The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 3 (of 9)

TO MR. RANDOLPH

    Philadelphia, June 2, 1793.

Dear Sir,—I have to acknowledge the receipt of yours of May 16th, with the information always pleasing of your being all well. In addition to the news which you will see in the papers, we now have the certainty of Dumourier's operation. He had proposed an armistice to the Prince of Saxe Cobourg, which was agreed to on condition of his withdrawing his troops from the Netherlands. He did so; it was then agreed that he should march with his army (on whom he thought he could rely) to Paris, and re-establish the constitution of 1791. On which Cobourg stipulated peace on the part of the Emperor and K. of Prussia. Dumourier's army knew nothing of this. He made them believe the deputies sent from the National Assembly were to arrest and carry him to Paris to be tried for his defeat of the 18th to the 22d of March. They considered this as an injury to themselves, and really loved and confided in him. They set out with him, but very soon began to suspect his purpose was to overset the republic, and set up a king. They began to drop off in parties, and at length in a body refused to go further. On this he fled with two regiments of horse, mostly foreigners, to the Austrians. His Saxe Cobourg's address to the French nation prove all this. Hostilities recommenced; and the combiners have determined not to attempt to march to Paris, as the last year, but to take all the strong places on the frontier. This will at least give time to the republic. The first thing to be feared for them is famine. This will infallibly produce anarchy. Indeed, that joined to a draught of soldiers, has already produced some serious insurrections. It is still a comfort to see by the address of Dumourier and Saxe Cobourg that the constitution of 1791 is the worst thing which is to be forced on the French. But even the falling back to that would give wonderful vigor to our monocrats, and unquestionably affect the tone of administering our government. Indeed, I fear that if this summer should prove disastrous to the French, it will damp that energy of republicanism in our new Congress, from which I had hoped so much reformation. We have had here for a considerable time past true winter weather, quite cold enough for white frost. Though that accident has not happened, fires are still kept up, having been intermitted only for short intervals of very hot weather. I have not yet received my model of the threshing mill. I wish it may come in time for the present crop; after so mild a winter as the last we must expect weavil. My love to my dear Martha, and kiss the little ones for me. Adieu my dear Sir. Yours with constant affection.

MR. GENET, MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY OF FRANCE

    Philadelphia, June 5, 1793.

Sir,—In my letter of May the 15th, to M. de Ternant, your predecessor, after stating the answer which had been given to the several memorials of the British minister, of May the 8th, it was observed that a part still remained unanswered of that which respected the fitting out of armed vessels in Charleston, to cruise against nations with whom we were at peace.

In a conversation which I had afterwards the honor of holding with you, I observed that one of those armed vessels, the citizen Genet, had come into this port with a prize; that the President had thereupon taken the case into further consideration, and after mature consultation and deliberation, was of opinion, that the arming and equipping vessels in the ports of the United States to cruise against nations with whom they are at peace, was incompatible with the territorial sovereignty of the United States; that it made them instrumental to the annoyance of those nations, and thereby tended to compromit their peace; and that he thought it necessary as an evidence of good faith to them, as well as a proper reparation to the sovereignty of the country, that the armed vessels of this description should depart from the ports of the United States.

The letter of the 27th instant, with which you have honored me, has been laid before the President, and that part of it which contains your observations on this subject has been particularly attended to. The respect due to whatever comes from you, friendship for the French nation, and justice to all, have induced him to re-examine the subject, and particularly to give your representations thereon, the consideration they deservedly claim. After fully weighing again, however, all the principles and circumstances of the case, the result appears still to be, that it is the right of every nation to prohibit acts of sovereignty from being exercised by any other within its limits; and the duty of a neutral nation to prohibit such as would injure one of the warring powers; that the granting military commissions within the United States by any other authority than their own, it is an infringement on their sovereignty, and particularly so when granted to their own citizens to lead them to acts contrary to the duties they owe their own country; that the departure of vessels thus illegally equipped from the ports of the United States, will be but an acknowledgment of respect analogous to the breach of it, while it is necessary on their part, as an evidence of their faithful neutrality. On these considerations, Sir, the President thinks that the United States owe it to themselves and to the nations in their friendship, to expect this act of reparation on the part of vessels, marked in their very equipment with offence to the laws of the land, of which the laws of nations makes an integral part.

