as well as that you are taking advantage of it to co-ope
rate in elucidating the great subject before the public. We see
here few of the publications relating to it, except those which
issue from meetings of the people, and which are of course re
published everywhere. The only Philadelphia paper that comes
to me is the Aurora, which, besides frequent miscarriages, is
not, I find, the vehicle used by the regular champions on either
side. I have occasionally seen Dunlap's, and in that some speci
mens of the display of the "Features, &c." I wish much to see
the whole of it. Your obliging promise to forward it, along
with any other things of the kind, will have a good opportunity
by the return of Mr. Wilson Nicholas, who is on his way to
Philadelphia, and will call on me on his way home. I requested
the favour of him to apprize you of the opportunity. I am glad
to find that the author of the "Features, &c." meditates a simi
lar operation on "The defence of the Treaty, by Camillus,"
who, if I mistake not, will be betrayed by his Anglomany into
arguments as vicious and as vulnerable as the Treaty itself.
The Resolutions of the Chamber of Commerce in New York
justify this anticipation. What can be more absurd than to
talk of the advantage of securing the privileges of sending raw
materials to a manufacturing nation, and of buying merchan
dizes which are hawked over the four quarters of the globe for
customers? To say that we must take the Treaty or be pun
ished with hostilities, is something still worse. By the way, it
is curious to compare the language of the author and abettors
of the Treaty with that held on the subject of our commercial
importance, when the Constitution was depending. Jay him
self could then view its adoption as the only thing necessary to
' extort the Posts, &c, and open the West India ports. (See his
address to the people of New York in the Museum.) The Fed
eralist [N°. XI] will exhibit a still more striking contrast on
this point in another quarter. You intimate a wish that I
would suggest any ideas in relation to the Treaty that may oc-

48 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
cur to my reflections. In my present sequestered situation, I
am too little possessed of the particular turns of the controversy
to be able to adapt remarks to them. In general, I think it of
importance to avoid laying too much stress on minute or doubt
ful objections, which may give an occasion to the other party
to divert the public attention from the palpable and decisive
ones, and to involve the question in uncertainty, if not to claim
an apparent victory. The characteristics of the Treaty which
I have wished to see more fully laid open to the public view
are: 1. Its ruinous tendency with respect to the carrying trade.
The increase of our shipping under the new Government has,
in most Legislative discussions, been chiefly ascribed to the ad
vantage given to American vessels by the difference of 10 per
cent, on the impost in their favor. This, in the valuable car
goes from Great Britain, has been sufficient to check the prefer
ence of British Merchants for British bottoms; and it has been
not deemed safe hitherto by Great Britain to force on a contest
with us in this particular by any countervailing regulations.
In consequence of the Treaty, she will no doubt establish such
regulations, and thereby leave the British capital free to prefer
British vessels. This will not fail to banish our tonnage from
the trade with that country. And there seems to have been no
disposition in the negociator to do better for our navigation in
the West India trade; especially if the exclusion of our vessels
from the re-exportation of the enumerated articles, Sugar, Cof
fee, &c, be taken into the account. The nature of our exports
and imports, compared with that of the British, is a sufficient,
but at the same time our only defence against the superiority
of her capital. The advantage they give us in fostering our
navigation ought never to have been abandoned. If this view of
the subject be just, and were presented to the public with mer
cantile skill, it could not fail to make a deep impression on New
England. In fact, the whole Treaty appears to me to assassin
ate the interest of that part of the Union. 2. The insidious
hostility of the Treaty to France, in general ; but particularly
the operation of the 15th article, which, as far as I have seen,
has been but faintly Touched on, though it be, in fact, pregnant

1795. LETTERS. 49
with more mischief than any of them. According to all our
other Treaties, as well as those of all other nations, the footing
of the most favored nations is so qualified that those entitled to
it must pay the price of any particular privilege that may be
granted in a new Treaty. The Treaty of Jay makes every new
privilege result to Great Britain, without her paying any pried
at all. Should France, Spain, Portugal, or any other nation,
offer the most precious privileges in their trade, as the price of
some particular favour in ours, no bargain could be made unless
they would agree not only to let the same favor be extended
to Great Britain, but extended gratuitously. They could not
purchase for themselves without at the same time purchasing-
for their rival. In this point of view, the 15th article may be
considered a£^jjjr£e.i_b.ar jto .our. treating with other nations,
ami. „paxt.icnl arl y wi £L. the French Republic. Much has been
said of a suspected backwardness to improve our commercial
arrangements with France, and a predilection for arrangements
with Great Britain, who had less to give, as well as less incli
nation to give what she had. It was hardly imagined that we
were so soon to grant every thing to Great Britain for nothing
in return; and to make it a part of this bad bargain with her,
that we should not be able to make a good one with any other
nation. 3. The spirit in which every point of the law of na
tions is regulated. It is the interest of the United States to
enlarge the rights of neutral nations. It is the general interest
of humanity that this should be done. In all our other Treaties
this policy has prevailed. The same policy has pervaded most
of the modern Treaties of other nations. Great Britain herself
has been forced into it in several of her Treaties. In the Treaty
of Jay, every principle of liberality, every consideration of in
terest, has been sacrificed to the arbitrary maxims which govern
the policy of Great Britain. Nay, a new principle has been
created, in the face of former complaints of our Executive, as
well as against the fundamental rights of nations and duties of
humanity, for the purpose of aiding the horrible scheme of starv
ing a whole people out of their liberties.
I. Even waiving the merits of the respective complaints and
vol. 11. 4

50 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
pretensions of the two parties, as to the inexecution of the
Treaty of peace, the waiver implies that the two parties were
to be viewed either as equally culpable or equally blameless;
and that the execution of the Treaty of peace equally by both
ought now to be provided for. Yet, whilst the United States
are to comply in the most ample manner with the article unful
filled by them, and to make compensation for whatever losses
may have accrued from the delay, Great Britain is released al
together from one of the articles unfulfilled by her, and is not
to make the smallest compensation for the damages which have
accrued from her delay to execute the other.
The inequality of these terms is still further increased by con
cessions on the part of the United States, which, besides adding
to the Constitutional difficulties unnecessarily scattered through
the Treaty, may, in a great measure, defeat the good conse
quences of a surrender of the Western posts.
The British settlers and traders, within an undefined Tract
of Country, are allowed to retain both their lands and their
allegiance at the same time; and, consequently, to keep up a
foreign and unfriendly influence over the Indians within the
limits of the United States.
The Indians within those limits are encouraged to continue
their trade with the British by the permission to bring their
goods duty free from Canada, where the goods, being charged
with no such impost as is payable on the goods of the United
States, will be offered for sale with that tempting preference;
a regulation but too likely, also, to cloak the frauds of smug
gling traders in a country favorable to them. The reciprocity
in this case is ostensible only, and fallacious.
Under another ostensible and fallacious reciprocity, the ad
vantage secured to the United States, in the fur trade, by their
possession of the carrying places, is abandoned to the superi
ority of British capital, and the inferiority of the Canada duties
on imports.
A part only of the Ports, harbours, and bays, of a single
British Province, is made free to the United States, in consid
eration of a freedom of all the ports, harbors, and bays, of the

1795. LETTERS. 51
whole United States. The goods and merchandize of the Uni
ted States, not entirely prohibited by Canada, (but which, in
fact, are always entirely prohibited, when partial and tempo- ~
rary admissions are not dictated by necessity,) may be carried
there, in consideration of a free admission of all goods and
merchandize from Canada, not entirely prohibited by the U.
States, (where, in fact, there never is this entire prohibition.)
A like stipulation, liable to the like observations, is extended
to the exports of the United States and the Province of Canada.
These are further instances of a nominal and delusive reci
procity. In the case of the Mississippi, there is not even an ostensible
or nominal reciprocity. The ports and places on its Eastern
side are to be equally free to both the parties; although the -
Treaty itself supposes that the course of the Northern Boundary
of the United States will throw the British beyond the very
source of that river. This item of the Treaty is the more to be
noticed, as a repetition and extension of the stipulated priv
ileges of Great Britain on the Mississippi will probably be con
strued into a partiality in the United States to the interests and
views of that nation on the American Continent, not likely to
conciliate those from whom an amicable adjustment of the navi
gation of the Mississippi is to be expected; and were no doubt
intended by Great Britain as a snare to our good understanding
with the nations most jealous of her encroachments and her ag
grandizement. II. Without remarking on the explicit provision for redress
ing past spoliations and vexations, no sufficient precautions are
taken against them in future; on the contrary,
By omitting to provide for the respect due to sea letters,
passports, and certificates, and for other customary safeguards
to neutral vessels, "a general search-warrant, (in the strong but
just language of our fellow-citizens of Charlestown,) is granted
against the American navigation." Examples of such provisions
were to be found in our other Treaties, as well as in the Treaties
of other nations. And it is matter of just surprise that they
should have no place in a Treaty with Great Britain, whose

52 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
conduct on the seas so particularly suggested and enforced every
guard to our rights that could reasonably be insisted on.
By omitting to provide against the arbitrary seizure and im
pressment of American seamen, that valuable class of Citizens-
remains exposed to all the outrages, and our commerce to all
the interruptions, hitherto suffered from that cause.
By expressly admitting that provisions are to be held contra
band in cases other than when bound to an invested place, and
impliedly admitting that such cases exist at present, not only
a retrospective sanction may be given to proceedings against
which indemnification is claimed, but an apparent license is
granted to fresh and more rapacious depredations on our law
ful commerce. And facts seem to shew that such is to be the
fruit of the impolitic concession. It is conceived that the pre
text set up by Great Britain, of besieging and starving whole
nations, and the doctrine grounded thereon, of a right to inter
cept the customary trade of neutral nations in articles not con
traband, ought never to have been admitted into a Treaty of
the United States; because — 1. It is a general outrage on hu
manity, and an attack on the useful intercourse of nations. 2.
It appears that the doctrine was denied by the Executive in the
discussions with Mr. Hammond, the British Minister, and de
mands of compensation founded on that denial are now depend
ing. 3. As provisions constitute not less than of our
exports, and as Great Britain is nearly half her time at war,
"an admission of the doctrine sacrifices a correspondent propor
tion of the value of our commerce. 4. After a public denial of
the doctrine, to admit it, in the midst of the present war, by a
formal Treaty, would have but too much of the effect, as well as
the appearance, of voluntarily concurring in the scheme of dis
tressing a nation in friendship with this Country, and whose re
lations to it, as well as the struggles for freedom in which they
are engaged, give them a title to every good office not strictly
forbidden by the duties of neutrality. 5. It is no plea for the
measure to hold it up as an alternative to the disgrace of being
involuntarily treated in the same manner, without a faculty to
redress ourselves; the disgrace of being plundered with impu-

1795. LETTERS.

53

nity against our consent being, under no circumstances, greater
than the disgrace of consenting to be plundered with impunity;
more especially as the calamity in the former case might not
happen in another war; whereas, in the latter case, it is bound
upon us for as much of twelve years as there may be of war
within that period.
By annexing to the implements of war, enumerated as contra
band, the articles of ship-timber, tar, or rosin, copper in sheets,
sails, hemp, and cordage, our neutral rights and national inter
ests are still further narrowed. These articles were excluded
by the United States from the contraband list when they were
themselves in a state of war.* Their other Treaties expressly
declare them not to be contraband. British Treaties have done
the same. Nor, as is believed, do the Treaties of any nation in
Europe, producing these articles for exportation, allow them to
be subjects of confiscation. The stipulation was the less to be
admitted, as the reciprocity assumed by it is a mere cover for
the violation of that principle; most of the articles in question
being among the exports of the United States, whilst all of them
are among the imports of G. Britain.
By expressly stipulating with Great Britain against the free
dom of enemy's property in neutral bottoms, the progress to
wards a compleat and formal establishment of a principle in the
law of nations so favorable to the general interest and security
of commerce receives all the check the United States could
give to it. Reason and experience have long taught the pro
priety of considering free ships as giving freedom to their car
goes. The several great maritime nations of Europe have not
only established it at different times by their Treaties with
each other, but on a solemn occasion [the armed neutrality]
jointly declared it to be the law of nations by a specific com
pact, of which the United States entered their entire appro
bation. Great Britain alone dissented. But she herself, in a
variety of prior Treaties, and in a Treaty with France since,
[1786,] has acceded to the principle. Under these circumstances,
* See Ordinance regulating captures in 178 .

54 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
the United States, of all nations, ought to be the last to unite
in a retrograde effort on this subject, as being more than any
other interested in extending and establishing the commercial
rights of neutral nations. Their situation particularly fits them
.to be carriers for the great nations of Europe during their wars.
And both their situation and the genius of their Government
and people promise them a greater share of peace and neutral
ity than can be expected by any other nation. The relation of
the United States by Treaty on this point to the enemies of
Great Britain was another reason for avoiding the stipulation.
Whilst British goods in American vessels are protected against
French and Dutch capture, it was enough to leave French and
Dutch goods in American vessels to the ordinary course of Ju
dicial determinations, without a voluntary, a positive, and an
invidious provision for condemning them. It has not been over
looked, that a clause in the Treaty proposes to renew, at some
future period, the discussion of the principle it now settles; but
the question is then to be, not only in what, but whether in any
cases, neutral vessels shall protect enemy's property; and it is
to be discussed at the same time, not whether in any, but in
what cases, provisions and other articles, not bound to invested
places, may be treated as contraband. So that when the prin
ciple is in favor of the United States, the principle itself is to
be the subject of discussion; when the principle is in favor of
Great Britain, the application of it only is to be the subject of
discussion. III. Whenever the law of nations comes into question, the re
sult of the Treaty accommodates Great Britain in relation to
one or both of the Republics at war with her, as well as in dim
inution of the rights and interests of the United States.
Thus, American vessels bound to Great Britain are protected
by sea papers against French or Dutch searches; bound to
France or Holland, are left exposed to British searches, with
out regard to such papers.
British property in American vessels is not subject to French
or Dutch confiscation. French or Dutch property in American
vessels is subjected to British confiscation.

1795. LETTERS. 55
American provisions in American vessels, bound to the ene
mies of Great Britain, are left by Treaty to the seizure and
use of Great Britain; provisions, whether American or not, in
American vessels, cannot be touched by the enemies of Great
Britain. Timber for ship-building, tar, or rosin, copper in sheets, sails,
hemp, and cordage, bound to the enemies of Great Britain, for
the equipment of vessels of trade only, are contraband; bound
to Great Britain for the equipment of vessels of war, are not
contraband. American citizens, entering, as volunteers, the service of
France or Holland against Great Britain, are to be punished.
American volunteers joining the arms of Great Britain against
France or Holland are not punishable.
British ships of war and privateers, with their prizes made
on citizens of Holland, may freely enter and depart the ports
of the United States. (Dutch ships of war and privateers, with ,
their prizes made on subjects of Great Britain, are to receive
no shelter or refuge in the ports of the United. States. \nd this
advantage in war is given to Great Britain, not by a Treaty
prior, and having no relation, to an existing war, but by a
Treaty made in the midst of war, and prohibiting a like article
of Treaty with Holland for equalizing the advantage.
The article prohibiting confiscations and sequestrations is
unequal between the United States and Great Britain. Amer
ican Citizens have little, if any, interest in public or Bank stock,
or in private debts within G. Britain. British subjects have a
great interest in all within the United States. Vessels and
merchandize belonging to individuals, governed *by the same
"confidence in each other, and in regard to their respective
Governments for their municipal laws, and for the laws of na
tions allowed to be part thereof as consecrates private debts,"
are not exempted from such proceedings. So that, where much
would be in the power of the United States, and little in the
power of Great Britain, the power is interdicted. Where more
is in the power of Great Britain than of the United States, the
power is left unconfined. Another remark is applicable. When

56 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
the modern usage of nations is in favor of Great Britain, the
modern usage is the rule of the Treaty. When the modern
usage was in favor of the United States, the modern usage was
rejected as a rule for the Treaty.
IV. The footing on which the Treaty places the subject of
Commerce is liable to insuperable objections.
1. The nature of our exports and imports, compared with
those of other Countries, and particularly of Great Britain, has
been thought by the Legislature of the United States to justify
certain differences in the tonnage and other duties in favor of
American bottoms; and the advantage possessed by Great Brit
ain in her superior capital was thought at the same time to re
quire such countervailing encouragements. Experience has
shewn the solidity of both these considerations. The American
navigation has, in a degree, been protected against the advan
tage on the side of British capital, and has increased in propor
tion; whilst the nature of our exports, being generally neces
saries or raw materials, and of our imports, consisting mostly
of British manufactures, has restrained Great Britain from any
attempt to counteract the protecting duties afforded to our nav
igation. Should the Treaty go into effect, this protection is
relinquished; Congress are prohibited from substituting any
other; and the British capital, having no longer the present in
ducement to make use of American bottoms, may be expected,
through whatever hands operating, to give the preference to Brit
ish bottoms.
2. The provisions of the Treaty which relate to the West
Indies, where the nature of our exports and imports gives a
commanding ^energy to our just pretensions, instead of allevia
ting the general evil, are a detail of peculiar humiliations and
sacrifices. Nor is a remedy by any means to be found in the
proposed suspension of that part of the Treaty. On the con
trary, If Great Britain should accede to the proposition, and the
Treaty be finally established without the twelfth article, she
will, in that event, be able to exclude American bottoms alto
gether from that channel of intercourse, and to regulate the

1795. LETTERS. 57
whole trade with the West Indies in the manner hitherto com
plained of; whilst, by another article of the Treaty, the United
States are compleatly dispossessed of the right and the means
hitherto enjoyed of counteracting the monopoly, unless they
submit to a universal infraction of their trade, not excepting
[that?] with nations whose regulations may be reciprocal and
satisfactory. 3. The Treaty, not content with these injuries to the United
States in their commerce with Great Britain, provides, in the |
XV article, against the improvement or preservation of their
commerce with other nations, by any beneficial Treaties that
may be attainable. The general rule of the United States in
their Treaties, founded on the example of other nations, has
been, that where a nation is to have the privileges that may be
granted to the most favored nations, it should be admitted gra
tuitously to such privileges only as are gratuitously granted;
but should pay for privileges not gratuitously granted the com
pensations paid for them. This prudent and equitable qualifica
tion of the footing of the most favored nation was particularly
requisite in a Treaty with Great Britain, whose commercial
system, being matured and settled, is not likely to be materially
varied by grants of new privileges that might result to the
United States. It was particularly requisite at the present
juncture, also, when an advantageous revision of the Treaty
with France is said to be favored by that Republic, when a
Treaty with Spain is actually in negociation, and Treaties with
other nations whose commerce is important to the United States
cannot be out of contemplation. The proposed Treaty, never
theless, puts Great Britain in all respects, gratuitously, on the
footing of the most favored nation; even as to future privileges,
for which the most valuable considerations may be given. So
that it is not only out of the power of the United States to
grant any peculiar privilege to any other nation, as an equiva
lent for peculiar advantages in commerce or navigation to be
granted to the United States; but every nation desiring to treat
on this subject with the United States is reduced to the alter
native, either of declining the Treaty altogether, or of including

58 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
Great Britain, gratuitously, in all the privileges it purchases for
itself. An article of this import is the greatest obstacle, next
to an absolute prohibition, that could have been thrown in the
way of other Treaties; and that it was insidiously meant by
Great Britain to be such is rendered the less doubtful by the
other kindred features visible in the Treaty.
It can be no apology for these commercial disadvantages that
better terms could not be obtained at the crisis when the Treaty
was settled. If proper terms could not be obtained at that
time, commercial stipulations, which were no wise essentially
connected with the objects of the Envoyship, ought to have
waited for a more favorable season. Nor is a better apology
to be drawn from our other Treaties. The chief of them were
the auxiliaries or the guaranties of our independence, and would
have been an equivalent for greater commercial concessions
than were insisted on. [Under other circumstances, there is no
ground to suppose that the same treaties, tho' more favorable
in several material articles than the Treaty in question, would
have been embraced by the United States.]
V. A Treaty thus unequal in its conditions, thus derogatory
to our national rights, thus insidious in some of its objects, and
thus alarming in its operation to the dearest interests of the
United States in their commerce and navigation, is, in its pres
ent form, unworthy the voluntary acceptance of an Independent
people, and is not dictated to them by the circumstances in
which Providence has kindly placed them. It is sincerely be
lieved that such a Treaty would not have been listened to at
any former period when Great Britain was most at her ease,
and the United States without the respectability they now enjoy.
To pretend that, however injurious the Treaty may be, it ought
to be submitted to in order to avoid the hostile resentment of
Great Britain, which would evidently be as impolitic as it would
be unjust on her part, is an artifice too contemptible to answer
its purpose. It will not easily be supposed that a refusal to
part with our rights without an equivalent will be made the
pretext of a war on us; much less that such a pretext will be
founded on our refusal to mingle a sacrifice of our commerce

1795. LETTERS. 59
and navigation with an adjustment of political differences. Nor
is any evidence to be found, either in History or Human nature,
that nations are to be bribed out of a spirit of encroachment
and aggressions by humiliations which nourish their pride, or
by concessions which extend their resources and power.
To do justice to all nations; to seek it from them by peace
able means in preference to war; and to confide in this policy
for avoiding that extremity, or securing the blessing of Heaven
when forced upon us, is the only course of which the United
States can never have reason to repent.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. August 24, 1795.
Dear Sir, — I hear nothing of Monroe but through the News
papers containing his correspondence with Pickering. As that
appears to have been closed on the 31st of last month, I am in
hourly expectation of seeing him. I am also without any late
information with respect to the progress of the Committee on
Blount's and Liston's conspiracy. Dawson wrote me some time
ago, "that they were going on well, and that he had well-
grounded reasons, which he could not communicate by letter, to
say that they should bring in some large fish." It is much to
be wished none of this description may escape, though to be
feared that they will be most likely to do so.
Mrs. Madison offers her respects to the ladies, and joins in
my inclination to visit Monticello; but I am so completely
plunged into necessary occupations of several kinds, that I can
not positively decide that we shall have the pleasure.
Yours affectionately.

60 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Orange, October 18, 1795.
Dear Sir, — On opening the letter forwarded by Pickering,
which I omitted at Monticello, because I took for granted that
it merely covered, like yours, a copy of the French Constitu
tion; I found a letter from Monroe, of the 30 June, from which
the following is an extract: " You will be surprised to hear that
the only Americans whom I found here were a set of New Eng
land men connected with Britain, and who, upon British capital,
were trading to this country; that they are hostile to the French
revolution is what you well know; but that they should be
thriving upon the credit which the efforts of others in other
quarters gain the American name here, you could not expect;
that, as such, they should be in possession of the little confidence
we had, and give a tone to characters on our side of the Atlan
tic, was still less to be expected. But such was the fact. With
a few exceptions, the other merchants are new-made Citizens,
from Scotland. Swan, ***** ^y virtue of be
ing the agent of France, and as we had no Minister, and he be
ing (though of the latter description) the only or most credita
ble resident American here, had a monopoly of the trade of both
Countries. Indeed, it is believed that he was connected with
the agents on one side, and the Minister on the other. I men
tion this as a trait worthy your attention. You will confide
this view to Mr. Jefferson only. But good may come from it,
and especially if the allurement here will draw them off from
the other side of the channel." The remainder of the letter is
little more than you have probably seen from him.
I have seen Philadelphia papers down to the 12th instant.
One of them contains another letter from Edmund Randolph to
the President, dated the 8th, and sent to the press on the 10$,
applying for a paper refused him by Pickering, intimating that
the want of this alone delayed his final statement, and notifying
the President that his consent would be expected to a publica
tion of it. It appears that the State elections in Pennsylvania
will be very warm, and are hinged on the distinction of Treaty

1795. LETTERS. 61
and anti-Treaty candidates. In Delaware, they are over, and
have given a triumph to the Anti-Treaty party. The French
Constitution has been unanimously concluded by the Conven
tion. It is not yet authenticated that war has taken place be
tween England and Spain, but reports and circumstances con
tinue to point at it. Yours affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Fredericksburg, Nov 8th, 1795.
Dear Sir, — I am thus far on my way to Philadelphia, and
shall proceed on the journey this morning. I left with my
Father, subject to your order, the packet of papers promised
you. In case of his absence, the overseer will be charged with
them. Should you send a special messenger, it will be well to
provide against much roughness in the carriage, as the papers
are in a state not unsusceptible of being injured by it.
I hear nothing new at this place, except that Wheat is falling
in Philadelphia, and consequently so here. Two reasons are
assigned: the bad quality of the crop, and the English harvest
turning out better than was expected. The last cause is no
doubt exaggerated, if not forged, but rather in England than
here, for the papers are full of such paragraphs copied from
English papers or English letters.
Mr. Randolph's publication is said to be in the press, but has
not yet made its appearance. In the mean time, Reports con
tinue to circulate to his disadvantage; and I find that malice
is busy in attempts to implicate others with his affair. I hope
you will not forget to draw on our friend in N. Carolina for
his political anecdotes, &c. He will, at least, in answer to your
queries, give you a history of the particular points compre
hended in your review. What passed in relation to the seat of
Government, I know has been entered in his Diary.
Yours truly,

62 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec 6, 1795.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letter, with a pamphlet under the
same cover, came to me a few days ago from the post office, with
a charge of a dollar postage. I have delayed to forward it till
further expence could be avoided. The pamphlet I will send
by the first good opportunity. I have your favor of the 26th
ult., corroborating the view I had before received of matters
at Richmond. There is likely to be a quorum of both Houses
of Congress to-morrow. Muhlenberg and Dayton will probably
be the candidates for the Chair in the House of Representatives.
I can say nothing yet of the complexion of the body, more than
has been known from general accounts long ago. With respect
to the Cabinet, I am without the least information. It does
not appear that any final step has been taken for filling the va
cant Departments. The offer of the Secretaryship of State to
P. Henry is a circumstance which I should not have believed,
without the most unquestionable testimony. Col. Coles tells
me Mr. Henry read the letter to him on that subject. It ap
pears that there have been some agitations in Paris, produced
by the decree of two-thirds tacked to the Constitution; but as
the Jacobins united with the Convention in crushing them, the
crisis was probably the expiring struggle of the counter-revo
lutionists. From the nature of the Decree, it is not wonderful
that it should not have been swallowed without some resistence.
Randolph's pamphlet is not yet out. I am told it will appear
in a few days. As soon as I can send you a copy you shall have
one. Yours affectionately.

1795. LETTERS. 63

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec 13, 1795.
Dear Sir, — I received yesterday your favor, covering a letter
to Monsr Liancourt, which I have put into the hands of Noail-
les, who will attend to the delivery of it. I inclose a copy of
the President's Speech. The Senate have answered it, as was
to be expected. You will see the first fruits of their open doors
in the debates it produced. The answer of the House of Rep
resentatives will be reported to-morrow. It has been delayed
by a disagreement of ideas in the Committee, which consisted
of Sedgwick, Sitgreaves, and myself. The two former are
strongly for the Treaty, and wish to favor it, at the same time
that they are afraid to hazard direct expressions to that effect.
The policy of that party is to obtain it a quiet passage through
the present session, pretending that it is too soon now to med
dle with it, as they will hereafter pretend that it is then too
late. The means employed are to blazon the public prosperity,
to confound the Treaty with the President, and to mouth over
the stale topics of war and confusion. The answer, as it stands
to be reported, contains a clause which will put the House of
Representatives in a dilemma similar to that forced on the
House of Delegates, and I believe will never be swallowed, be
cause it is in part notoriously untrue. It affirms the confidence
of his fellow-citizens to be undiminished, which will be denied
by many who sincerely wish it to be the case. It cannot yet be
determined what course the business will take. It seems most
probable at present that the answer will be neutralized, and
the subject immediately after taken up in a committee of the
whole on the state of the Union; which will have the advantage
of disentangling it from the President, and of accommodating
the wishes of some individuals who will be much influenced by
the mode. There is pretty certainly a great majority against
the Treaty on its merits; but besides the ordinary difficulty of
preventing schisms, there is a real obscurity in the constitutional
part of the question, and a diversity of sincere opinions about
it, which the other side will make the most of. Nothing very

64 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
late from abroad. The provision order has been repealed, but
the spoliations go on. The publication of E. R. is not yet out.
It is said it will appear the latter end of this week.
Flour 14 dollars, and it is thought will rise to 16. The pur
chases of British agents for the W. India armaments are, no
doubt, one of the causes of this extraordinary rise.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, Dec' 20, 1795.
Dear Sir, — The last of your favors come to hand bears date
Sept1 8, 1795, of which a duplicate has also been received. The
others which it may be proper to acknowledge or reacknowl-
edge are of Novr 30th, 1794, which was opened at Halifax, and
forwarded to me in that state; Dec' 18, 1794, covering a copy
of one of the same date to Mr. Randolph; Feb7 18, 1795, cover
ing a copy of one of Feb7 12 to the same; Feb7 25, covering a
duplicate of Ditto; June 13, inclosing a copy of a letter of May
4, from Mr. Short; June 3, 28, 30, July 26, covering the cor
respondence with Jay; and Aug' 15. As I cannot now give
minute answers to each of these letters, and the necessity of
them as to most has been superseded, I shall proceed to the ob
ject most immediately interesting to you, to wit, the posture of
things here resulting from the embassy of Mr. Jay. The Treaty
concluded by him did not arrive till a few days after the 3d of
March, which put an end to the last session of Congress. Ac
cording to previous notification to the Senators, that branch as
sembled on the 28th of June, the contents of the Treaty being
in the mean time impenetrably concealed. I understood it was
even withheld from the Secretaries at War and the Treasury,
that is, Pickering and Wolcott. The Senate, after a few weeks
consultation, ratified the Treaty, as you have seen. The injunc
tion of secrecy was then dissolved by a full House, and quickly
after restored, sub modo, in a thin one. Mr. Mason, disregard
ing the latter vote, sent the Treaty to the press, from whence it
flew with an electric velocity to every part of the Union. The

1795. LETTERS. 65
first impression was universally and simultaneously against it.
Even the mercantile body, with the exception of Foreigners
and demi- Americans, joined in the general condemnation. Ad
dresses to the President against his ratification swarmed from
all quarters, and without a possibility of preconcert, or party
influence. In short, it appeared for a while that the latent
party in favor of the Treaty were struck dumb by the voice of
the Nation. At length, however, doubts began to be thrown
out in New York whether the Treaty was as bad as was repre
sented. The Chamber of Commerce proceeded to an address
to the President, in which they hinted at war as the tendency of
rejecting the Treaty, but rested the decision with the constituted
authorities. The Boston Chamber of Commerce followed the
example, as did a few inland villages. For all the details on
this subject I refer to the Gazettes, which I presume you con
tinue to receive from the Department of State. It appears that
the struggle in the public mind was anxiously contemplated by
the President, who had bound himself, first, not to disclose the
Treaty till it should be submitted to the Senate, and, in the next
place, not to refuse his sanction if it should receive that of the
Senate. On the receipt here, however, of the predatory orders
renewed by Great Britain, the President, as we gather from
Mr. Randolph's pamphlet, was advised not to ratify the Treaty
unless they should be revoked, and adhered to this resolution,
from the adjournment of the Senate, about the last of June, till
the middle of August. At the latter epoch Mr. Fauchet's inter
cepted letter became known to him, and as no other circum
stance on which a conjecture can be founded has been hinted
to the public, his change of opinion has been referred to some
impression made by that letter, or by comments upon it; although
it cannot easily be explained how the merits of the Treaty, or
the demerits of the provision order, could be affected by the
one or the other. As soon as it was known that the President
had yielded his ratification, the British party were reinforced
by those who bowed to the name of constituted authority, and
those who are implicitly devoted to the President. The prin
cipal Merchants of Philadelphia, with others, amounting to
vol. ii. 5

66 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
about four hundred, took the lead in an address of approbation.
There is good reason to believe that many subscriptions were
obtained by the Banks, whose directors solicited them, and by
the influence of British capitalists. In Baltimore, Charleston,
and the other commercial towns, (except Philadelphia, New
York, and Boston,) no similar proceeding has been attainable.
Acquiescence has been inculcated with the more success by ex
aggerated pictures of the public prosperity, an appeal to the
popular feeling for the President, and the bugbear of war; still,
however, there is little doubt that the real sentiment of the
mass of the community is hostile to the Treaty. How far it
may prove impregnable, must be left to events. A good deal
will depend on the result of the session, and, more than ought,
on external contingencies. You will see how the session opened
in the President's Speech, and the answer to it. That you may
judge the better on the subject, I add in the margin of the lat
ter the clause expunged, as not true in itself, and as squinting
too favorably at the Treaty. This is the only form in which
the pulse of the House has been felt. It is pretty certain that
a majority disapproves the Treaty, but it is not yet possible to
ascertain their ultimate object, as matters now lie. The Speech
of the President was well adapted to his view. The answer
was from a Committee, consisting of myself, Sedgwick, and Sit-
greaves, in the first instance, with the addition of two other
members on the recommitment. In the first committee, my two
colleagues were of the Treaty party; and, in the second, there
was a willingness to say all that truth would permit. This ex
planation will assist you in comprehending the transaction.
Since the answer, as passed, and was presented, nothing has
been said or done in relation to the Treaty. It is much to be
feared that the majority against the Treaty will be broken to
pieces by lesser and collateral differences. Some will say it is
too soon to take up the subject before it is officially presented
in its finished form; others will then say it is too late. The op
portunity of declaring the sense of the House in the answer to
the speech was sacrificed to the opinion of some, from whom
more decision was expected than will be experienced towards

1795. LETTERS. 67
an immediate consideration of the subject by itself. The truest
policy seems to be, to take up the business as soon as a majority
can be ascertained; but not to risk that event on a preliminary
question. What the real state of opinions may be, is now un
der enquiry. 1 am not sanguine as to the result. There is a
clear majority who disapprove the Treaty, but it will dwindle
under the influence of causes well known to you; more especially
as the States, instead of backing the wavering, are themselves
rather giving way. Virginia has, indeed, set a firm example;
but Maryland, North Carolina, and New Hampshire, have coun
teracted it, and New York will soon follow with some strong
proceedings on the same side.
I am glad to find by your letters that France, notwithstand
ing the late Treaty, continues to be friendly. A magnanimous
conduct will conduce to her interest as well as ours. It must
ultimately baffle the insidious projects for bartering our honour
and our Trade to British pride and British monopoly. The
fifteenth article of the Treaty is evidently meant to put Britain
on a better footing than France, and prevent a further Treaty
with the latter; since it secures to Britain, gratuitously, all priv
ileges that may be granted to others for an equivalent, and of
course obliges France, at her sole expense, to include the inter
est of Britain in her future treaties with us. But if the Treaty
should take effect, this abominable part will be of short dura
tion, and. in the mean time, something, perhaps, may be done, dis
concerting the mischief in some degree. You will observe a
navigation act is always in our power. The article relating to
the Mississippi, being permanent, may be more embarrassing,
yet possibly not without some antidote for its poison. I in
tended to go on in cypher, but the tediousness obliges me to
conclude the present letter, in order to seize a conveyance just
known to me. Mr. Randolph's pamphlet is just out. Mr. Taze
well will send that and several other things collected for you
by this conveyance. Pickering is Secretary of State; Charles
Lee, Attorney General; no Secretary at war. The Senate have
negatived Rutledge as Chief Justice. Mr. Jones keeps you in
formed of your private affairs. He and Mr. Jefferson are well.

68 WORKS OF MADISON. 1795.
I have just received your two favors of October 23 and 24,
with the accompaniments, by Mr. Murray. The articles have
probably not arrived in the same Ship, as Mr. Yard has no in
formation from N. York thereon.
Accept from Mrs. Madison and myself ten thousand thanks
for your and Mrs. Monroe's goodness, which will, as generally
happens, probably draw more trouble upon you. Mr. and Mrs.
Y. well. Your friends at New York so, too.

TO ROBERT SIMMS, (OF S. C.)
Philadelphia, December, 1795.
Your letter, under the same cover with a memorial to the
House of Representatives, came duly to my hands through those
of Major Butler, and the memorial was, according to your re
quest, put into the hands of the Speaker. As it has not been,
and is not meant to be, laid before the House, it may be proper
for me to give you this information, and to add that the part
relating to an impeachment of the Senate, which is beyond the
Constitutional authorities of the House of Representatives, was
thought to render it so palpably improper to be read by them,
as to supersede the consideration of other parts of the memorial.
I cannot avoid expressing my hope that your recollection of the
services of the President, and your attachment to Republican
Government, in which mildness to the involuntary errors, not
less than gratitude for the successful exertions of public ser
vants, is among its truest merits, will overbalance the regret
which might otherwise attend your disappointment in this case.
With my acknowledgments for the favorable sentiments you
have thought fit to express toward me, I remain, your obt, hble
serv.

1795. LETTERS. 69
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec 27, 1795.
Dear Sir, — Mr. Randolph's pamphlet is out, and will be for
warded by the first opportunity. Although I have kept up an
enquiry, I have not been able to collect the impression it makes.
As it relates to the President, nothing seems to be said; and as
it relates to parties in general, very little. By Fenno's and
Webster's papers, it appears that an effort will be used to run
down Mr. R., and, if necessary for the purpose, to call in the inci
dents to which his pecuniary embarrassments have exposed him.
The Speech of the President will have shewn you the guarded
and perplexing shape in which the Treaty was brought into
view. The answer was the result of circumstances, which my
communications to you explain in part. The silence of it as to
the Treaty was an accommodation to the wishes of a few, who
preferred taking it up by itself afterwards. These individuals
have not shewn as much forwardness as was expected, and
owing to that cause, and to the account of an exchange of rati
fications and the momentary expectation of the Treaty, nothing
is yet done on the subject. The situation is truly perplexing.
It is clear that a majority, if brought to the merits of the Treaty,
are against it. But as the Treaty is not regularly before the
House, and an application to the President brings him person
ally into the question, with some plausible objections to the
measure, there is great danger that enough will fly off to leave
the opponents of the Treaty in a minority. Enquiries are on
foot to ascertain the true state of opinions and the probable
turn of votes; and if there be found a firm majority on the right
side, an attempt will be made to get at the subject. There are
accounts from Paris to the 5th of Nov'. The new Constitution
was taking an auspicious commencement. Monroe's letters to
me of Oct. 23 and 24 give a favorable prospect on that side, as
well as with regard to French affairs in general. He confirms
the late naval advantages, and speaks of the check on the Rhine
as a bagatelle. He knew only from Report the ratification of
the Treaty by the President. His language breathes equal

7Q WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
mortification and apprehension from the event. He says that
England would have refused us nothing, and we have yielded
everything; and he cannot but speak as reason dictates. A
nation threatened with famine at home, and depending on the
forlorn hope of West India armaments, which our market only
can feed, was a nation to make rather than receive concessions.
I am just told that 97 out of 98 of the Bermuda Judge's decrees
against our vessels are announced to be reversed in England.
This is another proof of Monroe's opinion. The reversal in
such a lump must have resulted not from principle, but from
policy, as the lumping condemnation proceeded from cupidity.
Flour at 14 dollars at present. We have had no winter as yet.
The weather is now as mild as October. I hope it will assist
you against your rheumatism. Adieu.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, January 10, 1796.
Dear Sir, — The House of Representatives have been latterly
occupied with a pretty curious affair. Certain Traders and
others, of Detroit, entered into a contract with certain individ
uals of the United States, for obtaining the peninsula formed
by Lakes Huron and Michigan, and containing 20 or 30 mil
lions of acres of valuable land. The traders, by means of their
influence over the Indians, were to extinguish the Indian Title;
and the other party, by means of their influence, and that of
their connexions, with Congress, to extinguish the title of the
United States. The Country was to be divided into shares, of
whicli the greater part was to be disposed of by the party who
had to deal with Congress. The reason of this, obvious enough
in itself, has been sufficiently established by proof. Ever since
the session commenced, two of the partners deputed to work the
project through Congress have been employed with great in
dustry, opening themselves in different degrees and forms, to
different members, according to circumstances. Some of the

1796. LETTERS. 71
members, who scented the criminality of the object, waited for
a full disclosure. Others, through an eagerness of some sort or
other, ran with the tale first to the President, and then into the
House of Representatives, without concerting or considering a
single step that ought to follow. In consequence of the infor
mation to the President, and a representation to the District
Judge of the United States, a warrant issued, and the offenders
were taken into custody by the Marshal. The House could not
be prevailed on to take a single day to consider the subject,
and a warrant issued from the Speaker, also, by virtue of which
the Prisoners were transferred to the Sergeant-at-arms. For
the proceedings which have ensued, I must refer you to the
newspapers. They ended in the discharge of one of the men,
and in the reprimand of the other at the bar, and remanding
him to Gaol, where he now lies. In the arguments of the Coun
sel, and in the debates in the House, the want of jurisdiction in
such a case over persons not members of the body was insisted
on, but was overruled by a very great majority. There cannot
be the least doubt, either of the turpitude of the charge, or the
guilt of the accused; but it will be difficult, I believe, to deduce
the privilege from the Constitution, or to limit it in practice,
or even to find a precedent for it in the arbitrary claims of the
British House of Commons. What an engine may such a priv
ilege become, in the hands of a body once corrupted, for protect
ing its corruptions against public animadversion, under the
pretext of maintaining its dignity and preserving the necessary
confidence of the public ! You will observe that a part of the
charge consisted of the slanderous assertion that a majority of
the Senate, and nearly a majority of the other House, had em
barked in the job for turning a public measure to their private
emolument. Apply the principle to other transactions, and the
strictures which the press has made on them, and the extent of
its mischief will be seen at once. There is much room to sus
pect that more important characters, both on the British and
American sides of this affair, were behind the ostensible parties
to it.
The Treaty has not yet been touched. I understand from

72 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
Mr. Giles that the delay has been explained by him to you. A
copy of the British ratification arrived lately, and it was hoped
a communication of it would have followed. The Executive
decided otherwise; and to appease the restlessness of the House
of Representatives, Pickering laid the papers before the Speaker,
to satisfy him, and enable him to explain the matter to others
individually. This mode of proceeding does not augment the
respect which a more direct and less reserved stile of conduct
would inspire, especially as the papers were sufficiently authen
tic for any use the House of Representatives would be likely to
make of them. It is now said that the original is arrived by a
British Packet just announced from New York. Having been
kept within doors by the badness of the day, I have not ascer
tained the truth of the account.
I have letters from Col. Monroe of the 23 and 24 of Oct'.
His picture of the affairs of France, particularly of the prospect
exhibited in the approaching establishment of the Constitution,
is very favorable. This, as far as we know, has had an easy
birth, and wears a promising countenance. He had not learnt
with certainty the ratification of the Treaty by the President,
but wrote under the belief of it. His regrets, and his appre
hensions, were as strong as might be expected. I have a letter
from T. Paine, which breathes the same sentiments, and con
tains some keen observations on the administration of the Gov
ernment here. It appears that the neglect to claim him as an
American Citizen when confined by Robespierre, or even to in
terfere in any way whatever in his favor, has filled him with an
indelible rancour against the President, to whom it appears he
has written on the subject. His letter to me is in the stile of a
dying one, and we hear that he is since dead, of the abscess in
his side, brought on by his imprisonment. His letter desires
that he may be remembered to you.
I inclose a copy of the proceedings relating to the presenta
tion of the French flag. What think you of the President's
Jacobinical speech to Adet?
Randolph's vindication has just undergone the lash of the
Author of the "Bone to gnaw." It is handled with much satir-

1796. LETTERS. 73
ical scurrility, not without strictures of sufficient ingenuity and
plausibility to aid the plan of running him down. By Mr. Carr,
who is now here, we will endeavor to contrive you a copy.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, Jan? 26, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Since my last I have had the pleasure of your
two favors of October 23 and 24: The business of the Treaty
with Great Britain remains as it stood. A copy of the British
ratification has arrived, but the Executive wait, it seems, for the
original, as alone proper for communication. In the mean time,
although it is probable that the House, if brought to say yea or
nay directly on the merits of the- Treaty, will vote against it, '
yet a majority cannot be trusted on a question applying to the
President for the Treaty. In the mean time, also, information
has arrived of the conclusion of a Treaty with Spain, with which
the other will of course be combined. No hint of the terms is
yet given to the public, nor are they probably otherwise known
to the Executive than by the instructions. That provision is
made for the Mississippi is to be presumed. Its aspect on the
Mississippi article in the British Treaty will be particularly in
teresting. Among other attitudes given by this event to our
situation, it is highly probable that the Spanish Treaty will
comprise stipulations at once popular, and similar in principle
to some attacked in the British Treaty.
General Smith, of Baltimore, has offered to the House a res
olution, that after the day of no vessel shall land
in the United States any article not produced by the country to
which the vessel belongs. It will embarrass the Eastern mem
bers, but they will venture to oppose it as tending to perplex
the treaty question; and probably with success, if joined by the
Southern members, as hitherto, from other motives.
You will be pleased, and perhaps surprised, at the scene pro
duced by the French flag. The harangue of the President must
grate the British party, but they are cunning enough to be

74 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
silent. It seems that Adet, notwithstanding the complimentary
and cordial language of the President and Representatives, is
much disgusted at the deposit of the Flag elsewhere than in the
Hall of Congress. You can, perhaps, better appreciate the case
than we can. Such a result, where other circumstances are so
propitious, is unfortunate. I send a copy of the proceeding. I
also send a copy of the proceedings in the case of Randal and
Whitney, which need no comment beyond your own reflections.
I send, also, E. Randolph's vindication, with a malignant at
tack on it, by a satirical, but scurrilous writer. The latter has
published several other pamphlets, exhibiting him in the same
character. Bond is among the putative authors. But the real
author is, probably, some hireling, to whom materials may be
supplied. Randolph is resettled at Richmond, and resumes the
practice of the law with flattering prospects, as is said. The
effect of his pamphlet is not yet fully known. His greatest ene
mies will not easily persuade themselves that he was under a
corrupt influence of France, and his best friends cannot save
him from the self-condemnation of his political career, as ex
plained by himself. The " Political observations " is a fugitive
thing of my own writing, at the heel of the last session, in pure
compliance with the urgency of certain friends. It is full of
press blunders, you will perceive.
We have accounts here that Mr. Paine is dead. I spoke to
Mr. Bache on the subject of the advance by you, to be repaid
for Mr. Paine through my hands. He said only that he would
call on me and shew me the papers, which he has not done. I
inferred from his manner that there was a deficit of funds in his
hands, to be explained by him. I heard nothing from Mr. Pick
ering on the other pecuniary subject. Just as I am making up
this packet, I have the pleasure of a letter for you from Mr.
Jones, which will no doubt give you all the requisite informa
tion for which you rely on him.
Mrs. M. seconds all the acknowledgments due to you and Mrs.'
Monroe, as well as the affectionate esteem with which I ever
remain, yours.

1796. LETTERS. 75
P. S. Chs. Lee has entered on the duties of Attorney Gen
eral. No Secretary at war yet nominated, nor any Judge in the
place of J. Rutledge, and Mr. Blair, who has resigned. Mr.
Rutledge also sent his resignation, but the Senate had previously
rejected him.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Jan? 31, 1796.
Dear Sir— *****
The original of the British ratification of the Treaty is still
to arrive, and we are not likely to be furnished with a copy.
Some members are anxious to apply to the President for the
communication, and some would take up the subject on its mere
notoriety. It is pretty evident, however, that either attempt
would be defeated by the advantage which the rub against the
President in one case, and the informality in the other, would
give to the friends of the Treaty,, in the discussion, and the pre
text they would afford to the insincere and cautious opponents.
The Treaty with Spain, also, is not yet arrived, though there is
reason for hourly expecting it. The same as to the Treaty with
Algiers. You will see in the Gazette inclosed a sketch of the
debate on the proposition to employ Roberton, of Petersburg,
as Stenographer to the House of Representatives. The more
the subject is opened, the more the objections are found to be
insuperable. There is little doubt that the project will be re
jected. A committee of ways and means are employed in investiga
ting our revenues and our wants. It is found that there are
between six and seven millions of anticipations due to the
Banks, that our ordinary income is barely at par with our ordi
nary expenditures, and that new taxes must be ready to meet
near one and a half millions, which will accrue in 1801. The
proposition of the Treasury is to fund the anticipation, and the
foreign debt due in instalments, with an absolute irredeemability
for such a period, say 20 or 30 years, as will sell the new stock

76 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
at par. This is treading as fast on the heels of G. Britain as
circumstances will permit. It is probable the House will not
consent to such an abandonment of the sound principle it has
been latterly favouring; but loans, at least, in some form or
other, will be indispensable, in order to face the demands on
the public, until new taxes can be brought into action. With
respect to this, the Committee are now in deliberation and em
barrassment. The excise system is unproductive, and new ex
cises that will be popular, even in the Eastern States, do hot
occur. On the other hand, direct taxes have been so blackened
in order to recommend the fiscal policy of indirect ones, and to
inspire hatred and jealousies in the Eastern against the South
ern States, and particularly Virginia, that it is doubtful whether
the measure, now that it is become necessary, will be borne.
Gallatin is a real treasure in this department of Legislation.
He is sound in his principles, accurate in his calculations, and
indefatigable in his researches. Who could have supposed that
Hamilton could have gone off in the triumph he assumed, with
such a condition of the finances behind him?
You will see that Gov' Adams has launched a pretty bold
attack against the Treaty. The Legislature have not yet an
swered his speech. Their unhandsome treatment of the Vir
ginia amendments portends a counter tone. Nothing could,
more than this treatment, demonstrate the success with which
party calumny has sown animosity and malignity in the State
of Massachusetts against a State which feels no return of ill-
will, and towards which there were formerly in that quarter the
strongest habits of cordiality and co-operation.
The navigation project of Gen1 Smith waits for a favorable
moment of discussion. The Treaty party will make war on it,
as secretly levelled at that transaction, and thus endeavour to
escape the consequences of sacrificing the obvious interests of
the Eastern States.

1796. LETTERS. 77

TO EDMUND PENDLETON. Philadelphia, Feb? 7, 1796.
My dear Sir, — Your favor of January 6th, owing to failures
of the mail South of Baltimore, did not come to hand within the
usual time; and subsequent delays in the communication, con
sultation, and decision of Mr. Giles and myself, on the manner
of publishing and applying your observations on the Carriage
tax, have brought down the return of my thanks for your favor
to the present date. I read with real pleasure the paper you put
into the hands of Mr. Giles; which is unquestionably a most
simple and lucid view of the subject, and well deserving the at
tention of the Court which is to determine on it. The paper
will be printed in the Newspapers, in time for the Judges to
have the benefit of it. I did not find that it needed any of those
corrections which you so liberally committed to my hand. It
has been thought unnecessary to prefix you name; but Mr.
Giles will let an intimation appear, along with the remarks,
that they proceed from a quarter that claims attention to them.
It is said that both the Judges and the Attorney General have
expressed a wish that the question should be argued on both
sides at the Bar; but as the ordinary motive does not operate
on the side of the Defendant, it is not certain that any profes
sional appearance for him will take place. It is, perhaps, bet
ter that the cause should rest on the printed arguments, and on
the discernment of the Bench, than that it should be espoused
by junior and unskilful volunteers. There never was a ques
tion on which my mind was more satisfied, and yet I have very
little expectation that it will be viewed by the Court in the
same light it is by me.*
The British Treaty in its final form, as ratified by both par
ties, has not yet been laid before the House of Representatives.
The delay is accounted for by the copy only, and not the origi-
* The alterations in the Carriage tax, recommended by the President, had no
reference to the Constitutional question.

78 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
nal, of the British ratification having been received. I am
sorry that so much weight is allowed to forms. My advice to
the President would have been, to have opened the actual state
of the business in his speech, and to have communicated all the
documents relating to it to the Legislature. A different opin
ion has prevailed, and nothing is more uncertain than the mo
ment when the Treaty will be laid on the Table for our consid
eration. In the mean time, there is no apparent disposition in
the majority either to apply for it, or to take it up informally,
on its general notoriety; and the name of the President is every
where used with the most wonderful success, by the Treaty par
tizans, in subduing the popular objections to that instrument.
No where has this policy been exerted with so much effect as in
New England, as is shewn by the proceedings of the Legisla
tures of New Hampshire and Massachusetts. The manner in
which the latter has treated the proposed amendments of Vir
ginia, is as unworthy on the part of Massachusetts as it is un
merited on that of her sister. It speaks an influence which can
not be friendly to either.
The Treaty with Spain is not yet arrived, nor is that with
Algiers. The contents of both are unknown. There can be little
doubt that the former contains some beneficial arrangements on
the subject of the Mississippi. The countenance of English
affairs grows more and more lowering. Among other signs
truly alarming to that Country, the Parliament are allowing a
bounty, amounting to 2s. Qd. Sterling a bushel, on the importa
tion of foreign wheat. The accounts from France, subsequent
to the establishment of the Constitution, are favorable to inter
nal order and tranquillity, and, of course, to her prospects on
every side.
Since the knowledge of the English Bounty, Flour has taken
a fresh start. It is now at about 14 dollars, and a further rise
is expected. For other domestic intelligence I must refer to
the newspapers, which I presume you occasionally see, and one
of which is inclosed.
I beg you to offer my best respects to Colonel Taylor, and to

1796. LETTERS. 79
accept the same yourself. With the truest esteem and attach
ment, I am, dear sir, your obt friend and serv\

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Feb* 7, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Several mails preceding that of yesterday brought
nothing more Southern than Baltimore. This will account for
my not receiving your favor of the 24th ult. till yesterday. I
will make the enquiries and execute the commissions in it with
pleasure, and without delay. I am afraid to make the same
promise as to the weekly history of what passes in the Govern
ment behind the curtain; especially as the cypher might be re
quired for some parts of it. What I can, I will do on the sub
ject. I have already made a partial collection of the Tracts
you wish. I know not what is meant by the correspondence of
Jay and Jefferson; probably it is the correspondence not be
tween them, but between each and others.
I thank you for the copy of your statement and letter to Mr.
Wythe. I value it not only as a gratification to myself, but as
another security for the preservation of the document.
Dohrman maintains a silence that justifies strong suspicions
of aversion or inability to pay his debts. I feel no longer any
other restraints from resorting to his deed of trust but that
which Mazzei's interest dictates. As yet, the land would sell
for considerably less than the sum due. The general rise of
price which is going on will probably soon remove this difficulty,
especially if the Treaty with Spain should have done what is
hoped as to the navigation of the Mississippi.
You will see that the aspect of English affairs grows more
and more lowering. The alarm of the Seditious Bills, the bounty
on foreign wheat and flour, the detention of the armament fitted
up for the forlorn experiment in the West Indies, are more por
tentous than any thing previous to these signs of a ripening
crisis. The accounts from France are not of very late date,

80 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
but continue to be auspicious. The Treaties with Algiers and
Spain loiter, as that with England did. It is to be hoped this
is the only instance in which the parallel holds.
An idea begins to shew itself that an unrestrained exportation
of the Bread articles threatens a scarcity in our own country.
The large towns will of course be the first seat of such an ap
prehension. It is certain that the crops of grain in North Caro
lina failed to such a degree as to start the price of corn at a
dollar a bushel, where it used to be at J of a dollar. In Vir
ginia, if the present price be the measure of the quantity, there
will be little corn to spare, and probably not a great deal more
of wheat. In this State, it is turning out more and more in evi
dence that the crop of wheat has been very scanty. The East
ern States always require large importations from the others.
In New Jersey and New York alone the crops of wheat appear
to have been good; and that is probably exaggeration on the
favorable side. Flour at present, in this place, is rising under
the information of the English bounty. All in the market is
said to be bought up, probably by English agents. It sold a
day or two ago, or rather there was offered for it, 14 dollars a
barrel, and the best informed speak with confidence of succes
sive rises. In this attitude of things, what a noble stroke would
be an embargo ! It would probably do as much good as harm
at home, and would force peace on the rest of the World, and,
perhaps, liberty along with it. But you know the spell within
the Government, as well as the obstacles to such a measure, in
the clamours that would be raised among the Merchants, the
Millers, and Farmers, to say nothing of the Tories, &c, who
would make more noise than any of them.
I intreat you not to procrastinate, much less abandon, your
historical task. You owe it to yourself, to truth, to the world.
There is some reason to think that John Rutledge is not right
in his mind. Cushing has been put at the head of the Bench,
but, it is said, will decline the pre-eminence. Chase in the place
of Blair ! ! A vacancy remains to be filled. M°Henry, Sec
retary at War. Through what official interstice can a ray of
republican truths now penetrate to the President ?

1796. LETTERS. 81

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Febr 21, 1796.
Dear Sir,— *******
I find, as I conjectured, that the provision made for the daugh
ters of De Grasse was not in the way of loan, but of gift. It
would be difficult, perhaps, to justify the act in either way, by
the text of the Constitution. The precedent, nevertheless, is in
favour of Mad9 de Chastellux's son. Whether his claim will
be viewed with the same indulgence, on the score of his father's
merits, is more than I can venture to decide. The services of
De Grasse were critical. Chastellux, you recollect, was not a
favorite here, tho' the cause may have been erroneous. Con
gress also were afraid of the precedent at the time, and endeav
oured to interweave ingredients of peculiarity. I am really
apprehensive that a compliance with the wishes of Mad9 de
Chastellux would entail on us a provision for the families of
the whole French army that served in this Country. Congress
are occupied with a Bill for selling the Western lands. Opin
ions are various, and the result doubtful. The British Treaty
not yet before us; nor the Spanish before the Senate, or even
arrived, as far as I know. The Algerine is come to hand, and
under the deliberation of the Senate. The history of it contains
some envious features, which it is not possible for me to explain
in time. In general, it cost an immense sum, and the annual
tribute is to be paid in naval stores, infinitely underrated in the
Tariff. The friendly interference of France, tho' applied for,
and in train, was precluded by the agent's precipitancy in clo
sing the Treaty, for the hardness of which the apology is, that
it was the best that could be got. The letter from Paris in the
inclosed paper is Monroe's, and the latest in date that has been
received from him. The Federal Court has not yet given judg
ment in the case of payments into the Virginia Treasury. Mar
shall and Campbell were the counsel on one side, and Lewis
and Tilghman on the other. Marshall's argument is briefly [?]
spoken of. Campbell and Ingersoll will appear vs. the Car
riage tax. Hamilton is here, and to join Lee on the other side.
VOL. II. 6

82 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, Feb? 26. 1796.
Dear Sir, — I have written you several particular letters lat
terly, and now add this for a conveyance of which I am just ap
prised. The British Treaty is still in the situation explained in my
last. Several circumstances have indicated an intention in the
Executive to lay it before the House of Representatives, but it
has not yet taken place. There is reason to believe that some
egregious misconception of  has disappointed the Execu
tive of the original ratification. Still, however, the Executive
is not to be excused for sacrificing substance to form by with
holding the subject; and as this idea must gain strength with
the delay, a call for the Treaty will become daily more and
more practicable and probable.
The Algerine and Spanish Treaties are both before the Sen
ate. Mr. Tazewell is to make them the subject of a letter to
you by the present opportunity, he being fully acquainted with
them. The former is stamped with folly, and the most culpable
irregularities. The latter gives general joy. I have not yet
ascertained whether it clashes with the British Treaty as to the
Mississippi, or is in any point chargeable with the unconstitu
tionality alleged against the British.
You already know that Pickering is Secretary of State, and
that Charles Lee is Attorney General. The vacancy in the
Secretaryship of War has been filled with Doctor M°Henry.
On the exclusion of John Rutledge, Cushing was made Chief
Justice, but has declined it, and no successor is yet nominated.
Chase is appointed to the vacancy produced by Mr. Blair's res
ignation. There is still a vacancy, resulting from Jay's trans
lation to the Government of New York, to be filled. On these
several appointments you will make your own comments. They
are, to a man, of the Treaty party.
The amendments proposed by Virginia for requiring the con
sent of the House of Representatives to Treaties, limiting the
terms of Senators to three years, &c, have excited the most ac-

1796. LETTERS. 83
tive party venom against that State, and the success of the hue
and cry has been greater than could have been imagined. The
Legislatures of N. Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, N.
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, have all rejected, and sev
eral of them insulted [?] the example.
It is now pretty certain that the President will not serve be
yond his present term. The British party had Jay first in view,
as is believed. It is now said Adams is the object. Their sec
ond man is not fixed on or discovered. It will probably be a
man who will cause a diversion of Southern blows. H. Lee
has been conjectured, but they will hardly think him the fittest
for the purpose. The Republicans, knowing that Jefferson alone
can be started with hope of success, mean to push him. I fear
much that he will mar the project and ensure the adverse elec
tion by a peremptory and public protest. The candidate for
the Vice President is not yet designated.
The immediate subjects before the House of Representatives
are: a bill for guarantying a loan on a mortgage of the public
lots in the federal City, for compleating the preparations there
in time, without selling the lots below their value. The bill
has been delayed by objections of various sorts, urged from va
rious motives. As the President has recommended the meas
ure, it is probable, though not certain, that it will be allowed
to pass. 2. A bill for selling the lands North West of the Ohio.
On this, also, opinions are multifarious, and the issue not cer
tain. 3. New taxes. Notwithstanding the parade with respect
to our finances, there are 6,200,000 dollars of anticipations due
to the Bank now called for, besides the foreign instalments, and
about 1,100,000 for the deferred debt, which will accrue by the
time plans laid now will become regularly and adequately pro
ductive. Wolcott, in the spirit of his predecessor, proposes to
fund the anticipations, &c, by selling new stock irredeemable
for 25 years; that is, the redemption is not to commence till the
end of 25 years. The new revenues contemplated are an in
crease of the duty on salt, a stamp tax, a tax on testamentary
dispositions, an increase of the tax on Carriages, &c. A tax
on leather and hats was also brought forward in a committee

84 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
of ways and means, but will not be passed. Would you have
supposed that a land tax and House tax, as indirect taxes, had
also a patronage?
The Constitutionality of the Carriage tax has been just argued
here before the federal Court of Appeals; Ch8 Lee and Hamil
ton on the side of the tax; Ingersoll, and Campbell, of Rich
mond, against it. Lee did not distinguish himself, and took
ground different from that of his coadjutor. Hamilton exerted
himself as usual. Ingersoll appeared to advantage, and Camp
bell, I am told, acquitted himself ably and very eloquently.
The Judges on the Bench were Wilson, Patterson, Iredell, and
Chase. No decision has yet been given, but an affirmance of
the law is generally anticipated. The payments into the Vir
ginia Treasury have also been argued at this term. Marshall
and Campbell came hither for the purpose, in behalf of the debt
ors. They were combated by Lewis and Tilghman. Marshall
is said to have figured very powerfully in his argument; and it
is thought the event is at least doubtful.
The birthday of the President has been celebrated with
greater splendour than ever. The crisis explains the policy.
A circumstance has taken place, however, more indicative in
its nature than any display within the fashionable circle. You
will recollect the usage of adjourning for half an hour to com
pliment the President on the anniversary of his birth. Last
year there were but thirteen dissentients; this year, the motion
to adjourn was negatived by fifty against thirty-eight.
It has been whispered that you are to be recalled, and Bing
ham to replace you. I entirely disbelieve it; but the whisper
marks the wishes of those who propagate it.
Pickering will pay your draught on him. Bache has not yet
received the second part of the Rights of Man, which he says is
the only fund on which Mr. Paine could draw.
Mrs. M. offers her best respects, along with mine, to Mrs.
Monroe. Adieu. Yours sincerely.

1796. LETTERS 85
A letter from Mr. Jones accompanies this. We are tliree
months without intelligence from France.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Feb? 29, 1796.
Dear Sir, — The Treaty with Spain arrived on Tuesday last.
It adjusts both the boundary and navigation in a very satis
factory manner. I have not yet been able to decide whether,
on the latter point, it clashes or not with the British Treaty,
the article being differently represented by different members
of the Senate. Nor am I able to say whether any of the arti
cle comes within the objections to the Constitutionality of the
British Treaty. In what relates to contraband and other
points in the law of nations, I understand it presents an honor
able contrast to Jay's stipulations. The Algerine Treaty has
some curious features. Among others, the sum of one million
paid for the ransom and the peace does not appear before the
Senate as any part of the Treaty, but has been paid as a ver
bal part of the Contract, under the authority of the law of ap
propriation; so that the most material part of the Treaty has
been made by the President and the Legislature, without the
Treaty-agency of the Senate. The British Treaty, as finally
ratified, has been republished in the newspapers from foreign
copies, but is still not laid before Congress.
The President's birthday has been celebrated with unexam
pled splendor. The crisis explains the policy of this. It is re
markable, however, that the annual motion to adjourn for half
an hour to pay the compliment of the day was rejected this year
by 50 vs. 38, altho' last year, on the yeas and nays, 13 only
voted in the negative.

86 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, March 6, 1796.
Dear Sir, — The Senate have unanimously ratified the Alge
rine and Spanish Treaties. The latter was a bitter pill to some,
for two reasons: first, as inviting additional emigrations to the
Western country; secondly, as jostling with the Mississippi ar
ticle in the British Treaties. The Spanish article is in the
words following: " It is likewise agreed that the Western bound-
" ary of the United States which separates them from the Span-
" ish colony of Louisiana is in the middle of the channel or bed
" of the river Mississippi, from the northern boundary of the said
" States to the completion of the 31° of latitude north of the
" Equator. And his Catholic Majesty has likewise agreed that
" the navigation of the said river, in its whole breadth, from its
" source to the ocean, shall be free only to his subjects and the
" Citizens of the United States, unless he should extend this
" privilege to the subjects of other powers by special Conven-
" tion." Doubts were expressed by King, in the Senate, whether
this could be construed into a harmony with the stipulations to
G. B., and the pulse of the body felt on the subject with a view
to a declaratory proviso to the ratification. It was concluded,
however, not to risk the project, and to presume a construction
that would avoid the inconsistency. It seems that Pinckney
considered the article as admitting a construction reconcileable
with the British article. It is also said that he was offered and
refused a proposition, expressing or implying our right to the
navigation, but more directly clashing with the British Treaties.
The President laid the Treaty before the House of Rep" on
Tuesday last, about one o'clock; and in the afternoon it ap
peared in a Proclamation in Brown's paper. I am well-in
formed that its publication was concerted with the Printer prior
to its communication to the House. Whether an original rati
fication was received as the ground of this proceeding, or the
copy, heretofore not deemed of sufficient formality, has been
viewed in a more favorable light, I cannot undertake to say. I
suspect the latter to be the case. Perhaps, also, the ratification

1796. LETTERS.

87

of the Spanish and Algerine Treaties, which contain some stip
ulations analogous to those complained of as unconstitutional
in the British Treaty, may have had weight on the occasion. In
general, however, the Spanish Treaty forms rather a contrast
to the British, being more than reciprocal in its essential arti
cles, and on the subject of contraband, and the freedom of goods
in free ships, being perfectly satisfactory. A motion has been
laid on the table by Mr. Livingston, calling on the President
for the instructions to Jay, &c. The policy of hazarding it is
so questionable, that he will probably let it sleep or withdraw
it. Notice of direct propositions on the Treaty will probably
be given to-morrow. The purport and form of them create much
diversity of ideas among the opponents of the Treaty. The
state of the business as it now presents itself, with the uncer
tainty of the particular way of thinking in several quarters of
the House, make it truly difficult to decide on the course most
acceptable to the body of anti-treaty members. The other side,
of course, have no difficulties of this sort to contend with.
The bill for the sale of the back lands makes progress, tho'
but slowly. Its fate is very uncertain. The proposed aid to
the federal city will probably succeed in the event, under the
patronage of the President, but, in the mean time, will no doubt
be played off in favour of the Treaty.
The Court has not given judgment yet on the carriage tax.
It is said the Judges will be unanimous for its constitutionality.
Hamilton and Lee advocated it at the Bar, against Campbell
and Ingersoll. Bystanders speak highly of Campbell's argu
ment, as well as of Ingersoll's. Lee did not shine; and the great
effort of his coadjutor, as I learn, was to raise a fog around the
subject, and to inculcate a respect in the Court for preceding
sanctions in a doubtful case.
We are three months without news from France, or even G.
Britain. There is a report that one of the Sedition bills has
passed the House of Lords, and is not likely to pass the H. of
Commons. There is a paragraph which says that Sweden and
Denmark have prohibited the exportation of Grain. Flour
here is about 15 doll", and wheat 20s.

88 WdRKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Mar. 13, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Since my last, by the last weekly mail, I have
seen Mr. Rittenhouse on the subject of the kitchen stoves. He
says that at Lancaster, where they were invented and are best
known, two only remain in use. They certainly save fuel, but
are so much complicated in their operation as to require par
ticular care, and are liable to the objection of keeping the
kitchen excessively hot. Mrs. Rittenhouse intimated that as
several modes of cookery, roasting, baking, &c, were carried
on at the same time, it often happened that one of the modes
did not keep pace with the other. Mr. R. could not learn the
price. He supposed, from the quantity of Iron, that it must be
considerable. We are at length embarked in the discussion of the Treaty,
which was drawn in rather abruptly, by a proposition calling
on the President for papers. The point in debate is, the con
stitutional right of Congress in relation to Treaties. There
seem at present strong reasons to conclude that a majority
will be firm in the doctrine that the House has a Constitutional
right to refuse to pass laws for executing a Treaty, and that
the Treaty power is limited by the enumerated powers. Whether
the right ought, in the present case, to be exerted, will be a
distinct question on the merits of the Treaty, which have not
yet come into discussion. I understand the Treaty party ex
pect success on this question, but despair on every other.
Nothing very late from Europe. The British armament is
arriving in the West Indies, which looks like a postponement
of peace. It will augment the call on this country for provis
ions, and of course the price. Flour is about 15 doll8 here at
present.

1796. LETTERS. 89

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, April 4, 1796.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of the 6th ultimo; also
your letters for Monroe, Mazzei, and Van Staphorst ; and shall
have a good conveyance for them in two or three days. I am
in some doubt, however, whether it may not be best to detain
those for Mazzei and V. until you can add the information I am
now able to furnish you from Dohrman. He has at length
closed the business of Mazzei in a just and honorable manner,
by allowing the N. Y. damages in the bills of 20 per cent., and
the N. Y. rate of interest of 7 per cent. This mode of settle
ment, after deducting the partial payments, for wliich he has
receipts, leaves a balance of 3,087 dollars, which has been just
paid into my hands, and will be disposed of as you shall direct.
You will of course lose no time in writing to me on the subject.
I have not yet heard from Bringhurst on the subject of Sharp-
less. He has no doubt written to you, according to his prom
ise. I have seen Mr. Howell, who says there would be no dif
ficulty in allowing you the credit you desire, if his son should
take the place of Lownes.
I was not unaware of the considerations you suggest with
regard to the post roads; but do not consider my proposition
as involving any dangerous consequences. It is limited to the
choice of roads, where that is presented, and to the opening
them, in other cases, so far only as may be necessary for the
transportation of the mail. This I think fairly within the ob
ject of the Constitution. It had, in fact, become essential that
something should be done, and something would have been at
tempted on a worse principle. If the route shall be once fixed
for the post road, the local authorities will probably undertake
the improvement, &c, of the roads; and individuals will go to
work in providing the proper accommodations on them for gen
eral use.
The newspapers will inform you that the call for the Treaty
papers was carried by 62 against 37. You will find the answer
of the President herewith inclosed. The absolute refusal was

90 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
as unexpected as the tone and tenor of the message are im
proper and indelicate. If you do not at once perceive the drift
of the appeal to the General Convention and its journal, recol
lect one of Camillus's last numbers, and read the latter part of
Murray's Speech. There is little doubt in my mind that the
message came from N. Y., when it was seen that an experiment
was to be made, at the hazard of the Pres., to save the faetion
against the Rep8 of the people. The effect of this reprehensible
measure on the majority is not likely to correspond with the
calculation of its authors. I think there will be sufficient firm
ness to face it with resolutions declaring the constitutional pow
ers of the House as to Treaties, and that, in applying for papers,
they are not obliged to state their reasons to the Executive. In
order to preserve this firmness, however, it is necessary to avoid,
as much as possible, an overt rencontre with the Executive.
The day after the message was received, the bill guarantying
the loan for the federal City was carried thro' the H. of Rep8
by a swimming majority.
I have letters from Monroe of the 12th and 20th of Jan7. The
truce with Austria was demanded by the latter, and was not
likely to be renewed. A continuance of the war with England
was counted on. The French Government was in regular and
vigorous operation, and gaining daily more and more of the
public confidence. A forced loan was going on for 25 million
Sterlg, 12 mil. of which was receivable in assignats at 100 for
one; the balance in specie and produce. It is said that the
British armament for the West Indie^s had suffered a third Coup
de Vent, after leaving the channel a third time.
According to my memory, and that of others, the Journal of
the Convention was, by a vote, deposited with the Pres., to be
kept sacred until called for by some competent authority. How
can this be reconciled with the use he has made of it ? Exam
ine my notes, if you please, at the close of the business, and let
me know what is said on the subject. You will perceive that
the quotation is nothing to the purpose. Most of the majority
would decide as the Convention did; because they think there
may be some Treaties, as a mere Treaty of peace, that would not

1796. LETTERS.

91

require the Legislative power; a ratification by law also ex
pressed a different idea from that entertained by the House of
its agency.

TO JAMES MONROE. ¦Philadelphia, April 7, 1796.
Dear Sir, — The letters from you of latest date are those of
Oct. 23, 24, and 29, and of Jan7 12 and 20th. The three first
have been heretofore acknowledged. For the interesting con
tents of the two last, I now thank you. I have given the ex
planation you desired, as to Mr. Paine, to F. A. M., who has
not received any letter as yet, and has promised to pay due re
gard to your request. It is proper you should know that T.
Paine, wrote some time ago a severe letter to the President,
which Pickering mentioned in harsh terms to me when I deliv
ered a note from T. P. to the Secretary of State, inclosed by
T. P. in a letter to me. Nothing passed, however, that betrayed
the least association of your patronage or attention to T. P. with
the circumstance; nor am I apprehensive that any real suspicion
can exist of your countenancing, or even knowing the steps
taken by T. P., under the impulse of his personal feelings or po
litical principles. At the same time, the caution you observe is
by no means to be disapproved. Be so good as to let T. P.
know that I have received his letter and handed his note to the
Secretary of State, which requested copies of such letters as
might have been written hence in his behalf. The note did not
require any answer either to me or through me, and I have
heard nothing of it since I handed it to Pickering. It is proper
T. P., as well as yourself, should know that, on my first appli
cation to Mr. Bache for the payment of the draught in your
favor, Mr. B. had^io funds in his hands, but he now tells me he
shall be able to honor the draught in a few days. Pickering has
been spoken to several times, and has promised, as soon as he
can find your letter and leisure, he will attend to the draught
on his department. I have communicated to Mr. Yard the para-

92 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
graph relating to Mr. and Mrs. K. It was impossible that we
should not all approve the conduct of Mrs. M. The known ec
centricity of character will easily explain the occurrence, if it
should ever arrive here.
Some of your enemies here have been base enough to throw
into circulation insinuations that you have launched into all
the depths of speculation. It has even been propagated that
you and Skipwith, or perhaps you, through Skipwith, had pur
chased Chantilly, the magnificent estate of the late Prince of
Conde. I was joined by others of your friends in the roundest
contradictions of such malicious reports, and in explaining the
incredibility and palpable falsehood of them. Having heard
nothing latterly on the subject, I conclude that the antidote has
effectually destroyed the poison. I understand, however, that
the circumstance of the money of which you were robbed, and
which it is said ought to have gone long before to Amsterdam,
where the public faith was violated by the delay, is a topic of
unfavorable conversation within the Treasury Department and
in unfriendly circles. If you ever wrote any thing to me on the
subject, it has totally miscarried. The first account I had of it
was very lately, from Mr. Swan, who threw the whole blame
on Skipwith, who was charged with the operation of remitting
the money to Holland. I am not apprehensive that any im
pressions can be entertained, even among your enemies in the
Cabinet, of anything more than incaution on your part; I am
sure that nothing beyond that can be impressed on others. In
the mean time, it is right you should know every handle that
can be taken against you. It continues to be the suspicion of
some that the Cabinet meditates your recall, and, of course, that
they may possibly lay hold of the slightest pretext. I retain
my opinion that such a step will never be hazarded on a slight
pretext, and, consequently, that it will never be hazarded at
all. >
I am much obliged by your kind offer to procure me articles
which I may want toward housekeeping, as well as Books. As to
the latter, I shall from time to time trouble you, particularly for
what is wanting to my set of the Encyclopedic Methodique, as

1796. LETTERS. 93
soon as I get to Virginia, and can ascertain the volumes which
I have not. As to the former, I am obliged to consult a certain
degree of economy, and have, in everything of that sort, a ref
erence to the order of things in Virginia. I recollect nothing
at present that I can particularize, unless it be a clock for the
chimney-piece, and a pair of glasses, not exceeding 100 dollars,
in which the size would be preferred to the ornamental expense.
The china is not yet arrived, but I look for it by every vessel
that escapes the British depredations. Whatever articles you
may be good enough to provide for me after the receipt of this, I
wish you to address to Virginia, not to this place, unless it may
be such as will be wanted particularly here in the course of
next winter, which I mean to 1569, 293, 1525. You will find
that the elections in Boston are running in favor of republican
ism. This will have a good effect. I have much always to say
to you when I take up my pen, but am often obliged to hurry
to a close sooner than I could wish. I am the less concerned
at it now, as the bearer, Mr. Fulton, will be able to give you a
thousand details which I omit. I have never been more occu
pied with the drudgeries of my station than at this moment. I
began this on the 7th and conclude it on the 19th April, 1796.
Always and affectionately adieu to yourself and Mrs. Mon
roe, to whom I offer my sincerest and best wishes, along with
those of Mrs. M.
I send, herewith, three letters from Mr. Jefferson, 1 from Mr.
Jones, and 1 from Mr. Langdon.
I send, also, three numbers of the Debates on the Treaty, and.
will, from time to time, add the rest as they come out. I also
send a large collection of Newspapers, which contain most of
the speeches not yet published in the pamphlet form. These
papers will possess you of the whole history of Congressional
proceedings for some time past.

94 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Apr1 11, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Yours of the 27th has been duly received. You
already know that the call for papers was refused, and reasons
assigned more extraordinary a great deal than the refusal.
This measure of the Executive produced two propositions, as
serting the right of the House to judge of the expediency of
Treaties stipulating on Legislative subjects, and declaring that
it was not requisite in a call for papers to express the use to be
made of them. It was expected that a long and obstinate dis
cussion would have attended these defensive measures. Under
that idea, I entered into a free but respectful review of the fal
lacy of the reasons contained in the message, and the day being
nearly spent, the Com9 rose and an adjournment succeeded.
The next morning, instead of a reply, the question was called
for, and taken without a word of argument on the subject. The
two resolutions were carried by 57 against 35; and six mem
bers, who, not foreseeing the early call for the question, had
not taken their seats, soon appeared, and desired to have their
names added to the majority. This was not permitted by the
rules of the House; but the case is explained in the newspapers.
To-day is fixed for taking up the Treaties.
We shall separate the Spanish and other Treaties from the
British, and proceed to make the necessary provisions. With
respect to the latter, it seems at present probable that it
will be hung up on a recital of the vices of the Treaty itself,
the want of information, and the perseverance in seizing our
ships and seamen, which ought to have the same influence on
our decision, whether viewed as consistent with or an infrac
tion of the Treaty. An Embargo on Indian Corn is proposed,
but has not been discussed. Nothing very material from abroad.
Bache is publishing the Treaty Debates in no8, for an 8° Vol.
I inclose the 1st no., under address to Mr. Carr.

1796. LETTERS. 95
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, April 18, 1796.
Dear Sir, — My last requested your orders relating to Dohr-
man's payment to me for Mazzei, and I impatiently wait for
them. Resolutions have passed for carrying into effect the Spanish,
Indian, and Algerine Treaties. The British is now depending.
I inclose the proposition in which the opponents of it will unite.
According to present calculation, this proposition will be car
ried by nearly the same majority as prevailed in the vote assert
ing the rights of the House on the subject of Treaties. The de
bate is but just commenced. Those who at first were for a silent
question will probably now spin out time, for the purpose of
calling in the mercantile interference in its behalf. You will
see the expedient on foot in this City. The petition of the mer
chants, &c, will be signed by 7 or 800, as is said. An adverse
petition will be signed by 3 or 4 times that number. In N. Y.
and Boston, it is hoped, the counter petitioners will equally
preponderate. Baltimore, which was at first most opposed to
the Treaty, is become most generally reconciled to the execu
tion. The hope of indemnification for past losses, and the fears
for their floating speculations, which have been arranged on the
idea that the Treaty would go into effect, bear down with that
class all attention to the general and permanent good of the
Country, and, perhaps, their own real and comprehensive inter
est. The Country is also under an operation for obtaining
petitioners for the Treaty. The Western Counties have yielded
a number; being dexterously alarmed for the Spanish Treaty, as
involved in the fate of the British. I expected to have sent you
my observations on the President's message, which the Printer
told me should certainly be out this morning. He thought Mr.
Iredell's charge and the echo of the G. Jury entitled to priority.

96 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO JAMES MONROE.
Philadelphia, April 18, 1796.
Dear Sir, — A letter, chiefly on private subjects, written about
ten days ago, will accompany this, which I have postponed to
the last moment of the opportunity by Mr. Fulton. This will
relate chiefly to the British Treaty and to subjects connected
with it. For a general view of the proceedings of Congress
I refer you to the Newspapers, &c, which Mr. Fulton will re
ceive for you from myself, and other friends. You will find
that the British Treaty was, after long delay, laid before the
House. It gave rise to a motion calling for the instructions
to the Envoy, his correspondences, and other documents rela
ting to the Treaty. This unqualified form being objected to,
the motion was varied, (by the mover, Mr. Livingston,) so as to
except from the papers called for such of them as might relate to
existing negociations. In order to render the motion perfectly
unobjectionable, and the more justifiable to the public in case
of a refusal of the papers, I moved to enlarge the exception to
all such papers as the President might deem it inconsistent with
the interest of the United States at this time to disclose. This
accommodating amendment was opposed by the whole Treaty
party, who, being joined by the warmer men on the other side,
succeeded in rejecting it. The principal motion was then dis
cussed at full length, and was made to turn, in the debates, prin
cipally on the constitutional power of the House in relation to
Treaties. The debates will shew you the ground taken on both
sides. They were spun out to a duration of several weeks.
When the question was at length taken, the majority for the
call was very decided, not less than twenty. Every eye within
and without doors was then turned to the President. The pre
vailing belief was, that he would send a part, if not the whole,
of the papers applied for. If he thought any part improper to
be disclosed, or if he wished to assert his prerogative without
coming to a rupture with the House, it was seen to be easy for
him to avoid that extremity by that expedient. You will find
by his Message, in answer, that he not only ran into the extreme

1796. LETTERS. 97
of an absolute refusal, but assigned reasons worse than the re
fusal itself. I have no doubt that the advice, and even the Mes
sage itself, were contrived in New York, where it was seen that
if the rising force of the republicans was not crushed, it must
speedily crush the British party, and that the only hope of suc
cess lay in favoring an open rupture with the President. It is
to be lamented that he so easily lent himself to the stratagem.
It was expected that the Message would have produced long
and animated discussion. In that expectation I entered into a
full comment on it, and in support, at the same time, of the two
Resolutions asserting the rights of the House, which you will
find in the Newspapers. No reply, however, was given to me,
and the question on the Resolutions was taken without anything
more on the subject. They were carried by about 60 against
35. The next step was to go into a committee of the whole on
all the Treaties. An attempt to lump them all, or, at least, the
British and Spanish, was made, but readily defeated. The Span
ish, Algerine, and Indian Treaties, were then decided on sepa
rately, and bills are ordered for carrying them into effect. The
House is now engaged on the British Treaty. This is the third
day of its discussion. I refer to the motion of Mr. Maclay for
the form in which it is proposed to get rid of the Treaty. If
no defections take place, the motion will succeed by a majority
of about twenty. But vast exertions are on foot without and
within doors. You will observe the memorial proposed by the
Mercantile interest of this place. A counter one, it is said, will
be circulated, and will be signed by the greater number. It is
probable the example on both sides will be followed in the other
large Towns. The Country, also, is stirred up to join in petitions
for carrying the Treaty into effect. The four insurgent Coun
ties of this State have been alarmed, by a dexterous combination
of the Spanish and British Treaties, into petitions in favor of
both. This has been the manoeuvre of Ross, the Senator. What
the result of the whole is to be, is among the arcana of time. I
trust, without being sure, that the House will be firm. If so,
the public mind will rally under their auspices. If not, you can
vol. 11. 7

98 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
appreciate the consequences, which will be mischievous, but I
hope temporary.
April 19. — Another day has passed in discussing the British
Treaty. The event will probably be procrastinated for the sake
of the experiment making out of doors. I have put off closing
this till the last moment, and, therefore, am obliged, with the
truest cordialities, in which my partner joins, to Mrs. Monroe
and yourself, to bid you Adieu.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 23, 1796.
Deaf, Sir, — I inclose another number of the Debates on the
Treaty. The subject is still going on in the House, as well as
the press. The majority has melted, by changes and absence,
to 8 or 9 votes. Whether these will continue firm is more than
I can decide. Every possible exertion is made, as usual, on the
other side. A sort of appeal has been made to the people, with
an expectation that the mercantile force would triumph over
the popular sentiment. In this city, the majority of petitioners
has appeared against the mercantile party. We do not know
the event of the experiment in N. York. Petitions on both
sides are running thro' the adjoining States of Delaware and N.
Jersey. Among other extraordinary manoeuvres, the Insurance
Companies, here and in N. York, stopped business, in order to
reduce prices and alarm the public. The Banks have been pow
erfully felt in the progress of the petitions in the Cities for the
Treaty. Scarce a merchant or Trader but what depend on dis
counts, and at this moment there is a general pinch for money.
Under such circumstances, a Bank Director, soliciting subscrip
tions, is like a highwayman with a pistol, demanding the purse.
We hope the question will be taken to-morrow. But if carried
against the Treaty, the game will be played over again in other
forms. The Senate will either send it down by itself, or coupled
with the Spanish Treaty, or both. Nothing of importance from
Europe.

1796. LETTERS.

99

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, May 1st, 1796.
Dear Sir, — I have your favour of the 17 Apr1, covering two
Extracts — one from your notes, the other from mine. The lat
ter corresponds with the recollection which myself and other
members had expressed, and the former with that of Majr But
ler, and with the Journals of the Senate. The report of the
Committee to which you refer cannot be found, tho' Mr. B. says
he knows one was made. This enquiry has been set on foot
without your name.
The Treaty question was brought to a vote on Friday in
Com9 of the whole. Owing to the absence {certainly casual and
momentary) of one member, and the illness of another, the Com
mittee were divided, 49 and 49. The Chairman (Muhlenberg)
decided in the affirmative, saying that in the House it would be
subject to modification, which he wished. In the House yester
day an enemy of the Treaty moved a preamble, reciting " that
altho' the Treaty was highly objectionable, yet considering all
circumstances, particularly the duration for two years, &c, and
confiding in the efficacy of measures that might be taken for
stopping the spoliations and impressments, &c." For this in
gredient, which you will perceive the scope of, all who meant
to persevere against the Treaty, with those who only yielded
for the reasons expressed in it, ought to have united in voting,
as making the pill a bitter one to the Treaty party, as well as
less poisonous to the public interest. A few wrongheads, how
ever, thought fit to separate, whereby the motion was lost by
one vote. The main question was then carried in favour of the
Treaty, by 50 against 48. This revolution was foreseen, and
might have been mitigated, tho' not prevented, if sooner pro
vided for. But some, who were the first to give way to the cri
sis under its actual pressure, were not averse to prepare for it.
The progress of this business throughout has been to me the
most worrying and vexatious that I ever encountered; and the
more so, as the causes lay in the unsteadiness, the follies, the
perverseness, and the defections among our friends, more than

100 WORKS CF MADISON. 1796.
in the strength, or dexterity, or malice of our opponents. It is
impossible for me to detail these causes to you now. My con
solation under them is in the effect they have in riveting my
future purposes. Had the preamble, condemning the Treaty on
its merits, exercising the discretionary power of the House, and
requiring from the Ex. a stoppage of the spoliations, &c, been
agreed to, I have reason to believe the Treaty party would
have felt it a complete defeat. You will be informed by the
newspapers of the means practised for stirring up petitions,
&c, in favor of the Treaty. The plan was laid in this City,
and circulated by a correspondence thro' the towns every where.
In the mean time, the Banks, the British merchants, the Insu
rance Comp8, were at work in influencing individuals, beating
down the prices of produce, and sounding the tocsin of foreign
war and domestic convulsions. The success has been such as
you would suppose. In sevoral neighbouring districts, the peo
ple have been so deluded as to constrain their Representatives
to renounce their opposition to the Treaty. An appeal to the
people on any pending measure can never be more than an ap
peal to those in the neighbourhood of the Government, and to
the Banks, the merchants, and the dependents and expectants
of the Government at a distance.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. May 9th, 1796.
Dear Sir, — We have had a calm ever since the decision on
the Treaty. Petitions, however, continue to arrive, chiefly in
favor of the Treaty. The N. England States have been ready
to rise in mass against the H. of Rep8. Such have been the in
fluence and exertions of Aristocracy, Anglicism, and Mercan
tilism, in that quarter, that Republicanism is perfectly overbal
anced, even in the town of Boston. I hope it will prove but a
transitory calamity, and that the discovery of the delusion will
ultimately work a salutary effect. The people have been every
where made to believe that the object of the H. of Rep8 in re-

1796. LETTERS. 101
sisting the Treaty was war; and have thence listened to the
summons "to follow where Washington leads." Nothing late
from abroad. We expect to adjourn about the 20th or 25th
Inst.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, May 14, 1796.
Dear Sir, — My last, with some pamphlets and newspapers,
was put into the care of Mr. Fulton, who, I had hoped, was
half across the Atlantic, when he reappeared here in conse
quence of shipwreck. I avail myself of his second departure
to add a little more to the printed budget, as well as to the
narrative in my letter. At the date of it the British Treaty
was in full discussion, and the event hanging in uncertainty.
It soon appeared that the majority was not entirely com
posed of materials firm enough for the crisis. It daily melted
down till the day of the question, when Muhlenberg, in
the chair of the committee, gave very unexpectedly a casting
vote in the affirmative, observing that he did so with a view to
some modification in the House. It is to be remarked that
when the vote was taken, Patton was ill, and Varnum casually
not present; both of them firm against the Treaty. In the
House, a proposition was made by Mr. Dearborn, reciting as a
preamble, that although the Treaty was objectionable and
injurious, yet, considering all circumstances, and particularly
that. the last eighteen articles will be of short duration, and con
fiding in the efficacy of measures that may be taken for bring
ing about a discontinuance of spoliations and impressments,
Resolved, &c. This was lost by a single vote only; seven or
eight of the stiffest anti-treaty men taking a wrong-headed
course. Such a preamble would have been a bitter ingredient,
though it would have transferred a few votes. On the main
question there was a majority of three, 51 and 48, for carrying
the Treaty into effect. Many of the means by which this
majority was brought about will occur to you. But it is to be

102 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
ascribed principally to an appeal to petitions under the mercan
tile influence, and the alarm of war. A circular letter from
the Merchants of Philadelphia gave the signal to all other
towns. The people were everywhere called on to chuse be
tween peace and war, and to side with the Treaty if they pre
ferred the former. This stratagem produced in many places a
fever, and in New England a delirium, for the Treaty, which
soon covered the table with petitions. The counter petitions,
though powerful from Philadelphia, and respectable from some
other quarters, did not keep pace. Indeed, there was not time
for distant parts, where the Treaty was odious, to express their
sentiments before the occurrence was over. Besides the alarm
of war in the smaller States, a great excitement was produced
in them by the appeal of the President, in his message, to their
particular interest in the powers of the Senate. What the
effect of this whole business will be on the public mind cannot
yet be traced with certainty. For the moment, at least, it
presses hard on the republican interest. It probably would
have been better if the great majority existing at one moment
had been taken advantage of for a strong preface in the tone
of Dearborn, and if the Treaty party had then carried their
object with the consequences on their own heads. The final
turn of the majority ought at least to have been sooner pre
pared for. This was, in fact, contemplated. But before some
were ripe for the arrangement, others were rotten. As soon
as the subject was finished, an explanatory article, signed by
Bond & Pickering, marked with sundry curious features, was
laid before the Senate, and has been ratified. The avowed
object is to declare that the Indian Treaty, which requires a
special licence to Traders residing at the Indian Towns, shall
not affect the British privileges under the third article. This,
when known by the public, will justify an important ground of
opposition to the Treaty. Adet seems to have conducted him
self with great circumspection throughout the crisis here, nor
do I know what, or whether anything, escapes him since the
the conclusion of it. It will be deeply interesting to know how
France will take it all. I hope no rash councils will prevail

1796. LETTERS. 103
with her. You can foresee the consequences of such here.
Whilst the war lasts, England will command most attention,
because she can do this country most harm. In peace, France
will command most attention, because she can do it most good.
This view of the subject may, perhaps, be worth your develop
ment on fit occasions. Among the bills just passed the House
of .Representatives is one prohibiting the sale of prizes in our
ports. It did not pass without doubts and opposition. The
real object with most was to protect Spanish and Dutch vessels
as much as possible, on the supposition that the British Treaty
protected hers in this respect against all nations. It is now
generally understood that the President will retire. Jefferson
is the object on one side; Adams, apparently, on the other.
The secondary object still unsettled. The general result is
rendered doubtful by the probable complexion of the New
York Legislature, and by a late law of Pennsylvania for
chusing Electors by a general ticket. If the decision should
result to the House of Representatives, it will be safe. I have
just received yours of Nov. 8th; your last was of January 20.
The papers will inform you that Fitzsimmons and Innes are the
American Commissioners for the Debts, and Pinkney of Mary
land and Gore of Massachusetts for the spoliations. The
tediousness of the cypher obliges me to close in haste. I will
write again before I leave this, which, I hope, will be in about
ten days, there being now a general impatience to adjourn.
Our best respects and regards to Mrs. Monroe and yourself.
Adieu. Yrs aff"7,
J. M., Jr.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Philadelphia, May 22, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Congress are hurrying through the remnant of
business before them, and will probably adjourn about Satur
day next. Petitions in favour of the Treaty still come in from
distant places. The name of the President and the alarm of

104 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.
war have had a greater effect than were apprehended on one
side, or expected on the other. A crisis, which ought to have
been so arranged as to fortify the Republican cause, has left it
in a very crippled condition; from which its recovery will be the
more difficult, as the elections in N. York, Massachusetts, and
other States, where the prospects were favorable, have taken
a wrong turn under the impressions of the moment. Nothing
but auspicious contingencies abroad or at home can regain the
lost ground. Peace in Europe would have a most salutary in
fluence, and accounts just received from France revive in some
degree the hope of it with the Emperor, which will hasten, of
course, a peace with England. On the other hand, a scene
rather gloomy is presented by a letter I have just received from
Col. Monroe. It is dated Feb7 27. The following extracts
form the substance of it. "About a fortnight past, I was in
formed by the Minister of Foreign affairs that the Government
had at length resolved how to act with us in respect to our
treaty with England; that they considered it as having vio
lated, or rather annulled, our treaty of alliance with them, and
taken part with the coalesced powers; that they had rather
have an open enemy than a perfidious friend; that it was re
solved to send an envoy extraordinary to the U. S., to discuss
this business with us, and whose powers would expire with the
execution of the trust. I was astonished with the communica
tion, and alarmed with its probable consequences. I told him
it might probably lead to war, and thereby separate us, which
was what our enemies wished; that it hazarded much, and with
out a probable gain; that from the moment a person of that
character arrive'd, their friends would seem to act under his
banner, and which circumstance would injure their character
and lessen their efforts; in truth, I did every thing in my power
to prevent this measure, and in which I am now told by the
minister that I have succeeded, the Directors having resolved
to continue the ordinary course of representation only. But
thro' this I hear strong sentiments will be conveyed. The
whole of this is made known to the Executive by me."
" The forced loan was less productive than was expected, and

1796. LETTERS. 105
the embarrassment in the finance extreme. Some think another
movement at hand, but I see no evidence of it at present. In
all calculations on this subject, it ought to be recollected that
the Executive are sound, and, having the Government in their
hands, are strong."
"There are strong symptoms of an actual rupture between us
and this country. The minister of the Government preferred
to have us as open enemies rather than perfidious friends. Other
proofs occur to shew that this sentiment has gone deep in their
Councils." The " Minerve," of N. York, lately announced, with an affected
emphasis, a letter from Paris to N. York, intimating that influ
ential persons in the U. S. were urging measures on France
which might force this Country to chuse war against England
as the only alternative for war against France. It is probable
that categorical steps- on the part of France towards us are an
ticipated, as the consequence of what has been effected by the
British party here, and that much artifice will be practised by
it to charge them in some unpopular form on its Republican
opponents. Before I leave this I shall make up a parcel of pamphlets,
&cv for you, to be forwarded to Richmond. The inclosed num
ber of the Debates is a continuation, which has been regular.
I hope the preceding numbers have all arrived safe.
King is appointed Minister to London, and Humphreys to
Madrid, Pinckney and Short retiring. The vacancy at Lisbon
not yet filled.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. May 30th, 1796.
Congress will adjourn the day after to-morrow. News as
late as April 8 from London; peace likely to take place be
tween France and England; provisions falling much in price,
both in F. and G. B. The moneyed distresses reviving in the
latter, and great alarms for a terrible shock to the Banking and
Mercantile Houses.

106 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO GEORGE WASHINGTON.
J. Madison presents his respectful compliments to the Presi
dent, and returns the Treatise on Small Canals, &c, with his
acknowledgements for the perusal of it. He is not enough con
versant with such subjects to decide on the merits of the vari
ous plans and machinery recommended by the Author. In gen
eral, his principles appear to be both effective and practicable;
but the question of their utility must be decided by a very ac
curate comparison of expense and saving, which cannot easily
be made without partial experiments, at least; and which must
vary, also, in different Countries and different situations of
Society. The Author, however, is certainly entitled to much
praise for his ingenuity and laudable zeal for improvement; and
has probably, by his work, really contributed to it, either imme
diately or by the use that may be made of his ideas by others.
Philadelphia, Dec' 1, 1796.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec. 5, 1796.
Dear Sir, — It i3 not possible yet to calculate with any de
gree of certainty whether you are to be left by the Electors to
enjoy the repose to which you are so much attached, or are to
be summoned to the arduous trust which depends on their allot
ment. It is not improbable that Pinckney will step in between the
two who have been treated as the principals in the question. It
is even suspected that this turn has been secretly meditated from
the beginning, in a quarter where the hading zeal for Adams
has been affected. This Jockeyship is accounted for by the
enmity of Adams to Banks and funding systems, which is now
become public, and by an apprehension that he is too headstrong
to be a fit puppet for the intriguers behind the skreen. It is to
be hoped that P. may equally disappoint those who expect to
make that use of him, if the appointment should in reality light
on him. We do not, however, absolutely despair that a choice

1796. LETTERS. 107
better than either may still be made; and there is always the
chance of a devolution of the business on the H. of Reps, which
will, I believe, decide it as it ought to be decided.
Adet's note, which you will have seen, is working all the evil
with which it is pregnant. Those who rejoice at its indiscre
tions, and are taking advantage of them, have the impudence
to pretend that [it] is an electioneering manoeuvre, and that the
French Gov' have been led to it by the opponents of the British
Treaty. Unless the unhappy effect of it here, and cause of it in
France, be speedily obviated by wise councils and healing meas
ures, the crisis will unquestionably be perverted into a perpetual
alienation of the two Countries by the secret enemies of both.
The immediate consequences of such an event may be distress
ing; but the permanent ones to the commercial and other great
interests of this country form a long and melancholy catalogue.
We know nothing of the policy meditated by the Executive on
this occasion. The speech will probably furnish some explana
tion of it.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. December 10th, 1796.
Dear Sir, — Exitus in dubio is still the motto to the election.
You must reconcile yourself to the secondary, as well as the pri
mary station, if that should be your lot. The prevailing idea
is that Pinckney will have the greatest number of votes, and I
think that Adams will be most likely to stand next. There are
other calculations, however, less favourable to both. The an
swer to the President's speech is in the hands of Ames, Sit-
greaves, Smith of Carolina, Baldwin, and myself. The form is
not yet settled. There is a hope that it may be got into a form
that will go down, without altercation or division in the House.
Yours sincerely.

108 WORKS OF MADISON. 1796.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec. 19, 1796.
Dear Sir, — The returns from N. Hampshire, Vermont, S.
Carolina, and Georgia, are still to come in, and leave the event
of the election in some remaining uncertainty. It is but barely
possible that Adams may fail of the highest number. It is
highly probable, tho'-' not absolutely certain, that Pinckney will
be third only on the list. You must prepare yourself, therefore,
to be summoned to the place Mr. Adams now fills. I am aware
of the objections arising from the inadequateness of the import
ance of the place to the sacrifices you would be willing to make
to a greater prospect of fulfilling the patriotic wishes of your
friends, and from the irksomeness of being at the head of a
body whose sentiments are at present so little in unison with
your own. But it is expected, that as you had made up your
mind to obey the call of your country, you will let it decide on
the particular place where your services are to be rendered. It
may even be said, that as you submitted to the election know
ing the contingency involved in it, you are bound to abide by
the event, whatever it may be. On the whole, it seems essential
that you should not refuse the station which is likely to be your
lot. There is reason to believe, also, that your neighbourhood
to Adams may have a valuable effect on his councils, particu
larly in relation to our external system. You know that his
feelings will not enslave him to the example of his predecessor.
It is certain that his censures of our paper system, and the in
trigues at New York for setting Pinckney above him, have fixed
an enmity with the British faction. Nor should it pass for
nothing, that the true interest of New England particularly re
quires reconciliation with France as the road to her commerce;
add to the whole, that he is said to speak of you now in friendly
terms, and will no doubt be soothed by your acceptance of a
place subordinate to him. It must be confessed, however, that
all these calculations are qualified by his political principles
and prejudices. But they add weight to the1 obligation, from
which you must not withdraw yourself.

179C. LETTERS. 109
You will see in the answer to the President's speech much
room for criticism. You must, for the present, be content to
know that it resulted from a choice of evils. His reply to the
foreign paragraph indicates a good effect on his mind. Indeed,
he cannot but wish to avoid entailing a war on his successor.
The danger lies in the fetters he has put on himself, and in the
irritation and distrust of the French Government.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Dec' 25, 1796.
Dear Sir, — I cannot yet entirely remove the uncertainty in
which my last left the election. Unless the Vermont election,
of which little has, of late, been said, should contain some fatal
vice in it, Mr. Adams may be considered as the President elect.
Nothing can deprive him of it but a general run of the votes in
Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky, in favour of Mr. Pinckney,
which is altogether contrary to the best information. It is not
even probable that Mr. P. will be the second on the list; the
secondary votes of N. Hampshire being even said to have been
thrown away on Ellsworth; and a greater number consequently
required from the States above mentioned than will be likely to
fall to his lot. We have nothing new from Europe. The pros
pect and projects in our foreign Department are under a veil,
not a corner of which I have been able to lift. I fear the dis
trust with which the French Government view the Executive
here, and the fetters which the President has suffered himself to
put on, will be obstacles to the reconciliation which he cannot
fail to desire. It is whispered, also, that the Spanish minister
has intimated the probable dissatisfaction of his Court at the
Explanatory article of the British Treaty. Nor can it be doubted,
from the nature of the alliance between that and France, that
a common cause will be made in all the steps taken by the latter
with respect to this Country. In the mean time, the British
party are busy in their calumnies for turning the blame of the
present crisis from themselves, on the pretended instigations of

HO WORKS OF MADISON. 1797.
France, by Americans at Paris; and some of them are already
bold enough to talk of an alliance with England, as the resource
in case of an actual rupture with France. The new President,
whoever he will be, will have much in his power; and it is im
portant to make as many circumstances as possible conspire to
lead him to a right use of it. There never was greater distress
than at this moment in the monied world. Failures and frauds
occur daily; and are so much connected with Banks, that these
Institutions are evidently losing ground in the public opinion.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Jan? 8, 1797.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favour of the 17th ult. The
election is not likely to terminate in the equilibrium of votes,
for which the Constitution has not provided. If the Vermont
votes should be valid, as is now generally supposed, Mr. Adams
will have 71 and you 68, Pinckney being in the rear of both. It
is to be hoped that the nicety, and, in truth, the unpropitious
casualty of the choice of Mr. A., will lessen the evil of such an
ostensible protest by this Country against Republicanism. Your
acceptance of a share in the administration will not fail to aid
this tendency. It is suggested to me that it will be necessary
for you to be here before the adjournment of Congress, in order
to be qualified. I have not examined the Constitution and the
law on this subject. You will have the means of doing both,
and of deciding on the question. Altho' I am sensible of the
inconveniency of such a trip at this season of the year, yet I see
so many advantages likely to result from it, that I cannot help
wishing it may be found necessary. If you cannot qualify else
where, you must come, of course, that the danger of an interreg
num may be provided against. The expense would be no ob
jection; and is, besides, balanced by the effect of the qualifica
tion in settling the date of the compensation.
The special communication from the President on our affairs
with France is not yet made. The gloom over them is in no

-797. LETTERS. HI
respect diminished. Not a word from Monroe, or any other
quarter, relating to his recall, or enabling us to judge on the
question whether Pinckney will be received. We wait with
anxiety for the light that will probably be thrown on the first
point by the expected communication.
The inclosed paper will give you the foreign news as it has
first made its appearance here. A comparison of paragraphs
renders the Italian part of it unfavourable to the French very
improbable. There may, nevertheless, be some foundation for
it. The French operations against our trade seem to be better
authenticated, as well as the renewal of the Algerine warfare.
The abortive result of Lord Malmesbury's errand is also highly
probable. I just understand that Spain declared war against
G. Britain on the 8th of October.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Jan? 15, 1797.
Dear Sir, — The last mail brought me your favour of Jan? 1,
inclosing an unsealed one for Mr. A., and submitting to my dis
cretion the eligibility of delivering it. In exercising this deli
cate trust I have felt no small anxiety, arising by no means,
however, from an apprehension that a free exercise of it could
be in collision with your real purpose, but from a want of con
fidence in myself, and the importance of a wrong judgment in
the case. After the best consideration I have been able to be
stow, I have been led to suspend the delivery of the letter, till
you should have an opportunity of deciding on the sufficiency
or insufficiency of the following reasons: 1. It is certain that
Mr. Adams, on his coming to this place, expressed to different
persons a respectful cordiality towards you, and manifested a
sensibility to the candid manner in which your friends had, in
general, conducted the opposition to him. And it is equally
known that your sentiments towards him personally have found
their way to him in the most conciliating form. This being
the state of things between you, it deserves to be considered

112 WORKS OF MADISON. 1797.
whether the idea of bettering it is not outweighed by the possi
bility of changing it for the worse. 2. There is, perhaps, a
general air on the letter which betrays the difficulty of your>
situation in writing it, and it is uncertain what the impression
might be resulting from this appearance. 3. It is certain that
Mr. A. is fully apprized of the trick aimed at by his pseudo
friends of N. Y., and there may be danger of his suspecting in
mementos on that subject a wish to make his resentment an
instrument for revenging that of others. A hint of this kind
was some time ago dropped by a judicious and sound man, who
lives under the same roof, with a wish that even the newspapers
might be silent on that point. 4. May not what he said, " of
the sublime delights of riding in the storm, &c," be miscon
strued into a reflection on those who have no distaste to the
helm at the present crisis? You know the temper of Mr. A.
better than I do, but I have always conceived it to be rather a
ticklish one. 5. The tenderness due to the zealous and active
promoters of your election makes it doubtful whether their
anxiety and exertions ought to be depreciated by anything im
plying the unreasonableness of them. I know that some indi
viduals who have deeply committed themselves, and probably
incurred the political enmity at least of the P. elect, are already
sore on this head. 6. Considering the probability that Mr. A.'s
course of administration may force an opposition to it from the
Republican quarter, and the general uncertainty of the posture '
which our affairs may take, there may be real embarrassments
from giving written possession to him of the degree of compli
ment and confidence which your personal delicacy and friend
ship have suggested.
I have ventured to make these observations because I am sure
you will equally appreciate the motive and the matter of them;
and because I do not view them as inconsistent with the duty
and policy of cultivating Mr. A.'s favorable dispositions, and
giving a fair start to his Executive career. As you have no
doubt retained a copy of the letter, I do not send it back as you
request. It occurs, however, that if the subject should not be
changed in your view of it by the reasons which influence mine,

1797. LETTERS. H3
and the delivery of the letter be accordingly judged expedient,
it may not be amiss to alter the date of it, either by writing
the whole over again, or authorizing me to correct that part
of it.
The special communication is still unmade. It is, I am told,
to be extremely voluminous. I hope, under the sanction of the
P.'s reply to our address, that it will be calculated rather to
heal than irritate the wounded friendship of the two Countries.
Yet I cannot look around at the men who counsel him, or look
back at the snares into which he has hitherto been drawn, with
out great apprehensions on this subject. Nothing from France,
subsequent to the arrival of Pinckney. The negociations for
peace, you will see, are suspended. The accession of Spain to
the war enforces the probability that its calamities are not
likely yet to be terminated. The late news from the Rhine and
from Italy are, on the whole, favorable to the French. The
last battle was on the 27th Oct., in the Hunspruck, and ended
in a victory on their side. The H. of Reps are on direct taxes,
which seem to be so much nauseated and feared by those who
have created both the necessity and odium of them, that the
project will miscarry. Hamilton, you will recollect, assured
the farmers that all the purposes of the Government could be
answered without resorting to lands, houses, or stock on farms.
This deceptive statement, with other devices of his administra
tion, is rising up in judgment against him, and will very proba
bly soon blast the prospects which his ambition and intrigues
have contemplated. It is certain that he has lost ground in
New York of late, and his treachery to Adams will open the
eyes of New England.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Jany 22, 1797.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of Jany 8th. You will
find by the papers that the communication on French affairs has
been at length made. It being ordered to be printed without
VOL. II. 8

H4 WORKS OF MADISON. 1797,
being read, I have no direct knowledge of its character. Some
of the Senate, where it haa been read in part, represent it as
well fitted to convert into an incurable gangrene the wound
which the friendship between the two Republics has suffered.
Adding this, on our side, to the spirit manifested in the language
and proceedings on the other, an awful scene appears to be open
ing upon us. The only chance to escape it lies in the President
elect. You know the degree in which I appreciate it. I am
extremely apprehensive that he may have been drawn into a
sanction to this last step of the Executive by a complimentary
initiation into the business which is soon to devolve on him.
This is, however, apprehension merely, no circumstance being
known from which the fact can be inferred. We hear nothing
from Monroe or from Pinckney. It has got in the newspapers
that an Envoy Extraord7 was to go to France, and that I was
to be the person. I have no reason to suppose a shadow of truth
in the former part of the story, and the latter is pure fiction.
Doc*. Logan has put into my hands a copy of his agricultural
experiments for you, which I will forward. A vote has passed
in favour of a direct tax. The event is, notwithstanding, doubt
ful. The Eastern members, after creating the necessity for it,
increasing the odium of it, and reproaching their brethren with
backwardness in supporting the Government, are now sneaking
out of the difficulty, and endeavouring, whilst they get what they
wish, to enjoy the popularity of having opposed it.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Jany 29, 1797.
Dear Sir, — Yours, covering an unsealed letter to Mr. Taze
well, came duly to hand, and will be turned to the use you wish.
As you take the Philadelphia Gazette, in which the belligerent
answer to Adet's note has been printed in toto, I refer to that
for the posture and prospect of things with France. The Brit
ish party, since this overt patronage of their cause, no longer
wear the mask. A war with France, and an alliance with

1797. LETTERS. H5
Great Britain, enter both into print and conversation; and no
doubt can be entertained that a push will be made to screw up
the President to that point before he quits the office. The
strides latterly made with so much inconsistency, as well as
weakness, in that direction, prepare us for receiving every fur
ther step without surprise. No further discovery has been
made of the mind of the President elect. I cannot prevail on
myself to augur much that is consoling from him. Nothing
from abroad, nor more at home than you will gather from the
newspapers.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Feb? 5, 1797.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of , giving notice that
we shall have the pleasure of seeing you here soon, but that let-
ters.written before the 7th would arrive before you leave home.
Nothing occurs to alleviate the crisis in our external affairs.
The French continue to prey on our trade. The British, too,
have not desisted. There are accounts that both of them are
taking our East Indiamen. This is an alarming symptom, there
being 60 or 70 vessels from different parts of the U. S. engaged
in that trade. Pickering's corrosive letter has not yet been
fully printed, so as to come before the H. of Reps. It is ex
tremely difficult to decide on the best course to be taken. Silence
may be construed into approbation. On the other hand, it is
not likely that any opportunity will be given for negativing an
approving resolution. And it is, at least, doubtful whether a
vote of positive disapprobation in any form whatever could be
safely risked in the House, or, if passed, whether the public
opinion would not be brought to side with the Executive against
it. It is, moreover, extremely difficult to shape any measure on
the occasion so as to escape the charge either of censuring or
advising without a proper warrant, from the nature of our con
stitutional relation to the Executive. Nor is it unworthy of
consideration that there are formidable steps not yet taken by

116 WORKS OF MADISON. 1797.
the Pres* which may be taken before the moment of his exit,
which, if taken, might be efficacious, and which his successor,
without his sanction, would not dare to take.
A bill for collecting the proposed taxes on land, &c, is before
the Committee of Ways and Means. The difficulties of the sub
ject, the shortness of the time, and the aversion of the Eastern
people, render it uncertain whether it will pass or not at the
present Session. I suspect the policy of the Treasury Depart
ment is, to separate the preparatory arrangements from the
actual collection of the tax, and to provide for the former only
at present; an expedient not unlikely to succeed, as it will
smooth the way for the Eastern members. Some, I find, who
do not disapprove of the plan of direct taxes, are unwilling to
fortify the disposition to embroil us with France, by enlarging,
at the present juncture, our system of revenue.
I reserve for a verbal communication the indications by
which we judge of the prospect from the accession of Mr. A. to
the helm. They are not, I conceive, very flattering.
I just learn that a British packet brings London accounts to
Dec' 7. Nothing is as yet given out but that the negociations
at Paris have ended in abortion. It is probable that what is
not given out is not more favorable to G. B. I do not believe
that any intelligence has been received from Monroe or Pinck
ney subsequent to the arrival of the latter. It is said that the
Spaniards are fortifying at the Chickasaw Bluffs. If this be
the case, it strengthens the apprehension that they regard the
British Treaty, with the explanatory article, as superseding the
obligation or policy of their Treaty with us.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Philadelphia, Feb? 11, 1797.
Dear Sir, — After several little turns in the mode of conveying
you notice of your election, recurrence was had to the precedent
of leaving the matter to the Senate, where, on the casting vote
of Mr. Adams, the notification was referred to the President of

1797. LETTERS. H7
the U. States, in preference to the Pres. of the Senate. You
will see in the papers the state of the votes, and the manner of
counting and proclaiming them. You will see, also, the inti
mation given by Mr. A. of the arrangement he had made for
taking the oath of office. I understand he has given another
intimation which excites some curiosity, and gives rise to sev
eral reflections, which will occur to you; it is, that he means to
take the advice of the Senate, on his coming into office, whether
the offices held during pleasure are, or are not, vacated by the
political demise of his predecessor. This is the substance. I
do not aim at or know the terms of the question, of which pre
vious notice is there given, that the members of the Senate may
the better make up their opinions. What room is there for
such a question at all ? Must it not have been settled by prece
dent ? On what principle is the Senate to be consulted ? If this
step be the result of deliberation and system, it seems to shew —
1. That the maxims of the British Government are still upper
most in his mind. 2. That the practice of his predecessor are
not laws to him, or that he considers a second election of the
same person as a continuation of the same reign. 3. That the
Senate is to be brought more into Executive agency than here
tofore. Accounts have been received of the arrival of Pinckney in
France, but not at Paris. Nothing yet from Monroe since he
knew of his recall. Everything relating to that quarter remains
in statu quo.
You will find in the inclosed papers that Buonaparte has
nearly cut up another Austrian army. It is to be hoped that
its consequences may force the Emperor to a peace, and, thro'
him, G. Britain. Adieu.
This goes by Mr. Bloodworth, son of the Senator from N.
Carolina, appointed to carry you notification of your appoint
ment.

