CHAPTER IX. — WASHINGTON SIGNS JAY'S TREATY. 1794-1795.
Congress had adjourned to meet on the 4th of November (1794), but a quorum of the Senate was not present until the 10th. Washington addressed both Houses of Congress in a longer speech than usual, giving, according to the intention he had expressed in his letter to Mr. Jay, already quoted, a particular view of the insurrection in Pennsylvania, and the measures which he had taken in order to suppress it.
As Commander-in-Chief of the militia when called into actual service, he had, he said, visited the places of general rendezvous, to obtain more correct information and to direct a plan for ulterior movements. Had there been reason for supposing that the laws were secure from obstruction, he should have caught with avidity at the opportunity of restoring the militia to their families and homes. But succeeding intelligence had tended to manifest the necessity of what had been done, it being now confessed by those who were not inclined to exaggerate the ill conduct of the insurgents, that their malevolence was not pointed merely to a particular law, but that a spirit inimical to all order had actuated many of the offenders.
After bestowing a high encomium on the alacrity and promptitude with which persons in every station had come forward to assert the dignity of the laws, thereby furnishing an additional proof that they understood the true principles of government and liberty, and felt the value of their inseparable union, he added:
"To every description indeed of citizens let praise be given. But let them persevere in their affectionate vigilance over that precious depository of American happiness—the constitution of the United States. And when, in the calm moments of reflection, they shall have retraced the origin and progress of the insurrection, let them determine whether it has not been fomented by combinations of men, who—careless of consequences and disregarding the unerring truth that those who rouse cannot always appease a civil convulsion—have disseminated, from an ignorance or perversion of facts, suspicions, jealousies, and accusations of the whole government."
Washington could not omit this fair occasion once more to press on Congress a subject which had always been near his heart. After mentioning the defectiveness of the existing system, he said:
"The devising and establishing a well-regulated militia would be a general source of legislative honor and a perfect title to public gratitude. I therefore entertain a hope that the present session will not pass without carrying to its full energy the power of organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and thus providing, in the language of the constitution, for calling them forth to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."
After mentioning the intelligence from the army under the command of General Wayne and the state of Indian affairs, he again called the attention of the House of Representatives to a subject scarcely less interesting than a system of defense against external and internal violence.
"The time," he said, "which has elapsed since the commencement of our fiscal measures has developed our pecuniary resources so as to open the way for a definitive plan for the redemption of the public debt. It is believed that the result is such as to encourage Congress to consummate this work without delay. Nothing can more promote the permanent welfare of the Union, and nothing would be more grateful to our constituents. Indeed, whatever is unfinished of our system of public credit cannot be benefited by procrastination, and, as far as may be practicable, we ought to place that credit on grounds which cannot be disturbed, and to prevent that progressive accumulation of debt which must ultimately endanger all governments."
In alluding to the intercourse of the United States with foreign nations, he said: "It may not be unseasonable to announce that my policy in our foreign transactions has been to cultivate peace with all the world; to observe treaties with pure and inviolate faith; to check every deviation from the line of impartiality; to explain what may have been misapprehended, and correct what may have been injurious to any nation, and having thus acquired the right, to lose no time in acquiring the ability to insist upon justice being done to ourselves."
In the Senate an answer was reported which contained the following clause: "Our anxiety, arising from the licentious and open resistance to the laws in the western counties of Pennsylvania, has been increased by the proceedings of certain self-created societies relative to the laws and administration of the government, proceedings in our apprehension, founded in political error, calculated, if not intended, to disorganize our government, and which, by inspiring delusive hopes of support, have been instrumental in misleading our fellow-citizens in the scene of insurrection."
The address proceeded to express the most decided approbation of the conduct of Washington in relation to the insurgents, and, after noticing the different parts of the speech, concluded with saying:
"At a period so momentous in the affairs of nations the temperate, just, and firm policy that you have pursued in respect to foreign powers, has been eminently calculated to promote the great and essential interest of our country, and has created the fairest title to the public gratitude and thanks."
To this unequivocal approbation of the policy adopted by the executive with regard to foreign nations, no objections were made. The clause respecting democratic societies was seriously opposed, but the party in favor of the administration had been strengthened in the Senate by recent events, and the address reported by the committee was agreed to without alteration.
In the House, Mr. Madison, Mr. Sedgwick, and Mr. Scott were the committee to report an answer to the speech of the President. It was silent, not only with respect to the self-created societies, but also as to the success of General Wayne, and the foreign policy of Washington. His interference with a favorite system of commercial restrictions was not forgotten, and the mission of John Jay still rankled in the memory of the republicans. No direct censure of the societies or approbation of the foreign policy of the President could be carried, and after an animated debate the opposition party triumphed in the House.