The expressions of friendly sentiments which we have already had the satisfaction of receiving from you, leave no room to doubt that the conclusion of the President being thus made known to you, these vessels will be permitted to give no further umbrage by their presence in the ports of the United States.

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

TO MR. HAMMOND

    Philadelphia, June 5, 1793.

Sir,—In the letter which I had the honor of writing you on the 15th of May, in answer to your several memorials of the 8th of that month, I mentioned that the President reserved for further consideration, a part of the one which related to the equipment of two privateers in the port of Charleston. The part alluded to, was that wherein you express your confidence that the executive government of the United States would pursue measures for repressing such practices in future, and for restoring to their rightful owners any captures, which such privateers might bring into the ports of the United States.

The President, after a full investigation of this subject and the most mature consideration, has charged me to communicate to you, that the first part of this application is found to be just, and that effectual measures are taken for preventing repetitions of the act therein complained of; but that the latter part, desiring restitution of the prizes, is understood to be inconsistent with the rules which govern such cases, and would, therefore, be unjustifiable towards the other party.

The principal agents in this transaction were French citizens. Being within the United States at the moment a war broke out between their own and another country, they determine to go into its defence; they purchase, they arm and equip a vessel with their own money, man it themselves, receive a regular commission from their nation, depart out of the United States, and then commence hostilities by capturing a vessel. If, under these circumstances, the commission of the captors was valid, the property, according to the laws of war, was by the capture transferred to them, and it would be an aggression on their nation, for the United States to rescue it from them, whether on the high seas or on coming into their ports. If the commission was not valid, and, consequently, the property not transferred by the laws of war to the captors, then the case would have been cognizable in our courts of admiralty, and the owners might have gone thither for redress. So that on neither supposition, would the executive be justifiable in interposing.

With respect to the United States, the transaction can be in nowise imputed to them. It was the first moment of the war, in one of their most distant ports, before measures could be provided by the government to meet all the cases which such a state of things was to produce, impossible to have been known, and therefore, impossible to have been prevented by that government.

The moment it was known, the most energetic orders were sent to every State and port of the Union, to prevent a repetition of the accident. On a suggestion that citizens of the United States had taken part in the act, one, who was designated, was instantly committed to prison, for prosecution; one or two others have been since named, and committed in like manner; and should it appear that there were still others, no measures will be spared to bring them to justice. The President has even gone further. He has required, as a reparation of their breach of respect to the United States, that the vessels so armed and equipped, shall depart from our ports.

You will see, Sir, in these proceedings of the President, unequivocal proofs of the line of strict right which he means to pursue. The measures now mentioned, are taken in justice to the one party; the ulterior measure, of seizing and restoring the prizes, is declined in justice to the other; and the evil, thus early arrested, will be of very limited effects; perhaps, indeed, soon disappear altogether.

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

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

    June 6, 1793.