118 WORKS OF MADISON. 1797.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Orange, Aug. 5th, 1797.
Dear Sir,— Yours of the 3d arrived safe yesterday. I will
converse with Co1 Monroe, as you desire, on the subject of his
letter to you, and listen to all his reasons for the opinion he
gives. My present conviction is opposed to it. I have viewed
the subject pretty much in the light you do. I consider it, more
over, as a ticklish experiment to say publicly yes or no to the
interrogatories of party spirit. It may bring on dilemmas, not
to be particularly foreseen, of disagreeable explanations, or of
tacit confessions. Hitherto the precedents have been the other
way. The late President was silent for many years as to the
letters imputed to him, and, it would seem, deposited in the office
of State only the answer which the zeal of the Secretary com
municated to the public. Mr. Adams has followed the example
with respect to Callender's charge * * * * 0f advising
the extermination of the Tories. Col. M. thinks that honest
men would be encouraged by your owning and justifying the
letter to Mazzei. I rather suspect it would be a gratification
and triumph to their opponents; and that out of the unfixed
part of the Community more converts would be gained by the
popularity of Gen1 Washington, than by the kind of proof that
must be relied on against it.
Wishing to return the " petition, &c," to your Court, as you
recommend, I must be brief on that subject. It is certainly of
great importance to set the public opinion right with regard to
the functions of grand Juries, and the dangerous abuse of them
in the federal Courts; nor could a better occasion occur. If
there be any doubts in the case, they must flow from the uncer
tainty of getting a numerous subscription, or of embarking the
Legislature in the business. On these points, the two gentlemen
you mean to consult can judge much better than I can do. The
Petition, in its tenor, cannot certainly be mended. I have noted
with a pencil the passages which, perhaps, may be better
guarded against cavil.

1797. LETTERS. Hg

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Oct. 20th, 1797.
Dear Sir, — I received the inclosed pamphlet from Col. Mon
roe, with a request that it might be returned to you. The pub
lication, under all its characters, is a curious specimen of the in
genious folly of its author. Next to the error of publishing at
all, is that of forgetting that simplicity and candour are the
only dress which prudence would put on innocence. Here we
see every rhetorical artifice employed to excite the spirit of
party to prop up his sinking reputation; and whilst the most
exaggerated complaints are uttered against the unfair and vir
ulent persecutions of himself, he deals out in every page the
most malignant insinuations against others. The one against
you is a masterpiece of folly, because its impotence is in exact
proportion to its venom. Along with the pamphlet is inclosed
a letter, which you will be good enough to have delivered by an
early opportunity.

TO JAMES MONROE. Orange, December 17, 1797.
Dear Sir— *****
I have not received a line from Philadelphia on the subject
of the speech, or, indeed, on any other. To me no explanation
of the phenomenon is necessary, having been on the ground for
observing the progressive apostasy from the principles of our
Revolution and Governments, which marked the period of your
absence. If events should not be unpropitious to the monar
chical party, you may prepare yourself for still more wonderful
indications of its spirit and views. Those who tolerate at
present the fashionable sentiments, will soon be ready to em
brace and avow them. The active characters who promoted
Mr. Adams to his station, knowing him to be what he is, can
not at bottom have been much averse to his political tenets, and
will find in the spirit of party, and in personal attachments and

120 WORKS OF MADISON. 1797.
animosities, sufficient motives to go all lengths with him. Let
us hope, however, that the tide of evil is nearly at its flood, and
that it will ebb back to the true mark, which it has overpassed.
Mrs. Madison, as well as myself, would be very happy to pass
a few days with you and Mrs. Monroe, being not discouraged
by the picture you give of your offices. But we are under an
engagement to make a visit to our sister, near Richmond, on
which she will set out the last of this week. I shall not follow
for eight or ten days; and it will give me great pleasure, if I
can, in that interval, to ride up; but the cause of my not accom
panying her will, I fear, put it out of my power. I expect
some workmen, who are to be put into a plan of business which
will keep them employed till our return from below. Mrs.
Madison offers her love to Mrs. Monroe, in which the family
desire to be joined.
Believe me, dear sir, your sincere friend and serv.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Orange, Decr 25, 1797.
Dear Sir, — We have had a great proportion of cold weather
since you passed us. The thermometer, however, has not been
lower than 10°. It was at this point on the morning of the
21st instant. The drought, also, is equal to the cold. Within
the last 31 days the fall of water has been but 1£ inches only.
Of snow there has been none. This cold and dry spell, succeed
ing the dry fall and late seeding, gives to the wheat fields the
worst of appearances.
You will not expect political occurrences from this quarter.
The objects of enquiry here are Liston's plot, the envoyship to
France, and Monroe's publication. The delay of this last occa
sions some surprise. I observe that the President has laid hold
of the late endemic at the seat of Government as an occasion
for getting the prerogative for proroguing the Legislature.
Fortunately, the Constitution has provided an important barrier

1798. LETTERS. 121
in this case, by requiring a session at least within every year.
But still the power may, in unforeseen emergencies, be made an
instrument of party or of usurpation, and, it is to be hoped,
will not therefore be granted. I have not examined it in a
constitutional view, but that also merits attention. Ambition
is so vigilant, and where it has a model always in view, as in
the present case, is so prompt in seizing its advantages, that it
cannot be too closely watched, or too vigorously checked.
When you do me the favor to write, let your letters leave
Philadelphia in the mail of Friday morning. They will then
come without any halt. Adieu.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Orange, Jaw 21, 1798.
Dear Sir, — When your favor of the 3rd instant arrived, I
was on a journey to the neighborhood of Richmond, from which
I did not return till the 18th. The mail on the day following
brought me the packet of newspapers under your cover. Col.
Bell has written me that the nails ordered, as stated in my last
to you, are all ready for me. I had not requested them to be
prepared in parcels, as I shall use them, because I want some
for out-houses immediately, and I wished to avoid the necessity
of more than one trip.
The attack on Monroe's publication evidently issues from, or
is aided by, an official source, and is a proof that the latter
bites. I have not yet seen a copy of it, and was astonished to
learn in Richmond, where I passed a day, that a single copy
only had reached that place, which, from the length of it, not
more than two or three persons had read. By them it was said,
that if this did not open the eyes of the people, their blindness
must be incurable. If a sufficient number of copies do not ar
rive there before the adjournment of the Assembly, the only
opportunity of circulating the information in this State will be
lost for a year, that is, till the subject has lost its flavor. The

122 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
enormous price, also, was complained of, as a probable obstacle
to an extensive circulation.
You will have seen in the newspapers the proceedings on the
Amherst Memorial, on the Glebes and Churches, and on the
proposition for revising the Constitution. The first was the
only test of party strength, and so far deceptive, as it confounds
scrupulous Republicans with their adversaries in the votes
against a Legislative censure on the Grand Jury.
I did not understand the presentment was vindicated posi
tively by a single member in the Debate. The unfavorable ac
counts as to our three Plenipo's got to Richmond while I was
there, by the way of Norfolk. It seemed to give extreme uneas
iness to the warm and well-informed friends of Republicanism,
who saw in a war on the side of England the most formidable
means put in the hands of her partizans for warping the public
mind towards Monarchy. This consideration certainly merits
the strictest regard as an argument for peace, as long as we
have a fair choice on the question. The Public will have a
right to expect, also, from our Executive and the negotiators,
the fullest communication of every circumstance that may attend
the experiment, if it should miscarry. The British Treaty has
placed such difficulties in the way of an adjustment, that noth
ing but the most cordial dispositions on both sides can over
come them; and such have been the indications on the side of
our Executive, even during the negociation, that it will not be
easily believed, in case of a rupture, that it was not promoted,
if not caused, by our own counsels.
We have had a fine spell of open weather, with plentiful rains
at proper intervals. This has been favorable to our winter
operations, but otherwise to some of those of nature, [?] particu
larly in our wheat fields, which continue to present the most
unpromising aspect. Accept the most affectionate farewell.

1798. LETTERS. 123

TO JAMES MONROE. Feb? 5, 1798.
Dear Sir, — The calls of my carpenters, and the fineness of
the weather, have induced me to hurry my wagon up for the
nails. It will receive the few articles which you have been so
good as to offer from the superfluities of your stock, and which
circumstances will permit me now to lay in; to wit, Two table
cloths for a dining-room of about 18 feet; two, three, or four,
as may be convenient, for a more limited scale; four dozen nap
kins, which will not in the least be objectionable for having been
used; and two mattresses. We are so little acquainted with the
culinary utensils in detail, that it is difficult to refer to such by
name or description as would be within our wants. We con
clude it best, therefore, not to interfere with any opportunity
you may have of gratifying your other friends, and to reserve
our demands on your kindness till we can have the pleasure of
seeing you, as well as have it in our power to compare the un-
disposed-of remains with our probable wants.
I found here a letter from Mr. Jefferson, of the 24th January.
The following are extracts: "A letter is certainly received here
from Talleyrand, which says our envoys have been heard, that
their pretensions are high, that possibly no arrangement may
take place, but that there will be no declaration of war by
France. It is said that Bournonville has written that he has
hopes of an accommodation, (three audiences having then, Nov1
3, been had,) and to be himself a member of a new diplomatic
mission to this country. On the whole, I am entirely suspended
as to what is to be expected." "Very acrimonious altercations
are going on between the Spanish Minister and the Executive,
and at the Natchez something worse than mere altercations,
&c." You will recollect the idea in our conversation, that a
war with Spain would be courted as a succedaneum for the bar
ren field presented by one with France to the privateering
avidity. I inclose the paper mentioned to you, which you will
of course be careful of. It is a curious specimen of Jay's re
gard for instructions in making the British Treaty, as his ad-

124 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
dress, or rather petition, to his Majesty, is of that manly and in
dependent spirit which Scipio labors to bestow on him.
Mrs. Madison and the family offer their affectionate respects
to Mrs. Monroe. Yours truly,

Calling to mind the difficulty you may experience from the
general failure of the potato crop last year, I beg you to accept
by the bearer a couple of bushels, which may furnish the seed
for your garden, if nothing more. Mrs. Madison insists on
adding for Mrs. Monroe a few pickles and preserves, with half
a dozen bottles of gooseberries and a bag of dried cherries,
which will not be wanted by us till another season will afford
a supply, and which the time of your return home must have
deprived her of, as the fruit of the last season. We both wish
we could substitute something more worthy of acceptance.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Orange, Feb? 12, 1798.
Dear Sir, — The last mail brought neither letters nor papers
from Philadelphia. By the preceding one I received your favor
of Jan7 24, and a bundle of the Gazettes down to the 25th, in
clusive, with an omission only of that of the 23d, wliich it may
be proper for you to supply in order to keep your set entire.
Your account of the probable posture of the negociation at
Paris is less decisively unfavorable than the reports prevailing
here. It will be happy if a good issue should result from the
crisis. But I have great apprehensions from two sources: 1.
The spirit in which the negociation will be conducted on the
side of our Executive, if not on the other side also. 2. The
real difficulties which the British Treaty has thrown in the way.
It is pretty clear that France will not acquiesce under the ad
vantage which that insidious instrument gives to her enemy,
and the House of Reps, at the last session, admitted that the

1798. LETTERS. 125
condition of the two nations ought to be equalized. How can
this now be done? In one of two ways only: either by dissolv
ing the British Treaty, or by stipulating with France that she
may plunder us, as we have stipulated that Britain may plun
der us.
To the first mode, the objections on the American side are
obvious. To the second, will not France refuse so far to sanc
tion the principle that free ships do not make goods free, as to
enter into a positive stipulation to that effect, chusing rather to
equalize her own situation on the principle of retaliation, which
indirectly supports instead of surrendering her favorite object?
Should this be her course, the U. S. will have no option but to
go directly to war in defence of the British Treaty, which was
adopted as a defence against war, and in defence of the princi
ple that free ships do not make free goods, in opposition both
to their own principles and their essential interests, or to go
indirectly to war, by using the frigates as convoys, and arming
private vessels, of which the owners and mariners will often be
British subjects, under American colours; or to some defensive
regulation of a commercial nature. The first will not be done,
because the people are not yet confided in to tolerate it. The
last will not be done, because it will be difficult to frame such
a regulation as will not injure Britain, as well as ourselves,
more than France. The second expedient I conclude, therefore,
will be persisted in; and as there is likely to be a majority
ready to back the hostility of the Executive, the best that can
be done by the Republicans will be to leave the responsibility
on the real authors of whatever evils may ensue.
I am not surprized at the extremity to which the dispute at
the Natchez is pushed. I never had a doubt that in proportion
as war with France is contemplated, a war with Spain will be
provoked by the present administration. The former would
not be relished, even by the New England privateers, without
the prospect of plunder presented by the latter. A war with
Spain would also be a most convenient grave for the misde
meanours of Liston and his partizans.
I returned from Albemarle on Monday last, where I con-

126 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
suited with your nailer on the subject of the sprigs and lathing
nails not included in the parcels prepared for me. I found that
the cutting machine has never been re-established, and I did
not request that their slight kind of nails should be made in the
common way. If you mean, however, that the machine shall be
set up again, or if it be a part of your plan to make such nails
in the common way, there will be time enough for either before
I shall want them. I was at Mr. Randolph's, and found all
well there, as you will doubtless learn to be the case from him
self. I was astonished to find that even Monroe himself had not
yet seen a printed copy of his publication. In the mean time,
Scipio's misrepresentations and sophistries are filling the public
mind with all the poison which P.'s malice can distil into it.
Where the book is not seen first, and an antidote does not
quickly follow from the same centre which gives circulation to
the poison, innocence and truth cannot have fair play.
Present my friendly respects to Mr. Giles, who, I hear, has
gone on to Philadelphia; also to Mr. Tazewell and Mr. Daw
son. I have been sorry to hear of the ill health of the former.
As I perceive by the votes in the Senate that he has resumed
his seat, I hope he is well again.
Yours always and affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Feby, 1798.
Dear Sir, — Since my last I have received yours of Feb7 8,
with a continuation of the Gazettes down to that date, with the
exception only, mentioned already, of the Gazette of Jan7 23.
I am glad to find the public opinion to be taking the turn you
describe on the subject of arming. For the public opinion alone
can now save us from the rash measures of our hot-headed Ex
ecutive—it being evident from some late votes of the House of
Reps, particularly in the choice of managers for the Impeach-

1798. LETTERS. 127
ment, that a majority there, as well as in the Senate, are ready
to go as far as the controul of their constituents will permit.
There never was, perhaps, a greater contrast between two
characters than between those of the present President and his
predecessor; although it is the boast and prop of the present
that he treads in the steps of his predecessor. The one, cool,
considerate, and cautious; the other, headlong, and kindled into
flame by every spark that lights on his passions : the one, ever
scrutinizing into the public opinion, and ready to follow, where
he could not lead it; the other, insulting it by the most adverse
sentiments and pursuits. Washington a hero in the field, yet
overweighing every danger in the Cabinet: Adams without a
single pretension to the character of a soldier, a perfect Quix-
otte as a statesman. The former chief magistrate pursuing peace
every where with sincerity, though mistaking the means : the
latter taking as much pains to get into war as the former took
to keep out of it. The contrast might be pursued into a vari
ety of other particulars — the policy of the one in shunning con
nections with the arrangements of Europe, of the other in hold
ing out the United States as a make-weight in the Balances of
power; the avowed exultation of Washington in the progress
of liberty every where, and his eulogy on the Revolution and
people of France, posterior even to the bloody reign and fate of
Robespierre; the open denunciations by Adams of the smallest
disturbance of the ancient discipline, order, and tranquillity of
despotism, &c, &c, &c.
The affair of Lyon and Griswold is bad enough every way,
but worst of all in becoming a topic of tedious and disgraceful
debates in Congress. There certainly could be no necessity for
removing it from the decision of the parties themselves before
that tribunal, and its removal was evidently a sacrifice of the
dignity of the latter to the party manoeuvre of ruining a man
whose popularity and activity were feared. If the state of the
House suspended its rules in general, it was under no obliga
tion to see any irregularity which did not force itself into pub
lic notice; and if Griswold be a man of the sword, he should
not have permitted the step to be taken; if not, he does not de-

128 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
serve to be avenged by the House. No man ought to reproach
another with cowardice who is not ready to give proof of his
own courage.
I have taken some pains, but in vain, to find out a person who
will engage to carry the mail from Fredericksburg to Char
lottesville. When I was in the neighborhood of the latter I
suggested the propriety of an effort there for the purpose, but
do not know that it will be more successful.
Our winter has continued without snow, and rather dry, and
our wheat fields wear the most discouraging aspect.
Adieu.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 4, 1798.
Dear Sir— *****
Mr. Tazewell's speech is really an able one in defence of his
proposition to associate juries with the Senate in cases of im
peachment. His views of the subject are so new to me, that I
ought not to decide on them without more examination than I
have had time for. My impression has always been that im
peachments were somewhat sui generis, and excluded the use of
Juries. The terms of the amendment to the Constitution are
indeed strong, and Mr. T. has given them, as the French say,
all their lustre. But it is at least questionable whether an ap
plication of that amendment to the case of impeachments would
not push his doctrine farther than he himself would be disposed
to follow it.
It would seem, also, that the reservation of an ordinary trial
by a jury must strongly imply that an impeachment was not to
be a trial by jury. As removal and disqualification, the punish
ments within the impeaching jurisdiction, were chiefly intended
for offices in the Executive line, would it not also be difficult to
exclude Executive influence from the choice of juries? or would
juries armed with the impeaching power, and under the influ
ence of an unimpeachable Tribunal, be less formidable than the
power as hitherto understood to be modified?

1798. LETTERS. 129
The universality of this power is the most extravagant nov
elty that has been yet broached, especially coming from a quar
ter that denies the impeachability of a Senator. Hardy as
these innovators are, I cannot believe they will venture yet to
hold this inconsistent and insulting language to the public. If
the conduct and sentiments of the Senate on some occasions
were to be regarded as the natural and permanent fruit of the
institution, they ought to produce not only disgust, but despair,
in all who are really attached to free Government. But I can
not help ascribing some part of the evil to personal characters,
and a great deal of it to the present spirit of the Constituents
of the Senate. Whenever the State Legislatures resume the
tone natural to them, it will probably be seen that the tone of
their Representatives will vary also. If it should not, the in
ference will then be unavoidable that the present Constitution
of the Senate is at war with the public liberty.
If the countervailing act of G. B. does not open the mouths
and eyes both of the Eastern Carriers, it will be a political
phenomenon without example. In the year 1789, G. B. had
about 230, and America 43 thousand of the tonnage in the mu
tual trade. The encouragements given by Congress, and which
G. B. did not dare to countervail till Jay tied our hands from
continuing the advantage on the side of America, have brought
up the American share to about one-half. The bounties now
secured to the British tonnage will pretty certainly reduce our
proportion below its original scantiness.* And if the French,
as may be expected, should suffer their disgust at the British
Treaty to dictate their navigation policy towards us, Jay will
have accomplished more than perhaps was ever done by the
same personal talents; he will have annihilated the marine of a
maritime Country by a single stroke of his pen, and, what is
still more extraordinary, received the plaudits of the victims
whom he has sacrificed.
I am curious to see how the zealots for expelling Lyon will
treat the deliberate riot of Griswold. The whole affair has
*. This prevented by the war in Europe and the neutrality of the U. S. — J. M.
VOL. II. 9

130 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
been extremely disgraceful; but the dignity of the Body will be
wounded, not by the misconduct of individual members, which
no public body ought to be answerable for, but by the miscon
duct of itself, that is, of a majority; and it is to be feared that
the majority in this case are ready for every sacrifice to the
spirit of party which infatuates them. The greatest sinners
among them are Sewall and Harper, who forced the offensive
business on the House.
We have had lately 4| inches of snow. On the 22nd, how
ever, the day on which it was snowing, as you observe in your
letter, it was throughout fair here. On the 21st, day and night
together, there fell | of an inch, and on the night of the 23rd, |
of an inch of rain. Yours always and affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 12th, 1798.
Dear Sir,— *****
I think the Whigs acted very properly in attending the Birth-
night, on the principle of appropriating it to the person, and
not to the office of the late President. It is a pity that the non-
attendance of the Adamsites is not presented to the public in
such a manner, with their names, as to satisfy the real friends of
Washington, as well as the people generally, of the true princi
ples and views of those who have been loudest in their hypo
critical professions of attachment to him.
The proceedings relative to the Stamp act mark strongly two
things: one, that the public feeling is not, as is pretended, in
unison with the measures of the Government; the other, that it
will, whenever it shews itself, direct immediately the course of
the H. of Reps, and no doubt, finally, the Senate also. The
Eastern votes for the repeal are a demonstration of both these
truths. The enclosed paper contains all the information I possess on

1798. LETTERS. 131
the subject of Mazzei's cargo of books. Notwithstanding the
lapse of time, I have never had a single return of sales. Whilst
Congress sat in New York, I repeatedly enquired of Rivington,
without learning that any had taken place. I beg you to pre
serve and return the paper.
We have had warm and dry weather for ten days till yester
day, which gave us a fine rain. The wheat fields in general
retain their sickly countenance. In many places it is thought
impossible to replace the seed, and it seems certain that the
ensuing crop will be very short, whatever change for the better
may happen in the residue of the season. Great efforts are gen
erally on foot for crops of Tobacco.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 2d, 1798.
Dear Sir, — Since my last, I am in debt for your two favors
of the 15th and 22, the Gazettes of the 3, 6, 7, and 8 ult., with
a regular continuation to the 22d; two statements from the
Treasury Department, and Paine's letter to the French people
and armies.
The President's message is only a further development to the
public of the violent passions and heretical politics which have
been long privately known to govern him. It is to be hoped,
however, that the H. of Reps will not hastily echo them. At
least it may be expected that, before war measures are instituted,
they will recollect the principle asserted by 62 vs. 37, in the
case of the Treaty, and insist on a full communication of the
intelligence on which such measures are recommended. The
present is a plainer, if it be not a stronger case; and if there
has been sufficient defection to destroy the majority, which was
then so great and so decided, it is the worst symptom that has
yet appeared in our Councils.
The constitution supposes, what the History of all govern
ments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power
most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has, accord-

132 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
ingly, with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legis
lature. But the doctrines lately advanced strike at the root of
all these provisions, and will deposit the peace of the Country
in that Department which the Constitution distrusts as most
ready, without cause, to renounce it. For if the opinion of the
President, not the facts and proofs themselves, is to sway the
judgment of Congress in declaring war; and if the Pres' in the
recess of Congress create a foreign mission, appoint the Minis
ter, and negociate a war Treaty, without the possibility of a
check, even from the Senate, until the measures present alterna
tives overruling the freedom of its judgment; if, again, a Treaty,
when made, obliges the Legislature to declare war contrary to
its judgment, and, in pursuance of the same doctrine, a law de
claring war imposes a like moral obligation to grant the requi
site supplies until it be formally repealed with the consent of
the P. and Senate, it is evident that the people are cheated out
of the best ingredients in their Government, the safeguards of
peace, which is the greatest of their blessings.
I like both your suggestions in the present crisis. Congress
ought clearly to prohibit arming, and the President ought to be
brought to declare on what ground he undertook to grant an
indirect licence to arm. The first instructions were no other
wise legal than as they were in pursuance of the law of nations,
and, consequently, in execution of the law of the land. The
revocation of the instructions is a virtual change of the law,
and consequently a usurpation by the Executive of a legislative
power. It will not avail to say that the law of nations leaves
this point undecided, and that every nation is free to decide it
for itself. If this be the case, the regulation being a Legisla
tive, not an Executive one, belongs to the former, not the latter
authority, and comes expressly within the power, "to define the
law of nations," given to Congress by the Constitution. I do
not expect, however, that the Constitutional party in the H. of
Reps is strong enough to do what ought to be done in the pres
ent instance.
Your 2d idea, that an adjournment for the purpose of consult
ing the constituents on the subject of war, is more practicable,

1798. LETTERS. I33
because it can be effected by that branch alone, if it pleases, and
because an opposition to such a measure will be more striking
to the public eye. The expedient is the more desirable, as it
will be utterly impossible to call forth the sense of the people
generally before the season will be over, especially as the towns,
&c, where there can be most despatch in such an operation, are
on the wrong side; and it is to be feared that a partial expres
sion of the public voice may be misconstrued or miscalled an
evidence in favor of the War party. On what do you ground
the idea that a declaration of war requires §d8 of the Legisla
ture ? The force of your remark, however, is not diminished
by this mistake; for it remains true, that measures are taking,
or may be taken by the Executive, that will end in war, con
trary to the wish of the Body which alone can declare it.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 15, 1798.
Dear Sir, — My last answered yours of the 21st, since which
I received on Friday last your three favors of the 29 ult., of
April 5 and 6. I have no reason to suspect that any of your
letters have miscarried, or been opened by the way. I am less
able to say whether mine have all reached you, as I have gener
ally written them in haste, and neglected to keep a note of
their dates. I will thank you to mention in your acknowledge
ment of this whether you received one from me inclosing a let
ter to F. A. Muhlenberg, and whether he certainly received it.
It related to a case of humanity, and required an answer, which
has never come to hand.
The effect of the President's speech in France is less to be
wondered at, than the speech itself, with other follies of a like
tendency, is to be deplored. Still, the mode and degree of resist
ing them is rather meeting folly with folly than consulting the
true dignity and interest which ought to prescribe such cases.
The conduct of Talleyrand is so extraordinary as to be scarcely
credible. I do not allude to its depravity, which, however

134 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
heinous, is not without examples. Its unparalleled stupidity
is what fills one with astonishment.
Is it possible that a man of sagacity, as he is admitted to be,
who has lived long enough in this Country to understand the
nature of our Government; who could not be unaware of the
impossibility of secrecy, and the improbability of success, in
pursuing his propositions thro' the necessary forms; who must
have suspected the Executive rather of a wish to seize pretexts
for widening the breach between the two Republics, than to
make use of any means, however objectionable, to reconcile their
differences; who must have been equally suspicious of the prob
able inclination of some one or other of the Envoys; is it pos
sible that such a man, under such circumstances, could have
committed both his character and safety by such a proposition?
If the evidence be not perfectly conclusive, of which I cannot
judge, the decision ought to be against the evidence, rather
than on the side of the infatuation. It is easy to foresee, how
ever, the zeal and plausibility with which this part of the des
patches will be inculcated, not only for the general purpose of
enforcing the war measures of the Executive, but for the partic
ular purpose of diverting the public attention from the other
more important part, which shews the speech and conduct of
the President to be now the great obstacle to accommodation.
This interesting fact must, nevertheless, finally take posses
sion of thinking minds, and strengthen the suspicion, that whilst
the Executive were pursuing ostensible plans of reconciliation,
and giving instructions which might wear that tendency, the
success of them was indirectly counterworked by every irrita
tion and disgust for which opportunities could be found in offi
cial speeches and messages, answers to private addresses, ha
rangues in Congress, and the vilest insults and calumnies of
newspapers under the patronage of Government.
The readiness with which the papers were communicated, and
the quarter proposing the call for them, would be entitled to
praise, if a mass of other circumstances did not force a belief
that the view in both was more to inflame than to inform the
public mind. It is not improbable that the influence of the

1798. LETTERS. I35
first impressions in checking the rising spirit in N. England,
and bearing up the party of Jay in N. York, whose re-election
is brought into danger by the pestilent consequences experi
enced from his Treaty, had considerable share in the motive.
The negative declaration proposed by Mr. Sprigg is liable to
so many specious objections, that I shall be surprised if a will
ing majority does not take advantage of them. In ordinary
cases, the mode of proceeding is certainly ineligible; but it seems
equally obvious that cases may arise for which that is the proper
one. Three of these occur where there does not appear any
room to doubt on the subject: 1. Where nothing less than a
declaration of pacific intentions from the Department entrusted
with the power of war will quiet the apprehensions of the con
stituent body, or remove an uncertainty which subjects one part
of them to the speculating arts of another. 2. Where it may
be a necessary antidote to the hostile measures or language of
the Executive Department. If war sentiments be delivered in a
speech to Congress which admits of a direct answer, and the sen
timents of Congress be against war, it is not doubted that the
counter sentiments might and ought to be expressed in the an
swer. Where an extra message delivers like sentiments, and
custom does not permit a like explanation of the sentiments of
the Legislature, there does not appear any equivalent mode of
making it, except that of an abstract vote. 3. Where public
measures or appearances may mislead another nation into dis
trust of the real object of them, the error ought to be corrected;
and in our Government, where the question of war or peace lies
with Congress, a satisfactory explanation cannot issue from any
other Department.
In Governments where the power of deciding on war is an
Executive prerogative, it is not unusual for explanations of this
kind to be given, either on the demands of foreign nations, or
in order to prevent their improper suspicions. Should a demand
of this sort be at any time made on our Gov', the answer must
proceed, if thro' an Executive functionary, from the war pre
rogative, that is, from Congress; and if an answer could be
given on demand, a declaration without a demand may cer-

136 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
tainly be made with equal propriety, if there be equal occasion
for it.
The discovery of Mr. A.'s dislike to the City of Washing
ton will cause strong emotions. What sort of conscience is
that which feels an obligation on the Gov4 to remove thither,
and a liberty to quit it the next day ? The objection to the
magnificence of the President's House belongs to a man of very
different principles from those of Mr. A. The increase of ex
pense, therefore, without a probable increase of salary in pro
portion, must be the real ground of objection.
I have looked over the two papers which you consider as so
threatening in their tendency. They do not, I own, appear to
me exactly in the same light; nor am I by any means satisfied
that they are from the pen you ascribe them to. If they are,
there certainly has been a disguise aimed at in many features
of the style. I differ still more from you as to the source from
which an antidote, if necessary, ought to come. But waiving
every thing of that sort, there is really a crowd and weight of
indispensable occupations on my time, which it would be very
tedious to explain, but which I pledge myself will justify me in
leaving such tasks to others, not only commanding more time
for them, but in every respect more favorably situated for exe
cuting them with advantage and effect. And it is with no small
pleasure I observe that some pens are employed which promise
the public all the lights with respect to their affairs which can
be conveyed to them thro' the channels of the press.
It is now become certain that not half crops of wheat can be
made. Many will not get back more than their seed, and some
not even that. We have lately had a severe spell of N. E. rain,
which, in this neighborhood, swept off at least 15 per cent, of
the cattle; and from accounts in different directions, it appears
to have been equally fatal. We are at present in the midst of
a cold N. W. spell, which menaces the fruit. The tops of the
blue mountains are tinged with snow, and the thermometer this
morning was at 31°. It does not appear, however, that the
mischief is yet done. The coming night, if no sudden change
takes place, must, I think, be fatal.

1798. LETTERS. I37
If Mr. Bailey has not yet taken up his note, be so good as to
have the enclosed forwarded to him.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 22d, 1798.
Dear Sir, — My last was on the 15 th, and acknowledged
your preceding letters. I have since received that of the 12th,
under the same cover with the Gazettes; and the instructions
and despatches under a separate cover. The interruptions of
company, added to the call of business, have not left me time as
yet to read over the whole of those papers. A glance at them,
with the extracts given of their contents, fully account for the
state of astonishment produced in the public mind. And yet
the circumstance that ought to astonish most, perhaps, is the
publication of them by the Executive and Senate.
Whatever probability there may be of individual corruption
within the pale of the French Gov', the evidence is certainly
very insufficient to support such an attack on its reputation in
the face of the world, even if we could separate the measure
from its inevitable effect in blasting every chance of accommo
dation, if it should reach France before terms shall be finally
settled. After this stroke in the politics of those two branches
of our Government, no one who has not surrendered his reason
can believe them sincere in wishing to avoid extremities with
the French Republic; to say nothing of the internal views to
which they mean also to turn this extraordinary manoeuvre.
There has not been time for any impressions on the public
sentiment in this quarter, which the Despatches are calculated
to make. The first will, no doubt, pretty much correspond with
those made elsewhere. But the final impressions will depend
on the further and more authentic developments, which cannot
be far behind, and which by this time may be arrived where
you are. I find that in several places the people have turned
out with their protests against the war measures urged by the
Executive. Whether the proceeding will be general, I cannot

138 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
pretend to decide. In this County, a petition is to be handed
about, which will, I presume, be pretty fully signed, if sufficiently
circulated; unless the disaffected few among us should be em
boldened by the present crisis to circulate along with it the im
pressions emanating from the Despatches, which may stop the
hands of wavering or cautious people.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 29, 1798.
Dear Sir, — My last was on the 22d. Yours received by the
last mail was of the 19th inst. The despatches have not yet
come sufficiently to the knowledge of the bulk of the people to
decide the impression which is to result from them. As far as
I can infer from the language of the few who have read the
newspapers, there will be a general agreement as to the im
proper views of our own Executive party, whatever difference
of opinion there may be as to the purity of the French councils.
Indeed, the reflexion of others, as well as my own, traces so
many absurdities and improbabilities in many of the details,
that the injustice seems equal to the temerity of publishing such
a libel on the French Government. Col. Monroe lodged with
me last night on his way to the District Court at Fredg. He
considers the transaction as evidently a swindling experiment,
and thinks the result will bring as much derision on the Envoys
as mischief on the Country. I am sorry to learn that the Naval
bill is likely to be carried, and particularly that any of our
friends should, by their leaving Congress, be accessory to it.
The public sentiment here is unquestionably opposed to every
measure that may increase the danger of War. Petitions, ex
pressive of it, will be signed by all to whom they are presented,
with such exceptions only as may be guessed at. It appears,
however, that the crisis is over for their effect on Congress, if
there were a disposition there to listen to them.
I take the liberty of subjoining a list of a few articles not to
be got out of Philadelphia, and so important to my present ob-

1798. LETTERS. I39
ject that I break through every restraint from adding to the
trouble, of which you have more than enough. I hope the com
mission may be facilitated by your previous acquaintance with
the places at which they are to be had, and that you will be
able to make use of the time of others chiefly for the purpose.
If J. Bringhurst should be in the way, he will readily relieve
you from all attention to the details. I wish them to be for
warded to " Fredericksburg, to the care of Robert Dunbar,
Esq., at Falmouth." The enclosed draught will be a fund for
the purchase. Adieu. Affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. May 5, 1798.
Dear Sir, — I have to thank you for your favor of the 26th
ult. My last was of the 29th. The success of the war party
in turning the Despatches to their inflammatory views is a mor
tifying item against the enlightened character of our citizens.
The analysis of the Despatches by Sidney cannot fail to be an
effectual antidote, if any appeal to sober reflection can prevail
against occurrences which are constantly addressing their im
aginations and feelings. The talents of this writer make it
lucky that the task has not been taken up by other hands. I
am glad to find, in general, that everything that good sense and
accurate information can supply is abundantly exhibited by the
newspapers to the view of the public. It is to be regretted
that these papers are so limited in their circulation, as well as
that the mixture of indiscretions in some of them should con
tribute to that effect. It is to be hoped, however, that any ar
bitrary attacks on the freedom of the press will find virtue
enough remaining in the public mind to make them recoil on
the wicked authors. No other check to desperate projects
seems now to be left. The sanguinary faction ought not, how
ever, to adopt the spirit of Robespierre, without recollecting

140 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
the shortness of his triumphs and the perpetuity of his infamy.
The contrivance of Jay for reproducing Hamilton into office
and notice suggests, no doubt, a variety of conjectures. If the
contrivance is to be ascribed chiefly to Jay, it probably origi
nated in the alarm into which the consequences of the Treaty
have thrown its author, and the new demand for the services
of its champion. Events have so clearly demonstrated the great
objects of that Treaty to have been to draw us into a quarrel
with the enemies of G. B., and to sacrifice our navigation to
hers, that it will require greater efforts than ever to skreen the
instrument and author much longer from the odium due to them.
The late acts of the B. Par' would, before this, have unmasked
the character of the Treaty, even to the people of N. England,
if adventitious circumstances had not furnished its partizans
with fresh dust for their eyes. A tax on land, with a loss of
market for its produce, will put their credulity and blindness
to a test that may be more dreadful to the Deluders.
We have had a dry spell latterly, which, succeeding the effects
of the frost, will affect every species of crop that depends on
the favor of the season. I write to Mr. Dawson by this post
for a small balance, between thirty and forty dollars, which I
beg you to receive. You will further oblige me by having my
brother William's name subscribed to Carey's paper, and pay
ing the necessary advance; the paper to be sent to Orange Ct.
House.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. May 13, 1798.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 3d Inst. My
last acknowledged your preceding one. The successful use of
the Despatches in kindling a flame among the people, and of the
flame in extending taxes, armies, and prerogative, are solemn
lessons, which I hope will have their proper effect when the in
fatuation of the moment is over. The management of foreign
relations appears to be the most susceptible of abuse of all the

1798. LETTERS. 141
trusts committed to a Government, because they can be con
cealed or disclosed, or disclosed in such parts and at such times
as will best suit particular views; and because the body of the
people are less capable of judging, and are more under the in
fluence of prejudices, on that branch of their affairs, than of any
other. Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty
at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or
pretended, from abroad. The credit given to Mr. Adams for a
spirit of conciliation towards France is wonderful, when we ad
vert to the history of his irritations, from the first name in the
Envoyship, down to his last answer to the addressers. If he
finds it thus easy to play on the prepossessions of the people for
their own Gov' against a foreign, we ought not to be disap
pointed if the same game should have equal success in the hands
of the Directory.
We have had little or no rain for a month, and the evil has
been increased by much windy and cold weather. The ther
mometer yesterday morning was at 38°, and the frost such as
to kill the leaves of tender trees in low situations. I hope now
you will soon be released from the thorny seat in which you
are placed, and that I shall not be disappointed of the pleasure
of seeing you on your way. You must so arrange your time as
to be able to ride a mile, while with me, to see a threshing-ma
chine I have lately built on Martin's plan. It is worked and
attended by five or six hands at most, and I think promises more
for general use than all the other modifications. I shall not
describe it, because your own inspection will so soon give you
a more perfect idea of it.
Yours always and affectionately.

I received no paper by last mail but Fenno's. I hope the
bridle is not yet put on the press.

142 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

May 80r 17j>?„
* *

Dear Sir,— *****
The Alien bill proposed in the Senate is a monster that must
forever disgrace its parents.* I should not have supposed it
possible that such an one could have been engendered in either
House, and still persuade myself that it cannot possibly be
fathered by both. It is truly to be deplored that a standing
army should be let in upon us by the absence of a few sound
votes. It may, however, all be for the best. These addresses
to the feelings of the people from their enemies may have more
effect in opening their eyes than all the arguments addressed to
their understandings by their friends. The Pres*, also, seems
to be co-operating for the same purpose. Every answer he gives
to his addressers unmasks more and more his principles and
views. His language to the young men at Phil" is the most
abominable and degrading that could fall from the lips of the
first magistrate of an independent people, and particularly from
a Revolutionary patriot. It throws some light on his meaning
when he remarked to me, " that there was not a single principle
the same in the American and French Revolutions; " and on my
alluding to the contrary sentiment of his predecessor, expressed
to Adet on the presentment of the Colours, added, " that it was
false, let who would express it." The abolition of Royalty was,
it seems, not one of his Revolutionary principles. Whether he
always made this profession is best known to those who knew
him in the year 1776. The turn of the elections in N. Y. is a
proof that the late occurrences have increased the noise only,
and not the number of the Tory party. Besides the intrinsic
* Quere: As to the difference between the tenor of the bill here referred to
and the bill as subsequently modified? Mr. Jefferson says in a succeeding letter
of 24th, " the Alien bill of the Senate still hangs before them. Some of its fea
tures have been moderated, which has so much disgusted its warmest friends that
some of them have declared they will vote against it, so that I think it possible
they may reject it." And in his letter of the 31st he says, " it has been consid
erably mollified, particularly by a proviso saving the rights of Treaties."

1798. LETTERS. 143
value of the acquisition, it will encourage the hopes and exer
tions in other States. You will see by the newspapers the turn
which a Town-meeting took in Fredericks*. I forgot to ac
knowledge the pamphlet containing the last Despatch from the
Envoys, received with your letter of the 10th. It is evidently
more in the Forensic than Diplomatic style, and more likely in
some of its reasonings to satisfy an American Jury than the
French Government. The defence of the provision article is
the most shallow that has appeared on that subject. In some
instances the reasoning is good, but so tedious and tautologous
as to insult the understanding, as well as patience, of the Di
rectory, if really intended for them, and not for the partial ear
of the American public.
The want of rain begins to be severely felt, and every appear
ance indicates a continuance of it. Since the 10th of April
there has fallen but one inch of water, except a very partial
shower of less than \ an inch.
Adieu. Affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. May. 27, 1798.
Dear Sir, — I have duly received yours of the 17th, accompa
nied by the Direct tax bill, which I have not yet been able to
run thro'. Everything, I perceive, is carried as the war party
chuse. They will of course be the more responsible for conse
quences. The disposition to continue the Session is a proof that
the operation of the irritating proceedings here on those of
France is expected to furnish fresh fuel for the popular flame,
and to favor the success of the Executive projects in the Legis
lature. It is to be deplored that we have no authentic and im
partial channel thro' which the true state of things in Europe,
particularly in France, can reach the public mind of this Coun
try. The present temper of the Envoys cannot fail to discolour
all that passes thro' them; and if this were not the case, the ob-

144 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
vious policy of the Executive is a complete bar to the disclosure
of all other than inflammatory communications.
The inclosed accurate and authentic view of that "stupen
dous fabric of human wisdom," which Mr. A. idolizes so much,
deserves, I think, the public attention at the present moment.
At the request of Callender, I promised several years ago to
send it to him, but never could lay my hand on it till a few days
ago, when it fell in my way without being sought for. If you
have an opportunity, and think it worth while, you can let the
public have a sight of it; and, for the reason just mentioned, I
could wish, if there be no objection, that it might pass thro' his
hands. As the paper is of some value, it may be well to pre
serve it, in case it should not be republished, or in case a part
only should be so.
There have been pretty extensive, but not universal rains
since my last. This neighbourhood has been but barely touched
by them. I have not heard from yours.
Adieu. Affectionately.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. June 3, 1798.
Dear Sir, — Friday's mail brought me your favour of May 24.
The letter from S. Bourne had previously reached us thro' a
Freds paper. It is corroborated, I find, by several accounts from
different sources. These rays in the prospect will, if I can judge
from the sensations in this quarter, have an effect on the people
very different from that which appears in the public councils.
Whilst it was expected that the unrelenting temper of France
would bring on war, the mask of peace was worn by the war
party. Now that a contrary appearance on the side of France
is intimated, the mask is dropped, and the lie openly given to
their own professions by pressing measures which must force
France into war. I own I am not made very sanguine by the
reported amendment in the posture of our negociators, first, be-

1798. LETTERS. 145
cause the account may not be very correct, and next, because
there are real difficulties to be overcome, as well as those which
the pride of one or other of the parties may create, not to men
tion the probable arrival of what has passed here before the
scene is closed there. But the palpable urgency of the Execu
tive and its partizans to press war in proportion to the appa
rent chance of avoiding it, ought to open every eye to the hypoc
risy which has hitherto deceived so many good people. Should
no such consequence take place, it will be a proof of infatuation
which does not admit of human remedy. It is said, and there
are circumstances which make me believe it, that the hot-headed
proceedings of Mr. A. are not well relished in the cool climate
of Mount Vernon. This, I think, may fairly be inferred from
the contrast of characters and conduct; but if it has been ex
pressed, it must have been within a very confidential circle.
Since my last, there has been a sequel of fine and extensive
rains. We have had a tolerable, though not an equal or suffi
cient share of them. Your neighbourhood, I fancy, has fared
better. If Barnes has not sent off the glass, pullies, &c, please to
order as much of the proper chord as will be wanted for the
latter. Very affectionately yours.

TO JAMES MONROE. June 9th, 1798.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of yesterday was duly delivered by
your servant; and I herewith enclose the copies you request of
the papers formerly transmitted to me. The originals I shall
forward to Mr. D., as you suggest. I send, also, your letter to
Van Staphorst, and his answer, which I found with the other
papers, and which may possibly be of use now or hereafter in
refreshing your memory, or otherwise. The other papers en
closed in your letter are also returned, as you desire.
VOL. II. 10

146 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
The base attack of Addison I had neither seen nor heard of.
Doctr Edwards' letter and the two certificates added to your
book meet it in all its points. The publication of the two for
mer must place the vile calumniator in a light that must make
him odious to honest men, whatever effect they may have on
himself or his unprincipled abettors. It may deserve consider
ation how far the unnecessary passages of a personal nature in
Doctor E.'s letter ought to go to the press. I mean the offen
sive allusion to Vanity, &c, and the mention of the names of
Whitesides, &c. You are, however, the better judge on
these points, and will no doubt suggest to Mr. D. what you de
cide to be done.
The sortie of Mr. Adams presents, as you observe, more diffi
cult questions. On one hand, silence may beget misconstruc
tions from opposite quarters. On the other, it is not easy to
find an unobjectionable, and at the same time adequate mode
of repelling the aggression. A repetition of your demand for
the reasons of your recall does not appear eligible after what
has passed on that subject, though it must be owned the ground
taken by Pickering is materially changed by the language of
Mr. Adams. Any summons of a personal nature on Mr. Adams
is, I think, forbidden by the considerations you have glanced at.
Nor is it, perhaps, unworthy of consideration, that in the present
composition and spirit of the two Houses anything like an oc
casion may be seized for wreaking party revenge through the
forms of the Constitution. It is even possible that the fury of
the moment may have suggested the unwarrantable attack as a
snare that might answer the purpose. Whatever difficulties
might obstruct such a proceeding, they would probably be got
over by the same spirit which is overleaping so many others.
If the case admits of any formal interposition on your part,
it would seem to be in the way of a temperate and dignified
animadversion, published with your name to it. In such a pub
lication there would be room for such ideas relative to yourself
as justice to yourself might render eligible, and also for such
relative to Mr. Adams as prudence would permit. This is an
idea, however, that has perhaps rather grown out of the diffi-

1798. LETTERS. 147
culties of the case than is recommended by its own merit. You
will be able to decide on it with more deliberation than I have
bestowed on it.
The course recommended by Mr. Jefferson certainly ought
not to be hastily relinquished. The reflections you make on it
have great weight, to which ought to be added the private sac
rifice it would involve. But as I am persuaded that, in a gen
eral view, your taking a station in Congress would have a prom
ising tendency, and as the present paroxysm may pass off with
as great a rapidity as it has been brought on, I cannot but
think it advisable to keep a hold on the disposition of Mr. C.
to open the way to you, if on final consideration it should be
judged proper to make use of it.
Your letter found me engaged in some business with persons
who are to return here this morning for its completion, as well
as in despatching a servant with letters, papers, &c, to my
father, who is beyond the Ridge. He has consequently been
detained longer than I wished, as I presume you mean to write
to Pennsylvania by the ensuing post; and I have been more
hurried, at the same time, in the answer, than I would have
chosen. Our sincerest offers of respect to Mrs. Monroe.
Adieu.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. June 10th, 1798.
Dear Sir, — I have duly received your favor of the 31st ult.,
and am glad to find mine are as regularly received as yours.
The law for capturing French privateers may certainly be
deemed a formal commencement of hostilities, and renders all
hope of peace vain, unless a progress in amicable arrangements
at Paris, not to be expected, should have secured it against the
designs of our Gov'. If the Bill suspending commerce with the
French Dominions passes, as it doubtless will, the French Gov'
will be confirmed in their suspicion, begotten by the British

148 WORKS OF MADISON. 1798.
Treaty, of our coalition in the project of starving their people;
and the effect of the measure will be to feed the English at the
expense of the farmers of this Country. Already flour is down,
I hear, at 4 dollars a barrel.
How far the views of the Government will be answered by
annihilating the ability to pay a land tax at the very moment
of imposing it, will be best explained by the experiment. Look
ing beyond the present moment, it may be questioned whether
the interest of G. B. will be as much advanced by the sacrifice
of our trade with her enemies as may be intended. The use of
her manufactures here depends on our means of payment, and
then on the sale of our produce to the markets of her enemies.
There is too much passion, it seems, in our councils, to calculate
consequences of any sort. The only hope is, that its violence,
by defeating itself, may save the Country.
The answers of Mr. Adams to his addressers form the most
grotesque scene in the tragi-comedy acting by the Gov*. They
present not only the grossest contradictions to the maxims,
measures, and language of his predecessor, and the real principles
and interests of his constituents, but to himself. He is verify
ing completely the last feature in the character drawn of him
by Dr. Franklin, however his title may stand to the two first,
" Always an honest man, often a wise one, but sometimes wholly
out of his senses."
I thank you for the offspring of the Senatorial Muse, which
shall be taken care of. It is truly an unique. It is not even
prose run mad.
Monroe is much at a loss what course to take in consequence
of the wicked assault on him by Mr. A., and I am as much so
as to the advice that ought to be given him. It deserves con
sideration, perhaps, that if the least occasion be furnished for
reviving Governmental attention to him, the spirit of party re
venge may be wreaked thro' the forms of the Constitution. A
majority in the H. of R. and § of the Senate seem to be ripe for
everything. A temperate and dignified animadversion on the
proceeding, published with his name, as an appeal to the candor
and justice of his fellow-citizens against the wanton and un-

1798. LETTERS. 149
manly treatment, might, perhaps, be of use. But it would be
difficult to execute it in a manner to do justice to himself, and
inflict it on his adversary, without clashing with the temper of
the moment. Hoping for the pleasure of congratulating you
soon on your release from your painful situation, I close with
the most affectionate assurance that I am, yours, &c.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Dec 29...
Dear Sir, — I enclose a draught on General Moylan, out of
which you will be pleased to pay yourself the price of the nails,
£48 lis. 3c£., Va. currency, to let Barnes have as much as will
discharge the balance I owe him, and to let what may remain
lie till I write to you again.
The President's speech corresponds pretty much with the idea
of it which was preconceived. It is the old song, with no other
variation of the tune than the spirit of the moment was thought
to exact. It is evident, also, that he rises in his pitch as the
echoes of the Senate and House of Representatives embolden
him, and particularly that he seizes with avidity that of the
latter flattering his vigilance and firmness against illusory at
tempts on him, without noticing, as he was equally invited, the
allusion to his pacific professions.* The Senate, as usual, per
form their part with alacrity in counteracting peace by dextrous
provocations to the pride and irritability of the French Gov
ernment. It is pretty clear that their answer was cooked in
the same shop with the speech.
********
I have not seen the result of the discussions at Richmond on
the Alien and Sedition laws. It is to be feared their zeal may
forget some considerations which ought to temper their pro
ceedings. Have vou ever .considered thoroughly the distinction
* The President's speech to Congress of the 8th December, 1798, and his re
plies to the answers of the Senate and House of Representatives on the same
occasion, are here referred to.

150 WORKS OF MADISON. 1799.
between the power of the fffafejandjjm.t oSJ^J^'O^^'^h on
questions relatmg^totEeTederal pact? On the supposition that
the former is clearly the ultimate Judge of infractions, it does
not follow that the latter is the legitimate organ; especially as
a Convention was the organ by which the compact was made.
This was a reason of great weight for using general expressions
that would leave to other States a choice of all the modes pos
sible of concurring in the substance, and would shield the Gen
eral Assembly against the charge of usurpation in the very act
of protesting against the usurpations of Congress.
I have not forgotten my promise of M'Gehee's prices, but
could not conveniently copy them for the present mail.
Always affectionately yours.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Jan? 12, 1799.
Dear Sir, — According to a promise in my last, I enclose a
copy of the rates at which M'Gehee works. I enclose, also, a
few observations on a subject which we have frequently talked
of, which are submitted to your entire disposal, in whole or in
part, under the sole reserve of the name of the author. In Gor
don's History, Vol. IV, p. 399, 400, is a transaction that may,
perhaps, be properly referred to in the debate on the alien bill.
Among other names is that of Sedgwick, to a protest against
a bill subjecting to banishment, without trial by jury. It does
not appear clearly whether the exiles were under the character
of aliens or Citizens. If under the former, the case is in point.
******
Our post had not arrived at the usual hour on Wednesday,
and I have not since heard from the office. We are, conse
quently, without any late intelligence of your proceedings. I
have been disappointed in seeing no step taken in relation to
Lyon. He is clearly within privilege, and it ought to be claimed
for him. In the case of Wilkes, the Judges were unanimously

1799. LETTERS. 151
of opinion that a libel did not take away his privilege, altho' it
is there less definite than with us. The House of Commons
voted differently; but it was the vote of a faction, and, there
fore, of less weight than the other authority.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Feb* 8, 1799.
Dear Sir, — I did not receive your last favor of the 16th
ultimo till the mail after it was due, with the further delay of
its coming by the way of Charlottesville.
*********
I have had a glance at Gerry's communications and Picker
ing's Report on it. It is impossible for any man of candor not
to see in the former an anxious desire on the part of France
for accommodation, mixed with the feelings which Gerry satis
factorily explains. The latter, *********
****** taken in combination with preceding trans
actions, is a link that fits the chain. The President could not
do less in his speech than allow France an option of peace; nor
his minister do more than to insult and exasperate her, if pos
sible, into a refusal of it.
*****

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Richmond, Dec 29, 1799.
Dear Sir, — My promise to write to you before your leaving
Albemarle was defeated by a dysenteric attack, which laid me
up for about a week, and which left me in a state of debility not
yet thoroughly removed. My recovery has been much retarded
by the job of preparing a vindication of the Resolutions of last
Session against the replies of the other States, and the sophis
tries from other quarters. The Committee made their report a
few days ago, which is now in the press, and stands the order
of the day for Thursday next. A set of Resolutions proposed

152 WORKS OF MADISON. 1799.
by Mr. Giles, instructing the Senators to urge the repeal of the
unconstitutional acts, the disbanding of the army, and a proper
arrangement of the militia, are also in the press, and stand the
order of the same day for the same Committee. It is supposed
that both these papers, the latter, perhaps, with some modifica
tions, will go through the House of Delegates. The Senate,
owing to inattention and casualties, is so composed as to render
the event there not a little uncertain. If an election to fill the
vacancy of Mr. H. Nelson, who lately resigned, should send Mr.
Andrews, in preference to his competitor, Mr. Saunders, I am
told that the parties will be precisely in equilibrio, excepting
only one or two, whom circumstances now and then on particu
lar questions transfer from the wrong to the right side. It is
hoped that this contingent fund of votes will be applicable to
the vindication. On other important questions, there is much
less expectation from it. There is a report here that the Legis
lature of N. Carolina, now in session, have voted the Resolu
tions of Virginia under their table. The report is highly im
probable, and I do not believe it. But it is impossible to cal
culate the progress of delusion, especially in a State where it is
said to be under systematic management, and where there is so
little either of system or exertion opposed to it. We had a nar
row escape yesterday from an increase of pay to the members,
which would have been particularly unseasonable and injurious,
both within and without the State. It was rejected on the third
reading by a small majority, and was so much a favorite with
the distant members particularly, that I fear it has left them in
rather an ill humour.
The late course of foreign events has probably made the same
impression everywhere. If it should not render France less
anxious to meet our advances, its good effects will be felt every
way. If our Executive and their Envoys be sincere in their
pacific objects, it will, perhaps, supply by their increased anxiety
what may be lost on the other side. But there can be little
confidence, after what has been seen, that the negociation would
be influenced by this temper of the Envoys, instead of that which
perverted it in the hands of their predecessors. This possibility

1800. LETTERS. I53
of failure in the diplomatic experiment will present the most
specious obstacle to an immediate discharge of the army. It
would be useful for the Assembly to know how this matter is
viewed where you are. Mr. Dawson will be good enough to
write me on the subject. I intended to have written to him by
this mail, but my time has been taken from me till the closing
of the mail is approaching.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Richmond, Jany 4, 1800.
Dear Sir, — My last covered a copy of the Report on the
Resolutions of last year. I now enclose a copy of certain reso
lutions moved by Mr. Giles, to which he means to add an in
struction on the subject of the intercourse law, which has been
so injurious to the price of Tobacco. It is not improbable that
the Resolutions, when taken up, may undergo some mollifica
tions in the spirit and air of them. The Report has been under
debate for two days. The attacks on it have turned chiefly on
our alleged inconsistency between the comment now made and
the arguments of the last session; and on the right of the Legis
lature to interfere in any manner with denunciations of the
measures of the Gen1 Gov'. The first attack has been parried
by an amendment admitting that different constructions may
have been entertained of the term "States," as "parties," &c,
but that the sense relied on in the report must be concurred in
by all. It is, in fact, concurred in by both parties. On exam
ination of the Debates of the last session, it appears that both
were equally inaccurate and inconsistent in the grounds for
merly taken by them. The attack on the right of the Legisla
ture to interfere by declaration of opinion will form a material
point in the discussion. It is not yet known how far the oppo
sition to the Report will be carried into detail. The part re
lating to the Common Law, it is said, will certainly be com
bated. You will perceive, from this view of the matter, that it
is not possible to guess how long we shall be employed on it.

154 WORKS OF MADISON. 1800.
There will, in the event, be a considerable majority for the Re
port in the House of Delegates, and a pretty sure one in the
Senate. Can you send me a copy of Priestley's letters last pub
lished?

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Jan^ 9, 1800.
Dear Sir, — The question on the Report printed was decided
by 60 for and 40 against it, the day before yesterday, after a de
bate of five days. Yesterday and to-day have been spent on
Mr. Giles' propositions, which, with some softenings, will prob
ably pass by nearly the same vote. The Senate is in rather a
better state than was expected. The Debate turned almost
wholly on the right of the Legislature to protest. The Consti
tutionality of the Alien and Sedition acts, and of the Common
Law, was waived. It was said that the last question would be
discussed under Mr. Giles' propositions; but as yet nothing has
been urged in its favour. It is probable, however, that the in
tention has not been laid aside. I thank you for the pamphlets.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Richmond, Jany 12, 1800.
Dear Sir, — My last informed you of the result of the debates
on the justifying Report of the Select Committee. I am now
able to add that of Mr. Giles's resolutions. The question on
the whole was decided in the affirmative by a little upwards of
a hundred against less than fifty. The vote was rather stronger
on some of the particular resolutions, for example, the instruc
tion for disbanding the army. The Alien, Sedition, and Tobacco
instructions passed without a count or a division. That relating
to the Common Law passed unanimously, with an amendment
qualifying it in the words of the paragraph in the Justifying
Report, under which certain defined parts of the Common
Law are admitted to be the law of the U. S. This amendment
was moved by the minority, on the idea that it covers the doc-

1800. LETTERS. I55
trine they contend for. On our side, it is considered as a
guarded exposition of the powers expressed in the Const", and
those necessary and proper to carry them into execution. I am
not able to say in what manner they misconstrue the definition,
unless they apply the term "adopt" to the "Court," which
would be equally absurd and unconstitutional. Tho judges
themselves will hardly contend that they can adopt a law, that
is, make that law which was before not law. The difference in
the majority on the Report and the Resolutions was occasioned
chiefly by the pledge given against the former by the members
who voted against the Resolutions of last year. The resolu
tions also underwent some improvements, which reconciled many
to them who were not satisfied with their first tone and form.
It is understood that the present assembly is rather stronger on
the republican side than the last one, and that a few favorable
changes have taken place in the course of the Session. It is
proposed to introduce to-morrow a bill for a general ticket in
causing the next Electors. I expect to leave this in a week, so
that your subsequent favors will find me in Orange.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Richmond, Jany 18, 1800.
Dear Sir, — Since my last, the Senate have agreed to the
Report and the Resolution by 15 to 6. To the latter, they made
an amendment to the definition of the portion of Common Law
in force in the U. S., by inserting the words "by Congress"
after the word "adopted," in order to repel the misconstruction
which led the minority to concur in that particular resolution
as it passed the House of Delegates. The amendment was
agreed to by 82 to 40. The plan of a Gen1 Ticket was so novel
that a great number who wished it shrunk from the vote, and
others, apprehending that their Constituents would be still more
startled at it, voted against it, so that it passed by a majority
of 5 votes only. The event in the Senate is rather doubtful,
tho' it is expected to get thro'. As the avowed object of it is

156 WORKS OF MADISON. 1800.
to give Virginia/air play, I think, if passed into a law, it will,
with proper explanations, become popular. I expect to get
away about the middle of the week. The Assembly will rise,
perhaps, at the end of it, tho' possibly not so soon. I forgot to
tell you that a renewed effort to raise the pay of the members
to 3 Dolls, has succeeded; a measure wrong in principle, and
which will be hurtful in its operation.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Orange, Feby 14, 1800.
Dear Sir, — My last to you was from Richmond; your last to
me is just received, covering the Bill for drawing Jurors by lot.
The plan proposed by the Bill is a great improvement on the
regulation in force here. I cannot say whether it may have the
same merit every where. This subject was not wholly forgotten
during our late session. A Bill was even prepared on it by
one of our State Judges. But subjects deemed more immedi
ately interesting diminished so much the attention of some whose
agency in carrying it thro' was essential, that the Bill was never
introduced. We see by the late papers that a new scene is presented on
the French Theatre, which leaves the denouement more a prob
lem than ever. The characters and professions of some of the
leading actors furnish a hope that monarchy may not be their
object, but melancholy evidence appears that the destiny of
the Revolution is transferred from the Civil to the military au
thority. Whether the lesson will have the proper effect here
in turning the public attention to the danger of military usur
pations, or of intrigues between political and military leaders,
is more than I can say. A stronger one was, perhaps, never
given, nor to a Country more in a situation to profit by it.
We have had, for two weeks and more, snow on the ground
from 15 to 20 inches deep, which has blockaded every body
within his own doors. Adieu.

1800. LETTERS. I57
I was a subscriber for Trumbull's prints, which, I find, are
now in America. Can you tell me when and how I am to get
them, and what is to be paid in addition to the payments at sub
scribing? I wish to know, also, whether they are to be de
livered in frames.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

March 15j_1800.

m 1 11
Dear Sir, — Since my last, I have been favored with the fol
lowing inclosures: the Bill relating to Electors, Ramsay's Ora
tion, the Report on Ways and Means, a motion by Bingham,
and the resolution for excluding the Judges from other offices.
It is not to be denied that the Constitution might have been
properly more full in prescribing the election of President andl
Vice President; but the remedy is an amendment to the Con-j
stitution, and not a Legislative interference. It is evident that
this interference ought to be, and was meant to be, as little per
mitted as possible; it being a principle of the Constitution that
the two Departments should be independent of each other, and
dependent on their Constituents only. Should the spirit of the
Bill be followed up, it is impossible to say how far the choice
of the Executive may be drawn out of the constitutional hands>
and subjected to the management of the Legislature. The dan
ger is the greater, as the Chief Magistrate for the time being
may be bribed into the usurpations by so shaping them as to
favor his re-election. If this licentiousness in constructive per
versions of the Constitution continue to increase, we shall soon
have to look into our code of laws, and not the charter of the
people, for the form, as well as the powers of our Government.
Indeed, such an unbridled spirit of construction as has gone
forth in sundry instances would bid defiance to any possible
parchment securities against usurpation.
I understand that the general ticket law is represented at
Phil" as generally unpopular. I have no reason to believe this
to be the fact. On the contrary, I learn that the information

158 WORKS OF MADISON. 1800.
collected at Richmond on this subject is satisfactory to the
friends of the law.
The ground has been covered for six weeks with snow, and
there is still a remnant of it. It has given a very unusual back
wardness to all the preparations for the ensuing crops, but we
hope for some amends from its influence on the winter grain.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 4, 1800.
Dear Sir, — Your favor by Mr. Trist was duly handed to
me, since which I have received the report on imports under
your cover, and yesterday your favour of the 25 ult., accompa
nied with the pamphlet and Mr. Nicholson's motion on the
Electoral Bill, which appears to be so fair and pertinent, that a
rejection of it in favor of any other modification proposed must
fix a new brand on the Authors. The spirit manifested in the
Senate steadily, and in the other House occasionally, however
mischievous in its immediate effects, cannot fail, I think, to aid
the progress of reflection and change among the people. In
this view our public malady may work its own cure, and ulti
mately rescue the republican principle from the imputation
brought on it by the degeneracy of the public councils. Such
a demonstration of the rectitude and efficacy of popular senti
ment will be the more precious, as the late defection of France
has left America the only Theatre on which true liberty can
have a fair trial. We are all extremely anxious here to learn
the event of the election in New York, on which so much de
pends. I have nothing to add to what I have already said on
the prospect with us. I have no reason whatever to doubt all
the success that was expected.
If it should fall in your way, you will oblige me by inquiring
whether there be known in Philadelphia any composition for
encrusting brick that will effectually stand the weather; and
particularly what is thought of common plaster, thickly painted
with white lead and overspread with sand. I wish to give some

1800. LETTERS. I59
such dressing to the columns of my portico, and to lessen as
much as possible the risk of the experiment.
Affectionately yours.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 20, 1800.
Dear Sir, — Since my last, I have been favored with yours by
Christo* M°Pherson. It brought me the first agreeable infor
mation of the prospect held out by our Envoys. The posture
of Europe, tho' dreadful to humanity in general, will, I trust,
enforce the disposition of France to come to a proper adjust
ment with us. And notwithstanding the group of daring ex
periments presented by our public Councils, I also trust that
they will not venture on either a direct refusal, or a palpable
evasion of this result. Still, however, the situation of the party
bent on war is such, that every stratagem ought to be suspected
that may afford a chance of prolonging their ascendency. The
horrors which they evidently feel at the approach of the Elect
oral epoch are a sufficient warning of the desperate game by
which they will be apt to characterize the interval. In my next
I shall be able to give you some partial information of the tem
per of the people here, as it will be shewn by our State Election,
which takes place on the 23 inst. I find that considerable ex
ertion is used to raise prejudices against the measures of the
last session of Assembly, especially the novel mode of appoint
ing Electors. I am not possessed, however, of any evidence of
their success that deserves attention.
I sincerely wish Mr. Dupont may fulfil his promise to you,
and that I may come in for a participation of the visit. I beg
you to make him sensible of the particular pleasure I shall feel
in an opportunity of testifying to him, at my own house, the
high esteem I entertain for his genius and virtues.

160 WORKS OF MADISON. 1800.

TO JAMES MONROE. Orange, Mav 23. 1800.
Dear Sir, — I received your favor of the 15th from Albemarle
a few days ago. I shall not be surprised at an experiment in
this State, at this moment, of its republican sensibility, by put
ting in force the sedition act; and entirely approve your idea
of the policy by which the measure ought to be turned against
its author. Nothing seems necessary now to rectify the public
opinion and reform the administration, but a steady adherence
to the principles of prudence, which have so far succeeded in
both. And it would be doubly unwise to depart from this
course at a moment when the party which has done the mischief
is so industriously co-operating in its own destruction. The
late ungracious vote for disbanding the army will probably ex
tinguish the project, if it existed, of making the camp at War
wick an auxiliary to the Judicial department. For the sake of
propriety, I am extremely glad that so obnoxious a step has
been precluded. In any other view, an opponent of the admin
istration would have no reason to regret so odious a perversion
of military force.

TO JAMES MONROE. 1800.
Dear Sir, — I now inclose a letter left here by Mr. Alston.
It will communicate all that I could repeat from one to me from
Col. Burr and Mr. Gelston. The latter is uneasy lest the South
ern States should not be true to their duty. I hope he will be
sensible that there was no occasion for it. It seems important
that all proper measures should emanate from Richmond for
guarding against a division of the Republican votes, by which
one of the Republican Candidates may be lost. It would be
superfluous to suggest to you the mischief resulting from the
least ground of reproach, and particularly to Virginia, on this
head.

1800. LETTERS. 161

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Sep'., 1800.
Dear Sir, — The silence which prevails as to the negociations
of our Envoys, is not less surprising to my view than to yours.
We may be assured, however, that nothing of a sort to be turned
to the party objects on the anvil has been received, unless, in
deed, the publication should be delayed for a moment deemed
more critically advantageous. As we are left to mere conjec
tures, the following have occurred to me. The long continu
ance of the Envoys at Paris of itself indicates that difficulties
of some sort or other have sprung up, or been created. As the
French Government seems to have provided for the future se
curity of our commerce by repealing the decrees under which
it had been violated, and as the ultimatum of the Executive, ex
plained by former instructions, permitted a waiver at least of
claims for past spoliations, it would seem that no insuperable
obstacles would be likely to arise on these articles. In looking
for other solutions, my attentions have fallen on the articles
contained in the Treaty of 1778, relating — 1. To free ships free
ing their Cargoes. 2. To the permissions granted to prizes.
3. To convoys. That a difficulty may have happened on the
first is rendered not improbable by the late transaction with
Prussia; the 2a is suggested by the circumstances under which
the stipulation was sought and obtained by G. B.; and the 3a,
by the late occurrences and combinations in Europe. Should
any one or more of these conjectures be just, the explanation
will also coincide with the reports from different quarters, which
speak of the Treaty of '78 as at the bottom of the impediments;
and if so, it seems more likely that they would be found in such
parts of it as have been alluded to, than in the guaranty which
cannot be needful to France, and which her pride would be more
ready to reject than to claim.
VOL. II. 11

162 WORKS OF MADISON. 1800.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
October 21, 1800.
Dear Sir, — This will be handed to you by Mr. Alston, of S.
Carolina, who proposes to call at Monticello on his return from
a Northern tour. He will probably be made known to you by
other introductions; but those which he has brought to me, as
well as a short acquaintance with him, make me feel an obliga
tion to add mine. He appears to be intelligent, sound in his
principles, and polished in his manners. Coming fresh from
New York, through Pennsylvania and Maryland, he will be
able to furnish many details in late occurrences. The fact of
most importance mentioned by him, and which is confirmed by
letters I have from Burr and Gelston, is, that the vote of Rhode
Island will be assuredly on the right side. The latter gentle
man expresses much anxiety and betrays some jealousy with re
spect to the integrity of the Southern States in keeping the for
mer one in view for the secondary station. I hope the event
will skreen all the parties, particularly Virginia, from any im
putation on this subject; though I am not without fears that
the requisite concert may not sufficiently pervade the several
States. You have no doubt seen the late Paris statement, as
well as the comment on it by Observator, who is manifestly
Hamilton. The two papers throw a blaze of light on the pro
ceedings of our administration, and must, I think, co-operate
with other causes in opening thoroughly the eyes of the people.

TO JAMES MONROE. Nov' 10, 1800.
Dear Sir, — I received yours of the 6th instant by Mr. Erwin,
whom I have found to justify the recommendations he brought
me. He appears to be intelligent, well informed, sound in his
principles, and agreeable in his manners. He has not yet
touched on the subject to which you allude, and I have not been
led to start a conversation on it. At the desire of Mr. Jeffer-

1800. LETTERS. 163
son, I returned the inclosed letters which you sent to him. Part
of one of them would be useful to the public, if it could be com
municated without impropriety. The substance of it, perhaps,
might be thrown into an unexceptionable form, and produce re
flections suitable to the crisis of our affairs with France. I
hear, with some surprise and apprehension, that Charleston has
chosen a large majority of anti-republican members for the Le
gislature. Should the country not afford a remedy in that State,
and Pennsylvania be kept from voting, the election of President
and Vice President will be a nice business. In this region of
Country, the elections have exceeded our hopes. In this County,
out of more than 350 votes, 7 only were on the wrong ticket.
I hear that in Frederick, the Jefferson ticket prevailed in the
proportion of 3 to 1.

TO JAMES MONROE. November 10, 1800.
Dear Sir, — Mr. Erwin proposing to set out in the morning
without my again seeing him, I think proper to add to the few
lines with which he is already charged, that our interview
closed without any allusion to the secondary object of the elec
tion. If I had not expected, as intimated by you, that he would
bring on the subject, it would, no doubt, have dropped from
me. As it is possible he may draw some erroneous inference
from my silence, especially as a good deal of free conversation
passed on the election generally, I hope you will take occasion
to guard against it. You know my sentiments, and I am not
averse to a communication of them, as far as you deem eligible.
I cannot apprehend any danger of a surprize that would throw
Mr. Jefferson out of the primary station. I cannot believe that
any such is intended, or that a single republican vote will aban
don him. The worst, therefore, that could possibly happen,
would be a. tie, that would appeal to the House of Representa
tives, where the candidates would certainly, I think, be arranged
properly, even on the recommendation of the secondary one'

164 WORKS O" MADISON. 1800.
As I do not wish that Mr. Erwin should be under any wrong
impressions, which might be as injurious in a public as disagree
able in a private view, in case they should be conveyed to others,
I have thought this supplement of sufficient importance to be
written after the retirement of Mr. Erwin.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Nov , 1800.
Dear Sir, — Yours by Mr. Erwin was delivered by him safe,
with the two letters inclosed. I forwarded them by him this
morning, as you desired, to the Governor.* They confirm, in
substance, the state and difficulty of the negociation, as presented
by the late statement under the Paris head. The observations
on the delays carved out by the Executive, and the favorable
moment lost thereby, are interesting, and deserve the public
attention, if they could be properly submitted to it. I have
suggested the idea to the Governor. The accounts from S. Caro
lina are rather ominous, but I trust we shall soon be relieved
by an overbalance of republicanism in the upper elections. To
the most unfavorable suppositions, we can, as yet, oppose the
hopes presented by Pennsylvania, and the chance that a compe
tency of votes may be obtained in spite, of defections in the for
mer State. I inclose a hand-bill lately published in Maryland,
and industriously circulated there and to the Southward. You
will probably be surprized at one of the documents included in
it. Mr. Duval expresses considerable fears of its tendency, but
I cannot view the danger in so serious a light. I am glad to
find you do not mean to postpone your journey to Washington
later than the 21st, as I wish much to see you on the way, and
shall set out for Richmond, if called thither on the electoral
errand, as is probable, at least 8 or 9 days before the legal day.
The elections, as far as I have learned, are successful beyond
expectation. In this County the votes were 340 odd to 7, and
* Mr. Monroe, then Governor of Virginia.

1800. LETTERS. 165
in a number of other Counties in the most commanding major
ities. Even in Frederick, I hear the difference was nearly as
3tol.

TO JAMES MONROE. December , 1800.
DR Sir, — I have received your favor of the 16th. It has not
removed the inquietude prevailing in this quarter as to the pre
cise issue of the election. There are reports from different quar
ters, which seem to be positive, that a difference of several votes
has taken place between the two republican candidates, but I
cannot trace in them either authenticity or particularity enough
to entitle them to confidence.
The project suggested by Col. Newton of a State Bank, as an
antidote to the partialities of the National Bank, involves many
important considerations. Although, as a dernier resort, much
may be urged in its favor, yet I should presume the want of
State funds would, at this time, be an insuperable objection; nor,
perhaps, ought such an experiment to precede that which is to
be made of a change in our national administration, from which
a new turn maybe given to most of the National measures. In
every view, a better judgment could be formed on the subject
some time hence than at present.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Orange, Dec 20, 1800.
Dear Sir, — I did not write to you from Richmond, because
I was considerably indisposed during my stay there, and be
cause I could communicate to you nothing that would not reach
you with equal speed through other channels. Before I left
that place, the choice of electors in S. Carolina had been re
ceived by the Governor in a letter from Col. Hampton, and was
understood by all parties to fix the event of a Republican Pres
ident. The manner in which the Electors have voted in that

166 WORKS OF MADISON. 1801
State, in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New York,
makes it probable that the Vice President will also be republi
can. If the States of Georgia, N. Carolina, Tennessee, and Ken
tucky, should follow these examples, it will even [?] devolve on
the House of Representatives to make the discrimination. There
can be no danger, I presume, but that in such an event a proper
one will be made; but it is more desirable that it should be pre
cluded by the foresight of some of the Electors. Gelston, of
New York, assures me that there are two, if not three States,
in which something to this effect may be looked for, but he does
not name the States. Governor Davie passed through Rich
mond whilst I was there. I happened not to see him, however,
nor did I learn from others what complexion he seemed disposed
to give to the business of his mission.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. January 10, 1801.
Dear Sir, — Mr. Browne having been detained at Fredericks
burg for some time, I did not receive your favor of the 19th in
time to be conveniently acknowledged by the last mail. The
succeeding one of the 26 th came to hand on the 7th instant
only, a delay that fixes blame on the post office either in Wash
ington or Fredericksburg. In all the letters, and most of the
newspapers, which I have lately received through the post office,
there is equal ground for complaint.
I find that the vote of Kentucky establishes the tie between
the Republican characters, and consequently throws the result
into the hands of the House of Representatives. Desperate as
some of the adverse party there may be, I can scarcely allow
myself to believe that enough will not be found to frustrate the
attempt to strangle the election of the people, and smuggle into
the Chief Magistracy the choice of a faction. It would seem
that every individual member who has any standing or stake in
society, or any portion of virtue or sober understanding, must
revolt at the tendency of such a manoeuvre. Is it possible that

1801. LETTERS.

167

Mr. Adams should give his sanction to it, if that should be made
a necessary ingredient? or that he would not hold it his duty
or his policy, in case the present House should obstinately re
fuse to give effect to the Constitution, to appoint, which he cer
tainly may do before his office expires, as early a day as possible
after that event for the succeeding House to meet and supply
the omission? Should he disappoint a just expectation in either
instance, it will be an omen, I think, forbidding the steps to
wards him which you seem to be meditating. I would not wish
to discourage any attentions which friendship, prudence, or be
nevolence, may suggest in his behalf, but I think it not improper
to remark that I find ******* the follies of his
administration, the oblique stroke at his predecessor in the let
ter to Coxe, and the crooked character of that to T. Pickerinsr,
are working powerfully against him. Added to these causes is
the pamphlet of Hamilton, which, though its recoil has perhaps
more deeply wounded the author than the object it was dis
charged at, has contributed not a little to overthrow the latter,
struggling as he before was in the public esteem.
On the supposition of either event, whether of an interregnum
in the Executive, or of a surreptitious intrusion into it, it be
comes a question of the first order, what is the course demanded
by the crisis? Will it be best to acquiesce in a suspension or
usurpation of the Executive authority till the meeting of Con
gress in December next, or for Congress to be summoned by a
joint proclamation or recommendation of the two characters
having a majority of votes for President? My present judg
ment favors the latter expedient. The prerogative of conve
ning the Legislature must reside in one or other of them, and if
both concur, must substantially include the requisite will. The
intentions of the people would undoubtedly be pursued. And
if, in reference to the Constitution, the proceeding be not strictly
regular, the irregularity will be less in form than any other
adequate to the emergency, and will lie in form only, rather
than substance; whereas the other remedies proposed are sub
stantial violations of the will of the people, of the scope of the
Constitution, and of the public order and interest. It is to be

168 WORKS OF MADISON. 1801.
hoped, however, that all such questions will be precluded by a
proper decision of nine States in the House of Representatives.
I observe that the French Convention is represented as highly
obnoxious to the Senate. I should not have supposed that the
opposition would be hinged on the article surrendering public
vessels. As the stipulation is mutual, it certainly spares our
pride sufficiently to leave us free to calculate our interest, and
on this point there cannot be a difference of opinion. I was
less surprized at the obstacle discovered in the British Treaty;
the latter of which, combined with the repeal of the French
Treaty, beget a suspicion that, in some quarters at least, the
present posture of things has been long anticipated. It is cer
tain, however, that the Convention leaves G. Britain on a bet
ter footing than the British Treaty placed her, and it is remark
able that Ellsworth, Davie, and Murray, should have concurred
in the arrangement, if it have any real interference with bona
fide engagements to G. Britain. It may be recollected that the
privilege given to British prizes was not purchased, like that
to French prizes, by any peculiar services to us; and never had
any other pretext than the alledged policy of putting the two
great rival nations of Europe as nearly as possible on an equal
footing. Notwithstanding this pretext for the measure, Hamil
ton, in his late pamphlet, acknowledges the error of it. It
would be truly extraordinary, if a measure intended for this
equalizing purpose should be construable into an insuperable
barrier to the equality proposed. It is of vast moment, both
in a domestic and foreign view, that the Senate should come to
a right decision. The public mind is already sore and jealous
of that body, and particularly so of the insidious and mischiev
ous policy of the British Treaty. It is strongly averse, also, to
war; and would feel abhorrence of an unjust or unnecessary
war with any nation. It is much to be wished that these facts
may not be disregarded in the question before the Senate. If
there be anything fairly inadmissible in the Convention, it
would be better to follow the example of a qualified ratifica
tion, than rush into a provoking rejection. If there be any
thing likely, however unjustly, to beget complaints or discon-

1801. LETTERS.

169

tents on the part of Great Britain, early and conciliatory
explanations ought not to be omitted. However difficult our
situation has been made, justice and prudence will, it is hoped,
steer us through it peacefully. In some respects, the task is
facilitated at the present moment. France has sufficiently man
ifested her friendly disposition, and, what is more, seems to be
duly impressed with the interest she has in being at peace with
us. Great Britain, however, intoxicated with her maritime as
cendency, is more dependent every day on our commerce for
her resources, must for a considerable length of time look in a
great degree to this Country for bread for herself, and abso
lutely for all the necessaries for her islands. The prospect of
a Northern Confederacy of Neutrals cannot fail, in several
views, to inspire caution and management towards the United
States, especially as, in the event of war or interruption of com
merce with the Baltic, the essential article of naval stores can
be sought here only. Besides these cogent motives to peace
and moderation, her subjects will not fail to remind her of the
great pecuniary pledge they have in this Country, and which,
under any interruption of peace or commerce with it, must fall
under great embarrassments, if nothing worse. As I have not
restrained my pen from this hasty effusion, I will add for your
consideration one other remark on the subject. Should it be
found that Great Britain means to oppose pretensions drawn
from her Treaty to any part of the late one with France, may
she not be diverted from it by the idea of driving us into the
necessity of soothing France by stipulations to take effect at
the expiration of the Treaty with Great Britain, and that would
be a bar to the renewal of the latter ? Or, in case the preten
sions of Great Britain should defeat the Treaty now before the
Senate, might not such an expedient be made a plaister for the
wound given to France?
My health still suffers from several complaints, and I am
much afraid that any changes that may take place are not likely
to be for the better. The age and very declining state of my
father are making, also, daily claims on my attention, and from
appearances it may not be long before these claims may acquire

170 WORKS OF MADISON. 1801.
their full force. All these circumstances mingle themselves
very seriously with one of the eventual arrangements contem
plated. It is not my purpose, however, to retract what has
passed in conversation between us on that head. But I cannot
see the necessity, and I extremely doubt the propriety, should
the contest in hand issue as is most probable, of my anticipating
a relinquishment of my home. I cannot but think and feel that
there will be an awkwardness, to use the softest term, in ap
pearing on the political Theatre before I could be considered as
regularly called to it, and even before the commencement of the
authority from which the call would proceed. Were any solid
advantage at stake, this scruple might be the less applicable;
but it does not occur that the difference of not very many days
can be at all material. As little can I admit that the circum
stance of my participation in the Executive business could have
any such effect on either the majority or minority as has oc
curred; or, if a partiality in any particular friends could be
gratified by a knowledge of such an arrangement, that the end
would not be as well attained by its being otherwise made
known to them that it was to take place, as by its being an
nounced by my appearance on the spot. I only add that I am
sensible of the obligation of respecting your conclusion, what
ever it may finally be, but I cannot but hope that it may be in
fluenced by the considerations which I have taken the liberty to
hint. You may recollect a difficulty suggested in making appoint
ments without a Senate, in case of resignations prior to March
4. How have you solved it?

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

February 28, 1801.
Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 1st instant was to have been
acknowledged a week ago, but the irregularity of the post, oc
casioned by high waters, has delayed it to the present oppor
tunity. I have now to acknowledge your two subsequent ones

1801. LETTERS. 171
of the 12th and 19th. In compliance with the last, I had pro
posed to leave home in a few days, so as to be with you shortly
after the 4th of March. A melancholy occurrence has arrested
this intention. My father's health for several weeks latterly
seemed to revive, and we had hopes that the approach of milder
seasons would still further contribute to keep him with us. A
few days past, however, he became sensibly worse, and. yester
day morning, rather suddenly, though very gently, the flame of
life went out. It is impossible for me now to speak of my
movements with precision. Although the exact degree of agency
devolving on me remains to be known, a crowd of indispensable
attentions must necessarily be due from me. In this posture of
things, I can only say that I shall wait the return of the post
after this reaches, by which I hope to learn whether your in
tended continuance at Washington will admit, and the state of
things will require, my being there before you leave it. By this
information I shall be governed, unless imperiously controuled
by circumstances here.
The conduct of Mr. Adams is not such as was to have been
wished, or, perhaps, expected. Instead of smoothing the path
for his successor, he plays into the hands of those who are en
deavoring to strew it with as many difficulties as possible; and
with this view, does not manifest a very squeamish regard to
the Constitution. Will not his appointments to offices, not va
cant actually at the time, even if afterwards vacated by accept
ances of the translations, be null ?
The result of the contest in the House of Representatives was
generally looked for in this quarter. It was thought not prob
able that the phalanx would hold out against the general revolt
of its partizans out of doors, and without any military force to
abet usurpation. How fortunate that the latter has been with
held ! and what a lesson to America and the world is given by
the efficacy of the public will, when there is no army to be turned
against it !
I observe that a committee is appointed to enquire into the
effects of the late fires. This is no doubt proper; but does not,
I think, promise much. More is to be expected from the scru-

172 WORKS OF MADISON. 1801.
tinies of honest heads of Departments, aided by the documents
and other evidences which they will have time and the best
means of examining. I take for granted one of the first steps
of the new administration will be to institute returns, particu
larly in the navy and war departments, of the precise state in
which every circumstance involved in them comes into the new
hands. This will answer the double purpose of enabling the
public to do justice both to the authors of past errors and abuses,
and the authors of future reforms.
I received a few days ago the inclosed letter from Mr. Page.
Although there are parts of it which might well be omitted in
the transmission to you, yet the length of the proper extracts
tempts me to shun the trouble of making them. In justice to
Doctor Tucker, I say with pleasure, that I have always regarded
him as a man of the greatest moral and political probity, truly
attached to republican principles, of a very ingenious mind, ex
tensive information, and great exactitude in his ideas and hab
its of business, and, consequently, well fitted for public service.
The letter from CaUender seems, from its contents, tohave been
meant for you, though superscribed to me.

TO JAMES MONROE. May 6th, 1801.
Dear Sir, — CaUender, I find, is under a strange error on the
subject of his fine, and in a strange humor in consequence of it.
I inclose an open letter for him, which you will please to read
and forward. How has the delay in giving effect to the remis
sion of the fine happened ? It ought to be known and explained
to him. What I state to him as the view of the President I
have from the President himself, and therefore cannot not be
mistaken in.

1801. LETTERS. 173

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Juno 1, 1801.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 23d ult. Cal-
lender made his appearance here some days ago, in the same
temper which is described in your letter. He seems implacable
towards the principal object of his complaints, and not to be
satisfied in any respect without an office. It has been my lot
to bear the burden of receiving and repelling his claims. What
feelings may have been excited by my plain dealing with him, I
cannot say; but am inclined to think he has been brought by it
to some reflections which will be useful to him. It is impossi
ble, however, to reason concerning a man whose imagination
and passions have been so fermented. Do you know, too, that,
besides his other passions, he is under the tyranny of that of
love? Strange as it may appear, this came out under a charge
of secrecy, in a way that renders the fact unquestionable. The
object of his flame is in Richmond. I did not ask her name, but
presume her to be young, beautiful, in hi3 eyes at least, and in
a sphere above him. He has flattered himself, and probably
been flattered by others, into a persuasion that the emoluments
and reputation of a post office would obtain her in marriage.
Of these recommendations, however, he is sent back in despair.
With respect to the fine, even, I fear that delays, if nothing
more, may still torment him, and lead him to torment others.
The case stands thus: Randolph had sent on, but not settled his
accounts, in which there was a credit to the United States for
the amount of the fine. In settling the accounts the credit is
struck out, and the comptroller has notified him that the 200
dollars are to be paid to CaUender. Whether he will do it
without a suit, is the question. If he will not, and the result
can be anticipated in any way, it will be fortunate, as Calen
der's irritation, produced by his wants, is whetted constantly
by his suspicion that the difficulties, if not intended, are the off
spring of indifference in those who have interposed in his be
half. I cannot but hope that the late Marshal will see the pro
priety of not opposing the order of the Treasury Department.

174 WORKS OF MADISON. 1801.
There was certainly no pretext for his refusal at all to refund
the money, as I understand his own statement leaves him a
debtor of about 1,660 dollars, and that of the Treasury Depart
ment at 2,500 dollars to the United States.
You see by the papers that our Mediterranean trade is in
jeopardy, if not attacked, and that the arrears of stipulated re
mittances are urged as the ground of complaint. Whether this
be or be not more than a pretext, it is certainly extraordinary
that the arrears should have been suffered so to accumulate.
From Europe, in general, we hear little more than what you see
in print. It is said that Portugal is presented with the alter
native of shutting her ports against G. Britain, and receiving a
French or Spanish garrison, or of being annexed and guarantied
as a province to Spain. The legations to that Country and
Batavia are to be abolished. The letters, &c, for the purpose,
to go to Smith and Murray, will be ready for the signature of the
President on Monday.
Intelligence has come through several channels which makes
it probable that Louisiana has been ceded to France. This is
but little wonderful, considering the calculations into which
France has been led by the transactions for several years back.
You will readily view this subject in all its aspects. If any
ideas occur on it that can be of service, favor me with them.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, July 25, 1801.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed came last evening in a packet from
Bordeaux. By the same conveyance I have a letter from Daw
son, of May 27, at Paris. Every appearance assured him that
the Convention would be ratified. Letters from King, of May
30 and June 1, represent the British Government as in disposi
tions equally favorable. They have given peremptory orders
to their West India cruisers to abstain from the captures which
have been most hurtful to us, and required all letters of Marque
to be called in which do not conform to them. Lord Hawks-

1801. LETTERS. 175
bury has also, on an interview invited for the purpose, commu
nicated to Mr. King, by order of his Majesty, that on hearing
of the intended expedition to the Mediterranean, orders had
been sent to Gibraltar, Minorca, and Malta, for the squadron
to be received in the most friendly manner, and supplied with
anything wanted from the King's stores, and that this commu
nication was made to Mr. King in order to its being transmitted
to the President of the United States. Although the sequel of
the conversation disclosed some circumstances, which I shall not
state on paper, detracting from the disinterestedness of this pro
ceeding, it shows that the present policy of the British Govern
ment treats the U. States with more respect and conciliation
than heretofore, notwithstanding the prophetic alarms sounded
on this subject against the election of Mr. Jefferson.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Ocf 24, 180^.
Dear Sir, — We have little news from abroad more than the
newspapers give, except that the negociation for settling the
difficulties under the 6th article of the British Treaty is in a fair
way to issue in a conversion of their vague claims into a round
sum, and that some other points in controversy are also likely
to be arranged. The Spaniards, in seizing our vessels under
the pretext of a blockade at Gibraltar, have excited much agita
tion among the Merchants, and considerable sensibility in the
public at large. The Executive will attend to it, under the joint
impression of the particular wrong done by Spain, and of her
amicable disposition in general towards the United States.
The election in New Jersey has had a republican issue. That
in Pennsylvania entirely so. Every where the progress of the
public sentiment mocks the cavils and clamors of the malignant
adversaries of the administration.

176 WORKS OF MADISON. 1802.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Jany 8, 1802.
Dear Sir, — I have not yet thanked you for the copy of your
Message, which I find has attracted attention, and circulates
with advantage to yourself, as well as to the public. It is much
to be wished that the same manly and enlarged, sentiments, and
the same just and enlightened policy, might distinguish the ad
dresses of all the Republican Governors, and co-operate with
the example set by the President, in affording honorable con
trasts to the passionate and apostate harangues which dis
graced a certain period in certain quarters.
Will you tell me what is the precise measure and kind of
qualifications possessed by your friend, Mr.  ? Has he
any knowledge of law? is he any wise familiar with forms? is
he practically acquainted with the usages and details of trade?
is he ready and clever with his pen, and for a style of writing
beyond the ordinary course of business? is his judgment of the
solid and correct kind? I ask these questions with a wish that
you would answer them in a manner enabling' me to take the
exact dimensions of the character, and with a further wish that
it may not be known they were asked, particularly that it may
not reach him or his friends that any correspondence in relation
to him has passed between us.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Jany 19, 1802.
Dear Sir, — I have this moment received yours of the 14th
instant. Mr. Dawson, as you will see, has at length reached
his post. I do not learn that any proceeding is instituted for
scrutinizing the legality of it. He brought ample despatches
from England, but not of very late date. At his departure a
cloud lay over the subjects depending between the United
States and Great Britain, a sudden and unaccountable tergiver
sation having shewn itself in the leaders of the latter Cabinet.

1803. LETTERS. 177

TO  VAN POLAREN. VmoniiA, August 13, 1802.
Sir, — I have received and communicated to the President
your letter of the 30th ult0, giving information of your appoint
ment to another public station, which terminates that which you
have held near the United States.
The President receives, with much satisfaction, the assurance
that the disposition of the Batavian Republic to cultivate friend
ship with the United States will suffer no diminution from the
mutual recall of their Diplomatic functionaries; and I am
charged to say in return, that as the step taken in this case, on
the part of the United States, had its origin altogether in con
siderations of domestic arrangement and economy, your Govern
ment may be equally assured of the constancy of the United
States in their cordial dispositions towards a nation whose
early and welcome proofs of good will strengthen its other
titles to their confidence, their esteem, and their cultivation of
the friendly relations which subsist between the two Countries.
I have the pleasure to add, that the personal merits exempli
fied during your residence in the United States have obtained
for you the sincere esteem of the President. Be persuaded,
Sir, that you will carry with you not less the regards and good
wishes which I beg leave to offer you, with the sentiments of
great respect and consideration, with which I have the honor
to be, your most obedient and humble servt.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 1, 1803.
Dear Sir, — Since you left us we have no further intelligence
from New Orleans, except a letter dated January 20th from the
Vice Consular agent there, from which it appears that the let
ters to the Governor and Intendant from the Spanish Minister
here had arrived about the 13th, and had not, on the 20th, pro-
VOL. II. 12

178 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
duced the desired change in the state of things. The delay,
however, does not seem to have been viewed by the Consul as
any proof that the Intendant would not conform to the inter
position. The idea continued that he had taken his measures
without orders from his Government. There are letters (ac
cording to that from the Consul) for the Marquis Yrujo now
on the way by land. These will probably shew whether the
Intendant will yield or not. The despatch vessel which carried
the Marquis's letters is not yet returned. The detention of her
beyond the allotted time is favorably interpreted by him, on
the presumption that she waits for a satisfactory answer, which
the pride of the Intendant postpones as long as possible.
The newspapers will have informed you of the turn given to
the proceedings of Congress on the subject of New Orleans, &c.
The propositions of Mr. Ross in the Senate, which drove at war
thro' a delegation of unconstitutional power to the Executive,
were discussed very elaborately, and with open doors. The
adversaries of them triumphed in the debate, and threw them
out by 15 votes against 11. On the motion of Mr. Brecken-
ridge, measures of expenseless or cheap preparation, in the style
of those which attended Mr. Jay's mission to G. Britain, have
been agreed on in the Senate. It is uncertain whether even
these will pass the House of Representatives. If they should,
as is, perhaps, not improper, they will not be understood as in
dicating views that ought to excite suspicions or unfriendly
sensations in either of the Governments to which your Mission
is addressed. The truth is, that justice and peace prevail not
only in the public councils, but in the body of the community;
and will continue to do so as long as the conduct of other na
tions will permit. But France and Spain cannot be too deeply
impressed with the necessity of revising their relations to us
thro' the Mississippi, if they wish to enjoy our friendship, or
preclude a state of things which will be more formidable than
any that either of those powers has yet experienced. Some ad
justments, such as those which you have to propose, have become
indispensable. The whole of what we wish is not too much to

1803. LETTERS. 179
secure permanent harmony between the parties. Something
much better than has hitherto been enjoyed by the States is
essential to any tolerable degree of it, even for the present.
I enclose you an extract of a letter from Mr. Gallatin, which
could not be well incorporated with the instructions. The in
formation it gives may nevertheless be of use, and I take this
mode of putting it in your hands.
I understand that a bill is likely to pass granting General La
Fayette 12,000 acres of land, as due for military services. We
are anxious that a clause may be inserted authorizing the Presi
dent to locate the tract wherever he pleases. Should this idea
succeed, the grant may become of great value, perhaps beyond
the contemplation of the Marquis, or his most sanguine friends.
Without such a clause, the land may be of little account, and
will probably fall short of the lowest expectations.
In the instructions relative to Article VI, you will find an
important discretion given on the subject of Beaumarchais's
claim. It was suggested by the possibility that the claim may
be pressed with an energy beyond its importance in any public
view; such a discretion was, therefore, highly expedient, and
may possibly be used with desirable effect.
(Extract of a letter from Albert CaUatin, EsqT., to J. Madison,
Estf.) Dated Feb* 7, 1803.
If West Florida can alone be purchased, it is certainly worth
attending to; but in that case, making the river Iberville the
boundary, as it was made in the Treaty of 1762, between France
and England, the article should be so worded as to give us the
whole channel of that river, or at least to permit us to open it,
so as to render it navigable in all seasons. At present, the bed
is 30 feet above low- water mark for 15 miles, from the Missis
sippi to Amit river; but I have no doubt that a very small open
ing would be widened and deepened afterwards by the river.
There is no obstruction, the whole being level, or mud, or sand.
But supposing even a portage there, the advantage of American

180 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
Houses settled in a American port would soon give a preference
over New Orleans to that port. The seaport may be, perhaps,
on the main, between Pearl and Pargacola rivers, but certainly
on that Island called " Ship Island," as through the passage be
tween that and the next Island there are more than 20 feet
water, and good anchorage close to the shore, which faces, the
main. A frigate of 36 guns was seen there by E. Jones, (the
first Clerk in my office, who is brother of our late Consul at
New Orleans, and lived ten years with him in West Florida,)
and it is the reason of its bearing that name. Judge Bay says
that there is another Island, called Deer Island, close to the en
trance of Lake Pontchartrain, which affords the same advan
tages. That Jones disbelieves; but the other is certain; and as
it is about half way between Mobile and the Lake, as the whole
navigation between these two places is locked in by the Islands,
and safe even for open boats and canoes, that Island would be
come the proper seaport for both rivers, Mississippi and Mobile;
for you can bring but 9 feet up Mobile Bay, 7 feet over the bar
of Lake Pontchartrain, and 15 over the bar at the mouth of the
Mississippi. It results from all that, that the possession of West
Florida, even without New Orleans island, is extremely im
portant, and that if it can be obtained, it ought expressly to in
clude all the islands within twenty leagues, or such distance as
to include those which are marked on the map.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, April 20, 1803.
Dear Sir, — You will receive with this all the communications
claimed by the actual and eventual posture of our affairs in the
hands of yourself and Mr. Livingston. You will find, also, that
the Spanish Government has pretty promptly corrected the
wrong done by its officer at New Orleans. This event will be
a heavy blow to the clamorous for war, and will be very sooth
ing to those immediately interested in the trade of the Missis-

1803. LETTERS.

181

sippi. The temper manifested by our Western Citizens has been
throughout the best that can be conceived. The real injury
from the suspension of the deposit was, however, much lessened
by the previous destruction of the entire crop of wheat in Ken
tucky, by the number of sea vessels built on the Ohio, and by
throngs of vessels from Atlantic ports to the Mississippi, some
of which ascended to the Natchez. The permission, also, to
supply the market at New Orleans, and to ship the surplus as
Spanish property to Spanish ports, was turned to good account.
The trial, therefore, has been much alleviated. Certain it is
that the hearts and hopes of the Western people are strongly
fixed on the Mississippi for the future boundary. Should no
improvement of existing rights be gained, the disappointment
will be great. Still, respect for principle and character, aversion
to poor rates and taxes, the hope of a speedy conjuncture more
favorable, and attachment to the present order of things, will
be persuasive exhortations to patience. It is even a doubt with
some of the best judges whether the deposit alone would not be
waived for a while, rather than it should be the immediate
ground of war and an alliance with England. This suggested
a particular passage in the official letter now sent you and Mr.
Livingston. The elections in New England are running much against the
administration. In Virginia, the result is but very partially
known. Brent outvoted Lewis. In general, things continue
well in that State.
The affair between the President and J. W. has had a happy
ecclaircissemenj;. Even this general communication is for your
own bosom, as already privy to the affair.
I have received a very friendly letter from General La Fay
ette, which I shall answer as soon as I can get some further in
formation. We are all much distressed by his late accident,
and are anxious for every proof to be given him of the affection
of this Country. Congress found an occasion of voting about
11 or 12,000 acres of land Northwest of the Ohio, with liberty
to locate it any where. This may be made worth now, probably,
about 20,000 dollars. In a little time the value must greatly

182 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
increase. Whether any thing else can or will be done, you can
judge as well as myself. Assure him of my undiminished friend
ship for him, which he knows to have been perfectly sincere and
ardent.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, May 1, 1803.
My Dear Sir, — I commit to your care the inclosed letters
and papers for General La Fayette, which are left open for
your perusal.
We have just received the message of his Britannic Majesty,
which is represented as the signal of a certain rupture with
France. From the positions taken by the parties, both diplo
matic and military, such an event seems scarcely avoidable. I
hope we shall be wise enough to shun their follies, and fortu
nate enough to turn them by honest means to our just inter
ests. You will probably have arrived very critically for the
purpose. The order from Spain for the restoration of the deposit has
had a good effect every where. We are told at the same time,
in the very words of the Article, that, in the cession of Louisi
ana, our rights under the Treaty of '95 are saved. On the 1st
of April, Laussat, the Prefect, was at New Orleans, and the late
Governor, Casa-Calvo, was expected in a few days from the
Havanna, to deliver possession to the French. Whether this
measure will be delayed for the arrival of the Cap'. General,
or what may result to it from other causes, can be better under
stood with you than here. Laussat professes to be kindly dis
posed, and undertakes to affirm that the French Government
had nothing to do in the arrest of the deposit by the Spanish
officer, and that if he had been there in authority no such thing
would have happened. He does not admit that he has any au
thority to meddle in any way at present, and gives this answer
to Pichon's exhortation. The Intendant had declined in like
manner to obey the advice of Yrujo. The last more peremp-

1803. LETTERS. I83
tory interpositions of these Ministers had not arrived, and the
importance of them was superseded by the orders from Spain.
The attention here is much alive to the transfer of the country
to France, and it becomes her, if she wishes to be on cordial
terms with ns, to proceed in every step with strict justice and
exemplary frankness.
The elections in New York, as far as known, have issued as
heretofore. In Virginia, there will certainly be two, and pos
sibly three members of the anti-party. In New England, the
tide has run strongly in that channel, but under impulses tem
porary and artificial. In general, our prospects are bright.
Excepting the case of Louisiana, there is scarcely a cloud in
them. Remove that, and the possibility of our being embar
rassed by the war of others, and our Country will be what has
been so often applied to another, the admiration and envy of
the world.
I am on the point of setting out to Virginia, whence I shall
return in two or tliree weeks. In this hurry, I can only add for
myself and family affectionate respects to you and yours.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Jnly 30, 1803.
Dear Sir, — I received your favor of  by Mr. Hughes, the
bearer of the public despatches from you and Mr. Livingston.
The purchase of Louisiana in its full extent, tho' not contem
plated, is received with warm, and, in a manner, universal ap
probation. The uses to which it may be turned render it a
truly noble acquisition. Under pendent management it may be
made to do much good, as well as to prevent much evil. By
lessening the military establishment otherwise requisite or coun
tenanced, it will answer the double purpose of saving expence
and favoring liberty. This is a point of view in which the
Treaty will be particularly grateful to a most respectable de
scription of our Citizens. It will be of great importance, also, to
take the regulation and settlement of that Territory out of other

184 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
hands into those of the U. S., who will be able to manage both
for the general interest and conveniency. By securing, also, the
exclusive jurisdiction of the Mississippi to the mouth, a source
of much perplexity and collision is effectually cut off. The com
munications of your colleague hither have fully betrayed the
feelings excited by your message, and that he was precipitating
the business soon after your arrival, without respect to the
measure of the government, to yourself, or to the advantage to
be expected from the presence and co-operation of the more im
mediate depository of the objects and sensibilities of his Coun
try. It is highly probable that if the appeal to the French Gov
ernment had been less hackneyed by the ordinary minister, and
been made under the solemnity of a joint and extraordinary
embassy, the impression would have been greater and the gain
better. What course will be taken by his friends here remains to be
seen. You will find in the Gazettes a letter from Paris, under
stood to be from Swan, indorsing a copy of his memorial, repre
senting it as the primary cause of the cession, praising the pa
triotism which undertook so great a service without authority,
and throwing your agency out of any real merit, while, by good
fortune, it snatched the ostensible merit. This letter, with the
memorial, has been published in all our papers; some of them
making comments favorable to Mr. Livingston, others doing
justice to you, others ascribing the result wholly to the impend
ing rupture. Another letter from Paris has been published,
which makes him Magnus Apollo. The publication of the me
morial is so improper, and in reference to the writer invites
such strictures, that from him is not to be presumed. The
passages against England have not escaped the lash. It would
not be very wonderful if they were to be noticed formally or in
formally by the British Legation here.
My public letter will show the light in which the purchase
of all Louisiana is viewed, and the manner in which it was
thought proper to touch the policy of Mr. Livingston, in com
plaining that the communication did not authorize the measure,
notwithstanding the information given that he was negociating

1803. LETTERS. 185
for more than the East side of the Mississippi. The pecuniary
arrangements are much disrelished, particularly by Mr. Galla
tin. The irredeemability of the stock, which gives it value above
par, the preference of the conditions to the true object in the
cash payment, and the barring of a priority among them, are
errors most regarded. The claims of the different creditors rest
on principles as different.
Governor Mercer has taken the field as a candidate for the
State Legislature, against four with whom he has been on the
same party. The inclosed print will give you an idea of the
violence of the contest, and of the personalities growing out of
it. His object is to set the State to rights on certain points.
He expects to accomplish it by a skilful management of parties.
It is difficult to calculate the precise result of this project, either
as it relates to the public or to himself. It is probable that he
will sink under it, or that he will throw the State off its centre,
and possible that both may happen.
I have received no letter from you or Mr. Livingston since
the arrival of Mr. Hughes, and consequently know nothing of
your subsequent movements. The public letters by this convey
ance were written under an ignorance whether you would be
found at Paris, London, or Madrid. I observe a paragraph
from an English paper says you had left Paris for Madrid,
which I presume to be founded in fact. I hope you will give
the proper cue to Spain, and carry all our points with her.
Avoid the error committed with France with respect to the
Creditors.

TO THOMAS PAINE.
Orange Codrt-Hoose, Virginia, August 20, 1803.
Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 6th having arrived at Wash
ington after I had left it, no answer could be given through the
gentleman who was charged with it. The report to which it
refers, that the British Government had cautioned ours not to
pay the money for Louisiana, for that they meant to take pos-

186 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
session of it, is utterly destitute of foundation. The British
Government has, on the contrary, expressed its satisfaction with
the cession, and, although the terms of it might not at the time
be particularly known, yet as a price was to be presumed, and
as the bargain was made bona fide, and even communicated
prior to the commencement of hostilities, there can be no pre
text whatever for complaint, nor is there the least ground for
supposing that it will take place.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Oct. 10, 1803.
Dear Sir, — Finding that Mr. Purveyance is within reach of
a few lines, I add them to what he is already charged with, to
observe that Yrujo has written another remonstrance against
our acquisition of Louisiana, alleging as a further objection,
that France, by not obtaining the stipulated acknowledgments
of the King of Etruria from the Courts of Petersburg and Lon
don, had a defective title herself to the Cession. Nothing can
be more absurd than these cavils on the part of Spain, unless it
should be her using in support of them force against our taking
possession. This she will scarcely attempt, if not backed by
France, which we hope is impossible. I am writing on this sub
ject to Livingston and Pinckney. I have already done so to
Yrujo, giving him to understand that we shall not withhold
any means that may be rendered necessary to secure our object.
Pichon is perfectly well disposed, is offended with the Spanish
Minister, and, if left under the orders he now has, will co-operate
zealously, with an honest view to the honor and obligations of
his own Country. On our part, I trust every thing that the
crisis demands will be done, and that we shall speedily be in
possession of the valuable object which the Treaty with France
has gained for us. Baring is here, but having not yet called on
me I have had no opportunity of paying him civilities, or ob
taining explanations from him. I wait anxiously for your next.
Your last was of Aug. 15. I hope you have been favorably

1803. LETTERS. 187
received, and will bring the British Government more and more
to understand their own interests, as well as our rights. Insist
on instructions to all their naval officers to abstain from impress
ments and to respect our jurisdictional rights. Incidents are
daily occurring which, otherwise, may overcome the calculating
policy of the present Executive, and provoke the public temper
into an irresistible impetus on the public Councils. Mr. King
says, that if he could have remained a little longer, the British
Government might possibly have been brought into a contract
guarding against this evil; but that the business is to be effected
at that Court by the United States, not so well by formal notes
and official discussions as by the frankness and familiarity of
explanatory and expostulatory observations in private dis
course. I give you this in confidence, as a hint that may be
useful. Mr. Purveyance had seized your wishes before I re
turned hither, and I did not know till this moment that he had
not sailed. I write in great haste to secure the present mail,
which is the only one that promises a conveyance by him. He
will give you much public and all private information.

TO BARBE MARBOIS. Def1 op State, Nov' 4, 1803.
Sir, — I received your favor of the 21 prairial, with a pleas
ure which is redoubled by the consideration that I am able, in
acknowledging it, to inform you of the formal approbation of
the late Treaty, and by every branch of our
Government. The event establishes, I hope forever, perfect
harmony between the two Countries. It is the more likely to
do so, as it is founded in a policy, coeval with their political
relations, of removing as much as possible all sources of jeal
ousy and collision. The frankness and uprightness which marked
the progress of this transaction are truly honorable to all con
cerned in it; and it is an agreeable circumstance that, in the
exchange of ratifications, it was closed in the same spirit of mu-

188 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
tual confidence, Mr. Pichon inferring, doubtless with the truest
reason, that an unqualified exchange, under actual circum
stances, would best accord with the real views of his Govern
ment. It remains now to compleat the work by an honest execution
of the mutual stipulations. On our part, the sequel will cer
tainly correspond with the good faith and prompt arrangements
thus far pursued; and full reliance is placed on the reciprocal
disposition of your Government, of which so many proofs have
been seen.
The interposition of Spain is an incident not more unexpected
than it is unreasonable. It is to be wished that it may termi
nate without any serious consequences, even to herself. What
ever turn it may take, the honour of the French Government
guaranties the object at which our measures are pointed; and
the interest of France will equally lie in making the fruits of
these measures hers, as well as ours.
I partake, Sir, in all the satisfaction which you feel at an
event which awakens recollections, both of a public and private
nature, so agreeable to both of us; and I pray you to be assured
that I observe with sincere pleasure, in the share you have con
tributed to it, those enlarged views and honorable principles
which confirm the high esteem and distinguished consideration
with which I remain, Dr sir, your friend and Serv*.

TO MR. MARBOIS, (BUT NOT SENT.)
DK Sir, — I have duly received the volume relating to the
Equestrian Statue of Henry 4th, with one of the Medals to which
it gave rise, for both which I offer you my thanks.
The volume is not only a valuable present to Artists, but is
enriched with articles of information which make it interesting
to the curious who are not artists. I observe that it justly
records your essential agency in this National Monument, and
have not overlooked the fine morsel of appropriate sentiment

1803. LETTERS. 189
which it was your lot to address to the reigning Prince, whose
name was so closely associated by the occasion with that of his
illustrious ancestor.
France is happy in having had a King worthy of the National
devotion which the erection of this statue proclaims to the mem
ory of Henry 4. He may be regarded as a model, not only to
his hereditary successors under a limited Monarchy, but as one,
also, to the other departments of the Government. His per
sonal virtues seem to have furnished that check and balance to
his royal prerogative, which are provided by partitions of
power among the Constitutional orders of the State.
I hope, Sir, you continue to enjoy the good health of which
you make so good a use, and that you will accept this renewed
assurance of my distinguished esteem.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Dec 26, 1803.
Dear Sir, — I have received, I believe, all your letters, public
and private, down to that of October 22d, written merely to say
that all continued well. I have taken due care of the commu
nications on the subject of your  . Everything seems to
be well understood on this side the water. I cannot say more
now, as I write of necessity without cypher.
Mr. Merry has been with us some time. He appears to be an
amiable man in private society, and a candid and agreeable one
in public business. A foolish circumstance of etiquette has
created some sensibility in Mrs. Merry, and perhaps himself; but
they will find so uniform and sincere a disposition in all con
nected with the Government to cultivate a cordial society with
them, and to manifest every proper respect for their characters
and station, that if any unfavorable impression has happened, it
must be very transient. It would be unfortunate if it were
otherwise, because a dissatisfaction, of whatever sort, or how
ever produced, might mingle itself with his general feelings, and,
thro' them, with the agency committed to them.

