Chapter V: Part III: Continued (4)

Examining by this rule the case of the British brig Fanny, taken on the 8th of May last, it appears from the evidence that the capture was made four or five miles from the land; and consequently, without the line provisionally adopted by the President, as before mentioned.

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

TO MR. HAMMOND.

GERMANTOWN, November 10, 1793.

SIR,--As in cases where vessels are reclaimed by the subjects or citizens of the belligerent powers as having been taken within the jurisdiction of the United States, it becomes necessary to ascertain that fact by testimony taken according to the laws of the United States. The Governors of the several States to whom the application will be made in the first instance, are desired immediately to notify thereof the Attorney's of their respective districts. The Attorney is thereupon instructed to give notice to the principal agent of both parties who may have come in with the prize, and also to the consuls of the nations interested, and to recommend to them to appoint, by mutual consent, arbiters to decide whether the capture was made within the jurisdiction of the United States, as stated to you in my letter of the 8th instant; according to whose award the Governor may proceed to deliver the vessel to the one or the other party. But in case the parties or consuls shall not agree to name arbiters, then the Attorney, or some person substituted by him, is to notify them of the time and place, when and where he will be, in order to take the depositions of such witnesses as they may cause to come before him, which depositions he is to transmit for the information and decision of the President.

It has been thought best to put this business into such a train as that the examination of the fact may take place immediately, and before the witnesses may have again departed from the United States, which would too frequently happen, and especially in the distant States, if it should be deferred until information is sent to the Executive, and a special order awaited to take the depositions.

I take the liberty of requesting that you will be pleased to give such instructions to the consuls of your nation as may facilitate the object of this regulation. I urge it with the more earnestness because as the attorneys of the districts are for the most part engaged in much business of their own, they will rarely be able to attend more than one appointment, and consequently the party who should fail from negligence or other motive to produce his witnesses, at the time and place appointed, might lose the benefit of their testimony altogether. This prompt procedure is the more to be insisted on, as it will enable the President, by an immediate delivery of the vessel and cargo to the party having title, to prevent the injuries consequent on long delay.

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

TO THE MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY TO GREAT BRITAIN.

GERMANTOWN, November 14th, 1793.

SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 7th instant, on the subject of the British ship Rochampton, taken and sent into Baltimore by the French privateer the Industry, an armed schooner of St. Domingo, which is suggested to have augmented her force at Baltimore before the capture. On this circumstance a demand is granted that the prize she has made shall be restored.

Before I proceed to the matters of fact in this case, I will take the liberty of calling your attention to the rules which are to govern it. These are, I. That restitution of prizes has been made by the Executive of the United States only in the two cases, 1st, of capture within their jurisdiction, by armed vessels, originally constituted such without the limits of the United States; or 2d, of capture, either within or without their jurisdiction, by armed vessels, originally constituted such within the limits of the United States, which last have been called proscribed vessels.

II. That all _military equipments_ within the ports of the United States are forbidden to the vessels of the belligerent powers, even where they have been constituted vessels of war before their arrival in our ports; and where such equipments have been made before detection, they are ordered to be suppressed when detected, and the vessel reduced to her original condition. But if they escape detection altogether, depart and make prizes, the Executive has not undertaken to restore the prizes.

With due care, it can scarcely happen that military equipments of any magnitude shall escape discovery. Those which are small may sometimes, perhaps, escape, but to pursue these so far as to decide that the smallest circumstance of military equipment to a vessel in our ports shall invalidate her prizes through all time, would be a measure of incalculable consequences. And since our interference must be governed by some general rule, and between great and small equipments no practicable line of distinction can be drawn, it will be attended with less evil on the whole to rely on the efficacy of the means of prevention, that they will reach with certainty equipments of any magnitude, and the great mass of those of smaller importance also; and if some should in the event, escape all our vigilance, to consider these as of the number of cases which will at times baffle the restraints of the wisest and best-guarded rules which human foresight can devise. And I think we may safely rely that since the regulations which got into a course of execution about the middle of August last, it is scarcely possible that equipments of any importance should escape discovery.

These principles showing that no demand of restitution holds on the ground of a mere military alteration or an augmentation of force, I will consider your letter only as a complaint that the orders of the President prohibiting these, have not had their effect in the case of the Industry, and enquire whether if this be so, it has happened either from neglect or connivance in those charged with the execution of these orders. For this we must resort to facts which shall be taken from the evidence furnished by yourself and the British vice-consul at Baltimore, and from that which shall accompany this letter.