I cannot but think that to decline the propositions of Mr. Genet on the subject of our debt, without assigning any reason at all, would have a very dry and unpleasant aspect indeed. We are then to examine what are our good reasons for the refusal, which of them maybe spoken out, and which may not. 1st. Want of confidence in the continuance of the present form of government, and consequently that advances to them might commit us with their successors. This cannot be spoken out. 2d. Since they propose to take the debt in produce, it would be better for us that it should be done in moderate masses yearly, than all in one year. This cannot be professed. 3d. When M. de Calonne was Minister of Finance, a Dutch company proposed to buy up the whole of our debt, by dividing it into actions or shares. I think Mr. Claviere, now Minister of Finance, was their agent. It was observed to M. de Calonne, that to create such a mass of American paper, divide it into shares, and let them deluge the market, would depreciate the rest of our paper, and our credit in general; that the credit of a nation was a delicate and important thing, and should not be risked on such an operation. M. de Calonne, sensible of the injury of the operation to us, declined it. In May, 1791, there came, through Mr. Otto, a similar proposition from Schweizer, Jeanneret &Co. We had a communication on the subject from Mr. Short, urging this same reason strongly. It was referred to the Secretary of the Treasury, who, in a letter to yourself, assigned the reasons against it, and these were communicated to Mr. Otto, who acquiesced in them. This objection, then, having been sufficient to decline the proposition twice before, and having been urged to the two preceding forms of government (the ancient and that of 1791), will not be considered as founded in objections to the present form. 4th. The law allows the whole debt to be paid only on condition it can be done on terms advantageous to the United States. The minister foresees this objection, and thinks he answers it by observing the advantage which the payment in produce will occasion. It would be easy to show that this was not the sort of advantage the Legislature meant, but a lower rate of interest. 5th. I cannot but suppose that the Secretary of the Treasury, being much more familiar than I am with the money operations of the Treasury, would, on examination, be able to derive practical objections from them. We pay to France but five per cent. The people of this country would never subscribe their money for less than six. If, to remedy this, obligations at less than five per cent. were offered, and accepted by Genet, he must part with them immediately, at a considerable discount, to indemnify the loss of the one per cent., and at still greater discount to bring them down to par with our present six per cent., so that the operation would be equally disgraceful to us and losing to them, &c., &c.

I think it very material myself to keep alive the friendly sentiments of that country, as far as can be done without risking war or double payment. If the instalments falling due this year can be advanced, without incurring those dangers, I should be for doing it. We now see by the declaration of the Prince of Saxe Cobourg, on the part of Austria and Prussia, that the ultimate point they desire is to restore the constitution of 1791. Were this even to be done before the pay days of this year, there is no doubt in my mind but that that government (as republican as the present, except in the form of its Executive) would confirm an advance so moderate in sum and time. I am sure the nation of France would never suffer their government to go to war with us for such a bagatelle, and the more surely if that bagatelle shall have been granted by us so as to please and not to displease the nation; so as to keep their affections engaged on our side. So that I should have no fear in advancing the instalments of this year at epochs convenient to the Treasury. But at any rate should be for assigning reasons for not changing the form of the debt. These thoughts are very hastily thrown on paper, as will be but too evident.

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

TO JAMES MADISON

    June 9, 1793.

I have to acknowledge the receipt of your two favors of May 27th and 29th, since the date of my last which was of the 2d instant. In that of the 27th you say you must not make your final exit from public life till it will be marked with justifying circumstances which all good citizens will respect, and to which your friends can appeal. To my fellow-citizens the debt of service has been fully and faithfully paid. I acknowledge that such a debt exists, that a tour of duty, in whatever line he can be most useful to his country, is due from every individual. It is not easy perhaps to say of what length exactly this tour should be, but we may safely say of what length it should not be. Not of our whole life, for instance, for that would be to be born a slave—not even of a very large portion of it. I have now been in the public service four and twenty years; one half of which has been spent in total occupation with their affairs, and absence from my own. I have served my tour then. No positive engagement, by word or deed, binds me to their further service. No commitment of their interests in any enterprise by me requires that I should see them through it. I am pledged by no act which gives any tribunal a call upon me before I withdraw. Even my enemies do not pretend this. I stand clear then of public right on all points—my friends I have not committed. No circumstances have attended my passage from office to office, which could lead them, and others through them, into deception as to the time I might remain, and particularly they and all have known with what reluctance I engaged and have continued in the present one, and of my uniform determination to return from it at an early day. If the public then has no claim on me, and my friends nothing to justify, the decision will rest on my own feelings alone. There has been a time when these were very different from what they are now; when perhaps the esteem of the world was of higher value in my eye than everything in it. But age, experience and reflection preserving to that only its due value, have set a higher on tranquillity. The motion of my blood no longer keeps time with the tumult of the world. It leads me to seek for happiness in the lap and love of my family, in the society of my neighbors and my books, in the wholesome occupations of my farm and my affairs, in an interest or affection in every bud that opens, in every breath that blows around me, in an entire freedom of rest, of motion, of thought, owing account to myself alone of my hours and actions. What must be the principle of that calculation which should balance against these the circumstances of my present existence—worn down with labors from morning to night, and day to day; knowing them as fruitless to others as they are vexatious to myself, committed singly in desperate and eternal contest against a host who are systematically undermining the public liberty and prosperity, even the rare hours of relaxation sacrificed to the society of persons in the same intentions, of whose hatred I am conscious even in those moments of conviviality when the heart wishes most to open itself to the effusions of friendship and confidence, cut off from my family and friends, my affairs abandoned to chaos and derangement, in short, giving everything I love in exchange for everything I hate, and all this without a single gratification in possession or prospect, in present enjoyment or future wish. Indeed, my dear friend, duty being out of the question, inclination cuts off all argument, and so never let there be more between you and me, on this subject.