190 WORKS OF MADISON. 1803.
We have had several conversations, both incidental and for
mal, on the topics most interesting to the two Countries. I have
taken pains to make him sensible of the tendency of certain pro
ceedings on the British side, and of their injustice as well as im
policy. I communicated to him a few days ago the intention
of the President to explain our views fully to you on these
topics, and to authorize you to negociate such conventional
eclaircissements and arrangements as may put an end to every
danger to which the harmony between the Countries is now
subjected. His ideas appeared to be moderate, and his disposi
tion conciliatory. As he will doubtless communicate to his
Government what passed us, I think it proper, in order to place
you on a level of information, to observe briefly, that the plan
will be to get rid of impressments altogether on the high seas;
to define blockades and contraband according to the last Treaty
between Great Britain and Russia; to regulate visits and searches
of our vessels, according to the Treaty of 1786 between Great
Britain and France; to put aside the doctrine, that a Colonial
trade, not allowed in time of peace, is unlawful in time of war;
and, in return, to agree to a mutual surrender of deserters from
ships and from garrisons, and to a legislative provision against
exporting articles enumerated as contraband to places within
the jurisdiction of an enemy. This will be the outline, except
ing a few minor propositions. The subject is now before the
Cabinet, and it will not be long before it will be forwarded to
you in its details. It is much to be desired that something may
be done to consolidate the good understanding between the two
nations, and I really believe that there is nothing aimed at by
us that is not for the true interest of both parties. I am not
without hopes that Mr. Merry sees the business in a good de
gree in the same light, and that his representations will co-op
erate with your reasonings on it. I am glad to learn that in
Europe violations of our maritime rights are so much mitigated
in comparison with the former war. It is a good omen. In the
American seas, however, the scene is very different, and I fear
is growing worse and worse. Impressments and other outrages
on our flag are multiplying, and the depredations, under pretext

1803. LETTERS. 191
of blockades, are going on in rivalship with all the extrava
gances of the last war. I will send herewith, if I can, certain
documents, both as to impressments and blockades, which will
explain the justice of these remarks, and satisfy you, as they
ought to do the British Government, that the friendship and
patience of this country are put to a severe trial. A bill has
been brought in Congress with a view to some remedy. It pro
poses to forbid the use of our pilots, our ports, and our supplies
and hospitalities, to any ship of war which shall be proved and
proclaimed to have impressed or otherwise insulted those on
board our vessels. Whether it will be pursued into a law is
uncertain; but if it should not, the forbearance will proceed
merely from a hope that a remedy to the evil is contemplated
by negociations. The public mind is rising to a state of high
sensibility, and no other consideration than such a hope would,
I am persuaded, suspend the effect of it on the Legislative Coun
cils. It is to be wished that the introduction of the Bill may
not be misconstrued into any unfriendly disposition towards
Great Britain. I have every reason to believe that the sup
posed necessity of it is deeply regretted, and that a just accom
modation of all differences with Great Britain will give the
most sincere and general satisfaction. Louisiana was delivered
by the Spanish authorities at New Orleans to Laussat, on the
30th of November. Our Commissioners, Claiborne and Wil
kinson, with their troops, were at Fort Adams, on their way to
receive the transfer to the United States. All difficulties are,
therefore, at an end in that quarter. Nothing appears to have
passed in relation to West Florida, or the boundaries in gen
eral. It is understood that Spain does not include any territory
East of the Mississippi, except the island of New Orleans, in the
idea of Louisiana. It will be an easy matter to take possession
according to our idea. The mode alone can beget a question.

192 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Jany 18, 1804.
Dear Sir, — I write you by Mr. Baring, who will also take
charge of full instructions on the subject of a Convention with
Great Britain for putting an end to impressments, &c. It is of
great importance to the harmony of the two Countries that the
project should not entirely fail. There is not time to forward
by this opportunity instructions relative to Madrid. They will
probably soon follow. In the mean time, you will collect from
a letter which the President writes his present views with re
spect to that mission. I refer to the same source, also, for other
things, of which a repetition is unnecessary, particularly the
arrangement as to Louisiana.
Your outfit in going to London is of course. There will be
a difficulty in varying the provision made beyond the annual
allowance as Minister Extraordinary to Paris, it being fixed
and recorded. Should you proceed to Madrid, it is probable
that your expences will be defrayed, according to the several
examples in point and the apparent reasonableness of it. As
soon as the instructions to proceed issue, a draught may, I pre
sume, be authorized, which will be better than the mode you
suggest of leaving the advance made you here for settlement on
your return.
I informed you in my last that I had received all your private
letters down to Oct. 22, including the documents relating to the
joint negociation, &c, with France, and that every thing seemed
to be sufficiently understood here to make you easy. The letter
of 22 March from T.  , that of April 10th to you, and the
extract from Col. M.'s journal, completely establish the essen
tial points.
Mr. Merry has said nothing yet about S' Domingo, altho' it
is understood to be now in the hands of the negroes, and has
been in that train clearly and certainly for some time past. I
learn, from what I take to be a sure source, that Great Britain
will not aim at a monopoly of the trade there, and will also,
by an arrangement with the negroes, shut the sea against them,

1804. LETTERS.

193

in order to keep Jamaica safe. If she pursues this course, we
shall be relieved from difficulties on that side. And it is to be
hoped that France will see that she has no motive to throw the
commerce and the attachments of the negroes into the exclu
sive possession of England, by prohibitions against other na
tions. Mr. Merry expressed in strong terms the dissatisfaction of
his government at the Memorial. He was told that the senti
ments of this Government were truly expressed in the friendly
assurances given by it, and that no authority had been given to
express others. It was added that the memorial was not offi
cial, nor meant for the public eye, and very probably had been
shaped into arguments most likely to favor the object of it, with
out adverting to the incidental tendency of mine. In a word,
that the view taken of the subject was such as was deemed most
likely to influence the policy of France, rather than to exhibit
the opinions or feelings of the writer. He seemed to be con
tent with this disavowal, and signified his confidence that his
Government would be so likewise.
The inclosed paper has an address to Mr. Merry, which shows
the importance to Great Britain of a stipulation to surrender
her deserting seamen. She cannot expect this to be either stip
ulated or practised whilst impressments go on. On the con
trary, she must expect other States to follow the example of
Virginia, which will throw the whole trade between the two
Countries, in time of war at least, into American vessels.

TO R. R. LIVINGSTON. Washington, Feby 7, 1804.
Dear Sir, — The public letters which you will receive by this
conveyance acknowledge all the letters received from you since
the date of those last written to you, except your correspond
ence with Mr. Monroe. This I have thought proper to ac
knowledge in a private letter, because I have not placed it on
the files of the office. You left me free to consider the letters
vol. ii. 13

194 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
which passed between you as private, and I have not yet decided
that it can be of use to dispose of them as of a public nature.
Should it, on further consideration, be deemed proper to view
them in this light, they can at any time be deposited in the
office; whereas if now deposited, and a further consideration
should oppose this use of them, the step would be irrevocable.
It is much to be desired, on various grounds, that the mutual
sensibilities which betray themselves in the correspondence
should have no greater publicity than may be inevitable, and
that no insuperable obstacles should be thrown in the way of
that oblivion of disagreeable incidents which cannot but be fa
voured by your mutual respect and liberality.
Congress have been long in session, but have passed but few
acts, and appear to move very slowly. They dwell with partic
ular tediousness on the Bill providing a Government for Lou
isiana. The newspapers I herewith send will give you an ac
count of their latest proceedings. I beg leave to refer to the
same source for other public occurrences. I communicated to
Gen1 Armstrong yesterday the present opportunity, namely, that
of a young gentleman who goes in the vessel carrying the French
Louisiana stock, and he said he would have a letter for you at
the office in time for it. If it comes, it will be inclosed here
with. You will find in the public letter the reasons for not hereto
fore forwarding a letter of leave, and of the intention to forward
one only on the receipt of your determination to make use of it.
It was not wished to take any step which might be misinter
preted as an instruction for your return; and it was conceived
that the letter you possess could, if your return was resolved on,
without impropriety be made use of. The date alone suggests
any difficulty, and that admits so easy an explanation, as
scarcely to be regarded as one. You will, I am persuaded, be
sensible that the footing on which the matter has been put was
that deemed most consistent with the delicacy and friendship
entertained for you, and which seemed best to reconcile a due
respect for your personal inclinations with the respect due to
the interest the public has in your diplomatic services.

1804. LETTERS. I95
TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Feb? 16, 1804.
Dear Sir, — In a private letter by Mr. Baring I gave you a
detail of what had passed here on the subject of etiquette. I
had hoped that no farther jars would have ensued, as I still
hope that the good sense of the British Government respecting
the right of the government here to fix its routes of intercourse,
and the sentiments and manners of the country to which they
ought to be adapted, will give the proper instructions for pre
venting like incidents in future. In the mean time, a fresh cir
cumstance has taken place, which calls for explanation.
The President, desirous of keeping open for cordial civilities
whatever channels the scruples of Mr. Merry might not have
closed, asked me what these were understood to be, and partic
ularly whether he would come and take friendly and familiar
dinners with him. I undertook to feel his pulse thro' some hand
that would do it with the least impropriety. From the infor
mation obtained, I inferred that an invitation would be readily
accepted, and with the less doubt, as he had dined with me, (his
lady declining,) after the offence originally taken. The invita
tion was accordingly sent, and terminated in the note from him
to me and my answer herewith inclosed. I need not comment
on this display of diplomatic superstition, truly extraordinary
in this age and in this country. We are willing to refer it to
the personal character of a man accustomed to see importance
in such trifles, and over cautious against displeasing his Gov
ernment by surrendering the minutest of his or its pretensions.
What we apprehend is, that with these causes may be mingled
a jealousy of our disposition towards England, and that the
mortifications which he has inflicted on himself are to be set
down to that account. In fact, it is known that this jealousy,
particularly since the final adjustment with France, exists, or is
affected in a high degree, and will doubtless give its colour to
the correspondence of the legation with its government. To
apply an antidote to this poison will require your vigilant and
prudent attention. It can scarcely be believed that the British

196 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
Government will not at once see the folly committed by its rep
resentative, especially in the last scene of the farce, and that it
will set him right in that respect. But it may listen with a
different ear to the suggestions that the United States, having
now less need of the friendship of Britain, may be yielding to a
latent enmity towards her. The best of all proofs to the con
trary would be the confidential communications you possess, if
it were not an improper condescension to disclose them for such
a purpose. Next to that is the tenor of our measures, and the
dictates of our obvious policy; on an appeal to both of which
you may found the strongest assurances that the Government
of the United States is sincerely and anxiously disposed to cul
tivate harmony between the two nations. The President wishes
to tose no opportunity and spare no pains that may be necessary
to satisfy the British administration on this head, and to pre
vent or efface any different impressions which may be trans
mitted from hence.
I collect that the cavil at the p§le mele here established turns
much on the alledged degradation of ministers and envoys to a
level with Charges D'Affaires. The truth is, and I have so told
Mr. Merry, that this is not the idea; that the President did not
mean to decide anything as to their comparative grades or im
portance; that these would be estimated as heretofore; that
among themselves they might fix their own ceremonies, and that
even at the President's table they might seat themselves in any
subordination they pleased. All he meant was, that no seats
were to be designated for them, nor the order in which they
might happen to set to be any criterion of the respect paid to
their respective commissions or Countries. On public occasions,
such as an Inaugural speech, &c, the heads of department, with
foreign ministers, and others, invited on the part of the Gov
ernment, would be in the same pSle mele within the space as
signed them. It may not be amiss to recollect that under the
old Congress, as I understand, and even in the ceremonies at
tending the introduction of the new Government, the foreign
ministers were placed according to the order in which their
Governments acknowledged by Treaties the Independence of

1804. LETTERS.

197

the United States. In this point of view, the pele mele is favor
able both to Great Britain and to Spain.
I have, I believe, already told you that the President has dis
countenanced the handing first to the table the wife of a Head
of Department, applying the general rule of p§le mgle to that,
as to other cases.
The Marquis d'Yrujo joined with Merry in refusing an invi
tation from the President, and has, throughout, made a common
cause with him, not, however, approving all the grounds taken
by the latter. His case is, indeed, different, and not a little
awkward, having acquiesced for nearly three years in the prac
tice against which he now revolts. Pichon, being a Charge
only, was not invited into the pretensions of the two Plenipo
tentiaries. He blames their contumacy; but I find he has re
ported the affair to his government, which is not likely to pa
tronize the cause of Merry and Yrujo.
Thornton has also declined an invitation from the President.
This shews that he unites, without necessity, with Merry. He
has latterly expressed much jealousy of our views, founded on
little and unmeaning circumstances.
The manners of Mrs.  disgust both sexes and all
parties.

Mote and Answer referred to in p. 195.
Mr. Merry has the honor to present his respects to Mr.
Madison. He has just had that of receiving a note from the President
of the United States, of which the following is a copy:
Thomas Jefferson asks the favor of Mr. Merry to dinner with
a small party of friends on Monday, the 13th, at half past 3.
February 9th, 1804. Superscribed, Mr. Merry.
It so happens that Mr. Merry has engaged some company to
dine with him on that day. Under other circumstances, how
ever, he would have informed himself whether it is the usage,

198 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
as is the case in most countries, for private engagements of
every kind to give way to invitations from the Chief Magistrate
of the United States; and if such were the usage, he would not
have failed to have alleged it as a just apology for not receiving
the company he has invited. But after the communication
which Mr. Merry had the honor to receive from Mr. Madison
on the 12th of last month, respecting the alteration which the
President of the United States had thought proper should take
place in regard to the treatment to be observed by the Execu
tive government towards foreign ministers from those usages
which had been established by his predecessors, and after the
reply which Mr. Merry had the honor to make to that notice,
stating, that notwithstanding all his anxiety to cultivate the
most intimate and cordial intercourse with every of the
. government, he could not take upon himself to acquiesce in that
alteration, on account of its serious nature, which he would,
therefore, report to his own government, and wait for their in-
vstructions upon it; it is necessary that he should have the honor
of observing to Mr. Madison that, combining the terms of the
invitation above mentioned with the circumstances which have
preceded it, Mr. Merry can only understand it to be addressed
to him in his private capacity, and not as his Britannic Majesty's
Minister to the United States. Now, however anxious he may
be, as he certainly is, to give effect to the claim above
expressed, of conciliating, personally and privately, the good
opinion and esteem of Mr. Jefferson, he hopes that the latter
will feel how improper it would be on his part to sacrifice to
that desire the duty which he owes to his Sovereign, and, con
sequently, how impossible it is for him to lay aside the consid
eration of his public character.
If Mr. Merry should be mistaken as to the meaning of Mr.
Jefferson's note, and it should prove that the invitation is de
signed for him in his public capacity, he trusts that Mr. Jeffer
son will feel equally that it must be out of his power to accept
it, without receiving previously, through the channel of the Sec
retary of State, the necessary formal assurances of the Presi
dent's determination to observe towards him those usages of

1804. LETTERS. I99
distinction which have heretofore been shewn by the executive
government of the United States to the persons who have been
accredited to them as his Majesty's Ministers.
Mr. Merry has the honor to request of Mr. Madison to lay
this explanation before the President, and to accompany it with
the strongest assurances of his highest respect and consider
ation. Washington, February 9th, 1804.
Mr. Madison presents his compliments to Mr. Merry. He has
communicated to the President Mr. Merry's note of this morn
ing, and has the honor to remark to him that the President's in
vitation, being in the style used by him in like cases, had no
reference to the points of form which will deprive him of the
pleasure of Mr. Merry's company at dinner on Monday next.
Mr. Madison tenders to Mr. Merry his distinguished consid- "
eration. Washington, February 9th, 1804.

TO GOVERNOR CLAIBORNE.
{Private and confidential.) Washington, February 20, 1804.
Dear Sir, — It being understood that Morales means to settle
himself at New Orleans, and that his temper and his treasures,
his connections and his views, may render him a mischievous
member of the society, his removal to some other part of the Uni
ted States, where he would be unimportant and harmless, would
be agreeable to the President. Perhaps it may be in your power
to bring this about, without violating any principle which ought
to be respected on such an occasion. It may have weight with
him merely to know that his continuance in Louisiana attracts
the notice of the Government, and that he would be perfectly
secure in other situations, where his wealth could be engaged
with more advantage. The case, however, is left to your own
judgment, both in its merits and its arrangement.

200 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
I have the honor to be, Sir, with great respect and esteem,
yr mo. ob*.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 8th, 1804.
Dear Sir, — Since my last, which went by duplicates, and
will, therefore, I hope, have been received, yours of Nov. 25,
which, like this, is private, has come to hand. Your public
letter accompanying it is answered publicly by this oppor
tunity. It is very agreeable to find the British Ministers so candidly
acknowledging the justice of our general conduct towards their
• nation, and the fairness, particularly, of our Treaty obtaining
Louisiana. If, as they admit, the sole ground of complaint
against us was the memorial of Mr. Livingston, there remains
no longer a single exception to be taken, an explanation having
been given to Mr. Merry which he thought would be satisfactory
to his government.
The Bill in the Senate on the impressment of seamen, of which
you have been apprized, was a few days ago postponed gen
erally, with reasons assigned, which were meant to render such
an issue conciliatory, without renouncing the right, or the event
ual necessity of some such remedy. The British functionaries
here consider all that has passed on this subject as the effect of
concert between the Executive and leading members of the
Legislature, and as meant to operate on the apprehensions of
England without the appearance of provoking a collision with
her. In general, the idea of such an understanding between the
Executive and Congress prevails among the Foreign Agents,
more especially on their first coming, and it is not easy to cor
rect the error. You know that a mutual independence exists,
precluding a responsibility on either side for the separate meas
ures of the other. Nothing is more common, in fact, than for
those who in general form the majority in Congress to divide

1804. LETTERS.

201

among themselves on questions in which it is known that the
Executive have taken an interest. In the case of the two Bills
concerning impressments, they were introduced under the gen
eral impulse of the Country, and the personal or local senti
ments of the movers, and the destiny of them is to be referred
to a like explanation. This country wishes for justice, and
thinks it has efficacious means in its own hands. It wishes, at
the same time, not to resort, without absolute necessity, to any
means that may interrupt harmony, or even wear an unfriendly
aspect. This is certainly the sentiment of the Executive, in
common with the other branches of the Government, and with
the nation. Among more general considerations favoring this
temperate and solid policy, it merits attention, that as the pres
ent administration in Great Britain appears more liberal and
cordial towards the United States than any preceding one, as
the administration here is certainly more so towards Great
Britain than was then anticipated, and as no formal experiment
has been made since the commencement of the present war to
adjust by negociation the question of impressments, it is proper
to make a fair experiment in that form, before redress be pur
sued in any other. I have not learnt whether the Bill in the
House of Representatives has yet been postponed. That it will
be, is probable; and if it should not, the sense expressed by the
Senate will be a bar to its passage into a law.
In a conversation with Mr. Merry on these bills, he intimated
the danger of their being considered in Great Britain as lead
ing to a state of violence, if passed into laws; and if postponed,
as still leaving a menace more likely to excite pride than com
pliance. Without admitting the first inference, the second was
easily repelled by an appeal to the operative negociation of Mr.
Jay, notwithstanding the strong posture taken by Congress at
the moment, and the existence of an embargo, well understood
to be levelled against British misconduct.
My public letter answers your enquiry relating to the East
and West India trade. The case of French prisoners taken
in American vessels cannot be more affected by the Treaty than
that of French property so taken, and must depend on the same

202 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
principles of public law. If not in military service, the capture
of them was wrong, and right requires that they should be dis
charged. It will be well, at the same time, to avoid interfer
ence in such cases, as far as will consist with the obligation and
power of the United States.
Your trip to Madrid has become a perplexing subject. The
present moment is not favorable to it, and the other object pre
sented to your view by the President's letter becomes every
moment more pressing for such services as yours. Whilst you
hold yourself ready, therefore, for a trip into Spain, in case
events should prescribe it, you will hold yourself still more so
for taking a station at New Orleans, whither it is more than
probable you will be summoned to repair the instant your ne
gociations at London shall be closed. In several views, the
situation of the ceded territory is critically interesting. Should
you go to Spain, it will evidently reconcile private with public
economy, and both with the comfort of your family, to place
them in the asylum you contemplate, and thereby stop the whole
expence of your London establishment. As to the modifications
of outfit, I can add nothing to what I have heretofore said. To
be prepared for every turn which the settlement of your allow
ance may take, your expences cannot be too exactly noted and
vouched. When I communicate finally your destination, I will commu
nicate, also, the sentiments of the President as to the person
into whose hands you are to deposit your papers, &c. In the
mean time, authorize no particular expectation in any one. The
President retains his favorable opinion of Erving; but it is of
importance to respect his standing with the British Ministry,
and also not to flatter pretensions beyond his standing in this
country, to which his present grade is thought to be commen
surate. Perhaps it will be found best to name no Charge, and
waive the necessary business with him as consul, making the
proper commission and request to Lord Hawkesbury.

1804. LETTERS.

203

TO GOVERNOR CLAIBORNE. Virginia, August 28, 1804.
Sir, — I have received your favor of the 12 and 14 of July.
The continuance and conduct of the Spanish officers at New
Orleans justly excite attention. In every view, it is desirable
that these foreigners should be no longer in a situation to af
front the authority of the United States, or to mingle, by their
intrigues, in the affairs of your territory. The first of October
will be an epoch which may be used for letting it be understood
that their stay, so much beyond the right and the occasion for
it, is not seen with approbation. The mode and measure of the
intimation are left by the President to your discreet judgment.
With Morales there may be less need of very delicate manage
ment; especially if he perseveres in retaining a title which,
having belonged to a Spanish officer purely provincial, in Lou
isiana, seems to arraign the present jurisdiction of the United
States. You will soon receive from Mr. Granger blank commissions
for offices within his Department. The President wishes you
to sound the Marquis de Casa Calvo on the subject of a link
of the chain of post offices within the contested territory, and,
by friendly explanations, to obtain his concurrence in making
such an establishment for mutual convenience by mutual con
sent; with an understanding, or, if preferred, an express decla
ration, that the measure is neither to strengthen nor weaken
the rights of either nation. Should a post office within the
limits possessed by Spain not be acquiesced in, it is thought
best that it be waived for the present, leaving to the mail a
mere passage, to which it may be presumed no opposition will
be made.
By the last communications from Madrid, of June 12, it ap
pears that the Spanish Government had imbibed the discontent
expressed by the Marquis d' Yrujo at the act of Congress au
thorising a revenue district on the waters of the Mobile, &c,
and that it manifested a backwardness to ratify the Conven
tion, which had been ratified here in the very terms in which it

204 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
was concluded on there. A knowledge of this ill humor may
be useful in the course of your transactions, particularly those
with the Spanish Functionaries.

TO GOVERNOR CLAIBORNE. Virginia, August 30, 1804.
Sir, — The President having thought proper to avail the Uni
ted States of the continuance of your services, by appointing
you Governor of the Territory of Orleans, in pursuance of the
late act of Congress for erecting Louisiana into two territories,
and providing for the temporary government thereof, I have
the pleasure of enclosing the commission for that purpose, with
a commission providing for the administration to you of the
oath of office required.
I enclose, also, a commission for the Secretary of the Terri
tory of Orleans, commissions for the members of the Legislative
Council,  for two Judges of the Superior Court of the said
Territory, a commission for the Judge of the District Court of
Orleans District, and for the Attorney and Marshal of the said
District; all which commissions I request the favor of you to
cause to be respectively delivered.
With sentiments of great respect and consideration.

N. B. All the commissions sent dated August 30, 1804, ex
cept that to Kerby, which is dated August 29. S&° One of
the Judges of the Superior Court not sent, and to be filled here
after.

TO MONSIEUR PICHON. Virginia, Sept' 3, 1804.
Sir, — I have received and laid before the President your let
ter of August 25, accompanied by a copy of the Senates Con-
sultum, giving a new form to the Government of France, and a

1804. LETTERS.

205

copy of a letter from the Minister of Exterior Relations to Mr.
Livingston, with an extract of a letter to you, relating to that
important event.
1 Previous to the departure of Gen1 Armstrong, appointed to
succeed Mr. Livingston in the Representation of the United
States at Paris, it having been sufficiently ascertained, without
being formally notified, that a change had taken place in the
form of the French Government, provision was made for the
case by blanks in his letters of credence, which he was instructed
to fill up, on consultation with the Minister of foreign Rela
tions, in such manner as would adapt them to the new formu
lary. This precaution, calculated to avoid inconvenient delays
which might be occasioned by the succession of a New Minister
from the United States in the crisis of a change in the Govern
ment to which he is sent, will have the effect, at the same time,
of manifesting the readiness of the United States to respect the
right of every Nation to give to its Government the form
deemed most correspondent with its situation and its happiness,
and the desire of the President to maintain, on the part of the
United States, all the confidence and friendly relations with the
Government of France, under its new form, which so happily
prevail between the two nations.
The President learns with satisfaction that, during the inter
val preceding the introduction of new diplomatic instruments,
a continuance in the accustomed form of all the communications
useful to the harmony and interest of the two Countries is par
ticularly authorised by his Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of
the French. You will not doubt, Sir, that a like regulation on
the part of the United States is prescribed not more by their
principles than by their friendly dispositions.

206 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.

TO MR. MERRY, BRITISH PLENIPOTENTIARY.
Virginia, Sept' 3, 1804.
Sir, — I had the honor to receive on the 25th of August your
letter, with its inclosures, of the 15th of that month, which has
been laid before the President.
The several communications and representations to which it
is a reply, had for their object to obtain your interposition to
wards repairing and controuling the irregularities practised by
British ships of war in the harbour of New York, and on the
adjoining coasts. The resort was produced by a confidence
that proceedings so contrary to public and local law, so irrita
ting in their tendency, and so much at variance with the senti
ments which your Government is believed to entertain towards
the United States, would have received from you all the dis
countenance which they seemed to merit. Finding from the
tenor of your letter, and it is found with much regret, that, in
stead of the expected result, charges, supported by regular proof
against the British Commanders, are considered as answered by
the denials of the parties; that not only the authority to impress
British subjects from American vessels on the high seas is main
tained, but a positive sanction is, moreover, given to the impress
ment of British subjects (which includes the decision of ques
tions of allegiance) from British vessels within the acknowl
edged Sovereignty of the United States, with an implied sanc
tion to the extraordinary pretension of a British Naval Com
mander, the Captain of the Cambrian, to a dominion of his Ship
over a certain space around it, even when lying in an American
port; that the continuance of enemy Ships in one of our ports.
a continuance which may be prolonged indefinitely at the pleas
ure of an adequate force, is alledged as a sufficient vindication
of the use which continues to be made of the port by British
Ships, and of their proceedings in its vicinity to which that use
is made subservient: finding, in a word, that the view which
you have been pleased to take of the complaints addressed to
you appears to be calculated rather to fortify than to restrain
the. British Commanders in the course which they are pursuing;

1804. LETTERS. 207
it is not perceived that any advantage is promised by the fur
ther discussion which might result from entering into the par
ticular comments of which some of your observations are sus
ceptible. It is deemed more proper to indulge the expectation
that the subject will be seen by the Councils of his Britannic
Majesty in a light more satisfactory to the United States, and
more correspondent with the disposition to cherish all the
friendly relations which so happily exist between the two Na
tions, and which are so strongly recommended by their mutual
interests. The irregularities charged on the French Ships of War now
at New York were first notified to the Government by your
representations on that head. You may assure yourself, Sir,
that they will be enquired into with that attention which the
United States owe not only to their own jurisdiction, but to
their neutral position, to which they will always be as ready to
pay respect themselves as to insist on it from others.

TO JOHN TYLER. Washington, Nov 3d, 1804.
Sir, — In the year 1801, Governor Monroe placed in my hands
three hundred Dollars, to be applied, when called for, to the
payment in France for a Sword (as well as I recollect) voted
by the State of Virginia to General Campbell. The money was
lodged in the Bank of Columbia, in Georgetown. Having
never been called for, it escaped my attention, till I was three
days ago reminded of it by lighting on the receipt given by the
Bank. With a view to remit it without delay, I have drawn
the money from its depository, and now inclose it in halves of
three bills, of 100 dollars each. The other halves will be sent
by another mail.

208 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Nov. 9, 1804.
Dear Sir, — Besides your public letters, I have received your
series of private ones down to August 24th. From the tenor
of the latest of both, I infer that your negociations with the
British Government will have issued in proofs merely of a gen
eral disposition to be in amity with us, without stipulating the
just accommodations claimed by the United States; and that
you will of course have set out for Madrid, in order to try the
temper of that Court. Thither I shall accordingly address this
letter. The public one which it accompanies, with the docu
ments therewith inclosed, and others to be found on Mr. Pinck-
ney's files, furnish all the lights with which we can assist you in
pursuing the objects of your mission. You cannot too earnestly
press on Spain the necessity of closing all the differences be
tween the two Countries. West Florida is essential to the
United States, both as to their revenue on the Mississippi, and
to the trade through the Mobile. Spain must also, sooner or
later, swallow the claim for French injuries. All she can ex
pect is, to have the pill wrapt up in the least nauseous disguise.
I am not sure that all the distinctions and arguments suggested
on that subject agree precisely with the principles and merits of
the case, which is a complex one, and in some respects turns on
questions not clearly defined and settled by public jurists or gen
eral usage. But it seems unquestionable that Spain is bound in
honor, as an independent nation, and in strict justice also, un
less she can prove as well as plead a real , to indemnify
the sufferers within her jurisdiction. I presume you will be able
to understand the subject more distinctly by inquiring into the
classes and details of the cases on the spot; and I hope, if
France cannot be brought to take side with us on this occasion,
and on that of settling the boundaries of Louisiana, that she
will not put her weight in the adverse scale. The South Amer
ican claims will also claim your critical attention. The Con
vention of 1802 leaves so much to construction and opinion,
that some further provision will be necessary, even if that in-

1804. LETTERS. 209
strument should go into effect. In a new Convention, it may be
blended with a provision for wrongs subsequent to that date.
In a communication of to Mr. P. , an attempt
was made to classify these South American claims, including
those for similar irregularities in the Spanish Islands, in order
to discriminate and graduate their respective merits. The aid
of the claimants was asked, but never obtained. The materials
and explanations on the spot may enable you to execute the
task with more precision. There is reason to believe that Yrujo
has worked against us with all his might, seeking to advance
himself by flattering the prejudices of his government, instead of
consulting its obligations or its true interest. He behaved so
badly as to require the recall signified in my public letter.
Pinckney's recall has been asked by the Spanish Government,
and a letter of leave goes to him. I suspect he will not return
in good humour. I could not permit myself to flatter him, and
truth would not permit me to praise him. He is well off in es
caping reproof, for his agency has been very faulty, as well as
feeble. Should you find him at Madrid, he may, however, give
you some clues that may be useful. It is probable that he will
be succeeded by Bowdoin, whose character is probably not un
known to you. It is certainly respectable, altho' his talents are
considered as moderate. You are aware, I presume, that the
Prince of Peace will claim your special attention. Mr. Short
inculcates the policy of it. He says that he governs the Court
absolutely, and may be managed by his weaknesses, particularly
his vanity. Such a resource is not to be neglected. But the main
one will lie in a skilful appeal to the fears of Spain, and the in
terest which France, as well as Spain, has in not favoring a co
alition of the United States with Great Britain. The Presi
dent's message goes to you by this opportunity. The Tableau
which it presents cannot fail to strengthen his administration
at home, and to increase the weight of the United States abroad.
His re-election is certain; so is the success of Clinton as Vice
President. Congress have not yet proceeded beyond the introductory
forms. The topics in the message, with some left open at the
VOL. II. 14

210 WORKS OF MADISON. 1804.
last session, particularly the trial of Chase, will give an idea
of the range of these deliberations. I ought to have included
the memorial from New Orleans, drawn by Edward Livingston,
who is laboring to trouble the waters in which he means to fish.
The bearers of the memorial have arrived at New York on
their way hither. You will have noticed in the newspapers the
dreadful mortality among the strangers and new settlers at New
Orleans. Among the victims particularly lamented for his per
sonal worth, and the dependents on his exertions, is Mr. Trist.
Young Gelston has also been taken off. Governor Claiborne
escaped narrowly, but lost, on the same day, his wife and only
child.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Dec' 3, 1804.
Dear Sir, — Captain Dulton goes immediately to Spain with
despatches, of which sundry copies have been sent to England,
so that you will be sure to get them, whether you should be in
the one or the other of those Countries. A letter from Mr.
Pinckney just received shews that Spain has laid aside certain
reinforcements intended for Florida, &c. Whether this step pro
ceeded from the note he put in, as he supposes, or partly from
that and partly from the posture of her affairs in England, it is
a proof that she does not wish to quarrel with the United States,
and that the moment for your operations may have particularly
arrived. We have the fullest confidence in the prudence with
which you will make use of such an opportunity, as well as of
every other, for the purposes with which you are charged. Mr.
Bowdoin is to succeed Mr. Pinckney. It is probable that some
little time will elapse before he will be able to embark. Your
last letter from London was dated on the 8 th of September.
By Mr. Graham, I learn that you were there on the 26 th, and
by a letter from Mr. Purviance to him, of the 21st, it appears
that the prospect of your negociation with the British Govern
ment was flattering neither as to the time nor the complexion

1805. LETTERS. 211
of its issue. We do not, however, altogether despair of a less
unfavorable account in your next letters, which we look for in
every mail that arrives.

to general turreau. Dept op State, Ap1 4, 1805.
Sir, — I have received a translation of a late Edict by Gen1
Ferrand, Commander-in-Chief, and acting as Captain General
at S' Domingo, in which he undertakes to denounce as pirates
all persons on board vessels, allies or neutrals, bound to or from
any ports in Hispaniola occupied by rebels, or found at the dis
tance of two leagues from any such port; and to declare that
they shall be tried and sentenced to death by a Military Com
mission. Although this document has not yet appeared in any
other than an unauthenticated form, and in a translation only,
the channel through which it has been transmitted leaves no
doubt as to its reality. A copy of it, as transmitted, is an
nexed. It would be perfectly superfluous to enter into a particular
comment on this extraordinary measure. You well know, Sir,
that piracy, being an offence defined by the law of Nations, can
not be varied by any particular Nation, much less by any of its
subaltern authorities; that the penalties to which those subject
themselves who are found on the high seas in the course of an
unlawful trade are also defined by the law of Nations, and
equally unalterable by any municipal authority; that the same
remark is applicable to the distance from the shore to which
the local jurisdiction extends, which is now generally limited
to a sea league; and that in no case can the mere circumstance
'of a vessel's being found within a given distance of a coast, to
which, in the course 'of a lawful and customary trade, vessels on
W. India voyages may be constrained to approach, be deemed
sufficient evidence that such vessel is actually destined for a
port on that coast. Still less can it be requisite to dwell on
the enormity of inflicting capital punishment in the cases stated

212 WORKS OF MADISON. 1805.
in the Edict, or the unexampled substitution of a Military trial
in place of the tribunal and rules which the law and practice of
Nations have universally established.
Persuaded, Sir, that you will view this measure of Gen1 Fer
rand in all its violations of public law, and in its tendency, if
carried into execution, to threaten the harmony so happily pre
vailing between our two Nations, and the better to guard which
was an object of the regulations lately provided by the Legis
lature of the U. States, in relation to their intercourse with the
W. Indies, I take the liberty of requesting that you will not
only make the proper communication on the subject to your
Government, but that you will be pleased, with the least possi
ble delay, to address to Gen1 Ferrand the considerations most
capable of diverting him from his rash and alarming purposes.
Notwithstanding the full reliance which is placed in the indig
nation with which the Emperor of the French will be inspired
by such an outrage on the law of Nations, and such an abuse of
the authority confided by him to a distant officer, and in the
remedy which he will cause to be applied, a more direct and
prompt interposition is rendered particularly necessary by the
precipitancy with which the Edict is to be carried into execu
tion, its commencement being postponed no longer than till the
21 of the present month. Assuring myself that this interposi
tion will be afforded with all the readiness and energy with
which the occasion requires, and which will comport with your
just and discerning appreciation of it, I have the honor to re
main, with sentiments of high respect and consideration,
Yr Mo. Obt St*.

TO R. R. LIVINGSTON.

Washington, July 5th, 1805.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 29 ult. was duly handed to me
by Mr. Townsend. I congratulate Mrs. Livingston and your
self on your safe arrival, and on the shortness of the passage.
Your trip up the North River was but a reasonable preliminary

1805. LETTERS. 213
to your visit to Washington, and was advised, also, by the ap
proach of the President's departure, which will take place in 8
or 10 days. Mine will be within a few before or after his. Our
return will be the last of September or the first of October,
when we shall see you with the greater pleasure, as being more
convenient to yourself.
The communications from Gen1 Armstrong are not later than
May 4. Those from Madrid are of about the same date. They
concur in shewing that Spain struggles much against our de
mands, and that France has her views in embarrassing, if not
defeating, the negociation. What the end will be remains to
be seen. Although appearances are not flattering, is there not
some room to calculate that when France finds she cannot get
her hand into our pocket, and that our disputes with Spain may
involve herself, and throw the United States into the British
scale, she will, unless events should place her above all such
considerations, promote an adjustment of our affairs with her
ally? Whether Madrid or Paris be the Theatre, the issue, it
would seem, equally depends on the influence, or rather author
ity, over the Spanish Cabinet.

TO JAMES MONROE. Philadelphia, Sept' 24, 1805.
Dear Sir, — The decision in the admiralty Courts of Great
Britain, disallowing the sufficiency of landing and paying duties
on Colonial produce of belligerent colonies, re-exported from
parts of the United States, to protect the produce against the
British cruisers and courts, has spread great alarm among mer
chants, and has had a grievous effect on the rate of insurance.
From the great amount of property afloat subject to this new
and shameful depredation, a dreadful sense of distress may
ensue to our Commerce. The subject was brought to attention
by the case of the Aurora, which gave rise to the observations
and instructions contained in my letter of 12th of April last. I
omitted in that letter to refer you to a case in Blackstone's re-

214 WORKS OF MADISON. 1805.
ports, where Lord Mansfield says that it was a rule settled by
the Lords of appeal, that a transhipment off a neutral port was
equivalent to the landing of goods from an enemy's Colony,
and that in the case of a landing, there could be no color for
seizure. As Mr. King's correspondence may not be in London,
I think it not amiss to remind you of what passed with the
British Government in 1801, in consequence of such seizures as
are now sanctioned. A copy of the document transmitted by
the Government to the Vice Admiralty Courts, as the law for
their guidance, is inclosed. If such a condemnation out of their
own mouths has no effect, all reasonings will be lost; and abso
lute submission, or some other resort in vindication of our neu
tral rights, will be the only alternative left.
I hope you will have received the instructions above referred
to, and that your interposition will have had a good effect. I
am engaged in a pretty thorough investigation of the original
principle, to which so many shapes are given, namely, that "a
trade not open in peace is not lawful in war," and shall furnish
you with the result as soon as my researches are digested. If
I am not greatly deceived, it will appear that the principle is
not only against the law of nations, but one which Great Brit
ain is precluded from assuming by the most conclusive facts and
arguments derived from herself. It is wonderful that so much
silence has prevailed among the neutral authors on this subject.
I find scarcely one that has touched on it, even since the preda
tory effects have been known to all the world. If you can col
lect any publications which can aid in detecting and exposing
the imposture, be so good as to send them.

TO G. W. ERVING. Washington, November 1, 1805.
Dear Sir, — By Mr. Smith, to whom this is committed, you
will receive the public letter in which the course approved by
the President is marked out for your conduct at Madrid. The
grounds for it are strengthened by the posture of things in Eu-

1805. LETTERS. 215
rope, and by the approach of the session of Congress. The im
pression made on this country by the proud and perverse con
clusion given by Spain to the endeavours of Mr. M  and
Mr. P  to adjust our differences, ought, if faithfully re
ported to her, to teach her a lesson salutary at all times, and
particularly so at the present moment. She may be sure that
she will never better her stipulations with this country by de
lay. If she calculates on the friend at her elbow, or be jogged
by him into follies not altogether her own, she is so far to be
pitied or despised as she avails herself of such explanations.
But here, again, she receives a lesson from the scene which ap
pears to be opening in Europe against the Imperial career of
France. England seems as ready to play the fool with respect
to this country as her enemies. She is renewing her depreda
tions on our Commerce in the most ruinous shapes, and has
kindled a more general indignation among our Merchants than
was ever before expressed. How little do those great Nations
in Europe appear, in alternately smiling and frowning on the
U. States, not according to any fixed sentiments or interests,
but according to the winds and clouds of the moment ! It will
be the more honorable to the United States if they continue to
present a contrast of steady and dignified conduct; doing jus
tice under all circumstances to others, and taking no other ad
vantage of events than to seek it for themselves.
For our domestic news, I refer to the Newspapers which go
by Mr. Smith. Congress do not meet till December. Their
session will involve important questions and measures relative
to the transactions of Europe having unsettled relations to this
Country, or committing wrongs against it.
The attention which you have been so good as to pay to
Bending to us publications useful for the Department of State
induces me to request that you will, during your stay at Mad
rid, procure whatever Books on diplomatic and commercial
subjects deserve a place in the office shelves; also, such as may
relate to America generally, and particularly the Ordinance,
&c, relating to the Indies and Islands belonging to Spain. This

216 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
general intimation will readily be applied by your own judg
ment to the pertinent objects.

TO MR. MERRY, BRITISH PLENIPOTENTIARY. Dept of State, Jany, 1806.
Sir, — I have received the letter in which you have done me
the honor to communicate, for the information of this Govern
ment, that his Britannic Majesty has directed a discontinuance
of the Blockade at the entrance of the rivers Elbe and Weser.
Considering communications from your Government on such
occasions as made with a view to relieve our Merchants from the
uncertainty they might otherwise be under, whether, on arriving
at a given port, they would or would not find it in a state of
Blockade, and be warned against entering it, the communica
tions are received as friendly marks of attention to the commer
cial interests of the United States. You will pardon me for
remarking, at the same time, that this is the only light in which
they can be reconciled with the true principles of blockade, and
the unquestionable rights of neutral commerce.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Jany 13, 1806.
Dear Sir, — I wrote you on the 8th instant, inclosing a pam
phlet on the principle in question between this Country and
Great Britain, and mentioned that it would be communicated
by the President, with other documents on the subject. This
will not be done, and I have written to recall the letter and
pamphlets from the parts to which they were sent. If either
of the copies should have gone to sea, and should reach you, be
so good as to consider the whole as cancelled, and not to ap
pear in your archives. The letter of this date, which this accom
panies, is the substituted communication. I meant to have writ
ten you fully, but it is not in my power. With respect to your

1806. LETTERS. 217
return, I hope you will at least postpone it till I can communi
cate the final sentiments of the President, which will soon be
done. Congress have not yet taken up our British affairs, nor got
through our Spanish.

TO GEN1 LA FAYETTE. Washington, Feby 21, 1806.
My dear Sir, — Your favor of December 8 was duly delivered
by Mr. Waddell. The one inclosed for Col. Toussard will be
forwarded as soon as possible.
It is with the sincerest regret, my excellent friend, that I find
myself unable to give you such an answer as you wish, with
respect to a loan here, which would meet your exigencies in the
beginning of next year. Col. Toussard conferred with both Mr.
Gallatin and myself on that subject, and must have communi
cated our anxious but unavailing deliberations on the means of
effecting such an object. In truth, there is no country, where
money exists at all, that is so unproductive of lenders as this.
The Banks, as well from the nature of their constitution as from
the critical situations into which the sudden jerks in our trade
frequently throw them, make no loans, either on landed security,
or for more than very short and fixed periods. Nor has Mr.
Gallatin even, much less myself, any of that sort of weight with
these institutions which could diminish the difficulty. And such
is the demand for money to carry on the private enterprizes in
commerce, and in landed property, that loans from the few in
dividuals who have the command of money are utterly unat
tainable. I feel great pain in communicating such unwelcome
truths; but as they unfortunately exist, it would be perfidious to
suppress them. We must hope, therefore, that the state of
things in Europe may be less unpropitious to your arrangements
than it is found to be in this quarter.
You already know that Mr. Du Plantier has been charged
with the location of your land, and that, he will be aided by

218 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
Governor Claiborne in the trust. I have only now to add, that
I have not yet received from either any information that is
worth detailing to you. They are both full of zeal to do the
most for you, and it will be reinforced by that of Col. Toussard,
who, I hope, will keep you informed directly from the spot of
the progress and prospect of the locations. The President
writes by Mr. Skipwith, the bearer of this, and will say all that
can be said as to one which has been particularly contemplated.
I fear, from what Gov1 Claiborne tells me, that nothing can be
made of the tract claimed by Marigny. I shall not fail to put
him and Mr. Du Plantier on the scent of the cotton land near
Point Coupe, to which your attention has been drawn.
As Mr. Skipwith has been a considerable time among us, and
proceeds immediately from the focus of our political affairs, I
refer to him for every thing, except the affectionate assurance
with which I remain your constant and faithful friend.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 10th, 1806.
Dear Sir, — We are waiting with solicitude for the answer
promised you by Lord Mulgrave early in December, and for the
effect of the President's message, with the information probably
transmitted from British sources here, on the Counsels of that
Government. These, I presume, will have been received pretty
early in January. The effect of the campaign in Germany may
be greater than that of any other cause; but as we cannot fore
see the course of events, and know here very imperfectly the
real character of those which are passed, we can make little use
of that fund of calculation. Our last accounts from the Theatre
of the war are those contained in the publications in London
on the 17th and 19th of December, which are less fitted to ex
plain than to cloud the operations of the early days in that
month. This is the 4th month since the Session of Congress com-

1806. LETTERS. 219
menced. Very little business, however, has been brought to a
conclusion. The two subjects of most striking importance were
the posture of things with Spain and Great Britain. That with
Spain was the subject of a special and confidential message
from the President, which followed on the heels of the general
message. It intimated to Congress the ground disclosed through
Armstrong for an adjustment of the depending difficulties under
the auspices of France, and was expected to have produced,
without delay, a provisional appropriation analogous to that
which was made for the negociation by you and Livingston. A
very unexpected and elaborate opposition, however, to the pur
chase of an adjustment, tho' securing East as well as West
Florida, spun out the question till a few days ago. And a fur
ther delay is now taking place in consequence of opposition in
the Senate to Armstrong, whom, with Bowdoin, the President
has nominated for the commission to treat at Paris. The oppo
sition to Armstrong is occasioned by a very misjudged opinion
given by him in the case of the ship New Jersey, and the offence
and complaints which it has excited among the merchants and
underwriters. As soon as a confirmation shall pass the Senate,
the instructions will be forwarded by a vessel now waiting for
them; and if the tide of French success should have changed the
disposition which existed in September, a satisfactory, or at
least an admissible result, may be hoped.
The British case was also the subject of a special message,
given in as soon as the Spanish one was finally provided for in
the House of Representatives. It was accompanied by sundry
documents, including your letter of the 18th October, which
was noted as peculiarly confidential, and withdrawn after being
read. In this case, also, the delay and deliberations have thus
far been unexpectedly tedious, and are likely to continue so.
For what has passed in it, I must refer you to a file of papers
which will be committed to the bearer, Mr. Prentiss. Whether
any and what harmonious result will succeed the discord of
opinions and projects coming forward, remains to be seen. The
merchants are zealous for an Extraordinary commission for the
negociating experiment. In this, they are seconded by those

220 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
who are averse to any legislative remedies, and by some, per
haps generally, by those who wish a negociation to be armed
with legislative provisions. The President has decided nothing
on this point as yet. I shall not fail to communicate his inten
tions as soon as they are ready for the purpose. You will of
course be included in such a commission, unless it should be
previously known that you will certainly not be on the ground
to act under it. I need not express to you the confidence which
your participation will add in the mind of the President. On
the other hand, he is too much impressed with the weight which
the reasons suggested in your letters may continue to have in
urging your return, already so long suspended, to require a fur
ther sacrifice of what you owe to yourself and your family.
You will find much in the newspapers with respect to Yrujo
and Miranda. The case of the former fully explains itself, and
no longer interests the public attention. That of the latter is
still a subject of much noise and misrepresentation, and vigor
ous attempts are made to turn it into a battery against the ad
ministration. Miranda had the address to make certain persons
at New York, among others Col. W. Smith, the Surveyor, be
lieve that, on his visit to Washington, he had enlisted the Ex
ecutive into a secret sanction of his project. They fell into the
snare; and in their testimony, when examined, rehearsed the rep
resentations of Miranda as to what passed between him and the
Executive. Hence the outcry against the latter as violating
the law of nations against a friendly power. The truth is, that
the government proceeded with the most delicate attention to
its duty; on one hand keeping in view all its legal obligations
to Spain, and on the other, not making themselves, by going
beyond them, a party against the people of South America. I
do not believe that in any instance a more unexceptionable
course was ever pursued by any Government.
We have had a most remarkably mild winter, resembling,
with the exception of a very few days of vigorous cold, rather
the autumn and Spring than the real season. The wheat has
been in a constant state of growing, and is now as much ad
vanced as is usual in the month of April. We have, of course,

1806. LETTERS. 221
a prospect of good crops. The last crop was of good quality,
but not a great one, in Virginia at least. That of Tobacco was
rather short, and of inferior quality. The price of both arti
cles is at present dull. Wheat sells from a dollar to a dollar
and a quarter. Tobacco of the best quality at Richmond at
about six dollars. Having not been in Orange for a year and
a half, I can say the less of the state of things on your estate,
which, I understand, has been farmed out. I shall, if possible,
make a visit as soon as Congress adjourn.
The President is just taken with one of his afflicting periodi
cal headaches. We hope, from some symptoms, that it will be
less severe than his former ones.
I fear you will have considered me as a delinquent in my cor
respondence, but it is an appearance I could not possibly avoid.
For the last year, especially the last 5 or 6 months, the weight
of business has almost broken me down, and robbed me of every
leisure for writing to my friends, even where public considera
tions, as well as private inclination, recommended it. I beg
you to be assured that the privation could in no case be more
sincerely regretted than it has been in yours; that I feel myself
much indebted for the numerous private communications I have
received from you; and that, with the united regards of Mrs. M.
and myself for you and Mrs. Monroe, I remain, dear sir.

Private. — Triplicate. London, March 11, 1806.
Dear Sir, — I have seen Mr. Fox and Mr. Grey to-day, and
had long conversations with each on our affairs, and have the
pleasure to inform you that the sentiments which they expressed
were of the most conciliating character. I cannot say that our
affairs will be arranged to our satisfaction, but I have the ut
most confidence that it will be the case. I ask'd Mr. Fox if he
had read my notes, &c? He said he had. Cannot we agree?
He saw no reason to suppose the contrary. If you were to in
sist on the principle of the late decisions, you would embroil

222 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
yourself with Russia. Yes, said he, and with other powers.
He seemed to admit that the ground of the Russian Convention
could not be opposed by G. Britain. But he added that he was
not authorized to state that by any decision of the Cabinet. I
have no doubt, however, that the Cabinet will be brought into
it. He assured me that the business should be concluded as
soon as possible, and certainly at no distant day. With Mr.
Grey I conferred principally on the impressment of seamen, tho'
I took occasion to give a sketch of the other; on which latter
he was reserved, as I supposed, because it was not in his de
partment. He informed me that great abuses were committed
in granting protections, of which he gave me some examples,
that were most shameful. He expressed, however, a very sin
cere desire to remedy the evil complained of on both sides,
which he seemed to think a practicable thing. On the whole,
I have great confidence in the opinion expressed above. The
13 Jany is the last letter which I have from you. The pamphlet
is received, and will, I think, be republished here. I think it
may be useful to have a sufficient number of copies struck to be
put into the hands of the Ministry, and circulated among the
members of Parliament. I hope that as soon as it is known
that the Ministry here has changed, our proceedings will as
sume a conciliating tone, and that it may even be understood
that the more liberal and just character of the present one,
which inspires confidence in the adoption of a system of just
measures, is the cause of it. I am satisfied that such a change
on our part would produce the happiest effect. Should every
thing fail, we shall be where we were, after giving a new proof
of our disposition to conciliate. I write you in haste this pri
vate letter, to be sent by different conveyances.
I am, dear sir, your friend and serv'.

P. S. Lord Selkirk is appointed to succeed Mr. Merry.

1806. LETTERS. 223
TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, May 17, 1806.
Dear Sir, — Your last favor was of March 11. The language
of Mr. Fox and Mr. Grey raises very favorable prospects; but
I am aware of the difficulties that may occur in settling details,
as well as in defining general principles. Other members of the
Cabinet may also not concur in the liberal dispositions of those
gentlemen. This goes by Mr. Pinkney, who is charged with
the joint commission, and instructions commensurate with its
objects. The commercial one will doubtless be felt by you in
all its delicacy. I need not suggest the expediency of guarding
against the particular vices of that of 1794, or against others
which might result from inattention. I hope the outline fur
nished you will be a safe guide, and that, as far as any practical
information may be required in aid of your and Mr. Pinkney's
general acquaintance with the course and character of our com
mercial relations to G. Britain, you will be able to obtain it
from mercantile sources on the spot. Perhaps Mr. Jas. Maury,
who must be well acquainted with the commerce between G.
Britain and this Country, may be consulted with advantage on
modifications which may be proposed by the adroitness of the
British Government on commercial and navigation points. Mr.
Pinkney has read over our correspondences with France and
Spain, as well as with G. Britain; and understands particularly
the objects committed to Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Bowdoin. To
his information I must refer you. It will be happy, if, notwith
standing all the delays and difficulties which have so unex
pectedly occurred, a final adjustment of everything should take
place with Spain. According to our latest accounts, there is
reason to believe that if no delay had arisen, the negociations
would have come on at a most favorable moment. Much will
now depend on the prospect of a peace or a continuance of war
between G. Britain and those powers. The complexion, if not
the issue, of your negociations will doubtless feel a like influ
ence. Mr. Pinkney and the newspapers will best explain the
state of our internal affairs. The Republicans, having lost the

224 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
cement given to their union by the rivalship of the Federal
party, have fallen in many places into schisms, of which the latter
are taking advantage. It is to be hoped, however, that as new
danger arises, it will heal the breaches which have been per
mitted by a state of security.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, June 4, 1806.
Dear Sir, — With this you will receive a duplicate of the
despatches taken with him by Mr. Pinkney, who sailed from
Baltimore fourteen days ago; as, also, a supplemental instruc
tion to you and him on the subject of the Indian trade, together
with some other documents, particularly copies of Mr. Merry's
communication and my answer on the notified blockade of the
4 German rivers. Mr. Merry communicated verbally, at the
same time, the contents of a letter to him from Mr. Fox, dated
April 7, in which Mr. Fox apologized for the delay in Treating
with you on the subject in controversy; expressed the good will
of the King towards the United States, and his wish for the es
tablishment of friendship on solid and lasting foundations; and
gave assurances that not a day would be unnecessarily lost in
proceeding to the work. As a like communication has probably
been made to you, we expect daily to hear from you on the
subject. In the instruction to yourself relating to the convention of
limits, it was signified as necessary to guard against a con
structive relinquishment on our part of the Island of Grand-
menan. I have not been able to investigate fully the several
questions concerning that object. But although, in some re
spects, the possession of it is desirable to the United States, I
doubt the propriety, under all circumstances, of suffering our
claim to the Island to defeat or retard the definitive adjustment,
if in other respects satisfactory. It will be well, at the same
time, to go a prudent length in maintaining our claim, and, if
possible, to avoid shutting the door against future discussion
of it.

1806. LETTERS. 225
I find, by the last accounts from Boston, that the Republicans
have at length succeeded in getting a majority in each branch
of the Legislature. In the Senate the majority is a bare one; in
the House of Representatives it amounts to about fifty. Gov
ernor Strong has a hundred or two votes more than Mr. Sulli
van. But it is not certain that, for want of a Constitutional
majority, the election will not devolve on the Legislature. In
New York the Federalists have also rather lost ground; but a
violent schism exists between those of their opponents who ad
here to Governor Lewis and those headed by the Clintonian
family. The proportional relation between these parties does
not appear to be ascertained. In general, the politics of that
State are but imperfectly understood out of it.

TO PIERREPONT EDWARDS. Washington, August 4, 1806.
Sir, — I have received your two favors of the 30 and 31 ultimo,
and am much obliged by the kind, and confidential communica
tions made in them.
We were not inattentive to the suggestions that an improper
acquittal of Smith and Ogden was to be apprehended from the
course which was indicated. But it was impossible to apply a
remedy without establishing a precedent objectionable in itself,
and which might be turned to a more mischievous account than
the case apprehended. We were aware, also, fully, of the policy
in summoning the testimony from Washington; but it was
thought best, on the whole, and in a permanent view, to meet it
in the mode pursued, rather than to abandon our public duties,
and exhibit the Heads of Departments as the sport of party
management, and appearing in court, not for the sake of evi
dence, which it was known was irrelevant, and, therefore, could
not be received, but rather to be examined.as so many culprits.
It were certainly to be wished that a fair state of the trans
action, as far as the interviews of Miranda with the Executive
are connected with it, could be laid before the public. It would
VOL. II. 15

226 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
prove, I believe, that the conduct of the latter was precisely
such as became the guardians of the laws, and as was required
by justice, honor, and sound policy. There is a real difficulty,
however, in making such a disclosure without encountering ob
vious objections of different kinds, some of them apparently in
superable in their nature. The disclosure, therefore, must be
left to time, which alone will do full justice to all parties. For
the present, the public must be left to its candid inferences from
the circumstances before it; and I cannot but believe that these
will, everywhere, except the immediate theatre of the illusions,
be such as they ought; nor do I think that even there the illu
sions will long resist the force of some of the facts brought out
on the trial. It is against all experience that evidence, law,
and argument, can long be borne down by such means as have
been employed against them.

A MEMOIR,
CONTAINING AN
EXAMINATION OF THE BRITISH DOCTRINE,
WHICH SUBJECTS TO CAPTURE
A NEUTRAL TRADE
NOT OPEN
IN TIME OF PEACE.

j/ji/r-j-i

EXAMINATION OF THE BRITISH DOCTRINE
WHICH SUBJECTS TO CAPTURE
A NEUTRAL TRADE NOT OPEN IN TIME OP PEACE.

IN times of peace among all nations, their commercial inter
course is under no other restrictions than what may be imposed
by their respective laws, or their mutual compacts. No one or
more nations can justly control the commerce between any two
or more of the others.
When war happens between any two or more nations, a ques
tion arises, in what respect it can affect the commerce of nations
not engaged in the war ?
Between the nations not engaged in the war, it is evident
that the commerce cannot be affected at all by a war between
others. As a nation not engaged in the war remains in the same re
lations of amity and of commercial pursuits, with each of the
belligerent nations, as existed prior to the war, it would seem
that the war could not affect the intercourse between the neu
tral and either of the belligerent nations; and that the neutral
nation might treat and trade with cither, or both the belliger
ent nations, with the same freedom as if no war had arisen be
tween them. This, as the general rule, is sufficiently estab
lished. But inasmuch as the trade of a neutral nation with a belliger
ent nation might, in certain special cases, affect the safety of
its antagonist, usage, founded on the principle of necessity, has
admitted a few exceptions to the general rule.
Thus, all instruments of war, going into the hands of one

230 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
belligerent nation, may be intercepted, on the high seas, by its
adversary. In like manner, a neutral trade with a place actually besieged
is liable to be interrupted by the besiegers.
It is maintained also on one side, though strongly contested
on the other, that the property of a nation at war, in a neutral
ship, may be seized and condemned by the enemy of that nation.
To these exceptions, Great Britain has undertaken to add
another, as important as it is new. She asserts a right to in
tercept the trade of neutrals with her enemies, in all cases,
where the trade, as it respects the ship, the cargo, or even the
individual port of destination, was not as free before the war,
as it is made during the war.
In applying this doctrine, the British government and courts
have not, as yet, extended it beyond the trade of neutrals on
the coasts, and with the colonies of enemies. But it is manifest,
that this limitation is founded in considerations of expediency
only; and that the doctrine is necessarily applicable to every
other branch of neutral commerce with a belligerent nation,
which was not open to the same nation in time of peace. It
might indeed with equal reason be extended farther. It might
be applied to the case of a trade legally permitted to foreign
nations in time of peace, but not actuaUy carried on by them in
time of peace; because in time of peace actually carried on by
the nation itself; and which is taken up by foreign nations in
time of war only, in consequence of the war, which, by increas
ing the risk or by finding other employment for the vessels and
seamen of the nation itself, invites neutral traders into the de
serted channels. In both cases, the neutral intervention may
be said to result from the pressure of the war; and in both
cases, the effect is the same to the belligerent; since in both,
neutrals carry on for him, a trade auxiliary to his prosperity and
his revenue, which he could no longer carry on for himself; and
which at the same time, by liberating his naval faculties for the
purposes of war, enables him to carry on the war, with more
vigor and effect. These inferences cannot be impaired by any

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 231
sound distinction, between a trade of foreigners with colonies,
and a trade of foreigners with the ports of the mother country.
Colonies, more especially when they are altogether subject to
the same authority which governs the parent state, are integral
parts of the same dominion or empire. A trade, therefore, be
tween a colonial port and a port of the parent or principal
State, is precisely of the same nature with a trade between one
and another port of the latter: and a trade between a colony
and a foreign port is, in like manner, precisely the same with
the trade between a foreign port and the parent country; which
is only a more considerable, as a colony may be a less consid
erable, part of the same country or empire. Previous to the
late political union of Ireland with Great Britain, the relation
between those two islands was strictly analogous to the rela
tion between Great Britain and the West Indies. Was any
difference ever entertained between a coasting trade from a
British to a British port, and a trade from a British to an Irish
port? or between a trade from a foreign port to an Irish port,
and a trade from a foreign to a British port? In the nature of
things, and in the eye of foreign nations, the cases were the
same. If any difference existed, it was merely circumstantial,
such as may be incident to all cases essentially the same; or
merely municipal, such as may result from those regulations of
trade, which all sovereigns have an acknowledged right to make.
It would not be unfair, therefore, in examining the doctrine
asserted by Great Britain, to view it in the whole extent of
which it is susceptible. But the latitude in which it is avowed,
and carried into operation, sufficiently demands the serious at
tention of all nations; but more than any, that of the United
States, whose commerce more than any is the victim to this bel
ligerent pretension. To prepare the way for this examination,
several remarks are to be premised.
First. The general rule being, that the trade between a neu
tral and belligerent nation is as free as if the latter were at
peace with all nations, and the cases in which it is not as free
being exceptions to the general rule, the exceptions, according

232 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
to a received maxim of interpretation, are to be taken strictly,
against those claiming the benefit of the exceptions, and favor
ably for those claiming the benefit of the general rule.
Secondly. The exceptions being founded on a principle of
necessity, in opposition to ordinary right, the necessity ought
to be evident and urgent. In proportion as the necessity may
be doubtful, and still more, in proportion as the sacrifice of neu
tral interests would exceed the advantage to the belligerent, the
exception fails.
Thirdly. The progress of the law of nations, under the influ
ence of science and humanity, is mitigating the evils of war, and
diminishing the motives to it, by favoring the rights of those
remaining at peace, rather than of those who enter into war.
Not only are the laws of war tempered between the parties at
war, but much also in relation to those at peace.
Repeating then, that every belligerent right to controul neu
tral commerce must, as an exception to the general freedom of
commerce, be positively and strictly proved, and the more
strictly, as the exceptions are in a course of restriction rather
than extension, the question is ready for examination, whether
it be a part of the law of nations, that a trade ordinarily shut
in time of peace, and opened to neutrals in time of war, on ac
count of the war, is liable, as much as a trade in contraband of
war or with a blockaded port, to capture and condemnation.
It will not be overlooked, that the principle, as thus laid
down, does not extend to any of the cases, where a new trade,
though opened during a war, is not opened on account of the
war, but on considerations which would produce the same
measure, if no war existed: from which follows another import
ant observation, that taking into view the probable occurrence
of such considerations, the still greater probability of a mixture
of such with considerations derived from the war, the impossi
bility of distinguishing the proportion of these different ingre
dients in the mixture, with the evident disadvantage of render
ing more complicated, instead of simplifying, a rule of conduct
between independent nations, to be expounded and enforced by

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 233
one of the parties themselves, it would seem to require no great
effort of candor, to acknowledge the powerful objection in prac
tice, to such a principle, were it really embraced by the most
specious theory.
But without dwelling on this view of the subject, however just
in itself, the principle in question will be tried:
First — by the writings most generally received as the deposi
taries and oracles of the law of nations;
Secondly — by the evidence of treaties;
Thirdly — by the judgment of nations, other than Great
Britain; Fourthly — by the conduct of Great Britain herself;
Fifthly — by the reasoning employed in favor of the prin
ciple. First. The written authorities on this subject.
It cannot be necessary to examine the historical fragments
which have been gleaned by modern authors, as evidence of the
usage and tenets of the civilized nations of antiquity. The great
change which has taken place in the state of manners, in the
maxims of war, and in the course of commerce, make it pretty
certain, that either nothing would be found relating to the ques
tion, or nothing sufficiently applicable, to deserve attention in
deciding it. There is but little hazard in saying, that in none
of the learned collections, is a single fact presented, which coun
tenances the British pretension; or even shews, that a single
ancient nation asserted or acted on it.
On a cursory review of the naval laws of Rhodes, of Oleron,
of Wisbuy, and of the Hanse Towns, they appear to be perfectly
barren of information. They are confined to subjects within
the law-merchant, taking no notice of questions between na
tions; and are no further binding on particular nations, than [as]
they may be respectively adopted into their municipal codes.
The ancient compilation under the title of Consolato del
Mare, a work of great authority with British jurists, has two
chapters which treat particularly of captures and recaptures.
They do not, however, touch any cases but those where either

234 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the ship or the cargo, in whole or in part, might be enemy's
property; and consequently are inapplicable to the case under
examination.* Descending to more modern times, the first authority which
offers itself, is the work of Albericus Gentilis.
He was the immediate precursor of Grotius, and has the merit
of preparing the way for the great work supplied by the genius
and erudition of the latter. Gentilis being so soon eclipsed by
a superior authority, is but little known beyond a few occa
sional citations, which, as far as they may not coincide with
the doctrines of Grotius, are, for the most part, superseded by
them. Grotius is not unjustly considered, as in some respects, the
father of the modern code of nations. Great, however, as his
authority deservedly may be, it yields, in a variety of instances,
to that of later jurists; who, to all the lights furnished by this
luminary, have added those derived from their own sources, and
from the improvements made in the intercourse and happiness
of nations.
On the relations between belligerent and neutral nations,
Grotius has but a single, and that a short chapter, (B. Ill,
Ch. 17,) with three short sections, Ch. 1, sec. 5, of the same
book with a note, and B. II, Ch. 2, sec. 10, and B. Ill, Ch. 6,
sec. 6, with a note.t The chapter begins with the following
paragraph: " It may seem needless for us to treat of those that are not en
gaged in war, when it is manifest that the right of war cannot
* Azuni has given a very learned account of tliese ancient compilations, par
ticularly of the Gonsolato del Mare, which he considers as a work of the Pisans,
during the period of their maritime prosperity.
f The extracts in the text are from the English edition and translation of Gro
tius, which is in general loose, and sometimes erroneous. It was inserted before
there was an opportunity of comparing it with the original.
"Supervacuum videri posset agere nos de his,. qui extra bellum sunt positi,
quando in hos satis constet nullum esse jus bellicum. Sed quia occasione belli
multa in eos, flnitimos proesertim, patrari Solent prsetexta necessitate, repetendum
hie breviter quod diximus alibi, necessitatem ut jus aliquod det in rem alienam,

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 235
affect them: but because upon occasion of war, many things are
done against them on pretence of necessity; it may be proper here
briefly to repeat what we have already mentioned* before, that
the necessity must be reaUy extreme, to give any right to an
other's goods: that it is requisite that the proprietor be not
himself in the like necessity. When real necessity urges us to
take, we should then take no more than what it requires; that
is, if the bare keeping of it be enough, we ought to leave the
use of it to the proprietor; and if the use be necessary, we ought
not to consume it; and if we cannot help consuming it, we ought
to return the full value of it."
Having illustrated this exemption of neutral property from
the effect of war between others, with the sole exception of cases
of extreme necessity, by a train of examples, he proceeds to lay
down the duty of neutrals towards the belligerent parties, as
follows: " On the other side it is the duty of those who are not engaged
in the war, to sit still and do nothing that may strengthen him
that prosecutes an ill cause or to hinder the motions of him that
hath justice on his side, as we have said before. [Ch. 1, of this
B., sec. 5.] But in a dubious cause to behave themselves alike
to both parties; as in suffering them to pass through their coun
try, in supplying them with provisions, and in not relieving the
besieged." In illustration of the impartiality here enjoined, a
number of instances are specified in the sequel of the chapter
and the notes.
The 5th section of chapter 1, above referred to, makes up the
whole of what Grotius teaches on this branch of the subject.
As it is more definite and particular than the other extracts,
the insertion of it, though of greater length, will be proper.
summam esse debere: requiri praeterea ut ipso domino par necessitas non subsit:
etiam ubi de necessitate constat, non ultra sumendum quam exigit: id est, si cus-
todia sufficiat, non sumendum usum; si usus, non sumendum abusum: si abusu
sit opus, restituendum tamen rei pretium."
* B. H, Ch. 2, sec. 10, in which the same precise sentiment is contained as is
here repeated.

236 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
*"Here also there uses to arise another question, what we
" may lawfully do to those who are not our enemies, nor are
" willing to be thought so, and yet supply our enemies with cer-
" tain things. There have been formerly, and still are great
" disputes about this matter, some contending for the rigors
" [tof the laws] of war, and others for a freedom of commerce.
"But first we must distinguish between the things themselves.
" For there are some things which are of use only in war, as
" arms, &c. Some that are of no use in war, as those that serve
" only for pleasure; and lastly, there are some things that are
" useful both in peace and war, as money, provisions, ships, and
" naval stores. Concerning the first (things useful only in war)
" it is true what Amalasuintha said to the Emperor Justinian,
" he is to be reputed as siding with the enemy, who supplies him
" with things necessary for war. As to the second sort of
* " Sed et questio incidere solet, quid liceat in eos qui hostes non sunt, aut dici
non sunt, sed hostibus res aliquas subministrant. Nam et olim et nuper de ea re
acriter certatum scimus, cum alii belli rigorem, alii commerciorum libertatem
defenderent. Primum distinguendum inter res ipsas. Sunt enim quse in bello
tantum usum habent, ut arma: sunt quse in bello nullum habent usum, at quse
voluptati inserviunt; sunt quse et in bello et extra bellum usum habent, ut pecu-
nise, commeatus, naves, et quse navibus adsunt. In primo genere verum est dic
tum Amalasuinthse ad Justinianum, in hostium esse partibus qui ad bellum
necessaria hosti administrat. Secundum genus querulam non habet."
"In tertio illo genere usus ancipitis, distinguendus erit belli status. Nam si
tueri me non possum nisi quse mittuntur intercipiam, necessitas, ut alibi exposui-
mus, jus dabit, sed sub onere restitutionis, nisi causa alia accedat. Quod si juris
mei executionem reram subvectio impedierit, idque scire potuerit qui advexit,
ut si oppidum obsessum tenebam, si portus clausos, et jam deditio aut pax ex-
pectabatur, tenebitur ille mihi de damno culpa dato, ut qui debitorem carceri
exemit, aut fugam ejus in meam fraudem instruxit: et ad damni dati modum res
quoque ejus capi, et dominium earum debiti consequendi causa quseri poterit.
Si damnum nondum dederit, sed dari voluerit, jus erit rerum retentione eum co-
gere ut de futuro caveat obsidibus, pignoribus aut alio modo. Quod si preterea
evidentissima sit hostis mei in me injustitia, et ille eum in bello iniquissimo con-
firmet, jam non tantum civiliter tenebitur de damno, sed et criminaliter, ut is qui
judici imminenti reum manifestum eximit: atque eo nomine licebit in eum stat-
uere quod delicto convenit, secundum ea quse de poenis diximus; quare intra
eum modum etiam spoliari poterit."
t The original is " belli rigorem,'' rigor of war.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 237
" things [for pleasure only, of which sort he gives examples
" from Seneca] there is no just cause of complaint.
" As to the third sort of things, that are useful at all times,
" we must distinguish the present state of the war. For if I
" cannot defend myself without interrupting those things that
" are sent to my enemy, necessity* (as I said before) will give
" me a good right to them, but upon condition of restitution, un-
" less I have just cause to the contrary. But if the supply sent
" hinder the execution of my designs, and the sender might have
" known as much; as if I have besieged a town or blocked up
" a port, and thereupon I quickly expect a surrender, or a peace,
'-' that sender is obliged to make me satisfaction for the damage
'' that I suffer upon his account, as much as he that shall take a
" prisoner out of custody that was committed for a just debt, or
" helps him to make his escape, in order to cheat me; and pro-
" portionably to my loss I may seize on his goods and take
" them as my own, for recovering what he owes me. If he did
" not actually do me any damage, but only designed it, then
* The note here of Barbeyrac, himself a respectable authority, is interesting
both as it corroborates the liberal spirit of Grotius in favor of neutral commerce,
and as it explains the ideas not only of Barbeyrac but of Cocceius, another re
spectable jurist, in relation to blockades. The note is as follows, see p. 519, note
5: " Our author [Grotius] here supposes the case of being reduced to the last
extremity; and then his decision is well founded, whatever Mr. Cocceius says,
Dissert, de Jur. Bel. in Amicos, sect. 12, wherein he only criticises our author in
regard to what he advances elsewhere, that in case of necessity, the effects become '
common. It is true, it suffices, that at such a time the goods of another may be
used without even the proprietor's consent. But as to the following cases, that
lawyer has reason, in my opinion, to say, § 15, 17, that provided that in furnish
ing corn, for instance, to an enemy besieged and pressed by another, it is not
done with design to deliver him from that unhappy extremity, and the party is
ready to sell the same goods also to the other enemy, the state of ' neutrality and
liberty of commerce leave the besieger no room for complaint. I add, that there
is the more reason for this, if the seller had been accustomed to traffic in the
same goods with the besieged before the war." This last remark of Barbeyrac,
as meant by him, is just. The primary duty of a neutral is impartiality; and the
circumstance of an antecedent and habitual trade to the same place, would be
the strongest, though not the only evidence, that the continuance of it, proceeded
from the ordinary motives of mercantile gain, and not from an unlawful par
tiality towards one of the nations at war.

238 ¦ WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" have I a right, by detaining those supplies, to oblige him to
" give me security for the future, by pledges, hostages, or the
" like. But further, if the wrongs, done to me by the enemy,
" be openly unjust, and he, by those supplies, puts him in a con-
" dition to maintain his unjust war, then shall he not only be
" obliged to repair my loss, but also be treated as a criminal,
" as one that rescues a notorious convict out of the hands of
" justice; and in this case it shall be lawful for me to deal with
" him agreeably to his offence, according to those rules which
" we have set down for punishments; and for that purpose I
" may deprive him even of his goods."
The following extracts explain the principles of Grotius on
the cases, where the property of an enemy is found in a neutral
ship, or neutral property in a belligerent ship.
In a note to B. Ill, Ch. 1, sec. 5, Grotius cites the Consolato
del Mare for the doctrine that enemy's property miglit be taken
in neutral ships, but that the ship of an enemy did not affect the
neutral cargo, nor the cargo of an enemy, the neutral ship. The
residue of this long note recites and disapproves the attempts
of Great Britain, France and other nations, to prohibit alto
gether the trade of neutrals with their enemies.
*B. Ill, Ch. 6, sec. 6: "Wherefore the common saying, that
goods found in our enemies' ships are reputed theirs, is not so
to be understood, as if it were a constant and invariable law of
• the right of nations; but a maxim, the sense of which amounts
only to this, that it is commonly presumed, in such a case, the
whole belongs to one and the same master; a presumption, how
ever, which, by evident proofs to the contrary, may be taken
off. And so it was formerly adjudged in Holland, in a full as
sembly of the sovereign court during the war with the Hanse
Towns in 1333, and from thence hath passed into a law."
* Quare quod dici solet, hostiles censeri res in hostium navibus repertas, non
ita accipi debet quasi certa sit juris gentium lex, sed ut proesumptionem quan-
dam indicet, quse tamen validis in contrarium probationibus possit elidi. Atque
ita in Hollandia nostra jam olim, anno scilicet 1338, flagrante cum Ansiaticis
bello, frequenti senatu judicatum, et ex judicata in legem transiisse comperi.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 239
In a note to this section, Grotius adds:* "Neither do the
ships of friends become lawful prize on the account of the ene
mies' goods; unless it is done by the consent of the owner of the
ship;" referring in this case to the authority of several writers,
and the practice of several nations.
The spirit of these passages, taken altogether, can leave no
doubt, as to the side on which the authority of Grotius is to be
placed. In the first place he expressly limits the general right of war
against the property of neutrals, to cases of that evident and
extreme necessity, which must always make a law for itself when
ever it exists, but which can never be applied to the cases fall
ing within the belligerent claim asserted by Great Britain.
In the next place he particularly limits to the case of a neces
sity of self-defence, the right of intercepting neutral supplies,
even to a blockaded or besieged place; and makes it a condi
tion, moreover, that a surrender of the place, or a peace, be
quickly expected as the effect of the blockade.
In the third place it is to be observed, that as in these pas
sages, Grotius has taken express notice of the several questions
of contraband, of blockades, and of the carriage of enemy's
property, which formed all his exceptions to the freedom of
neutral commerce; his silence with respect to the British excep
tion is an abundant proof, that this last had either never been
then asserted, or that he considered it so manifestly groundless ¦
as not to merit notice.
This is, in fact, the material inference to be drawn from the
review here taken of this celebrated jurist: and for the sake of
this inference principally, the review has been made thus full
and minute; for it must be admitted, that in general his ideas
are much less precise and satisfactory than those which are to
be found in succeeding authorities. In distinguishing wars, by
their justice or injustice, on which neutrals have no right to de
cide; in not distinguishing between supplies, as they may be
* Sed neque amicorum naves in praedam veniunt ob res hostiles, nisi ex con
sensu id factum sit dominorum navis.

240 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
sold only or sent; or as they may be sent by a government, or
by private persons; nor sufficiently distinguishing between the
right of a belligerent to prevent supplies by intercepting them,
and the right to do so, by punishing the offenders; he gives a
proof that his work is more to be admired for the novelty and
magnitude of the undertaking, than for the accuracy of its doc
trines and definitions.
Pufendorf, who may next be consulted, contents himself with
a simple reference to Grotius on the question — "How they are
to be dealt with, who supply the enemy with what he wants. "
In a note by Barbeyrac on this reference to Grotius, he him
self refers to a letter from Pufendorf to Groningius, as convey
ing the judgment of Pufendorf with respect to the question
'' whether we may hinder neutral nations from trading during
the war with the enemy." Groningius, it seems, having con
sulted Pufendorf on a treatise he had planned upon "free navi
gation," received the following answer; which, having under
gone much discussion, and as found in the English translation,
seeming to glance at the British principle of intercepting a com
merce opened to neutrals in time of war, is copied at full length,
and receives an attention which would not otherwise be be
stowed on it:
" The work, sir, that you have in view, relating to the liberty
of navigation, excites my curiosity. It is a curious subject, and
what no person as yet, that I know of, has particularly handled.
I very much however fear, if I may judge from your letter, that
you will find people who will dispute your notions. The ques
tion is, certainly, one of those which have not yet been settled
upon any clear or undeniable principles; so as to afford a gen
eral rule to mankind. In all the examples brought upon this
subject, there is a mixture of right and fact. Each nation usu
ally allows or forbids the maritime commerce of neutral people
with its enemy, either according as it is its interest to preserve
the friendship of those people, or it finds itself strong enough
to obtain from them what it requires. For example, the Eng
lish and Dutch may say, without absurdity, that it is lawful for
them to do all the ill they can to the French, with whom they

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 241
are at war; and consequently to employ the method the most
proper to weaken them, which is to traverse and ruin their
trade. They say it is not reasonable that neutral nations should
enrich themselves at their expence; and by engrossing to them
selves a commerce which the English and Dutch want, furnish
the French with money to continue the war. This seems the
rather just, because England and Holland commonly favor the
trade of neutral nations, by suffering them to transport and sell
in foreign markets merchandizes of their own growth and man
ufacture. In short, they say that they are willing to leave them
the trade they usuaUy carry on in time of peace; but they cannot
see them take advantage of the war, to extend their commerce to
the prejudice of England and HoUand. But as this matter of
trade and navigation does not so much depend upon rules
founded on a general law, as upon conventions made between
particular nations; so in order to form a solid judgment of the
point in question, we ought previously to examine what treaties
subsist between the northern crowns and England and Holland;
and whether these last powers have offered the former just and
reasonable conditions. On the other hand, nevertheless, if the
northern princes can maintain their trade with France, by send
ing strong convoys with their fleets, / see nothing to blame in it,
provided their vessels do not carry contraband goods. The
laws of humanity and equity between nations do not extend so
far as to require, without any apparent necessity, that one people
should give up its profit in favor of another. But as the ava
rice of merchants is so great that for the smallest gain they
make no scruple of exceeding the just bounds of commerce; so
nations that are at war may certainly visit neutral ships, and,
if they find prohibited goods on board, have a full right to con
fiscate them. Besides I am no way surprised that the northern
crowns have a greater regard to the general interest of Europe,
than to the complaints of some greedy merchants who care not
how matters go, provided they can satisfy their thirst of gain.
These princes wisely judge that it is not at all convenient for
them to take precipitate measures, while other nations unite all
their forces to reduce within bounds an insolent and exorbitant
vol. ii. 16

242 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
power, which threatens Europe with slavery, and the Protest
ant religion with destruction. This being the interest of the
northern crowns, it is neither just nor necessary, that for a
present advantage, they should interrupt so salutary a design,
especially as they are at no expence in the affair and run no
hazard," &c.
Without knowing more of the plan of "free navigation" es
poused by Groningius, it is not easy to understand precisely
the sentiments of Pufendorf on the subject. It deserves to be
remarked, however, that, in the argument on the belligerent
side, he states not what he thought, but what they said. On the
neutral side he expresses his own opinion: "On the other hand,
nevertheless, if the northern princes can maintain their trade
by sending strong convoys with their fleets, I see nothing to
blame in it, provided their vessels do not carry contraband
goods." But what is most material to be observed is, that the ex
pression, " that they (the belligerent nations) are wUling to leave
them (the neutrals) the trade they usually carry on in time of
peace; but that tJiey cannot see them take advantage of tlve war to
extend their commerce to tlie prejudice of England and HoUand,"
cannot possibly refer to the British distinction between a trade
usually permitted in peace, and a trade permitted only in war.
Such a construction, by no means countenanced either by the
general tenor of the letter, or the commercial history of the
period, is absolutely precluded by the preceding sentence.
" They say, qu'il n'est pas just que les peuples neutres s'enrich-
issent a leurs depens, et en attirant & eux un commerce inter-
rompu pour V Angleterre et la Holland, fournissent a la France
des secours, &c." The English translation of this sentence is
equivocal, if not false. The true meaning of it is, that it was
not deemed just that neutrals should enrich themselves by en
tering into a commerce interrupted, for England and Holland,
by the war. The commerce in question, therefore, was not a
commerce opened to neutrals during the war; but a commerce
which England and Holland had carried on with France pre
vious to the war, which the war had shut against them, and

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 243
which they did not like to see transferred to commercial com
petitors remaining at peace.*
Pufendorf, then, not derogating in this explanation of his sen
timents, from his reference to Grotius for the law of nations
concerning neutral rights and duties, but rather strengthening
the neutral rights asserted by Grotius, must be placed in the
same scale in which Grotius has been placed.
Bynkershoeck is the authority next in order of time. He treats
the subject of belligerent and neutral relations with more atten
tion, and explains his ideas with more precision, than any of his
predecessors. His 9th chapter is professedly on the question,t " what neu
trals may or may not do, during a war between other nations."
After stating, hypothetically, an unlimited claim, on the neutral
side, to trade with belligerents, in every thing, as if there was
no war; rejecting the distinction made by Grotius between a
just and unjust war; and urging the duty of impartiality towards
those engaged in it, he proceeds to observe,^ " that the enemies
* It is not amiss to remark, that the sentiments in this letter, so far as they favor
the rights of neutral commerce, have the greater weight, as the writer, though a
Saxon by birth, was a privy counsellor to the Elector of Brandenburg, and that
the letter was written at Berlin, whilst Prussia was of the belligerent party
against France. — Ompteda, p. 270.
Sir William Scott, supposing him to have been a Swede, endeavored, in the
case of the Swedish convoy, to draw from that circumstance a peculiar emphasis
to the concluding part of the letter, which, by grounding a prohibition of all trade
with France on the extraordinary nature of the war, seemed to favor one of the
grounds of which the Judge was willing to avail himself in his decision of that
case. It is a little singular, however, that in consulting this document, he should
have overlooked an express recognition by this illustrious authority, not three
sentences preceding his quotation, of the neutral right to protect a trade by
force of convoy; which was the precise question to be decided in the case.
f De his [non hostibus,] quseritur quid facere vel non facere possunt, inter
duos hostes.
J Amicorum nostrorum hostes bifariam considerandos esse, vel ut amicoB nos-
tros, vel ut amicorum nostrorum hostes. Si ut amicos consideres, recte nobis iis
adesse liceret, ope, consilio, eosque juvare, milite auxiliari, armis, et quibus
eunque aliis, quibus in bello opus habent. Quatenus autem amicorum nostro
rum hostes sunt, id nobis facere non licet, quia sic alteram alteri in bello prse-
ferremus, quod vetat sequalitas .amicitise, cui in primis studendum est. Prestat
cum utroque amicitiam conservare, quam alteri in bello favere, et sic alterius

244 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" of our friends are to be viewed in a two-fold character; either
" as our friends, or the enemies of our friends. If you consider
" them as friends, it would be lawful to aid them with our coun-
" sel, and to succor them with military forces, with arms, and
" with all other things whatsoever useful in war. But, inasmuch
" as they are the enemies of our friends, that cannot lawfully be
" done by us; because we should, in so doing, prefer one to
" another in the war, contrary to the equality of friendship,
" which is of primary obligation. It is better to preserve friend-
" ship Avith both, than, by favoring one in the war, to renounce
" tacitly the friendship of the other.
" And, indeed, what I have just said is taught not only by
" reason, but also by the usage received among almost all na-
" tions. For although the commerce with the enemy of our
" friends be free, it is agreeable to usage, as in the next chapter
" I shall shew more at large, that we should assist neither one
" nor another, with those things which may furnish and foment
" the war against our friends. It is not lawful, therefore, to
" carry to either, those things which are needful in making war;
" as are cannon, arms, and what are of principal use in war,
" soldiers; who are also excepted by various treaties between
" nations: materials for ships are also sometimes excepted,

amicitise tacite renunciare. Et sane id, quod modo dicebam, non tantum ratio
docet, sed et usus inter omnes fere gentea receptus. Quamvis enim libera sint
cum amicorum nostrorum hostibus commercia, usu tamen placuit, ut capite prox
imo latius ostendam, ne alterutrum his rebus juvemus, quibus bellum contra
amicos nostros instruatur et foveatur. Non licet igitur alterutri advehere ea,
quibus in bello gerando opus habet, ut sunt tormenta, arma et quorum proecip-
uus in bello usus, milites; quin et milites variis gentium pactis excepti sunt; ex-
cepta quandoque et navium materia, si quam maxime ea indigeat hostis ad ex-
truendas naves, quibus contra amicos nostros uteretur. Excepta ssepe et cibaria,
quando ab amicis nostris obsidione premuntur hostes, aut alias fame laborant.
Optimo jure interdictum est, ne quid eorum hostibus subministremus, quia his
rebus nos ipsi quodammodo vidiremur amicis nostris bellum facere. Igitur si
hostes simpliciter considercmus ut amicos, recte cum iis commercia exercemus,
et merces quascunque ad eos mittimus; Si consideremus ut amicorum nostrorum
hostes, excipiuntur merces, quibus in bello amicis nostris noceatur, et hseo ratio
priorem vincit; quomodocunque enim alteri contra alteram succurramus, bello
no? interponimus, quod salva amicitia non licet.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 245
" where an enemy is in absolute want of them for building ships
" to be employed against our friends. Provisions even, are
" often excepted, when an enemy is pressed by the siege of our
" friends, or is otherwise labouring under the want of food. On
" the best ground, therefore, are we interdicted to supply any of
" these things to belligerents; because by these things we should,
" in a manner, appear to make war ourselves on our friends.
" If, therefore, we consider belligerents, simply, in the light of
" friends, we may rightfully carry on commerce with them, and
" send them merchandizes of whatever kind; if we consider them
" as the enemies of our friends, merchandizes are to be excepted,
" which, in war, might annoy our friends; and this considera-
" tion prevails over the former one; for in whatever manner we
" succour one against the other, we take part in the war, which
" would be incompatible with the preservation of friendship."
Thus far the doctrine of this jurist cannot be mistaken. He
lays it down as a general rule, that the trade of neutrals with
the nations at war, provided it be impartial, is as if there were
no war; but that certain articles, as instruments of war, form
an exception to this general rule; to which he suggests as a
further exception, the case of a siege, or of a similar pressure
of famine. It cannot be pretended that there is either a single
general expression, or particular allusion, that can be tortured
into an exception of any trade, merely for the British reason,
that it was not open to neutrals before, as well as during, the
war. The residue of the chapter is chiefly employed in discussing
the legality and construction of treaties of succour and subsidy,
between a nation at peace and nations at war; after which he
proceeds to the tenth chapter, in which he treats of the list of
contraband, with several questions incident to it. His doctrine
here, the same precisely as in the preceding chapter, is laid
down in the following words : * " The rule, confirmed almost
* Regula est, pactis fere perpetuis probata, ne non hostes, ad hostes nostros,
vehant " contrabande goederen." Si vehant, et deprehendantur, in commissum ca-
dant; exceptis autem his, libere utrimque mercantur, et quaecunque alia ad hos
tes vehunt impune.

246 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" invariably by treaties is, that neutrals are not to carry con-
" traband articles to our enemies. If they carry them and are
" intercepted, they incur a forfeiture. But with the exception
" of these articles, they trade freely both backward and forward;
" and carry with impunity, all oilier articles whatever to the
" enemy." That under the term contraband, he could mean to class so
vague and novel a description of trade, as that which distin
guishes between commercial regulations, as existing before the
war, and as made in the course of the war, is rendered the more
impossible, by the definition given of contraband : * "Hence by
contraband, are to be understood, things which in their actual
state are adapted to war; without considering whether apart
from war, they may also be of use; there being few instruments
of war, which may not be used for other purposes." For this
he gives as a just reason, thatt " if you prohibit every material
out of whicli any thing may be formed for warlike use, great
would be the catalogue of prohibited articles; since there is
scarcely any material, out of which something at least, adapted
to war may not be fabricated."
In the ensuing chapter, he treats of the case of sieges and
blockades, as an exception to the freedom of neutral character.
In the 11th chapter, he examines the question, "whether the
contraband character of a part of the cargo, can affect the res
idue of the cargo or the ship;" with several other questions in
cident to such mixed cases.
Chapter 13th relates to neutral property in the ships of an
enemy; which he exempts from confiscation. His positions on
this subject shew how much the turn of his judgment must have
been adverse to any such restrictions on neutral commerce, as
* Ex his fere intelligo, contrabanda dici, quse, uti sunt, bello apta esse pos-
sunt, nee quicquara interesse an et extra bellum usum praebeant. Paucissima
sunt belli instrumenta, quse non et extra bellum prsebeant usum sui.
t Si omnein materiam prohibeas, ex qua quid bello aptari possit, ingens esset
catalogus rerum prohibilarum, quia nulla fere materia est, ex qua not saltern
aliquid, bello aptum, facile fabricemus.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 247
that instituted by Great Britain.* " According to reason, a
right of that sort [to confiscate neutral property in a belligerent
vessel] cannot be defended; for why may I not be allowed to
use the ship of my friend, though your enemy, in transporting
my merchandize? When treaties do not prohibit, I have a right,
as I said above, to carry on commerce with your enemy; and if
this be lawful, it is also lawful to enter into any contracts what
ever with him; to buy, to sell, to let, to hire, &c. Wherefore,
if I shall have engaged his ship and his service to transport my
effects by sea, it was a transaction on every principle lawful.
You, as his enemy, may take his ship; but with what right can
you take what belongs to me, that is, to your friend ? If, in
deed, I prove them to be mine; otherwise I agree with Grotius,
that there is some room for presuming things found in the ship
of an enemy, to be enemy's property."
Finally, in his 14th chapter, he treats the case of enemy's effects
in neutral vessels; deciding with Grotius and others, that the
neutrality of the ship does not protect the cargo from capture
and condemnation. He consequently makes this case also an
exception to the general freedom of neutral commerce, in favor
of belligerent privileges.
From this distinct and full view of the sentiments of Bynker-
shoeck, it is clear, that the whole weight of his authority is op
posed to the principle advanced by Great Britain. He is the
first writer who seems to have entered into a critical and sys
tematic exposition of the law of nations, on the subject of mari
time commerce between neutral and belligerent nations; and
* Ex ratione, utique, ejusmodi jus defendi non poterit; nam cur mihi non
liceat uti nave amici mei, quanquam tui hostis, ad transvehendas merces meas ?
Si pacta non intercedant licet mihi, ut supra dicebam, cum hoste tuo commercia
frequentare; quod si liceat, licebit quoque cum eo quoscunque contractus cele-
brare, emere, vendere, locare, conducere, atque ita porro. Quare, si ejus navem
operamque conduxerim, ut res meas trans mare vchat, versatus sum in re omni
jure licita. Tibi, qua hosti licebit navem ejus occupare, sed quo jure res meas,
id est amici tui, occupabis? Si nempe probem res meas esse; alioquin Grotio
adsentior, ex proesumptione quodam pro rebus hostilibus esse habenda quse in
navi hostili inveniuntur.

248 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the plan which he adopted was well calculated to do justice to
the subject. Instead of undertaking, after the example of Gro
tius and Pufendorf, an entire code of public law, he selected
for a more thorough discussion, the particular questions which
were deemed most important, and most frequent in the trans
actions and intercourse of modern nations. Among these, he
very properly classed the question of neutral commerce, and
bestowed on it, the formal investigation which we have seen.
He begins with the general question, how far a war between
two nations can affect the rights, particularly the commercial
rights, of a nation at peace with both, deciding in favor of neu
tral nations, that their commerce remains free as a general rule;
and in favor of belligerent nations, that in certain cases, excep
tions to that general freedom are prescribed by the principle
of self-defence. He goes on then to examine the several cases
which had been allowed or claimed, as exceptions. He estab
lishes the belligerent right to intercept articles on the list of
contraband. He establishes also the right to controul supplies
to places besieged or blockaded. He concurs in the doctrine,
that the flag of a friend does not protect the property of an en
emy. He discusses the claim, maintained by some, to confiscate
the property of a friend under the flag of an enemy, which he
disproves. He discusses, moreover, several other minor ques
tions, which were incident to the main subject. He appears, in
short, to have taken a comprehensive view of the commercial
relations between neutral and belligerent nations; and to have
omitted no question, belonging to those relations, which was of
sufficient importance to deserve his attention. And yet, it ap
pears, that he has not even glanced at the question, " whether
a neutral commerce, in articles not contraband, nor going to a
besieged or blockaded place, was unlawful, for the reason that
the belligerent party had been induced by the war, to new-
model its commercial regulations." Does it not necessarily and
undeniably follow, either that no such pretension had, at that
period, ever been started, or that it had received no countenance,
which could entitle it to notice? It is impossible to conceive

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 249
that a question of such magnitude could be otherwise passed
over, by a pen which dwelt with such minute attention on ques
tions less nearly allied to the main subject.
The authority of Bynkershoeck, in this case, ought to have the
greater weight with Great Britain, because, in other cases, so
much weight is claimed for it, by the champions of her favorite
doctrines. The reputation which Vattel enjoys in Great Britain, greater
perhaps than he enjoys any where else, requires that he should
be particularly consulted on this subject. The work of Vattel
unquestionably possesses great merit; not so much, indeed, for
the originality of his plan, or his matter, which he admits to
have been derived from Wolf; as for the agreeable dress which
he has given to the dry treatise of his prototype, and for the
liberal spirit which has, in many instances, improved the doc
trines of all his predecessors. Vattel is, however, justly charged
with failing too much in the merit of a careful discrimination;
and sometimes with delivering maxims, which he either could
not reconcile, or does not take pains to explain. In the chapter
on neutrality (B. Ill, Ch. 7,) he might perhaps have been more
exact in his definitions, and more lucid in the order of his ideas.
His meaning, nevertheless, is, on the whole, sufficiently clear,
and arranges him beyond all controversy, with Grotius, Pufen
dorf, and Bynkershoeck, in opposition to the doctrine under con
sideration. As the basis of the true doctrine, on the subject of neutral
commerce, he lays down these principles:
That a neutral nation is bound to an exact impartiality;
That this impartiality relates solely to the war;
That it includes two obligations: the first forbidding suc
cours in troops, not stipulated before the war, arms, ammuni
tion, or any thing of direct use in the war; the second, requiring
that in whatever does not relate to the war, one of the parties
must not be refused, on account of its present quarrel, what is
granted to the other. He observes "that this does not trespass
on the liberty of the neutral nation, in negotiations, connexions
of friendship, or its trade, to govern itself by what is most ad-

250 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
vantageous to the State. When this consideration induces it to
preferences in things of which every one has the free disposal, it
only makes use of its right, and is not chargeable with partiality.
But to refuse any one of these things, to one of the parties,
purely as being at war with the other, and for favoring the lat
ter, would be departing from an exact neutrality."
Having laid this foundation, and recommended to nations, in
tending, as they have a right, to remain neutral, that they should
secure their neutrality by treaties for the purpose, he proceeds
to state more particularly —
1st. "That whatever a nation does in use of its own rights,
and solely with a view to its own good, without partiality, with
out a design of favoring one power to the prejudice of another,
cannot, in general, be considered as contrary to neutrality; and
becomes such, only upon particular occasions, when it cannot take
place without injury to one of the parties, who has then a par
ticular right to oppose it. Thus, the besieger has a right to
prohibit access to the place besieged. Exclusively of this kind
of cases, the quarrels of another cannot deprive me of the free
disposal of my rights in the pursuit of measures which I judge
advantageous to my country." Hence he infers a right to per
mit, in certain cases, levies of troops to one of the parties, and
to deny it to the other, where there may be good reason for the
distinction; and where it is the custom, as among the Swiss, to
grant levies; and, consequently, where the custom would of it
self be a proof that the grant was not the effect of partiality in
relation to the war. He asserts, in like manner, for the sover
eign, as well as private citizens, in the habit of lending money
at interest, the right to lend it to one of the parties at war,
" who may possess their confidence, without lending it to the
other;" observing, that "whilst it appears that this nation lends
out its money purposely for improving it by interest, it is at
liberty to dispose of it according to its own discretion, and I
have no reason to complain. But if the loan be manifestly for
enabling the enemy to attack me, this would be concurring in
the war against me." He applies the same remark to the case
of troops furnished to an enemy, by the State itself, at its own

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 251
expence; and of money lent without interest: adding, at the
same time, as a further instance of neutral rights, that if a na
tion trades in arms, timber, ships, military stores, &c, I cannot
take it amiss that it sells such things to my enemy, provided it
does not refuse to sell them to me also. It carries on its trade
without any design of injuring me, and in continuing it, the same
as if I was not engaged in war, that nation gives me no just
cause of complaint.
Making, thus, impartiality the test of lawfulness in the con
duct of neutrals, and the mere pursuit of their own interest,
without a design to injure any of the belligerents, the test of
impartiality, he enters more particularly on the discussion of
the active trade which neutral nations carry on with those at
war. "It is certain," he says, "that, as they [neutrals] have no part
in my quarrel, they are under no obligation to abandon their
trade that they may avoid furnishing my enemy with the means
of making war. Should they make it a point* not to sell to
me any of these articles, whilst they take measures for trans
porting great quantities of them to my enemy, with a manifest
intention of favouring him, such a partiality would exclude them
from the neutrality they enjoyed. But if they simply pursue
their commerce t [suivre tout uniment leur commerce] they do
not thereby declare themselves against my interest; they only ex
ercise a right, which they are under no obligation of sacrificing
to me."
The general freedom of neutral commerce, being thus asserted,
* Si elles affectoient, &c.
f The Translation, "continue their customary trade," which might be con
strued to favor the British principle, is evidently erroneous. That which is sub
stituted conveys the true meaning. It is curious that the two authors, Pufendorf
and Vattel, who have alone appeared to speak a language any wise favorable to
the doctrine in question, should owe the appearance to English mistranslations.
It would be uncandid, nevertheless, to insinuate a design in the case; the more
so as the translation of Pufendorf was prior to the origin of the British preten
sion: but the error of translations may have strengthened the pretension which
it countenances.

252 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the writer goes on to lay down the exceptions which war makes
to it.
" On the other hand, whenever I am at war with a nation,
both my safety and welfare prompt me to deprive it as much as
possible of every thing which may enable it to resist or hurt me.
Here the law of necessity shews its force. If this law warrants
me on occasion to seize what belongs to another, shall it not
likewise warrant me to stop every thing relative to war, which
neutral nations are carrying to my enemy? Even if I should,
by taking such measures, render all these neutral nations my
enemies, I had better run the hazard than suffer him who is ac
tually at war to be thus freely supplied to the great increase of
his power. It is therefore very proper and very suitable to the
law of nations which disapproves of multiplying the causes of
war, not to consider those seizures of the goods of neutral na
tions as acts of hostility. When I have notified to them my
declaration of war against such or such a people, if they will
afterwards run the risk of supplying them with things relative to
war, let them not complain if their goods fall into my hands,
for I do not declare war against them, because they attempted
to carry such goods. They suffer indeed by a war in which they
have no concern, but it is accidentally, i do not oppose their
right, I only make use of my own, and if our rights clash, and
reciprocally injure each other, it flows from the effect of inevi
table necessity," &c.
"But that limits may be set to these inconveniences; that the
commerce of neutral nations may subsist in all the freedom
which the laws of war will admit, there are rules to be observed,
and on which Europe seems to be generally agreed."
What are the rules which fix these limits?
"The first is carefully to distinguish common goods which
have no relation to war, from those peculiarly subservient to it.
In the trade of the former neutral nations are to enjoy an entire
liberty, the parties at war cannot with any reason deny it, or
hinder the importation of such goods into the enemy's country,"
&c. He observes that the goods here referred to, as having re-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 253
lation to war, are those called contraband, of which he gives a
description; proceeding thence to shew how far they are sub
ject to confiscation, and to infer from the right of confiscation
the right of search on the high seas.
He next mentions, as a limit to the freedom of neutral com
merce, that the effects of an enemy found in a neutral ship are
subject to capture; deciding otherwise as to neutral effects on
board an enemy's ship, which some nations had been in the prac
tice of capturing.
He specifies, as his last limit or exception to the general free
dom of neutral commerce, the belligerent right to prohibit all
commerce with a place besieged or blockaded; closing the dis
cussion of this particular subject with an emphatic deduction in
these words — "A neutral nation continues with the two parties
at war, in the several relations which nature has placed between
nations. It is ready to perform towards them both all the du
ties of humanity reciprocally due from nation to nation. It is
in every thing not directly relating to war to give them all the as
sistance in its poioer, and of which they may stand in need. But
this assistance is to be given with impartiality, that is, in not
refusing to one of the parties any thing on account of his being
at war with the other. This does not hinder a neutral State
having particular connections of friendship and good neighbor
hood with one of the parties at war, from granting him in what
ever does not relate to military transactions the preference due
to friends: much more may he without giving offence continue
to him, for instance in commerce, such indulgencies as have been
stipulated in their treaties, &c."
We see then that the authority of Vattel coincides perfectly
with the preceding authorities, more especially that of Bynker
shoeck, in establishing the general freedom of neutral commerce,
with the exception of things relating to the war, and in limit
ing this exception to the several cases of supplying the enemy
with military contraband, of trading with places besieged oi
blockaded, and of carrying enemy's property.
Perhaps this author, not remarkable as already intimated foi

254 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
well-defined ideas, has in no particular branch of his work left
less room for mistaking or perverting his meaning.
It would be improper not to add Martens to the authorities,
who ought to be heard on this question. Martens was a pro
fessor of law in a Hanoverian University, with a salary from
the King of Great Britain as Elector of Hanover, and has dis
tinguished himself by several publications, which demonstrate
his critical judgment of the law of nations, and the extent of
his researches in order to verify and elucidate it. His summary
of this law is a work which was received by the public with a
due portion of that respect which constituted his predecessors
authentic depositaries and expositors of the code, by which the
society of nations ought to be governed. We find him accord
ingly on the same shelf already with Grotius, Pufendorf, Byn
kershoeck, and Vattel. In Great Britain indeed, notwithstand
ing his being a subject of her sovereign, and a professor under
his patronage, the doctrine he teaches on the question whether
free ships make free cargoes, has drawn on him the censure of
the zealous advocates for the side taken by Great Britain on
that question. In opposing, however, a favorite doctrine of that
nation, under the relation in which he stood to it, he gave a
proof of integrity and independence, which justly inspire the
greater esteem for his character, at the same time that they give
the greater weight to his opinions. Even there, however, his
censors have done justice to his eminent talents, and been ready
to avail themselves of his authority in cases where it supported
British principles and interests.
On the present subject the authority of Martens is clear and
full. He speaks first of neutral commerce according to the univer
sal law of nations, and next of the modern law of nations with
respect to neutral commerce, and its freedom, as acknowledged
by the powers of Europe.
The first he lays down as follows: " The right that a nation
enjoys in time of peace of selling and carrying all sorts of mer
chandize to every nation who chooses to trade with it, it enjoys

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 255
also in time of war, provided that it remains neuter." He ad
mits at the same time that necessity may authorize a power at
war to hinder the conveyance of warlike stores to its enemies, so
far as to sequester them till the end of the war, or to take them
at their full value for his own use.* He admits again that the
power at war may prohibit all commerce with such places " as
he is able to keep so blocked up as to prevent any foreigner
from entering." But he maintains that " since a belligerent
power cannot exercise hostilities in a neutral place, nor confis
cate property belonging to neutral subjects, such power ought
not to confiscate the goods of an enemy found in a neutral ves
sel navigating on a free or neutral sea, nor neutral goods found
in the vessel of an enemy: provided, however, in both cases that
these goods are not warlike stores."
In explaining what he styles the modern law of nations with
respect to neutral commerce, and its liberty as acknowledged by
the powers of Europe, he states it "as generally acknowledged
that a neutral power ought not to transport to either of the bel
ligerent powers merchandizes unequivocally intended for warlike
purposes, that treaties have at some times swelled out this list
with articles not evidently and unequivocally intended for such
purposes; at others have expressly declared these not to be con
traband, and that this last ought to be presumed to be the case
between powers having no treaties on the subject."
"With respect to merchandizes which are not contraband"
he says, "it is generally acknowledged by the powers of Eu
rope, that neutral powers have a right to transport them to the
enemy,t except it be to places blockaded, with which all com
merce is prohibited."
* This rule corresponds with the sentiments of Grotius.
f Martens in a note observes that " some powers have, but in vain, attempted
to forbid neutral nations to carry on commerce with their enemies, of which he
mentions the instance of the Dutch in 1666, and the joint instance of England
and Holland in 1689. In both these instances, it is well known, the attempt was
to intercept all trade with France, and not the trade only which was or might
be opened by France during the war; " a distinction to which he was invited by
the occasion either to have noticed, if he had thought it worthy of notice, as
among the vain attempts of some powers to forbid neutral commerce, or to have

256 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
These two exceptions, namely contraband of war, and the
case of blockaded or besieged places, are the only ones which
he allows against the freedom of neutral commerce. For with
respect to enemy's property in neutral ships, he considers the
new principle which identifies the cargo with the vessel, and
thereby avoids the disputes and embarrassments arising from
the old principle, as having been sufficiently established to take
the place of the old one in the law of nations.
The authority of Martens, then, unequivocally and undeni
ably concurs with that of his great predecessors, in deciding
that the commerce between neutral and belligerent nations,
with a very few exceptions, is entirely j free, and that these ex
ceptions do not include any such pretension as that of Great
Britain, to prohibit a trade otherwise lawful, merely because it
might have been laid open to neutrals in consequence of the
war. It would have been easy to add to the authorities here se
lected, other respectable jurists within the same period; as well
as a phalanx of authorities of later date, both in the South and
the North of Europe; but the testimony of Grotius, of Pufen
dorf, of Bynkershoeck, of Vattel, and of Martens, is more than
sufficient for the occasion. They are the luminaries and ora
cles, to whom the appeal is generally made by nations, who pre
fer an appeal to law, rather than to power; an appeal which is
made by no nation more readily than by Great Britain, when
she has sufficient confidence in the justice of her cause.
Two feeble objections may be thought to claim attention, on
this branch of the investigation.
First. In describing the general freedom of neutral commerce
with a nation at war, the writers who have been reviewed,
being strangers to the distinction now introduced between the
legal regulations of the latter in time of war, and those in time
of peace, have sometimes used expressions, which, though they
do not favor, do not necessarily exclude, such a distinction.
inserted it in the text as an exception to the freedom of neutral commerce, if he
had so viewed it, along with the other exceptions of contraband and blockaded

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 257
Thus Bynkershoeck, speaking of the neutral trade of the Bel
gians with the French, who were at war with the Spaniards,
says that it was of right, as free as before the war.* The free
dom of neutral commerce is laid down, in similar phrases, by
other jurists, both before and after Bynkershoeck. Many of the
more modern writers, not apprized of the misconstruction which
might be attempted on their phraseology, have also described
the general freedom of neutral commerce in time of war, by a
reference to the freedom which it enjoyed in time of peace.
The obvious and decisive answer to these criticisms is, that
the freedom of commerce between two nations in time of peace
does not refer to the actual footing on which it happened to be
placed by the mutual regulations of the parties, a continuance
of which would, on a subject so fluctuating as that of commerce,
be often inconvenient, sometimes absurd; but to the right which
the parties have to regulate their commerce, from time to time,
as their mutual interest may suggest, or, to adopt the language
of Vattel, to the relations in which nature has placed independ
ent nations.
This construction is not only the most obvious and rational
in itself, but is enforced by several additional reflections.
It is most consistent, and sometimes alone consistent, with
other passages in the same authors. An example may be seen in
Bynkershoeck, Lib. I, Ch. 9, where the expressions "ut ante bel
lum constabat," and "ut cum pax esset inter eos, &c," are evi
dently meant to comprehend every right, as well as the existing
state of commerce between the neutral and belligerent parties,
previous to the war.
As there is no evidence that the distinction was known at the
dates of the elder writers, it would be absurd to suppose them
alluding to a state of things which had never existed; rather
than to a state of things which was familiar in practice. And
with respect to the more modern writers, to most of whom the
distinction appears to have been equally unknown, the absurd-
* Liberum quarumcunque rerum commercium, quemadmodum, cum nondum
bellum esset.— Lib. I, Ch. 10.
VOL. II. 17

258 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
ity of the supposition is doubled by its inconsistency with the
whole tenor and complexion of their doctrines and reasonings
in behalf of neutral rights. Many of them are, in fact, cham
pions for the principles of the armed neutrality; one of which
is, that neutrals may trade freely with, and between any of, the
ports of an enemy not blockaded.
Finally — As all the writers on the general subject of neutral
commerce, discuss the several other exceptions to its rights,
which have, at any time, been claimed by belligerent nations,
it would be absurd to suppose that an exception, more extensive
than any of them, should be pretermitted. Their silence alone,
therefore, is an unanswerable proof, that the exception now con
tended for, could not be known, or could not be recognized by
those writers.
A second objection may be, that the practice of opening col
onies to neutral trade, had not been introduced, at the dates of
these publications, particularly the more early of them.
The fact on which this objection relies, might be disproved
by a mass of historical testimony. Two authorities will be suf
ficient: the first shewing that Spain, represented as the most
rigid in her colonial monopoly, began to relax it as early as
1669, even during peace: the second, that France had adopted
the same policy, in time of war, as early as the year 1705.
The first is from Long's History of Jamaica, vol. 1, p. 598.
"In 1669, Spain, for want of ships and sailors of her own, began
" openly to hire Dutch shipping to sail to the Indies, though
" formerly so careful to exclude all foreigners from thence.
" And so great was the supply of Dutch manufactures to Spain,
" &c, that all the merchandize brought from the Spanish West
" Indies was not sufficient to make returns for them; so that
" the Dutch carried home the balance in money." The date of
this Spanish relaxation of the colonial monopoly was prior to
the work of Pufendorf, which was published in 1672; and two-
thirds of a century prior to that of Bynkershoeck, which was
published in 1737; and which entered so systematically into
the question of neutral rights of commerce.
The other will be found in a Note of Robinson, in his Appen-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 259
dix to Vol. 4, page 17, of his Admiralty Reports. It is there
stated, with his authority for the fact, that about the year 1705,
it being then a time of war, friendly nations were admitted into
the trade of the French Colonies, as a better mode of supplying
their wants, and getting away their productions, than that of
convoys. It is added, that the first vessels thus introduced
having been captured, the French minister returned to the old,
as the only efficacious, expedient.
The reporter would conclude, from the capture of the neutral
vessels, that a neutral trade with colonies was then held to be
illegal. But it would be manifestly wrong to resort to an ex
planation not warranted by any ideas otherwise known to exist
at that period; especially when it is so easy to suppose that the
capture was directed against the French property on board the
neutral vessels. That the property was French is the more to
be presumed, as the Dutch, the only nation whose capital might
have neutralized the property, were parties to the war. Had
they indeed been neutral, their treaties with Great Britain
would have protected the trade in their vessels, on the two-fold
ground that it was lawful to trade, without restriction, with
and between the ports of an enemy; and that the freedom of
the ship protected the cargo. The true inference on the subject
is, that the neutral carriers were Danes, or of some other nation
who had no such treaties with Great Britain, and whose capi
tals did not neutralize the cargoes of French produce.

TREATIES.

All writers on the law of nations, as well didactic as po
lemic, avail themselves, whenever they can, of the authority of
Treaties. Treaties may be considered under several relations to the
law of nations, according to the several questions to be decided
by them.
They may be considered as simply repeating or affirming the
general law: they may be considered as making exceptions to
the general law, which are to be a particular law between the
parties themselves: they may be considered as explanatory of
the law of nations, on points where its meaning is otherwise
obscure or unsettled; in which case they are, first, a law be
tween the parties themselves, and next, a sanction to the gen
eral law, according to the reasonableness of the explanation,
and the number and character of the parties to it: lastly, Trea
ties may be considered as constituting a voluntary or positive
law of nations.
Whether the stipulations in a treaty are to be considered as
an affirmance, or an exception, or an explanation, may some
times appear on the face of the treaty: sometimes being naked
stipulations, their character must be determined by resorting to
other evidences of the law of nations. In other words, the ques
tion concerning the treaty must be decided by the law, not the
question concerning the law by the treaty.*
* In the report by Sir G. Lee, Doctor Paul, Sir D. Ryder, and Mr. Murray,
afterwards Lord Mansfield, in the case produced by the Silesia loan, the argu
ment drawn from Treaties, on the question whether free ships make free goods,
is not very worthy of the celebrated authors, or of the celebrity of the document.
Two treaties, stipulating that free ships do not make free goods, are cited as
direct proofs on the negative side of the question; and six, stipulating that free
ships do make free goods, as exceptions, proving still more strongly the negative

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 261
In the present case, it has been shewn, from the sources gen
erally allowed to be the most authentic, that the law of nations
is violated by the principle asserted by Great Britain. It is a
just inference, therefore, that every article in treaties contra
dicting that principle, is an affirmance and direct proof of the
general law; and that any stipulation of the principle would,
as an exception to the general law, be an indirect proof of it.
But supposing, for a moment, the present case to belong to
that class, in which the great oracles of the law of nations are
obscure, or at variance among themselves; and in which, more
over, the practice of nations, not being uniform, is an unsatis
factory guide; and consequently, that the evidence of treaties
were necessary in order to ascertain the law; still, it will be
found that the result of an appeal to that evidence is conclusive
against the British pretension. It may be confidently affirmed,
that on no point ever drawn into question, the evidence of
Treaties was more uniform, more extensive, or more satisfac
tory. Nay more; it may be affirmed that the treaties applicable to
this case may fairly be considered in their relation to the law
of nations last noticed; that is, as constituting a law of them
selves. If, in any case, Treaties can be sufficiently general,
sufficiently uniform, and of sufficient duration, to attest that
general and settled concurrence of nations in a principle or
rule of conduct among themselves, which amounts to the estab
lishment of a general law; such an effect cannot reasonably be
refused to the number and character of the treaties which are
applicable to the present case.
That Treaties may amount to a law of nations, follows from
side of the question. It could not have been less fair, to consider the six as
declaratory of the law, and the two as exceptions to it. But in either case, the
inference presupposes, instead of proving, the point in question. As far as the
point was to be considered as not otherwise proved, and as requiring the evi
dence of treaties to remove the uncertainty, the inference ought to have been
reversed. The six witnesses ought to have out-weighed the two, and it was in
cumbent on the reporters, instead of simply referring to the treaties as a confir
mation of their opinion, to have considered them as presenting an ostensible ob
jection, which was to be answered.