About the beginning of August the Industry is said to have arrived at Baltimore with the French fleet from St. Domingo; the particular state of her armament on her arrival is lately questioned, but it is not questioned that she was an armed vessel of some degree. The Executive having received an intimation that two vessels were equipping themselves at Baltimore for a cruise, a letter was on the 6th of August addressed by the Secretary of War to the Governor of Maryland, desiring an inquiry into the fact. In his absence the Executive Council of Maryland charged one of their own body, the honorable Mr. Killy, with the inquiring. He proceeded to Baltimore, and after two days' examination found no vessel answering the description of that which was the object of his inquiring. He then engaged the British vice-consul in the search, who was not able, any more than himself, to discover any such vessels. Captain Killy, however, observing a schooner, which appeared to have been making some equipments for a cruise, to have added to her guns, and made some alteration in her waist, thought these circumstances merited examination, though the rules of August had not yet appeared. Finding that his inquiries excited suspicion, and fearing the vessel might be withdrawn, he had her seized, and proceeded in investigation. He found that she was the schooner Industry, Captain Carver, from St. Domingo: that she had been an armed vessel for three years before her coming here, and as late as April last had mounted 16 guns; that she now mounted only 12, and he could not learn that she had procured any of these, or done anything else, essential to her as a privateer, at Baltimore. He therefore discharged her, and on the 23d of August the Executive Council made the report to the Secretary of War, of which I enclose you a copy. About a fortnight after this (Sep. 6) you added to a letter on other business a short paragraph, saying that you had lately received information that a vessel named the Industry had, within the last five or six weeks, been armed, manned and equipped in the port of Baltimore. The proceedings before mentioned having been in another department, were not then known to me. I therefore could only communicate this paragraph to the proper department. The separation of the Executive within a few weeks after, prevented any explanations on this subject, and without them it was not in my power to either controvert or admit the information you had received under these circumstances. I think you must be sensible, Sir, that your conclusion from my silence, that I regard the fact as proved, was a very necessary one.

New inquiries at that time could not have prevented the departure of the privateer, or the capture of the Rochampton; for the privateer had then been out some time. The Rochampton was already taken, and was arriving at Baltimore, which she did about the day of the date of your letter. After her arrival, new witnesses had come forward to prove that the Industry had made some military equipments at Baltimore before her cruise. The affidavits taken by the British vice-consul, are dated about nine or ten days after the date of your letter and arrival of the Rochampton, and we have only to lament that those witnesses had not given their information to the vice-consul when Mr. Killy engaged his aid in the enquiries he was making, and when it would have had the effect of our detaining the privateer till she should have reduced herself to the condition in which she was when she arrived in our ports, if she had really added anything to her then force. But supposing the testimony just and full, (though taken _ex parte_, and not under the legal sanction of our oath,) yet the Governor's refusal to restore the prize was perfectly proper, for, as has been before observed, restitution has never been made by the Executive, nor can be made on a mere clandestine alteration or augmentation of military equipments, which was all that the new testimony tended to prove.

Notwithstanding, however, that the President thought the information obtained on the former occasion had cleared this privateer from any well-grounded cause of arrest, yet that which you have now offered opens the possibility that the former was defective. He has therefore desired new inquiry to be made before a magistrate legally authorized to administer an oath, and indifferent to both parties; and should the result be that the vessel did really make any military equipments in our ports, instructions will be given to reduce her to her original condition, whenever she shall again come into our ports.

On the whole, Sir, I hope you will perceive that on the first intimation through their own channel, and without waiting for information on your part, that a vessel was making military equipments at Baltimore, the Executive took the best measures for inquiring into the fact, in order to prevent or suppress such equipments; that an officer of high respectability was charged with the inquiry, and that he made it with great diligence himself, and engaged similar inquiries on the part of your vice-consul; that neither of them could find that the privateer had made such equipments, or, of course, that there was any ground for reducing or detaining her; that at the date of your letter of Sep. 6, (the first information received from you,) the privateer was departed, had taken her prize, and that prize was arriving in port; that the new evidence taken ten days after that arrival can produce no other effect than the institution of a new inquiry, and a reduction of the force of the privateer, should she appear to have made any military alterations or augmentation, on her return into our ports, and that in no part of this proceeding is there the smallest ground for imputing either negligence or connivance to any of the officers who have acted in it.

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

TO MR. CIRACCHI, AT MUNICH.

PHILADELPHIA, November 14, 1793.

DEAR SIR,--I have received the favor of your letter of May 29, at Munich, and it was not till then that I knew to what place or through what channel to direct a letter to you. The assurances you receive that the monument of the President would be ordered at the new election, were founded in the expectation that he meant then to retire. The turbid affairs of Europe, however, and the intercessions they produced, prevailed on him to act again, though with infinite reluctance. You are sensible that the moment of his retirement, kindling the enthusiasm for his character, the affections for his person, the recollection of his services, would be that in which such a tribute would naturally be resolved on. This, of course, is now put off to the end of the next bissextile; but whenever it arrives, your title to the execution is engraved in the minds of those who saw your works here. Your purpose, with respect to my bust, is certainly flattering to me. My family has entered so earnestly into it, that I must gratify them with the hope, and myself with the permission, to make a just indemnification to the author. I shall be happy at all times to hear from you, and to learn that your successes in life are as great as they ought to be. Accept assurances of my sincere respect and esteem.