This triumph over the administration revived for a moment the drooping energies of these turbulent societies, but it was only for a moment. The agency ascribed to them by the opinion of the public as well as of the President, in producing an insurrection which was generally execrated, had essentially affected them, and while languishing under this wound they received a deadly blow from a quarter whence hostility was least expected. The remnant of the French convention, rendered desperate by the ferocious despotism of the Jacobins, and of the sanguinary tyrant who had become their chief, had at length sought for safety by confronting danger, and, succeeding in a desperate attempt to bring Robespierre to the guillotine, had terminated the reign of terror. The colossal powers of the clubs fell with that of their favorite member, and they sunk into long-merited disgrace. Not more certain is it that the boldest streams must disappear, if the fountain that fed them be emptied, than was the dissolution of the democratic societies in America, when the Jacobin clubs were denounced in France. As if their destinies depended on the same thread the political death of the former was the unerring signal for that of the latter. {1}
Notwithstanding the disagreement between the executive and one branch of the Legislature concerning self-created societies, and the policy observed toward foreign nations, the speech of the President was treated with marked respect, and the several subjects which it recommended engaged the immediate attention of Congress. A bill was passed authorizing the President to station a detachment of militia in the four western counties of Pennsylvania; provision was made to compensate those whose property had been destroyed by the insurgents, should those who had committed the injury be unable to repair it, and an appropriation exceeding $1,100,000 was made to defray the expenses occasioned by the insurrection.
Many of the difficulties which had occurred in drawing out the militia were removed, and a bill was introduced to give greater energy to the militia system generally, but this subject possessed so many intrinsic difficulties that the session passed away without effecting anything respecting it.
A bill for the gradual redemption of the national debt was more successful. The President had repeatedly and earnestly recommended to the Legislature the adoption of measures which might effect this favorite object, but, although that party, which had been reproached with a desire to accumulate debt as a means of subverting the republican system, had uniformly manifested a disposition to carry this recommendation into effect, their desire had hitherto been opposed by obstacles they were unable to surmount. The party in opposition to the government, while professing always a desire to reduce the debt took good care to oppose in detail every proposition having this object in view. While the subject was under discussion Colonel Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, addressed a letter to the House of Representatives, through their speaker, informing them that he had digested and prepared a plan on the basis of the actual revenues, for the further support of public credit, which he was ready to communicate. This comprehensive and valuable report was the last official act of Hamilton.
The penurious provision made for those who filled the high executive departments in the American government, excluded from a long continuance in office all those whose fortunes were moderate and whose professional talents placed a decent independence within their reach. While slandered as the accumulator of thousands by illicit means, Hamilton had wasted in the public service great part of the property acquired by his previous labors, and had found himself compelled to decide on retiring from his political station. The accusations brought against him in the last session of the second Congress had postponed the execution of this design until opportunity should be afforded for a more full investigation of his official conduct, but he informed Washington that, on the close of the session to meet in December, 1793, he should resign his situation in the administration. The events which accumulated about that time, and which were, he said, in a letter to Washington, of a nature to render the continuance of peace in a considerable degree precarious, deferred his meditated retreat. "I do not perceive," he added, "that I could voluntarily quit my post at such a juncture, consistently with considerations either of duty or character, and, therefore, I find myself reluctantly obliged to defer the offer of my resignation."
"But if any circumstances should have taken place in consequence of the intimation of an intention to resign, or should otherwise exist, which serve to render my continuance in office in any degree inconvenient or ineligible, I beg to leave to assure you, sir, that I should yield to them with all the readiness naturally inspired by an impatient desire to relinquish a situation in which even a momentary stay is opposed by the strongest personal and family reasons, and could only be produced by a sense of duty or reputation."
Assurances being given by Washington of the pleasure with which the intelligence that he would continue at his post through the crisis was received; he remained in office until the commencement of the ensuing year. Immediately on his return from the western country, the dangers of domestic insurrection or foreign war having subsided, he gave notice that he should on the last day of January (1795) give in his resignation.
In the esteem and good opinion of Washington, to whom he was best known, Hamilton at all times maintained a high place. While deciding on the mission to England and searching for a person to whom the interesting negotiation with that government should be confided, the mind of the chief magistrate was directed, among others, to him. He carried with him out of office the same cordial esteem for his character and respect for his talents which had induced his appointment.
The vacant office of Secretary of the Treasury was filled by Oliver Wolcott, of Connecticut, a gentleman of sound judgment, who was well versed in its duties. He had served as Comptroller for a considerable time, and in that situation had been eminently useful to the head of the department.