262 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the very definition of that law; which consists of those rules of
conduct which reason deduces, as consonant to justice and com
mon good, from the nature of the society existing among inde
pendent nations; with such definitions and modifications as may
be established by general consent.
One evidence of general consent i3 general usage, which im
plies general consent.
Can treaties which express consent be an inferior evidence,
where nothing on the face of the treaties, nor in any collateral
authority on the law of nations is found to impair the evidence?
Treaties may indeed in one point of view be considered as a
higher authority than usage, when they have a generality and
continuance, equal to the generality and continuance which give
to usage the authority of law; because all treaties involve a
usage commensurate with the sphere in which they are obliga
tory. Whilst usage, therefore, implies consent; treaties imply
the usage, at the same time that they express the consent of the
parties to them.*
But there is another point of view in which the influence of
treaties, those at least of peace and of commerce, in modifying
and defining the rules of public law applicable to periods of
war, ought, in preference to the influence of mere practice, to be
promoted by all governments which respect justice and human
ity, and by all jurists who aspire to the authority of commenta
tors on that subject.
The law of nations, as derived from mere usage or practice
during those periods, is evidenced for the most part by ex parte
ordinances, issued by belligerent governments, in the midst of
the passions or policy of war; and by judicial decisions, also ex
parte, and biassed more or less by the same causes, if not by the
interest also, which weighty individuals, or perhaps bodies of
individuals have, in widening the field of predatory wealth.
* Bynkershoeck derives the law of nations from reason and usage [ex ratione
et usu] and founds usage on the evidence of treaties and decrees [pactis et edic-
tis.] He therefore makes treaties a legitimate source of the law of nations, and
constantly adduces them to illustrate and verify his doctrines.— Quest. Jur. Pub.,
Lib. I, Ch. 10.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 263
Treaties are formed under very different circumstances.
Those of peace imply that the hostile passions and pursuits have
spent their force, and that a mutual spirit of liberality and ac
commodation have taken their place: treaties of commerce
again are necessarily founded in principles of reciprocal justice
and interest, wholly at variance with the violent spirit of war:
whilst in the negociation of treaties of both kinds the respective
efforts and interests of the parties form those mutual checks,
require those mutual concessions, and involve those mutual ap
peals to a moral standard of right, which are most likely to
make both parties converge to a just and reasonable conclusion.
Nor is a sense of character without its effect on such occasions.
Nations would not stipulate in the face of the world things,
which each of them would separately do, in pursuit of its selfish
objects. It will accordingly be found, as might be expected, that the
violent and cruel maxims of war, those still remaining, as well
as those from time to time exploded, have had their origin and
their continuance in the separate usages of belligerent nations,
not in treaties; whilst on the other hand, it will be found that
the reformation of those abuses has been the gradual work of
treaties; that the spirit of treaties is, with few, if any exceptions,
at all times more just, more rational, and more benevolent, than
the spirit of the law derived from practice only; and conse
quently, that all further meliorations of the code of public law,
are to expected from the former, not the latter source; and con
sequently, again, that all enlightened friends to the happiness
of nations ought to favor the influence of treaties on the great
code by which their intercourse is to be regulated.
The authority of every treaty is to be considered as opposed
to the principle asserted by Great Britain, where it either stip
ulates a general freedom of neutral commerce with a specifica
tion of exceptions to it, and an omission of this British excep
tion; or where it stipulates not only a neutral right generally
to a, free trade with belligerent nations, but particularly a right
to trade freely to and between the ports of such nations. These
stipulations, by the force of the terms, necessarily comprehend

264 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806
the coasting and colonial trades, as well as other branches of
commerce. It would be a waste of time to bestow it on the treaties of a
remote period, partaking too little of the civilization and spirit
of more modern times, to edify them by its examples. It will be
sufficient to commence this review with the treaty of Westphalia
in 1648, which forms an important epoch in the commercial and
political history of Europe, and to remark as the result of some
enquiry into antecedent treaties, that they contain nothing
which can give the least countenance to the principle under ex
amination. It will be sufficient also to limit the review of treaties, where
Great Britain was not a party, to those of most importance,
either for the tenor of the stipulations, or for the particular
parties to them, with marginal references to others of analogous
import; remarking again generally, that these others are all,
either negatively or positively, authorities against Great Brit
ain. As a more convenient distribution also, the first review will
stop with the epoch of the armed neutrality. The relation,
which the treaties subsequent to that event have to the subject,
will be noticed by itself.
Examples to which Great Britain is not a party.
By a treaty concerning navigation and commerce in 1650, pre
ceded by a particular article on the same subject concluded in
1648, it is stipulated between the United Provinces and Spain,
" that the subjects and inhabitants of the United Provinces (and
those of Spain reciprocally) may sail and trade with all freedom
and safety in all the kingdoms, States, and countries which are
or shall be in peace, amity, or neutrality, with the State of the
said United Provinces; and that they shall not be disquieted or
molested in this liberty by the ships or subjects of the King of
Spain, upon the account of hostilities which may exist, or may
happen afterwards, between the said King of Spain and the
aforesaid kingdoms, countries, and States, or any of them that

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 265
may be in amity or neutrality with the said lords the States as
above."* This liberty, in relation to France, was to extend to all sorts
of merchandize which might be carried thither before she was
at war with Spain; even contraband of war,\ not proceeding
from the States of Spain herself, and capable of being used
against the Spanish dominions.
With respect to other countries at peace with the United
Provinces, and at war with Spain, the enumerated articles of
contraband were not to be carried to them by the United Prov
inces, but all articles not contraband were to be freely carried,
with the exception only of cities and places invested or block
aded. The Pyrenean treaty, between France and Spain in 1659,
established so close a friendship between the two nations, that
they were mutually restrained from giving either of them to
those attacking the other, any assistance in men, money, or vict
uals, or with passage through his dominions. Yet it is stipula
ted in Arts. X — XVI, which are reciprocal, that the French shall
have liberty to trade to all parts whatsoever, though they should
be in war with his Catholic Majesty, excepting Portugal,! whilst
it continued in the condition it then was in; all merchandize
may be transported to other countries in war with Spain, as
was allowed before the said war, excepting || such as proceed
* Dumont, Tom. 6, part 1, p. 570.
f This is not a solitary instance of such a stipulation. Another is found in the
treaty of 1601, between the United Provinces and Portugal, where it was made
a general right of the neutral party to carry contraband to countries at war with
the other party. Dum., vol. 6, p. 2, 368. Azuni refers to other instances; a
treaty between Edward 4 and the Duke of Burgundy in 1468 — England and Por
tugal 1642 and 1G54 — Spain and the Hanse Towns 1647. — Azuni, vol. 2, p. 145,
of the French translation.
t Portugal was at that time engaged in a war with Spain for the establishment
of her independence, which was viewed by Spain as a rebellious war, and which
France was willing, it seems, so far to regard in the same light as to acquiesce
in this exception.
|| This exception might have been made by Spain herself as a municipal regu
lation.

266 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
from the Spanish dominions, and as may be serviceable against
Catholic King or his dominions, and contraband goods. By
contraband goods are understood all sorts of arms and warlike
stores; but corn and all manner of provision and goods, not
being arms and warlike stores, are not reputed contraband, and
they may be carried to places in war with Spain, excepting to
Portugal and blockaded places. The French vessels, passing
from the ports of Spain to any port in enmity with that crown,
shall not be in any way retarded or molested, after producing
their passes, specifying their lading.*
It here appears, that the parties were at liberty, when neutral,
to trade to all parts of a belligerent country, not blockaded,
and in all merchandizes not contraband. \
The expression "as was allowed before the said war," in this
and in the preceding examples, clearly falls within the observa
tions made on the like expressions, used by the writers on the
law of nations. They are merely a mode of describing the in
definite right to trade, as if no war had arisen, and consequently
to enter into any new channels of trade which might be opened
to them.
In a treaty in 1662, between France and the United Prov
inces, it is stipulated, Arts. XXVI, XXVII, &c, that the par
ties reciprocally are to trade and navigate with all freedom and
safety to countries respectively at war with one and at peace
with the other, without any exceptions made by the treaty,
other than a trade in contraband, or to a place blockaded. t
The treaty between France and the United Provinces, Arts.
XXVII — XXIX, as incorporated with the treaty of Breda in
1667, between the latter power and England, declares that the
subjects of either party may sail and traffic in aU countries at
any time, in peace with one and at war with the other, and this
transportation and traffic shall extend to aU articles not con
traband, and to aU places not blockaded.^
* Dum., Tom. 6, part 2, page 266.
t Dumont, Tom. 6, part 2, p. 414.
\ Chalmers' collect, treaties, vol. 1, p. 154. Dumont, Tom. 7, part 1, p. 49.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 267
In a treaty in 1672, between France and Sweden, Arts.
XXIII — XXIX, are of corresponding import.*
A treaty in 1675, between Sweden and the United Provinces,
contains like stipulations in the three first and following arti-
cles.t A declaration made in 1676, by Spain and the United Prov
inces, confirming the treaty of 1650, stipulates the right of
either party to trade with the enemy of the other, as well di
rectly as between enemy's ports, whether the ports belong to
the same or different enemies, contraband goods and places
blockaded being excepted.^
In Art. XIII, &c, of another treaty in 1678, between France
and the United Provinces, the same points are again stipula
ted.! The 13th Art. of another treaty in 1679, between Sweden and
the United Provinces, contains a like stipulation^
So again the like stipulation is contained in Art. XIII of
another treaty in 1679, between France and the United Prov
inces.!" In a treaty in 1701, between Denmark and the United Prov
inces, the stipulations import an uninterrupted commerce of the
neutral with an enemy of the other party, with the usual ex
ception of contraband.**
The like stipulation is found in a treaty of 1716, Art. VIII,
between France and the Hanse Towns.ft
A treaty, Art. VI, between the Emperor Charles VI, and
Philip V, of Spain, May 1, 1725, is of like import.^
The same is the language of a treaty in 1752, between Naples
and Holland.llll
* Dumont, Tom 7, part 1, p. 169.
t Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p. 317.
t Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p. 325.
|| Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p. 359.
§ Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p. 439.
IT Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p. 359.
** Dum., Tom. 8, part 1, p. 35.
ft Azuni, vol. 2, p. 130.
H Dum., Tom. 8, part 2. p. 115; Azuni, vol. 2, p. 124.
||ll Azuni. vol. 2. p- 131.

268 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
A treaty, Art. XVI, in 1767, between France and Hamburg,
and another between France and the Duke of Mecklenburg in
1779, maintain the same doctrine*
To these authorities derived from the conventional law of
Europe, against the British principle under investigation,!
might be added, if it were necessary, references to other treaties
of the like tenor.
Treaties to which England first, and then Great Britain, was a
party.
By a treaty with Sweden, in 1654, and another in 1656, con
firming and explaining the former, it is stipulated, Art. II — IV,
that it shall be lawful for the subjects of either of the confed
erates to trade with the enemies of the other; and, without im
pediment, to carry to them, except to places blockaded or be
sieged, any goods whatsoever not contraband, of which a spe
cification is inserted. Provision is also made for the efficacy
of passports in certain cases, and against the abuse of them for
covering enemies' property .%
The weight of these examples is not diminished by the name
of Cromwell, under whose authority the treaties were concluded
in behalf of England. In foreign transactions, as well as at
home, his character was distinguished by a vigor not likely to
relinquish or impair rights, in which his country, as a warlike
and maritime power, was interested.
On the other hand, it adds weight to the examples, that they
are treaties of aUiance, containing mutual engagements of friend
ship and assistance; and, consequently, the less apt to indulge
the parties in an intercourse with the enemies of each other, be
yond the degree required by the law of nations. This observa
tion is applicable to all the succeeding examples, where the
treaties are of the same kind.
* Martens' treaties, vol. 1, p. 255; vol. 2, p. 38.
t The list, however, would not extend to the period between 1738 and 1761;
no general collection of treaties to which Great Britain is not a party, during that
period, being at hand. The chasm is of the less moment, as the British treaties
of that period embrace most of the other maritime nations of Europe.
t Chalmers, vol. l.t>. 32—3.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 269
On the restoration of Charles II, a treaty of aUiance was con
cluded with Sweden in 1661, the 11th Article of which, in pursu
ance of those above copied from the treaties of 1654 and 1656,
stipulates anew, that neither party shall be impeded in carrying
to the enemies of the other, any merchandize whatever, with
the exceptions only of articles of contraband, and of ports or
places besieged.*
In a treaty with Spain, May 13, 1667, the Articles XXI—
XXVI import, that the subjects of each shall trade freely in all
kingdoms, estates, and countries at war with the other, in all
merchandizes not contraband; with no other exception of places
but those besieged or blockaded.f
In July, 1667, a treaty was concluded with the United Prov
inces, of which Art. Ill provisionally adopts certain articles
from the treaty of Breda, between the United Provinces and
France, on the subject of maritime commerce; until a fuller
treaty could be perfected between the parties. The articles
adopted, in relation to the trade between the subjects of one of
the parties and the enemies of the other, declare that the trade
shall extend, without impediment, to all articles not contraband,
and to all places not besieged or blockaded.^:
In February, 1667 — 8, the same parties, then under a perpet
ual defensive alliance by virtue of a treaty of 21st July, 1667,
and in a league moreover with Sweden by the triple league of
1668, resumed the subject of maritime and commercial affairs,
and repeated, in the first article of their treaty, the precise
stipulations adopted provisionally from the treaty between
France and the United Provinces.!
A treaty with Denmark, in 1669, stipulates, that they may
trade each with the enemies of the other, in all articles not con
traband, and to all places not blockaded, without any other ex
ceptions^ * Chalm., vol. 1, p. 52.
t 2 Chalm., 17—19.
t Chalm., vol. 1, p. 154.
|| Chalm,, vol. 1, p. 163.
§ Dum., Tom. 7, part 1, p, 126.

270 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
On the 11th July, 1670, another treaty of aUiance was con
cluded with Denmark, the 16th Art. of which declares that
" neither of the parties shall be impeded in furnishing to the
enemies of the other any merchandizes whatever; excepting
only articles of contraband, as described in the treaty, and ports
and places besieged by the other."*
It is worthy of notice in this treaty, and the remark is appli
cable to others, that the 5th Art. having stipulated a right mu
tually to trade in the kingdoms, provinces, marts, towns, ports,
and rivers of each other, it was immediately provided in the
next article, that prohibited ports and colonies should be ex
cepted. If it had been conceived that such ports or colonies of
enemies were not to be traded with, under the general right to
trade with enemies acknowledged in the 16th Article, it is man
ifest that they would have been as carefully excepted in this, as
in the other case, out of the meaning of general terms equally
comprehending them. This treaty proves also, that as early as
1670, colonies began to fall under attention in making treaties.
In a marine treaty of December 1, 1674, with the United
Provinces, stating in the title that it was "to be observed
throughout all and every tlie countries and ports of the world by
sea and land," it is stipulated again, in Art. I, to be " lawful for
all and every the subjects of the most serene and mighty prince,
the King of Great Britain, with all freedom and safety to sail,
trade, and exercise any manner of traffic in all those kingdoms,
countries, and estates, which are, or any time hereafter 'shall be
in peace, amity, or neutrality with his said majesty; so that they
shall not be any ways hindered or molested in their navigation
or trade, by the military forces, nor by the ships of war, or any
kind of vessels whatsoever, belonging either to the High and
Mighty States General of the United Netherlands, or to their
subjects, upon occasion or pretence of any hostility or difference
which now is, or shall hereafter happen between the said Lords
the States General, and any princes, or people whatsoever, in
peace, amity, or neutrality with his said majesty;" and so re
ciprocally. * Chalm., vol. 1, p. 85.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 271
Art. II. "Nor shall this freedom of navigation and commerce
be infringed by occasion or cause of any war, in any kind of
merchandizes, but shall extend to all commodities which may
be carried in time of peace, those only excepted which follow
in the next article, and are comprehended under the name of
contraband." Art. Ill enumerates the articles of contraband.
Art. IV contains a negative list, which, with aU other articles
not expressly included in the list of contraband, may be freely
transported and carried to places under the obedience of enemies*
except only towns or places besieged, environed, or invested.?
This recital has been made the more minute, because it is ne
cessary, in order to understand the whole force of the explana
tory declaration between the parties bearing the same date; a
document so peculiarly important in the present discussion, that
its contents will be recited with equal exactness.
This document, after stating "that some difficulty had arisen
concerning the interpretation of certain articles, as well in the
treaty marine concluded this first day of December, 1674, as in
that which was concluded the 17th February, 1667 — 8, between
his majesty of Great Britain on the one part, and the States
General, &c, on the other part," proceeds to state " that Sir
William Temple, &c, on one part with eight commissioners on
the other, have declared, and do by these presents declare, that
the true meaning and intention of the said articles is, and ought
to be, that ships and vessels belonging to the subjects of either
of the parties, can and might, from the time that the said arti-
* That this treaty stipulated the rights of neutrals in the extent which it is cited
to prove, is acknowledged by the British government, in the letter of Secretary
Fox, of May 4, 1782, to M. Simolin the Russian Minister at London, in which
this treaty is referred to as the basis of a reconciliation with Holland, and as " a
treaty by which the principles of the armed neutrality are established in their
widest extent." The first article in the armed neutrality asserts the neutral right
in question, and on that ground has been always combated by British writers,
and in Parliamentary discussions. In the debate in the House of Commons on
the treaty of 1786, with France, Mr. Fox took an occasion to remark that what
was then done had " the unanimous consent of his Majesty's Council."
t Chalm., vol. 1, p. 177—179.

272 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
cles were concluded, not only pass, traffic and trade, from a
neutral port or place, to a place in enmity with the other party,
or from a place in enmity to a neutral place, but also from a
port or place in enmity to a port or place in enmity with the
other party, whether the said places belong to one and the same
prince or State, or to several princes or States, with whom the
other party is in war. And we declare that this is the true
and genuine sense and meaning of the said articles; pursuant
whereunto we understand that the said articles are to be ob
served and executed on all occasions, on the part of his said
majesty, and the said States General, and their respective sub
jects; yet so that this declaration shall not be alleged by either
party for matters which happened before the conclusion of the
late peace in the month of February, 1673 — 4.*
Prior to the peace, neither of them could claim the rights of
neutrality against the other.
This declaratory stipulation has been said to be peculiarly
important. It is so for several reasons:
1st. Because it determines the right of the neutral party, so
far as may depend on the belligerent party, to trade not only
between its own ports and those of the enemies of the belliger
ent party, without any exception of colonies, but between any
other neutral port and enemies' ports, without exception of co
lonial ports of the enemy; and moreover, not only between the
ports, colonial as well as others, of one enemy and another ene
my, but between the different ports of the same enemy; and con
sequently between one port and another of the principal coun
try; between these and the ports of its colonies; between the
ports of one colony and another; and even to carry on the coast
ing trade of any particular colony.
2d. Because it fixes the meaning not only of the articles in
the two specified treaties; but has the same effect on all other
stipulations by Great Britain, expressed in the same or equiva
lent terms; one or other of which are used in most, if not all
her treaties on this subject. * Chalm., vol. 1, p. 189.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 273
3d. Because it made a part of the treaties explained, that free
ships should make free goods; and consequently, the coasting
and colonial trade, when combined with that neutral advantage,
was the less likely to be acknowledged, if not considered as
clearly belonging to the neutral party.
4th. Because the explanatory article was the result of the*
solicitation of England herself, and she actually claimed and en
joyed the benefit of the article, she being at the time in peace,
and the Dutch in war with France.f
In the treaty with France, February 24, 1677, Articles I, II,
and III, import that each party may trade freely with the ene
mies of the other, with the same merchandize as in time of peace,
contraband goods only excepted, and that all merchandizes not
contraband " are free to be carried from any port in neutrality,
to the port of an enemy, and from one port of an enemy to an
other; towns besieged, blocked up or invested, only excepted." \
In 1689, England entered into the convention with Holland,
prohibiting all neutral commerce with France, then the enemy
of both.! In consequence of the counter treaty of Sweden and
Denmark, for defending their neutral rights against this violent
measure, satisfaction was made, according to Vattel, for the
ships taken from them; without the slightest evidence, as far
as can be traced, that any attempt was made by either of the
belligerent parties, to introduce the distinction between such
part of the trade interrupted, as might not have been allowed
before the war, and as was therefore unlawful, and such part
as having been allowed before the war, might not lawfully be
subject to capture.
We are now arrived at the treaties of Utrecht, an epoch so
important in the history of Europe, and so essentially influ-
* See Sir William Temple's correspondence with his government, vol. 4, p. 55,
of his works, where the success of his efforts, made with the sanction of his gov
ernment, is particularly rehearsed.
t See memorial of Dutch merchants in the Annual Register for 1778. These
treaties remained in force for more than a century, viz: from 1674, to tho war
with the United Provinces in 1781.
| Jenkinson, vol. 1, p. 209.
|| Id., vol. 1, p. 209.
VOL. II. 18

274 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
encing the conventional law of nations, on the subject of neutral
commerce. The treaty of navigation and commerce, March 31, 1713, be
tween Great Britain and France, Article XVII, imports, that
all the subjects of each party shall sail with their ships with all
manner of liberty and security, no distinction being made who
are the proprietors of the merchandizes laden thereon, from any
port, to the places of those who now are, or shall hereafter be,
at enmity with the queen of Great Britain and the Christian
king," and " to trade with the same liberty and security from
the places, ports and havens of those who are enemies of both
or of either party, without any opposition or disturbance what
soever, not only directly from the places of the enemy aforemen
tioned to neutral places, but also from one place belonging to an
enemy, to another place belonging to an enemy, whether they be
under the jurisdiction of the same prince or under several."
Art. XVIII. " This liberty of navigation and commerce, shall
extend to all kind of merchandizes, excepting those only which
follow in the next article, and which are specified by the name
of contraband."
Art.' XIX gives a list of contraband, which is limited to war
like instruments.
Art. XX specifies others, many of which are in other treaties
on the list of contraband, declaring that these with all other
goods, not in the list of contraband in the preceding article,
"may be carried and transported in the freest manner by the
subjects of both confederates, even to places belonging to an
enemy, such towns or places being only excepted as are at that
time, besieged, blocked up round about, or invested."*
Could the principle maintained against Great Britain be
more clearly laid down, or more strongly fortified by her sanc
tion? To give to this example the complete effect which it ought to
have, several remarks are proper.
In the first place, on comparing the description given of the
•Chalm., vol. l,p. 390.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 275
free trade, which might be carried on between the neutral party
and an enemy of the other party, with the description of the
free trade allowed between the parties themselves, by the 1st
article of the treaty, it appears that in order to except the co
lonial trade in the latter case, the freedom stipulated in Article
I, is expressly limited to Europe. The terms are, "that there
shall be a reciprocal and entirely perfect liberty of navigation
and commerce between the subjects on each part, through all
and every the kingdoms, States, dominions of their royal majes
ties in Europe." In the stipulation relating to the neutral
commerce of either with the enemy of the other (who, if a mar
itime enemy, could not fail to possess colonies out of Europe)
the terms are, "that all merchandizes, not contraband, may be
carried in the freest manner to places belonging to an enemy,
such towns or places only being excepted, as are at that time be
sieged or blockaded, &c," without any limitation to Europe, or
exception of colonies any where. It is obvious, that the terms
here used comprehend all colonies, as much as the terms in the
first article would have done, if colonies had not been excepted
by limiting the freedom of trade to places " in Europe; " and
consequently that if any distinction between the colonial and
other places of an enemy, had been contemplated in the neutral
trade of either party with him, as it was contemplated between
the colonies and European possessions of the parties in their
commerce to be carried on between themselves, the distinction
would have been expressed in the latter case, as it was in the
former; and not being so expressed, the trade in the latter case
was to be as free to the colonies, as it would have been in the
former, if the colonies had not been excepted by the limitation
of the trade to Europe.*
Secondly. But the treaty not content with this necessary
construction, in favor of a neutral commerce with the colonies
of an enemy, proceeds, in conformity to the example in the de
claratory convention between England and Holland in 1674,
explicitly to declare the freedom of the neutral party, to trade
not only from any port, to the places of an enemy, and from the
* There are other treaties to which this reasoning is applicable.

276 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
places of an enemy to neutral places, but also from one place to
another place belonging to an enemy, whether the places be un
der the same or different sovereigns. Here both the coasting
trade and the colonial trade, which, in relation to the parent
country, is in the nature of a coasting trade, are both placed on
the same footing with every other branch of commerce between
neutral and belligerent parties, although it must have been well
known, that both those branches are generally shut to foreign
ers in time of peace, and if opened at all, would be opened in
time of war, and for the most part, on account of the war.
Thirdly. It is well known, that this particular treaty under
went great opposition and discussion, both without and within
the British Parliament; and that it was for some time, under a
legislative negative. Yet it does not appear, either from the
public debates, or from the discussions of the press, as far as
there has been an opportunity of consulting them, that the diffi
culty arose in the least from this part of the treaty. The con
test seems to have turned wholly on other parts, and principally
on the regulations of the immediate commerce between the two
nations. This part of the treaty may be considered, therefore,
as having received the complete sanction of Great Britain.
Had it indeed been otherwise, the repeated sanctions given to it
on subsequent occasions, would preclude her from making the
least use of any repugnance shewn to it on this.
On the 28th November, 1713, a treaty of peace and another
of commerce and navigation, were concluded at Utrecht with
Spain, renewing and inserting the treaty of May 13th, 1667, the
21st and 26th Articles of which have been seen to coincide
with the rules of neutral commerce, established by the treaty at
Utrecht, between Great Britain and France.*
Genoa and Venice were comprehended in the treaty of
Utrecht, between Great Britain and Spain.t
The above treaty of 1713, was confirmed by Article XII, of
a treaty of December 3, 1715, between Great Britain and
Spain.:): From the above date to the treaty of 1748, at Aix la Cha-
* Chalm., vol, 2, p. 109. t M-, vol. 2, p. 341. J Id., vol. 2, p. 174.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 277
pelle, the following treaties between England and other powers
took place; in each of which, the principles established by her
treaties at Utrecht, are reiterated:
With Sweden, January 21, 1720, Article XVIII*
With Spain, June 13, 1721, Article II. — Confirming the treaty
of 1667 and 1713.t
With France and Spain, November, 9, 1729, Article I. — Re
newing all treaties of peace, of friendship, and of commerce, and
consequently those of Utrecht.!
With the Emperor of Germany and the United Netherlands,
March 16, 1731, Article I. — Renewing all former treaties of
peace, friendship, and alliance.!
With Russia, December 2, 1734. — Stipulating in Article II, a
free trade between either party and the enemy of the other, in
all articles except munitions of war; and consequently articles
permitted after, though not permitted before, the war.§
With Spain, (a convention,) January 14, 1739, Article I. —
Reiterating among former treaties, those of 1667 and 1713,
above cited.T
The treaty of Aix la Chapelle concluded in 1748, forms an
other memorable epoch in the political system of Europe. The
immediate parties to it were Great Britain, France, and the
United Provinces.
The 3d** Art. of this treaty renews and confirms, among
others, the treaties of Utrecht.fi
This treaty was acceded to by Spain, Austria, Sardinia,
Genoa, and Modena.
* Jenkinson, vol. 2, p. 263.
f Jenkinson, vol. 2, p. 265.
J Chalm., vol. 2, p. 200.
|| Chalm., vol. 1, p. 312.
§ Azuni, vol. 2, p. 129.
H Jenkinson, vol. 2, p. 340.
** The treaty of commerce at Utrecht not being specially mentioned in that of
Aix la Chapelle, it may, perhaps, be questioned, whether it be included in the
confirmation. The question is of little consequence, as that treaty is expressly
included in the confirmation of preceding treaties, by the treaties of Paris, 1763
and 1783.
ft Jenkinson, vol. 2, p. 374.

278 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
In 1763,* in the treaty between Great Britain, France, and
Spain, to which Portugal acceded, the 1st Art. expressly renews
and confirms, among other treaties, the treaties of peace and
commerce at Utrecht.t
The treaty with Russia in 1766, Art. X, stipulates a free
trade between either party, being neutral, and an enemy of the
other, with the sole exception of military stores, and places
actually blockaded.^
In a convention with Denmark, July 4, 1780, explanatory of
a list of contraband settled in a former treaty, it is expressly
determined that merchandize not contraband, may be trans
ported to places in possession of enemies, without any other ex
ception than those besieged or blockaded.!
The treaty of peace in 1783 with France, by Art. II, renews
and confirms, among others, the treaties of Westphalia in 1648,
of Utrecht in 1713, of Aix la Chapelle in 1748, and of Paris,
1763; in all of which the neutral right, now denied by Great
Britain, was formally sanctioned by her stipulations. §
In her treaty of the same date, with Spain, the same confirm
ation is repeated. 1
In the treaty of commerce again with France in 1786, delib
erately undertaken in pursuance of Art. XVIII, of the treaty
of 1783, the articles above recited from the. treaty of Utrecht
are inserted word for word; and thus received anew the most
deliberate and formal sanction. — Chalm., vol. l,p. 350.
It may be here again remarked, that although this treaty un
derwent the most violent opposition in Great Britain, it does
not appear that the opposition was at all directed against the
articles on the subject of neutral commerce.
The treaty of 1786 was explained and altered in several par-
* If Great Britain had rested her captures of vessels trading with colonies of
enemies, during the war of 1756, on the principle now asserted, this treaty relin
quished the principle.
t Jenk., vol. 2, p. 180.
t Jenk., vol. 3, p. 228.
|| Chalm., vol. 1, p. 97.
§ Jenk., vol. 3, p. 337.
It Jenk., vol. 3, p. 377.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 279
ticulars, by a convention bearing date August 31, 1787; with
out any appearance of dissatisfaction, on either side, with the
articles on neutral commerce.
In the negotiations at Lisle, in 1797, it was proposed on the
part of Great Britain, by her ambassador, Lord Malmesbury, to
insert, as heretofore usual in the articles of peace, a confirma
tion of the treaties of Utrecht, Aix la Chapelle, &c, which was
opposed by the French negotiators, for reasons foreign to the
articles of those treaties in question.
On this occasion, Lord Malmesbury, in urging the proposed
insertion, observed, " that those treaties had become the law of
nations, and that if they were omitted* it might produce con
fusion." This fact is attested by the negotiations, as published
by the British Government.?
If the treaties had become, or were founded in, the law of
nations, such an omission, although it might be made a pretext
for cavil between the parties, could certainly have no effect on
the law of nations; and if the treaties expressed the law of na
tions on any subject at all, on what subject, it might be asked,
have they been more explicit than on that of the maritime rights
of neutrals?
This series of treaties, to which Great Britain is an immediate
party, lengthy and strong as it is, has not exhausted the exam
ples by which she stands self-condemned. One, in particular,
remains for consideration; which, if it stood alone, ought for
ever to silence her pretensions. It is the treaty with Russia
on the 5—17 of June, 1801.
A very important part of the treaty is the preamble:
" The mutual desire of his majesty the King of the United
" Kingdoms, &c, and his majesty the Emperor of all the Russias.
" being not only to come to an understanding between them-
" selves with respect to the differences which have lately inter-
" rupted the good understanding and friendly relations which
* Those treaties were not inserted in the treaty of Amiens, probably for the
reasons which prevailed at Lisle.
f See Lord Malmesbury's dispatch to Lord Grenville, dated 16th July, 1797.

280 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" subsist between the two States; but also to prevent, by frank
" and precise explanations upon the navigation of their respec-
" tive subjects, the renewal of similar altercations and troubles
" which might be the consequence of them; and the common db-
"ject of the solicitude of their said majesties being to settle, as
" soon as can be done, an equitable arrangement of those differ-
" ences, and an invariable determination of their principles upon
" the rights of neutrality, in their application to their respective
" monarchies, in order to unite more closely the ties of friend-
" ship and good intercourse, &c, have named for their plenipo-
" tentiaries, <fec, who have agreed," &c.
With this declaratory preamble in view, attend to the follow
ing sections in Article III:
" His Britannic majesty and his Imperial majesty of all the
" Russias having resolved to place under a sufficient safeguard
" the freedom of commerce and navigation of their subjects, in
" case one of them shall be at war while the other shall be neu-
" ter, have agreed;
" 1st. That the ships of the neutral power may navigate freely
to the ports and upon the coasts of the nations at war.
" 2d. That the effects embarked on board neutral ships shall
be free, with the exception of contraband of war and of enemy's
property; and it is agreed not to comprize under the denomina
tion of the latter, the merchandize of the produce, growth, or
manufactures of the countries at loar which should have been
acquired by the subjects of the neutral power, and should be
transported on their account; which merchandize cannot be ex
cepted in any case from the freedom granted to the flag of the
said power," &c, &c.
These extracts will receive additional weight from the fol
lowing considerations:
First. This treaty, made with Russia, the power that took
the lead in asserting the principles of the armed neutrality, was,
with exceptions not affecting the point in question, acceded to
by Sweden and Denmark, the two other European powers most
deeply interested in, and attached to, those principles. It is a

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 281
treaty, therefore, of Great Britain, as to this particular point,
as well as to most of the others, with Russia, Sweden, and Den
mark. Secondly. The treaty had for its great object, as appears by
its adoption of so many of the definitions of the armed neutral
ity, to fix the law of nations on the several points therein, which
had been so much contested; the three northern powers yielding
the point of free ships, free goods; and Great Britain yielding
to all of them, those relating to the coasting, as well as every
other branch of neutral trade; to blockades, and to the mode
of search; and yielding to Russia, moreover, the point relating
to the limitation of contraband. With respect to the case of
convoys, a case not comprehended in the armed neutrality of
1780, but of much subsequent litigation, and inserted in that of
1800; a modification, satisfactory to the northern Powers, was
yielded by Great Britain; with a joint agreement that the sub
jects on both sides should be prohibited from carrying contra
band or prohibited goods, according to an article in the armed
neutrality of both dates.
Thirdly. The treaty is expressly declared to be an invariable
determination [fixation] of their principles upon the rights of
neutrality, in their application to their respective monarchies."
It cannot be pretended that this stipulated application of the
rights of neutrality to the contracting parties, limits the declar
atory effect, which is equally applicable to all neutral nations.
Principles and rights must be the same in all cases, and in rela
tion to all nations; and it would not be less absurd than it
would be dishonorable, to profess one set of principles or rights
in the law of nations towards one nation, and another set to
wards another nation.
If there be any parts of the treaty, to which this declaratory
character is regarded as not applicable, it cannot be pretended
that they are the parts relating to the rights of neutrals to trade
freely to the ports and on tlie coasts of nations at war; because,
as already observed, the main object of the treaty was to settle
the questions involved in the armed neutrality; of which this
was a primary one, and is here placed by the structure of the

282 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
article under the same precise stipulation, with the liability to
confiscation, of enemy's property in neutral ships; a point above
all others which Great Britain must have wished to consecrate
as the law of nations, by declaratory acts for that purpose.
It cannot be pretended that the neutral rights here declared,
do not extend to the colonial as well as coasting trade of bel
ligerent nations, because the colonial trade is not only included
in a "free trade to the ports and on the coasts" of such nations,
but because it is expressly declared that the effects belonging
to neutrals, and transported on their account from countries at
war, cannot be excepted from the freedom of the neutral flag
in any case, and consequently not in the case of colonies, more
than any other portion of such countries. It is not improper to
remark that this declaratory stipulation is not only included in
the same article, which recognised the principle that enemy's
property is excepted from the freedom of the neutral flag, but
is associated with that recognition in the same section of the
article, and even in the same sentence.*
If it were possible to controvert the construction here given
* The British government having become aware of the entire renunciation
here made of her claim to intercept, in time of war, the commerce of neutrals
with the colonies of her enemies, set on foot negociations, with a view to new-
model the stipulation. Nothing more, however, could be obtained from Russia
than her concurrence in an explanatory declaration, dated October 20, of the
same year, in the terms following: "In order to prevent any doubt or misunder
standing with regard to the contents of the second section of the third article of
the convention, concluded 5 — 17 June, 1801, between his Britannic Majesty and
his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the said high contracting parties
have agreed and declare, that the freedom of commerce and navigation granted
by the said article to the subjects of a neutral power, [in the column in French,
de la puissance neutre,] does not authorize them to carry in time of war, the pro
duce and merchandize of the colonies of the belligerent power direct to the con
tinental possessions; nor vice versa from the mother country to the enemy's col
onies; but that the said subjects are, however, to enjoy the same advantages and
facilities in this commerce, as are enjoyed by the most favored nations, and espe
cially by the United States of America."
In this declaration it will be observed, that it excepts from the general right
of the neutral party to trade with the colonies of an enemy, merely the direct
trade between the colony and the mother country. It leaves consequently, and
recognises to the neutral party, 1, an indirect trade between the mother country
and her colonies — 2d, the trade between one belligerent country and the colo-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 283
to the treaty, a reference might be made to a very able speech
delivered by Lord Grenville in the British House of Lords in
November 1801, in which this very construction is fully demon
strated. The demonstration is rendered the more striking by
the embarrassed and feeble opposition made to it by the inge
nuity of the very able speakers who entered the list against
him.*nies of another — 3d, the trade between the neutral party itself, and enemy colo
nies — 4th, the trade between such colonies and any other neutral couutry.
Another observation is, that as the distinction made between the particular
trade excepted and the other branches of colonial trade, is not deducible by any
possible construction, from the terms of the original text, it must be understood
to be a compromise of expediency, on the part of Russia, rather than a deroga
tion from the principle on which the general right is founded.
It is to be further observed, that even the particular exception is abridged by
an agreement on the part of Great Britain, that in case a direct trade between an
enemy country and its colonies should be enjoyed by any other neutral country,
equal advantages and facilities shall be extended to Russia.
It may be still further observed, that the reference to advantages and facili
ties, as they may be enjoyed by neutral nations, particularly the United States,
seems to imply that the United States at least, (who are indeed alluded to by
Sir William Scott, as a nation particularly favored by France — 2 Rob. Rep., 168;
4 Rob. Rep. Append., p. 4,) furnished an example of such a state of things; and
as no such state of things was applicable to them, but that arising from regula
tions of France, which, being prior to the war of 1793, authorised on the British
principle itself, a like trade by the United States during the war, it follows that
all captures and condemnations of American vessels trading between France
and her colonies under those regulations, were on the British principle itself
illegal, and ought to be indemnified.
Lastly, it may be observed, that the treaty to which this explanatory declara
tion relates, was accepted and ratified by Sweden and Denmark, and that these
two powers are not parties to the declaration. If they afterwards became par
ties, it is more than is known. The observations, of which the declaration has
been found susceptible, must, indeed, render the fact of little consequence in any
point of view.
* For the speech, see a pamphlet entitled, " Substance of the Speech delivered
by Lord Grenville in the House of Lords, November 13, 1801." The object of
his Lordship was to make it appear that the treaty had abandoned certain mari
time doctrines of Great Britain; among others the doctrine relating to the trade
of neutrals with the colonies, and on the coasts of nations at war. This he has
done with the most complete success. With respect to the legality of the doc
trine, he assumes, rather than attempts to prove it. Had he employed in the
latter investigation the same abilities and candor, which distinguish his discussion
of the meaning of the treaty, he could not have failed to be as much convinced

284 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
Such is the accumulated and irresistible testimony borne by
Great Britain, in her own treaties, against the doctrine asserted
by her.
It will be in order now to resume the notice of treaties to
which she was not a party, but which authorize some inferences
and observations contributing still further, if possible, to invali
date her novel pretensions.
of the illegality of the doctrine abandoned, as he was of the abandonment itself.
For the very lame replies made by other speakers, see Annual Register for 1802,
chap. 4.
Au anonymous author of six ingenious letters in vindication of the treaty at
tempts a distinction between its meaning and that of the armed neutralities, with
a view to reconcile the former with the British doctrine.
In the two treaties of armed neutrality in 1780 and 1800, the neutral right to
trade with a party at war, is expressed as follows: "to navigate freely from port
to port, and on the coasts of nations at war."
In this treaty with Russia, the right is expressed with the following difference
of terms: " to navigate freely to the ports, and upon the coasts of the nations at
war." The author of the letters contends that the trade "from port to port" means
a neutral trade in the purchased produce of the belligerent country carried coast
wise; whereas to trade on the coasts of the belligerent, means nothing more than
to proceed from one port to another, in making successive deliveries of the neu
tral cargo transported to the belligerent country.
The answer is simple as it is conclusive. To navigate on the coast is to navi
gate from port to port. This is its plain meaning. The distinction between
neutral property carried to the belligerent country, and property acquired by a
neutral in the belligerent country, is suggested neither by the distinct modes of
expression, nor by any circumstance whatever affecting the interpretation of
them. The distinction is purely arbitrary. It would not be more so if the dif
ferent meanings which it assigns to these different phrases, were transposed.
To navigate or trade from port to port, must mean to trade on the coasts; and to
trade on the coast, is a coasting trade. It may be added, that the distinction
and inference attempted, are contradicted both by the general scope of the
treaty, and by the terms of Art. 3, §. 2.
Were the criticism allowed all the force which the author claims for it, he
would still give up more than he would gain. For the Russian treaty affirms the
right to navigate freely to the ports of those at war, without excepting the colo
nies. The trade would therefore remain free between all neutral and colonial
ports, and the neutral trade between a belligerent and its colonies, would be un
lawful on no other ground but that it was merely a coasting trade, without any
of those peculiarities often ascribed to the colonial trade by the advocates for
the British principle.
From the aspect of the letters, it may be conjectured that they were not writ-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 285
The review heretofore taken of this class of treaties was lim
ited to such as preceded the armed neutrality. Those now to
be added, are principally the treaties and conventions entered
into in the years 1780 and 1800.
The treaties of 1780 declare the right of neutrals in the case
under discussion, in the following terms: "that all vessels shall
be permitted to navigate from port to port, and on the coasts
of the belligerent powers." Those of 1800 are in terms too lit
tle varied to require recital.
It has never been questioned, that these definitions of the
neutral right were as applicable to colonies as to any other of
the territories belonging to a belligerent nation. All the Brit
ish writers have so understood the text, and in that sense, have
employed their pens against it.
It need scarcely be remarked that the treaties in question
were framed with a view, not of making a new law of nations,
but of declaring and asserting the law as it actually stood.
The preamble to the convention of 1800, for the re-establish
ment of an armed neutrality between Russia and Sweden, ex
plains the object in the terms following: "In order that the
freedom of navigation and the security of merchandize of the
neutral powers may be established, and tlie principles of the law
of nations be fully ascertained, &c."
The preamble to the convention of 1780, states the principles
avowed by the parties to be the principles derived from the
primitive rights of nations."
The treaty of 1780 was originally concluded between Russia
and Denmark. But it was acceded to by Sweden, Prussia, the
United Provinces, Austria, Portugal and Naples; and in effect,
by France and Spain. The principles of the treaty had the
sanction also of the United States of America in their cruising
ordinances. Thus it is seen, that with the exception of Great
ten without a knowledge of the views of the government; and that they were
intended to give colour to the distinction on which the explanatory declaration
above cited is founded; whether as a measure actually concluded, or projected
only, does not appear, the letters having no date in the edition which has ap
peared in this country.

286 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
Britain alone, all the powers of Europe, materially interested
in the maritime law of nations, have given a recent and repeated
sanction to the right of neutrals to trade freely with every part
of the countries at war. And although several of those nations
have, on some of the points contained in these treaties, as on
the points of contraband and enemy's property under neutral
flags, entered since into adverse stipulations; not one of them
has by treaty or otherwise relinquished the particular right un
der consideration,* whilst Great Britain, as we have seen in her
treaty with Russia, has herself, expressly acceded to the right.
The importance of treaties in deciding the law of nations, or
that portion of it, which is founded in the consent of nations,
will justify the extent which has been given to this review of
them; and the conclusion which this review justifies is, that the
tenor of treaties, throughout the whole period deserving atten
tion, confirms the neutral right contended for; that for more
than one and a half centuries, Great Britain has, without any
other interruptions that those produced by her wars with par
ticular nations, been at all times bound by her treaties with the
principal maritime nations of the world, to respect this right;
and what is truly remarkable, that throughout the long period
of time, and the voluminous collection of treaties, through which
the research has been carried, a single treaty only (putting
aside the explanatory article between Great Britain and Rus
sia, noted above) has occurred, which forms an exception to the
general mass.
The exception will be found in an article of a Danish treaty
of June, 1691,t with England and Holland. In that article
* On the contrary these rights have been repeated in the following treaties
subsequent to those of the armed neutrality, namely, Russia and Denmark, 8 — 19
October, 1782— Art. 16, 17, 2 Martens' treaties, p. 290. Same and the Porte,
10—21 June, 1783— Art. 39, lb., p. 392. France and Holland, 10th November,
1785— Art. 8, lb., p. 616. Austria and Russia in the year 1785— Art. 12, lb., p,
624. France and same, 31st December, 1786— 11th Jan., 1787— Art. 26—7, 3
Mart, treat., p. 15. Russia and the king of the Two Sicilies, 6—17 January,
1787— Art. 18, lb., p. 44. Portugal and Russia, 9—20 December, 1787— Art. 22,
lb., p. 117.
t Dum., Tom. 7, par. 2, p. 293.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 287
(the 3d) though somewhat obscure, either from inaccuracy in
the original text, or in the printed copy, it seems that Denmark
relinquished her neutral right of commerce between the ports
of France, then at war with the other parties. But this excep
tion, instead of availing in any respect the belligerent claim
in question, corroborates the testimony furnished by treaties
against it; as will appear from the following observations:
1st. In other parts of the treaty, there are stipulations favor
able to Denmark, which may have been regarded as some com
pensation for the restriction imposed on herself.
2d. Admitting, however, the restriction to have been made
without any compensating advantages; the sacrifice might fairly
be ascribed to the dreadful oppressions on the Danish com
merce, practised by England and Holland, and to the desire of
Denmark, as a weaker power, to effect some mitigation of her
sufferings. These sufferings cannot be better explained, than
by an extract from the preamble to a treaty concluded in 4693,
between Denmark and Sweden, for the purpose of putting in
force a preconcerted plan of reprisals. " Although their majes
ties, the kings of Sweden and Denmark had hoped, that after
they had concluded their treaty of March, 1691, for maintaining
their navigation and commerce, the many unjust piracies exer
cised on their subjects, would at length have ceased; they have
nevertheless been grieved to find that, notwithstanding the re
clamations and remonstrances which they have from time to
time made to the parties engaged in the war, in order that an
end might be put to them, they have rather increased and aug
mented, even to a point that it is in a manner impossible to ex
press, the pretexts, the artifices, the inventions, the violences,
the chicaneries, the processes which have been practised, not
only against the vessels and goods of the subjects of their ma
jesties, but also against their public convoys, to the prejudice
of the customs and tolls of their majesties, to the considerable
diminution of their duties and imports, and to the irreparable
injury of their kingdoms and provinces, the subjects of which
have suffered and lost infinitely, in their persons, their crews,

288 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
their vessels, goods and merchandizes. Hence it is that their
majesties have been obliged, &c."
Distresses, such as are here painted, might sufficiently account
for concessions on the part of a sufferer, without supposing them
to flow from a deliberate or voluntary acquiescence in the prin
ciple on which they were founded.
3. But admitting the stipulation to have been both gratuitous
and deliberate, and to form a fair exception to the general rule
of treaties, still being but a single exception to stipulations as
numerous and as uniform as have been brought into view, the
exception must be considered as having all the effect in confirm
ing the general rule, which can be ascribed, in any case, to a
confirmation of that sort.
4. The exception is limited to a trade between one French
port and another. It implies, therefore, and recognizes a free
dom of trade between foreign and French ports, as well colonial
as others.
To this ample sanction, drawn from the conventional monu
ments of Europe, it will be allowable to add the testimony of the
only nation at once civilized and independent, in the American
hemisphere. The United States have, or have had, treaties with
France, Holland, Sweden, Russia, Spain, and Great Britain.*
In all of these, except the treaty with Great Britain, they have
positively maintained the principle that neutrals may trade
freely between neutral and belligerent ports, and between one
belligerent port and another, whether under the same or differ
ent jurisdictions; and the treaty with Great Britain contained
not even an implication against the principle. It merely omit
ted a stipulation on the subject, as it did on many others, con
tained in' other treaties.t
* To these might be added their treaties with the coast of Barbary, which are
all favorable to the neutral rights of commerce. So are various treaties of Great
Britain, and of the other powers of Europe, with that coast and with the Otto
man Porte; all of which, as well as those with the Asiatic powers, it was thought
most proper to omit in this enquiry.
f One of the results of that treaty comprehends a most important sanction
from Great Britain, against the doctrine asserted by her. The 7th Article of the

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 289

The Conduct of other Nations.
The evidence from this source is merely negative; but is not
on that account without a convincing effect. If the doctrine
advanced by Great Britain had been entertained by other na
tions, it would have been seen in the documents, corresponding
with those which contain the British doctrine. Yet, with all
the research which could be employed, no indication has been
met with, that a single nation, besides herself, has founded on
the distinction between a trade permitted and a trade not per
mitted in time of peace, a belligerent right to interrupt the trade
in time of war. The distinction can be traced neither in their
diplomatic discussions, nor their manifestoes, nor their prize or
dinances, nor their instructions to their cruizers, nor in the de
cisions of their maritime courts. If the distinction had been
asserted or recognized, it could not fail to have exhibited itself,
in some or other of those documents. Having done so in none
treaty stipulated a compensation to citizens of the United States, for the dam
ages sustamed from irregular and illegal captures, and established a joint board
of 5 commissioners, to decide on all claims, according to equity, justice, and the
law of nations. These claims were founded in a very great degree on captures
authorized by the British instructions of November 6, 1793, and depending, there
fore, on the question whether a neutral trade with belligerent colonies, shut in
time of peace, was a lawful trade in time of war. The board, on a full consid
eration, reversed the sentences pronounced, even by the admiralty tribunal in
the last resort, in pursuance of those instructions; and consequently, as the com
missioners were guided by the law of nations, the reversal decided that the in
structions and the principle on which they were founded, were contrary to the
law of nations. The joint commissioners were appointed, two by each of the
parties, and the 5th by lot, which fell on an American citizen. Whether the
British commissioners concurred in the decision, does not appear. Biit whether
they did, or did not, the decision was equally binding; and affords a precedent
of great weight in all similar controversies, between the two nations. Nor is the
authority of the case impeached by the circumstance, that the casting voice was
in an American citizen; first, because he was selected and nominated by the
British side as an American candidate, possessing their confidence; secondly, be
cause as a man, he was highly distinguished for the qualities fitting him for so
independent a station; thirdly, because a joint tribunal so composed, must in
every point of view, be less liable to improper bias, than a tribunal established
by, and dependent on the orders of one of the parties only.
VOL. II. 19

290 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of them, the inference cannot be contested, that Great Britain
is the only nation that has ever attempted this momentous in
novation on the law of nations.
Conduct of Great Britain.
If it be not enough to have shewn, that the belligerent claim
asserted by Great Britain is condemned by all the highest au
thorities on the law of nations, by the clearest testimony of
treaties among all the principal maritime nations of the world,
herself included, and by the practice of all other nations; she can
not surely demur to the example of her own proceedings. And
it is here, perhaps, more than any where else, that the claim
ought to shrink from examination. It will be seen, in the course
of the following observations, that Great Britain is compelled,
under every appeal that can be made to herself, to pronounce
her own condemnation; and what is much worse, that the inno
vation, which she endeavors to enforce as a right of war, is
under that name a mere project for extending the field of mari
time capture, and multiplying the sources of commercial ag
grandizement; a warfare, in fact, against the commerce of her
friends, and a monopolizing grasp at that of her enemies.
1st. Whilst Great Britain denies to her enemies a right to
relax their laws in favor of neutral commerce, she relaxes her
own, those relating as well to her colonial trade, as to other
branches. 2d. Whilst she denies to neutrals the right to trade with the
colonies of her enemies, she trades herself with her enemies, and
invites them to trade with her colonies.
1st. That Great Britain relaxes in time of war her trade
laws, both with respect to her colonies and to herself, is a fact
which need not be proved, because it is not denied. A review
of the progress and modifications of these relaxations will be
found in Reeves'* Law of Shipping and Navigation; and in the
* " This is all that I have been able to collect, for illustrating the rules kid
down, in the act of navigation and of frauds, for the conduct of the European

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 291
successive orders of the British council, admitting in time of
war neutral vessels, as well as neutral supplies, into her West
India colonies. It will not be improper, however, to shew, that in
these relaxations of her peace system, she has been governed by
the same policy of eluding the pressures of war, and of trans
ferring her merchant ships and mariners from the pursuits of
commerce to the operations of war, which she represents as ren
dering unlawful the like relaxations of her enemies.
The object of dispensing, in time of war, with the navigation
act, was avowed by the legislature itself, in the preamble to one
of its acts, which was passed not long after the navigation act
was adopted. The preamble recites, "And whereas by the laws
trade. And having now taken a view of the policy pursued for rendering the
foreign trade of the whole world subservient to the increase of our shipping and
navigation, I shall draw the reader's attention to another part of the subject; and
present to him the instances in which this spirit of prescribing the mode of car
rying on foreign trade has been compelled to yield, and the execution of our navi
gation laws has been suspended, lest, in the attempt to enforce them, our com
merce might be extinguished, or greatly endangered.
" The laws of navigation, like other laws, have given way to necessity; and
have been suspended in time of war. During the dread of continual danger from
an enemy at sea, it is well if foreign trade can be carried on at all; it is no time
to be curious as to the built of the ship that is employed in it, how it is navigated,
or whence it comes. At such conjunctures it has been usual, more or less, to
suspend the act of navigation: the first instance of this was in the Dutch war, in
the reign of Charles H.
"It was then done, as was common in those times, by the prerogative exer
cised by the crown, of dispensing with laws upon urgent occasions. On the 6th
March, 1664, it was found necessary to issue an order of council for suspending
the act of navigation Wholly, as far as regarded the import and export of Nor
way, and the Baltic sea, and as far as regarded Germany, Flanders, and France,
provided the merchants and the owners of the ships were natural-born subjects:
it was further permitted to any one of a nation in amity to import from any
parts, hemp, pitch, tar, masts, saltpetre, and copper, and to pay duty only as
natural-born subjects. English merchants were permitted to employ foreign
ships in the coasting and plantation trade; but they were to comply with the re
striction of shipping in, and bringing their cargoes to England or Ireland.
"This was letting loose at once most of the restrictions belonging to our navi
gation system, and throwing it among the rest of Europe, to make the best of it,
during the time we were unable to follow up the plan we had proposed to ourselves.
" In the war of 1740, when we had a war with both France and Spain, it was
again necessary to relax from the strictness of our navigation laws; but it was

292 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
' now in force, the navigating of ships or vessels in divers cases,
' is required to be, the master and three-fourth parts of the
' mariners being English, under divers penalties and forfeitures
' therein contained: And whereas great numbers of seamen are
1 employed in her majesty's service for the manning of the Royal
' Navy, so that it is become necessary, during the present war,
' to dispense with the said laws, and to allow a greater num-
' ber of foreign mariners for the carrying on of trade and com-
' merce: Be it enacted, &c, that during the present war," &c.
Without pursuing the series of similar recitals during suc
cessive wars, one other example of later date will be given, in
which the same object is avowed. The preamble of 13 G. 2,
Ch. 3, is in the following words: "For the better supply of
mariners and seamen to serve in his majesty's ships of war, and
on board merchant ships and other trading vessels and priva-

endeavored to be done in such a way as would facilitate the carrying on of our
trade, without wholly giving up the favorite object of British shipping; and this
was, by permitting foreigners to become owners of British ships, and to trade as
British subjects.
"In the war with France, beginning in the year 1756, the like law was passed,
to continue during that war; and again in the year 1779, during the continuance
of the then subsisting hostilities with France.
" In these temporary expedients, we may trace the progressive increase of
British shipping. In the Dutch war of 1664, the nation were obliged at once to
abandon the Baltic trade, and to admit foreign ships into the coasting and planta
tion trade. But in the war of 1740 we made no bther concession than that of ad
mitting foreigners into the ownership of British-built ships, and to navigate with
foreign seamen for carrying the European commodities to this country and to
the plantations. This was also done in the war of 1756, and in the last war
However, in the last war, pressed as our trade was on all sides, we were com
pelled to yield a little further. Many articles of the trade of Asia, Africa, and
America, were permitted to be brought from any place, in any ships belonging
to a nation in amity. But in neither of these wars, not even in the last, when we.
had the maritime powers of both worlds to cope with, Spain, France, Holland,
and America, did we allow foreign ships to participate in the coasting or in the
plantation trade." — Beeves' Law of Shipping and Navigation, part 2, cliap. 3.
The reason for not then opening the plantation trade is obvious. The only
country furnishing the articles needed, was this country, with which Great Brit
ain was then at war.
In the wars of Great Britain, since the United States have been a neutral coun
try, her colonial trade has been opened to them.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 293
. teers, and for the better carrying on the present or any future
war, and the trade of Great Britain during the continuance
thereof," &c.
The British orders of council, and proclamations of govern
ors, issued from time to time during war, and opening, on ac
count of war, the colonial trade to neutrals, in cases where it
was shut to them in times of peace, are too well known to re
quire particular recital or reference. Orders to that effect are
now in operation; and fully justify the position, that, as well in
the case of the colonial trade as of the trade with the parent
country, the same thing is done by Great Britain herself, which
she denies the right of doing to her enemies.
2d. That she trades with her enemies, and invites them to
trade with herself, during war, are facts equally certain and
notorious. The efforts of Great Britain to maintain a trade at all times
with the colonies of other nations, particularly of Spain, both
in peace and in war, and both by force, and clandestinely, are
abundantly attested by her own, as well as other historians.
The two historians of Jamaica, Long and Edwards, are alone
sufficient authorities on the subject.
It has been already noticed, that, in the infancy of her bel
ligerent pretension against the trade of neutrals with the colo
nies of her enemies, she favored, by special licences, a trade of
her own subjects with the same colonies.
The like inconsistency might be verified by a train of exam
ples since the pretension was, during the war of 1793, brought
again into action. But it would be a waste of time to multiply
proofs of what is avowed and proclaimed to all the world by
her acts of parliament; particularly by the act of June 27, 1805,
" to consolidate and extend the provisions respecting the free
ports in the West Indies."
This act establishes certain free ports in Jamaica, Grenada,
Dominica, Antigua, Trinidad, Tobago, Tortola, New Provi
dence, Crooked Island, St. Vincent's, and Bermuda. These
ports, distributed throughout the West Indies, with a view to
the most convenient intercourse with the colonies, and settle
ments of her enemies in that quarter, are laid open to all the

294 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
valuable productions thereof, and to small vessels with single
decks, belonging to, and navigated by, inhabitants of such colo
nies and settlements. In like manner, the enemies of Great
Britain are allowed to export from the enumerated ports, rum,
negroes, and all goods, wares, and merchandizes, excepting naval
stores, which shall have been imported thither in British ves
sels. Provision is, at the same time, made for the re-exporta
tion, in British vessels, of the enumerated productions imported
from the colonies and settlements of her enemies, to Great Brit
ain and her possessions, according to the regulations prescribed
by her navigation act.
In pursuance of the same principle exercised in her laws, we'
find her entering into a treaty in time of war, which, in one of
its articles, opened a branch of colonial trade to neutrals not
open to them in time of peace, and which being to continue in
force only two years after the end of the war, may be consid
ered as made in effect for the war.
The 12th Article of the treaty with the United States in 1794,
stipulated that American vessels not exceeding a given size,
may trade between the ports of the United States and the Brit
ish West Indies, in cases prohibited to them by the colonial
system in times of peace. This article, it is true, was frustrated
by the refusal of the United States to ratify it; but the refusal
did not proceed from any supposed illegality of the stipulation.
On the part of Great Britain the article had a deliberate and
regular sanction; and as it would not have been a lawful stipu
lation, but on the supposition that a trade not open in peace
may be opened in war, the conduct of Great Britain, in this case
also, is at variance with the rule she lays down for others.
But a most interesting view of the conduct of Great Britain
will be presented by a history of the novel principle which she
is endeavoring to interpolate into the code of public law, and
by an examination of the fallacies and inconsistencies to which
her Government and her courts have resorted, in maintaining
the principle.
It is a material fact that the principle was never asserted or
enforced by her against other nations, before the war of 1756.
That at the commencement of the preceding war of 1739, it

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 295
did not occur, even to the ingenuity of British statesmen labour
ing for parliamentary topics of argument, is proved by the de
bate which, on that occasion, took place in the House of Lords.
In the course of the debate on the expediency of the war, this
particular point having fallen under consideration, the follow
ing observations were made by Lord Hervey against the war:
" Some people may perhaps imagine that great advantages
" might be made by our intercepting the Spanish plate fleets,
" or the ships that are employed in the trade with their settle-
" ments in America, because no Spanish ships can be employed
" in that trade; but even this would be precarious, and might
" in several shapes be entirely prevented; for if they should
" open that trade to the French and Dutch, it is what those two
" nations would be glad to accept of, and we could not pretend
" to make prize of a French or Dutch ship on account of her being
" bound to or from the Spanish settlements in America, no
" more than we could make prize of her on account of her being
" bound to or from any port in Spain. We could not so much
" as pretend to seize any treasure or goods (except contraband
" she had on board) unless we could prove that those goods or
" treasure actually belonged to the King or subjects of Spain.
" Thus the Spanish treasure and effects might safely be brought,
" Ac." Lord Bathurst in answer:
" We may do the Spaniards much damage by privateering,
&c. If they bring their treasure home in flotas, we intercept
them by our squadrons; if in single ships our privateers take
them. They cannot bring it home either in French or Dutch
ships,* because by the 6th Article of the treaty of Utrecht, the
King of France is expressly obliged not to accept of any other
* It was overlooked by both sides in the discussion, that the neutral right to
trade with tho coasts and colonies of an enemy, and even to cover the property
of an enemy, was stipulated by Great Britain to France, in the treaty of Utrecht,
1713, then in force, and to the Dutch in the treaty of 1674, then also in force. If
it be said that the omission to notice these treaties was deliberate, and proceeded
from a construction of the treaties which excluded from their purview, the co
lonial trade of an enemy, this presumed accuracy and deliberation of the speakers
would strengthen the inference from the omission to cite the principle in ques
tion, that the principle was unknown to or disclaimed by them.

296 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
usage of navigation to Spain and the Spanish Indies, than what
was practised in the reign of Charles II, of Spain, or than what
shall likewise be fully given and granted at the same time to
other nations and people concerned in trade. Therefore, the
Spaniards could not lay the trade in America open to the French,
or at least the French could not accept of it; and if the Dutch
should, they would be opposed by France as well as by us; an
opposition they would not, I believe, chuse to struggle with."*
Through the whole of the debate the subject is taken up, not
on the ground of a belligerent right, or of a neutral duty, but
merely on that of commercial jealousy and policy. Had the dis
tinction between a trade allowed in peace as well as war, and
a trade allowed in war only, been maintained by British states
men then, as it is maintained by them now, the same ready
answer would have been given then, as in a like discussion,
would be given now, viz: that neither France nor Holland could
enter into a trade with the Spanish colonies, because, being a
trade not open in time of peace, it could not be laid open in
time of war.
In the debates also, which took place in the House of Lords,
concerning the Spanish captures in America, and the war which
followed, several of the Lords in their speeches lay down in de
tail, the cases in which belligerent nations may search, capture,
and confiscate neutral vessels in time of war; yet, although co
lonial trade was the immediate subject of discussion, the dis
tinction now employed, seems never to have entered into the
thoughts of the speakers.
Again, in the course of this war to which France became a
party on the side of Spain in 1744, it appears that the tribunals
of Great Britain proceeded on the same principle, that the trade
of neutrals with the colonies of her enemies, though not open in
time of peace, might be a lawful trade in time of war. For this
there is the testimony of Robinson's reports, in which it is stated,
that ships taken on a voyage from the French colonies, were re
leased before the Lords of Appeal.t
We find then, that prior to the war of 1756, this belligerent
* 6 Lords' debates, 136, 154. t 2 Rob., 122, Am. edit.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 297
claim of attacking all neutral commerce not permitted in time
of. peace, a claim so broad in its principle and so baneful in its
operation, never had a place among the multiplied pretensions
enforced by power, or suggested by avarice. At some times
nations have been seen engaged in attempts to prevent all com
merce whatever with their enemies; at others to extend the list
of contraband to the most innocent and necessary articles of
common interchange; at others to subject to condemnation both
vessel and cargo, where either the one or the other was the
property of an enemy; at others to make the hostility of the
country producing the cargo, a cause of its confiscation. But
at no time, as seems to be admitted by Sir William Scott him
self* was this encroachment on the rights of neutrality devised
by any nation until the war of 1756. Then it was that the
naval resources of Great Britain augmented by her prosperous
commerce, more especially that of her then colonies, now the
United States of America, gave her an ascendancy over all her
rivals and enemies, and prompted those abuses which raised the
voice of all Europe against her.
The first effect of this overgrown power was seen in the bold
enterprize of seizing on the whole trade of France within her
grasp, in contempt of all forms of commencing hostilities, re
quired by the usage of nations. It was next seen in the exten
sive depredations on the trade of neutrals, particularly of the
Dutch, in defiance not only of the law of nations, but of the most
explicit stipulations of treaty. The losses of that single nation,
within the first two years of the war, amounted to several mil
lions sterling.? The Dutch, by their ambassador at London,
remonstrated. The British ambassador at the Hague was in
structed to enter into explanations. Among these it came out,:}:
for the first time, that Great Britain meant, notwithstanding the
admonitions of prudence as well as of justice, to deny the right
of neutrals to carry on with her enemies any trade beyond the
precise trade usually carried on in time of. peace.
* In the case of the Immanuel, 2 Rob., 156. Am. edit.
t See Annual Reg., 1757—8.
t Ibid., 1758.

298 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
The origin of this novel principle deserves a more particular
developement. The English Government had no sooner made
war on the French commerce, than the Dutch began to avail
themselves of their neutral and stipulated rights to enter into
it; particularly the commerce of the colonies, both to their own
ports, and to French ports. The English immediately made
war on this commerce, as indeed they did on the commerce to
Spain, Portugal, and other countries. The Dutch vessels were
even pillaged on the high seas, and their seamen very badly
treated. In the years 1757 and 1758 alone, the number of ves
sels captured and pillaged amounted to no less than three hun
dred; and the damages were estimated at eleven millions of
florins, between five and six millions of dollars. The Dutch ap
pealed to their treaties with England [those in 1674 and 1675]
which made enemy's goods free in their ships, contraband only
excepted, and the Dutch trade free from and to the enemy's
ports, and from one enemy's port to another. The English
were driven to the pretext, that the treaty of 1674 said only
that the liberty of trade should extend to all merchandizes
which were transported in time of peace, those of contraband
excepted; and was, therefore, not applicable to the colonial
trade in time of war. Besides that the time of peace, if it had
been any thing more than a mode of expressing the entire free
dom of commerce, could refer only to the kind of merchandizes,
not to the ports or channels of trade, the Dutch were able to
appeal to the declaratory treaty of 1675, which stipulated an
unlimited freedom of trade from and to ports of enemies, with
out saying any thing as to times of peace. This admitting no
reply, the English found no refuge but in the pretext, that the
Dutch vessels, being engaged in the colonial trade, were to be
considered as French vessels. This lucky thought eluded the
stipulation that free ships make free goods, as well as that which
embraced the right of trade on the coasts and with the colonies
of enemies. It was. alledged also, but with little seeming reli
ance on such an argument, that the commerce with the French
islands was not known in 1674, and therefore could not be com
prised in that treaty. These pretexts being very little satisfac-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 299
tory to the Dutch, the Province of Holland, the chief sufferer,
talked of reprisals. The English answer is in Tindal's Cont.,
vol. 9, p. 577 — 8. Undertaking to decide on a constitutional
question within an independent nation, they said, if the Prov
ince of Holland, which had no authority, should fit out ships,
they would be treated as pirates; and if the States General
should do it, it would be taken as a declaration of war. Such
was the birth of this spurious principle.
Being avowed, however, on the part of the Government, it
was to be expected that it would have its effect on the courts
of admiralty. As the decisions of these, during that period,
were never reported, the best knowledge of them is to be gath
ered from references incidentally made to them, in the proceed
ings of other British courts, and in the proceedings of the high
court of admiralty, since the reports of them have been pub
lished. The most precise information which has been obtained
through the first channel, appears in the case of Berens vs.
Rucker, before the court of King's bench, reported in 1 Black-
stone, p. 313. This was the case of a Dutch ship which had
taken in sugars at sea, off the Island of St. Eustatius, brought
along side of her by French' boats from a French island; which
ship was captured in 1758, on her return with that cargo to Am
sterdam. Lord Mansfield in pronouncing on the case in 1760,
expressed himself as follows:
" This capture was certainly unjust. The pretence was that
" part of this cargo was put on board off Saint Eustatius by
" French boats from a French island. This is now a settled
" point by the lords of appeals to be the same thing as if they
" had been landed on the Dutch shore, and then put on board
" afterioards, in which case there is no color for seizure. The
" rule is, that if a neutral ship trades to a French colony with
" all the privileges of a French ship, and is thus adopted and
" naturalized., it must be looked upon as a French ship, and is
" liable to be taken — not so, if she has only French produce on
" board, without taking it at a French port, for it may be pur-
" chased of neutrals."

300 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
Here the ground of capture must be distinctly noted. It is
not that the trade, as a trade allowed in war only, was unlaw
ful, and thence incurred a forfeiture of both ship and cargo; the
ground and measure of forfeiture, which are now alleged. The
vessel is condemned on the ground, or presumption, that it had,
by adoption, been made the property of the enemy; whilst the
cargo is not liable to condemnation, if not proved to be enemy's
property. In other words, the vessel is, in spite of the fact,
presumed from the mere circumstance of navigating in a French
channel, to be French property; and the cargo, although of
French production, and found in a vessel looked upon as French,
is notwithstanding these considerations, open to the presump
tion that it might be neutral property.
This shews only that the Herculean principle was at that time
in its cradle; and that neither the extent of its powers, nor the
wonders which it was to be called to perform, were at first un
derstood. Its capacities were to be learnt and applied, as they
might be unfolded by time and occasions. . At that time, neu
tral vessels being admitted into new channels of French trade
by grants of special licences to the vessels, the occasion was
thought to be best answered with respect to the vessels, by the
presumption, or rather the fiction, that they were French ves
sels; and with respect to the neutral cargo, as it did not fall
precisely under the presumption applied to the vessels, it was
left to escape until further time and occasions should teach the
other shapes and uses, of which the innovation was susceptible.
These shapes and uses soon began to disclose themselves: for
it appears from the references made in the case of the Provi-
dentia,* tried before Sir W. Scott in 1799, that French West
India produce, conveyed by neutrals from Monte Christi, a
Spanish neutral port, was, in the progress of the war of 1756,
condemned, on the pretext that the intervention of a neutral
port, was a fraudulent evasion of the rule which condemned the
trade with a French port; notwithstanding the previous rule of
the Lords of appeal, according to which the landing or even
* 2 Robinson, 120.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 391
trans-shipment of such produce, at a neutral port, neutralized
the trade, and made it lawful.
There is some obscurity, it must be owned, as to the principle
on which a neutral trade with the French colonies was con
demned, after the discontinuance of special licences; it being
sometimes stated in the arguments referring to that period, that
the condemnation was founded on the principle, that the trade
was virtually or adoptively, a French trade; and sometimes,
that it was founded on the general principle that it was a trade
not open in time of peace. Certain it is, that the original prin
ciple was that of a virtual adoption, this principle being com
mensurate with the original occasion; and that, as soon as this
original principle was found insufficient to reach the new occa
sions, a strong tendency was seen towards a variation of the
principle, in order to bring the new occasions within its reach.
It is remarkable that, notwithstanding the broad principle
asserted by the cabinet through its diplomatic organ at the
Hague, which interdicted to neutrals every trade not allowed
to them in time of peace, the courts of Admiralty not only lim
ited the principle at first, and hesitated afterwards to extend
it, in the manner which has been seen; but never undertook to
apply it to the coasting trade; though so strongly marked as a
peace monopoly, and therefore so clearly within the range of
the principle; nor does it appear, even, that the principle was
applied to the trade with the Spanish colonies, after Spain joined
in the war, notwithstanding the rigorous monopoly under which
they are known to be generally kept, in time of peace.
It is still more important to remark, as a proof of the incon
sistency always resulting from false principles, and the indul
gence of unjustifiable views, that the English themselves, if the
Annual Register is to be believed, were actually trading, by
means of flags of truce equivalent to licences, both directly
with the French islands, and indirectly through Monte Christi,
during the very period when they were confiscating the property
of neutrals carrying on precisely the same trade, in the same
manner. Such is the state of the question as presented during the war

302 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of 1756. The next enquiry relates to the war of the American
Revolution, or the French war of 1778.
Here it is conceded on the British side, that the new principle
was, throughout that period, entirely suspended. On the other
side, it may be affirmed, that it was absolutely abandoned.
One proof is drawn from the course of decisions, in the Brit
ish high court of Admiralty, by Sir James Marriott, the prede
cessor of Sir Wm. Scott.
The first volume only of his decisions has yet found its way
to this country. In that are contained the cases referred to
below;* all of which are adjudged on the principle, that the
coasting trade, and of course every other branch of trade, not
allowed to foreigners by a nation at peace, and which may be
opened to neutral foreigners by such nation when at war, are
lawful trades.
Although some of the ships, in these cases, were Danish, and
others Dutch, and consequently within the stipulations of treaties
which have been heretofore cited; yet there is no appearance
that the Judge was guided in his decisions by that authority;
nor is it in the least probable, that they will now be explained
by a resort to it. But should such an attempt be made, it could
be of no avail; because, among the cases, there are two, one of
a Lubeck and the other of a Prussian vessel, which could be
decided by no other rule than the general law of nations; there
being no British treaty, with either Prussia or Lubeck, applica
ble to the question. There is another case, a colonial one too,
decided 21st January, 1779, in which the law of nations must
of necessity have been the sole guide. It was that of a French
ship, bound from St. Domingo to Nantz. The general cargo,
as well as the vessel, were condemned as enemies' property;
reserving the question concerning the claims of considerable
* The Yonge Helena, a Dutch ship, p. 141.
La Prosperite, or Welfaren, claimed as a Lubecker, p. 170.
Les Quatres Freres, a Danish vessel, p. 180.
The Verenderen, or Le Changement, a Prussian vessel, p. 220.
The Zelden, a Dutch ship, p. 243.
The Dame Catherine de Workeem, a Dutch ship, p. 258.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 3Q3
value, made by two passengers as neutrals, the one asserting
himself to be a subject of Bohemia, the other of Tuscany. The
articles claimed were ultimately condemned as enemies' prop
erty; without the slightest allusion to the illegality of a neutral
trade between a belligerent country and its colonies; which, if
then maintained, as it is now, would at once have put an end to
the claims.
It is strictly and incontrovertibly just, then, to say, that these
decisions maintain the law of nations as asserted in this inves
tigation; and abandon and renounce it, as asserted in the decis
ions of the same court, under its present Judge. During the
war of 1778, the Judge had no guide whatever in prize cases,
turning on this question, but the law of nations. Neither trea
ties, nor acts of parliament, nor any known orders of council,
interposed any special rule controuling the operation of that
law. That law, consequently, was the sole rule of the decis
ions; and these decisions, consequently, complete evidence of
the law, as then understood and maintained by the court: and
let it be repeated, that if such was the law in the case of the
coasting trade, it was equally the law as to every other channel
of trade, shut in peace, and laid open in war.
These decisions were, indeed, made by the high court of Ad
miralty, and not by the Lords Commissioners of Appeal, the
authority in the last resort, on such subjects. But this consid
eration does not impeach the inference drawn from the decis
ions; which having not been reversed, nor appealed from, are
fair evidence for the purpose to which they are applied. It is
impossible to account for an omission to enter appeals, where
the captors were in their own country, and must have had the
best counsel, without supposing that the appeals afforded not
the smallest chance of a more favorable decision.
But as a further and more unexceptionable proof that the
principle was abandoned, it is stated by Sir Wm. Scott himself,
that "in the case of the Verwagtig* (a vessel trading between
France and Martinique during the war of 1778) and in many
* 1 Rob., 252.

304 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
other succeeding cases, the Lords of Appeal decreed payment of
freight to the neutral ship owner." This, it must be observed,
is a case of colonial trade; and a colonial trade of the most
exclusive kind in time of peace; a trade between the colony and
the parent country.
To these authorities, an explanation equally singular and un
satisfactory is opposed. It was understood, says Sir William
Scott, that " France in opening her colonies, during the war [of
' 1778] declared that this was not done with a temporary view
' relative to the war, but on a general and permanent purpose
' of altering her colonial system, and of admitting foreign ves-
' sels, universally and at all times, to a participation of that
' commerce. Taking that to be the fact, (however suspicious
' its commencement might be, during the actual existence of
' the war,) there was no ground to say that neutrals were not
' carrying on a commerce, as ordinary as any other in which
' they could be engaged; and therefore, in the case of the Ver-
' wagtig, and many other succeeding cases, the lords decreed
c payment of freight to the neutral ship owner."
At what particular time, and in what particular terms, this
important declaration by France was made, is not mentioned;
nor has any such declaration been discovered by a search which
has been carried through all the French codes, and such of the
annals of the time, as were most likely to contain it; and with
out some further account of this "declaration," or this "profes
sion" on the part of France, as it is elsewhere called in Rob.
Reports, it is impossible to decide on the precise character and
import of it.
But supposing the fact, as it was taken to be, how account
for so unexampled an instance of blind confidence by Great
Britain, in the sincerity of an enemy, always reproached by her
with the want of sincerity; and on an occasion too, so peculiarly
suspicious, as that of a profession at the commencement of war,
calculated to disarm Great Britain of a most precious branch
of her rights of war?
If her suspension of the new principle is not to be explained
by an intentional return to the established law of nations; and

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 395
the explanation of the fact lies in the alternative between her
respect for a suspicious declaration of France, made in the sus
picious crisis of a war, more than any other charged by her on
the perfidious ambition of France; and her respect for those
prudential motives which her own situation may have suggested
for abandoning, rather than renewing, the attempt to maintain
such a principle; it will not be easy to avoid preferring the ex
planation drawn from the following review of her situation.
However bold it may have been in Great Britain to advance
and act upon the new principle in the war of 1756, it has been
seen that she went but a small part of the length of it; and with
an evident desire to make the innovation as little conspicuous
and obnoxious as was consistent with her object. In this cau
tion she was probably influenced by a regard, not only to the
progress of opinion in Europe in favor of neutral rights; but
particularly to the king of Prussia, whose friendship she courted,
and who was known to be a patron of those rights. His dis
pute with Great Britain, produced by her seizure of Prussian
vessels in the preceding war, and by his seizing in return, the
Silesian funds mortgaged to Great Britain, is well known. The
issue of this dispute has been represented as a complete triumph
of the belligerent claims of Great Britain, over the pretensions
of the neutral flag. The fact, however, is, that she was obliged
to redeem the Silesian debt from the attachment laid on it, by
paying to Prussia the sum of 20,000 pounds sterling, as an in
demnity for the prizes made of Prussian ships.*
At the commencement of the war of 1778, the public opinion
had become still more enlightened and animated on the subject
of neutral rights. The maritime success of Great Britain in
the war of 1756, had alarmed, and the abuses of her power had
sharpened the feelings of every commercial nation. Champions
had started up all over Europe, maintaining with great learn
ing and strong reasoning, the freedom of the seas, and the rights
* The instrument containing this stipulation bears date January 16, 1756. It
may be seen in Jenkinson's collection of treaties.
vol. 11. 20

306 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of the neutral flag. The principle that free ships make free
goods, more especially employed a variety of very able pens;
and had made a rapid progress. Other principles, the offspring
or auxiliaries of this, and equally adverse to the maritime
claims of Great Britain, were also gaining partizans. In a
Word, that state of fermentation in the public mind was pre
pared, which being nourished by the example and the policy of
France, enabled Russia, in concert with France, to unite and
arm all the maritime nations of Europe, against the principles
maintained by Great Britain. To these discouraging circum
stances in the situation of Great Britain, it must be added, that
the cause in which she was fighting against her colonies, who
had separated from her, was unpopular; that their coalition
with her enemies, weakening her and strengthening them, had
a double effect in depressing her; and that it happened, as was
to be foreseen, that the fleets and cruisers brought against her,
and the distress to which her own West Indies were reduced
by her inability to supply their wants, made it questionable,
whether she might not lose, rather than gain, by renewing the
principle which she had formerly asserted. Early in that war,
Mr. Burke, in the House of Commons, exclaimed, "we are mas
ters of the sea, no farther than it pleases the house of Bourbon
to permit."
The effect of this state of things, in tempering the policy and
pretensions of Great Britain during the war of 1778, is attested
by a series of her public acts too tedious to be here inserted,
but which may be seen in Hennings' collection.
But to whatever causes, the relinquishment by Great Britain
of the new principle, is to be ascribed, the fact of the relinquish
ment remains the same; and that it did not proceed from any
declaration made by France, that she had permanently abolished
her colonial monopoly, is fully demonstrated by the following
considerations. The first is, that such a declaration, or such an abolition by
France, however satisfactory the evidence of it might be to the
British Cabinet, could have no legal effect on the decisions of

.1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 397
a Court, without some notification or instruction which is not
pretended; and which is sufficiently contradicted, by the guarded
terms used by Sir William Scott in speaking of the declaration.
And that the then judge of the court, Sir James Mariott, was
not in fact influenced in his decisions, either by the declaration
of France itself, or by any instruction of his own government
founded on such a declaration, is put beyond the possibility of
doubt, not only by the want of reference thereto in the decis
ions, but by an acknowledgment made by Sir William Scott, in
the case of the Emanuel in 1799, (1 Rob., p. 253;) the case of a
neutral vessel carrying from one Spanish port to another, salt
owned by the king of Spain, then at war with Great Britain.
"With respect to authorities (says he) it has been much urged,
that in three cases, this ivar, the Court of Admiralty has decreed
payment of freight to vessels so employed: and I believe that
such cases did pass, under an intimation of the opinion of the
very learned person who preceded me, in which the parties ac
quiesced, without resorting to the authority of a higher tribu
nal." If the decisions of Sir James Mariott in the war of 1778,
had been guided by the declaration of France, and not by the
law of nations, it is evident, as that declaration was inapplica
ble to the war of 1793, and had even been falsified on the re
turn of peace in 1783, as stated by Sir William Scott himself,
that the opinion intimated by Sir James Mariott with respect
to cases, Spanish too, and not French cases, in the beginning of
the war of 1793, could have no other basis than the principle,
that according to the law of nations taken by itself, the trade
of neutrals on belligerent coasts was a rightful trade.
Secondly. Were it admitted that a declaration by France had
been so made and communicated, as to become a rule binding
on the admiralty court, it is clear that the rule must have been
restricted to cases of trade with the French colonies, and could
have no effect on those of a trade with Spanish or Butch colo
nies, whose governments had made no such declaration as is at
tributed to France: yet it is not pretended, nor is it known,
that any distinction was made by the British courts, between

308 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the former and latter cases. The principle in question seems
to have been equally renounced in all.*
Thirdly. The alleged change in the system of France was re
stricted to her colonies. It is not pretended that any perma
nent change was either made, or declared in the system of her
coasting trade. But the decisions of the British court above
cited, relate principally to the coasting trade. The principle
then must have been drawn, not from the alleged change of
France, but from the law of nations: and if the law of nations
authorized in the judgment of the court, a coasting trade shut
in peace and opened in war, it must have authorized, in the same
judgment, the colonial and any other trade shut in peace and
opened in war.
It is an inevitable conclusion, therefore, not only that the
trade of neutrals to belligerent coasts and colonies, was sanc
tioned by the British courts, throughout the war of 1778, but
that the sanction was derived from the law of nations; and,
consequently, that the new principle, condemning such a trade,
was not merely suspended under the influence of a particular
consideration which ceased with that war, but was, in pursu
ance of the true principle of the law of nations, judicially aban
doned and renounced.
Passing on to the war of 1793, it appears, however, that the
policy of the British government, yielding to the temptations of
the crisis, relapsed into the spirit and principle of her conduct
towards neutral commerce, which had been introduced, in the
war of 1756.
The French revolution which began to unfold itself in 1789,
had spread alarm through the monarchies and hierarchies of
Europe. Forgetting former animosities, and rival interests, all
* Hennings, a Danish writer, alluding to the period of the war of 1778, says,
' ' But although in respect to the neutral trade to the colonies in America, since
France has permitted it to all nations, nothing has been expressly conceded by
Great Britain. Yet the courts of admiralty have released all prizes which had
been brought in, as coming from the French or Dutch possessions in America;
and the commerce of neutrals with the colonies, has been generally permitted.
This permission, therefore, may be considered as a settled point." — Treatise on
Neutrality, p. 58.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 399
the great powers on the continent were united, either in arms
or in enmity, against its principles and its examples: some of
them, doubtless were stimulated, also, by hopes of acquisition
and aggrandizement. It was not long before the British gov
ernment began to calculate the influence of such a revolution,
on her own political institutions; as well as the advantages to
which the disposition of Europe, and the difficult situation of
her ancient rival and enemy might be turned. War was, indeed,
first declared by the French government; but the British gov
ernment was, certainly, the first that wished it, and never per
haps entered into a war against France, with greater eagerness,
or more sanguine hopes. With all Europe on her side, against
an enemy in the pangs of a revolution, no measure seemed too
bold to be tried; no success, too great to be expected.
One of her earliest measures was accordingly that of inter
dicting all neutral supplies of provisions to France, with a view
to produce submission by famine.*
The project, however, had little other effect, than to disgust
those most interested in neutral commerce, and least hostile to
France. This was particularly the case with the United States,
who did not fail to make the most strenuous remonstrances
against so extraordinary a proceeding. The correspondence of
their Secretary of State with the British plenipotentiary, (Mr.
Hammond,) and of Mr. Pinckney the American plenipotentiary
with Lord Grenville, the British Secretary of State, are proofs
of the energy with which the innovation was combated, and of
the feebleness and fallacy with which it was defended. The
defence was rested on a loose expression of Vattel. Bynker
shoeck, who had not altogether got rid of the ideas of the for
mer century, and by whom Vattel probably was misled, could
have furnished a still stronger authority.?
The next experiment of depredation on neutral commerce was
directed, notwithstanding the former abandonment of the prin
ciple, and the continuance of the abandonment into the early
* See instructions of June 8, 1793.
t Frumentum scilicet etiam non hostis, ad hostem recte advchit, excepta ob-
sidionis/amis-ue causa. — Lib. I, Cap. 9.

310 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
cases of the war* of 1793, against that carried on with the pos
sessions of France in the West Indies. This experiment too
fell with peculiar weight on the United States. For some time
the irregularities went on, without any known instructions from
the government reviving the abandoned principle; but without
the licentious excesses which followed.
As early, however, as November 6, 1793, instructions were
issued, which struck generally at the neutral commerce with
the French West Indies. That of the United States was the
principal victim. The havoc was the greater, because the in
structions being carried into operation before they were pro
mulged, took the commerce by surprize.
This instruction of November 6th, 1793, was addressed to
the commanders of ships of war, and to privateers having letters
of Marque against France, in the following terms:
"That they shall stop and detain all ships laden with goods
the produce of any colony belonging to France, or carrying pro
visions or other supplies for the use of any such colony, and
f The Charlotte, Coffin, an American vessel, taken on a voyage from Cayenne
to Bourdeaux, October, 1793, and reserved with a class of like cases, prior to the
instructions of November, 1793, was tried and decided by the Lords of appeal
in 1803. On the side of the claimants it was argued, that considering the change
able ground on which the principle, condemning a trade in war not permitted in
peace, was first established in 1756, and the apparent abandonment of it during the
war of 1778, neutral merchants were entitled to the benefit of a justifiable igno
rance, until the instructions of November, 1793, had conveyed an admonition to
them: on the other side it was contended that the principle was sufficiently ob
vious as a principle of public law, without any instructions, and that neutrals had
no right to presume that relaxations confined to circumstances of the war of 1778
[on which subject by the way it was impossible they could have any knowledge]
would be continued. The court concurring in this view of the case, pronounced
the ship and cargo with the others in the like situation, subject to condemnation.
4 Rob., Appendix, p. 12. As the state of appearances had misled the " very
learned person " who preceded Sir William Scott, into an opinion that the neu
tral trade, though not permitted in peace, was lawful in war, it was surely rather
a hard sentence that refused to unlearned traders a plea of ignorance, of which
so very learned an expositor of the law is obliged to avail himself. Besides, if
"the principle was sufficiently obvious," why were the cases depending on it
reserved, and above all, why were the parties kept in uncertainty and expense
for ten years, and till the war was over? These are questions which it is more
easy to ask than to answer.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 31}
shall bring the same with their cargoes to legal adjudication in
our courts of admiralty."
In some respects this instruction went farther than the new
principle asserted by Great Britain; in others it fell short of
that principle.
It exceeded the principle in making the produce of a French
colony, although owned by neutrals, and going from a neutral
port where it might have been regularly naturalized, the crite
rion of the trade. The principle would have extended only to
produce exported immediately from the colony, in a trade not
permitted in time of peace.
Again, the principle was not applicable to an immediate trade
from certain ports* and places in the colonies, authorized by
permanent regulations antecedent to the war. The instruction
extends to any colony, and consequently violates a trade where
it was permitted and customary before the war.
On the other hand it falls short of the principle, in as much —
1, as it spares articles directly exported from, though not the
produce of, the colonies — 2, as it does not affect the coasting
trade of France, and other branches of French trade, laid open
in time of war, on account of the war.
With these mitigations, however, the instruction had a sweep
ing operation on the neutral commerce with the French colo
nies, carried on chiefly from the United States.
The resentment produced by it, and which was doubled by
the ensnaring concealment of the instruction, appeared not only
in the outcry of the suffering merchants,, but in the discussions
and proceedings of the government. Important restrictions on
the commerce of Great Britain were agreed to by one branch
of the Congress, and negatived by a single vote in the other.
A sequestration of British funds and effects in the United States
was proposed and strongly supported. And an embargo with
holding supplies essential to the subsistence of the British West
Indies, actually passed into a law, and remained in force for
some time. These measures, at length, gave way to the mission
* See the French free port act of 1784, in force in 1793.

312 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of a plenipotentiary extraordinary to the British court, which
terminated in the treaty of 1794.
The British government, in the mean time, aware of the pow
erful tendency of such depredations, to drive the United States
into a commercial, if no other warfare, against her, prudently
retreated from the ground taken by this instruction, as early as
the 8th of January, 1794, when she revoked the instruction to
her cruisers, of November 6th, 1793, and substituted the follow
ing: "1. That they shall bring in for lawful adjudication all ves
sels with their cargoes, that are loaded with goods the produce
of the French West India Islands, and coming directly from any
port of the said islands to any port in Europe."
" 2. That they shall bring in for lawful adjudication, all ships
with their cargoes, that are loaded with goods the produce of
the said islands, the property of which goods shall belong to
subjects of France, to whatsoever ports the same may be
bound." " 3d. That they shall seize all ships that shall be found at
tempting to enter any port of the said islands that is, or shall
be, blockaded by the arms of his majesty or his allies, and shall
send them in with their cargoes for adjudication, according to
the terms of the 2d article of the former instructions, bearing
date the 8th day of June, 1793."
" 4th. That they shall seize all vessels laden wholly or in part
with naval or military stores, bound to any port of the said
islands, and shall send them into some convenient port belong
ing to his majesty, in order that they, together with their car
goes, may be proceeded against according to the rules of the
law of nations."
As the three last articles cannot be regarded as any relaxa
tion or re-modification of the instructions of November, 1793,
since they relate only to principles well known to have been
long enforced by Great Britain, as a part of the law of nations,
it is not easy to discern the motive to them. The only effect
of the articles, as an enumeration and definition of belligerent
rights, in certain branches of trade, seems to be, to beget per-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC.

313

plexing questions with respect to these rights, in the branches
of trade pretermitted.
The material article is the first. It varies the preceding in
structions in three respects: 1st, in substituting "the French
West India islands " for " any colony of France; " of which there
are some not islands, and others not West India islands: 2d, in
limiting the seizure, to produce "coming directly" from any
port of the said islands: 3d, in the very important limitation
of the seizure, to vessels bound from those islands to any port
in Europe.
By these limitations it was, apparently, intended to take the
direct trade from the French West Indies to the United States,
out of the operation of the order of 1793: and, probably also,
the trade from the United States to the West Indies; leaving
the trade to Europe, from the French West Indies, a prey to
British cruisers. Whether it was also meant, as seems to be
implied, that the neutral trade from Europe to the French West
Indies was to be undisturbed, is a distinct question. This ques
tion was actually raised under the ambiguity of the instruction,
and decided, not without some marks of self distrust, by Sir
Wm. Scott, in the case of a trade from France herself to a
West India colony.*
The explanation of this change in the instructions of the Brit
ish Government is given, by the Reporter of Sir Wm. Scott's
decisions, in the following passage extracted from the appendix
to 4 Rob., p. 4: " The relaxations that have since [the instruc
tions of November 6, 1793] been adopted, have originated chiefly
in the change that has taken place in the trade of that part of
the world, since the establishment of an independent Govern
ment on the continent of America. In consequence of that
event, American vessels had been admitted to trade in some
articles, and on certain conditions, with the colonies both of
this country and of France. Such a permission had become a
part of the general commercial arrangements, as the ordinary
state of their trade in time of peace. The commerce of Amer-
* Immanuel, 2 Rob., 156.

314 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
ica was therefore abridged by the foregoing instructions, and
debarred of the right generally ascribed to neutral trade in time
of war, that it may be continued, with particular exceptions, on
the basis of its ordinary establishment. In consequence of rep
resentations made by the American Government, to this effect,
new instructions to our cruizers were issued, 8th January, 1794,
apparently designed to exempt American ships trading between
their own country and the colonies of France."
One remark suggested by this explanation is, that if it be a
just defence of the orders of January, 1794, it is a severe im
putation on those of November, 1793; for the sole reason which
is stated, as requiring this revocation of the orders of 1793, was
in existence at the date of those rigorous orders; and ought,
therefore, to have prevented them. Yet they were not only not
prevented, but were permitted to have a secret and extensive
operation on the American commerce. Nor does it appear, that
in any of the decisions on the captures made within that period,
conformably to the instructions, but contrary, as is here admit
ted, to the law of nations, which, on the British principle, au
thorized the American commerce, at least as far as it had been
actually enjoyed with the French, in time of peace, the court
ever undertook to modify the instructions; as is alledged to have
been done, in the war of 1778, in consequence of the professions
of France that she had opened her colonial ports, generally, to
the permanent trade of other nations.
The explanation calls for two other remarks. The first is,
that the instruction goes beyond the reason assigned for it. The
reason assigned is, that the trade between the United States
and the French islands had, by the permission of France, become
" the ordinary state of their trade in time of peace." Now so
far as this was the fact, the trade is expressly and truly stated,
in the explanation itself, to have been limited to " some articles,"
and "on certain conditions." But the instruction is admitted
to have been designed to exempt, without any such limitations,
American ships trading between their own country and the col
onies of France.
The second remark is, that it is not a fact, that the repre-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 315
sentations of the American Government were made to the effect
here stated; namely, that the instructions of 1793 debarred them
of the right of trading with the French colonies in time of war,
according to the ordinary state of the trade permitted to them
in time of peace. The representations of the American Govern
ment recognized no such principle, nor included any such com
plaint; as is proved by official documents* on the subject.
A third remark might be added. If the ordinary permissions
of France to trade with her colonies, was a good reason for ex
empting the trade of the United States from the orders of No
vember, 1793, the exemption ought to have been co-extensive
with the permissions; and, consequently, to have embraced the
neutrals of Europe, who enjoyed the same permissions as the
United States; instead of being restricted to the latter.
One is really at a loss, which most to admire, the hasty and
careless facility with which orders proceed from the Govern
ment of a great and an enlightened nation, laying prostrate the
commerce and rights of its friends; or the defective and prepos
terous explanations given of such orders, by those who under
take to vindicate or apologize for them.
But whatever may have been the origin, or the intention of
the second orders of 1794, revoking the restraints imposed by
those of 1793, on the United States; whilst they suffered those
restraints to continue, in great part at least, on other nations;
* Among the printed documents of that period is a letter of January 9, 1794,
from Mr. T. Pinckney, the American Minister at London, to Mr. Jefferson, then
Secretary of State, in which, alluding to an interview with Lord Grenville, he
says, " I reminded him that our ideas differed materially from theirs on this sub
ject; and without repeating the arguments I had before addressed to him, both
verbally and in writing, in support of our position, it was only necessary to say,
that we did not admit the right of the belligerent Powers to interfere further in
the commerce between neutral nations and their adversaries, than to prevent
their carrying to them articles, which, by common usage, were established as
contraband, and any articles to a place fairly blockaded; that consequently the
two first articles, though founded upon their principles, of not suffering, in war,
a traffic which was not admitted by the same nations in time of peace, and of taking
their enemy's property when found on board of neutral vessels, were neverthe
less contrary to what we contended to be the just principles of the modern law of
nations."

316 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
two consequences resulted, which seem not to have been taken
sufficiently into foresight.
One of them was, that the nations of Europe, excluded from
the trade not forbidden to the United States, were not a little
soured by the distinction; and which, very possibly, may have
contributed to the revival of the sympathies which brought
about the armed neutrality of 1800.
The other was, the vast growth of the carrying trade of the
United States, which supplied all parts of Europe, with the pro
duce of the West Indies, and without affording to Great Britain
any of the profits of an entrepot.
The developement of these consequences could not fail to
awaken the attention of the British Government, and is the best
key to the instruction which was issued January 25, 1798; and
which was extended to the possessions of Spain and Holland,
then united with France against Great Britain.
It revoked the instructions of January, 1794, reciting as the
consideration which rendered the alteration expedient, " the
present state of the commerce of Great Britain, as well as that
of neutral countries;" and in lieu thereof, the following was
issued: " That they should bring in for lawful adjudication, all ves
sels with their cargoes, that are laden with goods, the produce
of any island or settlement belonging to France, Spain, or the
United Provinces, and coming directly from any port of the
said islands or settlements, to any port in Europe, not being a
port of this kingdom, nor a port of that country, to which such
ships, being neutral ships, shall belong." The residue of the arti
cles merely extend to the islands and settlements of France,
Spain, and Holland, the three last articles in the instructions
of January, 1794.
The effect of this new change in the instructions was, to sanc
tion a direct trade from all the French islands, as well as from
those in the West Indies, and also from the French settlements
which were not islands, with a like sanction, to a like trade,
from the islands and settlements of the other enemies of Great
Britain; to extend to neutrals in Europe, the enjoyment of this

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 317
trade, with a refusal to the American States, of the direct trade,
from those islands *ind settlements to such European neutrals;
and finally, to permit to these States, as well as to the neutrals
of Europe, a direct trade from the hostile islands and settle
ments to Great Britain herself.
The explanation attempted by the reporter, Dr. Robinson, in
his appendix to the 4th vol., p. 4 — 5, is, that " In consequence
of the relaxation [in 1794] of the general principle in favor of
American vessels; a similar liberty of resorting to the colonial
market, for the supply of their own consumption, was conceded
to the neutral States of Europe, a concession rendered more
reasonable by the events of war, which, by annihilating the
trade of France, Spain, and Holland, had entirely deprived the
States of Europe of the opportunity of supplying themselves
with the articles of colonial produce in those markets."
With regard to the permission to all neutrals to convey the
produce of the enemies' colonies, directly to British ports, he is
silent. From a summary, however, of the discussions which had taken
place on cases before the Lords of Appeal, as it is given in the
appendix to 4 Rob., p. 6, an explanation of this part of the reg
ulation, might be easily collected, if it were not otherwise suf
ficiently obvious. Among the arguments used for so construing
the last order of 1798, as to justify a Danish vessel in trading
from a Spanish colony, to a neutral country, to which the ves
sel did not belong; it is observed, " that, originally, the preten
sion to exclude all neutrals, was uniformly applied on the part
of the belligerent; by which the effect of reducing such settle
ments for want of supplies, became a probable issue of the war;
now, since the relaxations have conceded to neutral merchants
the liberty of carrying thither cargoes of innoxious articles, and
also of withdrawing the produce of the colony, for the purpose
of carrying it to their own ports; now, to restrict them from
carrying such cargoes directly to the ports of other neutral
States, becomes a rule apparently capricious in its operation,
and one, of which the policy is not evident. From the north
ern nations of Europe, no apprehensions are to be entertained

318 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of a competition injurious to the commercial interests of our own
country. To exclude them from this mode «f traffic [that is of
trafficking directly from such colonies to other neutral coun
tries] in the produce of the enemy's colonies, is to throw a, far
ther advantage into the hands of American merchants, who can,
with greater ease, import it first into their own country, and
then, by re-exportation, " send it on " to the neutral nations of
Europe. No other key is wanted to let us into the real policy of the
orders of 1798; which placed the neutral nations of Europe, and
the United States on the same footing, by extending the rights
of the former, and thereby abridging the advantages of the lat
ter. This change of " the actual state of the commerce of this
country (G. B.) as well as that of neutral countries " was expe
dient for two purposes: It conciliated the Northern nations,
then perhaps listening to a revival of the armed neutrality, and
from whom "no apprehensions were to be entertained of an in
jurious competition with the commercial interests of Great
Britain; and at the same time, it so far took the advantages of
re-exportation out of the hands of the American merchants, from
whom such a competition, probably was apprehended.
But a mere adjustment of the balance between neutrals in
their advantageous trade with the enemy colonies, did not
answer all the purposes which were to be consulted. It gave
Great Britain herself, no share of the forbidden fruit. She took
at once, therefore, the determination, whilst she would permit
none of the neutral merchants of any country to carry on this
colonial trade of her enemies with another neutral country, to
authorize them all to carry it on with herself; disguising, as
well as she could, the policy of making herself the centre and
thoroughfare of so extensive a branch of profit, under the gen
eral expediency of changing " the state of commerce both Brit
ish and neutral " as it had resulted from her regulations of 1794;
and avoiding, as much as she could, to present to notice, the
palpable inconsistency of making herself a party to a trade with
her colonial enemies, at the very moment when she was exert
ing a belligerent pretension, having no other basis, than the

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 319
probable reduction of them, by suppressing all trade whatever
with them.
This subject is too important not to be a little further pur
sued. Unpleasant as the task is, to trace into consequences, so
selfish and so abounding in contradictions, the use made by
Great Britain of the principle assumed by her, the develope
ment is due to truth and to the occasion. It will have the im
portant effect, at the same time, of throwing further light on the
checkered scene exhibited by the admiralty jurisprudence of
Great Britain.
It must be added then, that the commercial policy for which
she employs her new beUigerent principle, is the more apparent
from two subsidiary pretensions, as new, as they are at variance
with the maritime rights of neutral nations.
The object of drawing through her own warehouses and
counting-houses, the colonial trade of her enemies, on its way
from the West Indies to the other countries of Europe, being
counteracted by the extensive intercourse between the United
States and those colonies, and by the re-exportation from the
United States, of the imported surplus of colonial produce, the
project was adopted, oi forcing this trade directly from the
West Indies to, and through Great Britain; 1st, by checking
the West India importations into the United States, and thereby
lessening the surplus for re-exportation; 2d, by embarrassing
the re-exportation from the United States; both considerations
seconded, no doubt, by the avidity of her cruizers and by the
public interest, supposed to be incorporated with their success
in making prizes; and the first consideration, seconded also, per
haps, by a desire to give an indirect check to the exportation
of contraband qf war from the United States.
In order to check importations, the principle is advanced, that
the outward and the return voyage are to be regarded, as form
ing but a single voyage; and consequently, if a vessel is found
with an innocent cargo on board, but on her return from a hos
tile port, her outward cargo to which, was as contraband of
war subject to capture, the vessel is thereby rendered liable to
capture, and the chance for capture, by that means, doubled.

320 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
That this principle is of modern date, can be shewn by more
than negative evidence; and from a source highly respectable.
When Sir L. Jenkins was judge of the high court of admiralty,
in the latter period of the 17th century, it was the practice,
sometimes for the king, at others for the commissioners of ap
peal, to call for his official opinions in writing, on cases depend
ing in other courts, or diplomatically represented to the gov
ernment. These rescripts are valuable, not only as one of the
scattered and scanty materials composing the printed stock of
admiralty precedents in Great Britain; but as the testimony of
a man, who appears to have been not undeservedly regarded as
an oracle in his department of law; and to have delivered his
opinions with a candor and rectitude, the more meritorious as
he served a sovereign who gave little encouragement to these
virtues, and as he was himself of a temper and principles suffi
ciently courtly.
The case of a Swedish vessel, which had conveyed enemy's
goods, having been seized on her return, with neutral goods,
was represented to the government by the Swedish Resident;
and by the Government referred to Sir L. Jenkins, the judge
of the high court of admiralty. His report is so interesting in
another respect, as well as that for which it was required, that
it shall be given in his own words:
, " The question which I am (in obedience to his Majesty's most
gracious pleasure) to answer unto, being a matter of fact, I
thought it my duty not to rely wholly on my own memory or
observation, but further to inquire of Sir Robert Wiseman, his
majesty's advocate general; Sir William Turner, his royal high
ness, the lord high admiral's advocate; Mr. Alexander Check,
his majesty's proctor; Mr. Roger How, principal actuary and
register in the high court of admiralty in England; whether
they, or any of them, had observed, or could call to mind, that in
the late war against the Dutch, any one ship, otherwise free, (as
belonging to some of his majesty's allies,) having carried goods
belonging to his majesty's enemies, from one enemn.es port to an
other, and being seized (after it had discharged the said goods)
laden with the proceed of that freight which it had carried and

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 321
received of the enemy upon the account of the ship's owners,
had been adjudged prize to his majesty; they all unanimously
resolved that they had not observed, n^r could call to mind that
any such judgment or condemnation ever passed in the said
court; and to this their testimony I must (as far as my expe
rience reaches) concur: and if my opinion be (as it seems to
be) required, I do not (with submission to better judgment)
know any thing, either in the statutes of this realm, or in his
majesty's declarations upon occasion of the late war, nor yet in
the laws and customs of tlie seas, that can (supposing the prop
erty of the said proceed to be bona fide vested in the ship owners
his majesty's allies) give sufficient ground for a condemnation
in this case. And the said advocates (upon the debate I had
with them) did declare themselves positively of the same opin
ion. Written with my hand this 6th day of February, 1667."*
Sir L. Jenkins' works, 2 vol., p. 741.
Here the point is clearly established, that a vessel found with
a lawful cargo, on a return voyage, cannot be affected by the
unlawfulness of the cargo immediately preceding it; and, conse-
* The works of Jenkins have become so scarce, that it were to be wished that
the parts at least, which contain his admiralty opinions and decisions, were re
published. Considering the luminous character, and the official weight belong
ing to them, it might have been expected that this would long ago have been
done; as well as that his authority would have been more frequently consulted
in admiralty proceedings. Perhaps one cause of the neglect may lie in the dif
ference which would be exhibited between his testimony of the law of nations,
and the expositions of modern date, on some other points beside that in the text.
For example, in defining contraband, he limits it to things " directly or imme
diately" subservient to the uses of war; and expressly decides " pitch and tar "
not to be contraband. By what authority has the law of nations been changed
in this particular? Certainly, not by an unanimous consent of nations, as was
required by Great Britain to change the law subjecting enemy's property under
a neutral flag, to confiscation; the contrary being admitted by Sir William Scott,
who remarks that this was a point, though not the only point of British differ
ence from the tenets of Sweden, 4 Rob., 201. With respect to tar and pitch, it
cannot even be pretended, that any change in the uses of these articles, since
that date, can have changed the reason of the rule, as it existed in the time of
Jenkins; or that the change was merely an adaptation of the same general prin
ciple to particular circumstances: for tar and pitch had the same relation to
ships, and ships the same relation to war, then as they have now.
VOL. II. 21

322 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
quently, that an outward and return voyage, cannot be consid
ered as but one voyage, or the character of one as transfused
into the other.
It is true that, in this case, the cargo in question was not
contraband of war, but enemy's property. But there is no room
for a distinction in the principle applicable to the two cases.
If the two voyages in fact make one and the same voyage in
law, an outward cargo of enemy's property must authorise cap
ture in the returned voyage as much as an outward cargo of
contraband would authorise it. If the two voyages do not
make one and the same; the contraband of war, in one voyage,
can no more affect another voyage, than enemy's property, in
one voyage, can affect another voyage.
It will not have escaped attention that, in the case stated in
the report of Jenkins, the voyage in which enemy's property
had been carried, and which it was imagined might thence have
vitiated the return voyage, was a coasting voyage from one
enemy's port to another. Yet so immaterial was that circum
stance, at that time, that it appears not even to have been taken
into his consideration, much less to have influenced his opinion.
Had it been otherwise, it would indeed have made his decision
so much the stronger against the amalgamation of two voyages,
on account of the unlawfulness of one of them: for on that sup
position the first of the two voyages would have been doubly
unlawful, as engaged both in carrying enemy's property, and
in carrying it from one enemy's port to another.
But this particular principle is not only of modern date, but
of very recent date indeed. Its history, like that of many other
belligerent innovations by Great Britain, is not unworthy of
attention. In December, 1798, in the case of the Frederick Molke, a
Danish vessel that had got into Havre, then deemed in a state
of blockade, and was taken on her way out, August 18th, 1798,
it was urged to be like the case of a return voyage, where the
cargo of the outward voyage had been contraband. Sir Wil
liam Scott admitted that, in the latter case, " the penalty does
not attach on the returned voyage" but denied the affinity be-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 323
tween the cases: "there is this essential difference," said he,
"that in contraband the offence is deposited with the cargo,
whilst in such a case as this, it is continued and renewed in the
subsequent conduct of the ship;"* the act of egress being, ac
cording to him, as culpable as the act of ingress.
In August, 1799, in the case of the Margaretha Magdalena ;
a vessel returning to Copenhagen from Batavia, her outward
cargo having consisted of contraband goods, was seized at St.
Helena, September, 1798. On the ground, however, that the
ship and cargo were neutral, and that the outward shipment
from Copenhagen was contingent and not absolutely for Bata
via, but sent under the management of the master to invest the
proceeds in the produce of Batavia, restitution was decreed by
Sir William Scott, notwithstanding the fact that the contraband
"articles were actuaUy sold at Batavia," with a remark only,
that there was great reason to bring this case to adjudication,
as a case very proper for enquiry. On this occasion the judge
made the following observations: "It is certainly an alarming
circumstance in this ease, that although the outward cargo ap
pears to have consisted of contraband goods, yet the principal
owner appears publicly at Copenhagen, and makes oath, "that
there were no prohibited goods on board, destined to the ports
of any party now at war." The master himself describes the
cargo that he carried out as naval stores, and in looking into
the invoice I find that they are there represented as goods to be
sold. That being so, I must hold that it was a most noxious
exportation, and an act of very hostile character, to send out
articles of this description to the enemy, in direct violation of
public treaties, and of the duty which the owners owe to their
own government. I should consider it as an act that would
affect the neutral in some degree on this returned voyage, for
although a ship on her return is not liable to confiscation for
having carried a cargo of contraband on her outward voyage,
yet it would be a little too much to say, that all impression is
done away; because if it appears that the owner had sent such
• l Rob., p. 72.