TO MR. MADISON.

GERMANTOWN, November 17, 1793.

DEAR SIR,--I have got good lodgings for Monroe and yourself, that is to say, a good room with a fireplace and two beds, in a pleasant and convenient position, with a quiet family. They will breakfast you, but you must mess in a tavern; there is a good one across the street. This is the way in which all must do, and all I think will not be able to get even half beds. The President will remain here, I believe, till the meeting of Congress, merely to form a point of union for them before they can have acquired information and courage. For at present there does not exist a single subject in the disorder, no new infection having taken place since the great rains of the 1st of the month, and those before infected being dead or recovered. There is no doubt you will sit in Philadelphia, and therefore I have not given Monroe's letter to Sehal. I do not write to him, because I know not whether he is at present moving by sea or by land, and if by the latter, I presume you can communicate to him. Wayne has had a convoy of twenty-two wagons of provisions, and seventy men cut off fifteen miles in his rear by the Indians. Six of the men were found on the spot scalped, the rest supposed taken. He had nearly reached Fort Hamilton. R. has given notice that he means to resign. Genet, by more and more denials of powers to the President and ascribing them to Congress, is evidently endeavoring to sow tares between them, and at any event to curry favor with the latter, to whom he means to turn his appeal, finding it was not likely to be well received by the people. Accept both of you my sincere affection.

TO MR. SODERSTROM, CONSUL OF SWEDEN.

GERMANTOWN, November 20, 1793.

SIR,--I received last night your favor of the 16th. No particular rules have been established by the President for the conduct of Consuls with respect to prizes. In one particular case where a prize is brought into our ports by any of the _belligerent_ parties, and is reclaimed of the Executive, the President has hitherto permitted the Consul of the captor to hold the prize until his determinations is known. But in all cases respecting a neutral nation, their vessels are placed exactly on the same footing with our own, entitled to the same remedy from our courts of justice and the same protection from the Executive, as our own vessels in the same situation. The remedy in the courts of justice, the only one which they or our own can have access to, is slower than where it lies with the Executive, but it is more complete, as damages can be given by the Court but not by the Executive. The President will gladly avail himself of any information you can at any time give him where his interference may be useful to the vessels or subjects of his Danish Majesty, the desire of the United States being to extend to the vessels and subjects of that crown, as well as to those of his Swedish Majesty, the same protections as is given to those of our own citizens.

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

TO MR. GENET.

GERMANTOWN, November 22, 1793.

SIR,--In my letter of October the 2d, I took the liberty of noticing to you, that the commission of consul to M. Dannery, ought to have been addressed to the President of the United States. He being the only channel of communication between this country and foreign nations, it is from him alone that foreign nations or their agents are to learn what is or has been the will of the nation, and whatever he communicates as such, they have a right and are bound to consider as the expression of the nation, and no foreign agent can be allowed to question it, to interpose between him and any other branch of government, under the pretext of either's transgressing their functions, nor to make himself the umpire and final judge between them. I am, therefore, Sir, not authorized to enter into any discussions with you on the meaning of our Constitution in any part of it, or to prove to you that it has ascribed to him alone the admission or interdiction of foreign agents. I inform you of the fact by authority from the President. I had observed to you, that we were persuaded in the case of the consul Dannery, the error in the address had proceeded from no intention in the Executive Council of France to question the functions of the President, and therefore no difficulty was made in issuing the commissions. We are still under the same persuasion. But in your letter of the 14th instant, you _personally_ question the authority of the President, and in consequence of that, have not addressed to him the commission of Messrs. Pennevert and Chervi. Making a point of this formality on your part, it becomes necessary to make a point of it on ours also; and I am therefore charged to return you those commissions, and to inform you, that bound to enforce respect to the order of things established by our Constitution, the President will issue no Exequatur to any consul or vice-consul, not directed to him in the usual form, after the party from whom it comes has been apprized that such should be the address.

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

TO MR. PINCKNEY.

GERMANTOWN, November 27, 1793.

DEAR SIR,--My last letters to you were of the 11th and 14th of September, since which I have received yours of July 5, 8, August 1, 15, 27, 28. The fever, which at that time had given alarm in Philadelphia, became afterwards far more destructive than had been apprehended, and continued much longer, from the uncommon drought and warmth of the autumn. On the first day of this month the President and heads of the department assembled here. On that day, also, began the first rains which had fallen for some months. They were copious, and from that moment the infection ceased, no new subject took it, and those before infected either died or got well, so that the disease terminated most suddenly. The inhabitants who had left the city, are now all returned, and business going on again as briskly as ever. The President will be established there in about a week, at which time Congress is to meet.