I enclose you some papers which have passed on the subject of a new town. You will see by them that the paper Coryphæus is either undaunted or desperate. I believe that the statement enclosed has secured a decision against his proposition. I dined yesterday in a company where Morris and Bingham were, and happened to sit between them. In the course of a conversation after dinner, Morris made one of his warm declarations that after the expiration of his present senatorial term, nothing on earth should ever engage him to serve again in any public capacity. He did this with such solemnity as renders it impossible he should not be in earnest. The President is not well. Little lingering fevers have been hanging about him for a week or ten days, and affected his looks most remarkably. He is also extremely affected by the attacks made and kept up on him in the public papers. I think he feels those things more than any person I ever yet met with. I am sincerely sorry to see them. I remember an observation of yours, made when I first went to New York, that the satellites and sycophants which surrounded him had wound up the ceremonials of the government to a pitch of stateliness which nothing but his personal character could have supported, and which no character after him could ever maintain. It appears now that even his will be insufficient to justify them in the appeal of the times to common sense as the arbiter of everything. Naked he would have been sanctimoniously reverenced; but enveloped in the rags of royalty, they can hardly be torn off without laceration. It is the more unfortunate that this attack is planted on popular ground, on the love of the people to France and its cause, which is universal. Genet mentions freely enough in conversation that France does not wish to involve us in the war by our guarantee. The information from St. Domingo and Martinique is, that those two islands are disposed and able to resist any attack which Great Britain can make on them by land. A blockade would be dangerous, could it be maintained in that climate for any length of time. I delivered to Genet your letter to Roland. As the latter is out of office, he will direct it to the minister of the Interior. I found every syllable of it strictly proper. Your ploughs shall be duly attended to. Have you ever taken notice of Tull's horse-houghing plough? I am persuaded that where you wish your work to be very exact, and our great plough where a less degree will suffice, leave us nothing to wish for from other countries as to ploughs, under our circumstances. I have not yet received my threshing machine. I fear the late, long, and heavy rains must have extended to us, and effected our wheat. Adieu. Yours affectionately.

TO GOUVERNEUR MORRIS

    Philadelphia, June 13, 1793.

Dear Sir,—The insulated state in which France is placed with respect to almost all the world, by the present war, has cut off all means of addressing letters to you through other countries. I embrace the present occasion by a private individual going to France directly, to mention, that since the date of my last public letter, which was April the 24th, and which covered the President's proclamation of April, I have received your Nos. 17 to 24. M. de Ternant notified us of his recall on the 17th of May, and delivered the letter of the Provisory Executive Council to that effect. I now enclose you the President's answer to the Council, which you will be pleased to deliver; a copy of it is also enclosed, open, for your information. Mr. Genet delivered his credentials on the same day on which M. de Ternant took his leave, and was received by the President. He found himself immediately immersed in business, the consequence of this war. The incidents to which that gives daily rise, and the questions respecting chiefly France and England, fills the executive with business, equally delicate, difficult and disagreeable. The course intended to be pursued being that of a strict and impartial neutrality, decisions rendered by the President rigorously on that principle, dissatisfy both parties, and draw complaints from both. That you may have a proper idea of them, I enclose you copies of several memorials and letters, which have passed between the executive and the ministers of those two countries, which will at the same time develop the principles of the proceedings, and enable you to satisfy them in your communications, should it be necessary. I enclose also the answer given to Mr. Genet, on a proposition from him to pay up the whole of the French debt at once. While it will enable you to explain the impracticability of the operation proposed, it may put it in your power to judge of the answer which would be given to any future proposition to that effect, and perhaps to prevent their being brought forward. The bill lately passed in England, prohibiting the business of this country with France from passing through the medium of England, is a temporary embarrassment to our commerce, from the unhappy predicament of its all hanging on the pivot of London. It will be happy for us, should it be continued till our merchants may establish connections in the countries in which our produce is consumed, and to which it should go directly.