324 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
a cargo, under a certificate obtained on a false oath, that there
was no contraband on board, it could not but affect his credit
at least, and induce the court to look very scrupulously into all
the actions and representations of such a person."*
That the judge was beginning to be a little unquiet under the
rule imposed on himself, not to consider a ship on her return
voyage as liable to confiscation for having carried a cargo of
contraband on her outward voyage, is sufficiently visible. He
is found, nevertheless, still submitting to the restriction.
The case of the Immanuel succeeded November 7th, 1799. It
is the case of a Hamburg ship, taken 14th August, 1799, on a
voyage from Hamburg to St. Domingo, having in her voyage
touched at Bourdeaux, where she sold part of her cargo, and
took a quantity of other articles for St. Domingo. The ques
tion was started, whether the stores which had been discharged
at Bordeaux, though originally destined for St. Domingo, were
contraband or not. The inference of the judge was, that they
were not of a contraband nature, at least that they were left am
biguous, and without any particular means remaining of afford
ing a certainty upon the matter. "If so," said he, "it is useless
to imagine what the effect of contraband, in such circumstances,
would have been. I shall say no more, than that I incline to
think that the discharge of the goods at Bordeaux would have
extinguished their powers of infection. It would be an exten
sion of this rule of infection, not justified by any former appli
cation of it, to say, that after the contraband was actually with
drawn, a mortal taint stuck to the goods, with which it had
once travelled, and rendered them liable to confiscation, even
after the contraband itself was out of its reach." f
This was not indeed a return voyage, but one link of an out
ward voyage. The reason, however, given why contraband,
after being discharged, could not leave a confiscating taint on
the expedition, namely, because itself was out of the reach of
confiscation, is precisely common to the two cases; yet it would
seem that the judge is becoming not a little languid in main-
* 2 Rob., p. 116, 117. * 2 Rob., p. 164.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 325
taining the opinion, " that the offence of contraband is deposited
with the cargo." He now "inclines to think that such would
be the effect."
February 5, 1800, the case of the Rosalie and Betsey, was
that of a ship taken May 31, 1799, on a voyage from the Isle
of France, asserted to be to Hamburg. It was made a question
of property, turning on a question of fraud; the fraud in the re
turned voyage was held to be reinforced by the fraud in the
outward voyage; and that fraud is stated by Sir William Scott,
"as more noxious on account of the contraband nature of several
of the articles of the outward cargo."
Here contraband in an outward voyage was, in spite of the
maxim that its offence was deposited with the cargo, allowed to
have an influence on the character of the returned voyage. Still
it was but an indirect and partial influence. It was held to be
an aggravation only of the fraud, the fraud being the git of the
offence. In 1800, June 24, occurs the case of the Nancy, Knudson
master, a ship taken en a voyage to Copenhagen from Batavia,
whither she had carried contraband of war. The cargo appears
to have been condemned, on the ground of fraud in the papers
and destination, combined with the contraband quality of the
outward cargo. The complexion and weight, however, which
the last ingredient had assumed in the mind of the judge, are
seen in the following extract from the judgment pronounced by
him: "But it is said, this is a past transaction, and that in cases
of contraband, the returned voyage has not usually been deemed
connected with the outward. In European voyages of no great
extent, where the master goes out on one adventure, and re
ceives at his delivering ports, new instructions and further or
ders, in consequence of advice obtained of the state of the mar
kets, and other contingent circumstances, that rule has pre
vailed; but I do not think, in distant voyages to the East Indies,
conducted in the manner this has been, the same rule is fit to be
applied. In such a transaction, the different parts are not to
be considered as two voyages, but as one entire transaction,

326 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
formed upon one original plan, conducted by the same persons,
and under one set of instructions, ab ovo usque ad mala."* This
condemnation of the cargo was confirmed by the lords of ap
peal, and the indulgence even allowed with respect to the ship,
by the high court of admiralty, reversed by that superior tribu
nal. The existence of contraband in an outward voyage, not only
figures more considerably in this, than in any preceding case;
but the judge gets hold of a new implement of judicial warfare
on neutral commerce. In aid of presumptive fraud, of the al
leged continuity of fraud from the outward into the returned
voyage, and of the aggravation given to fraud by the ingredient
of contraband in the outward voyage; in aid of all these, the
distance of the voyage, makes for the first time, its appearance.
In the case of the Margaretha Magdelena, the voyage, like this,
was a voyage to Batavia. In the case of the Rosalie and Bet
sey, the voyage was also into the East Indian seas. In neither
of these cases, the slightest allusion is made to that criterion
of right and wrong. The discovery then may fairly be dated
with the case of the Nancy, of no older date than June, 1800.
But mark the reason, why distant voyages to the East Indies
are distinguished from European voyages of no great extent.
It is, because in the latter the master " receives at his deliver
ing ports, new instructions and further orders, in consequence
of advice obtained of the state of the markets, and other con
tingent circumstances;" whereas, in distant voyages to the East
Indies, conducted in the manner this has been, the two voyages
are to be considered as one entire transaction, formed upon one
original plan, conducted by the same persons, and under one
set of instructions.
If the reason here given for the distinction between distant
voyages and voyages of no great extent, be a good one, it is not
easy to see the reason for requiring, in addition to the distance
of the voyage to the East Indies, that it should be conducted
in the manner of this particular voyage; unless indeed it be, as
* 3 Rob., 105—6.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 327
there is too much room to remark in the decisions of the Judge,
with a view to rest every case, as much as possible, on its own
particular circumstances; and thereby avoid the judicial fetters
formed by a chain of definite precedents.
Certain it is, that if the outward and returned voyages are
to be taken as one, where the distance of them is such, that new
orders cannot be given, in consequence of new advices from the
foreign ports of delivery, as may be done in voyages of no great
extent; but that the whole business must be executed under
one original set of instructions; every voyage to the East In
dies, in whatever manner conducted, must fall within the rule
which determines the outward and returned voyage to be but
one voyage; in other words, that in that extensive branch of
neutral commerce, the outward and returned voyage, making
but one, contraband in the outward cargo, though deposited at
its place of destination, is to have the same effect on the returned
voyage, as it would have had on the outward voyage, if actually
intercepted on the outward voyage.
Nay more; the rule must be applicable to every European
voyage, of great extent; an extent so great as to require that
the sale of the outward cargo at the ports of delivery, and the
purchase of a return cargo, should be provided for, in the same
original instructions.
In no view can the rule be less applicable to distant voyages
between Europe and the West Indies, than between Europe and
the East Indies; nor more to European voyages than to Ameri
can voyages to the West Indies, where these are of so great
extent as to require that the returned voyage should be pro
vided for in the same set of instructions with the outward voy-

Whether these analogies and inferences entered into the con
templation of the Judge on this occasion, is an enquiry which
may be waived. Nor is it known to the public, whether any
intermediate steps were taken by him, or by the superior tribu
nal, between that date and the 24th June, 1803, conducting the
policy or opinion of the cabinet, towards the instructions of this
last date. These form, however, a very natural result to those

328 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
preliminary ideas, as appears by the tenor of the instructions,
which is as follows:
"In consideration of the present state of commerce, we are
pleased hereby to direct the commanders of our ships of war
and privateers, not to seize any neutral vessel which shall be
carrying on trade directly between the colonies of enemies and
the neutral country to which the vessel belongs, and laden with
the property of inhabitants of such neutral country : Provided,
that such neutral vessel shall not be supplying, nor shall have,
on the outward voyage supplied, the enemy with any articles of
contraband of war; and shall not be trading with any blockaded
port." In these instructions we find the principle formally adopted,
and the returned cargoes of West India produce actually ob
structed, on their way to the United States, by the application
of the principle, wherever the outward cargo had included con
traband. We find, of course, the West India trade so far forced
out of the channel to Europe through the United States, into
such channels to and through Great Britain, as she may chuse
to prescribe.
This being necessarily and obviously the commercial effect of
the instructions, it may fairly be supposed that it corresponds
with the intentions of a nation so clear-sighted in whatever af
fects her commerce; and, consequently, that the principle on
which this instruction is founded, was assumed as subsidiary to
the commercial policy on which was founded the main principle
under investigation.
Another observation, with respect to this instruction, forces
itself upon us. It was a heavy reproach against the instruction
of November 6th, 1793, that it was not promulged until it had
for some time been ensnaring, and laying waste, the commerce
of neutral nations with the West Indies. The instruction of
June 24, 1803, first found its way (probably by chance) to pub
lic notice in the United States, from the obscure island of Tor-
tola, in the summer of 1805. It must, then, have been in the
pockets of cruisers, ensnaring and destroying the commerce of
this country, as far as that degree of innovation could have

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 329
that effect, for a period of about two years. The reproach is
heightened, too, by the consideration that the snare, in this case,
was successful in proportion to the respect observed towards
former instructions, the faith of which was violated by the ex
post facto operation of that in question. A reparation of the
damage is the least atonement that a just and wise nation can
wish to make, for such a trespass on all the maxims of public
morality, as well as of national honor.
The second pretension subsidiary to the commercial policy of
instructions, clothed with the language of belligerent rights,
is that of subjecting to capture, colonial produce, re-exported
from a neutral country to countries to which a direct transpor
tation from the colonies by vessels of the re-exporting country,
has been disallowed by British regulations. The effect of this
pretension evidently is, to check neutral nations, particularly
the United States, in the circuitous transportation of West India
produce; and in the same proportion, to force the trade into
channels terminating in British ports. And the effect is the
more particularly in her favor, as the re-exportation of the sur
plus carried into her ports can be regulated by her own laws,
for her own interests; whilst she will not permit the laws of
other countries to regulate the re-exportation of the surplus
carried into their respective ports.
That this pretension, also, is as new as it is arbitrary, will be
best seen by a review of its rise and progress; which will at the
same time, as in the other instance, illustrate the inconstancy
and inconsistency of the maritime proceedings of Great Britain
towards other nations.
Prior to the war of 1756, no trace of any such pretension is
discovered; and it is testified by the authority of Lord Mans
field, as already seen, that a principle was, during that war,
judicially settled in opposition to it. A neutral vessel, off the
neutral island of St. Eustatius, had received on board a part of
her cargo from French boats, from a French colony. "This,"
says his lordship, "is now a settled point by the lords of appeals,
to be the same thing as if they had been landed on the Dutch

330 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
shore, and then put on board afterwards; in which case there
is no color for seizure."
Here the rule was solemnly settled by the highest admiralty
tribunal in Great Britain, that the trans-shipment, off a neutral
port, of colonial goods from an enemy's vessel, protected the
goods from capture, and that where such goods had been landed
and reladen, there was not even a color for seizure.
Notwithstanding this solemn recognition of the neutral right,
it was found, as also has been seen, that French produce ex
ported by neutrals from the neutral port of Monte Christi,
during the war of 1756, was not protected by the rule.
During the war of 1778, the whole claim of disturbing neu
tral commerce on the ground of its not being open in peace as
well as in war, having been relinquished, the question could not
occur until the war of 1793. And what is not to pass unno
ticed, the first case in which the point fell under judicial obser
vation, appears to have been that of the Immanuel in November,
1799. During the six preceding years, as may be inferred from
what then fell from the judge, no doubt had existed, that an
importation of colonial produce into a neutral country, con
verted it into the commercial stock of the country, with all the
rights, especially those of exportation, incident to the produce
or manufactures of the country itself.
It will be most satisfactory to present the opinion of Sir Wil
liam Scott on that occasion, in the words of his reporter. "It
is argued that the neutral can import the manufactures of France
to his own country, and from thence directly to the French col
ony; why not immediately from France, since the same purpose
is effected? It is answered, that it is effected in a manner more
consistent with the general rights of neutrals, and less subser
vient to the special convenience of the enemy. If a Hamburg
merchant imports the manufactures of France into his own
country (which he will rarely do if he has like manufactures of
his own, but which in all cases he has an incontrovertible right
to do) and exports them afterwards to the French colony, which
he does not in their original French character, but as goods

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 331
which, by importation had become part of the national stock of
his own neutral country, they come to that colony with all the
inconvenience of aggravated delay and expence; so if he im
ports from the colony to Hamburg, and afterwards to France,
the commodities of the colony, they come to the mother country
under a proportional disadvantage; in short, the rule presses
on the supply at both extremities, and, therefore, if any consid
erations of advantage may influence the judgment of a belliger
ent country, in the enforcement of the right, which upon princi
ple it possesses, to interfere with its enemy's colonial trade, it
is in that shape of this trade, that considerations of this nature
have their chief and most effective operation."*
Although the judge is somewhat guarded in his terms, more
consistent with the general rights, and less subservient to the
special convenience of the enemy; and somewhat vague, if not
obscure, in his reasoning; yet he admits that an importation of
goods from a belligerent country, into a neutral country, had
the effect of making them a part of the national stock of the
neutral country, equally entitled with the national stock itself,
to be exported to a belligerent country. What circumstances
would constitute an importation are not specified; nor does it
appear in what light a mere trans-shipment, at a neutral port,
would have been regarded.
The next occasion, on which the judge delivered an opinion
on this subject, occurred in a case before the court, February 5,
1800, and which came before it again on farther proof, April
29, 1800. It was the case of an American ship taken October
16, 1799, on a voyage from Marblehead to Bilboa, with a mixed
cargo of fish, sugar and cocoa. The fish, which made the prin
cipal part of the cargo, could not enter into the question. The
sugar was part of a whole cargo brought from the Havanna in
the same ship, had been warehoused from some time in June
till some time in August, during the repair of the ship, and was
then reshipped. The cocoa, small in quantity, was originally
from a Spanish settlement, and had been trans-shipped from
* 2 Rob., 169, 170.

332 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
another vessel, lying at Marblehead, after having been entered
at the custom-house. Tlie ship had been restored by the captors.
The property of the cargo was proved. The legality of the
voyage was the sole question. On this question, Sir William
Scott pronounced the following judgment:
"There remains then only the question of law, which has
been raised, whether this is not such a trade as will fall under
the principle that has been applied to the interposition of neu
trals in the colonial trade of the enemy. On which it is said
that if an American is not allowed to carry on this trade di
rectly, neither can it [he ?] be allowed to do it circuitously. An
American has undoubtedly a right to import the produce of the
Spanish colonies for his own use; and after it is imported bona
fide into his own country, he would be at liberty to carry them
on to the general commerce of Europe: Very different would
such a case be from the Dutch cases, in which there was an
original contract from the beginning, and under a special Dutch
licence to go from Holland to Surinam, and to return again to
Holland with a cargo of colonial produce. It is not my busi
ness to say what is universally the test of a bona fide importa
tion. It is argued that it would not be sufficient that the duties
should be paid, and that the cargo should be landed. If tliese
criteria are not to be resorted to, I should be at a loss to know
what should be the test; and I am strongly disposed to hold, that
it would be sufficient that the goods should be landed and the
duties paid. If it appears to have been landed and warehoused
for a considerable time, it does, I think, raise a forcible pre
sumption on that side; and it throws it on the other party to
shew how this could be merely insidious and colorable. There
is, I think, reason to believe that the sugar was a part and par
cel of a cargo said to have been brought from a Spanish colony
in this vessel; and if so, the very distribution of the remainder
is some proof that they were not brought with an intention
only of sending thei.- on. But I have besides positive proof in
the affidavit of Mr. Asa Hooper, who swears that the duties had
been paid for them. Then the only difficulty remains as to the
cocoa, and it is said by one of the witnesses, and by one only,

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 333
that it was trans-shipped from another vessel, and that it had
been brought into America only ten days before; but although
there is something of a difficulty arising on this small part of
the cargo, yet upon the whole I cannot think it weighty enough
to induce me to send the case across the Atlantic for still fur
ther proof, as to the facts of this recent importation and trans
shipment, or of its having been transferred to the present pro
prietors, or of having been exported without a previous pay
ment of import duties. If it had composed a larger part of the
cargo, I might have deemed it reasonable to have had some
what more of satisfaction on some of these points, which do not
appear with sufficient certainty to found any legal conclusion
against it. It appears by the collector's certificate that it had
been entered, and imported, and I think that these words are
sufficient to answer the fair demands of the court."
It must be confessed that we perceive, in this opinion of the
judge, somewhat of that customary forecast, which in tying a
knot to bind himself, avoids drawing it too close to be loosened
a little, if there should be occasion. It is, nevertheless, estab
lished by the precedent, that the landing of the goods and pay
ing the duties, is a sufficient test of the importation; and that
the certificate of the collector that " they have been entered and
imported, is all the evidence of the fact, that can fairly be de
manded by the court."
It might indeed have been expected that the rule stated by
Lord Mansfield to have been settled by the lords of appeals,
[which makes the trans-shipment to be equivalent to the land
ing and reshipment of goods, and this last procedure to take
away all color for seizure,] would have found its way into the
notice of the judge. That rule, however, cannot be impaired
by any thing in his decision for two reasons. One is, that the
further satisfaction, which, if the part of the cargo trans-shipped
had been more considerable, he might have deemed reasonable
on some of the questions; might refer not to the legality of the
voyage, but to the question of property; and it is certainly
agreeable to all the just rules of interpretation so to understand
it, rather than to suppose a purpose in an inferior court, to de-

334 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
cide in direct opposition to a rule settled by the superior court.
The other reason is still more conclusive; it is, that on the sup
position of such a purpose in an inferior court, it could have no
legal effect in controuling the rule settled by the superior court,
the rule by which alone the conduct of individuals could be
governed. Such has been the judicial exposition of the neutral right,
even under the British restrictions. The acknowledgment by
the cabinet itself, was officially disclosed on the following occa
sion, and to the following effect:
The cruizers of Great Britain having seized, and the vice ad
miralty courts having condemned, American vessels bound from
the United States to the Spanish West Indies, on the pretext
that their cargoes consisted of articles the growth of Spain, then
at war with Great Britain; the American Minister in London,
in March, 1801, represented to the British Government the in
iquity of the proceeding, with the indignation which it inspired:
and required that precise instructions should be dispatched to
the proper officers in the West Indies and Nova Scotia, to put
an. end to the depredations. The subject was referred to the
king's advocate general, an extract from whose report was com
municated by the British Secretary of State to the American
minister, with information that the king had ordered the doc
trine laid down in the report, to be immediately transmitted to
the several inferior judges, as the law for their future guidance
and direction.
The extract containing this doctrine shall be literally re
cited: " I have the honor to report, that the sentence of the vice ad
miralty court appears to be erroneous, and to be founded in a
misapprehension or misapplication of the principles laid down
in the decision of the court of admiralty referred to, without
attending to the limitations therein contained.
" The general principle respecting the colonial trade has in
the course of the present war been to a certain degree relaxed
in consideration of the present state of commerce. It is now
distinctly understood, and has been repeatedly so decided by

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 335
the high court of appeals, that the produce of the colonies of
the enemy may be imported by a neutral into his own country,
and may be re-exported from thence, even to the mother coun
try of such colony; and in like manner the produce and manu
factures of the mother country may, in this circuitous mode, le
gally find their way to the colonies. The direct trade, however,
between the mother country and its colonies has not, I appre
hend, been recognized as legal, either by his majesty's Govern
ment or by his tribunals.
" What is a direct trade, or what amounts to an intermediate
importation into the neutral country, may sometimes be a ques
tion of some difficulty. A general definition of either applica
ble to all cases, cannot well be laid down. The question must
depend upon the particular circumstances of each case; perhaps
the mere touching in the neutral country, to take fresh clear
ances, may fairly be considered as a fraudulent evasion, and as
in effect the direct trade; but the high court of admiralty has
expressly decided (and I see no reason to expect that the court
of appeal wiU vary the rule) that landing tlie goods and paying
the duties in the neutral country, breaks the continuity of the voy
age, and is such an importation as legalizes the trade; altho' the
goods be reshipped in the same vessel, and on account of the same
neutral proprietors, and forwarded for sale to the mother coun
try."* It is impossible to express the law meant to be here laid down
in clearer terms, so far as it determines " that landing the goods
and paying the duties " in a neutral country, legalizes the cir
cuitous trade, even between a belligerent country and its own
colonies. What inferior circumstances would have the same
effect are not specified. It is not decided without a " perhaps"
that the mere touching, &c, would be insufficient to legalize the
trade. Nor is the legality even of a direct trade between the
mother country and its colonies, denied in stronger terms than
" I apprehend it has not been recognized."
Thus stood the admiralty in Great Britain, as announced by
' See the printed correspondence.

336 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
British tribunals, and officially communicated by the British
Cabinet to the neutral world. So it had continued to stand, as
a pledge and safeguard to neutrals, conforming themselves to it,
from the dates of those authorities, the last of which is as far
back as the spring of the year 1801.
With what astonishment, then, must the neutral world now
learn, from the decision of Sir William Scott on the 23d July,
1805, that, according to the rule of law just laid down, after
much deliberation, by the lords of appeals, " the circumstances
of landing the goods or securing the duties, do not furnish com
plete evidence of the termination of the voyage;" and that with
out this complete evidence, derived from the original intention
of the importing voyage, the voyage from the neutral port will
be treated as the continuance of the voyage from the colony to
the mother country.
This political change in the judicial rules of condemnation,
admits no other satisfactory, than a commercial explanation;
for the loss of character, which it induces, is a greater sacrifice
than could be made to the cupidity of cruisers, or the value of
their prizes to the public.
The whole course, indeed, of modifications pursued by the in
structions, and by the decisions of the courts as they appear
from day to day, can leave no doubt that the primary object
with Great Britain has been to transfer to herself as large a
share as possible of the commercial advantages yielded by the
colonies of her enemies. An absolute monopoly was embar
rassed by the irresistible pretensions of neutral countries; more
especially of the United States, whose neighborhood and habits
of intercourse, together with other considerations, forbade a
perseverance in the original attempt to exclude them. They
were accordingly the first of the neutral nations towards which
a relaxation was afforded. The relaxation, after considerable
delay, was extended, by the instruction of 1798, to the neutral
nations, of Europe. That instruction was founded on a com
promise between the interest and the prudence of Great Britain.
It permitted neutral nations to trade directly with the colonies
of her enemies; without trading in colonial productions with

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. §37
one another; and permitted all of them to carry those produc
tions directly to Great Britain. This arrangement was mani
festly calculated to limit the importations of each neutral coun
try to the amount of its own consumption; and consequently to
turn the immense residue of colonial wealth, through neutral
vessels, into her own market; whence it might be dispensed,
under her own regulations, to the neutral countries of Europe
having no direct commerce with the West Indies, and even to
the belligerent nations whose commerce with their respective
colonies she has as completely destroyed, as she has their com
merce with foreign countries. The arrangement was specious,
but proved to be deceptive. It was expected that the expence
and delay of a circuitous trade through the United States would
prevent importations and re-exportations, interfering with the
projected trade directly from the West Indies to herself; and
as long as this expectation was in any degree indulged, the right
of re-exportation was admitted, though reluctantly, both by the
Government and the courts. Experience, however, finally
shewed, that the activity, the capital, and the economy employed
by the American traders, overpowered the disadvantages inci
dent to the circuit through the ports of the United States; and
secured to them the profits of supplying Europe with the co
lonial productions of her enemies. In proportion as this unfore
seen operation disclosed itself, the commercial jealousy of Great
Britain began to take alarm. Obstructions were to be thrown
in the way of importations. Re-exportations were seen with
growing discontent. The idea of continuity, by which two voy
ages were consolidated into one, came into vogue. The Vice
Admiralty courts, regardless of the superior decisions in Eng
land, would not allow that the landing of a cargo, and paying
the duties, protected it against condemnation. At length ap
peared the sentence of Sir Wm. Scott, above cited, carrying
into effect the construction of the inferior courts, as having been
deliberately sanctioned by the Lords of Appeal. The doctrine
established by that decision has been followed by other decis
ions and dicta, at first requiring the re-exportation, in another
ship, then a previous sale of the articles in the neutral market,
vol. 11. 22

338 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
then other conditions, one after another, as they were found
necessary; till it is finally understood, that no precautions what
ever are to bar the cruisers from suspecting, nor the courts from
scrutinizing, the intention of the original importer, and that the
proof of this intention not to re-export the articles, is to fall on
the claimant. To fill up the measure of judicial despotism, these
wanton innovations are now extended to vessels returning from
the belligerent mother countries, as well as to those going
thither from the United States; with the addition of demands of
proof never before heard of in prize courts, on points utterly
unknown to the law of nations.
These unexampled and vexatious proceedings manifestly have
in view the entire obstruction of colonial re-exports from the
United States; and it would be more candid in Great Britain,
if not more just, to give public notice, at once, that in all such
cases capture and condemnation would be authorized.
Her present system, as subsidiary to the extension of her
commerce, will be still further seen in her concurrent measures,
of a type not less extraordinary than that of any which have
preceded them.
According to the instructions issued within the period of the
existing war, or to the received interpretation of them, the per
mission given to neutrals by those of 1798, to carry the produce
of enemy's colonies, directly therefrom to Great Britain, has
not been continued. At first view this might appear to be in
consistent with the policy ascribed to her, in obstructing re
exportations from the United States. The act of Parliament,
of June 27, 1805, however, which has been already noticed,
changes this appearance of departure from that policy, into a
new proof, and even an extension of that policy. By the regu
lations of that act a direct trade is opened between the British
colonies in the West Indies and those of her enemies; and her
enemies themselves are invited to enter into the trade. Whilst
neutrals, therefore, are excluded from carrying colonial produce
directly from the colonies to Great Britain, the commercial
views of Great Britain are answered by the substitution of
another channel through her own colonies; with the additional

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 339
advantage of a monopoly to her own ships, in the transporta
tion from her colonies across the Atlantic; and for the sake of
this advantage, or for that of repressing the growth of neutral
rivalship, or on both these accounts, she has been willing to en
counter all the reproach of cultivating an avowed commerce
with her enemies, in the very moment of laying new restrictions
on that of neutrals with them.
Further; the act of Parliament, of June 27, 1805, providing
for a trade between Great Britain and the colonies of her ene
mies, through the medium of free ports in her own colonies, was
preceded by an act of April 10, 1805, authorizing licences to
British subjects, to import, during the war, into Great Britain,
in neutral vessels, for their own or neutral account, from the
American colonies of her enemies, most of their productions; re
quiring, at the same time, that all sugar and coffee so imported
should be re-exported; and that the value of a certain portion
of the imports from such colonies should be returned in goods
and commodities from Great Britain.
Again; in concert with the act of June 27, instructions,
founded on another act of Parliament, were issued, June 29,
1805, authorizing British subjects to export in neutral vessels
to France, Spain, and Holland, a long list of articles, including
their respective colonial productions; and to import therefrom
a long list of such articles as suited her own wants.
To complete the arrangement, in all its forms, it has been
officially announced in the American Gazettes, conformably to
a resolution of the British privy council, of August 3, 1805, that
the trade with the settlements and islands belonging to the
enemy, in America and the West Indies, is to be carried on
through the medium of the British free ports in the West Indies,
and not otherwise.
The system of Great Britain may, therefore, now be consid
ered as announced to all the world, without disguise, and by the
most solemn acts of her government. Her navy having de
stroyed the trade of her enemies, as well between the mother
countries and their colonies, as between the former and neutral
countries; and her courts, by putting an end to re-exportations

340 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
from neutral countries, reducing the importations into these, to
the mere amount of their own consumption; the immense sur
plus of productions accumulating in the American possessions of
her enemies can find no outlet but through the free ports pro
vided for it; nor any other market than the British market, and
those to which she finds it for her interest to distribute it; with
a view to which, she not only allows her enemies to trade with
her possessions, but allows her own subjects to trade with her
enemies. And thus, in defiance as well of her treason laws and
of her trade laws, as of the rights of neutrality, under the
law of nations, we find her, in the just and emphatic language
of the President, " taking to herself, by an inconsistency at which
reason revolts, a commerce with her own enemy, which she de
nies to a neutral, on the ground of its aiding that enemy in the
war."* But let us return for a moment to the series of instructions
of which an historical review has been taken; and advert to
some additional lights in which the judicial construction and
application of them present the conduct of Great Britain.
Prior to the orders of November 6, 1793, the general princi
ple forbidding to neutrals a trade opened to them during the
war, must, if it be a principle of the law of nations, as asserted
by Great Britain, have been the rule of Admiralty decisions.
Accordingly, it appears, by 4 Rob. Appendix, p. 12, that con
demnations in cases prior to that date were, in the court of Ap
peals, made to rest on that principle.
The orders of November 6, 1793, designated for the opera
tion of the principle, the trade with the colonies of the enemy;
as well the trade to, as the trade from, them.
The orders of January, 1794, expressly revoking the orders
of November, 1793, designated for capture, the trade only from
the West India Islands of the enemy, and bound directly to
Europe, only.
The orders of January, 1798, revoking expressly the orders
of January, 1794, designated for capture the trade from the
* President's message, December 3, 1805.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 341
islands or settlements of the enemies, bound directly to any
port in Europe; excepting what might be bound to British
ports, or to the ports of the country to which the neutral vessels
should belong.
Without entering into a variety of minute questions growing
out of the varied and very inaccurate expressions in which the
orders are penned, several of very great importance occur, in
expounding and applying the rules laid down.
The first question is, whether the first order of 1793, which
made no express reference to the general principle, and which
was limited to the colonial branch of the enemy's trade, was to
be understood as merely a specification of certain cases to which
the general principle was applicable, leaving the general prin
ciple in force as to all unspecified cases; or whether this specifi
cation of certain cases was to be understood as implying a legal
ization of cases unspecified.
The question arises, also, under the successive orders, each
of them revoking the orders immediately preceding, whether it
was to be understood, that the specification of certain cases did,
or did not, legalize the cases omitted in the same order, but
specified in the orders preceding.
The more obvious construction of the original order, even,
seems to be, rather that it was meant to define the only cases
to which the general belligerent claim was to be applied, than
that it was meant merely to notify the claim in those particular
cases; a claim not more requiring notification in those cases,
than in the cases not notified.
With respect to the orders of posterior dates, the fair con
struction implies, that the belligerent claim was narrowed, first,
by all the difference between the orders of 1793 and those of
1794; and finally, by all the difference between the orders of
1794, and those of 1798.
Taking the whole together under these constructions, the ap
plication of the general principle of capture was restricted by
these orders to the trade of neutrals from the colonies of ene
mies, directly to ports, other than their own respective ports

342 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
and the British ports, and consequently there remained exempt
from capture:
1st. The coasting trade, and every branch of trade not colo
nial. 2d. The trade from any neutral country, to belligerent colo
nies. 3d. The trade by neutrals from any belligerent country to
its own colonies, and to the colonies of another belligerent
country. 4th. The trade between belligerent colonies, whether belong
ing to the same or to different belligerent countries.
Applying this rule of implication to the two orders only of
1794 and 1798; and admitting those of 1793 not to have super
seded by implication, the claims to capture in cases not therein
specified, there will be no other exception to the relations or
exemptions just enumerated in favor of neutral commerce, but
the coasting trade, and other trades not colonial, to which
Great Britain has applied, or may choose to apply, the general
principle. In general the high court of admiralty seems, by applying the
assumed principle to the coasting trade, to have pursued that
construction of the original order of 1793, which left the gen
eral principle in force as to cases not specified in it; and to have
considered the relaxations in the succeeding orders of 1794 and
1798, as referring solely to the colonial trade.
There appears, however, at no time to have been any clear
and fixed opinion in the court, with respect to the illegality and
penal consequences of the coasting trade.
Few cases are reported, perhaps few have occurred, of discus
sions relative to this branch of trade. In 1 Rob., p. 104, the
subject is incidentally brought into view, in a case where a
French vessel had been purchased. The doctrine held by the
judge is expressed as follows: "We certainly do allow it, [the
" purchase,] but only to persons conducting themselves in a fair
" neutral manner, &c; besides, this vessel appears to have been
" engaged in the coasting trade of France. The court has

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 343
" never gone so far as to say, that pursuing one voyage of that
" kind would be sufficient to fix a hostile character: but in my
" opinion, a habit of such trading would. Such a voyage how-
" ever must raise a strong degree of suspicion against a neutral
" claim; and the plunging at once into a trade so highly dan-
" gerous, creates a presumption that there is an enemy proprie-
" tor lurking behind the cover of a neutral name." Here, not
the coasting trade itself, but the presumption of enemy's prop
erty found in it, is made the ground of animadversion.
In the case of the Speculation, the same idea presents itself.*
The Emanuelt was itself the case of a coasting trade. In
this case the judge descanted with great energy and rigor, on
the manifest illegality of the coasting trade. " Can there be
" described," says he, " a more effective accommodation that
" can be given to an enemy during war than to undertake it
" for him during his own inability ? " He did not however
proceed further than to refuse freight on the principle settled
by ancient judgments, that "neutrals are not permitted to trade
on freight." He particularly refers to the case of the Mercurius,
[Lords, March 7, 1795,] in which freight was refused. Why
were not the ships confiscated in these cases? that being laid
down in other cases as included in the penalty for illegal voy
ages, and actually applied ultimately to cases of a trade between
a colony and the mother country, to which the coasting trade
is strictly analogous; both being trades from one port to an
other port of the same nation. It is not even to be inferred
from the authorities here cited, that a coasting trade, in the pro
duce of the country, if carried not on freight, but as property
belonging to the neutral owner of the ship, is subject to any
penalty. This indulgence to the coasting, and rigor towards
the colonial trade, is it to be explained by the fertility of the
one, and the little value of the other, as a source of captures
and commercial profit, or in what other way?
With respect to the orders of '94 and '98, and the colonial
trade, it appears to have been in general understood, that they
* 2 Rob., p. 244. t 1 R°t>-» 249.

344 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
were to be construed as successively enlarging the trade of neu
trals with the colonies of enemies, in the manner and to the ex
tent above explained.
The dilemma was indeed unavoidable; either the orders were
to be considered as relaxations, (and if relaxations at all, in
that extent,) or as leaving the general principle in force in cases
not specified in the orders, and therefore as no relaxations at
all. This latter decision would have given a character of mock
ery to the profession and parade of making, in their orders, so
many sacrifices of belligei 'mt rights to a spirit of moderation
and amity towards neutrals. The former side of the dilemma,
therefore, was necessarily taken. The orders, those of '94 and
'98 at least, were relaxations.
As relaxations however in the extent required by an obvious
and consistent interpretation, the door, opened to neutral com
merce with the belligerent colonies, was found to be wider than
was compatible either with the interests of British commerce,
the avidity of British cruizers, or the probable intentions of the
British government.
What was to be the remedy? The first tried was that of
shutting the door gradually, by the dint of constructions, as
may be seen by tracing the colonial cases adjudged by Sir Wil
liam Scott, and reported by Robinson, and the decisions of the
Lords of Appeals referred to by the reporter.
The task was assuredly not a little difficult, of which there is
the strongest demonstration in the crooked and contradictory
reasonings and decrees, into which it forced the very eminent
talents of the judge who presides in the high court of admir
alty. In addition to the evidence already presented, take the fol
lowing comparison between his rule of construction in the case
of the Providentia ,* and the rule of construction in the case of
the Immanuel. t
In the former case, August 16, 1799, he observes, " the first
* 2 Rob., p. 126. f 2 Rob., p. 159.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 345
" instructions were to bring in all ships which had been trading
" with any colony of the enemy: but this country afterwards re-
" ceded from these directions; and the second orders were to
" bring in all ships laden with produce of the West India
" islands coming directly from the ports of the said islands to
" any port in Europe. I cannot but consider this as an aban-
" donment of the former law, [instruction,] and I cannot but
" think that a cruiser taking this instruction, in conjunction with
" those given before must have inferred that it was no longer
" the intention of government to bring in, and much less to con-
" fiscate," [was there room for this distinction?] "cargoes of
" West India produce, unless coming to some port in Europe:
" this was followed by instructions now in force, which direct
" the bringing in of all vessels laden with the produce of the
" French and Spanish settlements, coming/row the ports of such
" settlements to any port of Europe, other than the ports of that
" country to which the vessel belongs. It is certainly not laid
" down in the negative that they shall not bring in such vessels
" as are coming from such settlements to their own ports; but
" looking at the former instruction, I think it was a strong ad-
" monition to cruisers not to bring in such ships, and I believe
" it has been generally so understood and acted upon by them;
" and in this court cargoes brought from Surinam to ports in
" Europe to which the vessels belonged, have been uniformly
" restored on proof of the neutrality of the property."
The reasoning here is plain and just. The first instructions
designated for capture the colonial trade, without distinguish
ing between Europe and America: the second designated the
trade to Europe only: therefore, by fair inference, the trade to
America was exempted from capture.
Again, the second orders designated for capture the trade to
Europe: the third orders designated the trade to ports of Eu
rope not being of Great Britain or of the country owning tlie
vessel: therefore by fair inference the trade to Great Britain
and to countries owning the vessels, was exempted from cap
ture. In the Immanuel, November 7, 1799, the case was that of a

346 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
neutral ship taken on a voyage last from France to a French
colony. According to the reasoning of Sir William Scott, just
quoted, the inevitable inference ought to have been that the
voyage was legal.
The first instructions designated for capture the trade to and
from the colonies. Both the second and third designated for
capture the trade only from the colonies; therefore, according
to that reasoning, the trade to the colonies was exempted from
capture. Hear nevertheless the reasoning employed by the judge him
self in this case.
After combating the neutral right to trade with the colonies
of an enemy, by arguments applicable, in principle, as well to a
trade between neutral ports and the colonies, as to a trade be
tween the mother country and its colonies; he proceeds to state,
in answer to all pleas for a neutral trade from the mother coun
try to its colonies, " that the true rule to this court is the text
" of the instructions; what is not found therein permitted, is
" understood to be prohibited, upon this plain principle, that
" the colony trade is generally prohibited, and that whatever
" is not specially relaxed, continues in a state of interdiction."
Now as what is not permitted, not specially relaxed, is by the
instruction to continue prohibited, the question to be decided
is, what it is that is permitted, or specially relaxed by the in
structions. Is it what is positively and expressly permitted or
relaxed? Then there is no permission or relaxation at all; for
every thing positive and express in the instruction is for the
capture, not for the permission or relaxation. Is it to be a per
mission or relaxation implied and inferred from a positive and
specified prohibition in one order, and an omission of that or
of a part of that prohibition, in a succeeding order ? Then the
neutral trade from a belligerent country to its colonies, which
was prohibited in the order of 1793, and omitted in the orders
of 1794 and 1798, was as much permitted, as specially relaxed,
as the trade from a neutral country to the colonies of an enemy,
is permitted or relaxed by the omission in the orders of 1794
and '98, to prohibit the trade to the colonies, which as well as

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 347
the trade from the colonies, was positively and specially pro
hibited by the previous order of 1793; or to recur to the rea
soning of Sir William Scott, in the former case of the Provi-
dentia, as much permitted or relaxed as the trade from the
colonies going not to Europe, was inferred to be so from the
order of 1794, taken in conjunction with the order of 1793; the
order of '93 having prohibited the trade from the colonies gen
erally, and the order of '94 having omitted to prohibit more of
the trade from the colonies than what was bound to some port
in Europe.
The judge concludes with declaring, " I see no favorable dis
tinction between an outward and return voyage. I consider
the intent of the instruction to apply equally to both communi
cations, though the return voyage is the only one specially men
tioned." What favorable distinction, then, could the judge see between
the outward and the return voyage, in a trade between a neu
tral country, and the colonies of an enemy, more than between
the two voyages to Spain, a mother country, and the colonies?
Is not the return voyage the only one specially mentioned,
whether the instruction be applied to the former trade or to the
latter trade ? This is self evident. Either then he must admit
the distinction in both, and say that the return voyage only
being specially mentioned, the outward voyage is in both trades
permitted; or he must reject the distinction in both, and say,
that the outward voyage, tho' the return voyage only be speci
ally mentioned, is prohibited in both. A different course how
ever was pursued. The instruction was applied to the outward
voyage in the neutral trade from the mother country to the
colony, without being considered as applicable to the outward
voyage in the trade from the neutral country to a colony; which
last has not as yet been subjected to condemnation. Whether
that is to be its future destiny, as has happened to some other
branches of commerce, where it was equally precluded by legal
decisions and even official assurances, is among the arcana of the
admiralty cabinet of Great Britain.
The judgment in this case, it is to be observed, did not go

348 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
beyond the condemnation of the goods. The vessel was restored,
but with a forfeiture of freight and expences.
By degrees, however, with the aid of alleged fraud, of false
destination, and of contraband in the outward voyages, the ship
as well as the cargo were brought within the rules of condem
nation in the high court of admiralty. The decision of the lords
of appeal has finally established, in the case of a voyage from a
Spanish colony to a neutral, but forbidden port in Europe, that
any illegal trade of neutrals with the colonies of an enemy for
feits both ship and cargo.*
Other examples might be drawn from the proceedings in the
British courts of admiralty, to illustrate the constructive return
towards the general principle which had been mitigated by suc
cessive instructions, and the anomalous and entangled decisions,
which have been employed for the purpose. These illustrations
cannot be here pursued, without too great an addition to the
prolixity which has already been incurred. It will only there
fore be remarked generally; first, that the course of proceed
ings, as they relate to the coasting, and different branches of
the colonial trade; to the grounds on which these have been in
terdicted to neutrals; and to the penalties attached to breaches
of the interdictions, compose a labyrinth for which no concate
nation of principles, no thread of reasoning whatever, affords a
clue: secondly, that constructive decisions, as appears in the last
volume of Robinson's reports, have not only restored, in a great
measure, the operation of the general principle; but have intro
duced collateral principles, greatly extending the mischiefs of
its operation.
Whilst all the considerations therefore which originally led
to the examination of this principle, are acquiring additional
force, it is fortunate that so irresistible a testimony against its
legitimacy, should have been furnished by the conduct of Great
Britain herself. * 4 Rob. Appen., p. 11.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC.

349

Review of the reasons urged in defence of tlie British principle.
Although some of the reasons by which this belligerent claim
of Great Britain is defended, have incidentally fallen under con
sideration in the course which the subject has taken, yet a more
particular notice of those most relied on, may be necessary to
complete the present examination.
The principal champions for the claim, are the judge of the
high court of admiralty himself, Sir William Scott; Mr. Ward,
now under Secretary of State in Great Britain, who is suffi
ciently known by his treatises on the law of nations, one of
which embraces this precise subject; and Mr. Browne, a profes
sor of civil law in the University of Dublin, and author of a
work on civil and admiralty law.
Sir William Scott has, in every view, the first title to be
heard. In the judgment delivered by him in the case of the Immanuel,
his eloquence has painted the belligerent claim in very glowing
colours. The passage shall be given in his own words:
"It is an indubitable right of the belligerent to possess him
self of such places, as of any other possession of his enemy.
This is his common right, but he has the certain means of car
rying such a right into effect, if he has a decided superiority at
sea: such colonies are dependent for their existence, as colonies,
on foreign supplies; if they cannot be supplied and defended
they must fall to the belligerent of course — and if the belliger
ent chooses to apply his means to such an object, what right has
a third party, perfectly neutral, to step in and prevent the ex
ecution? No existing interest of his is affected by it; he can
have no right to apply to his own use the beneficial consequences
of the mere act of the belligerent, and to say, ' True it is, you
have, by force of arms, forced such places out of the exclusive
possession of the enemy, but I will share the benefit of the con
quest, and by sharing its benefits prevent its progress. You
have in effect, and by lawful means, turned the enemy out of
the possession which he had exclusively maintained against the

350 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
whole world, and with whom we had never presumed to inter
fere, but we will interpose to prevent his absolute surrender, by
the means of that very opening, which the prevalence of your
arms alone has affected; supplies shall be sent and their pro
ducts shall be exported; you have lawfully destroyed his mo
nopoly, but you shall not be permitted to possess it yourself; we
insist to share the fruits of your victories, and your blood and
treasure have been expended, not for your own interests, but
for the common benefit of others.' Upon these grounds it can
not be contended to be a right of neutrals, to intrude into a
commerce which had been uniformly shut against them, and
which is now forced open merely by the pressure of war; for
when the enemy, under an entire inability to supply his colonies
and to export their products, affects to open them to neutrals, it
is not his will but his necessity that changes his system; that
change is the direct and unavoidable consequence of the com
pulsion of war, it is a measure not of French councils, but of
British force."
The first remark to be made is, that were the intrinsic rea
sonableness of the claim admitted, it would not follow that the
claim is justified by the law of nations as actually established.
Reason is indeed the main source from which the law of nations
is deduced; and in questions of a doubtful nature, is the only
rule by which the decision ought to be made. But the law of
nations, as an established code, as an actual rule of conduct
among nations, includes, as already explained, a variety of
nsages and regulations, founded in consent, either tacit or ex
press, and superadding to the precepts of reason, rules of con
duct of a kind altogether positive and mutable. If reason and
conveniency alone, without regard to usage and authority, were
to decide all questions of public law, not a few of the received
doctrines would at once be superseded; and among the first,
some to which Great Britain is most pertinaciously attached.
What would become of her favorite claim, to seize and condemn
all enemy's property, laden in neutral vessels, if the claim were
brought to the simple test of reason? a claim which gives so
much more vexation to the nations at peace, than it contributes

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 351
to any just advantage of those at war. On this question, it is
well known, that the appeal has been constantly made by Great
Britain from the reasoning of her adversaries, to the authority
of celebrated jurists, and other testimonies of tho established
rules and practice of nations. She must not expect to vary her
test of right, according to her individual interest: to appeal to
authority when reason is against her, and to reason, when au
thority is against her.
In testing the British claim, then, by the law of nations, re
currence must be had to other sources than the abstract dictates
of reason; to those very sources from which it has been shewn
that her claim is an unauthorized innovation on the law of na
tions. But let us examine this appeal of the eloquent Judge to the
reasonableness of his cause, and see what is gained by it.
" It is an indubitable right of the belligerent to possess him
self of such places, viz: colonies, [but the argument extends to
all places shut against neutral commerce in time of peace,] as
of any other possession of his enemy." Without question he
has the right to possess himself of any place belonging to his
enemy. "But he has the certain means of carrying such a right into
effect if he has a decided superiority at sea." This is not so
universally true as is assumed. A land force will be also neces
sary; unless both the superiority at sea and the situation of the
colony be such as to admit a complete interruption of supplies;
and then, a blockade must be the only legitimate expedient.
"Such colonies are dependent for their existence as colonies,
on foreign supplies: if they cannot be supplied and defended
they must fall to the belligerent of course." It is certainly true
that they must fall, if they can be neither fed nor defended.
But it is not so true that colonies, as such, are dependent on
foreign supplies. Some insular colonies are so dependent; others
are not. Few, if any, of the continental colonies or settlements
are dependent on foreign supplies.
" And if the" belligerent chooses to apply his means to such
an object, what right has a third party perfectly neutral to step

352 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
in, and prevent the execution?" No right at all to step in;
provided the belligerent does, in fact, apply his means to that
object, and, in the mode, conformable to the law of nations; that
is, by intercepting contraband of war, and availing himself of
his decided superiority at sea, to blockade the places, which if
deprived of foreign supplies, must fall into his hands of course.
Take the argument under another aspect. Colonies must
fall without foreign supplies; therefore, it is said, a belligerent,
without invading or investing them, may prevent neutrals from
supplying them.
The argument has one tendency which ought not to have es
caped the penetration of its author. If the dependence of a
place for its existence and defence on foreign supplies, be the
ground of the belligerent right to intercept all neutral trade
whatever with it, it will not be very easy to find a reasonable
ground for the belligerent right to obstruct neutral supplies to
a place blockaded, where the place, as frequently occurs, does
not depend on foreign supplies for its existence and defence.
Or the argument may take another turn, which ought not to
escape the attention of neutrals. If the applicability, without
an actual application of the means, to the legitimate object of
possessing himself of the colonies of enemies, can justify the
capture of neutral trade with such places, the mere existence of
a force applicable to the purpose of a blockade any where, will,
without an actual blockade, equally authorize the capture of a
neutral trade with ports susceptible of blockade; and thus the
neutral trade becomes interdicted with every part of the domin
ions of her enemy; on the same principle as interdicts it with
the colonial part of their dominions; a blockade being as legit
imate an object of war as conquest; and a decided superiority
at sea being at least as applicable to the former, as to the latter
object. But an essential vice of the argument lies in the fallacy of the
inference. It no more follows from the dependence of colonies
on foreign supplies, that neutrals have no right to trade with
them, with the exceptions of contraband and of blockaded ports,
than it follows from the dependence of other countries or parts

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 353
of countries on foreign supplies, that neutrals have no such right.
Is not Holland, is not Portugal, is not even Spain, at all times,
dependent on foreign supplies for their subsistence; not less per
haps than some of the insular colonies in the West, and much
more than some in the East Indies? Yet since the usurped
power of obstructing aU neutral trade with an enemy was aban
doned by belligerent nations, has it ever been pretended that
that dependence gave a right to the enemies of those countries,
to prevent neutral supplies to them?
The argument fails when brought to another test. If the de
pendence on foreign necessaries constitutes the belligerent claim
against the neutral trade to colonies, the principle of the claim
limits it to such colonies as labour under this dependence. The
continental colonies or settlements, which have within them
selves resources, necessary for their existence, and which there
fore no decided superiority at sea can reduce ,into the possession
of a belligerent, are clearly not within the utmost range of the
principle. Yet no distinction is made in the application of it,
either in argument or practice, between the most sterile and
indefensible island, and the vast and fertile provinces on the
continent of South America.
Thus far, then, the judge has found no foothold for the bel
ligerent pretension which he endeavors to support.
But he must be heard further: "No existing interest of his
[the neutral] is affected by it," [an exclusion, &c]
The interest of neutrals may be materially affected by the loss
of the customary supplies from belligerent colonies, as must
happen, if they can neither trade directly with the colonies, nor
receive supplies from them thro' the mother country. This is
the consideration expressly assigned, in the appendix to 4 Rob.,
for the orders of 1798: "Neutral vessels were by this relaxation
allowed to carry on a direct commerce between the colony of
an enemy and their own country; a concession rendered more
reasonable by the events of war, which by annihilating the trade
of France, Spain, and Holland, had entirely deprived the States
of Europe, of the opportunity of supplying themselves with the
vol. ii. 23

354 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806
articles of colonial produce, in those markets." This is a view
of the subject very different from that given by Sir William
Scott here, and in another paragraph; where he represents
" Guadaloupe and Jamaica, as no more to Germany, than if they
were settlements in the mountains of the moon, to commercial
purposes, as not in the same planet."
The judge proceeds, "He [the neutral] can have no right to
apply to his own use, the beneficial consequences of the mere
act of the belligerent."
Why not? In many respects, as will hereafter be seen, the
neutral suffers by war; is it unreasonable that in some respects,
he should profit by its effects ?
Waiving this consideration, it does not follow that one bel
ligerent has a right to deprive a neutral of a colonial market
opened to him under the pressure of war, by another belliger
ent, any more than of any new market or new channel of trade,
in relation to the mother country, opened under a like pressure.
As yet, however, the latter pretension has not appeared.* It is
even disavowed in a succeeding passage of this very judgment.
Is it not the pressure of war, which at this time, obliges the
enemies of Great Britain, to abandon in great measure, to neu
tral vessels, the trade between themselves and other countries?
Is it not the pressure of war, during which more food is consumed,
with fewer hands to raise it, that often compels nations at war,
to open their ports to the supplies and ships of neutrals, con
trary to their ordinary regulations in time of peace? In a word,
the whole commercial policy of belligerent towards neutral na
tions, undergoes changes, which the latter is in the constant
practice of "applying to their own use." And it is manifest that
Great Britain is as ready, as any of her enemies, to lay open
her navigation and her colonial markets, though so rigorously
* The pretension has not appeared in the courts in England. But in a late case
in the vice admiralty court at Halifax, it appears that the judge was disposed to
consider the introduction of certain regulations at Bourdeaux, favorable to neu
tral commerce, as forming an unusual trade, and, in that view, as a legal ground
of capture.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 355
shut in time of peace, whenever the pressure of war, makes it
her interest, that neutrals should apply the benefit of these
changes to their own use.
It is perfectly clear, then, that the mere circumstance of an
increase of profit to neutrals, from a participation in branches
of trade opened under the pressure of war, does not render that
participation unlawful.
The sequel of the argument assumes a very singular shape.
The neutral has no right to say to the belligerent, — " True it is
you have by force of arms forced such places out of the exclu
sive possession of the enemy, but I will share the benefit of the
conquest; and by sharing its benefits, prevent its progress. You
have, in effect, and by lawful means, turned the enemy out of
the possession which he had exclusively maintained against the
whole world, and with whom we had never presumed to inter
fere; but we will interpose to prevent his absolute surrender,
by the means of that very opening which the prevalence of your
arms alone has effected."
Here let it be observed, the case first stated is, that the place
has been forced by one belligerent out of the possession of an
other belligerent, and that the neutral is undertaking to share
the benefit of the conquest. Were that the real intention, as it
is the inevitable import of the statement, there could be no ad
vocate for a neutral pretension to interfere. But with an in
accuracy (a harder term will not be applied) little to have been
- looked for where it is found, this conquest, this turning of the
enemy out of exclusive possession, does not in the least mean,
as is quickly disclosed, a transfer of the place or colony to a
new sovereign. The colony remains precisely as it did; not
even attacked or threatened by a military operation. The con
quest really meant turns out to be nothing more than the cre
ation of a certain degree of difficulty and danger in the trade
between the colony and the mother country. With this change
in the statement of the fact, the inference with respect to the
intrusion of a neutral commerce must, unfortunately for the
argument, undergo a correspondent change. As the conquest
of the colony would have justified the conqueror stepping into

356 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
the exclusive possession, out of which his arms had forced his
enemy, in prohibiting a neutral interference with its trade, it is
equally certain, that he is not justified in any such prohibition
by the mere obstruction thrown in the way of the ordinary co
lonial trade; any more than he would be justified by obstruc
tions thrown equally in the way of other branches of his enemy's
trade, in prohibiting the entrance of neutrals into them.
That the meaning of the judge is shifted from an expulsion
of the enemy from his colony, to an obstruction of his trade
with his colony, is put beyond all question by the conclusion of
this hypothetical address of the neutral to the belligerent, —
"Supplies shall be sent, and their products shall be exported;
you have lawfully destroyed his monopoly, but you shall not be
permitted to possess it yourself."
Thus the right of a belligerent to possess himself of the col
onies of his enemies depending on foreign supplies, which, in
the beginning of the argument, was the ground of the unlawful
ness of such neutral supplies, as might prevent the colonies from
falling into the hands of the belligerent, undergoes a complete
transformation in its progress, and ends in a right of the bel
ligerent to supply the colonies himself, in exclusion of neutrals.
The neutral is interdicted from sending supplies to an enemy's
colony, and exporting its produce; not because it would inter
fere with the reduction of an enemy's possession; but because it
would interfere with a commercial monopoly. This at least
would be a new principle in the law of nations.
But it is worth while to enquire how the right of a belliger
ent to subdue the colonies of his enemy, and for that purpose to
obstruct neutral supplies to them, can be reconciled with the
actual regulations of the British Government on this subject.
Whilst this claim is exercised, in general, so much to the dis
advantage and dissatisfaction of neutrals, it is relaxed in some
respects which are fatal to the very purpose of the belligerent
to subdue the colonies of his enemy; which purpose alone could
give a colour to any such obstruction of neutral commerce. The
orders both of 1794 and of 1798 limit their restrictions on neu
trals to the trade from colonies; leaving by implication, unre-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 357
stricted, the trade to the colonies; or they manifest, at least,
under every construction, a solicitude rather against the trade
from, than against the trade to the colonies. Now if the object
and the pretext, in controuling the trade with the colonies, be
the conquest of the colonies, is it not extraordinary that whilst
checks are opposed to the exports, which can, at the most, have
but a remote influence in preserving them from the necessity of
surrender, the channel should be left open for the importation
of those foreign supplies, for the want of which, they might fall
to the belligerent of course? How is this to be explained? Not,
certainly, by a belligerent policy, which is completely defeated
by the relaxation. There is but one explanation that is satis
factory, and it must not be deemed uncandid to resort to it. As
the orders have endeavored to give to the trade from the colo
nies such a course as was most favorable to imports into Great
Britain, the course allowed to the conveyance of supplies to the
colonies is equally favorable to the export of manufactures from
Great Britain. British manufactures, it must have been sup
posed, could find their way to hostile colonies, through no chan
nel so conveniently and certainly, as through that of neutrals
which conveys the means of subsistence. Whilst the regulation,
therefore, defeats the measure of conquest, it extends the market
for' manufactures. Every fold of this belligerent claim wraps
up some commercial project.
In prosecuting his argument, the judge occupies another
ground for this belligerent pretension: "Different degrees of
relaxation," he observes, " have been expressed in different in
structions issued at various times during the war. It is admit
ted that no such relaxation has gone the length of authorizing
a direct commerce of neutrals, between the mother country and
its colonies;' because such a commerce could not be admitted
without a total surrender of the principle: for allow such a
commerce to neutrals, and the mother country of the enemy re
covers, with some increase of expence, the direct market of the
colonies, and the direct influx of their productions; it enjoys as
before, the duties of import and export, the same facilities of

358 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
sale and supply, and the mass of public inconvenience is very
slightly diminished."
It was lately the object of dispossessing the enemy of his col
onies altogether, that authorized the obstruction of neutral sup
plies. It was next the object of securing to the belligerent him
self, the monopoly of the commerce with those colonies, that
gave him such an authority. Now the authority is derived from
the policy of withholding from the mother country of the colony,
the public conveniencies arising from the revenue and from the
commercial profits supplied by her direct intercourse with her
colonies. It cannot be necessary to dwell on the hollowness of this
foundation, for the claim to make war on the participation of
neutrals in a colonial trade. It will be merely observed, or
rather repeated, that if neutrals have no right to •trade with an
enemy, where the enemy in consequence of the pressure of the
war, would otherwise lose the revenues and other public ad
vantages flowing from the trade, the inference fairly is, that
Great Britain, by driving the ships of her enemies, as she does
at this moment, altogether from the sea, may renew with effect
the old and exploded tyranny of interdicting all neutral com
merce whatever with her enemies.
This last argument only against the neutral trade to colonies,
was applicable to the coasting trade. There, neither conquest,
nor the substitution of the belligerent's own commerce, could
be the object. It will accordingly be seen in the case of the
Immanuel* that the belligerent claim is founded, as it is here,
on its general effect in cramping the revenues of the enemy, and
in inflicting a pressure which may compel a due sense and ob
servance of justice.
It only remains to advert to a reply, from the judge to the
counsel at the bar, with which he closes the argumentative part
of his judgment.
The inconsistency of Great Britain, in making, in time of
* 2 Rob., p. 249.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 359
war, the same relaxations in her navigation and colonial mo
nopolies, which she denies the right of her enemies to make, is
so obvious that it could not possibly escape the notice of the
counsel for neutral claimants. The more striking the incon
sistency, however, the greater the delicacy which was to be ob
served in pressing it on the court. It appears accordingly to
have been brought into view, in one instance only, in Robin
son's Admiralty Reports, which was in this case of the Immanuel ;
and here it is managed with much tenderness, and seasoned,
finally, with some material concessions to the known, opinions
of the Bench and the government. In order to do justice to
Mr. Arnold and Mr. Sewell, charged on that occasion with the
defence of the neutral claimants, and for the sake of some very
judicious reflections of a more general nature, with which they
introduce their particular argument, no abridgment will be made
of the following passage:
" It is true that the general colonial law of Europe has cre-
" ated a monopoly, from which other countries are generally
" precluded; at the same time laws respecting colonies, and
" laws respecting trade in general, have always undergone some
" change and relaxation after the breaking out of hostilities; it
" is necessary that it should be so, with regard to the rights of
" neutral nations; because as war cannot be carried on between
" the principal powers of Europe, in such a manner as to con-
" fine the effects of it to themselves alone, it follows that there
" must be some changes and variation in the trade of Europe,
" and it cannot be said that neutrals may not take the benefit
" of any advantages that may offer from these changes — because
" if so, it would lead to a total destruction of neutral trade; if
" they were to suffer the obstructions in their old trade, which
" war always brings with it, and were not permitted to engage
" in new channels, it would amount to a total extinction of neu-
" tral commerce: such a position, therefore, cannot be maintain-
" ed, that they may not avail themselves of what is beneficial in
" these changes, in lieu of what they must necessarily suffer, in
" other parts of their trade, in time of war. It is not meant
" that they should be entirely set at liberty from all the restric-

360 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" tions of peace — that would be going too far. But that, as
" there has been a regular course of relaxations, as well in our
" navigation laws, as in the colonial trade, in admitting impor-
" tations and exportations not allowed in time of peace; it
" seems not to be too much to say, that if they have been regu-
" larly relaxed in former wars, neutral merchants may think
" themselves at liberty to engage in it, in any ensuing war, with
" impunity ; and it does justify a presumption, that as a belliger-
" ent country allows a change in its own system as necessary, and
" invites neutrals to trade in its colonies under relaxations, so it
" would allow them to trade in tlie same manner, with the colo-
" nies of tlie enemy."
In reply: —
"It is an argument," says the judge, "rather of a more legal
nature than any derived from those general topics of commer
cial policy, that variations are made in the commercial systems
of every country in wars and on account of wars, by means of
which neutrals are admitted and invited into different kinds of
trade, from which they stand usually excluded; and if so, no
one belligerent country has a right to interfere with neutrals
for acting under variations of a like kind made for similar rea
sons in the commercial policy of its enemy. And certainly if
this proposition could be maintained without any limitation,
that wherever any variation whatever is made during a war,
and on account of the state of war, the party who makes it, binds
himself in all the variations to which the necessities of the ene
my can compel him, the whole colony trade of the enemy is le
galized; and the instructions which are directed against any
part are equally unjust and impertinent; for it is not denied
that some such variations may be found in the commercial policy
of this country itself; although some that have been cited are
not exactly of that nature. The opening of free ports is not
necessarily a measure arising from the demands of war; it is fre
quently a peace measure in the colonial system of every country:
there are others, which more directly arise out of the necessities
of war; — the admission of foreigners into the merchant service
as well as into the military service of this country; — the permis-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 3gi
sion given to vessel, to import commodities not the growth, pro
duce, and manufacture of the country to which they belong, and
other relaxations of the act of navigation, and other regulations
founded thereon: these, it is true, take place in war, and arise out
of a state of war; but then they do not arise out of the pre
dominance of the enemies force, or out of any necessity result
ing therefrom; and this I take to be the true foundation of the
principle. It is not every convenience, or even every necessity
arising out of a state of war; but that necessity which arises
out of the impossibility of otherwise providing against the ur
gency of distress inflicted by the hand of a superior enemy, that
can be admitted to produce such an effect. Thus, in time of
war, every country admits foreigners into its general service —
every country obtains, by the means of neutral vessels, those
products of the enemy's country which it cannot possibly receive,
either by means of his navigation or its own. These are ordi
nary measures, to wliich every country has resort in every war,
whether prosperous or adverse: they arise, it is true, out of a
state of war, but are totally independent of its events, and have
therefore no common origin with those compelled relaxations
of the colonial monopoly; these are acts of distress, signals of
defeat and depression; they are no better than partial surren
ders to the force of the enemy, for the mere purpose of prevent
ing a total dispossession. I omit other observations which have
been urged and have their force: it is sufficient that the varia
tions alluded to stand upon grounds of a most distinguishable
nature." On comparing the argument of the counsel with the discourse
of the judge, there is but too much room to remark, that there
are in the former a coolness and clearness not unworthy of the
Bench; and in the latter a florid and fervid stile, which might
have been less unsuitable to the zeal of the bar. But it is more
important to examine and weigh the effect which their respect
ive reasonings, so far as those of the judge can be extricated
from the general and somewhat obscure expressions employed
by him, ought to have on the point in question.
The reasoning at the bar is simply this — that as Great Brit

362 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
ain is herself in the practice of opening to neutrals, in time of
war, channels of navigation and colonial markets, which she
shuts to them in time of peace; she ought to allow, or might
reasonably be presumed to allow, as equally lawful in time of
war, a like relaxation of the colonial system of her enemies.
The judge does not deny the fact that Great Britain is in
the practice of relaxing in time of war her system of colonial
trade. He does not deny the inference that a like relaxation
would be equally lawful on the part of her enemies. It might
have been expected, therefore, that in his reply he would have
allowed to the enemies of Great Britain the same right to cap
ture neutrals trading with her colonies, as is exercised by Great
Britain against neutrals trading with the colonies of her ene
mies; and have contented himself with the advantage enjoyed by
Great Britain in her superior means of intercepting the neutral
trade with her enemies, and of preventing her enemies from in
tercepting the neutral trade with herself. This, it would seem,
was a more consistent, and also a more politic ground to have
taken. The judge was of a different opinion. Unwilling to
make even that degree of concession, he attempts to retain the
privilege claimed by Great Britain, and at the same time with
hold it from her enemies; by certain distinctions between the
two cases. With what success the distinctions are made, is
now to be seen.
One of the distinctions is between a colonial trade which is
frequently opened in peace, as in the case of free ports, and a
colonial trade opened in war only.
The example oi free ports was not very happily chosen; for it
has been seen that the trade from such ports in the French West
Indies to the United States, was not excepted in the British
orders on the subject of neutral trade with the colonies of
France; nor is it known that any such exception has been made
in the British courts of admiralty.
The distinction, however, fails in its essential point. It is
not an uncommon thing for relaxations to take place in time of
peace as well as in time of war, in the colonial monopolies of
all the European nations. The Spaniards, the French, and the

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 353
Dutch* never fail to open their colonies to foreign supplies,
whenever a scarcity, or other cause, renders it inconvenient to
supply them from European sources. Even on this ground then,
as admitted by the judge himself, a neutral trade- with enemy's
colonies would be lawful in time of war.
Another distinction is intimated between the ordinary meas
ures of relaxation, to which every country has resort in every
war, whether prosperous or adverse, and unusual measures of
relaxation produced by a peculiar state of the war.
Here again the distinction directly militates against the ob
ject for which it is made, it being well known to be an ordinary
measure, with the enemies of Great Britain, in all modern wars
at least, to open their colonial ports to neutral supplies. Prior
to the American revolution, Great Britain had, in these States,
resources which rendered it unnecessary for her colonies to in
vite supplies, if indeed they could have been obtained, from any
foreign sources. In her wars since that event, she has followed
the example of her enemies in relaxing her colonial system, as
far as was necessary to obtain supplies, from the sources and
through the channels which furnish her enemies. At this mo
ment, her islands are as open as the colonies of her enemies to
the supplies and the vessels of the United States, with this dif
ference, indeed, that her ports are opened by regulations more
temporizing and more special, than those of some, if not all, of
her enemies; and therefore with pretensions to legality, accord
ing to her own standard, inferior to those of her enemies.
The remaining distinction is the sole fortress on which the
defence of the principle maintained by the judge, must depend.
This distinction is so novel, and in its appearance so refined,
that in explaining it some difficulty was naturally felt, in the
selection of apposite expressions. A critic, tinctured with want
of candor, might be tempted to exclaim, that a distinction be
tween a necessity arising out of a state of war, and a necessity
* It is well known that the Dutch island of Curacao as well as that of St. Eus
tatius, has been constantly open in time of peace, to the trade of foreigners. The
orders, however, of Great Britain, extend equally to those islands, with the other
colonial possessions of her enemies.

364 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
arising out of an impossibility, which impossibility arises out of
a state of war, was a subject less proper for discussion, than for
a less serious treatment.
The judge, however, cannot be justly charged with a want of
meaning, whatever may have been his difficulty or his caution
in expressing it. It may be collected, with sufficient certainty,
that he meant to establish the right of Britain, and the want of
right in her enemies to interrupt neutral commerce, on the pre
dominance of force, on the decided superiority at sea, which she
enjoys, and on the inferiority of force, under which her enemies
labour. When she opens her colonial ports to neutrals, although
it arises out of a state of war, it does not arise, like theirs, out
of the predominance of the enemy's force. This predominance
he frankly declares to be the true foundation of the principle.
And thus we are arrived at the true foundation of the princi
ple which has so often varied its attitudes of defence, and when
driven from one stand, has been so ready to occupy another.
Finding no asylum elsewhere, it at length boldly asserts, as its
true foundation, a mere superiority of force. It is right in Great
Britain to capture and condemn a neutral trade with her ene
mies, disallowed by her enemies in time of peace, for the sole
reason that her force is predominant at sea. And it is wrong
in her enemies to capture and condemn a neutral trade with
British colonies, because their maritime force is inferior to hers.
The question no longer is, whether the trade be right or wrong
in itself, but on which side the superiority of force lies? The
law of nations, the rights of neutrals, the freedom of the seas,
the commerce of the world, are to depend, not on any fixt prin
ciple of justice, but on the comparative state of naval arma
ments, which itself may change at every moment, may depend
on the event of a battle, on the skill of an admiral, on the tack
of the wind; on one of those thousand casualties which verify
the admonition, that the battle is not always given to the strong,
any more than the race to the swift.
A government, which avows such a principle of conduct
among nations, must feel great confidence in the permanence, as
well as the predominance of its own power.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 365
It would nevertheless not be unwise in any nation, to reflect
on the vicissitudes of human affairs, and to ask herself the hon
est question, how she would relish the application of the princi
ple, if in the course of events, a maritime superiority should
happen to change sides? Should Great Britain ever find the
state of things thus reversed, she might wish, in vain perhaps,
to let her claim pass silently into abeyance, as she alleges was
done in the war of 1778.
Nor would it be less unworthy of her wisdom to reflect, that
if a predominance of force on one element confers right, a simi
lar right must result from a predominance of force on another
element. The supposition may be made to press more immediately on
her reflections. Great Britain as a maritime power is as de
pendent on external commerce, as the insular dominions of her
enemies are, as colonies, dependent on external supplies. In
this general view, the principle which she employs against the
colonies of her enemies, may be turned by her enemies against
herself. But a more particular view demands her attention.
She has already beheld her principal enemy on a coast little
distant from her own, by a decided preponderance of force on
land, and a threatened co-operation of naval armaments, giving
to the war an unexampled pressure on her faculties and re
sources. The wheel of fortune may reproduce the crisis. Her
seamen may be taken from her merchant ships, to man her fleets.
Her fleets may be called home from the protection of commerce,
to the defence of the State. In this posture of things, her har
vest may fail, her existence may depend on foreign food; its im
portation on neutral commerce; and the successful use of this
resource, on the right of neutral ships to a navigation not open
to them in times of peace. With such monitory possibilities in
view, ought an enlightened nation by her own example, and her
own language, to authorize her enemies to say to her friends —
you have no right to step into a trade with our enemy, from
which his monopoly of the navigation excluded you in times of
peace; you have no right to import for him supplies which are

366 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
absolutely necessary for his support, and which the distress I
am inflicting, renders it impossible for him otherwise to obtain.
Neither have you any right by a trade, also forbidden in time of
peace, to furnish to his colonies the supplies which his command
of the sea no longer ensures to them, and without which they
must fall of course into our possession.
What reply could be made to such an expostulation, by a
neutral, who had not refused to recognize a like claim on the
part of Great Britain; and, by the refusal, consulted better the
interest of Great Britain, than she had consulted it herself in
advancing the claim?
Taking leave of the very distinguished judge, with these
observations, some notice is next due to Mr. Ward and Mr.
Browne. A remark that soon occurs on opening the volumes of these
writers is, that both of them confound the principle here in
question, with the question whether free ships make free goods;
and under this confusion, bring the former within the arguments
and authorities belonging to the latter only. The confusion
results not only from the more general expressions in which
they describe the controversy between neutral and belligerent
nations, on the subject of commerce; but is promoted by their
frequent use of the terms "carrying trade," without distinguish
ing between the carriage of enemies property in neutral vessels,
and the neutral carriage of neutral property in channels navi
gated in time of peace by domestic carriers only. These ques
tions are evidently and essentially distinct; and the distinction
answers, of itself, much of the reasoning employed by those
writers; and most, of the authorities cited by them.
With respect to the consolato del mare, so much appealed to
by Mr. Ward, it has been already observed that however direct
its authority may be against the principle that enemy's prop
erty in neutral vessels is subject to confiscation, there is not a
sentence in that compilation which directly or indirectly recog
nizes or favors a belligerent claim, to confiscate neutral prop
erty, on the principle that it is found in channels of trade not

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 35*7
open at all or to other than subjects or citizens of the belliger
ent, in" time of peace. The negative testimony of the consolato,
therefore, is completely in favor of the contrary principle.
In recurring to Grotius, Mr. Ward, is led, by his own com
ment on the passage which describes the rights of belligerents
against the trade of neutrals, to conclude that the real question
before Grotius, was that which Grotius said had been so much
and so sharply agitated, namely, whether a belligerent had a
right to interdict all neutral commerce with his antagonist; and
Mr. Ward accordingly takes the defensive ground of maintain
ing that the neutral "claim to a carrying trade had never en
tered the mind of Grotius."
If by the "carrying trade" Mr. Ward means the carriage of
enemy's property, it must have been within the view of Grotius;
because he has furnished Mr. Ward himself with an authority
against the lawfulness of such a trade. If by the " carrying
trade" he meant a trade carried on in war, where it was not
allowed in peace, it is strictly true, that it appears never to
have entered the mind of Grotius. It did not enter his mind,
because no such particular claim had ever been asserted or ex
ercised against neutrals. The general claim to intercept all
neutral commerce with an enemy, did enter into his mind and
into his discussion, as well as the other particular claims of bel
ligerents in the case of contraband and of blockades; because
as well that general claim, as those particular claims, had, at
different periods, been asserted and exercised against neutrals.
To suppose that the carrying trade could be unnoticed by Gro
tius, for any other reason than that no belligerent right to inter
cept that particular branch of trade, had been asserted, would
be the more preposterous, for the reason suggested by Mr.
Ward, " that Grotius lived in a time when his countrymen were
raising to its height the source of their commerce, by rendering
their State the emporium of trade, and becoming the carriers
of tlie rest of the world;" carriers as well of their own property
as of the property of others, and in every channel which might
be opened to them with profit to the carriers.
Notwithstanding this relinquishment of the authority of Gro-

368 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
tius, in relation to the carrying trade, Mr. Ward has shewn a
strong inclination to extract from certain terms employed by
Grotius, on the subject before him, some general countenance to
the British principle. •
Grotius, it must be admitted, is less definite in explaining
himself in this particular instance, than he is in others; and
much less so, than other jurists who have succeeded him. It is
impossible at the same time to put on his words, any construc
tion that will avail Mr. Ward.
Although the passage has been heretofore analyzed, it will
not be improper to re-examine it with a particular reference to
the argument of this writer.
Grotius having made his distribution of the articles of neu
tral commerce into three classes — 1st, of such as are wholly of
pacific use — 2d, such as are wholly military, and 3d, such as
are, usus ancipitis — of a doubtful or double use, enlarges on this
3d class in the words following — "In tertio iUo genere, usus
ancipitis, distinguendus erit belli status. Nam si tueri me non
possum nisi quas mittuntur intercipiam, necessitas ut alibi ex-
posuimus jus dabit sub onere restitutionis, nisi causa alia acce-
dat. Quod si juris mei executionem rerum subvectio impedierit,
id que sciri potuerit qui advexit, ut si oppidum obsessum tene-
bam, si portus clausos, et jam deditio aut pax expectabatur,
tenebitur ille mihi de damno culpa dato, ut qui debitorem carceri
eximit,"* &c, &c. He proceeds next to graduate the injuries
done to the belligerent and the penalties due to the neutral,
according to certain distinctions since exploded, particularly
the distinction between a just and unjust war, on which he
* This passage stands as follows in the English translation: "As to the third
sort of things that are useful at all times, we must distinguish the present state
of the war. For if I cannot defend myself without intercepting those things that
are sent to my enemy, necessity (as I said before) will give me a good right to
them, but upon condition of restitution, unless I have just cause to the contrary.
But if the supply sent hinder the execution of my design, and the sender might
have known as much; as if I have besieged a town or blocked up a port, and
thereupon I quickly expect a surrender or a peace, that sender is obliged to
make me satisfaction for the damage that I suffer upon his account as much as
he that shall take a prisoner out of my custody."

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 359
founds a rule; "Quod si prasteria evidentissima sit hostis mei in
me injustitia, et ille eum in beUo iniquissimo confirmet, jam non
tautum civiliter tenebitur de damno sed et criminaliter, &c."
From this text, Mr. Ward makes the following deduction:
"The tenor of these words 'status belli' which is a general de-
" scrip tion; of 'juris executione ' which is the very right to take
" arms; of 'pax expectabatur' which is a final termination Of
" hostilities, not surrender of the besieged place; and lastly of
" 'beUo confirmet' which is demonstrably applicable to the
" whole field of war: these (he says) prove him to be occupied
" with the general plan of operations, and the general exigen-
" cies of a state of hostility."
The great importance attached to this passage in Grotius,
and the extensive consequences drawn from it by this learned
champion of the British principle, will be apologies for a more
critical attention to the passage, than it could be thought, of
itself, to require.
Whether Grotius did or did not limit his meaning to the
nature of contraband articles, and the case of blockades; it is
demonstrable that his words are inapplicable to the distinction
between a trade permitted, and a trade not permitted in peace.
1. According to Grotius, the articles in question are of the
third class only, the class of a doubtful or double use: the prin
ciple of Great Britain makes no such distinction. Articles of
every class and kind found in the new channel of trade, are ren
dered unlawful by the channel itself, however inapplicable they
may be to the uses of war.
2. According to Grotius, it is one state of war compared to
another state of war, that is to be distinguished — "distinquen-
dus erit beUi status:" According to Great Britain, the essence
of the distinction is, between the state of war, and the state of
peace; or rather between the state of the municipal laws of
commerce in time of war, and the state of those laws in time of
peace. 3. According to Grotius, the right to intercept the neutral
commerce accrues from its particular necessity, as a measure of
defence: according to Great Britain, the necessity is not the
vol. 11. 24

370 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
criterion. If there be no such necessity, the trade is condemned,
in case the channel were unlawful before the war. Be the ne
cessity what it may, the trade is free, if the channel was lawful
before the war.
4. According to Grotius it must be such a necessity as he
had elsewhere pointed out — "ut alibi exposuimus." The British
advocates have not undertaken to shew any other passage of
Grotius, giving the explanation which their principle requires.
No such passage exists.
5. According to Grotius, the articles intercepted, if no other
cause prevent, are to be restored. According to the British
decisions, no such restitution is due. Both vessel and cargo are
confiscated. 6. Finally — The war to which Grotius refers, when he uses
the expression "bello confirmet" is a war of the most evident
injustice — " evidentissima injustitia; bello iniquissimo confir
met," not beUo confirmet, as cited by Mr. Ward. The distinc
tion between just and unjust wars, does not enter into the prin
ciple, on which Great Britain founds her belligerent claim. It
is, in fact, disclaimed by Bynkershoeck* who succeeded Grotius;
and tho' countenanced by Vattel, is generally understood to
be excluded from questions affecting belligerent and neutral
rights. Whether the text of Grotius, therefore, is to be understood
as confined, or not confined to the case of contraband and block
ade, it cannot possibly be applied to the case of a trade asserted
to be unlawful in war, merely as being a trade not permitted in
peace. It may be observed nevertheless, in justice to Grotius, that
his meaning, ought in fairness, not to be extended beyond the
cases of contraband and blockades: First, because it is the only
construction that can satisfy one part of the text; whilst the
terms used in the other part, are by no means, inconsistent with
that construction. The expression least apposite to the case
* The whole passage is criticized, and, in several particulars, censured, by
Bynkershoeck: whose comment, at the same time, shews that he understood Gro
tius, not in the sense of Mr. Ward, but in that here assumed.— Lib. 1, C. 11.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC.. ETC. 371
of a blockade, is that of "pax expectabatur," or '' the expecta
tion of peace," as an event which might be frustrated by the
neutral commerce. But there may certainly be wars, where
peace itself might depend on a blockade. It is obvious that a
blockade of particular ports, such as that of Amsterdam, the
chief emporium of the country of Grotius, might influence the
question of peace, as well as the question of capitulation. Or
to state a case still more decisive: a state at war, may consist
of little more than the place actually blockaded. Venice and
Genoa, formerly, Hamburgh at present, are examples. A close
and continued blockade of such places as these, would neces
sarily involve a question of peace, with that of a surrender.
Again; the meaning of Grotius ought not to be extended, as
Mr. Ward extends it, beyond those two cases of contraband
and blockade "to the general plan of operations, and the gen
eral exigencies of a state of hostility;" because this construc
tion is directly at variance with the principles heretofore cited
from Grotius; particularly in the note where he condemns the
practice of England and Holland, in their general prohibition
of neutral trade with their enemy.
But the construction attempted by Mr. Ward not only puts
Grotius at variance with himself; it puts Mr. Ward at variance
with himself also; as well as with the limits affixed to the prin
ciple by his own government. For if the belligerent right laid
down in the passage of Grotius be not restricted to contraband
and blockades, and cannot be applied to the British distinction
between a trade in war and a trade in peace; but extends to
the general exigency of hostilities; it is impossible to deny to
belligerents a right to intercept aU neutral trade with their
enemy, whenever the state of the war, the accomplishment of
justice, or the expectation of peace, prescribe it; or whenever a
neutral trade may be calculated to confirm an enemy in the war.
This consequence is inevitable. Yet Mr. Ward, expressly,* in
another place, disclaims any such a latitude in the rights of war,
with an exultation that his country had once, and once only,
* See Ward's Treatise, &c, p. 3.

372 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
attempted it; and, on seeing its injustice, candidly renounced
the attempt.
The observations which have been already made on Pufen
dorf, and on his letter to Groningius, cited by Barbeyrac, afford
a conclusive reply to the use which Mr. Ward faintly endeavors
to make of that authority, on the point here in question. He
seems, indeed, in general, rather to combat it as an authority
claimed by an opponent, than to claim it as of much weight in
his own scale.
Bynkershoeck and Heineccius, though jointly cited as explicit
authority for the principle that free ships do not make free
goods, are neither of them appealed to by Mr. Ward as sup
porting the principle that a trade not allowed in peace was un
lawful in war. This silence of Mr. Ward, considering his spirit
of research, and his zeal for this latter principle, may reason
ably be ascribed to his discovery that he could gain nothing by
bringing it to the test of those authorities.
The same inference may be drawn from his silence with re
spect to the authority of Vattel, as to a trade of that descrip
tion. In Hubner, whose authority it is a great object with Mr.
Ward to discredit, he finds a half concession, to which he does
not fail to summon a marked attention. Hubner, it seems, re
ferring* to the case of a neutral trade with an enemy's colonies,
opened on account of the war, admits that it is subject to some
uncertainty, "quelque incertitude." He immediately subjoins,
however, " that he does not see why neutral sovereigns should
" refuse themselves so considerable a benefit when it offers; pro-
" vided they abstain from supplying those colonies with any
" merchandize which is prohibited in war. It is true," he adds,
" if, besides that, they are careful not to carry provisions thither,
" by which I mean, articles of the first and second necessity,
" which, in time of war, are fully and more than equivalent to
" contraband of war properly so called; then it is evident that
" neutral nations may lawfully carry on that commerce, because
* Saisie, b. 1, c. 4, sec. 6.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 373
" the principal cause of its being opened to them during the
" war, will not have had the effect intended to be produced; by
" means of which that commerce will no longer have any thing
" that may directly influence the war, and which consequently
" may be an object of the right which belligerent nations have
" of opposing every thing which tends to the immediate assist-
" ance of their enemies." In this ramble of Hubner, from the
plain path in which he commenced his answer to the uncertainty
suggested by himself, he bewilders both himself and his subject,
and lays a foundation for real uncertainties, in his attempt to
remove an imaginary one. How could distinctions be main
tained, in practice, between provisions of the first and those of
the second necessity, and between both and all other provisions?
What is meant by the right which belligerent nations have of
opposing every thing, which tends to the immediate assistance
of their enemies?
But were the concession free from these incumbrances, it
could not avail the advocates for the British doctrine: First, be
cause the concession is limited to the colonial trade,- not extend
ing even to the coasting trade: Secondly, because it is limited
to the case of those necessary supplies to the colonies, which
were the object in opening the trade to neutrals; whereas the
British doctrine extends to all trade to and from the colonies.
If any thing further be requisite to invalidate this fugitive
concession, or rather hesitation of Hubner, it is amply furnished
by Hubner himself, in sec. 5, of the same chap, and book, in
which he systematically establishes principles, by which the
rights of neutral commerce are to be determined.
"But let us suppose," says he, "that the commerce of a neu-
" tral nation with one of the belligerent parties, however inno-
" cent it may be, should indirectly strengthen the latter, does
" it follow, that his adversary has a right to hinder it, to the
" detriment of the neutral nation? who, in carrying it on, neither
" had nor could have that particular object in view; which
" merely exercises her industry as in time of peace; and which,
" besides, will be very glad to trade with that same adversary,
" upon the like terms, as far as his commercial laws will per-

374 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
' mit, and the nature and interest of its own commerce may re-
' quire. " To attempt to render a neutral State responsible for the in-
' crease of the strength of an enemy, because that increase
' arises from the commerce which that State carries on with
' him, is to impute to one, a thing which he has caused by mere
' accident." Again — "Neutral nations by trading with those who are at
1 war, merely avail themselves of their incontestible right.
' Now whoever makes use of his right, and merely does so,
' never can do an injury to another, which he can have a right
' to complain of. The possible consequences of just, innocent,
' and lawful acts, never can hinder us from doing them, at least
' there is no one who has a right to prohibit us, &c."
With such principles in his mind, it is not wonderful, that if
Hubner was startled, as Mr. Ward expresses it, by the terms
of his own premises, he should be more startled at his own con
cession; and that finding himself at a loss to explain the ground
on which such a claim as that of Great Britain could in any
degree be reconciled with the rights of neutral commerce, he
should be in a hurry to resume his principle, " that there is no
reason why sovereign States who are neuter, should refuse the
advantage presenting itself, provided they abstain from supply
ing colonies with contraband."
Hubner wrote in the war of 1756. Another Danish writer,
Hennings, published a treatise on "neutrality," in the interval
between the war of 1778 and the war of 1793. His authority
is precise and peremptory against Mr. Ward.
After the capture of Grenada, and the Grenadines by the
French, in the war of 1778, an act was passed by the British
parliament* "to protect goods or merchandize of the growth,
produce, or manufacture of those islands, on board neutral ves
sels bound to neutral ports during the present hostilities," with
provisoes, that the protection should not extend to cargoes from
* This act being temporary, is not found in D. Pickering's statutes at large—
but is inserted at full length in Hennings' collection of State papers during the
war of 1778— vol. 2, p. 114.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 375
any other island, nor affect any sentence of any vice admiralty
court, which prior to a given day should have condemned pro
ductions of the said islands.
There is some obscurity in the object and the text of this act.
To make it consistent, however, with itself, as well as with the
acknowledgment on all hands, that a neutral trade in neutral
property was free, during that period, with French colonies, it
must be understood, as intended either to exempt the trade of
those islands, which had become French, from the operation of
British laws, and to put them on the same footing with other
French islands; or to exempt from capture the property of the
inhabitants of the islands, become French property and French
subjects; an indulgence* that might be thought due to those
who had but just ceased to be British subjects, and who might
be restored to that character by a peace. t
Hennings, however, conceiving the act to have been intended
to legalize a neutral trade with French colonies, which other
wise might be subjected by the British courts to condemnation,
is led to the following assertion of the law of nations in oppo
sition to such a principle:
"An important subject which ought to be here noticed, is the
" trade with the colonies in America. Is there any principle
" on which the sugar islands in the West Indies ought to be
" considered as blockaded? And if there is no such principle,
" why is the permission of Great Britain required for neutral
" ships to take sugars from the islands of Grenada and the Gren-
" adines, since those islands have fallen into the hands of the
* So great was the disposition to assuage the misfortunes of these islands, and
perhaps to expiate the omission to defend them, that tho Dutch, their enemies,
were permitted by an additional instruction to trade with them, as also with St.
Vincent and Dominica, freely as neutrals, for four months. — 2 Hen., p. 105.
f D: the act is to be construed as a proof that the parliament did not think the
general trade of neutrals with enemy colonies justified by the law of nations, and
therefore, as requiring a special legalization by this act, it strengthens the proof
that the courts thought otherwise; since they continued to release neutrals taken
in the general trade with enemy colonies, in spite of the constructive denial of
its legality by this act of parliament.

376 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" French, and the French had opened a free trade to Martinico,
" and to their other islands, &c? "
" This law is evidently contrary to the rights of neutral
" powers, and they might refuse to acknowledge its obligation,
" as France alone has a right to permit or prohibit trading with
" her colonies, and as long as she permits it, no neutral ought
" to be molested therein."
Hubner and Hennings appear to be the only writers who have
taken notice of the principle in question. The former having
written at a period when the principle was in operation, was
doubtless influenced by that consideration. The attention of
the latter seems to have been drawn to the subject by the act
of parliament concerning Grenada and the Grenadines, which
he was inserting in his collection of State papers, and by the
construction which he gave to the purport of that act.
The other numerous writers of most modern date, though
generally strenuous advocates for the neutral rights of com
merce, make no allusion to the British principle: For it would
be absurd to regard in the light of an allusion to, and conse
quently a recognition of this particular principle, the language
they happen to use in stating the general principle, that when
war arises between some nations, the nations at peace with all,
are to proceed in their trade with all, on the same footing in
time of war as they did before the war broke out. The obvious
meaning of these phrases is, that with the particular exceptions
of contraband and blockades made by all of them, the neutral
right to trade with a nation at war remains the same as if that
nation was at peace; and consequently the right to trade to what
ever places, in whatever articles, and in whatever vessels, their
regulations might mutually permit. That such must have been
the intention of such writers as Galiani, Azuni, and even Lam-
predi, as well as of Schlegel and the German writers, cannot
be questioned, without setting up a forced construction of a par
ticular phrase, in opposition to the whole tenor of their publi
cations; without supposing that whilst they contend for the gen
eral system of the armed neutrality, of which this is an essen-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 377
tial principle, and have for their main object the enlargement
of neutral rights, they could, by a loose stroke of the pen sacri
fice a neutral right, far more important than those which they
took up their pens to maintain. Such suppositions cannot for
a moment be entertained. Nor indeed have any of the partizans
of Great Britain undertaken to advance them.
With respect to the opinion of these very late writers, in
deed, it is impossible to doubt that their sentiments are in op
position to the belligerent principle of Great Britain. If they
have not been more expressly so, their silence is readily ex
plained by the period when they wrote, that is, after the aban
donment of the principle during the war of 1778, and before
their attention could be called to the subject by the occurrences
of the war of 1793. As late even as the year 1799, it was af
firmed at the bar of the high court of admiralty, that "in the
late practice of this court, during this war, there have been a
variety of cases from the French and Dutch colonies, in which
the court has either ordered further proof, or restored in the
first instance."* And in a prior case, in the same year, Sir
William Scott in reply to an argument at the bar, that the ille
gality of a trade between the mother countries and their West
Indies had been in a good measure abandoned in the decisions
of the lords of appeal, does not pretend that any contrary de
cisions had taken place. He says only — "I am not acquainted
with any decision to that effect; and I doubt very much whether
any decision yet made has given even an indirect countenance
to this supposed dereliction of a principle rational in itself, and
conformable to all general reasoning on the subject, "t Even
the orders of council, commencing in January, 1793, could not
have been known to these writers; and if they had, were so
loosely expressed, so frequently changed, and had their effects
at so great a distance from European jurists, that the innova
tion could not be expected to become an immediate subject of
their attention and discussion.
To the incidental hesitation of Hubner, then, opposed by his
* 2 Rob., 122. f 1 Rob., 250.

378 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
own deliberate explanation of his principles, are to be opposed
the direct authority of one of his countrymen, and the unani
mous authority of a host of modern writers, all of a date later
than Hubner, and many of them more distinguished for their
talents and their erudition on subjects of public law.
It will be found that Mr. Ward is not more successful in his
definitions and reasonings on this subject, than in his appeal to
the authority of Jurists.
That the obscurity and uncongruity into which this heresy in
public law betrays the votaries who engage in its defence, may
be the better seen, Mr. Ward shall be exhibited in his own
words: "Let it be remembered, therefore, that the question on the
" part of the belligerent is not, as has been grossly supposed,
" whether he has a right to interfere with the neutral; but
" merely whether he cannot prevent the neutral from interfering
" with him? In other words, whether, when the former extends
" the bounds of his trade not with but for a belligerent; not
" only purchases what he wants for his own consumption, or
" sells his usual peace supply of articles; but sells to him arti-
" cles which may be easily converted into the means of annoy-
" ance; or even turns carrier for his oppressed friend who uses
" the surplus strength which is thus afforded him against his
" opponent; whether in such case the other belligerent has no
" reason to be offended, and to reclaim those rights which the
" pretended neutral is disposed to deny him? This is in fact
" the true state of the question."*
" In granting, therefore, the fair and reasonable enjoyment
" of their privileges to neutral nations, there must always be
" added the fair and reasonable caution that they use them so
" as not to hurt the belligerent; and that I may not seem to en-
" trench myself in generals ' ubi scepe versatur error' I would
" add that they have certainly no right to use them in any one,
" the smallest degree more than they did in times of peace, nor
" even in so great a degree, if such augmented, or the ordinary
*P. 4.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 379
" use of them, bears immediate mischief to either belligerent.
" For example, they may increase their purchases to any amount
" in the belligerent countries, provided their own consump-
" tion required it, and provided they remain domiciled in
" their own country. But if they persist in carrying, much
" more, if they extend their faculty of carrying for the belliger-
" ent, where the latter was in the habit of carrying before; and
" if, in consequence, he is enabled to come to the battle, and to
" stand the shock of war, with augmented strength, which he
" never would nor could have possessed without it, I see little
" or no difference between this and an actual loan of military
" assistance. All the distinction is, that he substitutes his own
" people in the place of taking foreigners, for every man which
" the neutral lends to his trade enables him to furnish a man to
" his own hostile fleets. In other words, it enables him to meet
" his enemy with undiminished forces, and yet preserve entire
" his sources of revenue; when, if it was not for this conduct of
" the neutral, either the forces or the revenue of the belligerent
" must be diminished.*
" According to our principles, the same reason which applies
" to contraband, applies to all nocent cases whatsoever."
A complaint in general terms that a power, which had hith
erto stood by, should step in and do that for the belligerent
which he was no longer able to do himself, introduces the fol
lowing passage: " to come a little more into the detail and ap-
" plication of this argument, let us suppose, as was the case with
" France, a heavy duty on foreign freight had formed an almost
" fundamental law of her own commercial code; which in times
" of peace, was a kind of navigation act amounting to an inter-
" diction of foreign interference; and that of a sudden, while
" engaged in war, wanting her sailors, perhaps her merchant
"ships, for hostile expeditions, at the same time wanting the
" pecuniary and other sources of her trade, which would thus
" be extinguished, she applied to nations calling themselves neu-
" tral, by taking off this duty, or even by bounties, to carry on
* P. 8, 9.

380 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
" this trade. Here is a proof how necessary this trade is to her
" exigencies, and how impossible it is to preserve it, consistently
" with her warfare. But where is the man of plain understand-
" ing, and uninterested in the question, who would not determ-
" ine, that if the neutral accepted the offer, that instant he in-
" terfered in the war, &c.?"*
" These observations apply very generally to all the carrying"
" trade, but they more particularly apply to that specific claim
" in the first article of the armed neutrality of 1780, to navigate
" freely on the coasts, and from port to port of nations at war.
" In so far as the coasting trade of a nation is more valuable
" and more necessary to its existence than its foreign commerce;
" in just so far is the interposition of neutrals more powerful in
" its favor."t
These extracts cannot be charged with perverting or muti
lating the argumentative part of Mr. Ward's vindication of the
belligerent claim in question.
The views of this claim, which Mr. Ward here gives, are, it
must be confessed, so vague and so confused that it is difficult
to fix on the real meaning of the writer. As far as it can be
reduced to any thing like precision, he appears to be at vari
ance with himself; and what is perhaps, not less extraordinary,
at variance with Sir William Scott; sometimes going beyond
the belligerent claims of the judge, and sometimes relinquish
ing a part of them.
Thus, on comparing him with himself, he first allows neutrals
to increase their purchases to any amount; provided their own
consumption require it. He next states, that the neutral priv
ilege is not only not to be used in the smallest degree^more than
in peace, but not in the ordinary degree, if it bears immediate
mischief to either belligerent. Finally, he maintains, that the
same reason which applies to contraband, applies to aU nocent
cases whatsoever.
On comparing him with Sir William Scott, Mr. Ward admits
that neutrals have a right to trade, so far as to purchase and
* P. n. t P- 12.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 381
increase their purchases, to the amount of their own consump
tion. It has been sufficiently seen that Sir William Scott, and
indeed his superiors both in the admiralty and executive de
partments, consider the trade of neutrals, beyond the permission
to trade in peace, as merely a relaxation of the rights of war.
Here then he stops short of Sir William Scott.
If we are not to consider that, as his real meaning, but pass
on to his next position, which denies to neutrals a trade, even
in the ordinary degree, if it bears immediate mischief to a bel
ligerent (by which the context will not permit us to understand
any possible allusion to contraband) he here expressly contra
dicts Sir William Scott, who lays it down with emphasis, "that
the general rule is, that the neutral has a right to carry on in
time of war, his accustomed trade, to the utmost extent of which
that accustomed trade is capable."
If we recur to his last and most rigorous position, that all
nocent cases whatever are within the reason applicable to con
traband; he must be still more extensively at variance with Sir
William Scott.
In support of the claim, whatever be the extent in which he
means to give it, Mr. Ward urges the unlawfulness of a neutral
trade, which " is not with, but for an enemy." This has been a
very favorite phrase with the patrons of the British claim. It
probably was first used in expressing the fiction by which neu
tral ships, licensed to trade with the French colouies, were con
verted into French ships. In its application to the subsequent
pretext, which determines the channel of trade itself to be unlaw
ful, it is not easy to find any distinct signification: If by trading
for an enemy be meant, carrying in neutral vessels enemy's
property, the phrase has no connection with the present ques
tion; which is not, whether enemy's property in a neutral ship
be liable to capture, but whether neutral property in a neutral
ship, in a particular channel, be a lawful trade: If by trading
for an enemy be meant, carrying to or from his ports, neutral
property, where he used to carry it himself; then it cannot be
any thing more than trading with, not for him, during the war;
as he traded with, not for the neutral nation, before the war;

382 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
and the case is nothing more than a relaxation of a navigation
act: If by trading with an enemy be meant, carrying neutral
articles of trade, which he would neither carry himself nor per
mit to be carried by neutrals before the war, but the carriage
of which he permits both to neutrals and to himself during the
war; this can no more be trading for, not with him, than it
was trading for, not with each other, for either to carry to the
other during war or peace, articles at one time prohibited, and
then permitted by the other; and the case is nothing more than
a relaxation with respect to the articles of commerce; as the
former was a relaxation with respect to the vessels transport
ing the articles. The same distinctions and inferences are gen
erally applicable where particular ports shut, at one time, come
to be opened, at another.
The essence of the argument supposed to be compressed into
this equivocal phrase, thus, evaporates altogether in the analy
sis. It either means nothing that is true, or nothing that is to
the purpose.
But the real hinge on which the reasoning of Mr. Ward turns,
is, the injury resulting to one belligerent, from the advantage
given to another, by a neutral whose ships and mariners carry
on a trade previously carried on by the belligerent himself, and
which, consequently, enables the belligerent to employ his own
ships and mariners in the operations of war; without even re
linquishing the revenue which has its sources in commerce. Be
tween this and an actual loan of military assistance by the neu
tral, Mr. Ward can see no difference; and this is the most plaus
ible consideration perhaps which could be urged in the cause
which he defends.
But unfortunately for this defence, it is completely subverted
by three other considerations:
1. The argument is just as applicable to cases where the ves
sels of the nation, before it was at war, were actually employed,
without any legal exclusion of those of the neutral nation, as to
cases where there was a legal exclusion of foreign vessels before,
and a legal admission of them during, the war. In both cases,
the belligerent vessels and seamen, as far as they are liberated

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 333
by the substitution of foreign vessels and seamen, may be added
to his military strength, without any diminution of his exports
and imports, or of the revenues connected with them. Either,
therefore, the argument must be extended (which will not be
undertaken) to the latter case, or it loses its force, as to the
former. 2. It has been shewn that Great Britain does herself, thus
relax her navigation act; and avowedly for the purposes of sub
stituting neutral vessels and mariners in place of those which
she finds it expedient to employ in the operations of war. Mr.
Ward must therefore either relinquish his argument, or condemn
the practice of his own government.
3. This fundamental argument of Mr. Ward is expressly
thrown out of the question by Sir William Scott, who admits
that Great Britain, like all countries, in all wars, relaxes her
navigation acts and other regulations founded thereon, in order
to obtain the service of foreigners with their vessels, where she
did without it in times of peace; but that these relaxations,
though they arise out of a state of war, do not arise from that
predominance of force which he takes to be the true foundation
of the principle.*
When Mr. Ward then asks, " where is the man of plain under
standing, and uninterested in the question, who would not de
termine, that if the neutral accepted the offer, [of a trade from
which the ships and seamen of the belligerent were withdrawn
for the purposes of war,] that instant he interfered in the war?"
A man may be named whose determination of the question, Mr.
Ward, as may be inferred from his eulogies on Sir William
Scott, would of all men be the last to contest.
On turning to the work of Mr. Browne, it does not appear
that he has presented any views of the subject, which require
particular examination. He has, in fact, done little more than
appeal to the authority of Sir William Scott, and praise and
repeat the arguments of Mr. Ward.
It may be thought, that some notice ought to be taken of a
* 2 Rob., 171.

384 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
discourse of the present Earl of Liverpool, prefixed to his col
lection of treaties. It would be injustice to the distinguished
author of that defence of the maritime principles of Great
Britain, to deny it the merit of learning, ingenuity, and a vein
of candor more than is always found in such discussions. His
attention, however, was almost wholly directed to the question
whether free ships make free goods, a question not within the
limits of this investigation. He has, indeed, a few cursory ob
servations, such as could not be here noticed without going into
unnecessary repetitions, in favor of the doctrine that a trade
not customary in peace cannot be lawful in war. These obser
vations, he concludes, with one referred to by Mr. Ward as of
great force, on the general question between belligerent and
neutral nations; namely, "that if this right were admitted, it
would be the interest of all commercial States to promote dis-
sen tions among their neighbors."
If there be any plausibility in this argument, it is certainly
all the merit that can be claimed for it. The wars which afflict
mankind, are not produced by the intrigues or cupidity, of the
weaker nations, who wish to remain in peace, whilst their neigh
bors are at war. They are the offspring of ambitious, and not
unfrequently commercial rivalships, among the more powerful
nations themselves. This is a fact attested by all history. If
maxims of public law are to be tested, therefore, by their pacific
tendency, such maxims, it is evident, must be favored as circum
scribe, not the rights and interests of neutral nations, but the
belligerent and commercial interests, of their more powerful and
warlike neighbors.
As a further answer to the observations of this noble author,
and as a final answer to all the arguments which are drawn
from the intrinsic equity or conveniency of this principle, the
following considerations must have weight with all candid and
competent judges.
In the first place it may be repeated, that on a question which
is to be decided, not by the abstract precepts of reason, but by
rules of law positively in force, it is not sufficient to show ou
which side an intrinsic reasonableness can be traced. It is ne-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 335
cessary to shew, on which side the law as in force, is found to
be. In the present case, it has been shewn that this law is not
for, but against, the British side of the question.
But secondly, it is denied that if reason, equity, or conve
niency, were alone to decide the question, the decision would
be different from that which the law in force pronounces on it.
War imposes on neutral commerce a variety of privations and
embarrassments. It is reasonable, therefore, as well as lawful,
that neutrals should enjoy the advantages which may happen to
arise from war.
1. In the case of contraband, the articles of which, especially
according to the British catalogue, may compose an important
branch of exports in time of peace, the commerce of particular
nations remaining at peace may suffer material defalcations
from the exercise of the rights of war.
2. In the case of enemy's property carried by neutral ships,
(as Great Britain, at least, understands and enforces the law of
nations,) a branch of trade more or less important to all com
mercial nations, and constituting the most profitable branch of
trade with some in times of peace, becomes an object of bel
ligerent interruption and confiscation.
3. In the case of blockades the abridgment and embarrass
ment to which the trade of neutrals, especially those at a dis
tance, is subjected by war, form other important items of loss
on their side. This is a belligerent claim, on which much might
be said, if the notoriety of its effects, to say nothing of its ex
travagant abuses, did not render it unnecessary.
4. The interruptions, proceeding from searches of neutral
vessels on the high seas, the erroneous suspicions and inferences
which send them into port for trial, the difficulty of obtaining
all the requisite proofs thereon by the claimant, the delays and
expences incident to the judicial proceedings, more especially
where the trial is at a great distance, and above all when ap
peals still more distant become necessary, the changes in the
state of markets during all these delays, which convert into loss
the gains promised by the expedition, the suspension of the
mercantile funds, the heavy sacrifices, and sometimes bankrupt-
vol. 11. 25

386 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
eies thence ensuing; all these injuries, which war brings on
neutral commerce, taken together, must surely, during war, re
quire a very great weight in the opposite scale to balance them,
and the weight of these injuries is sometimes not a little in
creased by the piracies which a state of war generates and em
boldens. The injuries, besides, which are here enumerated, are limited
to such proceedings as the laws of war may be thought to au
thorize. To a fair estimate of the evils suffered by neutral com
merce, must be added all those abuses which never fail to be
mingled with the exercise of belligerent rights on the high seas;
the protracted interruptions, the personal insults, the violent or
furtive spoliations, with a thousand irregularities, which are
more or less inseparable from the proceeding, and which can
seldom be so far verified and prosecuted to effect against the
wrong-doers, as to amount to a reparation.
If the evils, brought on neutrals by a state of war, were to be
traced to their full extent, a long list of a distinct kind ought
moreover to be thrown into the same scale. How many con
demnations are made either directly contrary to the law of na
tions, or by means of unjust presumptions, or arbitrary rules of
evidence, against neutral claimants ! How often and how se
verely are the neutral appellants aggrieved by measuring the
restitution awarded to them, not according to the actual loss,
but according to the deficient estimates, or the scanty proceeds
of sales, decreed by ignorant or corrupt vice admiralty courts,*
in places and under circumstances, which reduce the price to a
mere fraction of the value ! Examples of this sort might easily
be multiplied; but they may be thought of the less weight in
the present case, as they furnish a just ground of resort from
* The character of these courts may be estimated by a single fact stated on
the floor of the British House of Commons, 29th April, 1801,— that out of three
hundred and eighteen appeals, thirty-five only of the condemnations were con
firmed by the superior court. Notwithstanding this enormity of abuses, and the
Btrong remonstrances against them, no change was made in the courts till about
four months before the war was over. They were then put on an establishment
somewhat different, but which still leaves them a scourge to the fairest commerce
of neutrals.

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 337
the ordinary tribunals of justice, to those ulterior remedies,
which depend on negotiations and arrangements between the
belligerent and neutral governments. But whatever may be
the provisions for indemnity, obtained in these modes, it remains
an important truth on the present subject, that besides the in
termediate disadvantage to neutral traders from the mere delay
of diplomatic and conventional remedies, the justice stipulated
is always rendered very incomplete, by the difficulties in verify
ing the losses and damages sustained.
The principle urged against a neutral trade in time of war,
not permitted in peace, is the more unreasonable, because it
gives to a tribunal established by the belligerent party only, a
latitude of judgment improper to be confided to courts of jus
tice, however constituted.*
* The English courts of municipal law are much celebrated for the independ
ent character of the Judges, and the uniformity of their decisions. The same
merit has been claimed for the prize courts. In answer to the objection made in
a Prussian remonstrance against the condemnation of Prussian vessels during
the war of 1739, viz: that the Admiralty courts were ex parte tribunals, and their
decisions not binding on other nations, the Duke of Newcastle, in his letter enclos
ing the report of the four law officers, observes, " that these courts, both inferior
" courts and courts of appeal, always decide according to the universal law of
" nations only; except in those cases where particular treaties between the
" powers concerned have altered the dispositions of the law of nations." In the
Report itself it is declared, "that this Superior court [Lords of Appeal] judges
by the same rule which governs the court of Admiralty, viz: the law of nations
and the treaties subsisting with that neutral power whose subject is a party be
fore them;" "that in England the crown never interferes with the course of jus
tice. No order or intimation is ever given to any judge; " that " had it been in
tended, by agreement, to introduce between Prussia and England a variation, in
any particular, from the law of nations, and consequently a new rule for the
court of Admiralty to decide by, it could only be done by a solemn treaty in
writing, properly authorized and authenticated. The memory of it could not
otherwise be preserved; the parties interested, and the courts of admiralty, could
not otherwise take notice of it." In the judgment pronounced by Sir Wm. Scott;
in the case of the Swedish convoy, [i Rob., 295,] the independent and elevated
attributes of his judicial station are painted with his usual eloquence. ' ' In form
ing that judgment," says he, " I trust that it has not escaped my anxious recol
lection for one moment, what it is that the duty of my station calls for from me,
namely, to consider myself as stationed here not to deliver occasional and shift
ing opinions to serve present purposes of particular national interest; but to ad
minister with indifference that justice which the law of nations holds out without

388 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
In cases, even where the tribunal has an equal relation to
both the parties, it has ever been deemed proper, that the rules
of decision should be as plain and as determinate as possible;
in order not only, that they might be the surer guide to those
who are to observe them; but also a better guard against the
partialities and errors of those who are to apply them. Say,
then, whether it be not an abandonment of every reasonable
distinction to independent States, some happening to be neutral and some to be
belligerent. The seat of judicial authority is indeed locally here in the belliger
ent country, according to the known law and practice of nations; but the law
itself has no locality. It is the duty of the person who sits here to determine
this question, exactly as he would determine the same question if sitting at
Stockholm; to assert no pretension on the part of Great Britain, which he would
not allow to Sweden in the same circumstances; and to impose no duties on
Sweden, as a neutral country, which he would not admit to belong to Great
Britain in the same character. If, therefore, I mistake the law in this matter, I
mistake that which I consider, and which I mean should be considered, as the
universal law upon the question."
Does the judge either sustain these lofty pretensions, or justify the declaration
of his government to Prussia, when, a few months after, in the case of the Im
manuel, [2 Rob., 169,] he observes to the bar, "that much argument has been
employed on grounds of commercial analogy; this trade is allowed; that trade
is not more injurious; why not that to be considered as equally permitted?
The obvious answer is, that the true rule to this court is, the text of the instruc
tions. What is not found therein permitted, is understood to be prohibited, upon
this general plain principle, that the colony trade is generally prohibited, and
whatever is not specially relaxed continues in a state of interdiction."
He is not extricated from these inconsistencies by alleging that the instruc
tions, the text of which was taken as his rule, was a relaxation of the law of
nations within the prerogative of the crown, and favorable to the interests of the
neutral parties. — 1. Because it was incumbent on him, if he meant to keep him
self above all executive interference with the course of justice, to have reserved
to him the right to test the instructions by the law of nations, instead of profess
ing so ready and so unqualified a submission to the text of them. 2. Because,
without examining the extent of the royal prerogative, which depends on the
local constitution and laws, it has been shewn that, in some respects, the instruc
tions have extended the belligerent claims against neutral commerce beyond the
law of nations, as asserted on the part of Great Britain.
How far the authority of the instructions has been pursued by the High court
of Admiralty, in opposition to precedents of the Superior court settling the law
of nations, is a fit subject of enquiry, for which the adequate means are not pos-

The opinion has long and generally prevailed, that the Admiralty courts in
England were not those independent and impartial expositors of the law of na-

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 339
precaution, while the judges have, in their national prejudices,
in the tenure of their official emoluments, and in their hopes of
personal advancements, an exclusive relation to one of the par
ties; say whether it be not unreasonable to leave to the opinion,
perhaps to the conjectures of a tribunal so composed, the ques
tions whether in a distant quarter of the globe a particular
trade* was or was not allowed before the war, whether if not
allowed before the war, its allowance during the war, proceeded
from causes distinct from the war, or arising out of the war;
whether the allowance had or had not been common to all
wars; whether again, if resulting from the particular pressure
tions which they have professed to be; but rather the political organs of the
government, so constituted as to deliver its occasional and shifting views, with
reference to the occasional and shifting interests of the nation, belligerent and
commercial. And it is to be regretted that this opinion is but too much counte
nanced by the series of royal orders and judicial decisions which the last and
present war have produced. It would be an unjustifiable sacrifice of truth to
complaisance, not to say, on the present occasion, that with all the merits of the
illustrious civilian who presides in the high court of Admiralty, the Englishman
at least is often discerned through the robes of the judge.
This want of confidence in the impartiality of the admiralty courts is the less
surprizing, when it is considered that the Lords of Appeal, who decide in the
last resort, are frequently statesmen, not jurists; that they not only hold their
seats in that court at the most absolute pleasure of the crown, but are members
of the cabinet, and it may be presumed, are, in that capacity, the original advi
sers and framers of the very instructions, which in their judicial capacity they
are to carry into effect.
With respect to the inferior prize courts, orders directly addressed to them
are neither unusual nor concealed. As an example, take the orders communi
cated to Mr. King by Lord Hawkesbury, above cited. Another example is fur
nished by the orders communicated to this government through Mr. Merry in
1804, as having been addressed to the vice admiralty courts in the West Indies,
as a rule on the subject of blockades.
* See the case reported by Robinson, vol. 4, p. 267, of a vessel in the trade to
Senegal, and the difficulty, expence, and delay in ascertaining whether the trade
was or was not open before the war. A case (of Coffin, an American citizen) is
now depending, which involves the question, whether the trade from the island
of Java in the East Indies, to Muscat in the Persian gulph, was or was not open
before the war. This question was decided in the first instance by a vice-admir
alty court at Ceylon; and will probably be removed to Great Britain for a re
examination. The case, therefore, will have for its space three quarters of the
globe. Through what period of time it may extend, is a problem to be decided.
There are precedents, as has been already seen, for ten years at least.

390 WORKS OF MADISON. 1806.
of the war, the pressure amounted to a necessity; whether if
amounting to a necessity, the necessity resulted from an impos
sibility, imposed by a decided predominance and superiority at
sea, of the adverse party? These are not questions of fancy or
of unfairness. They are questions which it has been seen, that
the enlightened judge in the British high court of admiralty has
himself recognized as involved in the principle for which he
contends. But they are questions in their nature improper to
be decided by any judicial authority whatever; and in their
importance, they are questions too great to be left even to the
sovereign authority of a country where the rights of other sov
ereigns are to be the object of the decision.
Finally: — The belligerent claim, to intercept a neutral trade
in war not open in peace, is rendered still more extravagantly
preposterous and pernicious, by the latitude which it is now
assuming. According to late decisions in the British courts, it
is in future to be a rule, that produce of an enemy's colony, law
fully imported into a neutral country, and incorporated into its
commercial stock, as far as the ordinary regulations of a sov
ereign State can work such an effect, is to be subject on re-ex
portation to capture and condemnation; unless it can be shewn
that it was imported in the preceding voyage, with an intention
that it should not be re-exported. Consider for a moment the
indignity offered to a neutral sovereign in subjecting the integ
rity of its internal regulations to the scrutiny of foreign courts,
and to the interested suspicions of belligerent cruizers; consider
the oppression on the individual traders, inseparable from a
trial in a distant court, and perhaps an appeal to another court
still more distant, where the intention of an antecedent voyage
is to be traced through all the labyrinth of mercantile transac
tions. A neutral vessel goes to sea with a cargo consisting, in
whole or in part, of colonial produce. It may be the produce
of a neutral colony. It may be the produce of the country ex
porting it: The United States already produce cotton, sugar,
rice, &c, as well as the West Indies. The cruizer does not for
get, that the proof will probably be thrown on the claimants;
that besides the possibility that it may be a licensed capture,

1806. EXAMINATION, ETC., ETC. 391
the difficulty of proof may have the same effect in producing
condemnation. He recollects also that in the event of an ac
quittal the costs* will, where there is the least color for seiz
ure, be thrown on the claimants; and that, at the worst, he can
only be put to the inconvenience of giving up a few men to take
charge of the prize, in exchange for a few others, not unfre-
quently impressed into the vacancy. In a word, his calculation
is, that he may gain, and cannot lose. Will not, under such
circumstances, every hogshead of sugar, or bale of cotton, or
barrel of rum, &c, be a signal for detention? Could ingenuity
devise a project holding out a more effectual premium for the
multiplication of vexatious searches and seizures, beyond even
the ordinary proportion of condemnations? A project, in fact,
more unjust in itself, more disrespectful to neutral nations, or
more fatal to the liberty and interests of neutral commerce?
Would Great Britain be patient under such proceedings against
her, if she held in her hands, the means of controuling them?
If she will not answer for herself, all the world will answer for
her, that she would not, and what is more, that she ought not.
* It is well known to be the practice to favor the activity of cruizers against
the colonial trade. Sir William Scott in the case of the Providentia, in which
the ship and cargo were restored — 2 Rob., 128, says "Cases respecting the trade
of neutrals with the colonies of the enemy are of considerable delicacy; and I
therefore think it has been properly brought before the court."

BURR'S CONSPIRACY:-BOLLMAFS COMMUNICATION.