Our negotiations with the North-Western Indians have completely failed, so that war must settle our difference. We expected nothing else, and had gone into negotiations only to prove to all our citizens that peace was unattainable on terms which any one of them would admit.

You have probably heard of a great misunderstanding between Mr. Genet and us. On the meeting of Congress it will be made public. But as the details of it are lengthy, I must refer for them to my next letter, when possibly I may be able to send you the whole correspondence in print. We have kept it merely personal, convinced his nation will disapprove him. To them we have with the utmost assiduity given every proof of inviolate attachment. We wish to hear from you on the subject of Marquis de La Fayette, though we know that circumstances do not admit sanguine hopes.

The copper by the Sigon and the Mohawk is received. Our coinage of silver has been delayed by Mr. Cox's inability to give the security required by law.

I shall write to you again immediately after the meeting of Congress. I have the honor to be, with sentiments of great esteem and respect, dear Sir, your friend and servant.

TO MR. GENET.

PHILADELPHIA, November 30, 1793.

SIR,--I have laid before the President of the United States your letter of November 25th, and have now the honor to inform you, that most of its objects being beyond the powers of the Executive, they can only manifest their dispositions by acting on those which are within their powers. Instructions are accordingly sent to the district attorneys of the United States, residing within States wherein French consuls are established, requiring them to inform the consuls of the nature of the provisions made by the laws for preventing, as well as punishing, injuries to their persons, and to advise and assist them in calling these provisions into activity, whenever the occasions for them shall arise.

It is not permitted by the law to prohibit the departure of the emigrants to St. Domingo, according to the wish you now express, any more than it was to force them away, according to that expressed by you in a former letter. Our country is open to all men, to come and go peaceably, when they choose; and your letter does not mention that these emigrants meant to depart armed, and equipped for war. Lest, however, this should be attempted, the Governors of the States of Pennsylvania and Maryland are requested to have particular attention paid to the vessels named in your letter, and to see that no military expedition be covered or permitted under color of the right which the passengers have to depart from these States.

Provisions not being classed among the articles of contraband, in time of war, it is possible that American vessels may have carried them to the ports of Jeremie and La Mole, as they do to other dominions of the belligerent Powers; but, if they have carried arms also, these, as being contraband, might certainly have been stopped and confiscated.

In the letter of May 15th, to Mr. Ternant, I mentioned, that, in answer to the complaints of the British minister, against the exportation of arms from the United States, it had been observed that the manufacture of arms was the occupation and livelihood of some of our citizens; that it ought not to be expected that a war among other nations should produce such an internal derangement of the occupations of a nation at peace, as the suppression of a manufacture which is the support of some of its citizens; but that, if they should export these arms to nations at war, they would be abandoned to the seizure and confiscation which the law of nations authorized to be made of them on the high seas. This letter was handed to you, and you were pleased, in yours of May 27th, expressly to approve of the answer which had been given. On this occasion, therefore, we have only to declare, that the same conduct will be observed which was announced on that.

The proposition to permit all our vessels destined for any port in the French West India islands to be stopped, unless furnished with passports from yourself, is so far beyond the powers of the Executive, that it will be unnecessary to enumerate the objections to which it would be liable. I have the honor to be, &c.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

December 2, 1793.

Thomas Jefferson, with his respects to the President, has the honor to send him the letters and orders referred to in Mr. Morris' letter, except that of the 8th of April, which must be a mistake for some other date, as the records of the office perfectly establish that no letters were written to him in the months of March and April but those of March 12 and 15, and April 20 and 26, now enclosed. The enigma of Mr. Merlino is inexplicable by anything in his possession.

He encloses the message respecting France and Great Britain. He first wrote it fair as it was agreed the other evening at the President's. He then drew a line with a pen through the passages he proposes to alter, in consequence of subsequent information, (but so lightly as to leave the passages still legible for the President,) and interlined the alterations he proposes. The overtures mentioned in the first alteration, are in consequence of its having been agreed that they should be mentioned in general terms only to the two houses. The numerous alterations made the other evening in the clause respecting our corn trade, with the hasty amendments proposed in the moment, had so much broken the tissue of the paragraph, as to render it necessary to new mould it. In doing this, care has been taken to use the same words as nearly as possible, and also to insert a slight reference to Mr. Pinckney's proceedings.