Our commissioners have proceeded to the treaty with the northwestern Indians. They write, however, that the treaty will be a month later than was expected. This delay, should it be extended, will endanger our losing the benefit of our preparations for the campaign, and consequently bring on a delicate question, whether these shall be relinquished for the result of a treaty in which we never had any confidence? The Creeks have proceeded in their depredations till they assume the appearance of formal war. It scarcely seems possible to avoid its becoming so. They are so strong and so far from us, as to make very serious addition to our Indian difficulties. It is very probable that some of the circumstances arising out of our affairs with the Indians, or with the belligerent powers of Europe, may occasion the convocation of Congress at an earlier day than that to which its meeting stands at present.

I send you the forms of the passports given here. The one in three columns is that now used; the other having been soon discontinued. It is determined that they shall be given in our own ports only, and to serve but for one voyage. It has also been determined, that they shall be given to all vessels bona fide owned by American citizens wholly, whether built here or not. Our property, whether in the form of vessels, cargoes, or anything else, has a right to pass the seas untouched by any nation, by the law of nations; and no one has a right to ask where a vessel was built, but where is she owned? To the security which the law of nations gives to such vessels against all nations, are added particular stipulations with three of the belligerent powers. Had it not been in our power to enlarge our national stock of shipping suddenly in the present exigency, a great proportion of our produce must have remained on our hands for want of the means of transportation to market. At this time, indeed, a great proportion is in that predicament. The most rigorous measures will be taken to prevent any vessel, not wholly and bona fide owned by American citizens, from obtaining our passports. It is much our interest to prevent the competition of other nations from taking from us the benefits we have a right to expect from the neutrality of our flag; and I think we may be very sure that few, if any, will be fraudulently obtained within our ports.

Though our spring has been cold and wet, yet the crops of small grain are as promising as they have ever been seen. The Hessian fly, however, to the north, and the weavil to the south of the Potomac, will probably abridge the quantity. Still it seems very doubtful whether we shall not lose more for want of the means of transportation, and I have no doubt that the ships of Sweden and Denmark would find full employment here.

We shall endeavor to get your newspapers under the care of Major Reid, the bearer of this letter.

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

TO MR. PINCKNEY

    Philadelphia, June 14, 1793.

My last letters to you have been of the 7th of May and 4th instant. Since the last date, yours of April the 15th has come to hand.

I enclose you several memorials and letters which have passed between the Executive and the ministers of France and England. These will develop to you the principles on which we are proceeding between the belligerent powers. The decisions being founded in what is conceived to be rigorous justice, give dissatisfaction to both parties, and produce complaints from both. It is our duty, however, to persevere in them, and to meet the consequences. You will observe that Mr. Hammond proposes to refer to his court the determination of the President, that the prizes taken by the Citoyen Genet, could not be given up. The reasons for this are explained in the papers. Mr. Genet had stated that she was manned by French citizens. Mr. Hammond had not stated the contrary before the decision. Neither produced any proofs. It was therefore supposed that she was manned, principally, with French citizens. After the decision, Mr. Hammond denies the fact, but without producing any proof. I am really unable to say how it was; but I believe it to be certain there were very few Americans. He says, the issuing the commission, &c., by Mr. Genet, within our territory, was an infringement of our sovereignty; therefore, the proceeds of it should be given up to Great Britain. The infringement was a matter between France and us. Had we insisted on any penalty or forfeiture by way of satisfaction to our insulted rights, it would have belonged to us, not to a third party. As between Great Britain and us, considering all the circumstances explained in the papers, we deemed we did enough to satisfy her. We are, moreover, assured, that it is the standing usage of France, perhaps too of other nations in all wars, to lodge blank commissions with all their foreign consuls, to be given to every vessel of their nation, merchant or armed; without which a merchant vessel would be punished as a pirate, were she to take the smallest thing of the enemy that should fall in her way. Indeed, the place of the delivery of a commission is immaterial. As it may be sent by letter to any one, so it may be delivered by hand to him anywhere. The place of signature by the Sovereign is the material thing. Were that to be done in any other jurisdiction than his own, it might draw the validity of the act into question. I mention these things, because I think it would be proper, that after considering them and such other circumstances as appear in the papers, or may occur to yourself, you should make it the subject of a conversation with the minister. Perhaps it may give you an opportunity of touching on another subject. Whenever Mr. Hammond applies to our government on any matter whatever, be it ever so new or difficult, if he does not receive his answer in two or three days or a week, we are goaded with new letters on the subject. Sometimes it is the sailing of the packet, which is made the pretext for forcing us into premature and undigested determinations. You know best how far your applications meet such early attentions, and whether you may with propriety claim a return of them; you can best judge, too, of the expediency of an intimation, that where despatch is not reciprocal, it may be expedient and justifiable that delay should be so.