The bill for the gradual reduction of the public debt, on the basis of Hamilton's plan, was resisted in detail through nearly the whole session of Congress, but by the persevering exertions of the Federal party was finally carried, and the system inaugurated by Hamilton became a permanent portion of the financial policy of the country.
On the 3d of March (1795) this important session was ended. Although the party hostile to the administration had obtained a small majority in one branch of the Legislature several circumstances had concurred to give great weight to the recommendations of Washington. Among these may be reckoned the victory obtained by General Wayne and the suppression of the western insurrection. In some points, however, which he had pressed with earnestness, his sentiments did not prevail. One of these was a bill introduced into the Senate for preserving peace with the Indians, by protecting them from the intrusions and incursions of the whites.
General Knox, Secretary of War, like Hamilton, was driven from the service of his country by the scantiness of the compensation allowed him. He resigned at the close of the year 1794. Colonel Pickering, a gentleman who had filled many important offices through the war of the Revolution, who had discharged several trusts of considerable confidence under the present government, and who at the time was Postmaster-General, was appointed to succeed him.
After the rising of Congress, Washington made a short visit to Mount Vernon. He returned to Philadelphia about the 1st of May. Meantime, on the 7th of March (1795) the treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation between the United States and Great Britain, which had been signed by the ministers of the two nations on the 19th of the preceding November, was received.
From his arrival in London, on the 15th of June, 1794, Mr. Jay had been assiduously and unremittingly employed on the arduous duties of his mission. By a deportment respectful, yet firm, mingling a decent deference for the government to which he was deputed with a proper regard, for the dignity of his own, this minister avoided those little asperities which frequently embarrass measures of great concern, and smoothed the way to the adoption of those which were suggested by the real interests of both nations. Many and intricate were the points to be discussed. On some of them an agreement was found to be impracticable, but at length a treaty was concluded, which Mr. Jay declared to be the best that was attainable, and which he believed it for the interests of the United States to accept. Indeed it was scarcely possible to contemplate the evidences of extreme exasperation which were given in America, and the nature of the differences which subsisted between the two countries, without feeling a conviction that war was inevitable, should this attempt to adjust those differences prove unsuccessful.
The constitution had provided that all treaties should be ratified by the Senate, and Washington summoned that body to meet on Monday, the 8th of June, in order to take it into consideration. In the meantime Washington devoted himself to the task of examining its provisions with the utmost care. It was not, in all respects, what he had wished and expected. Many points were omitted which he had desired to be introduced and settled, others were arranged so as to leave room for future misunderstandings between the two nations. But he felt satisfied that Mr. Jay had obtained the best terms in his power, and that this treaty was the best that could have been made under all circumstances. Important privileges were secured, no great national advantages had been sacrificed, nothing detrimental to the national honor had been admitted, and peace was maintained. That the rejection of the treaty would be followed by a calamitous war did not admit of a doubt. In the existing state of Europe a war with Great Britain would have involved the United States in the long-continued agitations of Europe and deprive them of all the advantages of neutrality and undisturbed commerce. Fully aware of all these considerations, Washington determined that if the Senate should ratify the treaty he would give it the sanction of his signature.
On Monday, the 8th of June (1795), the Senate, in conformity with the summons of the President, convened in the Senate chamber, and the treaty, with the documents connected with it, were submitted to their consideration.
On the 24th of June, after a minute and laborious investigation, the Senate, by precisely a constitutional majority, advised and consented to its conditional ratification.
An insuperable objection existed to an article regulating the intercourse with the British West Indies, founded on a fact which is understood to have been unknown to Mr. Jay. The intention of the contracting parties was to admit the direct intercourse between the United States and those islands, but not to permit the productions of the latter to be carried to Europe in the vessels of the former. To give effect to the intention, the exportation from the United States of those articles which were the principal productions of the islands was to be relinquished. Among these was cotton. This article, which a few years before was scarcely raised in sufficient quantity for domestic consumption, was becoming one of the richest staples of the southern States. The Senate, being informed of this act, advised and consented that the treaty should be ratified on condition that an article be added thereto, suspending that part of the twelfth article which related to the intercourse with the West Indies.
This resolution of the Senate presented difficulties which required consideration. Whether they could advise and consent to an article which had not been laid before them, and whether their resolution was to be considered as the final exercise of their power, were questions not entirely free from difficulty. Nor was it absolutely clear that the executive could ratify the treaty, under the advice of the Senate, until the suspending article should be introduced into it. A few days were employed in the removal of these doubts, at the expiration of which, intelligence was received from Europe which suspended the resolution the President had formed.