On a severe review of the question, whether the British communication should carry any such mark of being confidential, as to prevent the Legislature from publishing them, he is clearly of opinion they ought not. Will they be kept secret if secrecy is enjoined? certainly not, and all the offence will be given (if it be possible any should be given) which would follow their complete publication. If they would be kept secret, from whom would it be? from our own constituents only, for Great Britain is possessed of every tittle. Why, then, keep it secret from them? no ground of support for the Executive will ever be so sure as a complete knowledge of their proceedings by the people; and it is only in cases where the public good would be injured, and _because_ it would be injured, that proceedings should be secret. In such cases it is the duty of the Executive to sacrifice their personal interests (which would be promoted by publicity) to the public interest. If the negotiations with England are at an end, if not given to the public now, when are they to be given? and what moment can be so interesting? If anything amiss should happen from the concealment, where will the blame _originate_ at last? It may be said, indeed, that the President _puts it in the power_ of the Legislature to communicate these proceedings to _their constituents_; but is it more their duty to communicate them to their constituents, than it is the President's to communicate them to _his constituents_? and if they were desirous of communicating them, ought the President to restrain them by making the communication confidential? I think no harm can be done by the publication, because it is impossible England, after doing us an injury, should _declare war_ against us, merely because we tell our constituents of it; and I think good may be done, because while it puts it in the power of the Legislature to adopt peaceable measures of doing ourselves justice, it prepares the minds of our constituents to go cheerfully into an acquiescence under the measures, by impressing them with a thorough and enlightened conviction that they are founded in right. The motive, too, of proving to the people the impartiality of the Executive between the two nations of France and England, urges strongly that while they are to see the disagreeable things which have been going on as to France, we should not conceal from them what has been passing with England, and induce a belief that nothing has been doing.

TO MR. GENET.

PHILADELPHIA, December 9, 1793.

SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3d instant, which has been duly laid before the President.

We are very far from admitting your principle, that the government on either side has no other right, on the presentation of a consular commission, than to certify that, having examined it, they find it according to rule. The governments of both nations have a right, and that of yours has exercised it as to us, of considering the character of the person appointed; the place for which he is appointed, and other material circumstances; and of taking precautions as to his conduct, if necessary; and this does not defeat the general object of the convention, which, in stipulating that consuls shall be permitted on both sides, could not mean to supersede reasonable objections to particular persons, who might at the moment be obnoxious to the nation to which they were sent, or whose conduct might render them so at any time after. In fact, every foreign agent depends on the double will of the two governments, of that which sends him, and of that which is to permit the exercise of his functions within their territory; and when either of these wills is refused or withdrawn, his authority to act within that territory becomes incomplete. By what member of the government the right of giving or withdrawing permission is to be exercised here, is a question on which no foreign agent can be permitted to make himself the umpire. It is sufficient for him, under our government, that he is informed of it by the executive.

On an examination of the commissions from your nation, among our records, I find that before the late change in the form of our government, foreign agents were addressed sometimes to the United States, and sometimes to the Congress of the United States, that body being then executive as well as legislative. Thus the commissions of Messrs. L'Etombe, Holker, Daunemanis, Marbois, Creve-coeur, and Chateaufort, have all this clause: "Prions et requerons nos tres chers et grands amis et allies, les Etat Unis de l'Amerique septentrionale, leurs gouverneurs, et autres officiers, &c. de laisser jouir, &c. le dit sieur, &c. de la charge de notre consul," &c. On the change in the form of our government, foreign nations, not undertaking to decide to what member of the new government their agents should be addressed, ceased to do it to Congress, and adopted the general address to the United States, before cited. This was done by the government of your own nation, as appears by the commissions of Messrs. Mangourit and La Forest, which have in them the clause before cited. So your own commission was, not as M. Gerond's and Luzerne's had been, "a nos tres chers, &c. le President et membres du Congres general des Etats Unis," &c., but "a nos tres chers, &c. les Etats Unis de l'Amerique," &c. Under this general address, the proper member of the government was included, and could take it up. When, therefore, it was seen in the commission of Messrs. Dupont and Hauterieve, that your executive had returned to the ancient address to Congress, it was conceived to be an inattention, insomuch that I do not recollect (and I do not think it material enough to inquire) whether I noticed it to you either verbally or by letter. When that of M. Dannery was presented with the like address, being obliged to notice to you an inaccuracy of another kind, I then mentioned that of the address, not calling it an _innovation_, but expressing my satisfaction, which is still entire, that it was not from any design in your Executive Council. The Exequatur was therefore sent. That they will not consider our notice of it as an innovation, we are perfectly secure. No government can disregard formalities more than ours. But when formalities are attacked with a view to change principles, and to introduce an entire independence of foreign agents on the nation with whom they reside, it becomes material to defend formalities. They would be no longer trifles, if they could, in defiance of the national will, continue a foreign agent among us whatever might be his course of action. Continuing, therefore, the refusal to receive any commission from _yourself_, addressed to an improper member of the government, you are left free to use either the general one to the United States, as in the commissions of Messrs. Mangourit and La Forest, before cited, or the special one, to the President of the United States.