Our Commissioners have set out for the place of treaty with the North Western Indians. They have learned on their arrival at Niagara that the treaty will be a month later than was expected. Should further procrastination take place, it may wear the appearance of being intended to make us lose the present campaign, for which all our preparations are made. We have had little expectations of any favorable result from the treaty; and whether for such a prospect we should give up a campaign, will be a disagreeable question. The Creeks have proceeded in their depredations and murder till they assume the appearance of unequivocal war. It scarcely seems possible to avoid its becoming so. It is very possible that our affairs with the Indians or with the belligerent powers of Europe, may occasion the convocation of Congress at an earlier day than that to which its meeting stands at present.

Though our spring has been cold and wet, yet the crops of small grain are as promising as could be desired. They will suffer, however, by the Hessian fly to the north and the weavil to the south of the Patowmac.

My letter of the 4th instant was written to go by the Packet, but hearing before its departure that Major Jackson was to go in a few days by a private vessel, it was committed to him, as is also the present letter.

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

TO M. GENET

    Philadelphia, June 17, 1793.

Sir,—I have received and laid before the President your letter of the 14th instant, stating that certain judiciary officers of the United States, contrary to the laws of nations, and the treaties subsisting between France and the United States, had arrested certain vessels and cargoes taken by a French armed vessel and brought into this port, and desiring that the authority of the President might be interposed to restore the prizes with the damages for their detention.

By the laws of this country every individual claiming a right to any article of property, may demand process from a court of justice, and decision on the validity of his claim. This is understood to be the case, which is the subject of your letter. Individuals claiming a right to the prizes, have attached them by process from the Court of Admiralty, which that Court was not free to deny, because justice is to be denied to no man. If, at the hearing of the cause, it shall be found that it is not cognizable before that Court, you may so far rely on its learning and integrity as to be assured it will so pronounce itself. In like manner, if having jurisdiction of the causes, it shall find the rights of the claimants to be null, be assured it will pronounce that nullity, and in either case the property will be restored, but whether with damages or not, the Court alone is to decide. It happens in this particular case that the rule of decision will be not the municipal laws of the United States but the law of nations, and the law maritime, as admitted and practised in all civilized countries, that the same sentence will be pronounced here, that would be pronounced in the Republic of France, or in any other country of Europe; and that if it should be unfavorable to the captors, it will be for reasons understood and acknowledged in your own country, and for the justice of which we might safely appeal to the jurists of your own country. I will add, that if the seizure should be found contrary to the treaties subsisting between France and the United States, the judges will consider these treaties as constituting a conventional law for the two nations, controlling all other laws, and will decree accordingly. The functions of the Executive are not competent to the decision of questions of property between individuals. These are ascribed to the judiciary alone, and when either persons or property are taken into their custody, there is no power in this country that can take them out. You will, therefore, be sensible, Sir, that though the President is not the organ for doing what is just in the present case, it will be effectually done by those to whom the Constitution has ascribed the duty, and be assured that the interests, the rights and the dignity of the French nation will receive within the bosom of the United States all the support which a friendly nation could desire, and a natural one yield.

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

TO MR. GENET