The English newspapers reported that the British government had renewed the order in council for seizing provisions in neutral vessels bound to French ports. Washington directed the Secretary of State to prepare a strong memorial to the British government against this order, and postponed the signing of the treaty until it should be ready. In the meantime his private affairs required that he should visit Mount Vernon, for which place he set off about the middle of July (1795).
Meanwhile, one of the Virginia senators, S. T. Mason, in violation of the obligation of secrecy and the evident demands of propriety, sent a copy of the treaty to the "Aurora," a violent partisan paper in Philadelphia. On the 2nd of July it was published and spread before the community without the authority of the executive, and without any of the official documents and correspondence necessary to a fair appreciation and understanding of its various provisions.
If, in the existing state of parties and the embittered feelings which widely prevailed, the mission of Jay was censured, and the result of his labors condemned in advance, before it was known at all what the treaty contained, the reader can imagine what an effect must have been produced by the publication of the treaty in this clandestine manner. Great Britain was hated and reviled, and France was almost adored by a large and powerful party in the United States, and there were numbers ready, in their blind political fury and excitement, to sacrifice everything rather than be on any terms of concord with the mother country, and rather than moderate in any degree their passionate devotion to France.
In the populous cities meetings of the people were immediately summoned, in order to take into consideration and to express their opinions respecting the treaty. It may well be supposed that persons feeling some distrust of their capacity to form a correct judgment on a subject so complex, would be unwilling to make so hasty a decision, and consequently be disinclined to attend such meetings. Many intelligent men stood aloof, while the most intemperate assumed, as usual, the name of the people—pronounced a definitive and unqualified condemnation of every article in the treaty, and, with the utmost confidence, assigned reasons for their opinions which, in many instances, had only an imaginary existence, and in some were obviously founded on the strong prejudices which were entertained with respect to foreign powers. It is difficult to review the various resolutions and addresses to which the occasion gave birth without feeling some degree of astonishment, mingled with humiliation, at perceiving such proofs of the fallibility of human reason.
The first meeting was held in Boston. The example of that city was soon followed by New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Charleston, and, as if their addresses were designed at least as much for their fellow-citizens as for their President, while one copy was transmitted to him another was committed to the press. The precedent set by these large cities was followed with wonderful rapidity throughout the Union, and the spirit in which this system of opposition originated sustained no diminution of violence in its progress. The party which supported the administration, however, were not idle; they held meetings and sent addresses to Washington, approving his principles of neutrality and peace. On the 18th of July (1795), at Baltimore, on his way to Mount Vernon, the President received the resolutions passed by the meeting at Boston, which were enclosed to him in a letter from the selectmen of that town. The answer to this letter and to these resolutions, given in a subsequent page, evinced the firmness with which he had resolved to meet the effort that was obviously making to control the exercise of his constitutional functions, by giving a promptness and vigor to the expression of the sentiments of a party which might impose it upon the world as the deliberate judgment of the public.
Addresses to Washington, and resolutions of town and country meetings were not the only means which were employed to enlist the American people against the measure which had been advised by the Senate. In an immense number of essays, the treaty was critically examined and every argument which might operate on the judgment or prejudice of the public was urged in the warm and glowing language of passion. To meet these efforts by counter efforts was deemed indispensably necessary by the friends of that instrument, and the gazettes of the day are replete with appeals to the passions and to the reason of those who are the ultimate arbiters of every political question. That the treaty affected the interests of France not less than those of the United States, was, in this memorable controversy, asserted by the one party with as much zeal as it was denied by the other. These agitations furnished matter to Washington for deep reflection and for serious regret, but they appear not to have shaken the decision he had formed or to have affected his conduct otherwise than to induce a still greater degree of circumspection in the mode of transacting the delicate business before him. On their first appearance, therefore, he resolved to hasten his return to Philadelphia, for the purpose of considering at that place, rather than at Mount Vernon, the memorial against the provision order and the conditional ratification of the treaty.
The following confidential letters are extremely interesting, as evincing the precise state of Washington's mind at this momentous and exciting period:
"To Edmund Randolph, Secretary of State.
"Private.
"MOUNT VERNON, July 29, 1795.
"My Dear Sir.—Your private letters of the 24th and 25th instant have been received, and you will learn by the official letter of this date my determination of returning to Philadelphia after Monday, if nothing in the interim casts up to render it unnecessary.