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

TO THE PRESIDENT.

December 11, 1793.

The President doubtless recollects the communications of Mr. Ternant expressing the dissatisfaction of the Executive Council of France with Mr. Morris, our Minister there, which, however, Mr. Ternant desired might be considered as informal; that Col. Smith also mentioned that dissatisfaction, and that Mr. Le Brun told him he would charge Mr. Genet expressly with their representations on this subject; and that all further consideration thereon lay over therefore for Mr. Genet's representations.

Mr. Genet, some time after his arrival (I cannot now recollect how long, but I think it was a month or more), coming to my house in the country one evening, joined me in a walk near the river. Our conversation was on various topics, and not at all of an official complexion. As we were returning to the house, being then I suppose on some subject relative to his country (though really I do not recall to mind what it was), he turned about to me, just in the passage of the gate, and said, "but I must tell you, we all depend on you to send us a good minister there, with whom we may do business confidentially, in the place of Mr. Morris." These are perhaps not the identical words, yet I believe they are nearly so; I am sure they are the substance, and he scarcely employed more in the expression. It was unexpected, and, to avoid the necessity of an extempore answer, I instantly said something resuming the preceding thread of conversation, which went on, and no more was said about Mr. Morris. From this, I took it for granted, he meant now to come forth formally with complaints against Mr. Morris, as we had been given to expect, and therefore I mentioned nothing of this little expression to the President. Time slipped along; I expecting his complaints, and he not making them. It was undoubtedly his office to bring forward his own business himself, and not at all mine, to hasten or call for it; and if it was not my duty, I could not be without reasons for not taking it on myself officiously. He at length went to New York, to wit, about the * * * * * of * * * * * without having done anything formally on this subject. I now became uneasy lest he should consider the little sentence he had uttered to me as effectually, though not regularly, a complaint; but the more I reflected on the subject, the more impossible it seemed that he could have viewed it as such; and the rather, because, if he had, he would naturally have asked from time to time, "Well, what are you doing with my complaint with Mr. Morris?" or some question equivalent. But he never did. It is possible I may, at other times, have heard him speak unfavorably of Mr. Morris, though I do not recollect any particular occasion; but I am sure he never made to me any proposition to have him recalled. I believe I mentioned this matter to Mr. Randolph before I left Philadelphia: I know I did after my return; but I did not to the President till the receipt of Mr. Genet's letter of September 30, which, from some unaccountable delay of the post, never came to me in Virginia, though I remained there till October 25 (and received there three subsequent mails), and it never reached me in Philadelphia, till December 2.

The preceding is the state of this matter, as nearly as I can recollect it at this time, and I am sure it is not materially inaccurate in any point.

TO MR. CHURCH.

PHILADELPHIA, December 11, 1793.

SIR,--The President has received your letter of August 16, with its enclosures. It was with deep concern that he learnt the unhappy fortunes of M. de La Fayette, and that he still learns his continuance under them. His friendship for him could not fail to impress him with the desire of relieving him, and he was sure that in endeavoring to do this, he should gratify the sincere attachments of his fellow citizens. He has accordingly employed such means as appeared the most likely to effect his purpose; though, under the existing circumstances, he could not be sanguine in their obtaining very immediately the desired effect. Conscious, however, that his anxieties for the sufferer flow from no motives unfriendly to those who feel an interest in his confinement, he indulges their continuance, and will not relinquish the hope that the reasons for this security will at length yield to those of a more benign character.

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

TO MR. HAMMOND, MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY OF GREAT BRITAIN.

PHILADELPHIA, December 15, 1793.

SIR,--I am to acknowledge the honor of your letter of November 30th, and to express the satisfaction with which we learn, that you are instructed to discuss with us the measures, which reason and practicability may dictate, for giving effect to the stipulations of our treaty, yet remaining to be executed. I can assure you, on the part of the United States, of every disposition to lessen difficulties, by passing over whatever is of smaller concern, and insisting on those matters only, which either justice to individuals or public policy render indispensable; and in order to simplify our discussions, by defining precisely their objects, I have the honor to propose that we shall begin by specifying, on each side, the particular acts which each considers to have been done by the other, in contravention of the treaty. I shall set the example.

The provisional and definitive treaties, in their 7th article, stipulated that his "Britannic Majesty should, with all convenient speed, and without causing any destruction, or _carrying away any negroes, or other property_, of the American inhabitants, _withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets, from the said United States_, and from every port, place, and harbor, within the same."