Substance of a communication made on the 23 of Jan?, 1807, by
Doctor BoUman to the President: J. M., at the request of the
President, attending:
Doctor Bollman having just arrived from N. Orleans under
the charge of L1 Wilson, in pursuance of an order from Gen1 W.,
had conveyed to the P. his desire of an opportunity, which was
immediately allowed, to disclose to him certain interesting par
ticulars relating to the plans of Col. Burr, in which the Doc*
was charged with a criminal participation.
Previous to the disclosure, the P. assured him that nothing
which he might say or acknowledge should be made use of
against himself; and it was further observed to him that it was
a settled rule in Court, that no communication confidentially
made to an officer of the Gov4, in his official capacity, could be
extorted from him as a witness.
The Docr opened himself by observing that he had known
Col. Burr for some years, and that he had reason to believe that
his thoughts had for five or six been turned to Mexico, as an
object of enterprize worthy of his preparatory researches; but
that his confidential intercourse with Burr on the subject com
menced at Washington during a visit which he, Bollman, made
there, with a view to effectuate, through the Marquis de Yrujo,
a share in the royal licences from Spain to trade with her

394 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
American Colonies; in which licences his House was, with
others, included; all of them, however, being in fact suppressed
in favour of that of Craig, of Philadelphia, in which it was well
known that Yrujo was a partner of the prodigious gains made;
and this House itself being since shut out by a later arrange
ment of the Spanish Government with the Hopes and Barings,
who had been able to afford advances of money, as well as more
satisfactory provisions for transferring the treasures of New
Spain to Europe.
During his stay in Washington he had occasional interviews
with Burr. They were chiefly at night, and very transient,
owing to the constant occupations of Burr with others, and with
his plans and papers. In consequence, however, of what passed
between them, and of further explanations of Burr at Philadel
phia, he was induced to enter into his views; and under the
colour of an arrangement with a farming brother on the Ohio,
who wished to gain a better establishment for himself, on lands
held out for settlement by Mr. D. Clark, near the Washeta, he
proceeded to New Orleans, where he arrived in September, with
the duplicate letter from Burr to Wilkinson, which he delivered
on the arrival of W. at New Orleans.
He stated that what he knew of Burr's plans and views was
derived entirely from Burr himself; Burr, as he believed, hav
ing an unbounded confidence in him, and making of course no
other the depositary of what was not disclosed to him.
In explaining these plans and views, he stated that Burr had
taken great pains to acquire a knowledge of Mexico in all its
circumstances, which might invite an attempt to revolutionize
it; that he had been successful in gaining information, and was
made very sanguine by it; that he considered such an enterprize
as under every aspect happy for Spanish America; as highly
beneficial to the United States; as extremely favorable even to
Europe; and as promising a glorious place in the history of
magnificent events. He more particularly stated that Burr
had obtained abundant proofs of the hatred of Spain to the
United States, her aversion to the transfer of Louisiana to them,

1807. BOLLMAN'S COMMUNICATION.

395

and her hopes of undoing that transaction; that France was
also unfriendly, considered the sale of Louisiana as little more
than a loan on mortgage, had views of getting it back on the
return of peace in Europe, and, ultimately, of bringing all Span
ish America under her sway; that for this purpose it was not
to be doubted that the present feeble and degenerate Govern
ment of Spain would be set aside in favor of a French dynasty,
under the tutelage of France, and thereby all the wealth and
power of Spanish America be turned into French resources for
accomplishing the objects of France in Europe, as well as on
this Continent; that even now the money of New Spain was a
fund essential to the operations and victories of that scourge of
Europe and humanity; and that in cutting it off, all the world
would share the happy effect; that under all these circumstances
it was equally just, necessary, and honorable for the U. S. to
enter into war against Spain, and to separate from her her most
wealthy possessions, as was easy to be done; and that the most
expedient mode of beginning and conducting hostilities would
be under the auspices of an individual who might find the means
independently of the Gov' for the purpose; that Burr was able
to provide these means; that he had accordingly engaged in so
doing; that he would be able, as he had latterly written to his
friends at N. 0.; that he could and should be at Natchez about
the 20 December with about 2,000 volunteers, to be followed
by about 4,000 more, to whom he could superadd two or three
times as many, if necessary, and he had possessed the pecuniary
resources; that his plan then was to proceed to N. O., avoiding
as much as he could violence and the invasion of private rights,
but that it was his intention to seize for his use the French Ar
tillery deposited there; and using force as far as necessary, to
lay under requisition all the shipping there, expected, that sea
son, to be sufficient to convey to Vera Cruz in a few days six
or seven thousand men, a force which, once effectually landed,
eould easily march to Mexico, and, with the aid of the discon
tented, bear down all opposition.
Was it understood that any of the officers, particularly the

396 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
higher ones of the Spanish Government, would join in the revo
lutionary project? No. Influential characters only, not in of
fice, were understood to be ready to co-operate.
He professed to be unacquainted with much of the detail of
the project, and seemed to be so of both the proceedings of Burr
and those against him, which have lately taken place in the W.
Country. He denied any knowledge of an intention to seize
the money in the Bank at N. 0.
The part which Wilkinson had taken, he said, was contrary
to all Burr's calculations, and would so embarrass him that it
was difficult now to know the course it would produce. As
a proof of the reliance of Burr on Wilkinson's joining him, and
according to the belief of Burr of the good grounds for it, he
said that just before he parted from Burr at Philadelphia, in
July, Burr told him he had just received a letter from Wilkin
son pledging himself to the enterprize, which he (Wilkinson)
applauded with an enthusiasm. On being asked what was
meant by Wilkinson's joining Burr, he said, [by] resigning his
commission in the Army of the United States and taking a com
mand under Burr. Was it expected that Wilkinson would carry
over with him the army, or any part it ? No; it was only thought
probable that a certain portion of the individuals might desert
and join the corps of Burr. Was it not apprehended that the
army would be an obstacle to the progress of Burr? Very little,
if at all; and it was expected that the army would be either en
gaged in hostilities with the Spaniards, or detained by the un
settled state of things on the Sabine; or so scattered into de
tachments that they could not make head against such a supe
rior and collected force.
On being asked whether he was himself to have gone with
Burr to Mexico, he said, no ; that he was allotted for another,
a sort of diplomatic service. What was that? It was the in
tention of Burr, as soon as he had embarked at N. 0. for the
execution of his plan, that he, Bollman, should be sent to Wash
ington, charged with such communications and representations
to the Government as might induce it to espouse the enterprize,
to concert measures with Burr, and thus, by a war, to consum-

1807. BOLLMAN'S COMMUNICATION. 397
mate and extend its objects. These communications and repre
sentations were to consist of documents, facts, discourses, and
arguments, which, taken together, could not fail to convince
Congress and the Executive that such was the deadly hatred
and the dangerous designs of Spain and France, and such the
opportunity of frustrating them by securing all we wished and
must have with respect to Louisiana and the Floridas, and at
the same time of effecting a glorious revolution in the Spanish
provinces, and depriving Bonaparte of the resource which prin
cipally supports him in his irresistible career, that the whole
Gov' would readily accede to his propositions.
What was the intention of Burr, in case of his success in Mex
ico, with respect to the political establishment to be made there?
This was to partake of monarchy, the people not being fit for
a republican Government; but the most influential and most in
telligent of the well-disposed persons of the Country were to
be consulted, and proper use made of their advice and co-oper
ation. Were there now, or had there been, with Burr, any persons
of consequence belonging to Mexico? He did not know that
any were now; or that more than one Spaniard had been with
him on the business. There was one who had given him in
formation as to the state of things there.
How could it be supposed that so extraordinary and illegal
an enterprize as that undertaken could proceed with the acqui
escence or without the knowledge of the Government? Or, if
presumed to be not disagreeable to it, why was it, instead of
being communicated, so industriously concealed? He had often
discussed this point with Burr; who supposed that the measures
were so taken and would be executed with such rapidity, that
the enterprize would get beyond the reach of the Government;
and that it was more expedient in every view that this course
should be pursued, even on the supposition that the dispositions
of the Government were in his favor. Burr, he said, would have
not concealed his views from the President, if the necessary au
thority had laid with him; but he, the President, could do noth
ing, or would be obliged to oppose them; and to make the com-

398 WQRKS OF MADISON. 1807.
munication to Congress would have produced a ruinous pub
licity. Whence have the funds been obtained or expected for pur
poses so far beyond those of individuals, such as the enlistment,
equipment, subsisting, and transporting, even to New Orleans,
a body of 6 or 7,000 men? No other than private funds, con
tributed by the friends of Burr, with the use of Bills at long
sights, had been employed; many of these bills were drawn at
120 to 150 days' sight, and Burr had expected, by the rapidity
of his successes, to be able to provide for the discharge of them.
He repeated that he was not acquainted with such details of the
plan; and particularly disowned a knowledge of the contributing
friends of Burr, or any circumstances affecting his son-in-law,
Alston. Had no pecuniary success been obtained or attempted from
foreign Governments, and what were Burr's prospects or connec
tions with those Governments? Had nothing taken place with
the Government of Great Britain, or [of] Spain, through their
Ministers here, or by agents of Burr abroad? Yrujo, whom
Burr, in order to lull, had duped into a belief that his object
was to revolutionize Louisiana, and separate the Western States
from the Union, entered eagerly and zealously into the plan;
visited him continually, and pestered him with his advice and
exhortations; offered him the use of 10,000 stand of arms, and
money to any necessary amount; was, in fact, so full of zeal,
that he would have gone to Spain in order to put his Govern
ment in the course of- effectual co-operation. Burr, however,
despised the dirty character of Yrujo, and never would accept
either money or any thing else from that quarter.
Did it appear that Yrujo acted merely from himself, under a
general confidence in the dispositions of his Government, or
that he had applied for and obtained particular instructions on
the subject? He did not know that there had been, or was time
for, any communication of Yrujo with his Government subse
quent to the first communication of Burr with him.
He dwelt here on what he had very early intimated, that it
never was a part of Burr's plan to detach the Western Coun-

1807. BOLLMAN'S COMMUNICATION.

399

try, or to revolutionize Louisiana; Burr's sole view in his inter
course with Yrujo was to keep him from watching him and
sounding alarms to the Government, by letting him enjoy the
pleasing belief that the operations of Burr were levelled against
the U. S., not against Spain. Yrujo was not without jealousy.
He one evening posted himself for two hours opposite Burr's
lodging, to ascertain the coming out of Merry; after this, Burr
was obliged to take measures for duping him thoroughly, and
succeeded. Did Burr contemplate a union of Mexico with the United
States; or did he not rather intend a union of Louisiana and
Mexico in an Independent State? Neither; ho had in view a
connection of friendship, but Mexico was too distant. The idea
appeared to be absurd. If Burr had wished to unite Mexico
and Louisiana, it would also have been folly to attempt it; be
cause ho must, in that case, have left part of his force to guard
Louisiana, and thereby have ruined his expedition to Mexico.
But might not the plan bo to proceed with the whole force to
Mexico, and after success there to re-act with its resources on
Louisiana? Ho could not see any grounds for such a plan.
Had Burr any, and what, communication with the British
Government? He communicated freely with Merry, who en
tered warmly into his views, assured him that its dispositions
could not but be entirely favorable, and that he would make
such representations to it that it could not fail to see its inter
est in the event too clearly not to be active, provided it could
be done without cause of umbrage to the United States. He
(Bollman) understood that no doubt was entertained, previous
to the death of Pitt, that decisive measures would have been
taken for espousing the plan of Burr, not with unfriendly views
towards tho U- S., but to promote the interests of Great Britain,
and eventually to unite more closely both against the Enemy
of the latter. The death of Pitt changed the face of things so
much, that ho could not say whether Burr had taken any steps
since, as to that Government, or what his hopes from it were,
further than that it would not oppose him, and that its ships of
war in that quarter might keep off those of Spain and France.

400 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
He had understood that Truxton would go to Jamaica to make
some favorable arrangement with the British Commander there,
and spoke of him as being there at this time.
What kind of aid was it understood was to be derived from
the British Government? was it money, a regular expedition
of ships and troops fitted out for the occasion, or merely the
incidental protection of ships of war, as in the case of Miranda?
He could not be precise on this subject. He presumed all these
aids, if requisite, would be furnished: money, as well as the rest.
How would the money probably be brought into the use of
Burr? In the usual mode, he presumed, of bills drawn on Great
Britain. Was it understood that the measures of Great Britain
were to be the effect of an arrangement particularly expected
between Burr and that Government, or at least of a mutual un
derstanding of the parties resulting from the communications
between Burr and Merry? He could not say any thing par
ticularly on this head. He presumed that the measures of both
would be guided by the understanding at least between them,
which commenced between Burr and Merry. He took pains,
at the same time, to impress the idea that Merry had no wish
to injure the interests or infringe the authority of the United
States, but solely to advance those of Great Britain, and to
draw as much as possible the two nations into a common inter
est on this occasion.
Burr, he said, had sent a person to the British Court. On
being asked his name, he wished to know whether the assu
rances that his communications should not be used against him
self extended to others, and being told not, he professed scruples
at giving the name; intimating, however, that he was not a
native, was of the mercantile class, and not a conspicuous char
acter; and that having arrived in England after the death of
Pitt, had probably never disclosed or done any thing in his mis
sion. Had Burr's plans any relation to those of Miranda? No.
Not the least. Burr thought meanly of Miranda, of his plans,
and of his prospects.
The primary object of B — 1 — n in wishing to see the Presi-

1807. BOLLMAN'S COMMUNICATION. AQl
dent seems to have been to explain his own conduct, which he
supposed to have been viewed as blended more with Burr's
transactions than was the fact: his next object, to present Burr's
plans and proceedings in a light as little criminal as possible.
He manifested a bitterness towards Yrujo and Spain — the re
verse towards Merry and Great Britain.
He betrayed, also, the strongest resentment against Wilkin
son, but tempered his remarks with a respect to his relation to
the Government, and to the presumed sentiments of the Presi
dent. He complained, however, of Wilkinson's conduct towards
him as harsh — insinuated as the motive a conscious treachery
of Wilkinson towards Burr, and expressed a confidence that
many were suspected at New Orleans, and some denounced,
without cause. He particularly acquitted E. Livingston and
Prevost. The latter, he said, Burr, who avowed the maxim of
trusting nothing to any body, beyond the necessity of the case
and the measure of discretion, never would unbosom himself to,
because Prevost was not considered as possessing the requisite
discretion. vol. u. 26

LETTERS, ETC.

TO JAMES MONROE.
Washington, March 20, 1807.
Dear Sir, — You will receive herewith a letter for yourself
and Mr. Pinkney, acknowledging the receipt of your communi
cations by Mr. Purviance, and suggesting the intermediate
course to be pursued, until the further instructions contemplated
by the President can be matured. The delay will be short; but
it is desirable to accommodate the instructions to the result of
some enquiries as to certain facts, and the probable operation
of certain arrangements.
The President writes you by this conveyance, and touches, I
presume, on the particular difficulties which restrain him from
closing the bargain with G. Britain on the terms which she so
obstinately insists on. In general, she has indulged a hard and'
spirit, of which it is probable Mr. Fox
would never have been the Minister. But in refusing an explicit
pledge against the horrible practice of impressments, and in
giving to the declaratory note the form and face chosen for it,
she has, in the view of the President, laid him under the neces
sity of recurring to the course and chance of negociation. The
declaration, if not put aside by the turn of events, may be put
into some candid and delicate shape which would remove that
difficulty. But the case of impressments consists altogether of
thorns. Considering that the public mind has reached a crisis
of sensibility, and that this object essentially contributed to the
Extraordinary Mission, as well as to the non-importation act,
there is every motive to seek in every mode an effectual rem
edy. For reasons already hinted, the promise in the note of
Lords* H. and A., of Novr 8, is not such a remedy, in the view
* Holland and Auckland.

404 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
produced here by circumstances which could not be so well ap
preciated where you are. In several other points the terms in
sisted on by G. Britain are liable to all the objections which
you opposed to them, and it is the wish of the President that
they may undergo revision, on grounds which will be stated in
my letter by Mr. Purviance.
The President and all of us are fully impressed with the dif
ficulties which your negociation had to contend with, as well as
with the faithfulness and ability with which it was supported,
and are as ready to suppose, in as far as there may be variance
in our respective views of things, that in your position we
should have had yours, as that, in our position, you would have
ours. What may be the effect of further efforts in another form,
or on other grounds, if these can be devised, remains to be seen.
The President has, doubtless, given you to understand as well
the choice left you as to a participation in these efforts, as the
satisfaction which will be felt in case your arrangements admit
of your stay for the purpose. If he has been silent, it is because
he assures himself that his sentiments cannot be misconstrued
by you. The uncertainty whether you may not have carried
into effect the purpose intimated in your private letter by Mr.
P., before this reaches London, concurs with the urgency of the
opportunity in rendering it shorter than it would otherwise be.

TO GEORGE JOT. Washington, May 22d, 1807.
Dear Sir, — I duly received your favor of Feb7 10. Not rec
ollecting the precise sentiments which you were induced to com
municate, first to Mr. Fox and then to Lord Holland, I cannot
fully appreciate the step taken. I know only that I felt the
dispositions expressed, that I did not look beyond your own
perusal of the letter, and that I am entirely persuaded of the
laudable motives which governed the use of it. You will, I am
equally persuaded, be sensible that the very consideration which
promised advantage from the communication would not permit
a repetition.

1807. LETTERS. 4(5
The Treaty signed with the British Commissioners has not
received the approbation of the President. Full justice is dono
to the talents and exertions of ours, but the terms admitted on
the other side do not satisfy the expectations on this. The case
of impressments, particularly, having been brought to a formal
issue, and having been the primary object of an Extraordinary
Mission, a Treaty could not be closed which was silent on that
subject — a subject which, whenever it shall no longer be seen
through the mist with which practice enveloped right, must ex
cite wonder that the patience of the United States has remained
so long unexhausted. That an officer from a foreign ship should
pronounce any person he pleased, on board an American ship
on the high seas, not to be an American citizen, but a British
subject, and carry his interested decision on the most important
of all questions to a freeman into execution on the spot, is so
anomalous in principle, so grievous in practice, and so abom
inable in abuse, that the pretension must finally yield to sober
discussion and friendly expostulation. Our Commissioners are
accordingly instructed to resume the negociation, with a view
to cure this and some other essential defects; and to revise sev
eral articles into which the British Commissioners pressed ad
vantages too unilateral. It is truly to be desired that the result
may establish a perfect cordiality between tho two Countries,
founded on solid justice and fair reciprocity. But it is not to
be overlooked, that so happy a state of things will be of short
continuance, if the arrangements on paper be not accompanied
with a suppression of the outrages which the Naval Command
ers of G. Britain are so much in the habit of practicing on our
shores, and even within our harbours. Insults have just been
received which rouse feelings that are only controuled by a con
fidence that such atrocious conduct will be elsewhere avenged.
Will you accept a statistical publication which contains some
interesting views of the progressive faculties of this Country ?
with assurances of the respect and esteem with which I remain,
Yr mo. ob4 servt.

406 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, May 25, 1807.
Dear Sir, — Although it is not certain that this will find you
in London, I cannot commit to Mr. Purviance the official des
patches without a few private lines.
It has been a painful task with the President to withhold
from the joint work of yourself and Mr. Pinckney the sanction
which was expected, as it has been to me to communicate the
event, with the considerations which produced it. I console
myself with an assurance that you will see in both the same
conscientious discharge of duty which is stamped on your pro
ceedings, and with a hope that your further efforts, aided by the
new proposition which is authorised, may yet close our common
labours with success and satisfaction. An adjustment with G.
Britain continues to be rendered important by the state of our
affairs with Spain, &c, as well as by the danger which a failure
threatens to the peace between the two nations. This danger
may be increased, too, by the late change in the British Coun
cils, if the new administration should be able to keep its legs,
and not be checked in its inclinations by the fear of encounter
ing the consequences to themselves of a rupture with the U.
States. But it is not consistent with the judgment of the Ex
ecutive, or, as is believed, with the temper of the nation, to
purchase an adjustment at a higher price than is explained in
the instructions of which Mr. Purviance is now the bearer.
We shall soon learn, I presume, whether a supersedeas to
Mr. Erskine will be among the minor changes proceeding from
the change in the Cabinet. It may be said with truth, that it
would be difficult to find a successor who would give or feel
more pleasure in the station than the present incumbent. The
latter consideration may, however, be a motive, whilst the for
mer may not be a sufficient objection to his removal.
I could on no occasion so properly refer to the bearer of a
letter for information as to Mr. P. on the present. He has
been long enough here to know every thing worth telling you,
and will be sure to tell it as he knows it. He returns in the

1807. LETTERS. 407
character which he brought with him; to which the commission
ers of the sinking fund have added a trust, the value of which
he will explain. The opportunity of giving him that mark of
esteem was embraced with the greater pleasure, as it would
have been difficult to find another, especially an equivalent.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, July 25, 1807.
Dear Sir, — Since the communications by the Revenge, which
sailed on Monday last, nothing very material has occurred. The
British squadron, on receiving the Proclamation, fell down to
the Capes, near which, (in Lynhaven Bay,) several of the same
or substituted ships remain. It is not known whether any or
ders have been received from the Admiral relative to their con
duct under the Proclamation. They continue to defy it, not
only by remaining within our waters, but by chasing Merchant
vessels arriving and departing. They make efforts, also, to get
in small parties on shore, for the purpose, as supposed, of obtain
ing water and provisions. In a late instance, two officers and
three men, said to be from the Leopard, were surprised and
taken. It became a question whether they were to be consid
ered as prisoners of war. The Executive council of Virginia
were for so viewing them, and for retaining them. The Gov
ernor was not of the same sentiment. The President has de
cided that it is expedient, under all considerations, not to
enforce the principle that a war de facto exists, in this first
instance; but leaves himself free to proceed according to expe
diency, if like instances occur. To release indiscriminately
will be to invite landing parties, and insults to the public au
thority. The public mind is settling itself every where into a deter
mined stand at the present crisis. The Proclamation is rallied
to by all parties. Reparation or war is proclaimed at every
meeting, or rather by every mouth, which is not British; and
the reparation must be such as ought to satisfy the just feelings

408 WORKS OF MADISON. 1807.
of a nation which values its honor, and knows its importance.
I anxiously hope that the British Government will not mislead
itself into a belief that it can evade our demand, or attempt to
abridge or disguise the satisfaction rendered, by the mode and
circumstances of rendering it. If, for example, a minister spe
cially sent to disavow and repair the insult should supersede
the ordinary Minister, and remain here, it would be regarded as
a species of subterfuge. His immediate return will be neces
sary, to shew to the world that his mission was for the purposes
avowed. I have been unwell for several days, and am much fatigued by
the business I have been lately obliged to go through, and by
the heat of the weather. I must, therefore, however abruptly,
add only that I remain, Dr Sir, your sincere friend and servant.

TO JUDGE PETERS. Sepf 5, 1807.
I wish you had been led to a more thorough development of
the principles which enter into the subject now engaging the
public attention — I mean the desertion of seamen. Although
the question produced between this and a Foreign nation by the
late outrage against one of our Frigates does not turn on that
point, there would be an advantage, in several views, in placing
the questions incident to the desertion of seamen on the true
ground. Judging from what is seen and heard, few subjects of
importance stand more in need of elucidation; although few,
one would suppose, could less require it.
Desertions from Merchantmen are merely breaches of private
contract; and when the parties and the contract are wholly
alien, it may or may not be enforced within our jurisdiction, as
the policy of the Country may dictate. As an encouragement
to commerce, and as a claim to reciprocity, there is sound policy
in enforcing the contract; and there are special considerations
for enforcing it specifically here, even where this would not be
done in the Country to which the parties belong. Still, the

1807. LETTERS. 409
Law of nations leaves us free to provide or omit the means
necessary for the purpose. In G. Britain no such provision has
been made. In several cases applications have been made in
vain for the restoration of seamen deserting our Merchant ves
sels in British ports; the magistrates alledging that it was not
authorized by law. I recollect particularly that on the late re
newal of the war with Spain, by the seizure of the Spanish
treasure, so many of our seamen at Liverpool were tempted to
desert and enlist on board British Privateers, that our trade
was seriously embarrassed, in consequence of which the Consul
thought it his duty to appeal to the magistracy. He received
for answer that the law afforded no relief in such cases.
Desertions from ships of war are of a character essentially
different. The deserters in such cases are on the common foot
ing of exiles, liable to punishment, even to capital punishment,
for violating the law. It is well understood that no nation is
bound to surrender them to the angry Sovereign, unless by
some positive stipulation. G. Britain never does it otherwise.
Her laws do not authorize it; nor is the Prerogative of the
King competent to it. It is, perhaps, sometimes done, indirectly
and covertly, by the instrumentality of impressments and the
courtesy of Naval commanders; but always then of favor, not
of duty. With us there is not only no obligation, but less than
with other nations the policy of inviting reciprocity, our navy
being so small, and so little resorting to Foreign ports. It is
rather our policy to discourage the resort of Foreign ships of
war to our ports; and as far as humanity can be justly consulted,
it does not plead for the surrender of men to vengeance for
leaving a situation such as that of a British ship of war, into
which they had been engaged by a mode such as that of impress
ment. All these considerations, however, amount to no more
than that a gratuitous surrender of such deserters ought not to
be expected. There are certainly views of the subject which
would authorize an article for the purpose in a convention, com
bining with it other articles providing for objects desirable to
this Country. The only distinctions between deserters from
National ships and other fugitive offenders is — 1. That in the

410 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
former case, the flight itself constitutes the offence; in the lat
ter, it is the consequence of a preceding offence. This being a
circumstantial distinction, does not affect the sameness of the
principle. 2. The offence committed by deserters from ships
of war generally takes place within the Country affording a
refuge; whereas the offences of other fugitives generally take
place in their own Country. But this, again, is a distinction not
affecting the principle. Ships of war in a Country not their
own are, with respect to the discipline on board, a part of their
own Country, not of the Foreign Country where they happen
to be; desertions violate the laws of the former, not of the lat
ter; and Tribunals deriving authority from the former, not the
latter, inflict the punishment incurred.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, Janr 5, 1808.
Dear Sir, — Nothing has occurred since you left us worth de
tailing to you. We are still uninformed of the precise circum
stances which have detained Mr. Rose on board the frigate.
There is a report that he will either pass up the bay to Annap
olis, or possibly engage a vessel to bring him immediately to
this place. As a precaution for the former event, an express
carried yesterday an instruction to the collector similar to the
one sent to Norfolk. Be so good as to keep in mind your prom
ise to note to me the passages in your correspondence proper to
be withheld from Congress, in the event of a communication of
our affair with G. Britain.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Department op State, Jam 7th, 1808.
The Secretary of State, in compliance with the note of the
President, relating to the public property at New Orleans, as
reported by Governor Claiborne to the Secretary of the Treas
ury, begs leave to state that no part of that property appears

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 411
to fall in any respect under the purview of the Department of
State, unless it be the Government House, and the lot on which
it stands. This, it is inferred from the representation given by
Governor Claiborne, might be disposed of for a greater sum
than would provide accommodations for the Governor of the
Orleans territory, in a part of the city more eligible for his
residence. It would require, however, further knowledge of
the local circumstances, to enable the Secretary of State to judge
of the expediency of such a proceeding. And it is presumable,
from the character given of the lot in question, that delay will
not be attended with less advance in its value than will be in
cident to the spot which might be substituted; so that the pro
posed sale and substitution may probably at any time be carried
into effect, without loss to the public.

NEGOTIATIONS WITH MR. ROSE.
Friday, 1st Feb", 1808.
General object of interview.
Explain causes of Proclamation — B®" continuation of at
tack — by seamen detained — officers recalled — Ships in Harbors
doing illegal things.
Grounds of prelim7. 1. Disavowal by Ld G. due to G. B.
even if war — 2. General assurance and personal conviction.
Impossible for means of judging for our
selves see Mr. E. Object of procln — precaution — not merely
as to the Chesapeake.
2. Errors. 1. In supposing reparation object — which an item
then only — 2. Precaution vs. Chesapeake.
Disavowal — due to G. B. — even if war meant — honor, inter
est, principle so much against her — disavowed by Ld Grenville —
disavowal no reparation — shews a disposition only to repair —
project of expl" — particulars and contemporary acts.
Mr. Rose — suggests idea of his friendly return with rep' of
the diff*.

412 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
J. M. reports this to P., who, on consultation on Monday, de
cides vs. this idea, and prefers informal disclosure by R. of
atonement and repeal of procln to be contemporary acts.
Tuesday, Feb1.
J. M. states to Mr. R. objection to adjournment of subject to
G. B., which Mr. Rose admits— -and in conversation as between
hvo private Gentn enquires whether U. S. will agree to a mu
tual discharge from public ships of all natural-born subjects and
Citizens, it appearing to be implied that this might contribute
to diminish difficulties and prepare way for something further —
willing to wait for answer. Wednesday, Feby 3.
Idea of Cabinet that the mutual discharge not inadmissible,
if extended to Merchant Vessels; considering the advantage to
naturalized subjects, of being kept out of danger from being
taken into the jurisdiction of their former Sovereign; and that
Mr. R. be sounded as to his powers and dispositions.
Thursday, Feb> 4.
Conversation of J. M. with Mr. Rose — explained himself on
the subject of Tuesday's conversation, by signifying that his
suggestion was a hasty thought, and that it was most consonant
to his situation to limit the enquiry to the case of deserting
subjects natural born. He was told this was already provided
for by the rules prescribed to our Naval Commanders. Occa
sion was taken to express the desire of the U. States to remove
all causes of danger to the harmony, &c, as well as that exem
plified in affair of Chesapeake, which was evidently of a nature
not likely to recur after disavowal, &c. He did not open him
self as to any thing beyond the limit to which he reduced the
enquiry, acquiescing generally in the desirableness of a general
adjustment, &c. The objections to the delay of seeking further
instructions, &c, was dwelt on by both, and ended in a frank
and direct suggestion by J. M. to let the satisfaction, accept-

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 413
ance, and recall of proclamation, be executed on same day, and
so as not to shew on the face of the proceeding a priority, leav
ing this to be assumed respectively, as might be agreeable. He,
Mr. Rose, would take into consideration with best wishes, but
was not sure that his instructions could bend to it. He held
out the idea of exhibiting without editing the revoking procla
mation, as an expedient to save him. He was told nothing
would be admitted that would expose the Executive to appear
ance of having yielded to his preliminary; and it was remarked
that Mr. Canning, if he had not supposed the Proclamation to
be a retaliation, and that the aggression had been discontinued,
which could not be during the detention of the men, would have
approved this course at least. Mr. Rose glanced at idea of dis
closing his terms, &c, through Mr. Erskine and Mr. Rob' Smith.
He went away under an arrangement for another interview to
morrow, 12 o'clock. Feb" 5th.
Conversation.
Mr. Rose appeared to have taken a view of the proposed con
temporary signing and adjustment of the Proclamation, which
required him to decline it definitively. On my restating it, he
resumed the conversation, and agreed to see me in the evening
at my house, in order to hold frank and informal communica
tions and explanations. Evening of Feb" 5.
He brought Mr. Erskine with him. The conversation was
free. The tenor of a suitable proclamation disclosed, and the
terms he meant to offer, viz: recall of Admiral Berkley; restora
tion of [the?] three men; and provision for families of the killed
and wounded. The idea of restoration to the same ship was stated
to him, which he seemed willing to favor; also punishment of
Berkley, which he said would be difficult by his co-officers, and
be in the result, perhaps, an obstacle to a permanent exclusion
from actual employment. Agreed to see one another at 1 o'clock
to-morrow, at office of State.

414 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
Friday, Feb" 6.
Conversation.
Mr. Rose starts the idea of a disavowal on our part of con
duct of Agents, &c, in encouraging and not discharging desert
ers — natural-born subjects. This was combated as going out of
the case of the Chesapeake and leading to other subjects of
complaint; and particularly as justifying a demand of British
disavowal of — &c, &c. The difficulty, also, as to natural born,
was stated, in cases of naturalization. He was reminded, too,
that orders had been issued and circulated to officers against
recruiting deserters, &c, which was amply sufficient. He retired
under doubts as to the possibility of his satisfying his instruc
tions without obtaining this point.
Monday, Feb* 8th, appointed to meet again.
Monday, Feb" 8.
Instead of the expected matter, Mr. Rose very soon intro
duced, as a point enjoined in his instructions, the necessity of
some disavowal on the part of the U. States as to the conduct
of their agents in encouraging, harbouring, and retaining, de
serters, natural-born subjects of H. B. M. ; as what had preceded
the affair of the Chesapeake, and was but a reasonable satisfac
tion to his Majesty preparatory to the adjustment intended by
him. As this was a new and unlooked-for preliminary ultimatum,
though it had been glanced at in a former conversation, when
it was supposed to have been answered in a way putting it en
tirely aside, it was proposed ¦ to him to reduce it to paper, so
that there might be no possible misconception, with a general
intimation only that it would not be admitted into the adjust
ment, and that it would be impossible for the U. States to view
natural-born subjects of G. Britain, who had been naturalized
here, in any other light than as American Citizens whilst within
American jurisdiction. Mr. Rose agreed to see me the next
day, (Tuesday, Feby 9,) with his idea put into writing, to be in
formally read to me.

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 415
Tuesday, Feb" 9, 1808.
Mr. Rose read from his paper, in substance, that with a view
to remove impressions made by recent events on the mind of
H. B. M., the U. States should disavow the conduct of their
Agents in encouraging, harbouring, and not discharging, natural-
born deserters — a case different from not surrendering, which
was not claimed.
He was reminded of the difficulty as to natural-born subjects
naturalized by the U, States; that if impressions were to be
removed on one side, so on the other, where they were much
greater, from the course of indignities offered by British Ships
in our harbours and on our coasts; that the proposal was not
reciprocal in itself — a thing essential to the honor of the U.
States, [here he remarked that this had not escaped him, read
ing a reservation to the U. States of their right to claim from
G. Britain a like disavowal; to which the reply was, that there
was no reciprocity between an actual disavowal and a right to
ask a disavowal;] and, finally, that it could not enter into the
Chesapeake business, unless other things as much connected
with it were also to be admitted.
Being myself much indisposed, the conversation was soon
ended, with an understanding that I would take the orders of
the President, and see him as soon as convenient.
Sunday, Feb" 14.
This was the earliest that I had health enough to see Mr.
Rose, who was invited to call at my house for the purpose. I
preferred the irregularity, both as to time and place, to a delay,
which was becoming very disagreeable on all sides, and was
rendered to him, as he had indicated, peculiarly distressing, by
his having two British Packets detained till he could say some
thing on the subject of his mission.
Having previously obtained the sanction of the President, I
repeated the insuperable objections to his proposal, (adding, in
fact, that there had been no refusal to discharge deserters, the
demand being always to surrender,) and, in place, suggested a

416 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
mutual disavowal — 1. As to receiving deserters into naval ser
vice. 2d. As to claiming a surrender of them. This would
agree with the principles now maintained on both sides, would
be reciprocal, and might be useful. He admitted that the sur
render was not claimed, but that his instructions did not au
thorise any such general or separate arrangements being re
stricted to the case of the Chesapeake.
It was observed that this was at least as much connected
with that as the case of the discharge; and it was signified that
a mutual, general, and separate disavowal of this case alone
would not be inadmissible, with a saving, by the form of expres
sion, of the principle as to naturalized Citizens. This also was
declined, as not within his instructions.
He was finally told, as had been on former occasions inti
mated, that it would be easy to write a letter on some pretext
to Mr. Erskine, explaining the principles of the U. States as to
Deserters; that if mere assurance of these principles was the
object of his Government, that object would thus be attained as
well as in his mode; if not that, but an expiatory act on the
part of the U. States was the object, it was absolutely inadmis
sible. He dwelt with expressions of great regret on the situation
in which he found himself, tied down, as he was, by his instruc
tions, and knowing, as he did, the impressions of his Govern
ment. To all which it was simply remarked that the attack on
the Chesapeake was a detached, flagrant insult to the flag and
Sovereignty of the U. States on the high seas, in face of the
world; that the plain course was to repair that, according to
usage public and private, and to the examples of his own Gov
ernment; that reparation made, the way was open to any de
mands of redress on other points, if any existed, where it might
be due to the redressing party, and a general example was the
best mode of securing liberal satisfaction.
In course of this conversation, he mentioned, with an apology
for omitting it before when he intended to do it, that a dis
avowal of Commodore Barron's denial that he had such men on
board as were required made a part of his instructions.

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 417
After remarking that it was impossible in any view that that
circumstance could be admitted, and that it was merely noticed
for the sake of truth, which could never do harm where the
manner did not imply something improper, I told him that Bar
ron was responsible to his Government for his conduct in that
instance; that his reply was wholly unbecoming his station;
that it was probable, however, that he said what he believed to
be true; and, indeed, was true, the demand of Humphreys being
for deserters from other ships than that to which the men taken
from the Chesapeake belonged. This he admitted, except as to
one Jenkins Radford, stated to be a deserter from the Halifax.
I told him that, even as to him, we had the authority of the
British Consul at Norfolk that he was a deserter from a Mer
chantman. This he seemed not to be aware of, and said that
if the fact was wrong, he could not found a proceeding on it.
He retired with an intimation that he would revolve the subject
and his instructions still further, and see me when I pleased to
intimate, which was promised as soon as health permitted. His
manner and concluding remarks left it uncertain what determi
nation he would bring to the inverview.
Tuesday, Feb" 16.
Conversation.
Mr. Rose, in consequence of an offer to see him to-day, called
about 2 o'clock. It appeared that he did not consider himself
authorized to accede to either proposal for getting over the dif
ficulty respecting the disavowal required from the U. States of
the conduct of our agents in harbouring, encouraging, and not
discharging deserters. He was reminded that this disavowal,
as stated by him, was as much a departure from the specific case
of the Chesapeake as the mutual disavowals proposed by me,
being general as to deserters, and not restricted to those enter
ing on board the Chesapeake. He seemed sensible of this, and
manifested a disposition to make it rather more limited; but
proposed nothing; nor did he revive the subject of disavowing
Barron's answer; seeming to be prepared for abandoning further
informal conversations, and leaving me to answer in form his
vol. 11. 27

418 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
note of the 26th ult. This was promised as soon as my health, and
some urgent business, [meaning the despatch of the vessel wait
ing at New York to carry letters, &c, to France and G. Brit
ain,] would permit; it being remarked to him that the hopes
that an answer would have been rendered unnecessary had pre
vented me from particularly revolving even a suitable answer.
Monday, Feb" 22.
Mr. Rose having signified by a note last evening a wish for
an interview to-day, 2 o'clock was named, when he called for
the purpose.
His object appeared to be to express his hopes that a failure
of our negociations might be still consistent with a future ad
justment, either here or in England, and to speak of the diffi
culty under which he should find himself in making known to
his Government the points on which the failure would have
taken place; as he could not give this explanation, after a re
fusal of his preliminary, without showing that he had departed
from his instructions. With these remarks he mingled expres
sions of much solicitude that no unfavorable inferences might
be drawn from the obstacles arising from his instructions, and
that he might be instrumental in promoting a removal of them,
which he thought he could best do by personal communications
at London.
It was observed to him, that without meaning to express more
than an abstract opinion, it would seem not difficult to let his
Government understand the points on which the business failed,
by intimating that there were sufficient indications that if the
preliminary had been complied with or got over, the views en
tertained by the Government on those points would have neces
sarily produced a failure. It was intimated, also, that the place
most proper in itself for adjusting the matter was here, not in
G. Britain, and that the propriety was strengthened by what
had passed. If, in the first instance, London had been proposed,
it was with a view to hasten the result.
Mutual observations were made pointing out the inconveni-

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 419
ences of referring the subject to a settlement under new instruc
tions. His attention was drawn to the experiments which had
been made to avoid delay, and it was repeated to him that there
was still a willingness to write a letter, detached from, and sub
ject to, an acceptance of the reparation, in which the principles
and practice of the U. States in the case of Deserters could be
stated, with the addition now authorised, that an order had
issued for discharging from the public Ships all British subjects.
It was remarked that could not be mentioned but in a certain
way, such as such a letter would admit, because the order was
not the result of either legal obligation, or of example; his Gov
ernment instantly refusing to discharge Americans voluntarily
accepting a bounty.
He manifested satisfaction at this course, and signified that
it could not fail to make agreeable impressions and promote
salutary objects. He was reminded that this was more than his
instructions aimed at; and it was for him to decide how far it
would balance the objections to a departure from the letter of
them. He professed to be gratified with the spirit of the conversa
tion, but without any apparent change in the course he was to
pursue, and retired with an understanding that I would see him
at any time he might wish to resume it.
Feb" 25.
Mr. Rose having yesterday asked an interview, was afforded
one to-day. He seemed to have in view to prevent any expec
tation that he would, instead of the disavowal required as to
deserters, accept the information proposed to be given of the
principles and policy of this Government on that subject, by
suggesting, that as this course would be inconsistent with his
powers, he should not act with candor towards us in so doing.
He reiterated his regret that his powers were so limited, and
his belief that the orders issued to discharge all British subjects
from our public ships would make great impression on his Gov
ernment. Little was said in reply, further than repeating the

420 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
inconveniences resulting from such an issue to his mission, and
remarking on our disappointment at the tenor of his instruc
tions, and the length we had prevailed on ourselves to go in
order to surmount the difficulties they occasioned. It was in
timated as one of the inconvenient effects of the actual posture
of the business, that the President was sending a Message to
Congress recommending an extension of precautionary meas
ures, necessarily attended with expence, &c.
Points for Mr. Rose. Wednesday, [Feb" 24.]
Evils of degradation mutually to be shunned
after acceding to the mode of separation cases of impressment
and of the Chesapeake, the demand of such preliminary the
less looked for, so categorical and precise.
The recall of Procl" founded on disavowal, &c, &c.
What is disavowed? Act of unauthorised officer — and prin
ciple of d°, an avowal never presumed — but the contrary.
What to be recalled ? Act of Gov* itself, an act not of ag
gression or of reparation; but wholly of precaution — and refer
ring to wrongs prior to, and wholly distinct from, the affair of
Chesapeake. To revoke the proclamation in face of the world, under such
circumstances, would acknowledge it to be aggressive, and
would originate a reparation on our part instead of receiving
one — a degradation, in fact, the worst of all evils,
and which a nation determined never to be degraded could
never suffer to be imposed on it. Do not wish to require, can
not, therefore, perform, degrading conditions. Unless, there
fore, some new turn to the subject, must proceed from oral to
written communications. If a precise and categorical prelimi
nary shuts the door against all chance and prospect, delay is
fruitless. But if door not shut, it will be agreeable to find that the con
sequences of a failure are not suspended on an ultimatum of
such a character.
The revocation of the Procl" impossible without extending

1808. NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROSE. 421
the disavowal, and assurances, to the several cases which led
to it, and referred to in it, and many of them long lying before
your Government without notice or promise of future security
to the U. States.
Tho' the time unexpected by the P — , no purpose, by hasty
issue on a particular point not perfectly understood, to preclude
amicable explanations, and which might possibly lead to a favor
able result.
General and mutual reasons vs. war — interest, harmony, &c,
Ac. With this view, U. S. desired to settle everything.
Union of Impressments and Chesapeake favorable thereto,
and facilitates latter.
Separation yielded, to the views taken of the subject by G.
B. and to his Mission.
Surprize at; at splitting the case of Chesapeake — entirely
statu quo. Talk Proclamation — precaution vs. other
wrongs — Bradly — Whitby — Love — French ship burnt — Doug1
seiz. of Norfk — Continental disobedience to Procln.*
* The following appears to have been intended for a contingent Proclamation
of the President, recalling his Proclamation of 2 July, 1807: —
" His B. M. having manifested his disposition to re-establish, by an honorable
reparation of the aggression committed in the month of June last on the frigate
Chesapeake of the U. States, by the Leopard, a British ship of war, the good un
derstanding affected by that incident; and this evidence of his disposition to
maintain amity with the U. States being considered as a pledge that such effect
ual measures will be taken on his part as shall ensure from his naval Command
ers an entire respect for the laws and the jurisdiction of the U. States, whilst
within their waters or on their coasts, and render unnecessary the precautionary
measures provided by my proclamation of the 2d of July, 1807: on these consid
erations, and with a view to manifest a corresponding desire to promote a re
turn of entire harmony between the two nations, I have thought proper to issue
this my proclamation, discontinuing all the provisions of the said former procla
mation; and hereby declaring that the same shall become void, cease, and have
no further effect; of which all officers, civil and military, of the U. States, and
all citizens and others within the same, are requested to take notice and act ac
cordingly.''

422 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, FebJ 6, 1808.
Dear Sir, — I received last night your favor of the 3d, and
lose no time in forwarding the papers which it requests. I am
sorry that they have been so long delayed; but, in truth, our
hands have been so full in one way or other of late, that the
transcripts which were to be taken for the office could not be
readily attended to. I am not sure that there may not yet be
some omissions, and must, therefore, ask the favor of you to re
turn such of the papers as you may have copies or not wish
copies of. Should any particular paper wanted not be now
sent, be so good as to drop a hint, and it shall be immediately
attended to.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 18, 1808.
Dear Sir, — I duly received your favor of the 5th, and with it
your observations, addressed to the Department of State, on
the subject of the Treaty of December, 1806, which will be com
municated to Congress with the documents relating to the
negociations, &c, connected with the Treaty; it being under
stood that such a disposition of the paper will conform to your
wishes. Mr. Rose's mission is abortive. Communications on the sub
ject will be made to Congress in a day or two. He made it an
indispensable preliminary to his entering on a negociation, or
even disclosing the terms of satisfaction he had to offer, that
the Proclamation of the President should be put out of force.
This being inadmissible, it was proposed that on his disclosing
his terms, and their appearing to be satisfactory, a repeal of
the Proclamation and the act of reparation might bear the
same date. His instructions being a bar to this, the correspond
ence was closed, with an intimation that it rested with his Gov
ernment to decide on the case. He will depart, I understand,
without delay.

1808. LETTERS. 423
TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 21st, 1808.
Dear Sir, — In the joint letter from you and Mr. Pinkney,
of October, a project on impressments is referred to which does
not appear. I forget what passed with you in conversation on
the subject. You will oblige me by dropping me the state of
the case, and if there be any document in your hands, that you
will be so good as to forward it, or a copy of it. It can, if ne
cessary, be thrown into the mass which will be before Congress.
This will be communicated to-morrow, probably, and will in
clude the proceedings in the case of the Chesapeake, and in re
lation to the general negociations preceding it. I regret much
that you could not afford your aid in selecting from your cor
respondences the parts proper for Congress, and the separation
of these, again, into the parts proper and improper for the public
at large. I have found the task extremely laborious, and be
ing infirm in health, and otherwise hard pressed on important
subjects, I have been obliged to let it devolve in a good meas
ure on others. You would have executed it with a better ap
prehension than many of us of the bearings of many passages,
especially on the feelings and way of thinking in the British
negociations, &c. I am not without fear that errors both of
omission and of commission may have happened. I will take
the liberty of forwarding by to-morrow's mail a list of the let
ters from you and Mr. P., joint and several, which have not
been allotted for communication, and will thank you, if there
be any, or parts of any, which your judgment would have
added, that you would note them to me. Occasion, perhaps,
may be found to get them thrown into Congress before the busi
ness be completed. I wish I could, with the same ease, give
you a view of the distinction between the parts of the papers
communicated; which are confidential within Congress, and
which are not so.

424 WORKS OF MADISON. 1808.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, March 30, 1808.
Dear Sir, — I received last evening your favour of the 26th,
and now enclose the promised list of the communications to
Congress, which gives as much information as can be done in
that form. Where extracts were made, they generally extended,
I believe, to nearly the whole of the letters, it being intended
that the residue should be reduced as much as motives of pru
dence and delicacy would permit. On examining the papers
inclosed, the project concerning impressments does not appear.
Will you be so good as to correct the omission ? A copy of the
original project accompanying your letter of Nov. 11th went to
Congress in its proper place. Of course, the renewal of it at
the latter period does not appear, as the communications now
stated. Being unable to distinguish which of the papers you
wished to be returned, I send the whole, with a request that
after taking them out, the rest may come back to the office. The
inclosed paper contains the correspondence with Mr. Rose, pro
duced by his Mission.

TO JAMES MONROE. Washington, April 18th, 1808.
Dear Sir, — Your favour of came duly to hand,
accompanied by the papers now returned, and by a note on the
correspondence communicated to Congress. It appears that in
most instances the parts allotted for publication coincide with
your wishes. In the excepted instances, an attempt will be
made to have the confidential parts conformed also to these, by
being included in the publication ordered by the House of Rep
resentatives, and by being made a supplement to that ordered
by the Senate, which is already out of the Press. With respect
to the two letters of August 4th and September 13, 1806, which
were not communicated to Congress, the object could not be
effected without a new communication to Congress, to which

1808. LETTERS. 425
the President would be disinclined. They were omitted in the
original communication as not within the general subject of it,
as were ;ny letters relating to such cases. And it would be
somewhat awkward to take up a distinct subject now, even if
the whole correspondence relating to it were embraced.
Will you accept a copy, herewith sent, of the documents, as
complete as they have yet come from the press ?

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, Nov 9, 1808.
Dear Sir, — I find, by the receipt of your last private letter
by Mr. Attwater, that there has been no miscarriage of any pre
ceding one.
The conduct of.the British Cabinet in rejecting the fair offer
made to it, and even sneering at the course pursued by the
United States, prove at once a very determined enmity to them,
and a confidence that events were taking place here which
would relieve it from the necessity of procuring a renewal of
commercial intercourse, by any relaxations on its part. With
out this last supposition, it is difficult to believe that, with the
prospects at home and abroad in Europe, so great a folly would
have been committed. As neither the public nor Congress have
yet had time to disclose the feelings which result from the pos
ture now given to our relations with G. Britain, I cannot speak
positively on that subject. I shall be much disappointed, how
ever, if a spirit of independence and indignation does not
strongly reinforce the past measures with others, which will
give a severity to the contest, of privations, at least, for which
the British Government would seem to be very little prepared,
in any sense of the word. It was, perhaps, unfortunate that all
the intelligence from this country, previous to the close of your
correspondence with Mr. Canning, was from a quarter and
during a period most likely to produce miscalculations of the
general and settled dispositions. You will see in the newspa
pers sufficient evidence of the narrow limits to which discontent

426 AVORKS OF MADISON. 1808.
was confined, and it may reasonably be expected that the coun
ter current will be greatly strengthened by the communications
now going forth to the public.
Among the documents communicated confidentially to Con
gress, I hope you will excuse us for including (with the excep
tion of some small passages) your private letter of Septr 21.
The excellent views which it appeared to take of our affairs
with G. Britain were thought to justify the liberty. They co
incided, indeed, so entirely with the sentiments of the Execu
tive, and were so well calculated to enlighten the Legislative
Body, that it was confidently presumed the good effects would
outweigh the objections in the case. A like liberty was taken
with a private letter to Gen1 Armstrong.
The President's Message mentions that no answer was given
by the French Government, <fec. It may not be inexpedient to
intimate, in order to appreciate this omission, that the note of
Gen1 Armstrong, in consequence of the arrival of the S' Michael,
bears date August 6, whilst he was absent from Paris; that the
Court did not return thither till about the middle of that month;
that no succeeding note on that subject was sent in, the experi
ment being declined under an idea that it would be injurious;
and that the last letter from Gen1 Armstrong to the Depart
ment of State, acknowledging the despatches by the Hope, bears
date the 30 th of August, at certain mineral Springs between
two and three hundred miles from Paris, to which Gen1 Arm
strong had not returned when the Messenger left it. These cir
cumstances will shew that the French Government may easily,
if reflection or events should induce, still take up the relations
with the United States in a favorable view. Gen1 Turreau
fosters such an expectation, and talks of the probability of soon
receiving favorable answers to his representations, whether
with sincerity or from policy is best known to himself.

1808. LETTERS. 427

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, Dec' 5, 1808.
Dear Sir, — I have little to add to the printed information
accompanying my official letter of this date. Congress seemed
to be sufficiently determined, as you will perceive, to resist the
unjust and insulting Edicts of the Belligerents, and differ only
as to the mode best suited to the crisis. The disposition to pre
fer war to the course hitherto pursued is rather gaining than
losing ground, and is even promoted by the efforts of those most
opposed to war with Great Britain, who concur in deciding
against submission, and at the same time contend that with
drawing from the Ocean is submission. It is very questionable,
however, whether a preference of war, to be commenced within
the present session, is so general in Congress, or so much looked
for by the nation, as to recommend the measure. Whether, in
case the measure should be , any such substi
tute providing for war during the recess, as I have communi
cated in one of my last letters, will be acceptable, is more than
I can undertake to say; nothing of the sort having been even
brought into conversation.
I find by conversation with Mr. , that he is him
self favorably impressed by the documents laid before Congress
as to the fairness of our conduct towards the two belligerents,
and that he is willing I should believe that the impression will
be the same on his Government. As it may be conceived by
him, however, to be politic to lull our feelings and suspicions,
I am the less sure that he calculates on any change in the Coun
cils of his Government likely to do justice to those of this Gov
ernment. As to the state of the public mind here, you will sufficiently
collect it from the printed information now forwarded. I can
not believe that there is so much depravity or stupidity in the
Eastern States as to countenance the reports that they will
separate from their brethren, rather than submit longer to the
suspension of their commerce. That such a project may lurk
within a junto ready to sacrifice the rights, interests; and honor,

428 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
of their Country, to their ambitious or vindictive views, is not
to be doubted; but that the body of an intelligent people, de
voted to commerce and navigation, with few productions of
their own, and objects of unceasing jealousy to G. Britain on
account of their commerce and navigation, should be induced to
abandon the Southern States, for which they are the Merchants
and carriers, in order to enter into an alliance with G. Britain,
seems to be impossible. What sort of a Commercial Treaty could
be made between such parties? In truth, the obstacles to one
between the United States and that Nation arise almost wholly
from the patronage by the former of the maritime rights and
interests of the Eastern States, as a portion of the Confederacy.
A Treaty between such parties, if made at all, must be political,
not commercial, and having in view modifications of Govern
ment and aggrandizement of individuals, not the public good.

TO JOEL BARLOW. Washington, February 7, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of  , and
valuing, as I do, the friendly and favorable expressions it con
tains, I cannot but be truly gratified by them.
I perceive that I did not impress Mr. Fulton as distinctly as
I meant to do with the circumstance that, previous to the re
ceipt of his letter, I had, as far as might lie with me, not only
fixed, in my thoughts, on a person for the approaching vacancy
in the department of State, but had taken a step towards an
understanding with him on the subject, which closed it against
reconsideration. This being the case, delicacy will, in every view, be best con
sulted by not entering into the particular considerations which
led to that selection. But I owe it to my high respect for your
talents, and my confidence in your principles, and the purity of
your patriotic zeal, to say that no abatement in the continuance
of either of those sentiments is implied by the course which I

1809. LETTERS.

429

have deemed, under all circumstances and combinations, most
advisable for the public service.
With the greatest esteem, I remain, Dear Sir, your friend
and hble serv'.

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, Febr 11, 1809.
Dear Sir, — My official letter by this conveyance leaves little
of importance to be added to its contents. You will see with
regret the difficulty experienced in collecting the mind of Con
gress into some proper focus. On no occasion were the ideas
so unstable and so scattered. The most to be hoped for at pres
ent is, that a respectable majority will finally concur in taking
a course not essentially dishonoring the resolution not to sub
mit to the foreign Edicts. The last vote taken, as stated in re
port of their proceedings, sixty odd against fifty odd, implies
that a non- intercourse with G. Britain and France, including an
Embargo on exports to those two nations, [should?] be substituted
for the general Embargo existing, and it is not improbable that
8 or 10 of the minority, who prefer a simple adherence to the
latter, will, on finding it cannot be retained, join in the non-in
tercourse proposed. It is impossible, however, to foretell the
precise issue of such complicated views.
If the non-intercourse, as proposed, should be adopted, it will
leave open a trade to all the Continent of Europe, except France.
Among the considerations for not including the other Conti
nental powers with France were — 1st, the certainty that the
Russian Edict, of which I inclose a copy, does not violate our
neutral rights; and, 2dly, the uncertainty as to most of the others
whether they have in force unlawful Edicts or not. Denmark,
it is ascertained, though not officially notified, is under the same
description as Russia. Holland and Spain are the only two
Countries which are known to have copied the several decrees
of France. With respect to Holland, it is understood that she

430 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
will favor as far as she can an intercourse with neutrals, in pref
erence to a co-operation with France. It would be imitating
the cruelty of the Belligerents to retaliate the reluctant injuries
sustained from such a quarter. With respect to Spain, the same
remark is applicable, even if her decrees should not have been
revoked. Besides this, it is particularly important not to ex
tend the non-intercourse to the Spanish Colonies, which, whilst
a part of Spain, would be within the effect of the Spanish De
crees on the question. It is probable, also, that if G. Britain
should lose or withdraw her armies from Spain, she will endeav
our to mitigate the odium by conniving at least at neutral sup
plies; or, rather, not to increase the odium and the evil by sub
jecting them to the famine threatened by the exhausted state pro
duced by the war. As another motive, she may be expected to
consult the sympathies with the parent nation of the Spanish
Colonies, to which her attention will doubtless be turned in the
event of a subjugation of Spain. As to Portugal, there can be
little doubt that the British Cabinet will have prudence, if not
humanity enough, not to oppose a trade supplying that Country
with the necessaries of life.
On what principle is it that G. Britain arrests our trade with
Russia, or even Denmark? Neither of these powers have edicts
to countenance her pretended retaliations; nor can the former
be regarded as under the sway of France, in the sense applied
to some others. Is it that Russia excludes the British flag?
That she has the right to do. England does the same. Is it
that she prohibits a trade with England under a neutral flag ?
That she has an equal right to do, and has equally examples in
the British code justifying it. I have been frequently asked
whether trade from the United States to Russia would be cap
tured. I have been obliged to answer, that as it came under
the letter of the British orders, though excluded by what you
held out as the principle of them, it was to be inferred, from the
spirit and practice of British cruisers and Courts, that such
would be the fate of vessels making the experiment.
The repeal of the Embargo has been the result of the opinion
of many that the period prescribed by honor to that resort

1809. LETTERS. 43I
against the tyrannical Edicts against our trade had arrived, but
principally from the violence excited against it in the Eastern
quarter, which some wished to assuage by indulgence, and others
to chastise into an American spirit by the lash of British spolia
tions. I think this effect begins to be anticipated by some who
have been most clamorous for the repeal. As the Embargo is
disappearing, the orders and decrees come into view, with the
commercial and political consequences whicli they cannot fail
to produce. The English market will at once be glutted, and
the Continental markets, particularly for the sugar and coffee
in the Eastern warehouses, will be sought at every risk. Hence
captures, and clamours against the authors of them. It cannot,
I think, be doubted, that if the Embargo be repealed and the
orders be enforced, war is inevitable, and will, perhaps, be
clamored for in the same quarter which now vents its disap
pointed love of gain against the Embargo.
There is reason to believe that the disorganizing spirit in the
East is giving way to the universal indignation of all parties
elsewhere against it. It is repressed in part, also, by the course
of events abroad, which lessens the prospect of British support
in case of a civil war.
The mode in which Canning's letter got to the press is not as
certained. I have seen it stated, on what authority I know not,
but with some probability, that the copy was obtained from the
Minister here, and was to have been published in the first in
stance at Halifax; but being shewn by the bearer to certain
British partisans, of more zeal than discretion, at Boston, he
was prevailed on to hand it at once to the Palladium, the paper
in which it first appeared.

TO MESS"8 ROCHESTER AND BRENT. Mar. 17th, 1809.
Gentlemen, — I have duly received your letter of the 6th in
stant, conveying the resolutions of a portion of my fellow-citizens
of Washington County, in the State of Maryland.

432 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
The situation of our Country justly awakens the anxious at
tention of all good citizens. Whether an adherence to the just
principles which have distinguished the conduct of the United
States towards the belligerent powers will preserve peace, with
out relinquishing independence, must depend on the conduct of
those powers; and it will be a source of deep regret, if a perse
verance in their aggressions should be encouraged by manifesta
tions among ourselves of a spirit of disaffection to the public
authority, or disobedience to the public measures. To any who
may yield to such a spirit, there cannot be a more instructive
example than is found in the animating pledges of support to
both, flowing from the sensibility of the Citizens of Washing
ton County, for the rights of the nation and the efficacy of the
laws.

TO THOs T. KENNEY. Washington, March 18, 1809.
Sir, — I have received the address conveyed through you, from
"The Republican citizens of the County of Essex, in the State
of New Jersey," with equal sensibility to the friendly motives
which suggested it, and to the patriotic sentiments which it ex
presses. Persuaded that the true interests of our Country, not less
than the precepts of Religion and humanity, make it the duty
of those entrusted with public authority to cherish peace, as long
as more imperious calls will permit, I see, with much pleasure,
the approbation given to the moderate and prudent course
which has been employed for prolonging its blessings.
Among the means best calculated to diminish the risk which
threatens an interruption of these blessings, is a cordial union
of every description of Citizens in supporting their Government
in its necessary authorities, and in promoting the execution of
the laws with an exemplary vigilance. Nothing, therefore,
could be more reproachful than efforts to open one of the most
baneful sources of discord, by arraying the interest of one sec-

1809. LETTERS. 433
tion of our Country against that of another; nor would any
thing be more to be dreaded than such efforts, were not so ef
fectual an antidote to the poison to be found in that liberal
spirit, that brotherly disposition, and those comprehensive
views, which pervade our fellow-citizens at large, and of which
so honorable a sample is now before me.
For the kind prayers which have been offered in my behalf,
I am truly thankful; and I pray, in return, that the authors of
them may experience the choicest tokens of divine favor.

TO EDWARD HALL AND THOs YARROW.
Washington, March 18, 1809.
Gentlemen,— The proceedings of "the Republican Delegates
of the several Townships of the County of Salem, in New Jer
sey, on the 3d instant," transmitted by you, have been duly re
ceived. It is highly agreeable to find in these proceedings our inter
nal embarrassments traced to their true source, in the injustice
and aggressions of foreign powers; and equally so, to see the
measures for counteracting them so entirely approved. It can
not be doubted that these measures have had many salutary
effects, and the efficacy of them would have been still greater,
if the perseverance of those powers in their wrongs had been
less encouraged by unworthy citizens, who have shewn them
selves ready to sacrifice their duty and their Country to the
spirit of party, or the thirst of gain. There could not be a
more honorable contrast than is presented in the sentiments and
determinations of the meeting in the County of Salem; nor
pledges more animating to those charged with the maintenance
of the rights and interests of the nation.
Having borne a part, though less distinguished than your
partiality ascribes to me, in establishing the system of Govern
ment under which we live, I may well be presumed to feel a
solicitude for its success, as well as a conviction of the sound
ness of its principles. Thus far we have all had reason to be
vol. 11. 28

434 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
gratified with its fruits; and nothing could make me more happy
than to be among the instruments of divine Providence in ren
dering it conducive, in the highest possible degree, to the welfare
of our Country.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, March 19, 1809.
Dear Sir, — Mr. Coles left us "this morning. The mail of
yesterday brought a letter from Armstrong of Decr 25, and
Paris papers of the 27th. No change had taken place in our
affairs. The occurrences and prospects in Spain will appear in
the National Intelligencer. No letter from Short, nor is he
named by Armstrong. I conclude he had set out for St Peters-
burgh.

TO WILLIAM HAYWARD. Washington. March 21, 1809.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 14th instant, convey
ing an address from the "Democratic Republican Citizens of
Talbot County, Maryland," and through you return my thanks
for the favorable sentiments which they have expressed of the
principles and purposes by which my public life has been and
will be governed.
The solicitude which they manifest for the preservation of
peace well becomes virtuous citizens of a free Country, which,
placing its glory in doing justice to others, and its ambition in
a pre-eminent happiness within itself, regards national degrada
tion as the only calamity which is not greater than those of
war. To avoid, if it be possible, amidst the unbridled passions
which convulse other Nations, both of these alternatives, is our
true wisdom, as well as our solemn duty; and among the essen
tial means of doing so, are that attachment to the Union, that
zeal for the authority of the laws, and that readiness to devote

1809. LETTERS. 435
life and fortune in the cause of their Country, which are so
laudably avowed by the Citizens of Talbot County. I tender
them my sincere respects and friendly wishes.

TO CORNELIUS COMEGYS. Washington, March 21, 1809.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 16th instant, inclosing
the proceedings of " The Democratic citizens of Kent County,
on the 4th instant."
I am certainly obliged by the kind expressions towards me
which have a place in those proceedings; and the more so, as
the value of them is enhanced by the patriotic spirit which char
acterizes the meeting.
In preferring peace, though prepared for a suspension of its
blessings, when the national rights cannot be otherwise main
tained; and in doing justice to the measures and motives by
which those blessings have been cherished, without an abandon
ment of those rights; they have shewn themselves worthy of the
Country and Government of which they are citizens.
It is a grateful reflection that a like disposition prevails
throughout the great mass of our countrymen; and it may rea
sonably be hoped that the number forming an exception will
every day diminish, under the influence of truth and of the gen
eral example.
I tender to the citizens of Kent County, to whom I am in
debted for the address transmitted by you, my sincere respects
and friendly wishes.

TO TIMOTHY SKINNER. Washington, March 22d, 1809.
Sir, — The Resolutions transmitted through you, as unani
mously adopted by a meeting of the " Republicans of the Town
of Litchfield," have been duly received.

436 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
The conduct, as unexampled as unprovoked, by which the bel
ligerent powers have trampled on the rights of neutral nations,
and in some instances added peculiar insults to the injuries
done to the United States, naturally excite the feelings which
these resolutions manifest.
In such a state of things, whilst it is the duty of the Govern
ment to take its measures with the impartiality and prudence
best calculated to save both our peace and our honor, it is in
cumbent on its constituents to reflect that the efficacy of these
measures must essentially depend on the support which can only
be found in their enlightened patriotism.
It affords pleasure, therefore, to observe, in the proceedings
of the Meeting at Litchfield, sentiments and pledges so well cor
responding with this duty.
In inculcating the vital importance of the Union, and a faith
ful maintenance of its Constitution and laws, they have evinced
a knowledge of the true sources of the public welfare, as well as
a laudable zeal in promoting it.
Happily, the union of these States is founded on so clear a
reciprocity of interests, and the most important constitutional
relations between the general and local authorities is now so
far illustrated by practice, that it may always be expected that
involuntary errors on those subjects will quickly yield to reflec
tion, and that voluntary ones, being confined to a few, will not
long resist the general impulse.
I tender to my fellow-citizens who were associated at Litch
field my sincere respects and friendly wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 28, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I have yours of the 24. The inquiry as to
will be made as soon as an opportunity offers. F. Page
had been appointed before your letter was received, and his
commission forwarded.
We have letters from Erving to January 28. He was at

1809. LETTERS.

437

Cadiz, intending, it appears, to adhere to the Junita Suprema,
till the drama should close, and then leave Spain, by way of
Gibraltar, or England, if no other course offered
itself. I fear he has run from one extreme to another, under
the influence of the existing atmosphere. His view is pretty
much like that in the paper inclosed. Yrujo was at Cadiz,
going on with his mills, which, involving a monopoly, were odi
ous, and not likely to survive popular fury in the only turn of
things that could preserve his patent. He says he has sacri
ficed his fortune in promoting the patriotic cause.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. April 9, 1809.
Dear Sir, — A Secretary of Legation, with a sort of Extra
establishment, has just arrived from England, with despatches
for Erskine. I have a private letter only from Pinkney. The
Ministry of G. Britain are pretty certainly shaken with respect
to this Country. The catastrophe in Spain, and the new policy
to which it leads, have doubtless contributed towards it. But
it is unquestionable that the documents communicated to Con
gress, and the countenance presented by their earlier resolu
tions, afford the true explanation. Erskine has not yet opened
much of his budget to Mr. Smith. The contents of it were not
disclosed to Pinkney; perhaps from an unwillingness to risk a
discovery by France, or a use of them by Armstrong. Private
letters from individuals in England leave no doubt that a great
dread prevailed of our perseverance in the Embargo.
Among the faux pas of Erving, he has brought about an ar
rangement between Izuardi and Hackley, much to be regretted
on account of the latter. It is a sort of Simoniacal contract,
by which H. gives I. 600 dollars a year, and receives from him
the appointment of Vice Consul; Izuardi retaining the title,
without the responsibility of Consul. The contract, with sun
dry details apportioning the functions and formalities, is exe
cuted in due form, with the sanction of Erving as a witness, and

438 WORKS OE MADISON. 1809.
transmitted hither for that of the Government. Erving (who ap
pears to have become a little aware of the folly committed) was
to have applied to the Spanish authorities for an [exequatur?]
to the vice Consulate, but has suspended the application till he
hears from us. In the mean time, the contract is in operation.
No time was lost by the Department of State in giving notice
of the nullity and impropriety of such a transaction. I am per
suaded, from what appears, that Mr. Hackley has been betrayed
into it by his confidence in the judgment and experience of
others. Erving remarks particularly that his conduct was un-
exceptionably delicate. It becomes a serious question, never
theless, whether the contemplated appointment of him at Cadiz
would not leave suspicions that the bargain with Izuardi was
secretly in fulfilment, and of course furnish a handle to a disap
pointed candidate for injurious attacks on the Government, as
well as Mr. Hackley. If it were certain that Jarvis would not
remain at Lisbon, it would mitigate the difficulty by transfer
ring H. thither. It is not probable that Jarvis would be will
ing to remove to Cadiz, which, I believe, is not rated as high as
Lisbon as a Consular birth. I recollect no other vacancy that
would bear a comparison with Cadiz.

TO GOVERNOR SNYDER. Washington, Ap1 13th, 1809.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 6th instant, accom
panied by certain acts of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, which
will be laid before Congress, according to the desire expressed.
Considering our respective relations to the subject of these
communications, it would be unnecessary, if not improper, to
enter into any examination of some of the questions connected
with it. It is sufficient, in the actual posture of the case, to re
mark that the Executive of the U. States is not only unauthor
ized to prevent the execution of a Decree sanctioned by the
Supreme Court of the U. States, but is especially enjoined by

.1809. LETTERS. 439
statute to carry into effect any such decree, where opposition
may be made to it.
It is a propitious circumstance, therefore, that whilst no legal
discretion lies with the Executive of the U. States to decline
steps which might lead to a very painful issue, a provision has
been made by the Legislative act transmitted by you adequate
to a removal of the existing difficulty; and I feel great pleasure
in assuring myself that the authority which it gives will be ex
ercised in a spirit corresponding with the patriotic character of
the State over which you preside.
Be pleased, Sir, to accept the assurances of my respectful con
sideration.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Ap1 2i, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 19th. You
will see in the newspapers the result of the advances made by
G. Britain. Attempts were made to give shapes to the arrange
ment implying inconsistency and blame on our part. They were,
however, met in a proper manner, and readily abandoned, leav
ing these charges in their full force, as they now bear on the
other side. The British Cabinet must have changed its course
under a full conviction that an adjustment with this country
had become essential; and it is not improbable that this policy
may direct the ensuing negociation, mingling with it, at the
same time, the hope that it may embroil us with France. To
this use, it may be expected, the federalists will endeavour to
turn what is already done, at the coming session of Congress.
The steps deemed proper to give the proceeding a contrary
turn will not be omitted. And if France be not bereft of com
mon sense, or be not predetermined on war with us, she will
certainly not play into the hand of her enemy. Besides the
general motive to follow the example of G. Britain, she cannot
be insensible of the dangerous tendency of prolonging the com
mercial sufferings of her Allies, particularly Russia, all of them

440 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
already weary of such a state of things, after the pretext for
enforcing it shall have ceased. She must be equally aware of
the importance of our relations to Spanish America, which must
now become the great object of Napoleon's pride and ambition.
Should he repeal his decrees with a view to this object, the most
probable source of conflict will be in his extending the princi
ple on which he required a prohibition of the Trade with S' Do
mingo to the case of the Spanish Colonies. Nor is it improb
able that he may couple such a requisition with an offer to cede
the Floridas, which would present a dilemma not very pleasant.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, May 1, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I am just favored with yours of the 27th. Young
Gelston is here, preparing to take his passage for France as
bearer and expositor of despatches, in the Syren, sloop of war,
which is waiting for him at Baltimore. He leaves this to-mor
row morning. Mr. Gallatin has had a conversation with Tur-
reau at his residence, near Baltimore. He professes to be confi
dent that his Government will consider England broken down
by the example she has given in repealing her orders, and that
the French decrees will be repealed as a matter of course. His
communications by the Syren will, if he be sincere, press the
policy of an immediate repeal. No official accounts have been
received from the French letters of Marque arrived at Boston.
The difficulty most likely to threaten our relations with France
lies in the effort she may make to render us in some way sub
servient to the reduction of Spanish America; particularly by
withholding our commerce. This apprehension is corroborated
by the language of Turreau. He alluded to his conversations
with you relating to Cuba, on which he builds jealousies which
he did not conceal. Cuba will, without doubt, be a cardinal
object with Napoleon.
The spirit which England will bring into the ulterior nego
ciations must differ much from that which influenced former

1809. LETTERS. 441
Treaties, if it can be moulded to our just views; and we must
be prepared to meet it with a prudent adherence to our essen
tial interests. It is possible, however, that the school of ad
versity may have taught her the policy of substituting for her
arrogant pretensions somewhat of a conciliating moderation
towards the United States. Judging from the tone lately used,
a change of that sort would be the less wonderful. If she can
be brought to a fair estimate of her real interest, it seems very
practicable to surmount the obstacles which have hitherto kept
us at variance, and, until surmounted, must continue to do so.
The case of impressments, hitherto the great obstacle, seems to
admit most easily of an adjustment, on grounds mutually advan
tageous.

TO THOMAS EVANS. Washington, May, 1809.
Sir, — I have duly received from you a copy of the proceed
ings of the meeting of Citizens at Accomac Court House, the
1st instant, on the subject of the late negotiation with G. Brit
ain, and of the Proclamation by which it was followed.
Next to the consciousness of a faithful discharge of public
duty, is the satisfaction afforded by a public approbation of it.
I cannot be insensible, therefore, to the favorable views of my
conduct expressed by my fellow-citizens, at whose meeting you
presided; however feeble the title is felt to be which is limited
to the honest execution of. a duty contemplated by law, and en
joined by the policy which has been uniformly exemplified by
our public Councils.
It will be happy, if, as we hope, the further negotiation with
G. Britain should be equally successful, as the means of fixing
on a liberal and lasting basis friendship and commercial inter
course between the two Countries; and still more happy, if, in
addition, a spirit of justice in other Governments with whom
differences exist should concur with the conciliatory disposition
of the United States in such a termination of them as will guar-

442 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
anty our tranquillity and commercial interests against future
interruptions. In promoting this desirable state of our foreign relations, I
trust there will be no failure of becoming endeavours on my
part, and in that event only will the support be merited which
is promised to the Administration of our Government.
I tender to my fellow-citizens, who have made their commu
nication through you, and to yourself, assurances of my respect
and friendly wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, May 30, 1809.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 22d did not come to hand till
the day before yesterday.
The new-fangled policy of the Federal party, you will have
noticed, has made a considerable figure in the newspapers.
Some of the Editors are resuming the old cant, and the others
will doubtless soon follow the example. Nothing could exceed
the folly of supposing that the principles and opinions manifested
in our foreign discussions were not, in the main at least, com
mon to us; unless it be the folly of supposing that such shallow
hypocrisy could deceive any one. The truth is, the sudden and
unlooked-for turn of the British Cabinet has thrown the party
entirely off the centre. They have at present no settled plan.
There is reason to believe that the leaders are sound towards
England, and much less disposed than heretofore to render our
interests subservient to hers. Expressions have been used by
one, at least, of the Essex Cabinet, whether sincerely or insid
iously may not be absolutely certain, from which it is inferred
that a disposition exists in that quarter not even to continue
the non-intercourse act against France. Certain it is, that the
desire of war with her is no longer manifested; that the defi
ciency of the English markets excites a keen appetite for a trade
with the Continent; and that a real uneasiness is felt lest the
negotiations with G. Britain should end in sacrifices on our

1809. LETTERS. 443
part, which they have been reproaching the administration for
not being ready to make. As one proof of their present feel
ings, the federal leaders shew a marked alienation from Erskine.
The elections in Massachusetts, as well as in New Hampshire
and New York, have issued unfavorably. But the smallness
of the majority, and the overstrained exertions it has required,
seem to repress rather than flatter the successful party. No
confidence is felt in the permanency of the triumph.
Not a line has been received of late from any one of our for
eign agents. All that is known is, therefore, to be gathered
from the ordinary and fallacious channels.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 12, 1809.
DE Sir, — The Pacific has just returned from G. Britain, bring
ing the accounts to be seen in the newspapers. The communi
cations from Pinkney add little to them. The new orders, con
sidering the time and that the act was known, on the passage
of which the instructions lately executed by Erskine were pre
dicated, present a curious feature in the conduct of the British
Cabinet. It is explained by some at the expense of its sincerity.
It is more probably ascribed, I think, to an awkwardness in
getting out of an awkward situation, and to the policy of with
holding as long as possible from France the motive of its ex
ample to have advances on her part towards adjustment with
us. The crooked proceeding seems to be operating as a check
to the extravagance of credit given to Great Britain for the
late arrangement with us; and so far may be salutary.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 20, 1809.
Dear Sir,— Yours of the 16th came to hand yesterday. The
Gazette of yesterday contains the mode pursued for reanima-

444 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
ting confidence in the pledge of the British Government given
by Mr. Erskine in his arrangement with this Government. The
puzzle created by the order of April struck every one. Erskine
assures us that his Government was under such impressions as
to the views of this, that not the slightest expectation existed
of our fairly meeting its overtures, and that the last order was
considered as a seasonable mitigation of the tendency of a fail
ure of the experiment. This explanation seems as extraordi
nary as the alternatives it shews. The fresh declarations of
Mr. Erskine seem to have quieted the distrust, which was be
coming very strong; but has not destroyed the effect of the ill
grace stamped on the British retreat, and of the commercial
rigor evinced by the new and insidious duties stated in the
newspapers. It may be expected, I think, that the British Gov
ernment will fulfil what its Minister has stipulated; and that if
it means to be trickish, it will frustrate the proposed negotia
tion, and then say their orders were not permanently repealed,
but only withdrawn, in the mean time.
The only question likely now to agitate Congress will be on
the Bill which opens our ports to French as well as British
ships of war. The Senate have passed it unanimously. Whether
the Federalists were sincere, or wished the debate, &c, to take
place in the House of Representatives, remains to be seen.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 27, 1809.
DR Sir, — I have received a private letter of March 30 from
Gen1 Armstrong, in which he desires me " to present him most
respectfully and cordially to you, and inform you that, by the
next public Ship that goes to America, he shall have the pleas
ure to send you an alteration of Mr. plough,
which, in light soils, is a great improvement upon the old one."
To me, he adds: "By the same vessel, I propose consigning,
&c, a machine of prodigious consequence under present circum
stances, combining great usefulness and little expence, and

1809. LETTERS.

445

meant to take the place of the common, small spinning-wheel in
the manufacture o,f flax, tow, and hemp. It occupies little more
room than the old spinning-wheel, is put and kept in motion by
any old or young negro wench, gives you twelve threads instead
of one, and those of better texture, and (if you ohuse it) of
greater fineness than can be given by fingers. The maker, who
is an American, will probably accompany it."
On public affairs, he says that tlie French Government had
made several favorable regulations; among them, one for re
storing the cargoes, suggested under the municipal operation of
the Berlin Decree: all of which, had been arrested by a belief,
founded on language used in the British Parliament, that the
United States were about to make war on France. The Men
tor, which is said to have arrived the latter end of April, will
have given more correct, though possibly not satisfactory infor
mation, of the policy prevailing here. Nothing more is known
of the late Battle in Germany than you will see in the newspa
pers. The Senate passed unanimously the Bill of non-inter
course with France, with a paragraph admitting French Ships
of War, in common with British, into our waters. The House
of Representatives rejected yesterday, by a large majority, a
motion to discriminate in favor of the British ships.

4
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. July i, 1809.
Dear Sir, — Tlie inclosed letter accompanied the skin of an
Animal, not named by the writer, which belongs to the Region
of the Rocky Mountains. The bundle being too large for the
Mail, I shall forward it by some other opportunity; perhaps as
far as Orange by a wagon. I shall soon leave on the return
thither. You will have seen that a renomination of J. Q. Adams for
Russia has succeeded with the Senate. In framing his credence,
it will be proper to adapt it to that given to Mr. Short, which
deviated from the beaten form; and it appears that the original

446 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
in that case passed on to Mr. Short, without being opened at
the office of State. No copy, therefore, exists, but the one re
tained by yourself. Will you be so good as to lend me that,
sending it to Orange Court House to await my arrival there,
which will probably be at an early day next week? We con
tinue without news from Europe later than the rumour from
Holland of a defeat of the Austrians.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, July 7, 1809.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letter from Mr. Short came under
cover to me. It was brought by the vessel lately arrived at
Philadelphia from Dunkirk. It appears that he had not left
Paris for Petersburg!), nor meant to do so until he should hear
further from the United States, as he has probably explained to
you. Mr. Coles had reached Paris, but in the absence of the
French Court nothing could be said very interesting on the
subject of his errand. From a paragraph in a letter from Gen1
Armstrong to Mr. Gallatin, it would seem that the French Min
isters were disposed to patronize a relaxation of the commer
cial policy of the Emperor, and that he was disposed to listen
to any expedient that would save him from the appearance of
inconsistency, and retreat from his stand against G. Britain.
There is some ground, therefore, to hope that the previous re
treat of the latter may have a good effect, unless his new suc
cesses should inspire a pertinacity in his old projects. It is
certain that great inconveniences are felt in France from the
want of external commerce, and that the opening presented by
the repeal of the British orders, not only for a reasonable trade
with the United States, but through that between the different
parts of the Continent itself, must render a continuance of the
blockading system peculiarly grating every where. The arri
val of Dashkoff makes it proper that I should not leave Wash
ington before he reaches it, which I fear will not be for some
days. My purpose was to have set out to-morrow, or on Mon
day at farthest.

1809. LETTERS. 447
TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF NEW ORLEANS. July 23d, 1809.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your act of June 10th with
the sensibility due to the kindness of its expressions towards
me personally, and with all the gratification which the just and
patriotic view it takes of the public welfare ought to inspire.
The peace and plenty which have distinguished our Country,
amid the convulsions and calamities forming the general char
acter of the times, and under the perplexities resulting to our
affairs, claim for the policy which has preserved those blessings
the approbation you bestow on it. Such marks of attachment
to the solid interest of our Country, and of confidence in the
public Councils, are the more to be valued, as the trials imposed
on us by foreign injustice have not yet ceased, and as it is
among those who are most averse to war whilst it can be hon
ourably avoided that we are, at all times, to look for the most
unyielding support of the national rights when peace can no
longer be preserved.
I behold with the truest satisfaction the advantages which
the Territory and City of New Orleans have reaped from their
incorporation with the United States, and especially that you
are so fully sensible of the degree in which they are the fruits
of our free system of Government, administered in the spirit
which belongs to it. The Nation into whose bosom you have
been received must always rejoice in your prosperity, because
it at once indicates and promotes the general prosperity. Never
was such a connection more distinctly pointed out by nature
herself, nor can the reciprocal benefits of it ever cease whilst
the laudable and enlightened sentiments which you proclaim
shall continue to pervade the great body of our fellow-citizens.
I tender you my sincere respects and my best wishes.

448 WORKS OF MADISON.. 1809.
TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MISSISSIPPI TERRITORY.
July, 1809.
I have duly received your address of July 5, and cannot be
the less impressed by your friendly confidence in my principles
and views, that it is entertained by a portion of my political
brethren, under the circumstances incident to the Mississippi
Territory. The Constitution of the United States is well entitled to the
high character you assign to it. It is among the proofs of its
merit that it is capable of inspiring with admiration and attach
ment the most distant members of the comprehensive family
over whom its guardianship extends. And it is equally honor
able to their enlarged patriotism to cherish those sentiments,
whilst the immaturity of their situation suspends a part of the
advantages common to their fellow-citizens of the elder commu
nities. With my cordial respects, I offer a return of my best wishes
for the prosperity and happiness of yourselves, and of the com
munity which you represent.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpellier, July 23d, 1809.
Dear Sir, — On my arrival at Orange Court House on Thurs
day, I found your favor of the 12th instant, with the document
expected, and the letters from Short and Warden inclosed. The
whole are now returned. No copy of the document was in the
office of State, as you suppose must have been the case. This
was owing to the letter being written by your own hand at
Monticello, and being sent on to Mr. Short without being opened
at Washington. Mr. Short's idea of leaving commerce to shift
for itself is not as new as he seems to think; and is liable to
greater objections in the case stated, at least. A decisive ob
jection would have been, that the expedient would have given
all the trade wanted to the power commanding the Sea, whilst

1809. LETTERS. 449
this would have cut off the commerce with its enemy; and thus
have found an adequate motive to keep in force its obnoxious
orders, as answering all its purposes. It was to be considered,
also, as a further objection, that such an expedient would have
involved our ignorant and credulous mariners in the penalties
incurred by the mercantile adventurers, without the indemnify
ing advantages which the latter would secure to themselves. It
may be added, that so formal an abandonment of the national
rights would not have borne an honorable appearance; though
the discredit would have been mitigated by examples of power
ful nations, and still more by the peculiarities of the actual state
of the world.
I have not received a line from any quarter, nor even a news
paper, since I left Washington. I can say nothing, therefore,
on the score of news. I was detained at Washington some days,
by an unwillingness to leave it at the moment Dashkoff was to
be expected. Although titularly not more than a Charge, he
brought a letter of Credence from the Emperor himself. His
conversation was in the spirit of this evidence of the respect
and good will of his Sovereign towards the United States.
Adams has accepted his appointment, and will embark as soon
as practicable. Dashkoff was extremely anxious for an inter
view with him before his departure; and had proposed one at
New York, if consistent with Mr. Adams' arrangements.
It is a part of our plan to pay our respects to Monticello, but
we can say nothing as yet of the time. It will afford us much
gratification to welcome you here, and with all of your family
that can accompany you.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpelliee, Aug. 3, 1809.
Dear Sir, — Herewith you will receive a packet, which being
wrapt up in a large one for me, from the Department of State,
was taken out of the mail yesterday, and not observed before
the rider had set out.
vol. 11. 29

450 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
I find myself under the mortifying necessity of setting out
to-morrow morning for Washington. The intricate state of our
affairs with England, produced by the mixture of fraud and
folly in her late conduct, and the important questions to be de
cided as to the legal effect of the failure of the arrangement of
April on our commercial relations with her, are thought by the
Heads of Department to require that I should join them. The
main question is, whether the non-intercourse act, as continued
at the last session, comes into force against England, thereby
putting her on the same footing with France.
You will see by the instructions to Erskine, as published by
Canning, that the latter was as much determined that there
should be no adjustment as the former was that there should
be one. There must, however, have been other instructions,
comprehending the case of the Chesapeake, and pther communi
cations from Canning accompanying the British orders of April
26, as referred to in Erskine's quieting declaration last made
to Mr. Smith. I believe, also, that Erskine's letter to Canning,
not disclosed by the latter, will not warrant his ascribing to
Erskine the statement of conversations with Mr. Gallatin, Mr.
Smith, and myself. Pinkney will also disavow what Canning
has put in his mouth.
I presume, from letters which reached me yesterday, that Mr.
Smith has communications from Paris as late as the 10th or
12th of June; whether by the return of Mr. Coles or another
conveyance is uncertain. The disavowal in England reached
Paris the day after the arrival of the arrangement transmitted
by Mr. Gelston. Our affairs with France had taken no decided
turn; owing, as alledged, to the absence and occupation of the
Emperor. The return of Gelston will probably put ns in pos
session of a final estimate.

L809. LETTERS. 451
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpellier, Aug. 16, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I got home from my trip to Washington on Sat
urday last, having remained there three days only. You will
have seen in the Proclamation issued the result of our consul
tations on the effect of what has passed on our commercial re
lations with G. Britain. The enforcement of the non-inter
course act against her will probably be criticized by some
friends, and generally assailed by our adversaries, on the
ground that the power given to the Executive, being special,
was exhausted by the first exercise of it; and that the power
having put out of force the laws to which it related, could, un
der no possible construction, restore their operation. In oppo
sition to this reasoning, it was considered that the act of the
last session continuing the non-intercourse no otherwise ex
cepted G. Britain than by a proviso that it should not affect
any trade which had been or might be permitted, in conformity
with the section of the original act authorising a proclamation
in favor of the nation revoking its Edicts; and that the procla
mation in favor of G. Britain was not conformable to that sec
tion. It was not so in substance, because the indispensable pre
requisite, a repeal of the Orders in Council, did not take place.
It was not so even in form; the law requiring a past and not a
future fact to be proclaimed, and the proclamation, on its face,
pointing to a future, not a past fact. This difficulty was felt at
the time of issuing the first proclamation; but it yielded to the
impossibility of otherwise obtaining, without great delay, the
coveted trade with G. Britain, and an example that might be
followed by France; to the idea that the mode in which the re
peal, though future, of the orders and of the law, was coupled
by the proclamation, might, on the occurrence of the former,
give a constructive validity to the latter; and to the opportu
nity afforded by an intervening session of Congress for curing
any defect in the proceeding. In one respect, it would have
been clearly proper for Congress to have interposed its author
ity, as was frequently intimated to members; that is, to provide

452 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
for the contingency, not so much of a disavowal by G. Britain,
which was never suspected, as of her not receiving the act of
her Minister till after the 10th of June. Congress, however,
never could be brought to attend to the subject, although it was
pressed by several members, I believe, certainly by 
 , on the general ground, that the Proclamation, however

acceptable, was not in a form, nor under the circumstances, con
templated by law. In some of the instructions given by Mr.
Gallatin's circular, a liberty has been taken having no plea but
manifest necessity, and as such will be before Congress.
Erskine is in a ticklish situation with his Government. I
suspect he will not be able to defend himself against the charge
of exceeding his instructions, notwithstanding the appeal he
makes to sundry others not published. But he will make out a
strong case against Canning, and be able to avail himself much
of the absurdity and evident inadmissibility of the articles dis
regarded by him. He can plead, also, that the difference be
tween his arrangement and the spontaneous orders of April 26
is too slight to justify the disavowal of him. This difference
seems, indeed, to limit its importance to the case of Holland,
and to consist in the direct trade admitted by the arrangement,
and an indirect one through the adjoining ports, required by
the orders. To give importance to this distinction, the Minis
try must avow, what, if they were not shameless, they never
would avow, that their object is not to retaliate injury to an
enemy, but to prevent the legitimate trade of the United States
from interfering with the London smugglers of sugar and coffee.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpellier, Aug. 23, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I see by the papers that Mr. Smith has probably
received despatches from Mr. Pinkney by a late arrival; but
being in Baltimore, I have not yet heard from him on the sub
ject. The newspaper dates from London were not later than
the 3d of July; of course give nothing from the Continent. It

1809. LETTERS. 453
appears only, in confirmation of late accounts, that Russia, as
well as Holland, adhere with rigor to the means of excluding
British Trade. Colonial produce, even Dutch in neutral ves
sels, is to be warehoused in Holland.

TO WILLIAM EUSTIS, SECRETARY OF WAR.
Momtpellier, August 30, 1809.
Dear Sir, — Several considerations appearing to render it ex
pedient that the Commander-in-Chief, now in the Territory of
Orleans, should be at the seat of Government, as soon as the
prerequisites to his setting out will permit, you will please to
transmit him instructions to that effect.
Should the correspondence between the Navy Department
and Captain Porter not have been otherwise communicated to
you, the enclosed copy of it will give information proper to be
possessed by you. Accept my respects and best wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpellier, Sep'f 11, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I send herewith a few papers which have come
to my hands, along with those addressed to myself.
Jackson, according to a note sent from Annapolis, to Mr. Smith,
was to be in Washington on Friday evening last. The letters
from Mr. Pinkney, brought by him, were dated June 23, and
merely rehearsed a conversation with Canning; from which it
would seem that Canning readily admitted that his second con
dition (Colonial trade) had no connection with the subject, and
that it was not to be expected the United States would accede
to the 3d, (G. Britain to execute our laws.) Why, then, make
them ultimate? or if not ultimate, why reject the arrangement
of Erskine for not including them? For as to the first article,
if he does not fly from his language to Pinkney, the continuance
of the non-intercourse against France cannot be denied to be a
substantial fulfilment of it. From this view of the matter, it

454 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
might be inferred that Jackson comes with a real olive in his
hand. But besides the general slipperiness of his superior, some
ideas fell from him in his conversation with Pinkney justifying
distrust of his views.

TO DOCTOR DAVID RAMSAY. September 20, 1809.
Sir,— I have received the Resolutions of the meeting of cit
izens in Charleston, on the 5th instant, covered by your favor
of the same date.
These Resolutions comprise too many circumstances enhan
cing the value of the patriotism they breathe not to afford par
ticular satisfaction.
However a difference of views may be indulged on subordi
nate questions of policy, a union of all, on such as evidently af
feet the Sovereignty, the honor, or the essential interests of the
nation, is a duty to which every denomination of citizens will
rally, whose love of Country elevates them above a spirit of
party. Of this genuine patriotism, the meeting at which you
presided has given a conspicuous example.
The occasion which led to this proceeding of your fellow-cit
izens is as much regretted as it was little to be anticipated. It
could the less have been anticipated, as, besides the respect due
to an arrangement solemnly entered into by a plenipotentiary
Minister, and not only strictly, but irrevocably, carried into ex
ecution by the other party, the arrangement itself was of a na
ture to claim a ready sanction, even if, contrary to every ground
of confidence, it had not been within the scope of previous in
structions. Whether the sequel may better correspond with the wishes
and hopes of the United States, founded on that attachment to
peace wliich they have proclaimed, and on that exemplary jus
tice which they have practised, remains to be seen. In no event
can the citizens of Charleston lose the merit of having evinced
a unanimity and zeal not less calculated to avert than to meet

1809. LETTERS. 455
aggressions prompted by a misconception of the American char
acter. For the confidence which the meeting has been pleased to ex
press in my faithful pursuit of the public good, I feel all the ob
ligations which it demands. In tendering this acknowledgment
of them, I beg, at the same time, that you will accept for your
self assurances of my particular esteem.

TO THE GENERAL REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE OF THE CITY AND
COUNTY OF NEW YORK. Septf 24, 1809.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your address, bearing date the
15th instant, with a due sense of the kind sentiments it ex
presses, and of the favorable light in which it views my ad
vancement to the Executive trust, and the several considera
tions which led to it.
In proportion as the present situation of our Country is inter
esting, it is consoling to find the conviction becoming univer
sal, that the difficulties rendering it so have resulted from the
accumulated wrongs committed by the principal belligerent
nations, in spite of the justice and forbearance of the United
States, which ought to have averted them; and that the only
remedy is to be found in a firm and patriotic support of the
measures devised and pursued by the Constituted Authorities.
The pledge and example of this duty presented in your ad
dress is entitled to the highest praise. Devoutly praying that
a sympathy and emulation every where may, under the divine
blessing, have the happy effect of preserving to our Country the
advantages of peace, without relinquishing its rights or its
honor, I tender to you, and to those whose sentiments you con
veyed, my cordial respects and my best wishes.

456 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.

TO THE WASHINGTON AND JEFFERSON ARTILLERY, AT RICHMOND,
VIRGA, COMMANDED BY JOHN H. PRICE.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 18 th instant, commu
nicating the unanimous resolution of the Washington and Jef
ferson Artillery, under your command, making a tender of their
services, in case the exigencies of their Country should call for
them. The best resource for the security of our Country, and the
maintenance of its rights, being in the unanimity and patriotic
zeal of its Citizens, no greater satisfaction can be afforded to a
Government, faithful to its trust, than results from the confi
dence which is felt in that public spirit of which your commu
nication presents so laudable a specimen.
Should the painful necessity of appealing to the military vir
tues of the nation be rendered unavoidable by the future con
duct of those whose past has been so little amicable or just, the
services now proffered cannot fail to receive the attention due
to them.
With my thanks for the kind expressions for which I am per
sonally indebted, I tender my respects and good wishes.
Sept* 26, 1809.

TO MATTHEW WALTON. Sept' 27, 1809.
Sir, — I have duly received the resolutions of the inhabitants
of Washington County, in Kentucky, assembled on the 28th of
August. The determination evinced by these Resolutions to maintain
the National rights and honor, against aggressions from what
ever quarter, cannot but be acceptable to those to whose re
sponsibility those essential objects are in a material degree
committed. Persuaded that the difference in the views taken on some
points from those which may prevail in the Executive Councils

1809. LETTERS. 4517
is combined with the purest zeal for the public good, I perceive
in such a motive, and in that reasonable confidence which is exj
pressed in the constituted authorities, a sufficient assurance
that the conduct of my fellow-citizens, at whose meeting you
presided, will adapt itself to the course of measures which may
result from a further development and a comprehensive survey
of our foreign relations.
For the expressions of personal regard and confidence towards
me I tender my sincere thanks, and a return of my friendly
wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Oct. 6, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I inclose, for perusal, a letter from Mr. Dupont
D. N. What does he mean by his desire "to contribute" to the
execution of his project of Education ? You will observe that
he has sent for you a copy of the works of Turgot, as far as
edited. Be so good as to point out the mode in which you wish
them to be tiansmitted. I expect a wagon here next month
which can take them to Orange, if you prefer that conveyance
to a water one to Richmond.
The late news from Europe will be found in the newspapers.
Jackson has been presented, and is on the threshold of business.
He is not deficient in the diplomatic professions, but nothing
appears to contradict the presumption that he is so in the requi
site instructions.

TO JOHN M. CREYON. October 17, 1809.
Sir, — I have received the Resolution unanimously entered
into by the Citizens of Columbia, and covered by your letter of
the 20th of September.
The very unexpected and inauspicious turn given to our rela
tions with G. Britain by the disavowal of the friendly arrange-

458 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
ment concluded by her accredited Minister, could not fail to
excite a lively sensibility among a people conscious of their own
just purposes, and satisfied of the reasonable views and good
faith which have been evinced by their own Government.
In such a posture of our affairs, it is a happy consideration
that a disposition more and more prevails to review the course
which has been pursued in our foreign relations, with a due at
tention to the causes which have produced and prolonged the
embarrassments which have distinguished them, and to unite in
support of the public authorities in tlie measures which may be
best adapted to the peculiarity of the crisis.
Such a union alone can be wanted to command respect from
foreign nations to our rights, or to vindicate them with success.
I tender to my fellow-citizens of Columbia my respects and
friendly wishes.

TO COL. JOHN McINTOSH. Washington, October 28, 1809.
Sir, — I have just received, under your cover of September 25,
the unanimous Resolutions of a Meeting of the Inhabitants of
Mlntosh County.
In the present unsettled state of our external affairs, and par
ticularly in that produced by the refusal of the British Govern
ment to fulfil an engagement, characterized as was that of its
Minister Plenipotentiary, faithful citizens of every section of
their Country cannot but be warmly alive to the multiplied
wrongs which it has suffered, and to the important duty of sup
porting the Constituted Authorities in the discharge of theirs.
The Resolutions which you have transmitted are a proof that
the Citizens of the County of McIntosh are animated by such
feelings. As far as these may be seconded by a confidence in
the principles and views which guide the Executive Depart
ment, it becomes me to express the sensibility which is due to
it, to which I add my respects and friendly wishes for those at
whose meeting you presided.

1809. LETTERS. 459
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Octr 30, 1809.
Dear Sir, — In the operation of removing from my former
quarters, the Digest of the City Code and business, which you
had been so good as to furnish me, has, by some unaccountable
accident, been lost, or possibly so thrown out of place as not to
be found. I have written to Capt. Coles to take Monticello in
his way, and ask the favor of you to permit him to take another
copy from your original. As that letter, however, may not
reach him, I must beg you to signify my wishes to him, in case
he should call on you, as he probably will.
I inclose the latest accounts from Europe. Onis has returned
to Philadelphia. The reality or degree of his disappointment
is not easily ascertained. His last conversation with Mr. Smith
did not manifest ill humour. How could he expect a different
result, in the actual state of things? And what motive can
Spain or the Colonies have, in any state of things, to make en
emies of the United States? I see nothing to change the view
of Jackson, which I formerly hinted to you.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Nov' 6, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I received your letter from Eppington. I had
not heard that either the Attorney General or the Governor of
Illinois meant to resign.
Inclosed are several letters for you, received from France by
the return of the Wasp. You will see the propriety of my
adding one to myself from Mr. Short, to be returned after peru
sal. Our information from Paris, of the 19th of September,
gives no countenance to the rumoured renewal of hostilities in
Austria. The delay of peace in form alone keeps alive such
rumours. But why should such an event flatter the hopes of G.
Britain? According to all the lessons of experience, it would
quickly be followed by a more compleat prostration of her Ally.

460 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
Armstrong had forwarded to the French Court the measure
taken here in consequence of the disavowal of Erskine's ar
rangement, but there had not been time for an answer. The
answer to the previous communication had been, let England
annul her illegal blockade of France, and the Berlin decree will
be revoked; let her then revoke her orders of November, and
the Milan decree falls, of course. This state of the question
between the two powers would promise some good, if it were
ascertained that by the blockade of France previous to the Ber
lin decree was meant that of May, extending from the Elbe to
Brest, or any other specific act. It is to be feared that there is
an intentional obscurity, or that an express and general renun
ciation of the British practice is made the condition. From G.
Britain we have only newspaper intelligence. The change in
the Ministry seems likely to make bad worse, unless we are to
look for some favorable change in the extremity to which things
must rapidly proceed under the quackeries and corruptions of
an administration headed by such a being as Perceval. Jack
son is proving himself a worthy instrument of his patron, Can
ning. We shall proceed with a circumspect attention to all the
circumstances mingled in our affairs, but with a confidence, at
the same time, in a just sensibility of the nation to the respect
due to it.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Dec' 11, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I duly received your two letters of the 26 and
30 ult. The state of Col. Monroe's mind is very nearly what I
had supposed. His willingness to have taken a seat in the
Cabinet is what I had not supposed. I have written to Major
Neely, according to your suggestion, and shall follow it, also, as
to the distribution of Govr Lewis' papers when they arrive.
Fayette, in a letter to me, has been equally urgent on the sub
ject of his land titles, which are required as the basis of a loan.
Owing to delays incident to the distance and the nature of the

1809. letters. 46i
proceedings in consummating land titles, and more particularly
to the miscarriage of a mail containing instructions from Mr.
Gallatin, which was long unknown to him, the business has
never been compleated. I have renewed my efforts to acceler
ate it, and have so written to Fayette, by the Ship John Adams,
which carries a remittance from the Treasury to Holland, and
will touch at France and England for collateral purposes. It
was found cheaper to make the remittance in this way than by
Bills of Exchange, at their present rate. The papers will tell
you what Congress are about. There is not, as yet, any ap
pearance by which their course can be foretold. The Republi
cans, as usual, are either not decided, or have different leanings.
The Federalists are lying in wait to spring on any opportunity
of checking or diverting the tide now setting so strongly against
them.

TO THOMAS HERTELL, N. Y. Dec' 20, 1809.
Dear Sir, — I have been some time a debtor for your favor of
Novr 11th, accompanied by a copy of your Expose. It reached
me at a [time?] when my attention had some particular calls on
it; and I was so unlucky as to lose, by an accident, the answer
which I had prepared for a late mail.
I now repeat the thanks it contained for your communication.
I have read with pleasure the interesting lights in which you
have placed a subject which had passed through so many able
hands. The task of abolishing altogether the use of intoxica
ting, and even exhilarating drinks, is an arduous one. If it
should not succeed in the extent at which you aim, your mode of
presenting the causes and effects of the prevailing intemperance,
with the obligation and operation of an improved police and
of corrective examples, cannot fail to recompense your efforts,
though it should not satisfy your philanthropy and patriotism.
A compleat suppression of every species of stimulating indul
gence, if attainable at all, must be a work of peculiar difficulty,

462 WORKS OF MADISON. 1809.
since it has to encounter not only the force of habit, but pro
pensities in human nature. In every age and nation some ex
hilarating or exciting substance seems to have been sought for,
as a relief from the languor of idleness, or the fatigues of labor.
In the rudest state of Society, whether in hot or cold climates,
a passion for ardent spirits is in a manner universal. In the
progress of refinement, beverages less intoxicating, but still of
an exhilarating quality, have been more or less common. And
where all these sources of excitement have been unknown, or
been totally prohibited by a religious faith, substitutes have
been found in opium, in the nut of the betel, the root of the gin
seng, or the leaf of the tobacco plant.
It would doubtless be a great point gained for our country,
and a great advantage towards the object of your publication,
if ardent spirits could be made only to give way to malt liquors,
to those afforded by the apple and pear, and the lighter and
cheaper varieties of wine. It is remarkable, that in the coun
tries where the grape supplies the common beverage, habits of
intoxication are rare; and in some places almost without ex
ample. These observations, as you may well suppose, are not made
for notice in a new edition of your work, of which they are cer
tainly not worthy, even if they would not too much vary from
your own view of the subject. They are meant merely as an
expression to yourself of that respect for the laudable object
of the Expose, and for its author, of which sincere assurances
are tendered.

THE REV" WILLIAM BENTLEY.
Washington, December 27th, 1809.
Sir, — In consequence of your favor of the 11th instant I have
addressed the few lines* enclosed to General Stark. If the
possession of this sincere testimony of my esteem be entirely
satisfactory, it may, perhaps, be as well that it should not be
* See the copy on file.

1810. LETTERS. 463
followed by a publication; the sole object being to contribute
in that form whatever gratification may be afforded him by
learning the sentiments of one of whom he has been pleased to
think and speak so favorably. With an entire confidence in
your judicious estimate of the case, I limit myself to this inti
mation. Accept, Sir, assurances of my friendly respects.

TO PLANTAGENET ECCLESTON. 1810.
Sir, — I have duly received the Medallion of General Wash
ington accompanying your favor of Jan7 1, and return my thanks
for it. The high veneration in which his memory is held in his
own Country renders such tokens of respect to it in others at
once grateful in themselves, and just titles to esteem in those
who, looking beyond a national horizon, can do justice to the
worthies and benefactors of mankind, wherever seen or however
distant.

TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
January, 1810.
The Address of the General Assembly of the 23d of Decem
ber could not but be received with a satisfaction much enhanced
by the unanimity with which they approve the course pursued
by the Executive of the United States for maintaining the rights
of the Nation, and the respect due to its Government.
Whilst the unyielding injustice of Foreign Powers continues
to render our situation perplexing, and the preservation of peace
more and more uncertain, the Councils of the General Govern
ment must find their confidence in the spirit and faculties of the
Nation greatly fortified by the co-operating patriotism of the
States. Nor could this resource be more honorably or accept
ably pledged than in the example now given.

464 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
In the stress which the General Assembly have been pleased
to lay on my capacities and endeavours to promote the welfare
of our country, I perceive a partiality which claims the return
of my affectionate acknowledgments; along with which I tender
assurances of my high consideration and best wishes.

TO THE SURVIVING MILITARY CHARACTERS OF THE LATE REVOLU
TIONARY ARMY AND NAVY, RESIDING IN THE CITY AND COUNTY
OF PHILADELPHIA. January, 1810.
I have received, fellow-citizens, with particular satisfaction,
the sentiments you have thought fit to address to me at a mo
ment so interesting to the honor and well-being of our country.
The unjust proceedings of Foreign Governments have long been
witnessed by the nation with feelings repressed only by a love
of peace, and by hopes founded on appeals to those principles
of law and right which have been exemplified in its own con
duct. These hopes having continually failed, our situation re
tains its perplexity, and the preservation of peace becomes more
and more uncertain. At such a period, it is a precious consid
eration that the Government of the United States, instead of
having provoked this inauspicious state of our foreign relations,
has been as persevering as it has been sincere in efforts to avert
it; and that as our wrongs become aggravated, the readiness to
maintain our rights becomes more universal. From none was
this patriotic spirit more to be looked for than from those who,
knowing most, experimentally, the price paid for our Independ
ence, must be the last to suffer its attributes to be impaired in
its descent to their posterity. A free people, firmly united in a
just cause, can never despond of either inspiring respect for
their rights, or of maintaining them against hostile invasions.
Should this last alternative, in spite of all our conciliatory en
deavours, be forced upon us, it may well be expected, that how
ever the capacity of our revolutionary champions for active ser
vice may be impaired by the infirmities of age, the deficiency

1810. LETTERS.

465

will be amply made up bv the animation given by their former
example and present zeal to their fellow-citizens who have not
before been compelled to rally to the banners and the defence of
their Country.
Accept assurances of my respects and friendly wishes.

TO GEORGE JOY. Washington. Jan* 17th, 1810.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 10th. Your
anxiety that our Country may be kept out of the vortex of war
is honorable to your judgment as a patriot, and to your feelings
as a man. The same anxiety is, I sincerely believe, felt by the
great body of the nation, and by its public councils; most as
suredly by the Executive branch of them. But the question
may be decided for us. by actual hostilities against us, or by
proceedings leaving no choice but between absolute disgrace
and resistance by force. May not, also, manifestations of pa
tience under injuries and indignities be carried so far as to in
vite this very dilemma?
I devoutly wish that the same disposition to cultivate peace
by means of justice, which exists here, predominated elsewhere.
particularly in G. Britain. But how can this be supposed,
whilst she persists in proceedings which comprize the essence
of hostility; whilst she violates towards us rules which she en
forces against us in her own favor; more particularly whilst we
see her converting the late reconciliation, through one of the
Ministers, into a source of fresh difficulties and animosities
through another? For in this light must be viewed her disa
vowal of Mr. Erskine. and the impressions made through his
successor. Had the disavowal been deemed essential to her in
terests, a worse plaster could not have been devised for the
wound necessarily inflicted here. But was the disavowal essen
tial to her interests? was it material to them, taking for the
test her own spontaneous change of system, and her own official
language? By the former, I refer to her orders of April, re-
vol. n. 30

466 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
stricting their original orders against neutrals to a trade with
France and Holland; by the latter, to the conversation of Mr.
Canning with Mr. Pinkney, in which he abandons, as he could
not but do, two of the conditions which had been contemplated;
and admits that a non-intercourse law here against Holland
was not a sine qua non. So that the arrangement of Mr. Ers
kine was disavowed essentially for want of a pledge that our
non-intercourse would be continued against France and her do
minions. But why disavow absolutely, why at all, on this ac
count? The law was known to be in force against France at
the time of the arrangement. It was morally certain that, if
put in force against France whilst she was pleading the British
orders, it would not be withdrawn if she should persist in her
decrees after being deprived of this plea. And there would be
no fair ground to suppose that the condition would not be
pledged and stipulated, if required, as soon as the requisite au
thorities here should be together. The disavowal is the more
extraordinary, as the arrangement was to be respected till the
20th July, and, therefore, with the addition of four or five weeks
only, would have afforded an opportunity of knowing the sense
of this Government, and of supplying all that was Wanted to
satisfy the British ultimatum. This course was so obvious, and
that pursued so opposite, that we are compelled to look to other
motives for an explanation, and to include among these a dis
inclination to put an end to differences from which such advan
tages are extracted by British commerce and British cruisers.
Notwithstanding all these grounds of discontent and discour
agement, we are ready, as the British Government knows, to
join in any new experiment, and through either our diplomatic
channel there, or hers here, for a cordial and comprehensive ad
justment of matters between the two countries.
Let reparation be made for the acknowledged wrong com
mitted in the case of the Chesapeake — a reparation so cheap to
the wrong-doer, yet so material to the honor of the injured party;
and let the orders in Council, already repealed as to the avowed
object of retaliation, be repealed also, as an expedient for sub
stituting an illicit commerce in place of that to whicli neutrals

1810. LETTERS. 467
have, as such, an incontestable right. The way will then be
open for negotiation at large; and if the British Government
would bring into it the same temper as she would find in us,
and the same disposition to insist on nothing inconsistent with
the rule of doing as she would, or rather as she will, be done by,
the result could not fail to be happy for both.
Permit me to remark that you are under a mistake in sup
posing that the Treaty concluded by Messrs. Monroe and Pink
ney was rejected because it did not provide that free ships should
make free goods. It never was required, nor expected, that such
a stipulation should be inserted. As to deserting seamen, you
will find that G. Britain practises against us the principles we
assert against her, and in fact goes further; that we have al
ways been ready to enter into a convention on that subject,
founded on reciprocity ; and that the documents long since in
print shew that we are willing, on the subject of impressment,
to put an end to it, by an arrangement which most certainly
would be better for the Britsh Navy than that offensive re
source; and which might be so managed as to leave both par
ties at liberty to retain their own ideas of right. Let me add
that the acceptance of that Treaty would have very little
changed the actual situation of things with G. Britain. The
orders in Council would not have been prevented, but rather
placed on stronger ground; the case of the Chesapeake, the same
as it is; so, also, the case of impressments, of factitious block
ades, &c. ; all, as at present, pregnant sources of contention and
ill humour.
From this view of the subject, I cannot but persuade myself
that you will concur in opinion, that if, unfortunately, the ca
lamity you so benevolently dread should visit this hitherto fa
vored Country, the fault will not lye where you would not wish
it to lye.

468 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY.
Janr 20, 181.0.
Dear Sir, — I received some days ago a letter of the 10th in
stant from Doctor Logan, containing observations on the pos
ture and prospect of our foreign relations. Before the answer
was out of my hands, I received another dated four days after,
in which he merely informed me that he should embark for Eng
land in about eight clays, with an offer to take charge of any
communications for you. As his first letter did not glance at
any such intention, it must be presumed to have been very sud
denly formed. And as his last is silent as to the object of the
trip, this is left to conjecture. From the anxiety expressed in
his first letter for the preservation of peace with England,
which appeared to him to be in peculiar danger, and from his
known benevolence and zeal on the subject, it may reasonably
be supposed that his views relate, in some form or other, to a
mitigation of the hostile tendencies which distress him; and that
his silence may proceed from a wish to give no handle for ani
madversions of any sort on the step taken by him.
You will receive from the Secretary of State, unless, indeed,
opportunity fail through the shortness of the notice, such com
munications and observations as may be thought useful to you.
You will find that the perplexity of our situation is amply dis
played by the diversity of opinions and prolixity of discussion
in Congress. Few are desirous of war; and few are reconciled
to submission; yet the frustration of intermediate courses seems
to have left scarce an escape from that dilemma. The fate of
Mr. Macon's Bill, as it is called, is not certain. It will prob
ably pass the House of Representatives, and, for aught I know,
may be concurred in by the Senate. If retaliated by G. Britain,
it will operate as a non-importation act, and throw exports into
the circuit of the non-intercourse act. If not retaliated, it may
be felt by the British navigation, and, thro' that interest, by the
Government, since the execution of the law which relates to
the ship, and not to the merchandize, cannot be evaded. With
respect to the E. Indies, the proposed regulation will have the

1810. LETTERS. 4gg
effect of compelling the admission of a direct and exclusive trade
for our vessels, or a relinquishment of this market for India
goods, farther than they can be smuggled into it. It just ap
pears that a proposition has been made in the House of Repre
sentatives to employ our ships of war in convoys, and to permit
merchantmen to arm. However plausible the arguments for
this experiment, its tendency to hostile collisions is so evident.
that I think its success improbable. As a mode of going into
war, it does not seem likely to be generally approved, if war
was the object. The military preparations which have been
recommended, and are under consideration, are what they pro
fess to be, measures of precaution. They are not only justified,
but dictated by the uncertainty attending the course which G.
Britain may take, or, rather, by the unyielding and unamicable
traits in her Cabinet and her countenance. Measures of that
sort are also the more adapted to our situation, as, in the event
of accommodation with G. Britain, they may possibly be wanted
in another quarter. The long debates on the Resolution of Mr.
Giles, on the subject of Mr. Jackson, have terminated in affirm
ative votes, by large majorities. This, with the refusal of the
Executive to hold communication with him, it is supposed, will
produce a crisis in the British policy towards the United States;
to which the representations of the angry Minister will doubt
less be calculated to give an unfavorable turn. Should this
happen, our precautionary views will have been the more sea
sonable. It is most probable, however, that instead of express
ing resentment by open war, it will appear in more extended
depredations on our commerce; in declining to replace Mr.
Jackson; and, perhaps, in the course observed with respect to
you, in meeting which your own judgment will be the best
guide. Should a change in the composition or calculations of
the Cabinet give a favorable turn to its policy towards this
country, it is desirable that no time may be lost in allowing it
its effect. With this view, you will be reminded of the sev
eral authorities you retain to meet in negotiation, and of the
instructions by which they are to be exercised; it being always
understood, that with the exception of some arrangement touch-

470 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
ing the orders in Council, reparation for the insult on the Ches
apeake must precede a general negotiation on the questions be
tween the two countries. At present, nothing precise can be
said as to the condition on our part for the repeal of the orders
in Council; the existing authority in the Executive to pledge
one being expirable with the non-intercourse act, .and no other
pledge being provided for. As it is our anxious desire, how
ever, if the British Government should adopt just and concilia
tory views, that nothing may be omitted that can shew our
readiness to second them, you may offer a general assurance
that, as in the case of the Embargo and the non-intercourse acts,
any similar power with which the Executive may be clothed
will be exercised in the same spirit. You will doubtless be
somewhat surprised to find among the communications to Con
gress, and in print, too, the confidential conversations with Mr.
Canning, reserved from such a use by your own request. It was,
in fact, impossible to resist the pointed call for them, without
giving umbrage to some, and opportunity for injurious infer
ences to others. The difficulty was increased by the connection
between those and other communications necessarily falling
within the scope of the rule of compliance in such cases. Finally,
there did not appear to be any thing in the conversations which
could warrant British complaint of their disclosure, or widen
the space between you and the British Ministry.
As it may not be amiss that you should know the sentiments
wliich I had expressed to Doctor Logan, and which, though an
answer to his letter written previous to the notification of his
intended trip, he will of course carry with him, I enclose a copy
of the answer.
The file of newspapers from the Department of State will give
you the debates on the case of Jackson. I enclose, however, a
speech I have just looked over, in a pamphlet form. Although
liable to very obvious criticisms of several sorts, it has pre
sented a better analysis of some parts of the subject than I have
observed in any of the speeches.