But the British garrisons were not withdrawn with all convenient speed, nor have ever yet been withdrawn from Machilimackinac, on Lake Michigan; Detroit, on the strait of Lakes Erie and Huron; Fort Erie, on Lake Erie; Niagara, Oswego, on Lake Ontario; Oswegatchie, on the river St. Lawrence; Point Au-fer, and Dutchman's Point, on Lake Champlain.

2d. The British officers have undertaken to exercise a jurisdiction over the country and inhabitants in the vicinities of those forts; and

3d. They have excluded the citizens of the United States from navigating, even on our side of the middle line of the rivers and lakes established as a boundary between the two nations.

By these proceedings, we have been intercepted entirely from the commerce of furs with the Indian nations, to the northward--a commerce which had ever been of great importance to the United States, not only for its intrinsic value, but as it was the means of cherishing peace with those Indians, and of superseding the necessity of that expensive warfare we have been obliged to carry on with them, during the time that these posts have been in other hands.

On withdrawing the troops from New York, 1st. A large embarkation of negroes, of the property of the inhabitants of the United States, took place before the commissioners on our part, for inspecting and superintending embarkations, had arrived there, and without any account ever rendered thereof. 2d. Near three thousand others were publicly carried away by the avowed order of the British commanding officer, and under the view, and against the remonstrances of our commissioners. 3d. A very great number were carried off in private vessels, if not by the express permission, yet certainly without opposition on the part of the commanding officer, who alone had the means of preventing it, and without admitting the inspection of the American commissioners; and 4th. Of other species of property carried away, the commanding officer permitted no examination at all. In support of these facts, I have the honor to enclose you documents, a list of which will be subjoined, and in addition to them, I beg leave to refer to a roll signed by the joint commissioners, and delivered to your commanding officer for transmission to his court, containing a description of the negroes publicly carried away by his order as before mentioned, with a copy of which you have doubtless been furnished.

A difference of opinion, too, having arisen as to the river intended by the plenipotentiaries to be the boundary between us and the dominions of Great Britain, and by them called the St Croix, which name, it seems, is given to two different rivers, the ascertaining of this point becomes a matter of present urgency; it has heretofore been the subject of application from us to the Government of Great Britain.

There are other smaller matters between the two nations, which remain to be adjusted, but I think it would be better to refer these for settlement through the ordinary channel of our ministers, than to embarrass the present important discussions with them; they can never be obstacles to friendship and harmony.

Permit me now, sir, to ask from you a specification of the particular acts, which, being considered by his Britannic Majesty as a non-compliance on our part with the engagement contained in the 4th, 5th, and 6th articles of the treaty, induced him to suspend the execution of the 7th, and render a separate discussion of them inadmissible. And accept assurances, &c.

TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES.

PHILADELPHIA, December 18, 1793.

SIR,--The Minister Plenipotentiary of France has enclosed to me a copy of a letter of the 16th instant, which he addressed to you, stating that some libellous publications had been made against him by Mr. Jay, Chief Justice of the United States, and Mr. King, one of the Senators for the State of New York, and desiring that they might be prosecuted. This letter has been laid before the President, according to the request of the minister; and the President, never doubting your readiness on all occasions to perform the functions of your office, yet thinks it incumbent on him to recommend it specially on the present occasion, as it concerns a public character peculiarly entitled to the protection of the laws. On the other hand, as our citizens ought not to be vexed with groundless prosecutions, duty to them requires it to be added, that if you judge the prosecution in question to be of that nature, you consider this recommendation as not extending to it; its only object being to engage you to proceed in this case according to the duties of your office, the laws of the land, and the privileges of the parties concerned.

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

TO THE GOVERNOR OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

PHILADELPHIA, December 23, 1793.

SIR,--It is my duty to communicate to you a piece of information, although I cannot say I have confidence in it myself. A French gentleman, one of the refugees from St. Domingo, informs me that two Frenchmen, from St. Domingo also, of the names of Castaing and La Chaise, are about setting out from this place for Charleston, with a design to excite an insurrection among the negroes. He says that this is in execution of a general plan, formed by the Brissotine party at Paris, the first branch of which has been carried into execution at St. Domingo. My informant is a person with whom I am well acquainted, of good sense, discretion and truth, and certainly believes this himself. I inquired of him the channel of his information. He told me it was one which had given them many pre-admonitions in St. Domingo, and which had never been found to be mistaken. He explained it to me; but I could by no means consider it as a channel meriting reliance; and when I questioned him what could be the impulse of these men, what their authority, what their means of execution, and what they could expect in result; he answered with conjectures which were far from sufficient to strengthen the fact. However, were anything to happen, I should deem myself inexcusable not to have made the communication. Your judgment will decide whether injury might not be done by making the suggestion public, or whether it ought to have any other effect than to excite attention to these two persons, should they come into South Carolina. Castaing is described as a small dark mulatto, and La Chaise as a Quarteron, of a tall fine figure.