1810. LETTERS.

471

TO  . Washington, Jany 31, 1810.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 25th, inclosing the
unanimous resolutions of a meeting of Citizens of Washington
County, at Hager's Town on the 20th instant, approving the
course lately taken by the Executive of the United States with
respect to the British Minister Plenipotentiary, and pledging
their support of the constituted authorities in such measures as
may be required by the unjust conduct of the belligerent Powers.
It must be agreeable at all times, to responsible and faithful
functionaries, to find their proceedings attended with the con
fidence and support of their fellow-citizens. And the satisfac
tion cannot but be increased by unanimity in declarations to
that effect. Among the means of commanding respect for our
National character and rights, none can be more apposite than
proofs that we are united in maintaining both; and that all
hopes will be vain which contemplate those internal discords
and distrusts from which encouragement might be derived to
foreign designs against our safety, our honor, or our just in
terests.

TO THE REPUBLICAN CITIZENS OF THE 1st CONGRESSIONAL DIS
TRICT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your Address of the 14th in
stant, with the impressions which its assurances of approbation
and attachment could not fail to make; and with every partici
pation in your sensibility to the extraordinary circumstances
which continue to distinguish our foreign relations.
You do no more than justice, as well to my predecessor as to
myself, in referring the course which has been pursued to a
steady purpose of withholding from each belligerent a pretext
for disturbing our rightful intercourse with the other, by ob
serving towards both the strictest impartiality in exercising
our neutral rights, and in fulfilling our neutral obligations.

472 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
This unexceptionable conduct, which ought to have shielded us
from aggressions of every sort, has been followed by a perse
verance in multiplying them, which no appeals to law, to reason,
or to that policy which alone accords with the true interest of
Nations, as of individuals, have succeeded in averting or arrest
ing. In this state of things, it lies with the Legislative Councils
to decide on the measures adapted to it. That their decision
will duly consult the sense of the Nation, and faithfully pursue
its best interests, is what I feel great satisfaction in presuming;
as I do in witnessing the patriotism which, in your example,
unites with a manly expression of your particular sentiments a
confidence in the Constituted Authorities, and a determination
to support them. Accept, fellow-citizens, my respects and
friendly wishes.
Washington, Feb^ 21, 1810.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, April 23, 1810.
Dear Sir, — Yours of the 16th has been received. Congress
remain in the unhinged state which has latterly marked their
proceedings, with the exception only that a majority in the
House of Representatives have stuck together so far as to pass
a Bill providing for a conditional repeal by either of [the] bel
ligerents of their edicts; laying, in the mean time, 50 per cent
to the present duties on imports from G. Britain and France
What the Senate will do with the Bill is rendered utterly un
certain by the policy which seems to prevail in that branch
Our last authentic information from G. Britain is of the 28
February, and from France of the 2d of Feby. The informa
tion in both cases has an aspect rather promising, but far from
being definite; and subsequent accounts, through the ordinary
channels, do not favor a reliance on general professions or
appearances. Bonaparte seems not to have yet attended to
the distinction between the external and internal character of

1810. LETTERS. 473
his decrees, and to be bending his augmented faculties for anni
hilating British Commerce with the Continent, with which our
corrupt traders have confounded the American flag. And it
will be a hard matter for Wellesley, should he be well disposed,
to drag his anti-American colleagues into a change of policy;
supported, as they will be, by the speeches and proceedings of
Congress. From those, the inference will be that one party
prefers submission of our trade to British regulation, and the
other confesses the impossibility of resisting it. Without a
change of Ministry, of which there is some prospect, it would
be imprudent to count on any radical change of policy. For
the moment, I understand that the Merchants will not avail
themselves of the unshackled trade they have contended for; a
voluntary Embargo being produced by the certainty of a glutted
market in England, and the apprehension of British blockades
and French confiscations. The experiment about to be made
will probably open too late the eyes of the people to the expe
diency and efficacy of the means which they have suffered to be
taken out of the hands of the Government, and to be incapaci
tated for future use.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, May 7, 1810.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letter from Jarvis accompanied one
to me, on the subject of the Merinos. I learn that they have
arrived safe, but the vessel is aground a few miles below Alex
andria. Joa Doherty is gone to bring them up, making the se
lections warranted by Mr. Jarvis. As the means I shall employ
to have my pair conveyed to Virginia will suffice for yours, it
will be unnecessary for you to attend to the matter till you hear
of their arrival in Orange. Although there have been several
late arrivals from England, we remain in the dark as to what
has passed between Wellesley and Pinkney. The same as to
the French Government and Armstrong. You will notice the
footing on which Congress has left our relations with these

474 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
powers. Unless G. Britain should apprehend an attempt from
France to revive our non-intercourse against her, she has every
earthly motive to continue her restrictions against us. She has
our trade, in spite of France, as far as she can make it suit her
interest, and our acquiescence in cutting it off from the rest of
the world, as far as she may wish to distress her adversaries, to
cramp our growth as rivals, or to prevent our interference with
her smuggling monopoly. New England and New York are
rallying to the Republican ranks. In New Jersey, every branch
of the Government is again sound. The election in Massachu
setts, now going on, will probably have a like issue with their
late one. There is some danger, however, from the federal ar
tifice of pushing the federal towns to their maximum of Repre
sentation. Boston is to send forty.

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, May 23d, 1810.
Dear Sir, — You will learn from the Department of State, as
you must have anticipated, our surprise that the answer of Lord
Wellesley to your very just and able view of the case of Jack
son corresponded so little with the impressions of that Minister
manifested in your first interviews with him. The date of the
answer best explains the change; as it shows that time was
taken for obtaining intelligence from this Country, and adapt
ing the policy of the answer to the position taken by the advo
cates of Jackson. And it must have happened that the intelli
gence prevailing at that date was of the sort most likely to mis
lead. The elections which have since taken place in the East
ern States, and which have been materially influenced by the
affair of Jackson, and the spirit of party connected with it, are
the strongest of proofs that the measure of the Executive coin
cided with the feelings of the Nation. In every point of view,
the answer is unworthy of the source from which it comes.
From the manner in which the vacancy left by Jackson is
provided for, it is inferred that a sacrifice is meant of the re-

&

1810. LETTERS. 475
spect belonging to this Government, either to the pride of the
British Government, or to the feelings of those who have taken
side with it against their own. On either supposition, it is ne
cessary to counteract the ignoble purpose. You will accord
ingly find that on ascertaining the substitution of a Charge to
be an intentional degradation of the diplomatic intercourse on
the part of Great Britain, it is deemed proper that no higher
functionary should represent the United States at London. I
sincerely wish, on every account, that the views of the British
Government, in this instance, may not be such as are denoted
by appearances, or that, on finding the tendency of them, they
may be changed. However the fact may turn out, you will, of
course, not lose sight of the expediency of mingling in every
step you take as much of moderation, and even of conciliation,
as can be justifiable; and will, in particular, if the present des
patches should find you in actual negotiation, be governed by
the result of it in determining the question of your devolving
your trust on a Secretary of Legation.
The act of Congress, transmitted from the Department of
State, will inform you of the footing on which our relations to
the belligerent powers were finally placed. The experiment
now to be made, of a commerce with both, unrestricted by our
laws, has resulted from causes which you will collect from the
debates and from your own reflections. The new form of ap
peal to the policy of Great Britain and France, on the subject
of the Decrees and Orders, will most engage your attention.
However feeble it may appear, it is possible that one or other
of those powers may allow it more effect than was produced by
the overtures heretofore tried. As far as pride may have influ
enced the reception of these, it will be the less in the way, as
the law in its present form may be regarded by each of the par
ties, if it so pleases, not as a coercion or a threat to itself, but
a promise of attack on the other. Great Britain, indeed, may
conceive that she has now a compleat interest in perpetuating
the actual state of things, which gives her the full enjoyment of
our trade, and enables her to cut it off with every other part of
the world; at the same time that it increases the chance of such

476 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
resentments in France at the inequality as may lead to hostili
ties with the United States. But, on the other hand, this very
inequality, which France would confirm by a state of hostilities
with the United States, may become a motive with her to turn
the tables on G. Britain, by compelling her either to revoke her
orders, or to lose the commerce of this country. An apprehen
sion that France may take this politic course would be a ra
tional motive with the British Government to get the start of
her. Nor is this the only apprehension that merits attention.
Among the inducements to the experiment of an unrestricted
commerce now made, were two which contributed essentially to
the majority of votes in its favor; first, a general hope, favoured
by daily accounts from England, that an adjustment of differ
ences there, and thence in France, would render the measure
safe and proper; second, a willingness in not a few to teach the
advocates for an open trade, under actual circumstances, the
folly as well as degradation of their policy. At the next meet
ing of Congress, it will be found, according to present appear
ances, that instead of an adjustment with either of the belliger
ents, there is an increased obstinacy in both; and that the in
conveniences of the embargo and non-intercourse have been
exchanged for the greater sacrifices, as well as disgrace, result
ing from a submission to the predatory systems in force. It will
not be wonderful, therefore, if the passive spirit which marked
the late session of Congress should at the next meeting be
roused to the opposite point; more especially as the tone of the
nation has never been as low as that of its Representatives, and
as it is rising already under the losses sustained by our com
merce in the Continental ports, and by the fall of prices in our
produce at home, under a limitation of the market to G. Brit
ain. Cotton, I perceive, is down at 10 or 11 cents in Georgia.
The great mass of Tobacco is in a similar situation. And the
effect must soon be general, with the exception of a few articles
which do not at present glut the British demand. Whether
considerations like these will make any favorable impression
on the British Cabinet, you will be the first to know. What
ever confidence I may have in the justness of them, I must for-

1810. LETTERS. 477
get all that has past before I can indulge very favorable ex
pectations. Every new occasion seems to countenance tho be
lief that there lurks in the British Cabinet a hostile feeling
towards this Country, which will never be eradicated during
the present reign; nor overruled, whilst it exists, but by some
dreadful pressure from external or internal causes.
With respect to the French Government, we are taught by
experience to be equally distrustful. It will have, however, the
same opportunity presented to it, with the British Government,
of comparing the actual state of things with that which would
be produced by a repeal of its Decrees, and it is not easy to find
any plausible motive to continue the former, as preferable to the
latter. A worse state of things than the actual one could not
exist for France, unless her preference be for a state of war. If
she be sincere, either in her late propositions relative to a chro
nological revocation of illegal Edicts against neutrals, or to a
pledge from the United States not to submit to those of Great
Britain, she ought at once to embrace the arrangement held out
by Congress, the renewal of a non-intercourse with Great Brit
ain being the very species of resistance most analogous to her
professed views.
I propose to commit this to the care of Mr. Parish, who is
about embarking at Philadelphia for England; and finding that
I have missed a day in my computation of the opportunity, I
must abruptly conclude, with assurances of my great esteem,
&c.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, May 25, 1810.
Dear Sir, — I have duly received your favor of the 13th.
The general idea of disposing of the supernumerary Merino
Rams for the public benefit had occurred to me. The mode
you propose for the purpose seems well calculated for it. But
as it will be most proper, as you suggest, to let our views be
developed to the public by the execution of them, there will be

478 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
time for further consideration. When the sheep came into my
hands, they were so infected with the scab that I found it ne
cessary, in order to quicken and ensure their cure, to apply the
mercurial ointment. I hope they are already well. One of the
ewes has just dropt a ewe lamb, which is also doing well. I
expect my overseer every day to conduct them to Orange. As
he will have a wagon with him, the trip, I hope, may be so man
aged as to avoid injury to his charge.
A former National Intelligencer will have given you our last
communications from G. Britain. That of this morning exhibits
our prospects on the side of France. The late confiscations by
Bonaparte comprise robbery, theft, and breach of trust, and ex
ceed in turpitude any of his enormities not wasting human
blood. This scene on the continent, and the effect of English
monopoly on the value of our produce, are breaking the charm
attached to what is called free trade, foolishly by some, and
wickedly by others. We are hourly looking for the " John
Adams." There is a, possibility that the negotiations on foot at
Paris may vary our prospects there. The chance would be
better, perhaps, if the last act of Congress were in the hands of
Armstrong; which puts our trade on the worst possible footing
for France- but, at the same time, puts it in the option of her to
revive the non-intercourse against England. There is a possi
bility, also, that the views of the latter may be somewhat affected
by the recent elections; it being pretty certain that the change
in the tone of Wellesley from that first manifested to Pinkney
was, in part, at least, produced by the intermediate intelligence
from the United States, which flattered a fallacious reliance on
the British party here.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 4, 1810.
Dear Sir, — I have received your two letters of the 25 and
30 ultimo. I have not yet seen any of the Secretaries to whom
you have written on the subject of the papers relating to the

1810. LETTERS. 479
Batture. I take for granted they will readily comply with your
request. Mr. Gallatin is absent on a visit to his farm, in the
western part of Pennsylvania. But his chief Clerk will, I pre
sume, be able to furnish the papers, if any, lying in that Depart
ment. The argument of Moreau de Lislet has never been printed,
nor, as I believe, fully translated. The original manuscript, if
not in the hands of Mr. Rodney, will be forwarded from the
Department of State. What Poydras has said on the subject is
herewith inclosed. Although the ground to be taken in the suit
against you is not disclosed, I think it not difficult to conjecture
it. The act of Congress will be represented as unconstitutional,
and the case of the Batture as not within its scope; and miscon
structions as too obvious to be resolvible into official error of
judgment. In any event there will be the chance of an obiter
opinion of the Court on the merits of the case, strengthening
the cause of Livingston. Till I received your letter, I had
scarcely yielded my belief that a suit had been really instituted.
If the Judiciary should lend itself for such a purpose, it cannot
fail, I think, to draw down on itself the unbounded indignation
' of the Nation, and a change of the Constitution, under that feel
ing, carried, perhaps, too far in the opposite direction. In a
Government whose vital principle is responsibility, it never will
be allowed that the Legislative and Executive Departments
should be compleatly subjected to the Judiciary, in which that
characteristic feature is so faintly seen.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 15, 1810.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letters were brought, together with
the separate packet now forwarded, by the John Adams. The
official communications received by her from France and G.
Britain you will find in the National Intelligencer of this date.
The Editor, I perceive, passes over the obnoxious refusal of G.
Britain to comply with the reasonable course of putting an end
to the predatory Edicts of both Nations; and it is not improb-

480 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810
able that a like sensibility to the atrocity of the French Gov
ernment may direct the public attention from what would other
wise strike it with due force.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 22, 1810. '
Dear Sir, — On the first publication of the despatches by the
John Adams, so strong a feeling was produced by Armstrong's
picture of the French robbery, that the attitude in which Eng
land was placed by the correspondence between Pinkney and
Wellesley was overlooked. The public attention is beginning
to fix itself on the proof it affords that the original sin against
Neutrals lies with G. Britain, and that, whilst she acknowledges
it, she persists in it.
Have you received a copy of Cooper's (the Pennsylvania
Judge) masterly opinion on the question whether the sentence of
a foreign Admiralty Court in a prize cause be conclusive evi
dence in a suit here between the Underwriter and Insured? It
is a most thorough investigation and irrefragable disproof of
the British doctrine on the subject, as adopted by a decision of
the Supreme Court of the United States. If you are without a
copy, I will provide and forward one.

TO GOVERNOR SNYDER. Washington, July 5th, 1810.
Sir, — I have duly received your letter of June 9, covering
the Resolutions of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, adopted at their last session.
The principles and purposes avowed in these Resolutions are
such as were to be expected from a State which has given so
many proofs of its readiness to maintain the rights and honor
of the nation against foreign aggressions and insults.
In this renewed pledge of their co-operation, whenever, in the
opinion of the National Councils, an appeal to the patriotism

1810. LETTERS. 481
and force of the American people becomes necessary, the Gen
eral Assembly afford an example equally animating to those
charged with the interests of the Union and worthy the emula
tion of every member of it.
Accept, sir, assurances of my high respect.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpellier, July 17, 1810.
Dear SiR,~Among the papers relating to the Convention of
1787, communicated to you, that copies in your hands might
double the security against destructive casualties, was a deline
ation of Hamilton's plan of a Constitution. On looking for it
among the Debates, &c, which were returned to me, this par
ticular paper does not appear.* I conclude, therefore, that it
had not then been copied, or was at the time in some separate
situation. I am very sorry to trouble you on such a subject,
but being under an engagement to furnish a copy of that pro
ject, I must ask the favor of you to see whether it be not among
your papers, and if so, to forward it by the mail.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Dear Sir, — Yours of the 13th was duly received. I cannot
account for your not getting Moreau's Memoir. I have given
a hint for it now to be sent from the Department of State. His
view of the case ought certainly to be comprized in your exam
ination of it. I shall peruse this, when received, with pleasure,
though not for all the reasons you enumerate, and for some
which you do not; and I shall be particularly happy in the visit
with which you flatter me. * Afterwards found.
vol. n. 31

482 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
TO MR. GALLATIN. Montpellier, August 29, 1810.
Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 8th instant came duly to hand,
and I have since been favored with that of the 17th.
It seems that in the decreasing amount of the Treasury de
posits, any distributive transfer of them to the State Banks
would not be convenient to the public, and must soon become
unimportant to them. Nothing better, therefore, is practicable
in that mode than a temporary relief of particular Banks, par
ticularly affected by the demands of the National Bank. Ap
plication has been made, on this ground, in behalf of the Bank
of Columbia, and equal attention would be due to any other
applications. The Spaniard who dined with me last winter, and was lately
executed at the Havanna, was not the one introduced by Doct'
Thornton. His particular title to my civilities was a letter of
strong recommendation from Doct' Rush. The other Spaniard
was never at my table.
If the French decree releasing the American property in the
warehouses of Holland be authentic, may it not be the result of
apprehended reprisal here?

TO JUDGE TOULMIN. Montpellier, Sep' 5, 1810.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of July 28 has been duly received.
The particulars which it communicates are of a nature to claim
the attention of the Executive, and I thank you for yours in
transmitting them. I am glad to find, by subsequent informa
tion, that the indications of a purpose to carry into effect the
enterprise on Florida had become less decisive. There can be
no doubt of its unlawfulness, nor as to the duty of the Execu
tive to employ force, if necessary, to arrest it, and to make ex
amples of the authors. These are the less to be excused, as
there never was a time when private individuals should more

1810. LETTERS.

483

distrust their competency to decide for the Nation, nor a case
in which there was less ground to distrust the dispositions of
the Government, regulated as they must be by the limits of its
authority, and by the actual state of its foreign relations.
Be pleased to accept my esteem and friendly wishes.

TO J. Q. ADAMS. Washington, October 16th, 1810.
Dear Sir, — Previous to my return to this city, I received a
letter from Mrs. Adams, your highly respectable mother, com
municating your anxiety to leave a situation rendered insup
portable by the ruinous expenses found to be inseparable from
it, and taking for granted that you had written, or would write,
to the Secretary of State to the same effect. The answer to her
was, that as it was not the intention of the Executive to expose
you to unreasonable sacrifices, it could not withhold a permis
sion to retire from them, and that you would be so informed
from the Department of State. You will accordingly receive
a letter of leave, and a blank commission, providing for the
care of our affairs till a successor may be appointed. As no
communication of your wishes, however, has yet been received
from yourself, I cannot but hope that the peculiar urgency man
ifested in the letter of Mrs. Adams was rather hers than yours,
or that you have found the means of reconciling yourself to a
continuance in your station. Besides that confidence in the
value of your services which led to the call upon them, there
are considerations, which you will readily appreciate, bearing
against a sudden return from a short mission, the occasion for
which has been made the subject of so much lucubration. Among
them, is the difficulty of shielding the step against unfavorable
conjectures as to its cause in the mind of the Emperor; and the
evil might become the greater, from the possibility of a pro
tracted intermission, if not entire discontinuance, of a repre
sentation of the United States at S' Petersburg, corresponding
with the grade of the Russian Minister here. It will, for this

484 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
reason, be particularly expedient, in case you should make im
mediate use of the document sent you, to spare no pains in
guarding against a misconstruction of your departure, and in
preparing the Russian Government for a delay in filling the va
cancy, which may be unavoidable, notwithstanding the purpose
of preventing it. As far as assurances of unabated friendship
here can be of aid to you, they may be given with every empha
sis which the sincerity of these sentiments can warrant.
I will add, that whilst I do not disguise my wish that the con
tinuance of your valuable services may be found not inconsist
ent with your other and undeniable duties, I cannot, on the
other hand, wish that the latter should be sacrificed beyond a
reasonable measure, and within that measure I am entirely per
suaded that your patriotism will cheerfully make the sacrifice.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, October 19, 1810.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 15th. All we
know of the step taken by France towards a reconciliation with
us is through the English papers sent by Mr. Pinkney, who had
not himself received any information on the subject from Gen1
Armstrong, nor held any conversation with the British Minis
try on it, at the date of his last letters. We hope from the step
the advantage at least of having but one contest on our hands
at a time. If G. Britain repeals her orders, without discontin
uing her mock blockades, we shall be at issue with her on
ground strong in law, in the opinion of the world, and even in
her own concessions. And I do not believe that Congress will
be disposed, or permitted by the Nation, to a tame submission;
the less so as it would be not only perfidious to the other bel
ligerent, but irreconcilable with an honorable neutrality. The
crisis in West Florida, as you will see, has come home to our
feelings and our interests. It presents, at the same time, seri
ous questions as to the authority of the Executive, and the ade
quacy of the existing laws of the United States for territorial

1810. LETTERS. 485
administration. And the near approach of Congress might
subject any intermediate interposition of the Executive to the
charge of being premature and disrespectful, if not of being ille
gal. Still, there is great weight in the considerations that the
Country to the Perdido, being our own, may be fairly taken
possession of, if it can be done without violence; above all, if
there be danger of its passing into the hands of a third and
dangerous party. The successful party at Baton Rouge have
not yet made any communication or invitation to this Govern
ment. They certainly will call in either our aid or that of G.
Britain, whose conduct at the Caraccas gives notice of her
propensity to fish in troubled waters. From present appear
ances, our occupancy of West Florida would be resented by
Spain, by England, and by France, and bring on not a triangu
lar, but quadrangular contest. The vacancy in the Judiciary
is not without a puzzle in supplying it. Lincoln, obviously, is
the first presented to our choice, but I believe he will be inflex
ible in declining it.

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, October 30, 1810.
Dear Sir, — Your letter of August 13 was duly received. Its
observations on the letter and conduct of Lord Wellesley are
an interesting comment on both. The light in which the letter
was seen by many in this Country was doubtless such as gave
to its features an exaggerated deformity. But it was the
natural effect of its contrast to the general expectation founded
on the tenor of your private letter to Mr. Smith, and on the cir
cumstances, which, in the case of Jackson, seemed to preclude
the least delay in repairing the insults committed by him. It
is true, also, that the letter, when viewed in its most favorable
light, is an unworthy attempt to spare a false pride on one side
at the expence of just feelings on the other, and is in every re
spect infinitely below the elevation of character assumed by the
British Government, and even to that ascribed to Lord Welles-

486 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810,
ley. It betrays the consciousness of a doubt, with a wish to
discharge it in false coin. Had the letter been of earlier date,
and accompanied by the prompt appointment of a successor to
Jackson, its aspect would have been much softened. But every
thing was rendered as offensive as possible by evasions and de
lays, which admit no explanation without supposing a double
game, by which they were to cheat us into a reliance on fair
promises, whilst they were playing into the hands of partizans
here, who were turning the delays into a triumph over their
own Government. This consideration had its weight in the de
cision last communicated, with respect to your continuance at
London, or return to the United States.
The personal sensibilities which your letter expresses are far
greater than I can have merited by manifestations of esteem
and confidence which it would have been unjust to withhold.
As a proof of your partiality, they ought not, on that account,
to excite less of a return. As little ought your readiness to re
tire from your station, from the honorable motives which gov
ern you, to be viewed in any other light than as a proof of the
value which attaches itself to your qualifications and services.
It is not to be denied that a good deal of dissatisfaction has is
sued through the press against some of your intercourse with
the British Government. But this could have the less influence
on the Executive mind, as the dissatisfaction, where not the
mere indulgence of habitual censure, is evidently the result of
an honest misconstruction of some things, and an ignorance of
others, neither of which can be lasting. I have little doubt that
if your sentiments and conduct could be seen through media
not before ^he public, a very different note would have been
heard; and as little, that the exhibitions likely to grow out of
the questions and discussions in which you are at present en
gaged will more than restore the ground taken from you.
The sole question on which your return depends, therefore,
is whether the conduct of the Government where you are may
not render your longer stay incompatible with the honor of the
United States. The last letter of the Secretary of State has so
placed the subject for your determination, in which the fullest

1810. LETTERS. 487
confidence is felt. Waiving other depending subjects, not of re
cent date, a review of the course pursued in relation to Jackson
and a successor excites a mixture of indignation and contempt,
which ought not to be more lightly expressed than by your im
mediately substituting a Secretary of Legation for the grade
you hold; unless the step be absolutely forbidden by the weighty
consideration which has been stated to you, and which coin
cides with the sound policy to which you allude, of putting an
adversary compleatly in the wrong. The prevailing opinion
here is, that this has been already abundantly done.
Besides the public irritation produced by the persevering in
solence of Jackson in his long stay, and his conduct during it,
there has been a constant heart-burning on the subject of the
Chesapeake, and a deep and settled indignation on the score of
impressments, which can never be extinguished without a liberal
atonement for the former, and a systematic amendment of the
latter. You have been already informed that the Proclamation would
issue giving effect to the late act of Congress, on the ground
of the Duke de Cadore's letter to Gen1 Armstrong, which states
an actual repeal of the French Decrees. The letter of W. to
you is a promise only, and that in a very questionable shape;
the more so, as G. Britain is known to have founded her retali
ating pretensions on the unprecedented mode of warfare against
her; evidently meaning the exclusion of her trade from the
Continent. Even the blockade of May, 1806, rests on the same
foundation. These considerations, with the obnoxious exercise
of her sham blockades in the moment of our call for their re
peal, backed by the example of France, discourage the hope
that she contemplates a reconciliation with us. I sincerely wish
your next communications may furnish evidence of a more fa
vorable disposition.
It will hot escape your notice, and is not undeserving that of
the British Government, that the non-intercourse, as now to be
reviewed, will have the effect of giving a monopoly of our ex-
portations to G. Britain to our own vessels, in exclusion of hers;
whereas, in its old form, G. Britain obtained a substantial mo-

488 WORKS OF MADISON. 1810.
nopoly for hers through the entrepots of N. Scotia, E. Florida,
&c. She cannot, therefore, deprive our vessels, which may now
carry our exports directly to G. Britain, of this monopoly, with
out refusing the exports altogether, or forcing them into diffi
cult and expensive channels, with the prospect of a counteract
ing interposition of Congress, should the latter experiment be
resorted to. Nothing would be necessary to defeat this experi
ment but to prohibit, as was heretofore contemplated, the ex
port of our productions to the neighboring ports belonging to
Great Britain or her friends.
The course adopted here towards West Florida will be made
known by the Secretary of State. The occupancy of the Terri
tory as far as the Perdido was called for by the crisis there,
and is understood to be within the authority of the Executive.
East Florida, also, is of great importance to the United States,
and it is not probable that Congress will let it pass into any new
hands. It is to be hoped G. Britain will not entangle herself
with us by seizing it, either with or without the privity of her
allies in Cadiz. The position of Cuba gives the United States
so deep an interest in the destiny, even, of that Island, that
although they might be an inactive, they could not be a satisfied
spectator at its falling under any European Government, which
might make a fulcrum of that position against the commerce
and security of the United States. With respect to Spanish
America generally, you will find that G. Britain is engaged in
the most eager, and, if without the concurrence of the Spanish
authority at Cadiz, the most reproachful grasp of political in
fluence and commercial preference. In turning a provident at
tention to the new world, as she loses ground in the old, her
wisdom is to be commended, if regulated by justice and good
faith; nor is her pursuit of commercial preferences, if not sec
onded by insidious and slanderous means against our competi
tions, as are said to be employed, to be tested by any other
standard than her own interest. A sound judgment of this
does not seem to have been consulted in the specimen given in
the Treaty at Caraccas, by which a preference in trade over
all other nations is extorted from the temporary fears and neces-

1810. LETTERS. 439
sities of the Revolutionary Spaniards. The policy of the French
Government at the epoch of our Independence, in renouncing
every stipulation against the equal privileges of all other na
tions in our trade, was dictated by a much better knowledge of
human nature, and of the stable interest of France.
The elections for the next Congress are nearly over. The
result is another warning against a reliance on the strength of
a British Party, if the British Government be still under a de
lusion on that subject. Should France effectually adhere to
the ground of a just- and conciliatory policy, and G. Britain
bring the United States to issue on her paper blockades; so
strong is this ground in right of opinion here, and even in the
commitment of all the great leaders of her party here, that G.
Britain will scarce have an advocate left.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Dec' 7, 1810.
Dear Sir, — The letter inclosed came to me as you see it; and
though probably meant more for me than you, is forwarded ac
cording to its ostensible destination.
We have nothing from abroad more than has been made pub
lic. The latest date from Pinkney is the 3d of October. The
arrival of November will have been some test, positive or nega
tive, of the views of England. Her party here seems puzzled
more than usual. If they espouse her Blockades, they must sink
under the odium. And this course is the more desperate, as it
is possible that she may abandon them herself, under the duress
of events.
Lincoln does not yield to the call I made in a private and
pressing letter. Still, some wish him to be appointed, hoping
he may serve for a time.

490 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.

TO THE SOCIETY OF ARTS, PHILADELPHIA.
Washington, Jan* 28, 1811.
Gentlemen, — I have received your letter of the 27th instant,
communicating, in the name of the Society of Artists established
at Philadelphia, its appointment of me as Patron of the Institu
tion. I accept it with due sensibility to the value the Society
has attached to my friendship for its laudable objects; but not
without regret that this will consist more in favorable inclina
tions than in the usefulness, which would be the best title to
the distinction. I can only, therefore, return my thanks, through
you, for a flattering testimony, made the more so by the terms
in which you have presented it, with an assurance to the Soci
ety, that regarding the Arts which it cherishes as among the
endowments and enjoyments which characterize human Society
under its highest and happiest destinies, it is one of my ardent
wishes, that the tendency of our free system of Government may
be portrayed, as well in what may contribute to embellish the
mind and refine the manners, as in those primary blessings of
which it already affords so many grateful proofs and presages.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, March 18, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours inclosing two letters im
properly addressed to you.
A sketch, in manuscript, was brought by yesterday's mail from
New York, saying that a vessel just arrived stated that the
Prince Regent had appointed his Cabinet; that Lord Holland
was Prime Minister, Grenville Secretary of State, Moira Com
mander-in-Chief, &c, and that a new Parliament was to be
called. Whether these details be correct or not, it is highly
probable that some material change in the general policy of the
Government, in relation to this Country, as well as in other re
spects, will result from the change of the men in power. Nor
is it improbable that a repeal of the Orders in Council will be

1811. LETTERS. 491
accompanied by a removal, in some form or other, of the other
condition required by the act of May last. Still, the attachment
to maritime usurpations on public law, and the jealousy of our
growing commerce, are sources from which serious difficulties
must continue to flow, unless controuled by the distress of the
Nation, or by a magnanimity not to be expected even from the
personification of Fox in Lord Holland. Grenville is known
to be very high in his notions of British rights on the Ocean;
but he has never contended for more on the subject of Block
ades than that cruising squadrons, creating a manifest danger
in entering particular ports, was equivalent to a stationary
force, having the same effect. His principle, however, though
construable into an important restriction of that modern prac
tice, may be expanded so as to cover this abuse. It is, as you
remark, difficult to understand the meaning of Bonaparte to
wards us. There is little doubt that his want of money and his
ignorance of Commerce have had a material influence. He has
also distrusted the stability and efficacy of our pledge to renew
the non-intercourse against G. Britain, and has wished to exe
cute his in a manner that would keep pace only with the execu
tion of ours; and at the same time leave no interval for the
operation of the British orders, without a counter operation in
either his or our measures. In all this his folly is obvious.
Distrust on one side produces and authorizes it on the other,
and must defeat every arrangement between parties at a dis
tance from each other, or which is to have a future or a con
tinued execution. On the whole, our prospects are far from
being very flattering; yet a better chance seems to exist than,
with the exception of the adjustment with Erskine, has presented
itself for closing the scene of rivalship in plundering and in
sulting us, and turning it into a competition for our commerce
and friendship.
In the midst of other perplexities, foreign and internal, a
source has been opened very near me, and where co-operation
against them was to have been rightfully expected, from per
sonal obligations, as well as public duty. I find, also, that the
appointment of Warden is to draw forth the keenest resent-

492 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
ments of Armstrong. I have no doubt, however, that the ground
on which we stand is sufficiently firm to support us with the
nation, against individual efforts of any sort, or from any quar
ter.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, April 1, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I intimated to you the offence taken by Arm
strong at the reinstatement of Warden. It is not improbable
that it will be the ground of an open hostility. This will call
into view his present denunciations of Warden, which are
pointed against him as an adventurer and impostor, from the
commencement to the end of his career, in comparison with the
patronage so long continued to him, and the sentiments hereto
fore expressed of him. Will you be so good as to send me the
extract from Armstrong's Jetter, written in the Summer or Fall
of 1808, which notifies the appointment of Warden as Consul,
and gives the favorable side of his character, as well as the ob
jections to a confirmation of the appointment? That letter was
the only communication made on the subject.
You will have inferred the change which is taking place in
the Department of State. Col. Monroe agrees to succeed Mr.
Smith, who declines, however, the mission to Russia, at first not
unfavorably looked at. I was willing, notwithstanding many
trying circumstances, to have smoothed the transaction as much
as possible, but it will be pretty sure to end in secret hostility,
if not open warfare. On account of my great esteem and re
gard for common friends, such a result is truly painful to me.
For the rest, I feel myself on firm ground, as well in the public
opinion as in my own consciousness.
Wilkinson, I find, has lately received a letter from you, which
he has shewn to his friends with much apparent gratification.
I understand, at the same time, that the letter is cautious, and
limited to the charge of privity with Burr. Did he disown to
you the anonymous letter printed in Clark's Book, or say any
thing relative to that subject ?

1811. LETTERS. 493
The latest information from Europe will be found in the in
closed papers. The indications from France are rather favor
able. Should the old King displace the Regent in England,
little is to be hoped from that quarter, unless forced on the
Cabinet by national distress. In the last correspondence of
Pinkney with Wellesley, the latter sufficiently shewed his teeth,
and received the severest scourging that was ever diplomati
cally inflicted.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, April 19th, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of , con
taining the requested extract from Armstrong's letter relating
to Warden. Armstrong has entangled himself in such gross
inconsistencies, that he may, perhaps, not execute his threat to
vindicate his removal of Warden against my reinstatement of
him. This consideration alone will restrain his enmity against
both of us. You will see the conflict in which he is engaged
with Fulton. Pinkney is weekly expected by. the return of the
Essex. Previous to his taking leave of the Prince Regent, he
ascertained, by a correspondence with Wellesley, that his stay
was wished for the mere purpose of delay and delusion. The
mission of Foster, like that of Rose, plays the same game. The
convalescence of the King renders the Prince a cypher, and his
Cabinet is inflexible in its folly and depravity. The inclosed
paper of Poulson publishes from the "Courier," a Cabinet
paper, the doctrine which is to be maintained and modified for
the purposes of plunder. We have been long without official
intelligence from France. The last was not unfavorable. Ap
pearances and reports have of late engendered suspicions of
foul play. The arrival of two vessels from Bayonne, in the
Delaware, with the notice of others to follow, indicate a renewal
of trade. On the other hand, extracts of letters seem to imply
a continuance of the Iron policy in that quarter. The symptoms
of approaching war between France and Russia seem to multi-

494 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
ply. I am sorry to trouble you with a recurrence to your dor
mant files, but as I know the facility afforded by the method of
them, I will ask the favor of you to look under the "anony
mous " head for a long letter or letters, written from London
in the beginning of 1809, in a disguised hand, and signed "A
Man." If received at all, it probably was forwarded by Ly
man.

ROBERT SMITH, EX-SECRETARY OF STATE *

Having seen in the Aurora of the 5th inst., [April, 1811,]
and since copied into other Gazettes, an explanation which the
Editor says he was authorized to make "of the rupture which
has taken place between Mr. Madison and Mr. R. Smith," I have
thought it proper, whilst the circumstances are fresh in remem
brance, to preserve them in the following memorandum:
On the  day of March Mr. S. called on me, as was com
mon, on some point of official business. In the conversation, he
alluded to the account in the newspapers of the dismission of
Mr. Pickering by Mr. Adams, as just published for the first
time by the former. Altho' the manner of Mr. S. did not de
note any purpose beyond the ordinary conversation incident to
such a topic, it happened to be the very day on which I meant
to have sent for him, in order to communicate the necessity of
making a change in the head of the Department of State. Drop
ping, therefore, the case of Mr. Pickering, and breaking its ap
parent relation to his own by the interposition of other subjects,
I intimated that, in coming over, he had anticipated my inten
tion of sending for him, with a view to a conversation, which
would be as candid and explicit on my part as it was, in some
respects, delicate and disagreeable in itself. After remarking
that I had delayed the execution of my purpose for some time
after I had formed it, in order that my communication might
have the character of being, not the result of any sudden im
pulse, but of a deliberate regard to public considerations and
official duty, I proceeded to state to him, that it had long been
* This paper is a copy from the autographical original, consisting of sixteen
pages of letter-press, in Mr. McGuire's collection, and endorsed with the follow
ing words, also in the handwriting of Mr. Madison: (" Quere: If necessary to
become public?) Memorandum as to R. Smith, Ap1, 1811."

496 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
felt, and had at length become notorious, that the administra
tion of the Executive Department laboured under a want of the
harmony and unity which were equally essential to it3 energy
and its success; that I did not refer to the evil as infecting our
Cabinet consultations, where there had always been an apparent
cordiality, and even a sufficient concurrence of opinion, but as
shewing itself in language and conduct out of doors, counteract
ing what had been understood within to be the course of the
administration and the interest of the public; that truth obliged
me to add, that this practice, as brought to my view, was ex
clusively chargeable on him; and that he had not only counter
acted what had been the result >of consultations apparently
approved by himself, but had included myself in representa
tions calculated to diminish confidence in the administration
committed to me. He expressed surprise that I should have
yielded to such impressions; declared that he had given no
cause for them; observing, that it was not to be conceived that
a motive could be felt by him to be otherwise than friendly, per
sonally, as well as to the credit of my administration. I told
him that I had long resisted such impressions, well knowing
that my conduct to him had merited a very different return;
but that they were the result of facts and circumstances brought
to my knowledge from so many sources and with so many cor
roborations, that it was impossible to shut my mind against them.
I assured him that I had struggled against the belief as long as
I could; that it was painful, as well as difficult, for me to suppose
that, conscious, as he must be, of the friendship he had experi
enced in my nomination of him to the Department of State, and
in the constant aids I had given him in discharging its duties,
he should privately set himself against me in any respect; but
that what had harassed my feelings in a degree equalled by no
occurrence in a long political life, was the reflection that there
were among those most nearly connected with him a number
of individuals whom I had always felt a gratification in classing
among the best of my friends, political and personal, and for
whom I felt the highest esteem and sincerest affection; and that
the idea of distressing them was most severely so to myself. He

1811. EX-SECRETARY SMITH. 497
repeated his solemn denial of unfriendly conduct in any wav
towards me, or having done any thing tending to obstruct or
embarrass the administration; that, on the contrary, he had been
always personally my friend, and had contributed, as far as he
could, to the credit and support of the administration. What
motive could he have to be otherwise, being himself a member
of it, and having neither pretensions nor expectations of any
higher sort? What could have given rise to the unfavorable
sentiments I had expressed he was at a loss even to conjecture.
I told him I was aware of the awkwardness of my situation, in
being obliged to refer to information and evidence which had
come to me in ways not permitting me to name to him the
sources; but I could assure him that the sources were such as
made it my duty not to disregard them; and that, unquestion
ably, he would himself, in my situation, yield to the accumulated
statements which had their effect on me. In what instances had
he set himself against me, or against measures espoused by the
administration? I reminded him of a conversation with Mr.
 , reported by the latter, in which he had indulged him
self in disparaging remarks on my official character, and that
of others in the Cabinet; ou the general course of my policy,
which he signified he disapproved; and in which he had commu
nicated certain Cabinet proceedings, some of which were of so
confidential a nature that the gentleman did not consider himself
at liberty to repeat them. I had taken occasion before to drop
him a hint that such a conversation had been given out, observ
ing, at the time, that I did it, not because I lent an ear to it,
but, that it might suggest circumspection. He slighted then
the report, as proceeding from a source not likely to be listened
to; and now repeated the denial of the conversation, with an
allusion to a report from the same source as to a conversation
with another member of the Cabinet, where it appeared that
no interview could have taken place. I admitted that if this
had been a solitary case, it would have been entirely dismissed
from my recollection; but this was far from being the fact,
altho' I could not equally enter into a specification of other
cases. For examples in which he had counteracted what he
vol. 11. 32

498 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811,
had not himself disapproved in the Cabinet, I referred to the
Bills called Macon's bills, and the non-intercourse bill, on the
consultations on which he appeared to concur in their expedi
ency; that he well knew the former, in its outline, at least, had
originated in the difficulty of finding measures that would pre
vent what Congress had solemnly protested against, to wit, a
compleat submission to the belligerent edicts; that the measure
was considered as better than nothing, which seemed to be the
alternative, and as part only of whatever else might, in the pro
gress of the business, be found attainable; and that he neither
objected to what was done in tho Cabinet, (the time and place
for the purpose,) nor offered any thing in the place of it; yet it
was well understood that his conversations and conduct out of
doors had been entirely of a counteracting nature; that it was
generally believed that he was in an unfriendly disposition, per
sonally and officially; and that, altho' in conversations with dif
ferent individuals he might not hold the same unfavorable lan
guage, yet with those of a certain temper it was no secret that
he was very free in the use of it; and had gone so far as to avow
a disapprobation of the whole policy of commercial restrictions,
from the Embargo throughout. I intimated to him, also, that
it was a complaint among our friends in Congress that the Fed
eralists frequently quoted him for communications from our
Ministers abroad which were unknown to others, the disclo
sures being sometimes such as to be deemed confidential, and to
be turned against the administration. I glanced, also, at the re
port of his conversation with Mr. Morier, in which he (Mr. S.)
had expressed his disapprobation of the whole course of policy
observed by the U. States towards G. B. All these facts he re
pelled by a repetition of what he had before said. With respect
to his motives for dissatisfaction, I acknowledged that I had
been, for the reasons given by him, much puzzled to divine any
natural ones, without looking deeper into human nature than I
was willing to do; and it was on this account that I had so
long resisted the impression which had at length been made on
me; that instead of having any just motives to become an adver
sary, I knew, and he must be conscious, that in my confidential

1811. EX-SECRISTARY smith.

499

intercourse with him, in my kindness in general, and, above all,
in the labor I had taken upon myself in behalf of his official
duties, and for his credit, as well as that of the administration, I
ought to have found an opposite return. On this subject, as well
as every other, I told him I meant, as I ought, to bo entirely
frank, and must, therefore, say, that it was an imperious consider
ation for a chango in the Department of State, that whatever tal
ents he might possess, he did not, as he must have found by expe
rience, possess those adapted to his station; that this had thrown
the business more into my hands than was proper, or consistent
with my own duties; that as long as I considered him in the
light I once did I had cheerfully given him my aid, but that it
was too much to be expected under actual circumstances, and
that, moreover, the increase of the public business had put it out
of my power to do his share as well as my own; and that, in
deed, throughout, it was not done as well as might have been by
a mind appropriated thereto. I observed that I could appeal to
himself for the fact that the business of the Department had not
been conducted in the systematic and punctual manner wliich
was necessary, particularly in the foreign correspondence, and
that I had become daily more dissatisfied with it. He did not
admit that complaint was well founded, intimating that I had a
particular way of thinking on this subject, and that his conduct
of tho business would fully justify itself on examination. I told
him he could not but be in a great error, reminding him of the
condition in which his correspondence, more particularly, was
brought to me; which was almost always so crude and inade
quate, that I was in the more important cases generally obliged
to write them anew myself, under the disadvantage, sometimes,
of retaining, thro' delicacy, some mixture of his draft; that he
must recollect that in the cases of Erskine and Jackson, the
correspondence on his part had, in a manner, fallen entirely on
my hands. I reminded him, also, of important failures to make
seasonable communications to our foreign agents; particular
izing the case of neglecting, tho' repeatedly desired, to make
known to our Minister at Paris, as was done to our Minister at
London, that in case the letter of the Duke de Cadore of Aug.

500 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
5, to Gen1 Armstrong, as reaching us through English news
papers, should it be officially confirmed, it would be the ground
of a Proclamation as authorized by the act of May, 1810; and
the case of not keeping Mr. Shaler, at the Havanna, duly in
formed of the state of our foreign relations, in consequence of
which, as appeared by Mr. Shaler's letters, he was unable to pur
sue the object of his mission with advantage. I observed that
if he had transmitted at once, in multiplied copies, and thro' dif
ferent channels, the same information for the French Govern
ment as to the B. Government as to the light in which the letter
of the D. de Cadore was viewed, it might, by removing uncer
tainty and distrust as to the course here, have prevented the
delay and embarrassment resulting from the course there. The
impression made by these remarks was shewn rather by his
manner than his comment, which was limited to a general dis
claimer of the justness of them; and to allusions to a report that
he had expressed to Mr.  Ingersoll lately in Washington,
a disapprobation of the Proclamation putting in force the non
importation act against G. B., which he denied to be fact, and
said that he had sought out that gentleman, and had obtained
from him a satisfactory explanation.
In this stage of the conversation, but in what particular con
nection is not recollected, it was noticed, as a mark of his dis
inclination to co-operate in promoting measures for the better
fulfilling of the Executive trust, that altho' the Act of Congress
at the session preceding that just closed relating to our diplo
matic establishment, and of course particularly affecting his de
partment, had been found so very inconvenient, and it had been
so often suggested to him as desirable that some active member
of Congress should be apprized of the expediency of amending
or repealing the act, yet no such hint had been ever given, till
at length I had availed myself of an opportunity of explaining
the matter to a member of the Senate, who readily introduced
it to the Senate, but too late in the session to receive an effect
ual attention. He signified that he had not been in the habit
of proceeding in such a way with business belonging to the
Legislature, and seemed to disapprove or doubt the propriety

1811. EX-SECRETARY SMITH.

501

of it. I remarked that where the intention was honest, and the
object useful, the conveniency of facilitating business in that
way was so obvious that it had been practised under every past
administration, and would be so under every future one; that
Executive experience would frequently furnish hints and lights
for the Legislature; that nothing was more common than for
members of Congress to apply for them; and that, in fact, such
communications, in cases not calling for formal messages, were
indispensable to the advantageous conduct of the public busi
ness. A resort to formal messages, on every occasion where
executive information might be useful, was liable to obvious
objections. He made no particular reply, but did not seem to
acquiesce. Returning to the necessity of harmony and unity in
the Executive Councils, in providing for which I expressed a
disposition to wound feelings any where as little as possible, he
said he had himself regretted my situation, in reference to the
want of cordiality among members of the Cabinet, declaring, at
the same time, that whilst he was aware of intrigues and hostili
ties carried on against himself, he had abstained from every
thing of that sort against others, disdaining, at all times, to stoop
to such practices. I told him it was unnecessary to repeat ob
servations which I had already made; that such was the state
of things, that a remedy had become essential in the view of the
most considerate friends of the administration; and that I
wished, for the reasons given, to make it as lenient as would
answer the purpose. It had occurred to me that he might not
be disinclined to serve his country in a foreign mission, and that
St. Petersburg, where there was a vacancy, might be an eligi
ble, as it certainly was an important situation. London more
so, he remarked quickly. For London, I replied, another ar
rangement was thought of; adding, with a view to repress mis
calculations, that it was a place of discussions and negotiations,
calling for appropriate talents and habits of business. He said
he had for a considerable time entertained thoughts of retiring
from the Department of State, and had looked towards a va
cancy on the Bench of the Supreme Court, likely to be produced
ere long by a death in Baltimore, (alluding to Judge Chase.)

502 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
I observed that in that event it might be found most proper to
seek a successor elsewhere; intimating, also, that he had been
long out of the practice and study of the law, and that the Sen
ate would probably be hard to please in such a case. He made
light of that consideration, with au expression of confidence in
his standing there, which led me to remark that he was not
aware how much room there was for a different estimate; that
he had assuredly lost ground extremely with the members of
both Houses of Congress, in so much that the prevailing senti
ment, as brought to my knowledge in the most direct manner,
and from some quarters not unfriendly to himself, called for
some arrangement that would at least vary the composition of
the Cabinet. He ascribed unfavorable impressions against him,
as far as they might exist, to intrigues and calumnies; signifying
that there was, however, a body of firm friends, personal and
political, who would not desert him, whatever course things
might take. I did not admit that any considerable body of the
Republicans would, in any event, take side against the adminis
tration; that, on the contrary, many on whom he might perhaps
count had become dissatisfied with the course he had pursued;
that it was not so much, therefore, the consideration alluded to
by him which weighed with me, tho' not without weight, espe
cially at the present crisis in Maryland, [the approaching elec
tions of Senatorial Electors,] as the one I had before mentioned,
namely, the personal friends common to both of us, that made
me desirous of smoothing the change become necessary by pro
posing a mission to Russia, which I sincerely wished him to ac
cept. I remarked that the services there, tho' neither difficult
nor laborious, might be important; that the station was respect
able, and that it was desirable to find a minister whose political
grade here had been such as would satisfy the expectations of
the Emperor, and whose private resources would also aid his
salary in bearing the expensiveness of that Metropolis and
Court. He admitted an inclination towards a trip to Europe
as more eligible than his situation here; and, after a few unin
teresting observations, concurred Ih the measure, with a mutual
understanding that the appointment would be postponed for

1811. EX-SECRETARY SMITH.

503

some days, till he could wind up the business of his Department,
and prepare for his departure from Washington. I observed
that as the 1st of April closed a quarter, it might be a conveni
ent epoch for the date of his Commission, in which he acqui
esced. He said he supposed there would be no impropriety in
letting it be known that the mission was on foot; none at all.
After a short pause— May I say that the appointment is offered
to me? I have no objection, it being of course understood that
it is to take place on the 1st of April, and that you will let me
be at liberty, as many days previous as may be convenient, to
take overt measures for supplying the vacancy; which he prom-.
ised. The conversation closed with his proposal that it should
be considered as entirely confidential, and my acquiescence
in it.
From his conversations and conduct for several days, in his
office and elsewhere, it was not doubted that he persisted in his
intention to accept the mission, and was making preparations
accordingly. Circumstances soon, however, began to denote
and strengthen doubts, particularly his declining, after accept
ing my invitation, to dine with a party, including the Russian
Legation; and as I did not hear from him as was expected, and
the 1st of April approached, I sent for him.
On his arrival, I told him my object, and that I had, accord
ing to the understanding between us, caused a commission to be
made out for him. He said he was himself on the point of com
ing over to me, with the view of returning into my hands his
Commission of Secretary of State, (handing it to me at the same
time,) and to inform me that he had determined to decline the
other which had been proffered to him. However disposed he
might have been to accept it under other circumstances, it was
impossible he could do so under such as would give it the ap
pearance of a mere expedient to get rid of him as Secretary of
State. He had learned from Baltimore that a removal of him
was believed to have been determined on, under the influence
of intrigues against him, and that this intention was known
even to federal members of Congress, as was evinced by their
language on their return home; that the same impression ex-

504 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
isted elsewhere; that he had, in fact, received letters from his
friends, not only in Baltimore, but in Pennsylvania and N. York,
advising him by no means to make himself a party to the trans
action by accepting the Russian Mission, which would be re
garded as a mere cover for his removal. I told him I could
not be answerable for the reports or assertions that might be
propagated; that the course I had pursued was the one deemed
proper in the circumstances which had resulted from that pur
sued by him, and had been as delicate and favorable to him as
could be reconciled with what I owed to the public and to my
self; that in tendering him the commission for Russia, I wished
him to accept it for the reasons explained to him; that what the
Federalists said on the occasion must have grown out of the con
versations which had, as was well known, been frequent and
free among the friends of the administration, on the necessity
of a change in the Department of State. I availed myself of
this turn of the conversation to allude anew to the reports and
complaints that the Federalists were the first to get from him
information of our foreign affairs; and to its being understood
that he had told Mr. Morier that the whole policy of the Gov
ernment towards G. B. had been contrary to his opinion and
advice. This he denied. I assured him there was full evidence
that Morier had said so; that this was known to and believed
by sundry members of Congress, and had contributed, with
other causes, to strengthen the current running against him. I
reminded him of the official letter from Mr. Morier to him, com
plaining of the non-intercourse being enforced against G. B.
during the actual conduct of France, in which he (M.) referred
to a conversation in which he (S.) admitted that G. B. had a
right to complain; I told him I had been surprised, when he
communicated the letter to me, to find no apparent intention of
a formal disavowal of that circumstance till I had pressed it on
him, as material to himself in case the correspondence should l)e
brought before the public or Congress; and that I did not ap
prove of the course finally taken by him, of getting Morier to
withdraw the letter and substitute another omitting the passage;
a course less eligible than the one I had suggested, of a written

1811. EX-SECRETARY SMITH. 595
disavowal, as Morier's communications to his Government might
correspond with his first letter, and might find their way to the
public thro' a call for papers by the British Parliament, in which
case the statement would be without his contradiction. These,
I observed, were disagreeable topics, and I willingly turned
from them to repeat to him, that, with a wish to consult the
sensibility of common friends, I had been ready to give him, in
exchange for an office which he professed no longer to relish, a
foreign mission, which in itself did not appear to be unaccepta
ble to him; and that it was still in his option, and would re
main so for a short time longer, if he wished to deliberate fur
ther on the subject. He said he had made up his mind, and
meant to be understood as having given his final answer to the
proposal. He recurred to the aspect it wore of an indirect
removal of him from the Department of State, and to the alle
gation of intrigues against him, which had been mistaken for a
loss of confidence with the public and with Cqngress; regretted
the tendency of what was taking place to injure the Republican
cause; observing, again, that he should be supported by a body
of friends, and that he knew he could stand on good ground in
justifying himself to his Country. I assured him that neither
my sentiments nor conduct in relation to him were in the least
the effect of intrigues, to which I should never listen, but of the
facts and considerations I had unfolded to him; that I did not
doubt the friendship for him of a number of respectable and
weighty characters; but it was not less true, however disagree
able it might be to dwell on the circumstance, that with the Pub
lic, as well as among the members of Congress in both Houses,
the tide was setting strongly and extensively against him; that
I regretted as much as himself a tendency in any occurrence to
impair harmony among the Republicans, more especially at this
time and in this State, but that I believed this was not likely to
be much the case; conceiving that the administration rested on
ground as solid as at any preceding period; and that for my
self, I was entirely confident that what I had done in relation
to him could be justified, not only to the public, if it should be
come there necessary, but even to the most partial of his per-

506 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
sonal friends; that I could have no personal objection, there
fore, to any step he might take which would call the public at
tention to it. He said it was not his wish, however confident
he might be of the ground on which he stood, to introduce any
public discussion. The conversation being at an end, he took
his leave with a cold formality, and I did not see him after
wards. On reading over the above, I recollect nothing worth men
tioning which is omitted; unless it be thought an exception,
that in some stage of the conversation I alluded to the pretty
general opposition made by his brother in the Senate to the
measures proposed or supposed to be approved by the Execu
tive, and its effect in strengthening the presumption with many
of a like spirit in the Secretary of State; explicitly declaring,
at the same time, that however I might be sometimes disap
pointed at the part taken by his brother, or regret it on account
of his talents and his weight, I had always considered myself
bound to suppose him actuated by a just respect for the inde
pendence of his station and his character; and that as he stood
in no official connection with the Executive rendering him any
wise responsible for his political conduct, I had never permitted
myself to complain of it.
J.M.
April, 1811.

LETTERS, ETC.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Washington, May 3, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of the 24th April, and re
turn the letter inclosed in it, after having made the communi
cation intended for Mr. Gallatin. Your expostulations with
Duane could not be improved; but he gives proofs of a want of
candor, as well as of temperance, that will probably repel ad
vice, however rational or friendly. The great fulcrum of his
attacks on Mr. Gallatin is Erskine's statement of his favorable
dispositions toward England; and these attacks he obstinately
reiterates and amplifies, notwithstanding the public and solemn
denial of Mr. Gallatin; whilst Mr. Smith and myself, though
included in a like statement, under which we have both remained
silent, have not been reproached on that account, and Mr. Smith
is become an object even of favor. A like want of candor is
seen in the comments of the Aurora, on the putative explana
tion of the rupture between Mr. Smith and myself. Of the al-
ledged points of difference, the main one, viz: the non-inter
course, it appears as his opinion on my side; yet he takes the
other side generally, without alluding to the exception; and, of
late, restricts his comments to Macon's bills, or smothers the
"non-intercourse" under an &c, or confounds the measure with
the manner of its execution. Again, whilst he admits occasion
ally that the non-intercourse, or rather non-importation, now
in force, is the best and the only adequate resort against the
aggressions of G. Britain, he continues his abuse on the Gov
ernment for abandoning the interests and rights of the nation.
I have always regarded Duane, and still regard him, as a sin
cere friend of liberty, and as ready to make every sacrifice to

508 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
its cause but that of his passions. Of these, he appears to be
compleatly a slave.
Our expected frigate is not yet arrived from Europe, nor is
there any account of the departure either of Pinkney or Foster
from G. Britain. The last account from Pinkney was of March
13, when he was packing up for his passage in the Frigate.
Whether the delays proceed from the approach of the Equinox,
the posture of the Regency, or a wish to learn the result of
things in Congress, or from some other cause, is unknown.
From the jumble of accounts from France, it is probable that
the repeal of the Decrees is professedly adhered to; and that an
exchange of the productions of the U. States and France, with
an exception of certain articles, is permitted by the municipal
laws, under vexatious precautions against British forgeries and
American collusions; and, perhaps, under some distrust of the
views of this Government.

TO THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF NEW HAVEN.
I have received, fellow-citizens, the petition which you have
addressed to me, representing the inconveniences experienced
from the existing non-importation law, and soliciting that the
National Legislature may be speedily convened.
It is known to all that the commerce of the United States
has, for a considerable period, been greatly abridged and an
noyed by Edicts of the belligerent powers; each professing re
taliation only on the other, but both violating the clearest rights
of the United States as a neutral nation. In this extraordinary
state of things, the Legislature, willing to avoid a resort to war,
more especially during the concurrent aggressions of two great
powers, themselves at war, the one with the other, and determ
ined, on the other hand, against an unqualified acquiescence,
have endeavoured, by successive and varied regulations affect
ing the commerce of the parties, to make it their interest to be
just. In the act of Congress out of which the existing non-importa-

1811. LETTERS.

509

tion has grown, the state of commerce was no otherwise quali
fied than by a provision, that in case either of the belligerents
should revoke its unlawful Edicts, and the other should fail to
do the same, our ports should be shut to the vessels and Mer
chandize of the latter. This provision, which, like our previous
offers, repelled the very pretext set up by each, that its Edicts
against our trade with the other was required by our acqui
escence in like Edicts of the other, was equally presented to the
attention of both. In consequence of the communication, the
French Government declared that its Decrees were revoked.
As the British Government had expressed reluctance in issuing
its orders, and repeatedly signified a wish to find in the exam
ple of its adversary an occasion for putting an end to them, the
expectation was the more confident that the occasion would be
promptly embraced. This was not done; and the period allowed
for the purpose having elapsed, our ports became shut to Brit
ish ships and merchandize. Whether the conduct of the French
Government has been and will be such as to satisfy the author
ized expectations of the United States; or whether the British
Government may have opened, or will open, the way for the
Executive removal of the restrictions on British Commerce with
the United States, which it continues in its power to do by re
voking its own unlawful restrictions on our commerce, is to be
ascertained by further information, which will be received and
employed by the Executive with the strict impartiality which
has been invariably maintained towards the two belligerents.
Whatever may be the inconveniences resulting, in the mean
time, from the non-importation act, it was not to have been sup
posed, that whilst it falls within the necessary power and prac
tice of regulating our commercial intercourse with foreign Coun
tries according to circumstances, the act would be regarded as
not warranted by the Constitution; or that whilst it was a par
tial restriction only, and had for its object an entire freedom
of our commerce, by a liberation of it from foreign restrictions
unlawfully imposed, it could be viewed as destroying commerce;
and least of all, that a likeness could be seen between a law en
acted by the representatives of the Country, with a view to the

510 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
interest of the Country, and Acts of a Government in which the
Country was not represented, framed with a view to the inter
est of another Country at the expense of this.
If appeals to the justice of the belligerents, through their in
terests, involve privations on our part also, it ought to be rec
ollected that this is an effect inseparable from every resort by
which one nation can right itself against the injustice of others.
If sacrifices made for the sake of the whole result more to
some than to other districts or descriptions of citizens, this also
is an effect which, though always to be regretted, can never be
entirely avoided. Whether the appeal be to the sword or to
interruptions or modifications of customary intercourse, an equal
operation on every part of the community can never happen.
Nor would an unqualified acquiescence in belligerent restric
tions on our commerce, if that could be reconciled with what
the nation owes to itself, be less unequal in its effect on differ
ent local situations and interests.
In estimating the particular measure which has been adopted
by the National Councils, it may be reasonably expected, there
fore, from the candor of enlightened citizens, that with the pe
culiarity of the public situation, they will be impressed, also,
with the difficulty of selecting the course most satisfactory, and
best suited to diminish its evils or shorten their duration; that
they will keep in mind that a resort to war must involve neces
sary restrictions on commerce; and that were no measure what
ever opposed to the belligerent acts against our commerce, it
would not only remain under the severe restrictions now im
posed by foreign hands, but new motives would be given for
prolonging and invigorating them.
These observations are not meant to anticipate the policy
which the Legislature may henceforward find best adapted to
support the honor or promote the interest of the Nation; or to
prejudge questions relative to particular changes which may be
pointed out by experience, or be called for by the state of our
foreign relations. Neither do they imply any predetermination
as to the measure of convening the Legislature, which it will
be a duty to adopt or decline as our national affairs may appear

1811. LETTERS.

511

to require. The view of our situation presented to your patri
otic reflections has been suggested by that contained in your
address; and it will have its desired effect, if it recalls your at
tention to the peculiar embarrassments with which the National
Councils have had to contend, and enforces the importance of
manifesting that union of all in supporting the measures of the
constituted authorities whilst actually in force, which is as ne
cessary to their effect at home and abroad as it is consistent
with the right and with the legitimate modes of seeking a revisal
of them. In the mode which the Town of New Haven has em
ployed, I witness with satisfaction, that in exercising the right
of freemen, the obligation of Citizens has not been forgotten;
and that it affords a pledge and an example which I am far
from undervaluing.
I tender you my respects and my friendly wishes.
Washington, May 24, 1811.

TO THE BAPTIST CHURCHES ON NEAl/s CREEK AND ON BLACK
CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your address, approving my
objection to the Bill containing a grant of public land to the
Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House, Mississippi Territory.
Having always regarded the practical distinction between Re
ligion and Civil Government as essential to the purity of both,
and as guarantied by the Constitution of the United States, I
could not have otherwise discharged my duty on the occasion
which presented itself. Among the various religious societies
in our Country, none has been more vigilant or constant in
maintaining that distinction than the Society of which you
make a part, and it is an honorable proof of your sincerity and
integrity, that you are as ready to do so in a case favoring the
interest of your brethren as in other cases. It is but just, at
the same time, to the Baptist Church at Salem Meeting House,
to remark that their application to the National Legislature
does not appear to have contemplated a grant of the land in

512 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
question but on terms that might be equitable to the public as
well as to themselves.
Accept my friendly respects.
June 3d, 1811.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 7, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I return the letter from you to Duane, on the
subject of Mr. Gallatin: he seems to be incorrigible. If I am not
misinformed, his eyes are opening to the conduct and character
of Mr. Smith, with respect to both of which he has suffered him
self to be misled, partly by his own passions, partly by those
who took advantage of them. You see the new shapes our
foreign relations are taking. The occurrence between Rodgers
and the British ship of war, not unlikely to bring on repeti
tions, will probably end in an open rupture or a better under
standing, as the calculations of the British Government may
prompt or dissuade from war. Among the items in these will
be the temper here, as reported by its partizans. The state of
parties in Massachusetts is in this view important, especially as
it will attract particular notice by its effect in degrading Pick
ering, who has made himself so conspicuous in the British ser
vice. On the other hand, much impatience is shewing itself in
the Eastern States under the non-importation. The little em
barrassment which occurs in procuring returns for the articles
sent from Connecticut to the W. Indies is generating remon
strances, as in the case of the Embargo. I have been obliged
to answer one from New Haven, headed by Hillhouse, which
they have not yet published. The protracted delay of the Es
sex still leaves us a prey to the ignorance and interested false
hoods which fill our newspapers. It would seem that G. Brit
ain is determined against repealing her orders, and that Bona
parte is equally so on the destruction of her commerce, to which
he readily sacrifices his own commerce with the United States.
As to the blockade of England, (the decree to which alone the

1811. LETTERS.

513

act of Congress and the Proclamation have reference,) there is
no evidence of its being continued in force. All the official evi
dence is on the other side. And yet, by a confusion of ideas or
artifice of language, the appearance is kept up that the ground
of the non-importation has failed, and that it is consequently a
wrong to G. Britain. After all, we must remain somewhat in
the dark till we hear more on the subject; probably till the re
turn of the vessel that carried to France the act of Congress
putting in force the non-importation, for which Bonaparte seems
to be waiting.

TO EDWARD TIFFIN, GRAND SACHEM.
Washington, June 23, 1811.
Sir, — I have received the letter of the 14th instant, which
you have addressed to me, in the name of the Taminy Society
of Wigwam N°. 1, in the State of Ohio.
The circumstances in our National situation to which you
refer could not but render it peculiarly embarrassing to those
entrusted with the National rights and interests. Whilst Jus
tice, however, continues to be the basis of our policy, and the
great body of our fellow-citizens remain firm in sentiments and
determinations such as are expressed by the society of which
you are the organ, our Country will be found adequate to every
trial to which it may be exposed. The approbation which the
Society bestows on the share I have had in the public transac
tions, and its confidence in my further efforts for the public
good, are entitled to my thankful acknowledgments, to which I
add a tender of my respects and friendly wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, July 8, 1811.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 3d came duly to hand. You
will have noticed in the National Intelligencer that the wicked
publication of Mr. Smith is not to escape with impunity. It is
vol. n. 33

514 WORKS OF MADISON. 18.11.
impossible, however, that the whole turpitude of his conduct
can be understood without disclosures to be made by myself
alone, and, of course, as he knows, not to be made at all. With
out these his infamy is daily fastening itself upon him; leaving
no other consolation than the malignant hope of revenging his
own ingratitude and guilt on others. The case of Erving will
probably be better explained in the newspaper than I can here
do it. The general facts of it, I believe, are, that the three
offices at London were centered in him, with one of the salaries
only, it being understood at the time that he would be made
assessor to the Board under Jay's Treaty, in which case he
would be well recompensed. The Board declined to appoint
him, giving preference to Cabot. Still, however, a certain por
tion of business passed through his hands. On this he charged
the usual commission of 2| per cent., accruing from the individ
uals, and not from a public fund. Having paid over the whole
of the money of individuals in his hands to the public, instead
of retaining his commission, a resort to Congress became neces
sary. Whilst the subject was before them, doubts were excited
as to the merits of the case, and a call made on Mr. Gallatin
for information. His report put an end to the difficulty; the
appropriation was immediately made; and, but for the perverted
view of the matter now before the public, would never more
have been thought of. The Treasury officers, though politically
adverse to Mr. Erving, do him much justice on the occasion,
declaring that his official transactions throughout, as presented
in his accounts, are models of clearness and exactness; that he
appears to have saved or gained to the public by his vigilance
and assiduity sixty or seventy thousand dollars; that there re
mains a surplus of unclaimed monies to a considerable amount,
the greater part of which will probably never be claimed; and,
finally, that the only error committed by Mr. Erving was his not
avoiding the necessity of asking Congress to give back the
amount of his commission, by deducting it himself from the sums
paid into the public coffers.
It has been thought best, whilst Mr. Monroe is in communi
cation with the British and French Ministers here, to be silent

1811. LETTERS.

515

on the subject. As the latest information from Russell is prior
to the arrival of the non-importation act, the state of our affairs
at Paris may be conjectured. Pinkney brings, of course, noth
ing, Foster being the channel of English news. I do not know
that he has yet opened himself compleatly to Mr. Monroe; but
from the conciliatory disposition of the Prince Regent, and the
contrary one of his Cabinet, still deriving an ascendency from
the convalescence of the King, you will be very able to dive
into the character of the mission. You will perceive in the
printed paper inclosed a step by the British Minister, which,
very unseasonably it would seem, denotes an increasing rigor
towards this Country. According to a preceding interposition
with the Court of Admiralty, cases under the orders in Coun
cil had been suspended.

TO JONATHAN RUSSELL. Washington, July 24, 1811.
Sir, — I have received your letter of Jany 2d, with the sketch
of a convention arranged between you and the Marquis Alma-
nara. The purity of your views is attested by the guarded
manner of your proceeding, as well as by the explanations in
your letter. But it is proper you should be apprized that such
a transaction would be deemed inadmissible on different
grounds, were it without the feature given to it by the individ
ual agencies and interests so justly denounced by you.
For information on other subjects which it may be interest
ing for you to receive, I refer to the communications of the
Secretary of State.

TO J. Q. ADAMS. Washington, Nov 15, 1811.
Dear Sir, — I have received your several favors of Febr 8th,
Ap1 19th, June 3d, and Aug. 17th, all of them in triplicates or
duplicates.

516 WORKS OF MADISON. 181L
I need not say how agreeable it would have been to me, and
I am persuaded satisfactory to the public, if your inclination
and circumstances had favored the new allotment of your ser
vices. Being ignorant of the obstacle arising from the particu
lar state of your family, and inferring, from considerations
known to you, that such an exchange might not be unwelcome,
I had proceeded so far in anticipating a decision different from
that which took place in your mind as to hold out the station
at S' Petersburg to another. It has- happened that no disap
pointment of any sort ensued to your contemplated successor.
But I ought not to omit that I did not so far lose sight of the
possibility that you might be induced to decline the new ap
pointment as not to have meditated a provision for that event,
which would have probably deprived it of its embarrassments.
In the present state of things, I have only to wish that your
diplomatic situation may continue to be less incommodious than
it was at first found, and that opportunities of rendering it use
ful to your Country may equal her confidence in the fidelity and
ability which you will apply to them.
Count Pahlenhas just delivered his letter of leave, in pursu
ance of the order of the Emperor, which translates him to Rio
Janeiro. His excellent dispositions and amicable deportment
have justly rendered him so highly and universally agreeable
here, that we take for granted that no doubt on that point can
have been among the reasons of his sovereign for this change
of his destination.
You will receive by this conveyance from the Department of
State the late communications to Congress, including the ad
justment of the rusty and corrosive affair of the Chesapeake.
The pretension of G. Britain, which requires us, as a neutral
nation, to assert against one belligerent an obligation to open
its markets to the products of the other, shews a predetermina
tion to make her Orders in Council co-durable with the war, if
even that will fulfil the condition annexed to their repeal. The
question to be decided, therefore, by Congress, according to
present appearances, simply is, whether all the trade to which
the orders are and shall be applied is to be abandoned, or the

1811. LETTERS. 5^
hostile operation of them be hostilely resisted. The apparent
disposition is certainly not in favor of the first alternative,
though it is more than probable that if the second should be
adopted, the execution of it will be put off till the close of the
session approaches; with the exception, perhaps, of a licence to
our Merchantmen to arm in self-defence, which can scarcely fail
to bring on war in its full extent, unless such an evidence of
the declaration of the United States to prefer war to submis
sion should arrest the cause for it. The reparation made for
the attack on the American frigate Chesapeake takes one splin
ter out of our wounds; but besides the provoking tardiness of
the remedy, the moment finally chosen deprives it of much of its
effect, by giving it the appearance of a mere anodyne to the ex
citements in Congress and the Nation produced by the cotem-
porary disclosures.
It will afford you pleasure to know that the aggregate of our
crops was never greater than for the present year. The grain
part of them is particularly abundant.

TO JONATHAN RUSSELL. Washington, Novr 15, 1811.
Dear Sir, — Your letter of June 10th was duly delivered. I
feel a pleasure in being able to say that the information con
veyed to you, with respect to an unfriendly language having
been held by Mr. Pinkney against you, is not confirmed by any
thing heretofore known to me. He has certainly lodged no
complaint with me, nor have I ever heard that he has censured
you to others. If the reports to you, therefore, be not destitute
of all foundation, I am persuaded they are great exaggerations,
if not perversions, of expressions escaping from him, under his
anxiety for further information from Paris, and his ignorance
of the prudential considerations which governed your corre
spondence. I have been always equally aware of the delicate situation in
which you were placed, having in view the importance, on one

518 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
hand, of obtaining from the French Government confirmations
of the repeal of its decrees, and, on the other, that of not weak
ening the ground on which the British repeal was urged; and
this delicacy was increased by the mixed character of the French
decrees, some parts of them relating to Great Britain only,
others to the United States; and these, again, affecting our neu
tral character, so as to give G. Britain a plea for interposing;
and partly our National rights or interests, with which G. Brit
ain had nothing to do. Under this last head might, in truth,
be placed the very case of the N. 0. packet, which must
have been seized under a part of the Decrees which did not vio
late our neutral rights. She entered voluntarily into a French
port, and violated conditions only which France, as respects G.
Britain, had an indisputable right to annex to our trade with
herself. The conditions, with respect to us, no otherwise vio
lated our rights than as they were enforced under circumstances
giving them a retrospective effect. With a previous notice, they
would only have contravened the dictates of friendship and re
ciprocity. Referring you to communications from the Department of
State, I tender you my esteem and friendly respects.

TO JOEL BARLOW.
(Private.) Washington, Nov' 17, 1811.
Dear Sir, — You will receive by this conveyance the proper
communications from the Department of State. You will see in
them the ground now avowed for the British orders in Council.
It must render them co-durable with the war ; for nothing but
a termination of it will re-open the continental market to Brit
ish products. Nor is it probable that peace will do it in its
former extent. The pretension which requires the United
States, as a neutral power, to assert an obligation on one bel
ligerent to favor, by its internal regulations, the manufactures
of another, is a fitter subject for ridicule than refutation. It

1811. LETTERS.

519

accordingly has no countenance here, even among the most de
voted champions of Great Britain. Whether some of them, by
arming themselves with simulated facts and sophistical distinc
tions, may not be emboldened to turn out in her defence, will
soon be seen. Nothing has yet passed in Congress disclosing
the sense of that body with respect to the moment and manner
of meeting the conduct of Great Britain in its present hostile
shape. A disposition appears to enter at once on preparations,
which will probably be put in force, or not, as the effect of them
on the British Councils shall be ascertained in the course of
the session. In the mean time, it is not improbable that the
merchant vessels may be permitted to arm for self-defence. This
can scarcely fail to bring on maritime reprisals, and to end in
the full extent of war, unless a change in the British system
should arrest the career of events. All proceedings, however,
relating to Great Britain, will be much influenced by the con
duct of France, not only as it relates to a violation of our neu
tral rights, but of our national ones also; and to justice for the
past as well as for the future, and that, too, not only in cases
strictly French, but in those in Naples and elsewhere indirectly
so. Altho', in our discussions with Great Britain, we have been
justified in viewing the repeal of the French Decrees as suffi
ciently substantiated to require a fulfilment of the pledge to re
peal the orders in Council; yet the manner in which the French
Government has managed the repeal of the decrees, and evaded
a correction of other outrages, has mingled with the conciliatory
tendency of the repeal as much of irritation and disgust as pos
sible. And these sentiments are not a little strengthened by
the sarcastic comments on that management with which we are
constantly pelted in our discussions with the British Govern
ment, and for which the French Government ought to be
ashamed to furnish the occasion. In fact, without a systematic
change from an appearance of crafty contrivance and insatiate
cupidity, for an open, manly, and upright dealing with a nation
whose example demands it, it is impossible that good will can
exist; and that the ill-will which her policy aims at directing
against her enemy should not, by her folly and iniquity, be

520 WORKS OF MADISON. 1811.
drawn off against herself. The late licentiousness of the French
privateers in the Baltic, the ruinous transmission of their cases
to Paris, and the countenance said to be there given to such
abuses, are kindling a fresh flame here; and if a remedy be not
applied, and our merchantmen should arm, hostile collisions
will as readily take place with one nation as the other. Were
it not that our frigates would be in danger of rencounters with
British ships of superior force in that quarter, there could be
no scruple at sending thither some of them, with orders to sup
press by force the French and Danish depredations. I am
aware that a pretext for these has been sought in the practice
of our vessels in accepting British convoy; but have they not,
in many instances, at least, been driven to this irregular step
by the greater irregularities practised against them? We await
the return of the Constitution, not without a hope of finding the
good effect of your remonstrances in a radical change of the
French policy towards this Country.
The reparation for the outrage on the Chesapeake frigate,
which you will find in the correspondence between Mr. Foster
and Mr. Monroe, tho' in a stile and extent sufficiently admis
sible under actual circumstances, has been so timed as to lose
its conciliatory effect, by wearing the appearance of a diplo
matic ruse. Those who value it most do so on the calculation
that Mr. Foster is authorized to go forward in the road from
which he has removed the stumbling-block. In this they allow
their wishes to mislead their judgments.
From a late communication of Mr. Russell to the Secretary
of State, it appears that the French Emperor has very wisely
made up his mind for the Independence of Spanish America; and
for the possession of East as well as West Florida by the Uni
ted States. It is to be hoped that no unworthy attempt will
be made to extract money from the occasion: 1. Because it is
incompatible with the assumed idea that Spanish America must
be independent. 2. Because, without our occupancy, that of
Great Britain would be interposed. 3. And essentially, because
the pecuniary value of the territory is due from Spain to the
United States. You ought to know that there is good reason

1811. LETTERS. 521
to believe that an agent (Keene) for certain grasping land-job
bers of New Orleans, and possibly elsewhere, has been treating
with the Cortes, for the vacant lands in East Florida, and it
may be counted on that equal art and avarice will mingle them
selves with every opportunity for corrupt speculations.
Hitherto the Continental Colonies of Spanish America have
masked their views of independence under a nominal adherence
to Ferdinand, as the head of the whole empire, in contradistinc
tion to the Cortes, governing the European part of it only.
Venezuela, however, has thrown off this mask, has communicated
to us its declaration of Independence, and solicits our acknowl
edging it by receiving a public Minister, &c. Mexico, accord
ing to our intelligence, which is difficult and obscure, is still in
the struggle between the revolutionary and royal parties.
In what manner Great Britain will proceed in the case of
Venezuela, and other districts following its example, does not
yet appear. Whilst Ferdinand was acknowledged, it was less
difficult to steer between the Cortes and the Colonies. It will
require more dexterity to reconcile her political connections
with the former, and her commercial views towards the latter.
If our information from Cadiz be not very erroneous, she is
doing us all the mischief there which her influence can effect.
What her conduct may be in the event of our taking possession
of East Florida cannot yet be said. The game she will play
with Cuba may more readily be conjectured. But, like most of
her others, it may in the end be a losing one.
You will receive from the Department of State a set of News
papers, and will see the public countenance as reflected in that
mirror. I add one or two which happen to be at hand, and to
contain some things worth perusal.
Accept my great esteem and most friendly respects.
To Joel Barlow, &c, &c.

522 WORKS OF MADISON. 18il.

Washington, Dec' 10, 1811.
Sir, — I have received your letter of November 23d, covering
an Address from the Legislature of the State of Tennessee.
The patriotic sentiments which it expresses are an honorable
sample of those which animate the great body of our fellow-citi
zens. The wrongs which have been so long borne by our
Country, in the hope that a sense of justice, and the true policy
inseparable from it, would have put an end to them, are per
sisted in, with aggravations which leave to a nation determined
not to abandon its rights no appeal but to its own means of
vindicating them. The necessity will be deplored by a people
who have cherished peace in sincerity, because they are alive to
the calamities which begin where peace ends. But they will
meet those as not the greatest calamities, when a surrender of
their sacred rights and vital interests are the alternative. They
will meet them with the intrepid firmness inspired by a con
sciousness that the issue has been unsought on their part, and, I
trust, with the unanimity also which such a cause ought to pro
duce. In the measures by which the navigable streams proceeding
from the neighborhood of Tennessee were secured to the United
States, the Executive paid a just regard to the importance of
them, in both a local and national view, without losing sight of
the principles of justice and right on one hand, and of those of
the Constitution on the other. The sequel rests with the Na
tional Councils, on which the Legislature of Tennessee properly
rely for all the attention to the particular interests of that
State which may be compatible with a comprehensive regard
to the whole.
For the confidence which the Legislature and yourself have
been pleased to express in my views and endeavours for the
public good I tender my acknowledgments, with assurances of
my high respects, and a return of my best wishes.

1812. LETTERS.

523

TO GOVK HAWKINS, (n. CAROLINA.) Washington, Jany i, 1812.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 26th ult., inclosing
the Resolutions of the General Assembly of North Carolina,
approving the sentiments contained in the Message to Congress
of November 5, and declaring their readiness to co-operate in
vindicating the violated rights of their Country.
Approbation from such a source could not fail, under any cir
cumstances, to strengthen the satisfaction arising from a con
sciousness of faithful purposes. In the present conjuncture it
is the more gratifying, as it is accompanied by a pledge of co
operation in the measures by which such sentiments may be ef
fectuated. I heartily join in the hopes you express that the state of our
national affairs will have its proper influence in converting
party feelings and prejudices into united exertions against the
aggressions and insults which the just conduct of our Coun
try has failed to avert, and I tender you assurances of my great
respect.

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF SOUTH
CAROLINA. Jany 8, 1812.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your address, transmitted on
the 22d of December, 1811.
Under the circumstances which impose on the National Coun
cils the duty of resorting to other means for obtaining respect
to the National rights than a continuation of the unavailing
appeals to the justice of the aggressors, it is an animating con
sideration that the great body of the Nation appear to be united
in the convictions and feelings which you have expressed.
Our Country, faithful to the principles which it professed,
and studious of the blessings of peace, omitted no pacific effort
to engage the belligerents to abandon their anti-neutral sys-

524 WORKS OF MA.DISON. 1812.
terns, persevering in the authorized expectation that if the ex
ample should be given by either, it would be followed by the
other. When the repeal of the French Edicts, therefore, was
officially declared, it was reasonably inferred that the occasion
would be seized by G. Britain to demonstrate the sincerity of
her professions, and to remove the obstructions to our commer
cial intercourse with her which had resulted from the obstruc
tions of our commerce with her adversary. Far from making
good the pledge to proceed, even step by step with France, in
returning to a respect for our neutral rights, her Government
contended for formalities in the French proceeding not observed
even in her own practice, and disputed an evidence of facts
which any other than a reluctant party would have promptly
embraced; until, forced into a distrust of these pretexts for ad
hering to her orders, she has at length made it a condition of
their repeal that the markets shut by her enemy shall be opened
to her productions and manufactures; a condition which, being
equally beyond our right to demand, and our means to effect,
involves a continuance of the system levelled against our lawful
trade during a war itself of indefinite duration.
The alternative thus presented to the American Nation is
rallying it to a vindication of its violated rights; and it would
be injustice to its character to doubt that its energy and perse
verance, when rendered necessary, will be proportioned to the
justice and moderation by which that necessity ought to have
been prevented.
Acquiescence in the practice and pretensions of the British
Government is forbidden by every view that can be taken of
the subject. It would be a voluntary surrender of the persons
and property of our citizens sailing under the neutral guaranty
of an Independent flag. It would recolonize our commerce, by
subjecting it to a foreign authority; with the sole difference that
the regulations of it formerly were made by acts of Parliament,
and now by orders in Council. And whatever benefits might
be reaped by particular portions of the community, whose pro
ducts are favored by contingent demands, but whose patriotism
will not the less make a common cause with every other por-

1812. LETTERS. 525
tion, experience warns us of the fatal tendencies of a commerce
unrestricted with Great Britain, and restricted by her pleasure
and policy elsewhere. Whilst the limited market would con
tinue overcharged with our exports, the disproportionate im
ports from it would drain from us the precious metals, endan
ger our monied institutions, arrest our internal improvements,
and would strangle in the cradle the manufactures which prom
ise so vigorous a growth. Nor would the evil be confined to
our commerce, our agriculture, or our manufactures. The ship
owners and ship builders and mariners must be equally suffer
ers. Should the regulating power submitted to afford no new
preferences to British Navigation, those derived from existing
laws and orders would exclude American vessels from the car
riage of the products of their own country from its own ports.
Finally, an acquiescence in the regulation of our Commerce by
the belligerent having the command of the sea would be the
surest method of perpetuating its destructive edicts. In a state
of things so favorable to its interests, and so flattering to its
power, the motives to a change would cease, if a change were
otherwise likely to take place.
¦It is with a just discernment, therefore, that you have re
garded a dereliction of our National rights as not less ruinous
than dishonorable, and, with an exemplary patriotism, that you
have unanimously resolved to co-operate in maintaining them.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, Feby 7, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I have received several letters from you, which,
not requiring special answers, I now beg leave to acknowledge
in the lump. I have delayed it in the hope that I might add
something on our public affairs not uninteresting. If there be
any thing at present of this character, it will be found in the
inclosed paper from New York. We have no late official in
formation from Europe; but all that we see from Great Britain
indicates an adherence to her mad policy towards the United

526

WORKS OF MADISON. 1812

States. The newspapers give you a sufficient insight into the
measures of Congress. With a view to enable the Executive
to step at once into Canada, they have provided, after two
months' delay, for a regular force requiring twelve to raise it,
and after three months' for a volunteer force, on terms not likely
to raise it at all for that object. The mixture of good and bad,
avowed and disguised motives, accounting for these things, is
curious enough, but not to be explained in the compass of a let
ter. Among other jobs on my hands is the case of Wilkinson.
His defence fills 6 or 700 pages of the most colossal paper.
The minutes of the Court, oral, written, and printed testimony,
are all in proportion. A month has not yet carried me through
the whole.
We have had of late a hard winter and much ice, which still
lies on the water in view. The reiteration of Earthquakes con
tinues to be reported from various quarters. They have slightly
reached the State of New York, and been severely felt West
and South Westwardly. There was one here this morning at 5
or 6 minutes after 4 o'clock. It was rather stronger than any
preceding one, and lasted several minutes; with sensible though
very slight repetitions throughout the succeeding hour.

TO JOEL BARLOW. Washington, February 21, 1812.
Dear Sir, — Mr. Morris delivered yesterday morning the dis
patches committed to him, including your letters to me.
The reasons for hastening the departure of the vessel now or
dered to France will not permit the Secretary of State to do
much more than acknowledge the receipt of your communica
tions. The instructions you wish relatiye to the question of a
commercial Treaty with France at this time, as well as the re
quisite terms, should such an one be admissible, will be subjects
of due consideration and early communication.
I see with pleasure the auspicious attentions which have dis
tinguished your intercourse with the French Government, and

1812. LETTERS.

527

the convincing views presented, on your part, of the commer
cial policy which it ought to adopt towards the United States.
From these sources encouragement is drawn. In other respects,
the prospect suggests distrust rather than expectation. The
delay in answering your note; the vagueness of the answer when
given; the refusal to sign the contents of the paper presented by
you, even in the ordinary and unexceptionable form proposed;
and the substitution of a verbal for a written notification of the
orders to the Custom-houses, &c, &c, by which our merchants
were to be invited to the French market, are circumstances
which necessarily attract serious notice. The reserve mani
fested on the subject of the paper alluded to is the more remark
able, as a written sanction to it would have so little committed
them. Beyond a freedom of the French ports to the products
of the United States, under all the existing limitations and in
cumbrances, it pledged nothing more than a melioration of for
malities as to ownership and origin; leaving Colonial produce
on the old footing of special licences. The liberation of the re
maining ships and cargoes could surely have created no diffi
culty, if any real purpose of friendship or good faith be enter
tained. It would seem, therefore, that the objection must have
lain against the clause forbidding captures and seizures for
other cause than forged papers. The recent condemnations in
the Baltic cases, and the avowal of the French Consul in Den
mark that all vessels, whithersoever bound, with Colonial pro
duce, were taken within the orders to capture, favor this conjec
ture; and if it be the true one, adjustment is hopeless, and the
consequences obvious. I do not forget that your understanding
of all these particulars was better than mine can be, and that
my constructions may be merely colorable. I wisli this may be
the case; but we find so little of explicit dealing or substantial
redress mingled with the compliments and encouragements,
which cost nothing because they may mean nothing, that suspi
cions are unavoidable; and if they be erroneous, the fault does
not lie with those who entertain them.
From the scanty attention I can now give to the subject of a
commercial treaty with France I am at a loss for the necessity

528 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
of it, or the motives of France to set it on foot, if it be not
meant to gain time, and be guided by events. On our side we
have nothing to stipulate which is not secured to her, as long
as she merits it, by our general system, which leaves our exports
and imports free, without any duties on the former, and with
moderate ones on the latter. It is on her side that changes and
securities are necessary to a friendly reciprocity; and these
will for the present be satisfactory to us in the form of stable
regulations, fairly executed. Among them, a reduced tariff fa
voring all our great staples, and a transit thro' French ports to
inland markets, are indispensable to a continued admission of
French staples. The system of licences must be abolished, if
not by France, by us. The neglect of the subject by Congress
is remarkable, but the event cannot be doubtful. Such a mode
of commerce corrupts one class of citizens and disgusts all the
rest; and when the trade licensed is in foreign, not native arti
cles, the evil preponderates still more over the profit. The
French Government seems to have taken up a radical error with
regard to the commercial interests of the two Countries. It
overrates our desire of her commodities. The present footing
of the commerce is intolerable to the United States, and it will
be prohibited if no essential change takes place. At all times
it will be a barter of food and raw materials for superfluities in
great part; and altogether so (with the temporary exception of
Colonial re-exports) as long as a balance in money is prevented
by the existing policy of France, and a return of useful fabrics
by the war. Why might not certificates of origin from French
Consuls, or, still better, of direct shipments from our ports, take
the place of licenses? The advantages of the change are numer
ous and obvious. Mr. Gallatin promises to say something to
Mr. Lee on this head.
I am concerned that the prospect of indemnity for the Ram-
bouillet and other spoliations is so discouraging as to have led
to the idea of seeking it thro' King Joseph. Were there no
other objection than the effect on the public mind here, this
would be an insuperable one. The gratification of the sufferers
by the result would be lost in the general feeling against the

1812. LETTERS. 529
measure. But Joseph is not yet settled on the Spanish Throne;
when so, de facto, he will be sovereign neither de facto nor de
jure of any Spanish part of this Continent; the whole of which,
if it had not on other accounts a right to separate from the pen
insula, would derive it from the usurpation of Joseph. So evi
dent is it that he can never be King of a Spanish Province,
either by conquest or consent, that the independence of all of
them is avowedly favored by the policy which rules him. Nor
would a purchase under Joseph place us an inch nearer our ob
ject. He could give us neither right nor possession; and we
Bhould be obliged to acquire the latter by means which a grant
from him would be more likely to embarrass than promote. I
hope, therefore, that the French Government will be brought
to feel the obligation and the necessity of repairing the wrongs,
the flagrant wrongs in question, either by payments from the
Treasury or negotiable substitutes. Without one or other, or
some fair equivalent, there can be neither cordiality nor confi
dence here; nor any restraint from self-redress in any justifiable
mode of effecting it; nor any formal Treaty on any subject.
With justice on this subject, formal stipulations on others might
be combinable.
As the Hornet had reached France before the sailing of the
Constitution, and the latter had not a very short passage, we
shall soon look for further communications from you. I hope
they will correspond equally with your patriotic exertions and
the public calculations. If they do not exhibit the conduct of
the French Government in better colours than it has yet as
sumed, there will be but one sentiment in this Country, and I
need not say what that will be.
Be assured of my affectionate esteem.
vol. n. 34

530 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, March 6, 1812.
Dear Sir, — You will see that Congress, or rather the House
of Representatives, have got down the dose of taxes. It is the
strongest proof they could give that they do not mean to flinch
from the contest to which the mad conduct of Great Britain
drives them. Her perseverance in this seems to be sufficiently
attested by the language of Lord Liverpool and Mr. Perceval
in their parliamentary comments on the Regent's Message. The
information from France is pretty justly described in the para
graph inserted in the National Intelligencer after the arrival
of the Constitution. The prints herewith inclosed are for
warded to you at the request of Thomas Gimbrede, (of N.
York,) the author.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. March 9, 1812.
Dear Sir, — As the Intelligencer will not publish the Message
and documents just laid before Congress for the present mail,
I send you a copy of the former. It is justified by the Docu
ments, among which are the original credential and instructions
from the Governor of Canada, and an original despatch from
the Earl of Liverpool to him approving the conduct of the secret
agent. This discovery, or rather formal proof, of the co-oper
ation between the Eastern Junto and the British Cabinet, will,
it is to be hoped, not only prevent future evils from that source,
but extract good out of the past.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, April 3, 1812.

Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 26 th, and have
made to the members of the Cabinet the communication you

1812. LETTERS.

531

suggest with respect to your printed Memoir on the Batture. I
learn from the Department of State that some books were re
ceived for you, and duly forwarded. What they were was not
ascertained or remembered. If they do not, on their arrival,
correspond with your expectation, let me know, and further en
quiry will be made. Meantime, there is in my possession a very
large packet addressed to you, which is probably a continuation
of Humboldt's draughts, or other maps. It was accompanied by
no letter to me, and, being unfit for the mail, waits for the pa
tronage of some trusty traveller bound in the stage towards
Monticello. A late arrival from G. Britain brings dates sub
sequent to the maturity of the Prince Regent's authority. It
appears that Perceval, &c, are to retain their places, and that
they prefer war with us to a repeal of their Orders in Council.
We have nothing left, therefore, but to make ready for it. As
a step to it, an embargo for sixty days was recommended to
Congress on Wednesday, and agreed to in the House of Repre
sentatives by about 70 to 40. The bill was before the Senate
yesterday, who adjourned about 4 or 5 o'clock without a de
cision. Whether this result was produced by the rule which
arms a single member with a veto against a decision in one day
on a bill, or foretells a rejection of the Bill, I have not yet
heard. The temper of that body is known to be equivocal.
Such a measure, even for a limited and short time, is always
liable to adverse, as well as favorable considerations; and its
operations at this moment will add fuel to party discontent and
interested clamor. But it is a rational and provident measure,
and will be relished by a greater portion of the Nation than an
omission of it. If it could have been taken sooner, and for a
period of 3 or 4 months, it might have enlisted [?] an alarm of
the British Cabinet for their Peninsular system on the side of
concessions to us, and would have shaken their obstinacy, if to
be shaken at all; the successes on that theatre being evidently
their hold on the Prince Regent, and the hold of both on the
vanity and prejudices of the Nation. Whether, if adopted for
60 days, it may beget apprehensions of a protraction, and thence
lead to admissible overtures before the sword is stained with

532 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
blood, cannot be foreknown with certainty. Such an effect is
not to be counted upon. You will observe that Liverpool was
secretary for the Foreign Department ad interim, and that Cas
tlereagh is the definitive successor of Wellesley. The resigna
tion of this last, who has received no other appointment, is a
little mysterious. There is some reason for believing that he
is at variance with Perceval, or that he distrusts the stability
of the existing Cabinet, and courts an alliance with the Gren
ville party, as likely to overset it. If none of that party desert
their colours, the calculation cannot be a very bad one; especi
ally in case of War with the U. States, in addition to the dis
tress of British trade and manufactures, and the inflammation
in Ireland; to say nothing of possible reverses in Spain and
Portugal, which alone would cut up the Perceval ascendency by
the roots. From France we hear nothing. The delay of the
Hornet is inexplicable, but on the reproachful supposition that
the French Government is waiting for the final turn of things
at London before it takes its course, which justice alone ought
to prescribe towards us. If this be found to be its game, it
will impair the value of concessions, if made, and give to a re
fusal of them consequences it may little dream of.
I understand the Embargo will pass the Senate to-day, and
possibly with an extension of the period to 75 or 90 days.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, April 24, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I have just received your favor of the 17th. The
same mail brings me the "Proceedings of the Government of
the United States relative to the Batture," for which you will
accept my thanks.
I had not supposed that so great a proportion of produce,
particularly of wheat and flour, was still in the hands of the
farmers. In Pennsylvania, it was known to be the case. In
New York, almost the whole of the last crop is in the country,
though chiefly in the hands of the Merchants and Millers. The

1812. LETTERS. 533
measure of the Embargo was made a difficult one, both as to its
duration and its date, by the conflict of opinions here, and of
local interests elsewhere; and to these causes arc to be added
that invariable opposition, open with some and covert with
others, which has perplexed and impeded the whole course of
our public measures. You will have noticed that the Embargo,
as recommended to Congress, was limited to 60 days. Its ex
tension to 90 proceeded from the united votes of those who
wished to make it a negotiating instead of a war measure; of
those who wished to put off the day of war as long as possible,
if ultimately to be met; and of those whose mercantile constitu
ents had ships abroad, which would be favored in their chance
of getting safely home. Some, also, who wished and hoped to
anticipate the expiration of the terms, calculated on the osten
sible postponement of the war question as a ruse against the
Enemy. At present, great differences of opinion exist as to the
time and form of entering into hostilities; whether at a very
early or later day, or not before the end of the 90 days, and
whether by a general declaration, or by a commencement with
letters of Marque and Reprisal. The question is also to be
brought forward for an adjournment for 15 or 18 days. What
ever may be the decision on all these points, it can scarcely be
doubted that patience in the holders of wheat and flour at least
will secure them good prices, such is the scarcity all over Eu
rope, and the dependence of the W. Indies on our supplies. Mr.
Maury writes me, on the 21st of March, that flour had suddenly
risen to 16J dollars, and a further rise looked for. And it is
foreseen that, in a state of war, the Spanish and Portuguese
flags and papers, real or counterfeit, will afford a neutral cover
to our produce, as far as wanted, in ports in the favour of G.
Britain. Licences, therefore, on our part, will not be necessary;
which, though in some respects mitigating the evils of war, are
so pregnant with abuses of the worst sort as to be liable, in
others, to strong objections. As managed by the belligerents
of Europe, they are sources of the most iniquitous and detest
able practices.
The Hornet still loiters. A letter from Barlow to Granger

534 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
fills us with serious apprehensions that he is burning his fingers
with matters wliich will work great embarrassment and mis
chief here, and which his instructions could not have suggested.
In East Florida, Mathews has been playing a strange comedy,
in the face of common sense, as well as of his instructions. His
extravagances place us in the most distressing dilemma.

TO THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF MILTON, IN MASSACHUSETTS.
I have received the memorial of the Inhabitants of the Town
of Milton on the subject of vaccination, and the interesting
papers sent with it. These have been distributed as desired,
and I return my thanks for the setts allotted to myself.
In acknowledging the communication, I cannot withhold the
tribute due to the exertions made by the Town of Milton for
verifying and diffusing that propitious antidote to one of the
severest scourges to the health and the lives of their fellow-men.
I wish them all the success to which their benevolence is enti
tled; and have the satisfaction to inform them, that the precau
tion which occurred to them, in behalf of such of their fellow-
citizens as may be more particularly exposed in the public ser
vice to the infectious malady against which vaccination pro
tects them, has been already attended to.
The sympathy of the Inhabitants of Milton with the cause of
their injured Country, as well as with that of individual human
ity, is a proof that they add the merit of good citizens to that
of good men. The patriotic sentiments which they express will,
I trust, be found, on trial, to pervade the great body of the Na
tion; and I join fervently in their prayer, that our public Coun
cils may in every vicissitude be under the direction of that Al
mighty Being who alone can ensure a happy success to them.
May 18, 1812.

1812. LETTERS.

535

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Wvsuinoton, May 25, 1812.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letters came under cover to me by
the Hornet. France has done nothing towards adjusting our
differences with her. It is understood that flic Berlin and Mi
lan Dacrees are not in force against the United States, and no
contravention of Ihem can be established against her. On the
contrary, positive cases rebut the allegation. Still, the manner
of the French Government betrays the design of leaving G.
Britain a pretext for enforcing her Orders in Council. And in
all other respects, the grounds of our complaints remain the
same. The utmost address has been played off on Mr. Barlow's
wishes and hopes; in so much that at the departure of the Hor
net, which had been so long detained for a final answer without
its being obtained, he looked to tho return of the Wasp, which
had just arrived, without despair of making her the bearer of
some satisfactory arrangement. Our calculations differ widely.
In the mean time, tho business is become more than ever puz
zling. To go to war with England and not with France arms
the Federalists witli new matter, and divides tlie Republicans,
some of whom, with the Quids, make a display of impartiality.
To go to war against both presents a thousand difficulties;
above all, that of shutting all the ports of the Continent of Eu
rope against our cruisers, who can do little without the use of
them. It is pretty certain, also, that it would not gain over tlie
Federalists, who would turn all those difficulties against the ad
ministration. The only consideration of weight in favor of this
triangular war, as it is called, is, that it might hasten through
a peace with G. Britain or France; a termination, for a while,
at least, of the obstinate questions now depending with both.
But even this advantage is not certain. For a prolongation
of such a war might be viewed by both belligerents as desira
ble, with as little reason for the opinion as has prevailed in the
past conduct of both.

536 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
June 22, 1812.
Dear Sir, — The inclosed letter was sent to me, with a request
that I would forward it. The reason assigned was, that the
one of which it is a duplicate was presumed to have miscarried,
no answer to it having been received. An answer will, of
course, be expected.
I inclose a paper containing the Declaration of war, <fec,
merely to supply a possible miscarriage of others usually re
ceived by you. It is understood that the Federalists in Con
gress are to put all the strength of their talents into a protest
against the war, and that the party at large are to be brought
out in all their force.
It is impossible to say what effect will follow the assassina
tion of Perceval. In England, it is doubted whether there will
be a successor of the same kidney; whether Wellesley will be
the man, with some modifications not affecting the character of
the Cabinet; or whether he will be allowed to make one for
himself, in which case it is supposed he will bring in the Tax
party. All this will depend on the Prince, who, it seems, is
ruled at present by Lady Holbert, [Hertford ?] who, at the age
of 60 years, has some secret fascination for his vitiated caprice.

TO

Washington, July 25, 1812.
Sir, — I have received the address from "The Convention of
Republican Delegates from the several Counties of the State of
New Jersey," explaining the sentiments entertained, at this
crisis, by that portion of my Constituents. The sentiments are
worthy the character of Citizens who know the value of the
National rights at stake in the present contest, and who are
willing to do justice to the sincere and persevering efforts which
have been employed to obtain respect to them without a resort
to arms.

1812. LETTERS.

537

The conduct of the nation against whom this resort has been
proclaimed left no choice but between that and the greater evil
of a surrender of our Sovereignty on the Element on which all
nations have equal rights, and in the free use of which the Uni
ted States, as a nation whose agriculture and commerce are so
closely allied, have an essential interest.
The appeal to force in opposition to the force so long contin
ued against us had become the more urgent, as every endeavor
short of it had not only been fruitless, but had been followed
by fresh usurpations and oppressions. The intolerable outrages
committed against the crews of our vessels, which, at one time,
were the result of alleged searches for deserters from British
ships of war, had grown into a like pretension, first, as to all
British seamen, and next, as to all British subjects; with the
invariable practice of seizing on all neutral seamen of every
Nation, and on all such of our own seamen as British officers
interested in the abuse might please to demand.
The Blockading orders in Council, commencing on the plea
of retaliating injuries indirectly done to G. Britain, through
the direct operation of French Decrees against the trade of the
United States with her, and on a professed disposition to pro
ceed step by step with France in revoking them, have been since
bottomed on pretensions more and more extended and arbitrary,
till at length it is openly avowed as indispensable to a repeal
of the Orders as they affect the U. States, that the French De
crees be repealed as they affect G. Britain directly, and all
other neutrals, as well as the United States. To this extraor
dinary avowal is superadded abundant evidence that the real
object of the Orders is, not to restore freedom to the American
Commerce with G. Britain, which could, indeed, be little inter
rupted by the Decrees of France, but to destroy our lawful com
merce, as interfering with her own unlawful commerce with her
enemies. The only foundation of this attempt to banish the
American flag from the highway of Nations, or to render it
wholly subservient to the commercial views of the British Gov
ernment, is the absurd and exploded doctrine that the ocean,
not less than the land, is susceptible of occupancy and dominion ;

538 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812
that this dominion is in the hands of G. Britain; and that her
laws, not the law of Nations, which is ours as well as hers, are
to regulate our maritime intercourse with the rest of the world.
When the United States assumed and established -their rank
among the nations of the Earth, they assumed and established
a common Sovereignty on the high seas, as well as an exclusive
sovereignty within their territorial limits. The one is as essen
tial as the other to their character as an Independent Nation.
However conceding they may have been on controvertible points,
or forbearing under casual and limited injuries, they can never
submit to wrongs irreparable in their kind, enormous in their
amount, and indefinite in their duration; and which are avowed
and justified on principles degrading the United States from the
rank of a sovereign and independent power. In attaining- this
high rank, and the inestimable blessings attached to it, no part
of the American people had a more meritorious share than the
people of New Jersey. From none, therefore, may more rea
sonably be expected a patriotic zeal in maintaining by the sword
the unquestionable and unalienable rights acquired by it, and
which it is found can no otherwise be maintained^

TO GENERAL DEARBORN. Washington, August 9, 1812.
Dear Sir, — The last of your favors which I have to acknowl
edge is that of the 3d ultimo, from Boston. I am glad to find
that you are again at Albany, where your presence will aid
much in doing all that can be done for the reputation of the
campaign. The lapse of time, and the unproductiveness of the
laws contemplating a regular force, and volunteers for an entire
year, and under Federal commissions, compel us to moderate
some of our expectations. It was much to have been desired
that simultaneous invasions of Canada, at several points, par
ticularly in relation to Maiden and Montreal, might have se
cured the great object of bringing all Upper Canada, and the
channels communicating with the Indians, under our command;

1812. LETTERS. g39
with ulterior prospects towards Quebec flattering to our arms.
This systematic operation having been frustrated, it only re
mains to pursue the course that will diminish the disappoint-
ment as much as possible. Hull, as you will have learnt, is pre
paring a force for the attack of Maiden; and that he may de
scend towards Niagara with greater effect and be the more se
cure against Indian dangers, a reinforcement of 1,500 men is
ordered, which will be promptly supplied by the overflowing
zeal of the detached militia of Ohio and Kentucky. We hope
that your arrangements with Governor Tompkins will have
provided an effective co-operation for subduing the hostile force
opposite ours at Niagara, and preparing the way for taking
possession of the country at the other extremity of Lake On
tario. In these events, we shall have in our hands not only all
the most valuable parts of the Upper province, but the import
ant command of the Lakes. It appears that Hull was making
an effort to overpower the British force on Lake Erie, his suc
cess in which will be critically useful in several respects.
In addition to these measures, it is essential, notwithstanding
the advance of the season, and the difficulties thrown in our
way, that the expedition against Montreal should be forwarded
by all the means in your power. The number of regulars that
can be procured for it cannot even yet be ascertained; but it is
sufficiently ascertained that an extensive auxiliary force will be
wanted; and it is nearly as certain that this will not be fur
nished by the Volunteer Act of February, unless a sudden ardor
overcoming the objections to it should be inspired by the vicin
ity of the object and the previous conquests. The last resource,
therefore, on which we are to depend, is that portion of the de
tached and other militia which may be within reach, will com
ply with the call, and voluntarily unite with their officers in
rejecting geographical limits to their patriotism. To this re
source I hope you will turn your full attention, with a view to
the immediate steps proper to be taken to enable it to supply
the deficit of regulars and volunteers; with respect to the latter
of which, as far as they are within a practicable distance, the
number known here to be in readiness is very inconsiderable.

540 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
From the Vermont and New Hampshire militia favorable ex
pectations are indulged, the State authorities being well disposed
to promote the service. As to Massachusetts and Connecticut,
even, notwithstanding the obstructions created by the Govern
ors, it is not yet decided that the spirit of some of the detached
and other corps may not give effect to your requisitions. Should
an adequate force be attainable from the whole or part of the
sources referred to, you will be the best judge how far a demon
stration towards Quebec will be proper in aid of the measures
against Montreal; which, if we can take by any means of any
sort, we shall find the means of holding. Should it be found
impracticable to take it this campaign, will it be possible to
occupy any other post that will cut off the intercourse with the
Indians thro' the Ottowas river ?
You will have noticed the arrival of a dispatch vessel from
the British Government. Nothing is disclosed from that quar
ter that ought in the slightest degree to slacken our military
exertions. The Secretary of State is on a visit to his farm, where he will
leave his family. On his return, which will take place in a few
days, I propose a like respite. I find myself much worn down,
and in need of an antidote to the accumulating bile, of which I
am sensible, and which I have never escaped in August on tide
water.

TO JOEL BARLOW. Washington, August 11, 1812.
Dear Sir, — As I write on short notice and in cypher, I must
be very brief.
The conduct of the French Government, explained in yours
of the  , on the subject of the decree of April, 1811, will
be an everlasting reproach to it. It is the more shameful as,
departing from the declaration to General Armstrong, of which
the enforcement of the non-importation was the effect, the re-

1812. LETTERS. 54I
yoking decree assumes this as the cause, and itself as the effect;
and thus transfers to this Government the inconsistency of its
author. The decree of April may, nevertheless, be used by Great
Britain as a pretext for revoking her orders, notwithstanding
the contrary language of Lord Castlereagh in Parliament. An
authentic, tho' informal, communication has just arrived in a
despatch vessel from Great Britain, importing that the orders
were to be revoked on the 1st of August, subject to renewal if
required by the conduct of France and the United States, par
ticularly if the non-importation act should not be forthwith re
scinded on the arrival of the act of revocation. As this pledge
was given before the declaration of war was known, it may not
be adhered to. It is not improbable, however, that it was hur
ried off, as a chance for preventing an apprehended war; and
the same dislike to the war may possibly produce advances for
terminating it, which, if the terms be admissible, will be read
ily embraced.
In the event of a pacification with Great Britain, the full tide
of indignation with which the public mind here is boiling will
be directed against France, if not obviated by a due reparation
of her wrongs. War will be called for by the nation almost
una voce. Even without a peace with England, the further re
fusal or prevarications of France on the subject of redress may
be expected to produce measures of hostility against her at the
ensuing session of Congress. This result is the more probable,
as the general exasperation will coincide with the calculations
of not a few, that a double war is the shortest road to peace.
I have been the more disposed to furnish you with these pros
pects that you may turn them to account, if possible, in prose
cuting your discussions with the French Government, and be
not unprepared to retire from them altogether on a sudden no
tice so to do. Your return home may possibly be directed even
before the meeting of Congress, if the intermediate information
should continue to present the French conduct in the provoking
light in which it has hitherto appeared.
The Secretary of State is absent. But you will receive from

542 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
Mr. Graham the usual supply of current intelligence, to which
I refer you. I have not time to write to General La Fayette.
With my best regards to him, tell him that Congress rose with
out deciding as to the validity of the remaining locations near
Point Coupee. Affectionate respects.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, August 17, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of the 10th, and return, as
you request, the letter of Mr. Higginbotham. He will prob
ably have understood from Col. Monroe that the Consulate of
Lisbon is the object of numerous and respectable candidates.
The seditious opposition in Massachusetts and Connecticut,
with the intrigues elsewhere insidiously co-operating with it,
have so clogged the wheels of the war that I fear the campaign
will not accomplish the object of it. With the most united ef
forts in stimulating volunteers, they would have probably fallen
much short of the number required by the deficiency of regular
enlistments. But under the discouragements substituted, and
the little attraction contained in the volunteer act, the two
classes together leave us dependent for every primary opera
tion on militia, either as volunteers or draughts for six months.
We are, nevertheless, doing as well as we can in securing the
maritime frontier, and in providing for an effective penetration
into Upper Canada. It would probably have been best, if it
had been practicable in time, to have concentrated a force which
could have seized on Montreal, and thus, at one stroke, have
secured the upper Province, and cut off the sap that nourished
Indian hostilities. But this could not be attempted without
sacrificing the Western and North Western Frontier, threatened
with an inundation of savages, under the influence of the British
establishment near Detroit. Another reason for the expedition
of Hull was, that the unanimity and ardor of Kentucky and

1812. LETTERS.

543

Ohio promised the requisite force at once for that service, whilst
it was too distant from the other points to be assailed. We
just learn, but from what cause remains to be known, that the
important post of Michilimackinac has fallen into the hands of
the enemy. If the reinforcement, of about 2,000, ordered from
the Ohio, and on the way to Hull, should not enable him to
take Maiden and awe the savages, emboldened by the British
success, his situation will be very ineligible. It is hoped that
he will either be strong enough, as he has cannon and mortars,
to reduce that Fort, or to leave a force that will justify him in
passing on towards the other end of Lake Erie, and place the
British troops there between him and those embodied, under ar
rangements ofDearborn and Tompkins, at Niagara, for the pur
pose of occupying the central part of Upper Canada. In the
mean time, the preparations against Montreal are going on,
and perhaps may furnish a feint towards it that may conspire
with the other plan. I find that Kingston, at the East end of
Lake Ontario, is an object with Gen1 Dearborn. The multipli
cation of these offensive measures has grown out of the defen
sive precautions for the Frontiers of New York.
We have no information from England since the war was
known there, or even seriously suspected, by the public. I think
it not improbable that the sudden change in relation to the
Orders in Council, first in yielding to a qualified suspension,
and then a repeal, was the effect of apprehensions in the Cabi
net that the deliberations of Congress would have that issue;
and that the Ministry could not stand against the popular tor
rent against the Orders in Council, swelled, as it would be, by
the addition of a war with the United States to the pressure of
the non-importation act. What course will be taken when the
declaration here shall be known is uncertain, both in reference
to the American shipments instituted under the repeal of the
Orders, and to the question between vindictive efforts for push
ing the war against us, and early advances for terminating it.
A very informal and, as it has turned out, erroneous communi
cation of the intended change in the Orders was hurried over,
evidently with a view to prevent a declaration of war, if it

544 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
should arrive in time. And the communication was accompa
nied by a proposal from the local authorities at Halifax, sanc
tioned by Foster, to suspend hostilities, both at sea and on land.
The late message of Prevost to Dearborn, noticed in the news
papers, has this for its object. The insuperable objections to a
concurrence of the Executive in the project are obvious. With
out alluding to others, drawn from a limited authority, and
from the effect of patriotic ardor, the advantage over us in cap
tures would be past before it could take effect. As we do not
apprehend invasion by land, and preparations on each side were
to be unrestrained, nothing could be gained by us, whilst ar
rangements and reinforcements adverse to Hull might be deci
sive; and on every supposition the Indians would continue to be
active against our frontiers, the more so in consequence of the
fall of Michilimackinac. Nothing but triumphant operations
on the theatre which forms their connection with the enemy
will controul their bloody inroads.
I have been indulging my hopes of getting away from this
place in the course of the present week. It is quite possible,
however, that my stay here may be indispensable. As yet, I
have less of bilious sensations than 1 could have expected.

TO REVD S. SPRING. Montpelier, Septr 6, 1812.
Revd Sir, — I have received your favor of August 26. I rec
ollect our collegiate friendship with the same impressions which
it gives me pleasure to find you still retain. Nor have I for
gotten the pleasant hours that passed between us, at a much
later day, under my own roof.
We all feel the weight of the times, and it is to be regretted
that all cannot unite in the measures opposed [?] to them. If it
were proper for me, it might not be agreeable to you, to discuss
the subject; but I will not conceal the surprize and the pain I
feel at declarations from any portion of the American people
that measures resulting from the national will, constitutionally

1812. LETTERS. 545
pronounced, and carrying with them the most solemn sanctions,
are not to be pursued into effect without the hazard of civil
war. This is surely not the legitimate course. Neither is it
the language on other occasions heard from the same quarter,
nor a course consistent with the duration or efficacy of any Gov
ernment. Permit me to express equal surprise that this extraordinary
opposition to the war declared against Great Britain is most
emphatically rested on an alliance or a connection with France,
presumed to exist, or be intended, in the face of demonstrations
to the contrary with which the slightest degree of candor ought
to be satisfied.
Without entering into comparisons between different districts
of the Union with respect to the suffering which led to the war,
or the objects at stake in it, it is clear that every district felt
more or less the evils which produced it, and is more or less
deeply interested in the success of it. It is equally certain that
the way to make it both short and successful, would be to con
vince the enemy that he has to contend with the whole, and not
a part of the Nation. Can it be doubted that if, under the pres
sure added by the war to that previously felt by G. Britain,
her Government declines an accommodation on terms dictated
by justice, and compatible with, or rather conducive to, her in
terest, it will be owing to calculations drawn from our internal
divisions? If she be disposed to such an accommodation, it will
be evinced in due time, to the most prejudiced and misinformed,
that the earliest and fairest opportunities are not withheld.
I need scarcely remark that this is a letter altogether private,
and written in confidence that it will be so received.

TO MAJE GEN1 DEARBORN. Washington, October 7, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of Sep' 30. I am glad
to find that you have succeeded in producing such apprehensions
at Montreal as to prevent reinforcements from that quarter to
vol. 11. 35

546 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812
the posts above. It would have been fortunate if you could have
derived such Militia and Volunteer aids from Vermont and
Eastward of it as might have substantially a like controul on
Prevost, and thereby have augmented the regular force ordered
to Niagara. Appearances denote a better spirit, or rather, per
haps, a better use of it, in the Eastern quarter; but it may be
too late and too distant to answer immediate purposes; unless,
indeed, the Volunteers of Maine, and the Militia or Volunteers
of New Hampshire, should be in sufficient numbers and forward
ness to prevent descents on our maritime frontier by a show
towards Nova Scotia, which would excite defensive attention at
Halifax. The advance of the season would, I presume, render
a measure of that sort unavailing at Quebec. Yet there is un-
dubitably the sensorium to which projects of alarm may be
most successfully addressed, when not too palpably chimerical.
You will receive from the War Office the last information from
Gen1 Harrison. He has a prospect of doing something towards
retrieving tlie campaign. The promptitude and numbers of the
force under his command will at least save the Military char
acter of that part of the nation, will satisfy G. Britain that the
tendency of defeat is to rouse, not depress, the American spirit,
and will stamp deep on the Indian mind the little security they
have in British protection. As Harrison seems to be making
sure of food for his army, and the measures taken promise sea
sonable supplies of other necessaries, I see nothing to prevent
his reaching Detroit early in this month. And if the great ex
ertions on foot to give him cannon should not fail, it may be
hoped he will not only be in possession of that place, but of
Maiden also, and proceed towards a still more effectual co-op
eration with the forces at Niagara. Nor do we despair of his
success should the cannon not reaeh him in time, if the British
garrisons be such as are represented, and he can carry with him
the force he has in view; since he will be able to proceed with
a very impressive portion, and leave sufficient investments and
precautions behind. The artillery sent from this place had
travelled nearly to Pittsburg, at a rate which promised a good
chance for its reaching Detroit before November, if not by the

1812. LETTERS. 547
20th of this month. As Hull's army was lost, it is to be re
gretted that the misfortune did not take place a little earlier,
and allow more time, of course, for repairing it within the pres
ent season. This regret is particularly applicable to the Great
Lakes. What is now doing for the command of them proves
what may be done. And the same means would have been used
in the first instance, if the easy conquest of them by land held
out to us had not misled our calculation. The command of the
Lakes by a superior force on the water ought to have been a
fundamental point in the national policy from the moment the
peace took place. Whatever ma.v be the future situation of
Canada, it ought to be maintain-ed, without regard to expense.
We have more means for the purpose, and can better afford the
expense than G. Britain. Without the ascendency over those
waters we can never have it over the savages, nor be able to
secure such posts [as] Makinaw. With this ascendency we com-
nand the Indians, can controul the companies trading with
them, and hold Canada, whilst in foreign hands, as a hostage
por peace and justice.
I do not wonder you are oppressed with 1^'iour, as well from
the extent of your command, rendered necess _/ by the mutual
relations between its objects, as from the deficiency of General
Officers, and particularly the difficulty and delay in bringing
the staff department even into its present state. The effect of
these circumstances in burdening you with details has been se
verely felt here, in throwing them where they as little belonged.
To carry on the war with due advantage, more effectual induce
ments, at least, must be put into the hands of recruiting officers.
The volunteer system must be essentially improved, the use of
the militia secured to the constitutional authority, and an ad
dition made to the General Officers, both of Divisions and Bri
gades. It will be equally essential to discriminate better the
functions of the several staff Departments, and to have heads
of them in immediate contact with the War Department. Ex
perience enforces these truths; and nothing but that will ever
sufficiently inculcate them. We have nothing important from
abroad but what is in the Newspapers.

548 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.

TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE
OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
October 10th, 1812.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your joint address, transmit
ted by the President and Speaker.
In the unanimous determination to support the war in which
our country is engaged, you have given a conspicuous proof of
your fidelity to the National rights and sensibility to the Na
tional character. It is a war worthy of such a determination;
having its origin neither in ambition nor in vain-glory; and for
its object, neither an interest of the Government distinct from
that of the people, nor the interest of a part of the people in
opposition to the welfare of the whole. It is a war which was
forced by persevering injustice on exhausted forbearance.
And having been called for by the public voice, every motive
ought to be felt to bear its necessary pressure with cheerfulness,
and to prosecute it with zeal to a successful issue.
The approbation you have been pleased to express of the
agency which fell to my lot in resorting to the only mode left
of maintaining for our Country the rights and the rank of an
independent Nation, claims my acknowledgments. I tender
them, with my fervent wishes that a general emulation and exer
tion of the patriotism exhibited by the Legislature of South
Carolina may speedily secure to the Unfted States the blessings
of a just and honorable peace.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, October 14, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I received your favor of the 2d, inclosing the
letter from Mr. Meigs. The place he wishes has been long
allotted to Mr. Mansfield, who preferred it to that of the sur-
veyorship held by him, and who has just obtained the exchange;
and a commission for the place vacated has just been sent to
Mr. Meigs, who was long ago recommended for it, and who, it

1812. LETTERS. 549
was understood, wished it. It is the more probable that it will
be acceptable to him as he has connections in the Western
Country, particularly the Governor of Ohio.
I see so*little chance of being able to peruse the lucubrations
of Faronde you were so good as to send me, that I replace them,
for the present at least, in your hands.
The last intelligence from the Westward left a military crisis
near Fort Defiance. Winchester, with about half the army,
was encamped within 3 miles of the encampment of about 300
British troops, with some field pieces, and a body of Indians,
stated at 2,000 or 2,500. It is probable they were destined
against Fort Wayne, with the general view of finding employ
ment for our forces on their way to Detroit, until the season
should be spent, or Brock could send troops from below. Of
our affairs at Niagara and the neighbourhood of Montreal it is
difficult [to] judge, the force of the enemy being imperfectly
known, and that under General Dearborn depending so much
on circumstances. Our best hopes for the campaign rest on
Harrison; and if no disaster, always to be feared from Indian
combats, befall him, there is a probability that he will regain
Detroit, and perhaps do more. He has a force of 8 or 10,000
men at least, enthusiastically confiding in him, and a prospect
of adequate supplies of every sort, unless it be cannon, which,
though on the way, may possibly encounter fatal delays. This
article, however, he appears not to make a sine qua non; nor
will it be wanted for Detroit, if it be true, as is reported, that
every piece has been withdrawn by the British.
The latest accounts from Europe are in the newspapers. The
ideas of which Foster and Russell are put in possession will
soon draw from the British Government some evidence of their
views as to peace. From France we hear nothing, and shall
probably meet Congress under the perplexity of that situation.
The current elections bring the popularity of the war, or of
the Administration, or both, to the Experimentum crucis. In
this State the issue is not favorable, though less otherwise than
would appear. In the Congressional Districts the Republicans,
I believe, have not lost ground at all, notwithstanding the aux-

550 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
iliaries to Federalism. In the State Legislature they will be in
a minority on a joint vote. Pennsylvania, although admitted
to be shaken, is represented to be safe. New Jersey is doubt
ful, at least. The same is the case with New Hampshire. North
Carolina, also, is reported to be in considerable vibration. The
other States remain pretty decided on one hand or on the other.

TO GOVERNOR GALUSHA. Washington, November 30, 1812.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 7th instant, communi
cating a Resolution of the General Assembly of Vermont, pledg
ing their co-operation with the General Government and with
the nation in the present contest with a Foreign power. Had
this contest originated in causes appealing with a less indis
criminate force to the common interests and honorable feel
ings of every portion of our fellow-citizens, that respect for
the will of the majority regularly proclaimed, which is the vital
principle of our free Constitution, would have imposed on all
the sacred duty which is thus laudably recognised by the State
of Vermont; and the discharge of which is enforced by the pow
erful consideration, that nothing can more contribute to prolong
the contest and embarrass the attainment of its just objects, than
tlie encouragement afforded to the hopes of the enemy by ap
pearances of discord and discontent among ourselves.
In doing justice to the patriotism which dictated the Resolu
tion transmitted, I take a pleasure in remarking that it is
heightened by the particular exposure of Vermont to the pres
sure which the war necessarily brings with it, and in assuring
myself that proportionate exertions of her citizens will add new
lustre to their character. In the war which made us an Inde
pendent nation their valor had a conspicuous share. In a war
which maintains the rights and attributes of Independence on
the Ocean, where they are not less the gift of nature and of na
ture's God than on the land, the same zeal and perseverance

1812 LETTERS. 55I
may be confidently expected from the same pride of liberty and
love of Country.
Accept the assurances of my high respect and best wishes.

TO WILLIAM EUSTIS, SECRETARY OF WAR.
Washington, December 4, 1812.
Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of yesterday, with the
impressions which could not but result from your purpose of re
tiring from an office so nearly related to that which has been
entrusted to me, in which your services have been coeval with
mine, and in which I have witnessed the zeal and constancy of
your exertions for the public good under difficulties peculiarly
arduous and trying. In bearing this testimony, I indulge my
own feelings as well as pay a tribute which is so justly due.
I take the liberty of adding a hope that it will not be incon
sistent with your arrangements to continue your official atten
tions until they can be replaced by a successor.
I thank you for the kind wishes you have expressed, and I
offer you the best of mine for your welfare and happiness.

TO PAUL HAMILTON. December 31, 1812.
Dear Sir,— I have received your letter of yesterday, signify
ing your purpose to retire from the Department which has been
under your care.
On an occasion which is to terminate the relation in which
it placed us, I cannot satisfy my own feelings, or the tribute
due to your patriotic merits and private virtues, without bear
ing testimony to the faithful zeal, the uniform exertions, and
unimpeachable integrity, with which you have discharged that
important trust; and without expressing the value I have al
ways placed on that personal intercourse, the pleasure of which
I am now to lose.

552 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
With these recollections and impressions, I tender you assur
ances of my affectionate esteem, and of my sincerest wishes for
your welfare and happiness.

LETTERS.

Washington, 1812.
My red Children, — You have come through a long path to
see your father, but it is a straight and a clean path, kept open
for my red children who hate crooked walks. I thank the
Great Spirit that he has brought you in health through the long
journey, and that he gives us a clear sky and a bright sun for
our meeting. I had heard from General Clarke of the good
dispositions of several of the Nations on and West of the Mis
sissippi, and that they shut their ears to the bad birds hovering
about them for some time past. This made me wish to see the
principal chiefs of those bands. I love to shake hands with
hearts in them.
The red people who live on this same great Island with the
White people of the 1 8 fires are made by the Great Spirit out
of the same earth, from parts of it differing in colour only. My
regard for all my red children has made me desirous that the
bloody tomahawk should be buried between the Osages, the
Cherokees, and the Choctaws. I wished, also, that the hands
of the Shawenoe and the Osage should be joined in my presence,
as a pledge to cherish and observe the peace made at S' Louis.
This was a good peace for both. It is a chain that ought to
bold them fast in friendship. Neither blood nor rust should
ever be upon it.
I am concerned at the war which has long been kept up by
the Sacs and Foxes against the Osages, and that latterly a
bloody war is carried on between the Osages and loways. I
now tell my red children now present that this is bad for both
parties. They must put under my feet their evil intentions
against one another, and henceforward live in peace and good

554 W.ORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
will, each hunting on their own lands, and working their own
soils. Your father loves justice. He extends it to all the red tribes.
When they keep the chain of friendship with the 18 fires bright,
he will protect them and do them good. If any make the chain
bloody, it must be broken on their heads. The Winebagoes,
and some other tribes between the Mississippi and Lake Michi
gan and the Wabash, have shut their ears to my Councils. They
have killed men, women, and children, and have plundered the
white people. They refuse to give up the murderers, and to
return the stolen property. Time enough has been allowed
them. When they feel the punishment, they must blame their
own folly and the bad counsels to which they have listened. I
will not suffer my white children to be killed without punishing
the murderers.
A father ought to give good advice to his children, and it is
the duty of his children to hearken to it. The people compos
ing the 18 fires are a great people. You have travelled through
their Country. You see they cover the land as the stars fill
the sky, and are thick as the trees in your forests. Notwith
standing their great power, the British King has attacked them
on the great water beyond which he lives. He robbed their
ships, and carried away the people belonging to them. Some
of them he murdered. He has an old grudge against the 18
fires, because, when he tried to make them dig and plant for his
people beyond the great water, not for themselves, they sent
out warriors who beat his warriors; they drove off the bad
chiefs he had sent among them, and set up good chiefs of their
own. The 18 fires, did this when they had not the strength
they now have. Their blows will now be much heavier, and
will soon make him do them justice. It happened wl en the 13
fires, now increased to 18, forced the British King to treat them
as an independent nation, one little fire did not join them.
This he has held ever since. It is there that his agents and
traders plot quarrels and wars between the 18 fires and their
red brethren, and between one red tribe and another. Maiden
is the place where all the bad birds have their nests. There

1812. TALK TO INDIANS. 555
they are fed with false tales against the 18 fires, and sent out
with bloody belts in their bills to drop among the red people,
who would otherwise remain at peace. It is for the good of all
the red people, as well as the people of the 18 fires, that a stop
should be put to this mischief. Their warriors can do it. They
are gone and going to Canada for this purpose. They want no
help from their red brethren. They are strong enough without
it. The British, who are weak, are doing all they can by their
bad birds to decoy the red people into the war on their side.
I warn all the red people to avoid the ruin this must bring
upon them. And I say to you, my children, your father does
not ask you to join his warriors. Sit still on your seats, and
be witnesses that they are able to beat their enemies and pro
tect their red friends. This is the fatherly advice I give you.
I have a further advice for my red children. You see how
the Country of the 18 fires is filled with people. They increase
like the corn they put in the ground. They all have good
houses to shelter them from all weathers, good clothes, suitable
to all seasons, and as for food of all sorts, you see they have
enough and to spare. No man, woman, or child of the 18 fires
ever perished of hunger. Compare all this with the condition
of the red people. They are scattered here and there in hand-
fuls. Their lodges are cold, leaky, and smoky. They have
hard fare, and often not enough of it. Why this mighty differ
ence? The reason, my red children, is plain. The white peo
ple breed cattle and sheep. They plow the earth, and make it
give them every thing they want. They spin and weave. Their
heads and their hands make all the elements and productions
of nature useful to them. Above all, the people of the 18 fires
live in constant peace and friendship. No tomahawk has ever
been raised by one against another. Not a drop of blood has
ever touched the chain that holds them together as one family.
All their belts are white belts. It is in your power to be like
them. The ground that feeds one Lodge by hunting would
feed a great band by the plow and the hoe. The Great Spirit
has given you, like your white brethren, good heads to contrive,
strong arms, and active bodies. Use them like your white

556 WORKS OF MADISON. 1812.
brethren; not all at once, which is difficult, but by little and
little, which is easy. Especially live in peace with one another,
like your white brethren of the 18 fires, and, like them, your
little sparks will grow into great fires. You will be well fed,
well clothed, dwell in good houses, and enjoy the happiness for
which you, like them, were created. The Great Spirit is the
friend of man of all colours. He made them to be friends of
one another. The more they are so, the more he will be their
friend. These are the words of your father to his red children.
The Great Spirit, who is the father of us all, approves them.
Let them pass through the ear, into the heart. Carry them
home to your people. And as long as you remember this visit
to your father of the 18 fires, remember these as his last and
best words to you.
In the present state of your wants, Factories are established
where you may trade and supply them. Of late, the times have
made it difficult to send you all the things convenient to you.
We are now enlarging our workshops and our weaving houses,
and soon there will be no difficulty.
As we cannot always see one another, the distance being
great, my words, from time to time, will be delivered to you by
General Clarke, and others who may be near you. Your words
will always come to me through the same hands. I hope they
will always be good words.

557

LETTERS, ETC.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.
Washington, Jany 27, 1813.
Dear Sir, — Congress proceed with their usual slowness, even
on the most essential subjects ; and the undercurrent against
us is as strong as ever. I have not time to explain the late
changes in the Executive Department, if I were disposed to
trouble you with them. Bonaparte, according to his own shew
ing, is in serious danger; and if half the official accounts of the
Russians be true, his own escape is barely possible, and that
of his army impossible. The effect of such a catastrophe on
his compulsory allies may once more turn the tables quite
round in the case between France and England. You will have
seen the speech of the Regent. The debates on it have not
reached us. Wellesley's party attack the Ministry for not pros
ecuting the war more vigorously against us. Nothing but the
difficulty of their affairs will open their ears, and that without
opening their hearts to peace. In the Peninsula, the French
are driving Wellington back to Lisbon, and there now is no
doubt that the late harvest is a very short one, and the quality
for the most part bad. Their expenditures, also, are enormous,
beyond former years; and their Bank paper 35 per cent below
specie. I have for you a copy of Cooper's Justinian, which I
will forward by next mail.

TO JOHN BINNS AND OTHERS.
Washington, Feby 11, 1813.
Gentlemen, — I have received your communication in behalf
of the naturalized Citizens in and near Philadelphia who were

558 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
born within the British dominions, occasioned by the Proclama
tion of the Prince Regent of G. Britain, dated the 26 of October
last, and by other indications of a purpose of subjecting to the
penalties of British law such of that description of Citizens as
shall have been taken in arms against G. Britain.
As the British laws and practice confer all the rights and
immunities of natural-born subjects on aliens serving even a
short period on board British vessels, it might have been con
cluded that an intention would have been neither formed nor
proclaimed by the Head of that nation, which is as inconsistent
with its own example as it is repugnant to reason and human
ity. The rights of naturalized Citizens being under the same guar
anty of the National faith and honor with the rights of other
Citizens, the former may be assured that it is the determina
tion, as it will be the duty of the Executive department of the
Government, to employ whatever just means may be within its
competency, for enforcing the respect which is due from the
enemy to tho rights and persons of those who combat under the
banners, and in defence and maintenance of the rights and
safety, of their adopted country.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, March 10, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have received your two favors of the 8 and 21
ult. The conduct and character of the late Commander at Ni
agara, as portrayed in the narrative enclosed in the first, had
been before sufficiently brought to our knowledge. Some of his
disqualifications for such a trust were indeed understood when
he was appointed Inspector General. Gen1 Dearborn seems not
to have been apprised of some of the sides of his character,
though he has an apology for what he did in the paucity of
General officers provided for the army at that time, and the
difficulty of making a satisfactory selection. The narrative is
returned, as you desire. It gives me pleasure to receive a con-

1813- LETTERS. 559
firmation of the unchanged .dispositions of those whose sympa
thies with R  S  could notfail to be most excited.
The opportunity of proving to one of them that I have not per
mitted my belief or my dispositions to be affected by reports or
presumptions inconsistent with his penetration, candour, and
justice, has been promptly embraced, as you will see by the late
military appointments. His son has just received the rank of
Major. You will see, also, that I have taken the liberty of
naming Mr. Randolph to the Senate for the command of a Regi
ment, and that it is now within his acceptance. I was aware
of all the considerations, and [?] embracing those around him,
which were mingled with the subject. But knowing his superi
ority in the talents and military acquirements so much needed
in our Army, and that they had occurred to others of his friends
as well as myself, I could not do less than give the public a
chance of having the benefit of them. I should, indeed, have
taken the same liberty in the original nominations, but for the
less decided state of things than that now existing.
If you do not receive the New York Mercantile Advertiser,
the enclosed will give you the Russian account of the catastro
phe of the French Army. It is doubtless much exaggerated;
but there is no doubt that the losses are beyond example.
Whether they can be so replaced as to prevent the defection of
Allies, and to present another formidable countenance to the
North is uncertain. It does not appear that any thing like
despondence is felt at Paris; and so many interests on the Con
tinent have become associated with the ascendancy of Napoleon,
that it will [not?] be surprising, if, with the terrors of his name,
he should surmount his difficulties. In England, unusual ex
ultation is indulged on the recent events, and, united with the
rage and jealousy produced by our little naval triumphs, account
for the gigantic force she is bringing against us on the water.
In the meantime, Russia, as you will observe, is tendering her
mediating friendship, with the collateral view, there is reason
to believe, of deriving advantage from the neutral interference
with British monopoly in the trade with her. We shall en
deavor to turn the good will of Russia to the proper account.

560 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
Whether England will accede to the mediation, or do so with
evasive purposes, remains to be seen. That she has brought it
about I cannot readily suppose, because I think she would not
promote our political intercourse with the Baltic, where she ap
prehends a sympathy with our maritime doctrines, and not with
hers. The present occasion proves the good policy of having
cultivated the favorable dispositions of the Emperor Alexander.
We have good reason to believe that Sweden is as well in
clined towards us as Russia.

TO COL. DAVID HUMPHREYS. Washington, Mar. 23, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of the 19th ultimo.
Mr. Perkins, who was to have been the bearer, has not yet ar
rived, unless, as is possible, he may have done so, and had his
communications with the Patent Office without my knowing it.
Altho' it is neither usual nor often eligible to enter into po
litical explanations on such an occasion as the present, I am
induced by the frank and friendly tenor of your remarks to ex
press (under the reserves which you will infer) my regret thai
you should be able to cite a prevailing opinion, that " an alliance
with France and a systematic exclusion of commerce" were
within the views of the Administration.
To say nothing of the extreme improbability of such a policy
on the first point, it is not easy to conceive a more formal dis
avowal of it than has been repeatedly made and published both
by my predecessor and myself, particularly in the Messages re
lating to the war, which emphatically impugn political alliances
or conventions with any foreign power. In full conformity
with these disavowals is the letter from Mr. Barlow to Mr.
Monroe, lately published, from which it must be necessarily in
ferred that he was forbidden to enter into any arrangement with
France beyond the subjects of indemnity and commerce. With
such strong presumptions and decisive proofs before the public,
it is impossible that a purpose in this Government of allying

1813. LETTERS.

561

itself with that of France can be seriously believed by any in
telligent individual not in a temper to reject a witness even
from the dead.
As to a systematic exclusion of commerce, a belief of it is
still more incomprehensible. Temporary abridgements or sus
pensions of it must have for their object its permanent freedom,
as interruptions of peace have for their object a re-establish
ment of peace on improved foundations. In such a light only
can the restrictive measures applied to our commerce be ration
ally viewed. The avowed object of them, in fact, was to liber
ate our commerce from foreign restrictions equally obnoxious
to all parties. Whether the means were well applied or not
may be made a question. The object itself never can. How is
it possible that any man in his senses should attempt or wish to
annihilate the foreign commerce of such a country as this; or
that such a policy should be supported by that portion of the
country which thinks itself as much more interested in com
merce than the other portion as the' cargoes of ships are more
valuable than their freight?
Viewing the topics which have so much agitated the public
mind in the light here presented, I have never allowed myself
to believe that the Union was in danger, or that a dissolution
of it could be desired, unless by a few individuals, if such there
be, in desperate situations or of unbridled passions. In addition
to the thousand affinities belonging to every part of the nation,
every part has an interest, as deep as it is obvious, in maintain
ing the bond which keeps the whole together; and the Eastern
part certainly not less than any other. Looking to the imme
diate and commercial effect of a dissolution, it is clear that the
Eastern part would be the greatest loser by such an event, and
not likely, therefore, deliberately to rush into it; especially when
it takes into view the groundlessness of the suspicions which
alone could suggest so dreadful an alternative, and the turn
which would probably grow out of it to the relations with Eu
rope. The great road of profitable intercourse for New Eng
land, even with old England, lies through the wheat, the cotton,
and the tobacco fields, of her Southern and Western confeder-
vol. ii. 36

562 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
ates. On what basis could New England and old England form
commercial stipulations? On all the great articles they would
be in direct rivalship. The real source of our revolution was
the commercial jealousy of Great Britain towards that part of
her then Colonies. If there be links of common interest between
the two countries, they would connect the Southern, and not the
Northern States, with that part of Europe.

TO JOHN NICHOLAS. Washington, April 2d, 1813.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 11th March came duly to hand,
and I feel myself obliged by the friendly spirit of the observa
tions it contains. The circumstances under which the war com
menced on our part require that it should be reviewed with a
liberality above the ordinary rules and dispositions indulged in
such cases. It had become impossible to avoid, or even delay,
war at a moment when we were not prepared for it, and when
it was certain that effective preparations would not take place
whilst the question of war was undecided. Another feature
was, the discord and variety of opinions and views in the public
councils, of which sufficient evidence has been seen in the public
debates and proceedings, and of which much more is known
than ever has been published. The calculations of the Execu
tive were, that it would be best to open the war with a force
of a kind and amount that would be soon procured, and that
might strike an important blow before the enemy, who was
known to disbelieve the approach of such an event, could be re
inforced. These calculations were defeated, as you observe, by
mixing and substituting preparations necessarily producing fatal
delays, and in some respects thwarting each other. At this mo
ment, notwithstanding the additional stimuli, it is not certain
that the regular force exceeds that which was in the first in
stance recommended, which would have been more an over
match for the then strength of the enemy than the force voted,
if realized, would be for his present strength; and which could

1813. LETTERS. 563
have been easily augmented as fast as might be necessary to
maintain conquered ground, or meet reinforcements from Eu
rope or elsewhere. The failure of our calculations with respect
to the expedition under Hull needs no comment. The worst
of it was, that we were misled by a reliance, authorized by him
self, on ita securing to us the command of the Lakes. The de
cisive importance of this advantage has always been well under
stood; but until the first prospect ceased, other means of attain
ing it were repressed by certain difficulties in carrying them
into effect. These means have since been pushed with alacrity,
and, we hope, will enable us to open the campaign, in relation to
Canada,, with a retort of the success which the last turned
against us. With the command of Lake Ontario, the treason
able commerce at which you point will probably be found too
hazardous to be prosecuted. I have furnished you hints, how
ever, for the consideration of the proper Departments.
We are at present occupied with the mediation of Russia.
That is the only power in Europe which can command respect
from both France and England, and at this moment it is in its
zenith. We shall endeavour to turn this mediation to the best
account, in promoting a just peace. We are encouraged in this
policy by the known friendship of the Emperor Alexander to
this Country; and by the probability that the greater affinity
between the Baltic and American ideas of maritime law than
between those of the former and of G. Britain, will render his
interposition as favorable as will be consistent with the char
acter assumed by him.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, June 6, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I received your favor of the  , and now
return the letter of Doctor Waterhouse, with the newspapers
sent with it. He appears to be a man of ability and learning,
and to have been rendered interesting to several distinguished

564 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
friends to the Administration by the persecutions he has suf
fered from its enemies. Like many others, however, I see at
present no reward for him but in his own virtues. The Treasury
of the Mint was allotted by the general sentiment to Doctor J.
Rush. And Doctor Tilton has long since been had in view for
the superintendence of the Medical Department of the Army.
Your suggestions for protecting the trade of the Chesapeake
by gun-boats at the South end of it, with a safe retreat provided
for them, have been taken into consideration, with all the re
spect due to the importance as well as. the motives of them.
The present Secretary of the Navy is not unfriendly to gun
boats, and, in general, the call for them by the inhabitants of
the coast proves a diffusive sense of their utility. It seems
agreed, at the same time, that, being too slow in sailing and
too heavy for rowing, they are limited in their use to particular
situations, and rarely for other than defensive co-operations.
That an adequate number of them in Lynhaven Bay, with a
safety of retreat, would be useful, cannot be doubtful; but if the
enemy chuse to bring such a force as they have applied, and
with appearances of an intended increase, the number of gun
boats necessary to controul them would be very great, and their
effect pretty much restricted to guarding the interior naviga
tion of the Bay. Cruisers on the outside of the Capes, beyond
the range of the gun-boats, would still blockade the external
commerce. Commodore Barry has suggested a species of row galley,
which he considers as better fitted for protecting the interior
trade of the Bay than the gun-boat, or, rather, as an essential
auxiliary to the gun-boats. His plan is to allow them twenty
oars and muskets on each side, to be planked up for protection
of the oarsmen against small arms in the enemy's launches, and
to have one long and heavy gun; their construction to fit them
for speed and for shallow water, and their length and form to
be such that at the end of the war they might be easily raised
on, and become ordinary coasters. Twenty of these, costing 50
or 60 thousand dollars, he thinks would put an end to the dep-

1813- LETTERS. 565
redations of the smaller vessels, which have been the greatest,
and might even attack large ones in the night, or under special
circumstances. I have not ascertained the opinion of the Secretary of the
Navy, who adds to a sound judgment a great deal of practical
knowledge on such subjects.
You have in the newspapers all the latest news, both foreign
and domestic.

TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
I have received from the committee appointed by the resolu
tion of the Senate of the — day of  , a copy of that reso
lution, which authorizes the committee to confer with the Presi
dent on the subject of the nomination made by him of a minister
plenipotentiary to Sweden.
Conceiving it to be my duty to decline the proposed confer
ence with the committee, and it being uncertain when it may be
convenient to explain to the committee, and, through them, to
the Senate, the grounds of my so doing, I think it proper to ad
dress the explanation directly to the Senate.
Without entering into a general review of the relations in
which the Constitution has placed the several departments of
the government to each other, it will suffice to remark:
That the executive and Senate, in the cases of appointments
to office and of treaties, are to be considered as independent of
and co-ordinate with each other. If they agree, the appoint
ments or treaties are made. If the Senate disagree, they fail.
If the Senate wish information previous to their final decision,
the practice, keeping in view the constitutional relations of the
Senate and the Executive, has been either to request the Execu
tive to furnish it, or to refer the subject to a committee of their
body, to communicate either formally or informally with the
head of the proper department. The appointment of a commit
tee of the Senate to confer immediately with the Executive him
self appears to lose sight of the co-ordinate relation between

566 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
the Executive and the Senate which the Constitution has estab
lished, and which ought, therefore, to be maintained.
The relation between the Senate and House of Representa
tives, in whom legislative power is concurrently vested, is suffi
ciently analogous to illustrate that between the Executive and
Senate in making appointments and treaties. The two houses
are in like manner independent of and co-ordinate with each
other; and the invariable practice of each, in appointing com
mittees of conference and consultation, is to commission them
to confer, not with the co-ordinate body itself, but with a com
mittee of that body. And although both branches of the Legis
lature may be too numerous to hold conveniently a conference
with committees were they to be appointed by either to confer
with the entire body of the other, it may be fairly presumed
that, if the whole number of either branch were not too large
for the purpose, the objection to such a conference, being against
the principle, as derogating from the co-ordinate relations of the
two houses, would retain all its force.
I add only that I am entirely persuaded, of the purity of the
intentions of the Senate in the course they have pursued on this
occasion, and with which my view of the subject makes it my
duty not to accord; and that they will be cheerfully furnished
with all the suitable information in possession of the Executive
in any mode deemed consistent with the principles of the Con
stitution, and the settled practice under it.
Washington, July 6, 1813.

TO ALBERT GALLATIN. Washington, Aug' 2, 1813.
Dear Sir, — You will learn from the Secretary of State the
painful manner in which the Senate have mutilated the mission
to S' Petersburg. But the course and circumstances of the pro
ceeding require more of explanation than may fall within his
scope, and more, indeed, than can well be conveyed on paper.
Previously to sending in the nomination of the Envoys, there

1813. LETTERS. 56>7
was no indication that, if the popularity of the object did not
prevent opposition, it would extend beyond a portion of the
Senate essentially short of a majority. And there is reason to
believe that if a preliminary attempt to embarrass the subject
had been decided on at the proper time, and before out-door
means could be interposed, the desired and expected result
would have been secured. Liberality, however, yielded to an
adjournment of the question, and the opportunity afforded by it
was industriously improved. The first step, after formally as
certaining the arrangement under which you were included in
the mission, was to obtain a vote declaring an incompatibility
(without specifying whether constitutional or otherwise) be
tween the domestic and diplomatic appointments. The tendency
of this proposition, to comprehend as many and to commit as
much [?] as possible, is obvious. It would seem, notwithstanding,
that the vote of incompatibility was concurred in by some who
regarded it not as an obstacle to an ultimate concurrence in the
nomination, but rather as a protest throwing the whole respon
sibility upon the Executive. The next step was to communicate
this opinion of the Senate to me, with a view either to extort a
compliance, or to unite against the nomination all, or as many
as possible, who had concurred in the vote of incompatibility.
In this stage of the business, it was the confident opinion of the
supporters of the nomination that inflexibility on the part of
the Executive would ensure a majority for it, and their unani
mous and urgent advice, as well on general grounds as on that
particular calculation, not to yield to the irregular views of the
adverse party. The event proved that the final purposes of
certain individuals, on whom the turning of the scale depended,
had been miscounted. It is not easy to express the mixed feel
ings produced by the disappointment, or the painfulness of my
own, in particular. It was at first suggested, from some friendly
sources, as most advisable in such a posture of things, to send
in a renomination, founded on a vacancy in the Secretaryship
of the Treasury; and under certain points of view this expedi
ent had its recommendations. They were met, however, by dif
ficulties and considerations not to be got over. 1. The ground

568 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
taken by the Executive did not admit a compliance with the
condition imposed by the Senate, without a palpable inconsist
ency. 2. Those who had approved and urged this ground could
not brook the idea of putting their opponents ostensibly in the
right, and themselves in the wrong. 3. It was calculated that
the mediation, if accepted by Great Britain, would be over, and
the Envoys on their way home, before the decision of the Senate
could reach S' Petersburg; and that this last would certainly
be the case should the mediation be rejected, as was becoming
more and more probable, especially considering the prospects
on the Continent, and, as seems now to be put beyond doubt, by
a late communication from Beaseley, at London. Nor were these
the only views of the subject. It was apprehended by some of
the best disposed and best informed of the Senate that a renom
ination would not secure the object. As it had become certain
that the open and secret adversaries together amounted to a
formidable number, who would be doubly gratified by a double
triumph, it was suspected that, after succeeding in getting the
Treasury vacated, it would be a prerequisite to a confirmation
of the other appointment that the vacancy should be actually
filled, in order to prevent its being kept open for your return,
which might be looked for within the term of six months; and
that with this view a resolution might be obtained declaring
the inconsistency of a protracted vacancy with the public ser
vice, and the incompatibility of the two offices held by the Sec
retary of the Navy, to be used in like manner with the first
resolution, as a motive or pretext for embarrassing and, if pos
sible, getting rid of the renomination. It is certain that some
who had intimated an intended change of their votes, in case
the Treasury Department should be vacated, had in view that
the vacancy should be forthwith filled, and even that a nomina
tion to it should go in with the renomination. Whether a ma
jority would have gone such lengths is uncertain; but strong
symptoms existed of a temper in the Body capable of going
very great lengths. And, apart from all other considerations,
it would have been impossible, even if it had been intended to
make and fill a vacancy in the Treasury Department, that the

1813. LETTERS. 56g
consent of the Senate in the other case could be purchased by a
pledge to that effect. Besides the degradation of the Execu
tive, it would have introduced a species of barter of the most
fatal tendency.
I have given you this summary, that you may understand the
true character of a proceeding which has given us so much con
cern. I will add to it two observations only: 1. That the Sen
ate, by resting their negative on the opinion of official incom
patibility, tacitly acknowledge a personal fitness, and so far
defeat the:r own hostility. 2. That the whole proceeding, ac
cording to e^ery friendly opinion, will have the effect of giving
you a stronger hold on the confidence and support of the na
tion. Judging from the effect as already known, this cannot
fail to be the case.
I have just recovered strength enough, after a severe and
tedious attack of bilious fever, to bear a journey to the moun
tains, whither I am about setting out. The physicians prescribe
it as essential to my thorough recovery and security against a
relapse at the present season. For recent occurrences and the
general state of affairs, I refer to the official communications
going by this conveyance. If it were less inconvenient to me
to lengthen my letter, I should recollect that I send it without
expecting that it will find you at Petersburg, should it happen
not to be intercepted on its passage.
Accept my affectionate esteem and best wishes.

TO MAJ" GENL HENRY DEARBORN.
y Washington, Aug' 8th, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of the 24th July. As my
esteem and regard have undergone no change, I wish you to be
apprized that such was the state of things, and such the turn
they were taking, that the retirement which is the subject of
your letter was pressed by your best personal friends.
It was my purpose to have written to you on the occasion,

570 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
but it was made impossible by a severe illness, from which I am
now barely enough recovered for a journey to the mountains,
prescribed by my physicians as indispensable. It would have
been entirely agreeable to me if, as I took for granted was to
be the case, you had executed your original intention of pro
viding for your health by exchanging the sickliness of Niagara
for some eligible spot, and I sincerely lament every pain to
which you have been subsequently exposed, from whatever cir
cumstance it has proceeded. How far the investigation you
refer to would be regular, I am not prepared to say. You have
seen the motion in the House of Representatives comprehending
such an object, and the prospect held out of resuming the sub
ject at another session. I am persuaded that you will not lose
in any respect by the effect of time and truth.

TO GOVERNOR SHELBY. Montpeliek, Aug. 12, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I received your favor of the 18th July a few
days only before I left Washington, which was on the 9th
instant. If any doubt had ever existed of the patriotism or
bravery of the citizens of Kentucky, it would have been turned
into an admiration of both by the tests to which the war has
put them. Nor could any who are acquainted with your his
tory and character wish the military services of your fellow-
citizens to be under better direction than yours. How far a
call on you and them, according to the provision made by your
Legislature, will take place, must depend on the wants of Gen1
Harrison, who will be regulated in his applications for succour
by his own prospects on Lake Erie, and by the operations on and
below Lake Ontario, which must have a considerable bearing
on his. We do not despond, though we ought not to be too san
guine, that the effect of our naval preparations on the several
Lakes, and the proper use of the forces assembled on and con
venient to them, will soon relieve the distant militia and volun
teers from much of the demands which the course of the war on

1813. LETTERS. 571
our inland frontier has made on them. Should it happen other
wise, it is consoling to know that such resorts exist as those to
which your letter contains so favorable an example.

TO JOHN GRAHAM, [CHIEF CLERK IN STATE DEPARTMENT.]
Montpellier, Aug' 28th, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have received your favor of the 26th. I can
not recollect, off-hand, very much about the letter from Turreau
to R. Smith, of which a translation is printed at Georgetown.
My general impression is, that it was considered, at the time, as
highly exceptionable in several passages; that it was noticed
that Turreau, by a ruse diplomatique, which distinguished be
tween the existing and preceding administrations, and assumed
the air of a private instead of an official paper, had attempted
to cover and pass off here a rudeness which might be received
as a proof of his energetic zeal by his own Government; and
that, unless Turreau preferred taking back the paper, a proper
notice of its offensiveness ought to be taken; it being of course
left to R. Smith to manage the business with Turreau. A fur
ther appeal to my memory may give more precision to these
circumstances, and may recover others from the oblivion into
which they have fallen. The case will probably be the same
with you. If you can pronounce with certainty from your own
knowledge, or the information of Mr. Smith, that the letter was
taken back by Turreau, (a thing not very unusual in such cases,
and of which there have been examples with other foreign Min
isters, British,* if I mistake not, as well as French,t) it may be
well, perhaps, that the fact should be noticed in the newspaper.
An antidote in some form to the mischievous intent of the pub
lication seems due to the crisis chosen for it. If no answer
were given. to the letter, which the records will test, that alone
would be animadversion, in one of its modes, of no inconsider-
* Mr. Erskine. f Mr. Pichon.

572 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
able force. It is unfortunate that the individual possessing the
fullest knowledge of all circumstances cannot be resorted to.
If he has himself conveyed the paper to the printer, as you con
jecture, it is another evidence of the folly which has marked his
career; since the position which he occupied, and the address
of the paper to him as " une lettre simple," would assign to him,
more particularly, any reproach of want of sensibility to its of
fensive character: for he will hardly pretend that he was con-
trouled in the expression of it. The time for doing that was
the time when he mustered the whole of that and every other
species of denunciation against the object of his tormenting
passions. If the original of the French letter was returned to
Turreau without a eopy having been taken, as may be inferred
from the sending of a translation to the printer, and your trans
lation is not found in the office, the translation sent must have
been yours, and the public will decide between the clerks in
the Department and the then head of it. It is sufficiently known
that he carried with him out of it copies of other papers which
he wished to possess, with a view to eventual publicity.
If the date of the translated letter be correctly published, the
letter must have been received before the rejection of Erskine's
arrangement was known, and at a period when a reconciliation
with England was considered as certain. This consideration
might properly have had weight in disposing the Cabinet to
bear with less impatience an exceptionable tone from a French
Minister, whose feelings on such an event would naturally min
gle themselves with his complaints on other subjects, some of
which, particularly the apathy of the American Government
with respect to the French ship burnt near the shore of North
Carolina, it was not very easy to meet in a satisfactory manner.
I am very sorry to hear of the indisposition of Col. Monroe.
I hope it will be found to justify the term slight which you ap
ply to it. My own health has greatly improved since my arrival
here, but I have not been without several slight returns of fever,
which are chargeable rather on the remnant of the influenza
than the cause from which I suffered in Washington. I am now

1813. LETTERS. 573
pretty well recovered from the last return, which took place a
few days ago. Accept, with my respects, my best wishes for
your health and welfare.

TO WILLIAM WIRT. Montpelier, Sepf 30th, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have been several weeks in possession of your
favor of the 29th of August. As it appeared that you were on
an excursion from Richmond, perhaps behind the mountains, I
have not been in a hurry to acknowledge it. From the present
advance of the season, I infer your probable return to that
place. From whatever motives information such as that in your let
ter might proceed, it ought not to be unwelcome. The friendly
ones by which I well know you were governed entitle it to my
sincere thanks, which I pray you to accept.
I have not been unaware of the disappointment and discon
tent gaining ground with respect to the war on Canada, or of
the use to which they were turned against the Administration.
I have not been less aware that success alone would put an end
to them. This is the test by which public opinion decides more
or less in all cases, and most of all, perhaps, in that of mili
tary events, where there is the least opportunity of judging by
any other. No stimulus, therefore, has been wanting to the
exertions necessary to render our arms successful in the quarter
where they have failed.
How far these exertions will prevail remains to be seen; and
how far past failure is to be ascribed to the difficulties incident
to the first stages of a war commenced as the present neces
sarily was; to the personal faults' of those entrusted with com
mand; to the course pursued by the National Legislature; or to
mismanagements by the Executive Department, must be left to
those who will decide impartially, and on fuller information
than may now exist.
Without meaning to throw undue blame elsewhere, or to shun

574 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
whatever blame may be justly chargeable on the Executive, I
will, in the confidence with which we both write, intimate the
plan for giving effect to the war, originally entertained by that
branch of the Government. As it was obvious that advantage
ought to be taken of our chusing the time for commencing, or
rather retorting, hostilities, and of the pains taken to make the
British Government believe that they were not to be resorted
to by the United States; and as it was foreseen that there
would be great delay, if not impossibility, in raising a large
army for a long term of service, it was thought best to limit our
first attempts to such a force as might be obtained in a short
time, and be sufficient to reduce Canada, from Montreal up
wards before the enemy would be prepared to resist its pro
gress; trusting to the impression to be made by success, and to
the time that would be afforded, for such an augmentation of
the durable force as would be able to extend as well as secure
our conquests. With these views, it was recommended to Con
gress to provide immediately and effectually for compleating
the existing establishment of 10,000 men; to provide for a like
number to be enlisted for a shorter term of 2 or 3 years; and
for volunteers, of whom an adequate number, as was repre
sented, would be readily furnished by the enthusiasm of the
frontiers of New York and Vermont. With this arrangement
was combined the expedition conducted by Hull against the
upper and weaker part of the Province.
Of the issue of this part of the plan, and its distressing con
sequences, it is needless to speak. The other part, not coinci
ding with the ideas adopted by Congress, was not brought to
an experiment. It was there thought best to commence with
the addition of 25,000 regulars to the existing establishment
of 10,000. And to the delays in passing the laws for this
purpose; to the deficiency in the bounty and pay allowed re
cruits; to the necessity of selecting 1,000 officers, to be drawn
from every part of the Union; and to the difficulty, not to say
impossibility, of procuring, at a crisis of such scarcity, supplies
for such an army, and of distributing them over such a surface
in the worst season of the year; may reasonably be ascribed the

1813. LETTERS. 575
loss of the first year of the land war. It unfortunately hap
pened, also, that the first provision for the two vital Depart
ments, the Commissary's and Quarter Master's, was so inade
quate, that the War office, otherwise overcharged, was obliged
for some time to perform the functions of both. It was only
after repeated failures and a lapse of months that a Commissary
General could be obtained on the terms offered by the law.
Nor ought it to be omitted that the recommendation of a greater
number of General Officers, though complied with at the last
session of Congress, was rejected in the first instance. The
same may be remarked as to two auxiliary appointments in the
War office, now substantially provided for under other names
in the organization of the military establishment. The utter
inexperience of nearly all the new officers was an inconvenience
of the most serious kind, but inseparable, as it always must be,
from a Country among whose blessings it is to have long in
tervals of peace, and to be without those large standing armies
which even in peace are fitted for war.
These observations will be allowed less weight in the present
than in the first year of the war. But they will justly mitigate
the lateness, to say nothing of the thinness of the ranks, not
withstanding the augmented inducements to enlist, attending
the operations by which the character of the campaign is to be
decided. My anxiety for the result is great, but not unmingled
with hopes that it will furnish topics better than the past on
which the censorious adversaries and criticising friends of the
Administration are to be met.
Accept, dear Sir, the assurances of my regard.

TO MORRIS BIRKBECK.
Sir, — I have received your letter of September 18, though at
a much later day than that at which it was due. The letter in
closed in it from Mr. Coles would have been received with ad
ditional pleasure from your own hand, if you had found it con
venient to take Montpelier in your Westwardly route. He

576 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
was a few days ago with me, and confirmed verbally the esteem
and the friendly interest he takes in your behalf.
I cannot but commend the benevolent solicitude you express
for your emigrating countrymen; and I sincerely wish that all
who are attached to our Country by its natural and political
advantages might be as little disappointed or embarrassed on
their arrival as possible. I am obliged, at the same time, to say,
as you will doubtless learn from" others, that it is not either the
provision of our laws or the practice of the Government to give
any encouragement to emigrants, unless it be in cases where
they may bring with them some special addition to our stock
of arts or articles of culture. You will perceive, therefore, that
it is not in the power of the Executive to dispose of the public
land in a mode different from the ordinary one; and I should
not be justified in encouraging any reliance on the success of a
resort to the National Legislature.
Should your future movements bring you at any time within
reach of my residence, I shall be happy in an opportunity of
proving, by a cordial welcome, the sincerity of my respect and
good wishes.

TO WILLIAM EUSTIS.Washington, November 12, 1813.
Dear Sir, — I have just been favored with yours of the 7 in
stant. Whatever may be the weight of your observations, it would
be difficult to act on the view they take of the subject, compli
cated as it necessarily is with some other views of it, passing
by the incompetency of the Executive alone to consummate the
arrangement suggested.
I may not be able to do full justice to impressions, some of
which, at least, may possibly grow out of circumstances not to
be exactly appreciated in other situations. Usage, however,
seems to have excluded the necessity of disagreeable compari
sons in cases' of appointments not having for their object honor

1813. LETTERS. 577
or distinctions, but reference merely to calculations of interest
or conveniency; more especially where the appointments are not
coeval. I shall take no further step until I shall be favored with your
final communication, taking the liberty only of intimating, that
the early functions [?] of the Collectors in the towns having
Banks is urged from the Treasury Department, and of renewing
assurances of my high esteem and best regards.

TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEM
BLY OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. December 11, 1813.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your memorial of the 29th
ult., representing the exposure of your State to danger on its
sea-coast, and requesting to be informed whether measures will
be immediately taken by the National Government for its pro
tection. The anxiety which you manifest for the security of the State
under your particular care cannot but be commended; and it
would be highly agreeable to make a communication that would
remove all occasion for it.
The Legislature of North Carolina is too enlightened and too
just not to be sensible that the protection to be extended by the
General Government over the Union must be proportioned to
the aggregate means applicable thereto; and that in distributing
these regard must be had to the comparative practicability and
probability of attempts on particular States and places. Against
occasional attempts, where there are so many points accessible
by water, from an enemy having on that element a force so ex
tensive and so readily concentrated, an absolute protection of
every one is not possible. Considering the States as parts of
one whole, the best defence of the whole must be kept in view
by the authority to which that is entrusted; and it fortunately
happens, that the security and interests of particular parts will
vol. 11. 37

578 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813.
be often comprehended in the effect produced by measures more
immediately applied to the protection of other parts.
These observations are not intended to preclude a due con
sideration of the particular case stated in your memorial. They
appeal only to the candour with which you will be sure to re
view the measures of the Executive in relation to the general
and particular defence of our country, and to the confidence
claimed by the impartiality which have directed them.
With a view to the more convenient superintendence and pro
tection of every part of the United States, they have been par
titioned into military districts. The officer allotted to that
which includes the State of North Carolina will be instructed,
as soon as practicable, to visit and examine the situation of the
exposed parts of the State, with a view to improvements which
may be properly made in works of defence. He was about to
make such a visit when he was lately called away to a more ur
gent but temporary service. In the mean time, a Col. of Engi
neers had been sent to examine the forts and to make report on
the subject of them.
The Secretary of the Navy has not been inattentive to the
means of defence depending on his Department which were
thought best adapted to the waters of North Carolina. And to
the gun-boats already allotted, and the equipments of which has
not been intermitted, a like number of armed boats of another
modification will be added as soon as they can be made ready
for service.
In making this communication, it will, of course, not be under
stood as superseding any auxiliary provisions which the State
of North Carolina may think proper to make on its own ac
count, as has been done by some other States, in order to a more
compleat and particular security than it may be in the power
of the General Government to extend to every exposed situation
throughout the frontiers of the United States.
Be pleased, fellow-citizens, to accept assurances of my high
respect and my best wishes.

1813. LETTERS. 579

TO THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
December, 1813.
I have received, fellow-citizens, your communication of the
18th of December. It is in a spirit which was to be expected
from a public Body whose sensibility to the rights and honor
of the nation produced a unanimous approbation of a war waged
in defence of both.
You do no more than justice to the love of peace, patient for
bearance, and the conciliatory efforts which preceded this last
appeal of injured nations against the inflexibility of their ag
gressors. When finally and formally assured by the British
Government that its hostile measures would not be revoked, no
alternative was left to the United States but irretrievable deg
radation, or the lesser calamity of a resort to arms.
The reluctance of this resort has been sufficiently attested by
the readiness shewn, and the steps taken on the part of the Uni
ted States, first to suspend its effects, and then, by liberal ar
rangements, to terminate its causes. Until a correspondent
disposition on the part of the enemy shall give success to the
pacific views on our part, the course pointed at by your honor
able patriotism is that alone which becomes a free people, de
voted to their Independence, and awake to their high destinies.
Amidst the painful scenes of the war, it is consoling to us all
that it has been conducted, on our part, in a spirit and manner
which prove that the American character is as conspicuous for
humanity as for bravery; and that, if a seeming departure from
the former has taken place in any instance, it has been extorted
by the cruel policy of the adversary, and has for its real object
a controul or correction of that policy, dictated by humanity
itself. The approbation which you have been pleased to express of
my public conduct during a trying period derives a particular
value from my high respect for the source from which I receive
it; and I pray you, fellow-citizens, to accept, with my acknowl
edgments, assurances of my best wishes for your prosperity and

580 WORKS OF MADISON. 1813,
that of a State whose example in the common cause so well
merits it.

TO GOVERNOR TOMPKINS. Washington, Jan* 25th, 1814.
Sir, — Your favor of the 3d instant came duly to hand. You
will have learnt from the Secretary of War the measures which
were thought, on the whole, best suited to the general posture
of our military affairs.
The events on the Niagara frontier were as unexpected as
they have been distressing. As there can be little comparative
inducement to the enemy to prolong their barbarities in that
neighbourhood, it is most to be apprehended that the attention
of that part of their force will be turned to some other quarter;
either to Presque Isle or Detroit. Precautions have been taken
with respect to both; but such is the reduction of our regular
force from sickness and other causes every where, and such the
difficulties of supplying occasional force in distant and detached
situations, that some anxiety necessarily remains for the security
of those important points. As a controul on enterprises of the
enemy upwards, as well as a barrier to the Country adjoining
Niagara, a regular force of the amount you suggest would be
the best provision for that station, could it be spared from the
armies below and the objects to be elsewhere kept in view.
Sackett's harbour and the stake on Lake Champlain have an
essential and constant claim to attention. If, besides making
the former safe, Kingston can be attacked, or even seriously
threatened, the effect will be salutary every where.
In the Navy Department every possible exertion will be made
to keep down the enemy on Lake Ontario. The task is arduous,
but its importance is in full proportion.
Be assured, sir, that I do justice to your laudable solicitude
for the safety of the State over which you preside, and estimate
as I ought your readiness to co-operate with the measures of
the General Government.

1814. LETTERS. 581
Be pleased to accept assurances of my great consideration
and respect.

TO WILLIAM PINKNEY. Washington, Jan? 29, 1814.
Dear Sir, — I have received your letter conveying a resigna
tion of the important office held by you. As the Bill to which
you refer has not yet passed into a law, I hope you will be able
to prolong your functions till a successor can be provided ; and
at any rate to afford aid in the business of the United States,
particularly understood by you, at the approaching term of the
Supreme Court.
On the first knowledge of the Bill, I was not unaware that
the dilemma it imposes might deprive us of your associated ser
vices, and the United States of the advantage accruing from
your professional care of their interests. I readily acknowledge
that, in a general view, the object of the bill Is not ine"J0ible to
the Executive. At the same time, there may be instances where
talents and services of peculiar value outweigh the considera
tion of constant residence; and I have felt all the force of this
truth since I have had the pleasure of numbering you among
the partners of my public trust. In losing that pleasure, I pray
you to be assured of my high and continued esteem, and of my
sincere friendship and best wishes.

TO WILLIAM JONES. April , 1814
Dear Sir, — I have before me your letter of yesterday. At
the communication it makes, I cannot but feel the sincerest re
gret, which is much heightened by the considerations which pro
duced it. The nature of these forbids any effort to divert you
from your purpose, especially as it is qualified by the interval
of carrying it into effect. All that I ought to hope is, that if a
continuance of the war should call for services so difficult to be

582 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
found, some removal of the pressure of unfavorable circum
stances may justify you in prolonging yours. Whatever may
happen, I cannot let the present occasion pass without express
ing the gratification I have experienced in the entire fulfillment
of my expectations, large as they were, from your talents ^.nd
exertions, and from all those personal qualities which harmo
nize official and sweeten social intercourse. To these assurances
permit me to add my best wishes for your success in every thing
that may conduce to your prosperity and happiness.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Montpeliek, May 10, 1814.
Dear Sir, — Having particular occasion, and the state of busi
ness at Washington not forbidding, I am on a short visit at my
farm. Mrs. M., as well as myself, would gladly extend it to
Monticello, but with a certainty that our return to Washington
must be very soon. I am obliged, moreover, to hold myself in
readiness to hasten it at any moment of notice. We must post
pone, therefore, the pleasure of paying our respects there till the
autumn, when I hope we shall be less restricted in time.
We have received no information from our Envoys to the
Baltic for a very long time. From those last appointed, there
has not been time to hear after their arrival at Gottenburg.
Neither have we any accounts from England, other than the
newspaper paragraphs which you have seen. The British Gov
ernment cannot do less than send negotiators to meet ours; but
whether in the spirit of ours, is the important question. The
turn of recent events in Europe, if truly represented, must
strengthen the motives to get rid of the war with us; and their
hopes, by a continuance of it, to break down our Government,
must be more and more damped by occurrences here as they
become known there. The election in New York alone crushes
the project of the Junto faction, so long fostered by and flatter
ing the expectations of the British Cabinet. Still, it is possible
that new fallacies may suffice for a willingness to be deceived.

!814. LETTERS. ggg
Our difficulties in procuring money without heavy taxes, and
the supposed odium of these, will probably be made the most of
by our internal enemies to the experiment
of prolonged hostilities.
The idea of an armistice, so much bandied in the newspapers,
rests on no very precise foundation. It is not doubted that it
is wished for in Canada, and might coincide with the opinions
of the naval commander; but it is presumable that the latter
has no commensurate power, and it is taken for granted that
the power in Canada is limited to operations of land forces.

TO GOVERNOR JAMES BARBOUR.
(Private.) Washington, June 16, 1814.
Dear Sir, — I have duly received your letter of the 13th.
That the late events in Europe will put it in the power of
Great Britain to direct a much greater force against the Uni
ted States, cannot be doubted. How far she may be restrained
from so doing by an estimate of her interest in making peace,
or by a respect for the sentiments of her allies, if these should
urge it, cannot be yet known. It is incumbent on us to suppose
that she may be restrained by neither, and to be prepared as
well as we can to meet the augmented force which may invade
us. Our means for this purpose consist essentially of regular
troops, and of Militia. As far as the former go, they will be
applied in the way deemed most conducive to the public safety.
The deficiency must be supplied by a resort to the latter; and
the questions arising are, first, whether they shall be immedi
ately called into service in anticipation of attack; and, secondly,
what measures, in case of no such immediate call, can be use
fully adopted by the States liable to attack.
Under existing circumstances, which, whilst they suggest gen
eral apprehensions, afford no information either as to the amount
or the particular destination of forces that may be sent against

584 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
us; and taking into view the great number of objects accessible
to attack by a large and concentrated force of the enemy, the
objections to an immediate call of militia into service are obvi
ous. If the call be made in favor of one assailable object, it
must be extended proportionally to all. It would waste a re
source on which eventually every thing may depend. And, what
cannot escape the most serious reflection, the employment of
bodies of militia sufficient to give security and tranquillity every
where would rapidly exhaust our pecuniary means, and soon
put every thing at hazard. Prudence advises, therefore, that
we should exert all our vigilance in discovering the particular
views of the enemy, and, by not prematurely or erroneously ap
plying our means of defence, be the more able to use them with
effect where and when they become necessary.
In the mean time, it will rest with the State Governments to
do whatever may depend on them for keeping every thing in as
preparatory an arrangement as possible for the prompt and
effective service of their militia, as detachments from it may be
required by emergencies. Where particular States have mili
tary means of any sort exclusively their own, they will of course
decide for themselves as to the best use that can be made of
them. Knowing the just solicitude you feel for the safety of every
part of the State under your charge, a solicitude I most sin
cerely participate, I regret that it is not in my power to give
you either more certain information with respect to the plans
and purposes of the enemy, or more satisfactory views of our
means of frustrating them, or any answer more precise to the
particular enquiry made by you. I assure myself you will
readily comprehend that nothing more has been in my power.
Accept my high esteem and friendly respects.

1814. LETTERS.

585

TO C. J. INGERSOLL. Washington, July 28th, 1814.
Dear Sir,— I have received your favor of the 18th instant,
and delivered into the hands of Mr. Rush the interesting extract
inclosed in it. The armed neutrality in 1780 forms an Epoch
in the history of maritime law, which makes it more than a
point of mere curiosity to trace it to its real source. You know,
perhaps, that there is an American pretension to a share, at
least, in bringing about that measure. The fact may not im
properly enter into a general research.
On the question of "free ships, free goods," it has always ap
peared to me very clear that the principle was right in itself,
and friendly to the general interest of Nations. It is, perhaps,
less clear that the United States have a special interest in it;
unless combined with another principle, of which an example is
found in our Treaty with Prussia, and probably in no other,
namely, that unarmed merchant vessels, like wagons or ploughs,
the property of one belligerent, should be unmolested by the
other. This principle has, I believe, an undisputed American
Father in Doctor Franklin.
On the question whether, under the law of Nations, as it
stands de facto, "free ships make free cargoes," the United
States, at an early day, took the negative side;* and although
the acknowledgment of it has been shunned as much as possible
since, it seems to have been generally understood that the Brit
ish doctrine was practically admitted.
Were the question to be regarded as unsettled and open to
fair discussion, I am persuaded that the weight of authority
furnished by reason, public good, treaties, and the luminaries
of public law, preponderates in favor of the principle, "free
ships, free goods."
The ablest defence of the opposite principle which I have
seen is in a treatise by Croke, the present Vice Admiralty
Judge at Halifax, in answer to Schlegel. I am sorry I neither
* See Jefferson's correspondence with Genet.

586 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
possess a copy, nor can refer you to any convenient depository
of one.
On the side of "free ships, free goods," may be urged not only
the intrinsic merit of the rule, and the number and character of
distinguished Jurists, but the predominant authority of Treaties,
even of Treaties to which G. Britain is a party. Prior to the
Treaty of Utrecht, her treaties, particularly with the Dutch,
carefully inserted the stipulation. Sir William Temple, her
ambassador, claimed great merit, on one occasion, for his suc
cess in obtaining from them an article to that effect. In the
Treaty of Utrecht, in 1713, to which the several great maritime
powers were -parties, the principle is stipulated in the most ex
plicit form. In the successive Treaties, to which the great mari
time powers were also parties, in 1748, 1763, and 1783, the
Treaty of Utrecht is renewed and made a part thereof. Per
haps no article in maritime law can be found which, at one time,
rested on such broad and solid evidence of that general consent
of nations which constitutes the positive law among them. To
those Treaties, embracing so many parties, may be added. the
Treaty of 1786, between the two most important of them, G.
Britain and France. In the negotiations at Amiens, at a still
later date, the British Government was desirous of again re-
enacting the Treaty, though probably with a view rather to the
political balance than to the maritime principles contained in
it. It has been unfortunate that all the efforts of the Baltic Pow
ers to secure the interests of neutrals have been frustrated by
the want of a united and determined perseverance. Their
leagues have been broken to pieces; and to finish the catastro
phe, each of the parties has separately deserted itself. The
latter Treaties of Russia, of Sweden, and of Denmark, with G.
Britain, have all, in some form or other, let in the British doc
trines, and become authorities against the claims of neutrals.
If a purification of the maritime code ever take place, the
task seems to be reserved for the United States. They cannot
fail to acquire rapidly more and 'more of respect from other
nations, and of influence on those having a common interest

1814. LETTERS. 587
with themselves. They will soon become, in the canvas they
spread, and in all the means of power, on the ocean, rivals of
the nation which has, in fact, legislated on that element. Un
der such auspices, truth, justice, humanity, and universal good,
will be inculcated, with an advantage which must gradually and
peaceably enlist the civilized world against a code which vio
lates all those obligations; a code as noxious by the wars and
calamities it produces to its overbearing patron as to the na
tions protesting against it.
As a preparation for such a result, it is of great moment that
the subject of maritime law should appear in our public debates,
in the Judicial proceedings, and in individual disquisitions, to
have been profoundly studied and understood, so as to attract
favorable attention elsewhere; and by inspiring respect for the
lights and the character of the nation, increase that for its pow
er and importance. The law of nations has been made by the
powerful nations; and these having been warlike in their dis
positions and institutions, the law has been modelled to suit
belligerent rather than peaceable nations. With the faculties
for war, it is to be hoped our country will continue friendly to
peace, and exert the influence belonging to it in promoting a
system favorable to nations cherishing peace and justice, rather
than to those devoted to ambition and conquest.
The questions claiming more particular research and elucida
tion seem to be those relating to contraband of war, blockades,
the colonial and coasting trades, and the great question of " free
ships, free goods."

TO GOVERNOR TOMPKINS. Sep' 28, 1814.
DB Sir, — Mr. Monroe having just been appointed Secretary
of War, it is necessary to provide for the vacancy resulting in
the Department of State. Wishing to avail the U. States of
your talents and services, I take the liberty of requesting per
mission to name you to the Senate as his successor. I am aware

588 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
of the very important station from which their concurrence will
withdraw you; but I justify my personal wish to see you a mem
ber of the Executive family by my persuasion that the one con
templated will afford still greater scope for the benefits which
you have given so many proofs of your disposition to render to
our Country. I need not suggest that as early an answer as
you can make convenient will be acceptable.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, October 10, 1814.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 24th ult. came duly to hand.
I learn that the Library Committee will report favorably on
your proposition to supply the loss of books by Congress. It
will prove a gain to them if they have the wisdom to replace it
by such a collection as yours. Mr. Smith will doubtless write
you on the subject.
I have not yet read your last communication to Mr. Monroe
on the subject of Finance. It seems clear, according to your
reasoning in the preceding one, that a circulating medium, to
take the place of a Bank or metallic medium, may be created by
law, and made to answer the purpose of a loan, or rather antici
pation of a tax; but as the resource cannot be extended beyond
the amount of a sufficient medium, and of course cannot be con
tinued but by successive re-emissions and redemptions by taxes,
resort must eventually be had to loans of the usual sort, or an
augmentation of taxes, according to the public exigencies. I
say augmentations of taxes, because these, absorbing a larger
sum into circulation, will admit an enlargement of the medium
employed for the purpose. In England, where the paper me
dium is a legal tender in paying a hundred millions of taxes,
thirty millions of interest to the public creditors, &c, &c, and
in private debts, so as to stay a final recovery, we have seen
what a mass of paper has been kept afloat, with little if any de
preciation. That the difference in value between the circulating
notes and the metals, [is] produced rather from the rise in the

1814. LETTERS. 539
latter than from the depreciation of the former, is now proved
by the fact that the notes are, notwithstanding a late increase
of their quantity, rising towards a par with the metals, in con
sequence of a favorable balance of trade, which diminishes the
demand of them for foreign markets.
We have just received despatches from Ghent, which I shall
lay before Congress to-day. The British sine qua non excluded
us from fishing within the sovereignty attached to her shores,
and from using these in curing fish; required a cession of as
much of Maine as would remove the obstruction to a direct com
munication between Quebec and Halifax; confirmed to her the
Passamaquoddy Islands as always hers of right; included in
the pacification the Indian allies, with a boundary for them
(such as that of the Treaty of Greenville) against the United
States mutually guarantied, and the Indians restrained from
selling their lands to either party, but free to sell them to a
third party; prohibited the United States from having an armed
force on the lakes or forts on their shores; the British prohibited
as to neither; and substituted for the present North Western
limit of the U. States a line running direct from the West end
of Lake Superior to the Mississippi, with a right of G. Britain
to the navigation of this river. Our ministers were all present,
and in perfect harmony of opinion on the arrogance of such de
mands. They would probably leave Ghent shortly after the
sailing of the vessel just arrived. Nothing can prevent it but
a sudden change in the British Cabinet, not likely to happen,
though it might be somewhat favored by an indignant rupture
of the negotiation, as well as by the intelligence from this Coun
try and the fermentations taking place in Europe.
I intended to have said something on the changes in the Cab
inet, involving, in one instance, circumstances of which the pub
lic can as yet very little judge, but cannot do it now.
The situation of Sackett's Harbour is very critical. I hope
for the best, but have serious apprehensions.

590 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.

TO GOVERNOR TOMPKINS. Washington, Oct' 18, 1814.
Dear Sir, — I have received your two letters of the 6 and 8th
instant. I cannot deny the cogency of the considerations which
have determined you to decline the station which was the sub
ject of mine of the 28th ult., and that some of them can by no
one be so well appreciated as by yourself. I was not unaware
of the great value of your services within the limits of your
particular State, under the circumstances attending it; but in
looking to the Nation at large, and the importance of drawing
into the Cabinet at so critical a period as much weight of char
acter as possible, I thought I consulted my judgment, as well
as my inclination, in the attempt to translate you from the one
to the other sphere of service. As your estimate of the public
interest and of your duty does not allow me the gratification I
should have felt in a different result, I can only add my regrets
to the assurances I pray you to accept of my great esteem and
friendly respects.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, October 23, 1814.
Dear Sir, — I have received yours of the 15th, and attended
to your remarks on "ways and means." I find that the vari
ance in our ideas relates — 1. To the probable quantity of cir
culating medium. 2. To the effect of an annual augmentation
of it. I cannot persuade myself that in the present stagnation
of private dealings, and the proposed limitation of taxes, the
two great absorbents of money, the circulating sum would
amount even to 20 millions. But be this amount what it may,
every emission beyond it must either enter into circulation, and
depreciate the whole mass, or it must be locked up. If it bear
an interest, it may be locked up for the sake of the interest; in
which case it is a loan, both in substance and in form, and im
plies a capacity to lend; in other words, a disposable capital in

1814. LETTERS.

591

the Country. If it does not bear an interest it could not be
locked up, but on the supposition that the terms on which it is
received are such as to promise indemnity, at least for the in
termediate loss of interest, by its value at a future day; but this
both involves the substance of a loan to the amount of the value
locked up, and implies a depreciation differing only from the
career of the old continental currency by a gradual return from
a certain point of depression to its original level. If this view
of the subject be in any measure correct, I am aware of the
gloomy inferences from it. I trust, however, that our case is
not altogether without remedy. To a certain extent, paper, in
some form or other, will, as a circulating medium, answer the
purpose your plan contemplates. The increase of taxes will
have the double operation of widening the channel of circula
tion and of pumping the medium out of it. And I cannot but
think that a domestic capital, existing under various shapes, and
disposable to the public, may still be obtained on terms, though
hard, not intolerable; and that it will not be very long before
the money market abroad will not be entirely shut against us;
a market, however ineligible in some respects, not to be declined
under our circumstances.
We hear nothing from our Envoys since the despatches now
in print, nor any thing else of importance from abroad. We
continue anxious for the situation of Sackett's Harbour. Izard
has joined Brown on the Canada side of the straight, and of
fered battle to Drummond, which he does not accept, and which
it seems cannot be forced on him without risk of reinforcements
now transportable to him. The most that can fairly be hoped
for by us now is, that the campaign may end where it is.

TO GEO. W. CAMPBELL. November 2d, 1814.
Dear Sir, — The committee appointed by the House of Rep
resentatives to enquire into the causes of the late military events
in this District have called for information on the several mem-

592 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
bers of the Cabinet, and the call will embrace you. That you
may be under no restraint whatever from official or personal
confidence, I think it proper to intimate to you that, in relation
to myself, I hope that no information you may be able to give
will be withheld from either of those considerations.
I am so far from wishing to circumscribe the range of enquiry
on this subject, that 1 am anxious that every circumstance may
be reached that can throw light on it. I am, indeed, the more
anxious, because I understand that a statement furnished by the
late Secretary of War implicates me in two particulars: 1.
That I committed to him the direction of the operations on the
field of battle, which I could not even legally do. 2. That at
a critical moment I interposed and prevented it.
On the latter point, I am aware that, as you were not on the
ground, you can have no direct knowledge, and may be without
a knowledge of any circumstances indirectly bearing on it. It
is a point, however, which I believe can be disproved by evi
dence as decisive as can be required to establish the negative.
On the first point, your memory may furnish circumstances
not unimportant, as the statement in question has, doubtless,
reference to the conversation with Gen1 Armstrong on the morn
ing of August 24, to which I was led by the regret you ex
pressed at his apparent reserve on so momentous a crisis, and
your suggestion that he might be kept back by some feeling of
delicacy in relation to Gen1 Winder.
The conversation was held very near to you, but no part of
it might be within your hearing. Your recollection of my reply
to your remarks, and of my communication of what passed be
tween me and Gen1 Armstrong, may, in connection with recol
lections of others, aid in elucidating truth.
I have ' heard with pleasure that you were far advanced on
your journey to Nashville, and that your health was improving.
With my sincerest wishes for its perfect restoration, accept as
surances of my great esteem and friendly respects.

1814. LETTERS. 593

TO GOVERNOR TOMPKINS. Washington, Nov' 12, 1814.
Sir, — I have received your letter of the 5th instant, covering
a unanimous Resolution of the two Houses of the Legislature
of N. York, expressing the emotions with which they view the
terms of peace proposed by the British Commissioners at Ghent,
and recommending the most vigorous measures for bringing the
war to an honorable termination.
This language does great honor to the patriotism and just
sentiments of the State by whose Councils it has been adopted.
And the Resolution derives additional value from the unanimity
stamped upon it.
Such a devotion every where to the rights and dignity of our
Country is alone necessary to a speedy triumph over the obsta
cles to an honorable peace. And such an example could pro
ceed from no source more entitled or more conducive to patri
otic emulations.
Accept, Sir, assurances of my high esteem and my friendly
respects.

TO WILSON C. NICHOLAS. Washington, Nov' 25, 1814.
Dear Sir, — I did not receive your favor of the 11th instant
till a few days ago, and I have, till now, been too much indis
posed to acknowledge it.
You are not mistaken in viewing the conduct of the Eastern
States as the source of our greatest difficulties in carrying on
the war; as it certainly is the greatest, if not the sole induce
ment with the enemy to persevere in it. The greater part of
the people in that quarter have been brought by their leaders,
aided by their priests, under a delusion scarcely exceeded by
that recorded in the period of witchcraft; and the leaders them
selves are becoming daily more desperate in the use they make
of it. Their object is power. If they could obtain it by men-
vol. 11. 38

594 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
aces, their efforts would stop there. These failing, they are
ready to go every length for which they can train their follow
ers. Without foreign co-operation, revolt and separation will
hardly be risked; and what the effect of so profligate an experi
ment would be, first, on misguided partizans, and next on those
remaining faithful to the nation, who are respectable for their
consistency, and even for their numbers, is for conjecture only.
The best may be hoped, but the worst ought to be kept in view.
In the mean time, the course to be taken by the Government is
full of delicacy and perplexity, and the more so under the pinch
which exists in our fiscal affairs, and the lamentable tardiness
of the Legislature in applying some relief.
At such a moment the vigorous support of the well-disposed
States is peculiarly important to the General Government, and
it would be impossible for me to doubt that Virginia, under
your administration of its Executive Government, will continue
to be among the foremost in zealous exertions for the national
rights and success.

TO WILLIAM EUSTIS.
(Private.) Washington, December 15, 1814.
Dear Sir, — It has been in view for some time to counter-
place Mr. Changion by an Envoy Extraordinary and Minister
Plenipotentiary to his Sovereign Prince, and I have had you in
my thoughts for the service. I postponed, however, consulting
you on the subject, on the calculation that it could be done at
any time without inconvenient delay to the object. Circum
stances now exist which render an immediate appointment ex
pedient, and I have just sent in your name to the Senate. I
must pray you to excuse my taking this liberty with it, and my
hoping that it will be not inconsistent with your views to un
dertake the mission contemplated. You will oblige me by a
few lines of as early a date as you can make convenient.
Accept assurances of my great esteem and friendly regards.

1814. LETTERS.

595

TO BENJAMIN W. CROWNINSHIELD. Washington, December 15, 1814.
Sir,— Mr. Jones having retired from the Secretaryship of the
Navy, my thoughts have been turned to you as a desirable suc
cessor, and I have this day sent in your name to the Senate for
the appointment. I hope you will excuse my doing it without
your consent, which would have been asked if the business of
that Department had less urged an avoidance of delay. The
same consideration will apologize for my hoping that it will
not be inconsistent with your views to aid your country in that
station, nor with your conveniency to be prepared to repair to
it as soon as you may receive notice that the Senate have given
effect to the nomination.
Accept, Sir, assurances of my esteem and of my friendly re
spects.

TO JOHN ADAMS. Washington, Dec 17th, 1814.
Dear Sir, — Your favor of the 28th ultimo was duly received,
though with more delay than usually attends the mail. I re
turn' the interesting letter from your son, with my thanks for
the opportunity of perusing it.
I have caused the archives of the Department of State to be
searched, with an eye to what passed during the negotiation for
peace on the subject of the fisheries. The search has not fur
nished a precise answer to the enquiry of Mr. Adams. It ap
pears, from one of your letters referring to the instructions ac
companying the commission to make a Treaty of commerce with
G. Britain, that the original views of Congress did not carry
their ultimatum beyond the common right to fish in waters dis
tant three leagues from the British shores. The negotiations,
therefore, and not the instructions, if no subsequent change of
them took place, have the merit of the terms actually obtained.
That other instructions, founded on the Resolutions of Congress,

596 WORKS OF MADISON. 1814.
issued at subsequent periods cannot be doubted, though as yet
they do not appear. But how far they distinguished between
the common use of the sea and the use, then common also, of the
shores, in carrying on the fisheries, I have no recollection.
The view of the discussions at Ghent presented by the private
letters of all our Ministers there, as well as by their official
despatches, leaves no doubt of the policy of the British Cabinet,
so forcibly illustrated by the letter of Mr. Adams to you. Our
enemy, knowing that he has peace in his own hands, speculates
on the fortune of events. Should these be unfavorable, he can
at any moment, as he supposes, come to our terms. Should they
correspond with his hopes, his demands may be insisted on, or
even extended. The point to be decided by our Ministers is,
whether, during the uncertainty of events, a categorical alterna
tive of immediate peace, or a rupture of the negotiation, would
not be preferable to a longer acquiescence in the gambling pro
crastinations of the other party. It may be presumed that they
will, before this, have pushed the negotiations to this point.
It is very agreeable to find that the superior ability which
distinguishes the notes of our Envoys extorts commendation
from the most obdurate of their political enemies. And we have
the further satisfaction to learn that the cause they are plead
ing is beginning to overcome the prejudice which misrepresent
ations had spread over the continent of Europe against it. The
British Government is neither inattentive to this approaching
revolution in the public opinion there, nor blind to its tendency.
If it does not find in it a motive to immediate peace, it will in
fer the necessity of shortening the war by bringing upon us, the
ensuing campaign, what it will consider as a force not to be re
sisted by us.
It were to be wished that this consideration had more effect
in quickening the preparatory measures of Congress. I am un
willing to say how much distress in every branch of our affairs
is the fruit of their tardiness; nor would it be necessary to you,
who will discern the extent of the evil in the symptoms from
which it is to be inferred.

1814. LETTERS.

597

Extract of a letter from J. Q. Adams to his Father, dated Ghent,
October 27, 1814.
" The whole compass of the diplomatic skill employed by the
British Government in this negotiation has consisted in con
suming time, without coming to any conclusion. Mr. Clay and
Mr. Russell arrived at Gottenburg the 11th of April. The ne
gotiation had been proposed by Lord Castlereagh in November;
had been acceded to by the President in the beginning of Jan
uary. The British Government were informed in February of
the appointment of American Plenipotentiaries. Their first dil
atory proceeding was to defer the appointment of their Commis
sioners until official notification should be given them, by the
American Ministers themselves, that they were at the place of
meeting which had been agreed upon. One full month was
gained by this. The next device was, to propose the transfer
of the negotiation to Ghent, which absorbed six weeks more;
and then they left us from the 24th of June to the 6th of Au
gust waiting here for the appearance of their Plenipotentiaries."

TO GOVERNOR EARLY, OF GEORGIA. Dec' 18, 1814.
Sir, — I have duly received your letter of the 2d instant, with
the Resolutions of the Legislature of Georgia, expressing unan
imously the sentiments inspired by the extravagant terms of
peace demanded by the enemy, and the readiness of that State
to make any sacrifice necessary to a vigorous prosecution of the
war, till it can be brought to an honorable termination.
Resolutions of such a cliaracter are worthy of the real and
public spirit of which so many other proofs have been given by
the State of Georgia; and they have the greater merit as pro
ceeding from a part of the Nation which presents so dispropor
tionate an extent of frontier to the pressures of the war, with
the other disadvantages incident to their situation in sustain
ing them.

598 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
It is under such circumstances that the patriotism and mag
nanimity of a people are put to the severest trial; and it will
be a lasting honor to those of Georgia that the trial bears testi
mony to the manly spirit which presides in their public Coun
cils. Accept, sir, assurances of my great esteem and friendly re
spects.

TO MAJB GEN1 DEARBORN. Washington, March 4th, 1815.
Dear Sir, — Being desirous of obtaining for the Department
of War services which I thought you could render with pecu
liar advantage, and hoping that, for a time, at least, you might
consent to step into that Department, I took the liberty, with
out a previous communication, for which there was not time, to
nominate you as successor to Mr. Monroe, who was called back
to the Department of State. I had not a doubt, from all the
calculations I could make, that the Senate would readily con
cur in my views; and if a doubt had arisen, it would have been
banished by the confidence of the best informed and best dis
posed with whom I conferred, that the nomination would be
welcomed where it was to be decided on. Contrary to these
confident expectations, an opposition was disclosed in an extent
which determined me to withdraw the nomination. But before
the Message arrived, the Senate very unexpectedly had taken
up the subject and proceeded to a decision. They promptly,
however, relaxed, so far as to erase the proceeding from their
Journal, and in that mode to give effect to the withdrawal.
I have thought this explanation due both to me and to your
self. I sincerely regret the occasion for it. But to whatever
blame I may have subjected myself, I trust you will see in the
course taken by me a proof of the high value I place on your
public, and of the esteem I feel for your personal, character.
Permit me to add, that I have been not a little consoled for the
occurrence to which I have been accessary by the diffusive ex-

1815. LETTERS. 599
pression to which it has led of sentiments such as your best
friends have heard with most pleasure.

TO THE REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE OF MASSA
CHUSETTS. March 7, 1815.
I have received, fellow-citizens, the address transmitted by
you on the 23d of February, with the attention due to the occa
sion which gave rise to it, and to the view which it takes of
past scenes and events.
Whatever differences of opinion may have existed among
good citizens, all will rejoice in the happy result of the contest
in which we have been engaged. If this has been attended
with difficulties and with sacrifices, with anxieties and with ap
prehensions, we have a reward in the reflection that the rights
of our Country have been successfully maintained, under pecu
liar disadvantages, against a nation powerful at all times in
armaments and resources, and wielding them against us under
circumstances the most favorable to her; that the arduous trial
has unfolded the energies of the American people, the extent
of their public spirit, the stability of their political Institutions,
and their capacities for war, as well as for the improvements
and enjoyments of honorable peace.
The firm and persevering resistance which has been made to
violations of our national rights and of our essential interests,
and the signal valour and patriotism displayed by every variety
of our arms, both on the water and on the land, whilst they
cannot fail to do justice to the American name, will be among
the best guardians of our future peace and safety.
It remains for us to strengthen these titles to the respect and
esteem of other nations by an adherence to the policy which
has cultivated peace, friendship, and useful intercourse with all;
and to provide still further for our external security, as well as
for our internal prosperity and happiness, by fidelity to the
Union; by reverence for the laws; by discountenancing all

600 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
local and other prejudices; and by promoting every where the
concord and brotherly affection becoming members of one
great political family.
I thank you, fellow-citizens, for the kind partiality with
which you have regarded the discharge of my duty throughout
the period which called for the best efforts of us all in our re
spective situations; and I pray you to accept for yourselves, and
for those in whose behalf you have spoken, assurances of my
friendly respects and my best wishes.

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. Washington, March 12, 1815.
Dear Sir, — It was long desirable that an Expose of the
causes and character of the war between the United States and
Great Britain should remedy the mischief produced by the Dec
laration of the Prince Regent, and other misstatements which
had poisoned the opinion of the world on the subject. Since
the pacification in Europe, and the effect of that and other oc
currences in tilrning the attention of that quarter of the world
towards the United States, the antidote became at once more
necessary and more hopeful. It was accordingly determined,
soon after the meeting of Congress, that a correct and full view
of the war should be prepared, and made public in the usual
demi-official form. The commencement of it was, however,
somewhat delayed by the probability of an early termination
of the negotiations at Ghent, either in a peace, or in a new
epoch particularly inviting a new appeal to the neutral public.
The long suspension of intelligence from our Envoys, and the
critical state of our affairs at home, as well as abroad, finally
overruled this delay, and the execution of the task was com
mitted to Mr. Dallas. Although he hastened it as much as the
nature of it and his other laborious attentions admitted, it was
not finished in time for publication before the news of peace
arrived. The latter pages had not even been struck off at the
press. Under these circumstances, it became a question whether

!815. LETTERS. 601
it should be published with a prefatory notice that it waa writ
ten before the cessation of hostilities, and thence derived its
spirit and language; or should be suppressed, or written over
with a view to preserve the substantial vindication of our
Country against prevailing calumnies, and avoid asperities of
every sort unbecoming the change in the relations of the two
Countries. This last course, though not a little difficult, might
have been best in itself, but it required a time and labour not
to be spared for it; and the suppression was preferred to the
first course, which would have been liable to misconstructions
of an injurious tendency. The printed copies, however, amount
ing to several hundred, are not destroyed, and will hereafter
contribute materials for a historical review of the period which
the document embraces. I have thought a perusal of it might
amuse an hour of your leisure, requesting only, that as it is to
be guarded against publication, you will be so good as either to
return the copy, or to place it where it will be in no danger of
escaping. You will observe, from the plan and cast of the
work, that it was meant for the eye of the British people, and
of our own, as well as for that of the neutral world. TI*s three
fold object increased the labour not a little, and gives the com
position some features not otherwise to be explained.
The despatch vessel with the peace, via France, has just ar
rived. It brings little more than duplicates of what was re
ceived via England. The affairs at Vienna remain in a fog,
which rather thickens than disperses. The situation of France,
also, has yet, it would seem, to pass some clearing-up shower.
The peace between this Country and Great Britain gives sincere
pleasure there, as relieving the Government and the nation from
the dilemma of humiliating submissions to the anti-neutral meas
ures of G. Britain, or of a premature contest with her. In
Spain, every thing suffers under the phrenzy of the Throne and
the fanaticism of the people. But for our peace with England,
it is not impossible that a new war from that quarter would
have been opened upon us. The affair at New Orleans will,
perhaps, be a better guaranty against such an event.

602 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
Mr. Smith will have communicated to you the result of our
consultation on the transportation of the Library.
We are indulging hopes of paying a trip soon to our farm,
and shall not fail, if it be practicable, to add to it the pleasure
of a visit to Monticello.

TO THE COMMITTEE OF A MEETING OF CITIZENS IN BALTIMORE,
APRIL 10, 1815.
I have received, fellow-citizens, the congratulations upon the
conclusion of an honorable peace with G. Britain, which you
have communicated on the part of a numerous and respectable
meeting of Republican Citizens of the city and precincts of
Baltimore. A candid review of the trials to which our Country has been
exposed, and of its conduct previous and subsequent to the ap
peal to arms, will always do equal justice to its love of peace
and its energies in war; to the stability of its political Institu
tions amid threatening shocks, and the public spirit which ani
mated and was in turn cherished by them; to its respect for the
rights of other nations, and its firmness in asserting its own.
The present generation, in disregarding temporary interests
when brought into competition with essential rights and Na
tional character, the only foundations of lasting prosperity, has
emulated the wisdom and the virtue of that which bequeathed
to it the blessings of freedom and Independence; and it will
have the happiness of handing down the precious trust with ad
ditional security and lustre to the generations which are to fol
low. A comparison of the present situation of our Country in its
own eyes, and in the eyes of the world, with the degradation
inviting future insults in which it would have been left by an
unresisted accumulation of oppressions, will convey to discrimi
nating minds and to American hearts the value of what has
been done, and the compensation for what has. been suffered.

1815. LETTERS.

603

For the success which has placed us on the high ground which
calls for our common congratulations, too much praise cannot
be given to the warriors who, on both elements, have fought so
gloriously the battles of their country; nor to the great body
of citizens whose patriotism has borne every sacrifice and braved
every danger.
In the varied scenes which have put to the test the constancy
of the nation, Baltimore ranks among the portions most distin
guished for devotion to the public cause. It has the satisfaction
to reflect that it boldly and promptly espoused the resort to
arms when no other honorable choice remained; that it found
in the courage of its citizens a rampart against the assaults of
an enterprising force; that it never wavered nor temporized
with the vicissitudes of the contest; and that it has had an am
ple share in the exertions which have brought it to an honora
ble conclusion.
For the favorable light in which your kind partiality has re
garded my participation in the public Councils and measures,
throughout the arduous period now so auspiciously terminated,
I tender my thanks, with my respects and my best wishes.

I TO BENJAMIN W. CROWNINSHIELD. Washington, June 12, 1815.
Sir, — I have given to the questions growing out of your let
ter and communications of the 23d of May, and others from the
Commissioners of the Navy Board, the consideration due to
them. The following remarks convey the result of it.
The law which establishes the Board containing provisions
entirely new, and rendering the Constitution of the Navy De
partment more complicated, at the same time that they render
it more ample for its objects, it might well happen that different
constructions would in the first instance be put on some parts
of the law. It is to be hoped, however, that by recurring to
the constitutional principles on which the Executive Depart
ment of the Government rests, in aid of the established rules of

604 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
interpretation, the meaning of the act may be satisfactorily de
termined. The better to ascertain the relation in which the Board is
placed to the Secretary of the Navy, it is proper to take into
view the relation of the latter to the President.
By the structure of the several executive Departments, and
by the practice under them, the Secretary of the Navy, like the
other Secretaries, is the regular organ of the President for the
business belonging to his Department; and with the exception
of cases in whicli independent powers are specially vested in
him by law, his official acts derive their authority from, or, in
other words, carry with them, the authority of the Executive of
the U. S. Should a Head of Department at any time violate
the intentions of the Executive, it is a question between him
and the Executive. In all cases where the contrary does not
appear, he is to be understood to speak and to act with the Ex
ecutive sanction, or, in other words, the Executive is presumed
to speak and to act through him.
This being the relation of the Secretary of the Navy to the
Executive, and no direct relation existing between the Board
of Commissioners and the Executive, the relation between them
must be through the Secretary of the Navy, and niust depend
on the relation of the Board to the latter, as established by
law. According to the terms of the law, the Board is attached to
the office of the Secretary of the Navy, and shall discharge all
its ministerial duties under his superintendence.
Altho' the term "attached," taken by itself, may not fully
explain the relation of the Board to the office of the Secretary,
it excludes the idea of a substantive power independent of him.
The ministerial duties to be performed by the Board are the
ministerial part of the duties of the office of the Secretary.
The nature of these duties is as well expressed by the term
"ministerial" as by any other that could be applied. Uncer
tainties will doubtless occur in the detail, which a course of
practice only can remove.
In saying that the Board " shall discharge " the duties in ques-

1815. LETTERS. 605
tion, the law is not to be understood as giving an independent
power and imposing an absolute obligation. The terms taken
by themselves would not require such a construction. In the
Legislative use of them, in analogous cases, they import only
that when certain acts become requisite, it will be the duty of
the functionary named to perform them. The terms, if taken
in a literal and absolute sense, would make the Board as inde
pendent of the President as of the Secretary of the Navy, and
would destroy the unity, the efficiency, and the responsibility of
the Executive in an important branch of the Administration.
This could not be contemplated by the Legislature.
On the contrary, it is expressly provided that the ministerial
duties in question are to be discharged "under the superintend
ence" of the Secretary of the Navy, acting, of course, under
the authority of the Executive. The term "superintendence,"
whether its meaning be sought in the Books employed in the
explanation of words, or in the use of it in legislative acts, im
ports a superiority and authority in the superintending over the
superintended party. To superintend or supervise without an
authority to guide or controul, would be a task either alto
gether nugatory, or of a nature which the Legislature cannot
be presumed to have committed to a Head of Department and
a Constitutional organ of the Executive authority.
But whilst the Board is restricted to the discharge of duties
which are ministerial, and are subject therein to the superin
tendence of the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary, in the dis
charge of his duties, so far as they ministerially relate to mat
ters connected with the naval establishment, is restricted to the
intermediary functions of the Board.
No separate or subordinate officers or agents can be immedi
ately employed by him for purposes embraced by the duties of
the Board.
The powers of the Board to adopt rules and regulations for
the government of their meetings, and to appoint their own
Secretary and two clerks, to be attached to their office, being
specially vested in them, are exceptions, and not under the su
perintendence of the Secretary of the Navy.

606 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
The Board is specially authorized, also, to prepare rules and
regulations necessary for securing uniformity in the several
classes of vessels and their equipments, and for repairing and
refitting them, and for securing responsibility in the subordinate
officers and agents; under the restriction, however, of preparing
them by and with the consent of the Secretary of the Navy, and
that they be approved by the President.
Whether the alteration which has been made in the Navy
Department might have been better modified, or defined with a
more discriminating precision, are questions which do not be
long to those whose duty it is to execute the law according to
the necessary rules of expounding it as it stands.
The exposition which has been given will at least have the
advantage of avoiding essential inconsistencies in its several
parts, as well as of preserving that unity of action which is es
sential to the Executive trust. And with the aid of that can
dor, cordiality, and confidence, which distinguish those whom
the law associates, and which will be exercised in proportion
to the call for co-operation in overcoming difficulties, of what
ever sort, incident to new arrangements for complicated objects,
I flatter myself that the law will go into its due effect with the
advantages to the public service for which it was enacted.
Accept assurances of my esteem and respect.
Washington, June 12, 1815.
The Secretary of the Navy will communicate to the Board of
Commissioners a copy of the above letter.

TO  CHARLTON, MAYOR OF SAVANNA.
Washington, June 19th, 1815.
Sir, — I have duly received your communication of the 5th in
stant, and am very sensible of the value I ought to place on the
friendly and favorable sentiments which it conveys from the
Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savanna.
It will always be honorable for the patriotic citizens of that

1815. LETTERS. 607
City that^ they uniformly and zealously supported their Country
in every stage of the struggle which has terminated so happily
for its interests, and so gloriously for its arms and its Repub
lican Institutions.
It was a struggle due to the Independence of the present and
to the security of future generations. It could not have been
avoided without a derogation from both. And it is a proud and
gratifying consideration that its issue has consolidated the one
and is so auspicious to the other.
If the peace does not embrace every provision which might
have been justly claimed, no blame can touch those whose blood
and treasure were devoted to the public cause. If a more unan
imous discharge of patriotic duties could have rendered the con
test shorter, or the conduct of it less costly, or could have im
proved, in any manner, the terms on which it was closed, time
and reflection are giving lessons to those who did not emulate
the general example, which will be a barrier against recurrences
of the melancholy error; whilst the past difficulties, which were
added to those inseparable from an unaided encounter of so
powerful an adversary, enhance the final triumph over the
whole. Accept, Sir, and tender to those associated with you, assur
ances of my high respect and my friendly wishes.

TO WILLIAM PLUMER, JUN*.
Washington, July 14, 1815.
Sir, — I received, some time ago, your letter of June 8, which
it has not been convenient for me sooner to acknowledge.
The war lately concluded, with its causes, its events, and the
lessons to be drawn from it, will form a volume so interesting
in the history of our Country, that it is much to be desired that
the facts and features of it may be presented to the world as
they really existed. The view you have taken of the task ap
pears to be a very just one; and from the preparations and aids
to which you refer, and the style of your observations on the

608 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
subject, I cannot but augur a valuable and acceptable execu
tion of it. The undertaking is the more meritorious, if, as
you intimate, there be danger of early and deceptive publica
tions, which may preoccupy the public belief, and do lasting in
justice to our Country or those who have served it.
With respect to the enquiries which you may find it requisite
to address to the Departments or Officers of the Government, I
cannot doubt that they will be always ready to contribute
proper information for an undertaking laudable in its object,
and in hands worthy of the respect and confidence to which pat
rons, such as your letter points at, must of themselves secure to
you.

RETURN OF NAPOLEON FROM ELBA,
[1815.]

TO COL. MONROE, (ON THE RETURN OF NAPOLEON.)
Dear Sir, — From the aspect of the latest intelligence from
Europe, we are to infer that war is to be renewed. If the co
alition against F. be also renewed, and a civil war there should
aid it, the Bourbons and peace may soon be restored. Should
Napoleon have the united support of the French, and be able to
disunite the allies, the war may soon be terminated in his favor.
On other suppositions, the war may be protracted and the issue
be doubtful. As war, however, is so presumable, and with Eng
land and France adverse parties in it, it is our duty to contem
plate a recurrence of embarrassments to the U. S. Should Na
poleon yield less than he may be expected to do to the lessons
of experience, a difference in his own situation, in that of
France, in that of the Continent of Europe, and in that of the
U. S., will probably divert him from the anti-commercial and
anti-neutral policy which marked his former career. He may
even take the opposite course of inviting the commerce of neu
tral America, for the double purpose of nourishing his own re
sources, and laying snares for his maritime adversary. On the
other hand, it is possible, that his old prejudices may not have
forsaken him, and that he may relapse into collisions with our
rights, national or neutral.
But whatever may be the system embraced in that quarter,
we cannot turn to another without serious apprehensions that,
in some form or other, our commerce and navigation will en
counter vexations dangerous to our peace. The full enjoyment
of the American market, and an involuntary respect for the mil
itary and naval faculties of the U. S., of which such monitory
vol. n. 39

610 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
demonstrations have been given, must, indeed, not be without
effect in the Councils of G. B. It must occur, also, that with
the use of the ports of F., the pressure of our marine would be
more than doubled on her commerce. Nor can she be unaware
of the dilemma wliich a war with the U. S. must impose, of
either leaving Canada open to our attacks, or defending it by
forces not to be well spared from Europe. But strong as these
motives are to a just and conciliatory conduct on the part of
that nation, it does not follow that they will prevail. It is more
probable, especially if the administration continue in the pres
ent or similar hands, that a spirit of revenge, a hope of retriev
ing lost reputation, a wish to retard our maritime growth, a
pride in shewing to the world that neither the war nor the
peace with this Country has impaired her maritime claims, or
her determination to exert them, will all unite with the object
of distressing France and destroying her Ruler, in stimulating
her into her former violence on the ocean. Should she even
cover a discountenance of her impressments under arrangements
with us saving her pride, she will be unwilling to forego a gen
eral blockade of the ports of France, as at once crippling her
enemy and checking the prosperity of her rival. She will be
the less apt to decline a resort to this measure, as her conti
nental allies will be reconciled to it when directed against a
common enemy, as well as by the plea already prepared, that
such an enemy has no claim to the benefit of public law; whilst
the measure itself might have the aspect of asserting the British
doctrine on the subject of blockades against the pretensions of
the U.S.
We may expect vexations, also, from a fresh application of the
rule of '56, in case the French colonies should abandon the
Bourbons in favor of Napoleon.
With these sources of collision before us, the -questions to be
decided are: 1. What is the armor [?] in which U. S. ought to
present themselves, and, particularly, whether the law reducing
the military establishment ought to be carried into immediate
effect? 2. Whether any and what diplomatic experiments
ought to be made for the purpose of obviating threatened col-

1815. RETURN OF NAPOLJEON, ETC. 611
lisions, by a conciliatory adjustment of differences wliich may
produce them?
With respect to the reduction of the Army, I am induced to
think that it will be the better course, on the whole, to carry
the law into execution; and if the members of the Cabinet at
Washington concur in this opinion, the Secretary of War will
take his measures accordingly, on the return of the documents
sent to me, which will be by the mail of to-morrow. If a pref
erence be given to a delay of the reduction, I wish to have an
opportunity of reconsidering the subject with the aid of the
views of it leading to that preference.
On the 2d question, I wish to have the result of a consulta
tion as it relates to Great Britain, to France, and even to Spain;
but more particularly as it relates to G. B., and as it relates
to the number composing the mission, and the subjects commit
ted to them. It is not impossible that something may have
passed from the British Government after the arrival of our
ratification of the peace, and the prospect of a new war with
France, in reply to the last communication from our Ministers
at Ghent, that may affect the question of an Extraordinary
Mission. When you are all together, take up, also, the expediency of pro
longing or rescinding the suspension of the orders for the sail
ing of Commodore Decatur. If the danger be not serious, the-
delay-may be complained of by the Mediterranean commerce [?] ;
the more so, as vessels may have gone thither with an understand
ing that a protecting force would be hastened. It merits consid
eration whether the squadron might not proceed in such force
only as would overmatch that of Algiers and suffice for a block
ade; diminishing thus the stake exposed, without an entire dis
appointment as to the original objects. The reinforcing squad
ron or squadrons might follow as soon as better estimates of
the prospect should justify it.
I return you the communications by the Fingal [?], with a
couple of letters to me from Mr. Crawford for your perusal. I
have read the whole but slightly; but you may want them in
your consultations.

612 WORKS OF MADISON. 1815.
The mail of this morning arrived without your correspond
ence with Baker. It brought, in fact, not even a newspaper.
Of course, the whole mail to Fredericksburg must have failed.
Best wishes and respects.

INDEX TO
LETTERS CONTAINED IN VOL, H,

A.
To John Adams. page-
17 December, 1814 - - - 695
To John Quincy Adams.
16 October, 1810 - - - 483
15 November, 1811 - - - 517
To [Anonymous.]
23 August, 1795. [Semb. to
Tench Coxe, or A. J. Dallas] 46
31 January, 1810- - - 471
10 December, 1811 522
25 July, 1812 - 536
To the Washington and Jeffer
son Artillert, at Rich
mond, Va. 1809- - - 456
B.
To the Committee of a meete*g
of Citzens in Baltimore.
10 April, 1815- - 602
To the Baptist Churches on
Neal's Creek and on Black
Creek, North Carolina.
3 June, 1811- - - 511
To James Barbour.
15 June, 1814 - - 583
To Joel Barlow. •
7 February, 1809 - - - 428
17 November, 1811 518
24 February, 1812 - - - 626
11 August, 1812 - - 640
To Joshua Barney and others.
1 May, 1794 - 12
To the Rev. William Bentley.
27 December, 1809 - - - 462
To John Binns and others.
11 February, 1813 - - - 557
To Morris Birkbeck. 1813- - - 675
(613)

C.

To George W. Campbell.
2 November, 1814- - 591
To  Charlton, Mayor of
Savanna.
19 June, 1815 - - - 606
To Governor Claiborne.
20 February, 1804 - - - 199
28 August, 1804- - 203
30 August, 1804 - - 204
To Cornelius Commegys.
21 March, 1809 - - - 434
To John M. Creyon.
17 October, 1809 - - - 457
To Benjamin W. Crowninshield.
15 December, 1814 - - 595
12 June, 1815- - - 603
D.

To Gen. Henry Dearborn.

9 August, 1812 -

- 538

7 October, " -

545

8 August, 1813 -

- 569

4 March, 1815 -

598

E.
To Governor Early.
18 December, 1814- - - 597
To Plantagenet Eccleston.
1810- - - 463
To Pierrepont Edwards.
4 August, 1806 - - 225
To G. W. Erving.
1 November, 1805 - - 214
To WrLLiAM Eustis.
4 December, 1812 - - 551
12 November, 1813- - - 576
15 December, 1814 - - - 594
To Thomas Evans.
May, 1809- - - 441

614

INDEX TO LETTERS IN VOL. II.

PAGE.

F.

To Thomas Jefferson.

To General La Fayette.

6 December,
1795-
- 62
21 February,
1806-
217
13 December,
27 December,
"
63
- 69
G.
10 January,
1796-
- 70
To Albert Gallatin.
31 January,
li
- 75
29 August,
1810 -
482
7 February,
il
- - 79
2 August,
1813 -
- 566
21 February,
li
- 81
From Albert Gallatin.
29 February,
tt
- 85
7 February,
1803 -
179
6 March,
tt
86
To Governor Galusha.
13 March,
**
88
30 November,
1812 -
- 550
4 April,
it
- 89
To John Graham.
11 April,
H
94
28 August,
1813 -
- 571
18 April,
il
96
IT
23 April.
"
- 98
To Edward Hall and Thomas Yarrow.
9 May,
10 May,
22 May,
30 May,
5 December,
<<
- 100
- 99
18 March,
1809 -
433
it
103
To Paul Hamilton.
" -
- 105
31 December,
1812 -
- 551
it
- 106
To Governor Hawkins.
10 December,
<*
107
4 January,
1812-
523
19 December,
«
- 108
To William Hayward.
25 December,
11
109
21 March,
1809 -
- 434
8 January,
15 January,
22 January,
29 January,
5 February,
1797-
110
To Thomas Hertell.
a
111
20 December, 1809 -
To Col. David Humphreys.
- 461
titt
113114
23 March,
1813 -
560
it
- 115
I.
11 February,
tt
- 116
To Charles J. Ingersoll.
5 August,
tt
- 118
28 July,
1814-
- 585
20 October,
It
119
J.
25 December,
tt
120
21 January,
1798-
- 121
To Thomas Jefferson.
12 February,
It
124
2 March,
1794 -
1
February,
ti
? 126
9 March,
"
5
4 March,
it
- 128
12 March,
li
6
12 March,
tt
130
14 March,
tt
7
2 April,
il
131
24 March,
il
8
15 April,
tt
- 133
26 March,
it
8
22 April,
ti
- 137
31 March,
it
9
29 April,
*• -
138
14 April,
[f _
10
5 May,
"
- 139
28 April,
*'
- 11
13 May,
*'
- 140
9 May,
tt
13
20 May,
tt
- 142
11 May,
tt
- 14
27 May,
tt
- 143
25 May,
" -
- 17
3 June,
tt
- 144
1 June,
**
- 18
10 June,
a
147
16 June,
"
18
29 December,
tt
149
30 November,
tt
21
12 January,
1799-
- 150
21 December,
a
28
8 February,
tt
151
11 January,
1795 -
31
29 December,
il
- 151
26 January,
it
- 33
4 January,
1800-
- 153
15 February,
it
- 35
9 January,
(<
154
23 March,
tt
- 38
12 January,
tt
154
6 August,
tt
- 43
18 January,
it
- 155
24 August,
it
59
14 February,
*t
- 156
18 October,
a
- 60
15 March,
tt
157
8 November,
'«
61
4 April,
a
158
INDEX TO LETTERS IN VOL. II

615

To Thomas Jefferson.

20 April, 1800 -

- 159

September, " -

- 161

21 October, " -

- 162

November, " -

- 164

20 December, " -

- 165

10 January, 1801 -

- 166

28 February, " -

- 171

7 January, 1808 -

- 410

19 March, 1809 -

- 434

28 March, " -

- 436

9 April, " .

- 4S7

24 April, " -

439

1 May, " .

440

30 May, " -

- 442

12 June, " -

- 443

20 June, " -

- 443

27 June, " -

- 444

4 July, " -

- 445

7 July, " - -

- 446

23 July, " -

- 448

3 August, " -

- 449

16 August, "

- 451

23 August, "

- 452

11 September, "

- 453

6 October, " -

- 457

30 October, "

459

6 November, "

459

11 December, "

- 460

23 April, 1810 -

472

7 May, "

473

25 May, " -

- 477

4 June, " -

478

15 June, " -

- 479

22 June, " -

- 480

17 July, " - -

- 481

" -

- 481

19 October, " -

- 484

7 December, " -

- 489

18 March, 1811 -

- 490

1 April, "

- 492

19 April, " -

- 493

3 May, " -

- 507

7 June, " -

- 512

8 July, " -

- 513

7 February, 1812 -

- 525

6 March, " -

530

9 March, " -

530

3 April, " -

- 530

24 April, " -

- 532

25 May, " -

- 535

12 June, " -

- 536

17 August, " -

- 542

14 October, " -

548

27 January, 1813 -

- 557

10 March, " -

558

6 June, " -

- 563

10 May, 1814 -

582

To Thomas Jefferson.
10 October, 1814 -
23 October, " -
12 March, 1815 -
To Whxiam Jones.
April, 1814 -
To George Joy.
22 May, 1807 -
17 January, 1810 -
K.
To Thomas D. Kenney.
18 March, 1809 -
L.

To Col. John McIntosh.
28 October, 1809 -
To James Madison, Senior.
19 May, 1794 -
To Barbe Marbois.
Department of State, 4 Novem
ber, 1803 -
1803 -
To the Inhabitants op the Town
op Milton, Massachusetts.
18 May, 1812 -
To the Republican Members op
the Legislature of Massa
chusetts.
7 March, 1815 -
To Mr. Merry, British Plenipo
tentiary. 1804 -
9 February, 1804 -
3 September, "
Department of State, January,
1806 -
To the Representatives of the
Mississippi Territory.
July, 1809 -
To James Monroe.
4 December, 1794 -

11 March,
26 March,
20 December,
26 January,
26 February,
7 April,
8 April,
14 May,
17 December,
5 February,
9 June,
23 May,

1795

1796 ¦

1798-

1800-

588
590COO581
404
465

432

To R. R. Livingston.
10 August, 1795 -
7 February, 1804 -
5 July, 1805 -

- 44
- 193
- 212

M.

- 458

16

187
188

534

599

206 199
206
216

- 448
- 23
- 37
- 40 64
- 73
- 82
- 9196
101
119
- 123
- 145
- 160
- 160

616

INDEX TO LETTERS IN VOL. II.

To James Monroe.
10 November, " -
10 November, " -
December, " -
6 May, 1801-
Uune, " -
25 July, " -
24 October, " -
8 January, 1802-
19 January, " - -
1 March, 1803-
20 April, " -
IMay, " -
30 July, " -
10 October, " -
26 December, " -
18 January, 1804-
16 February, " -
8 March, "...
9 November, " -
3 December, " -
24 September, 1805 -
13 January, 1806-
10 March, " -
17 May, " -
4 June, " -
20 March, 1807-
25 May, " -• -
25 July, " -
5 January, 1808 -
6 February, " -
18 March, " -
21 March, "...
30 March, «...
18 April, " - -
1815 - - -
N.
To the Inhabitants of the Town
of New Haven.
24 May, 1811-
To the City Council of New
Orleans.
23 July, 1809-
To the General Republican
Committee of the City and
County of New York.
24 September, 1809 -
To John Nicholas.
2 April, 1813 -
To Wilson Carey Nicholas,
25 November, 1814 -
To the Senate and House of Com
mons of the General As
sembly op the State of
North Carolina. 1813 -

162 163
165 172 173
174175176 176
177 180182183186189
192 195
200 208
210213216218223224
403 406407410
422 422423424 424 609

508

447

455

- 562

- 593

577

To the General Assembly op the
State of North Carolina.
January, 1810 - - -
P.
To Thomas Paine.
20 August, 1803-
To Edmund Pendleton.
8 January, 1795 -
7 February, 1796 -
To the Republican Citizens op
the FntST Congressional
District of the State of
Pennsylvania.
21 February, 1810 -
To Judge Peters.
5 September, 1807 -
To the Surviving Military Char
acters OF THE LATE REVO
LUTIONARY Army and Navy,
residing in the clty and
County of Philadelphia.
January, 1810 -
To Monsieur Pichon.
3 September, 1804 -
To William Pinkney.
9 November, 1808 -

5 December,

"

11 February,

1809-

20 January,

1810-

23 May,

tt

30 October,

It

29 January,

1814-

To William Plumer, Jr

14 July,

1815-

R.
To Dr. David Ramsay.
20 September, 1809 -
To Rochester and Brent.
17 March, 1809 -
To Jonathan Russell.
24 July, 1811 -
15 November, " -
To Governor Shelby
8 August, 1813 -
To Timothy Skinner.
22 March, 1809 -
To Governor Snyder.
13 April, 1809 -
5 July, 1810-
To the Society of Arts, Phil
adelphia.
28 January, 1810 -
To the House of Representatives
of the State of South Ca
rolina.
8 January, 1812-

463

185 30
77

471

408

464204 425427
429468474 485
581 607

- 454
- 431
515
- 517
- 570436 439480

490

523

INDEX TO LETTERS IN VOL. II.

PAGE.
To the Senate and House of Rep
resentatives of the State
of South Carolina.
10 October, 1812 - - 548
To the Legislature of the State
of South Carolina.
December, 1813 - - - 579
To the Rev. S. Spring.
6 September, 1812 - - - 644
T.
To Edward Tiffin, Grand Sachem.
23 June, 1811 - - - 513
To Daniel D. Tompkins.
25 January, 1814 - - - 580
18 October, "... 590
12 November, "... 593
To Judge Toulmin.
6 September, 1810 - - - 482

To Gen. Turreau.
4 April, 1805 -
To John Tyler.
3 November, 1804 -
V.
To — Van Polaren.
13 August, 1802 -
W.
To Matthew Walton.
27 September, 1809 -
To George Washington.
8 February, 1794 -
1 December, 1796 -
To William Wirt.
30 September, 1813 -

617
PAGE.
- 211
- 207
- 177

456 1
106
573

IIIIIIIHIIIIIIilllllllllMlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll O
3 9002 00566 9420 -*