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

TO DR. EDWARDS.

PHILADELPHIA, December 30, 1793.

DEAR SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your two favors of July 30th and August 16th, and thank you for the information they contained. We have now assembled a new Congress, being a fuller and more equal representation of the people, and likely, I think, to approach nearer to the sentiments of the people in the demonstration of their own. They have the advantage of a very full communication from the Executive of the ground on which we stand with foreign nations. Some very unpleasant transactions have taken place here with Mr. Genet, of which the world will judge, as the correspondence is now in the press; as is also that with Mr. Hammond on our points of difference with his nation. Of these you will doubtless receive copies. Had they been out yet, I should have had the pleasure of sending them to you; but to-morrow I resign my office, and two days after set out for Virginia, where I hope to spend the remainder of my days in occupations infinitely more pleasing than those to which I have sacrificed eighteen years of the prime of my life; I might rather say twenty-four of them. Our campaign with the Indians has been lost by an unsuccessful effort to effect peace by treaty, which they protracted till the season for action was over. The attack brought on us from the Algerines is a ray from the same centre. I believe we shall endeavor to do ourselves justice in a peaceable and rightful way. We wish to have nothing to do in the present war; but if it is to be forced upon us, I am happy to see in the countenances of all but our paper men a mind ready made up to meet it, unwillingly, indeed, but perfectly without fear. No nation has strove more than we have done to merit the peace of all by the most rigorous impartiality to all. Sir John Sinclair's queries shall be answered from my retirement. I am, with great esteem, dear Sir, your most obedient servant.

TO MR. GENET.

PHILADELPHIA, December 31, 1793.

SIR,--I have laid before the President of the United States your letter of the 20th instant, accompanying translations of the instructions given you by the Executive Council of France to be distributed among the members of Congress, desiring that the President will lay them officially before both houses, and proposing to transmit successively other papers, to be laid before them in like manner; and I have it in charge to observe, that your functions as the missionary of a foreign nation here, are confined to the transactions of the affairs of your nation with the Executive of the United States; that the communications, which are to pass between the Executive and Legislative branches, cannot be a subject for your interference, and that the President must be left to judge for himself what matters his duty or the public good may require him to propose to the deliberations of Congress. I have therefore the honor of returning you the copies sent for distribution, and of being, with great respect, Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

PHILADELPHIA, December 31, 1793.

DEAR SIR,--Having had the honor of communicating to you in my letter of the last of July, my purpose of returning from the office of Secretary of State, at the end of the month of September, you were pleased, for particular reasons, to wish its postponement to the close of the year. That term being now arrived, and my propensities to retirement becoming daily more and more irresistible, I now take the liberty of resigning the office into your hands. Be pleased to accept with it my sincere thanks for all the indulgences which you have been so good as to exercise towards me in the discharge of its duties. Conscious that my need of them has been great, I have still ever found them greater, without any other claim on my part, than a firm pursuit of what has appeared to me to be right, and a thorough disdain of all means which were not as open and honorable, as their object was pure. I carry into my retirement a lively sense of your goodness, and shall continue gratefully to remember it. With very sincere prayers for your life, health and tranquillity, I pray you to accept the homage of the great and constant respect and attachment with which I have the honor to be, dear Sir, your most obedient, and most humble servant.

TO E. RANDOLPH.

MONTICELLO, February 3, 1794.

DEAR SIR,--I have to thank you for the transmission of the letters from General Gates, La Motte, and Hauterieve. I perceive by the latter, that the partisans of the one or the other principle (perhaps of both) have thought my name a convenient cover for declarations of their own sentiments. What those are to which Hauterieve alludes, I know not, having never seen a newspaper since I left Philadelphia (except those of Richmond), and no circumstances authorize him to expect that I should inquire into them, or answer him. I think it is Montaigne who has said, that ignorance is the softest pillow on which a man can rest his head. I am sure it is true as to everything political, and shall endeavor to estrange myself to everything of that character. I indulge myself on one political topic only, that is, in declaring to my countrymen the shameless corruption of a portion of the Representatives to the first and second Congresses, and their implicit devotion to the treasury. I think I do good in this, because it may produce exertions to reform the evil, on the success of which the form of the government is to depend.

I am sorry La Motte has put me to the expense of one hundred and forty livres for a French translation of an English poem, as I make it a rule never to read translations where I can read the original. However, the question now is, how to get the book brought here, as well as the communications with Mr. Hammond, which you were so kind as to promise me.

* * * * *

This is the first letter I have written to Philadelphia since my arrival at home, and yours the only ones I have received.

Accept assurances of my sincere esteem and respect. Yours affectionately.

TO JAMES MADISON.

MONTICELLO, April 3, 1794.