"I am excited to this resolution by the violent and extraordinary proceedings which have and are about taking place in the northern parts of the Union, and may be expected in the southern; because I think that the Memorial, the Ratification, and the Instructions, which are framing, are of such vast magnitude as not only to require great individual consideration, but a solemn conjunct revision. The latter could not take place if you were to come here, nor would there be that source of information which is to be found at, and is continually flowing to, the seat of government; and, besides, in the course of deliberation on these great objects, the examination of official papers may more than probably be found essential, which could be resorted to at no other place than Philadelphia.
"To leave home so soon will be inconvenient. A month hence it would have been otherwise; and it was, as I hinted to you before I left the city, in contemplation by me for the purpose of Mrs. Washington's remaining here till November, when I intended to come back for her. But whilst I am in office I shall never suffer private convenience to interfere with what I conceive to be my official duty.
"I view the opposition which the treaty is receiving from the meetings in different parts of the Union in a very serious light, not because there is more weight in any of the objections which are made to it than was foreseen at first, for there is none in some of them and gross misrepresentations in others, nor as it respects myself personally, for this shall have no influence on my conduct—plainly perceiving, and I am accordingly preparing my mind for it, the obloquy which disappointment and malice are collecting to heap upon me. But I am alarmed at the effect it may have on and the advantage the French government may be disposed to take of the spirit which is at work to cherish a belief in them, that the treaty is calculated to favor Great Britain at their expense. Whether they believe or disbelieve these tales, the effect it will have upon the nation will be nearly the same; for, whilst they are at war with that power, or so long as the animosity between the two nations exists, it will, no matter at whose expense, be their policy, and it is to be feared will be their conduct, to prevent us from being on good terms with Great Britain, or her from deriving any advantages from our trade, which they can hinder, however much we may be benefited thereby ourselves. To what length this policy and interest may carry them is problematical, but, when they see the people of this country divided, and such a violent opposition given to the measures of their own government, pretendedly in their favor, it may be extremely embarrassing, to say no more of it."
"To sum the whole up in a few words, I have never, since I have been in the administration of the government, seen a crisis which in my judgment has been so pregnant with interesting events, nor one from which more is to be apprehended, whether viewed on one side or the other. From New York there is, and I am told will further be, a counter current, but how formidable it may appear, I know not. If the same does not take place at Boston and other towns, it will afford but too strong evidence that the opposition is in a manner universal, and would make the ratification a very serious business indeed. But, as it respects the French, even counter resolutions would, for the reasons I have already mentioned, do little more than weaken, in a small degree, the effect the other side would have."
"I have written, and do now enclose the letter, the draught of which was approved by the heads of departments, to the selectmen of the town of Boston; but if new lights have been had upon the subject, since it was agreed to, or if upon reconsideration any alteration should be deemed necessary, I request you to detain it until I see you. Let me also request that the same attention may be given to the draught of a letter to Portsmouth and the Chamber of Commerce at New York as was recommended on that occasion. I am, etc."
"To Edmund Randolph, Secretary of State."
"Private."
"Mount Vernon, July 31, 1795.
"My Dear Sir.—On Wednesday evening I sent the packet, now under cover with this, to the post-office in Alexandria, to be forwarded next morning at the usual hour, 4 o'clock, by the Baltimore mail. But, behold! when my letter-bag was brought back from the office and emptied, I not only got those which were addressed to me, among which yours of the 27th was one, but those also which I had sent up the evening before."
"I have to regret this blunder of the postmaster on account of the enclosures, some of which I wished to have got to your hands without delay, that they might have undergone the consideration and acting upon which were suggested in the letter accompanying them. On another account I am not sorry for the return of the packet, as I resolved thereupon and on reading some letters which I received at the same time, to wait your acknowledgment of the receipt of my letter of the 24th instant before I would set out, as I should thereby be placed on a certainty whether your journey hither or mine to Philadelphia would, under all circumstances, be deemed most eligible, or whether the business could not be equally well done without either; repeating now what I did in my letter of the 24th, that I do not require more than a day's notice to repair to the seat of government, and that if you and the confidential officers with you are not clear in the measures which are best to be pursued in the several matters mentioned in my last, my own opinion is, and for the reasons there given, that difficult and intricate or delicate questions had better be settled there, where the streams of information are continually flowing in, and that I would set out accordingly. To be wise and temperate, as well as firm, the present crisis most eminently calls for. There is too much reason to believe, from the pains which have been taken before, at, and since the advice of the Senate respecting the treaty, that the prejudices against it are more extensive than is generally imagined. This I have lately understood to be the case in this quarter, from men who are of no party, but well disposed to the present administration. How should it be otherwise, when no stone has been left unturned that could impress on the minds of the people the most arrant misrepresentation of facts: that their rights have not only been neglected, but absolutely sold; that there are no reciprocal advantages in the treaty; that the benefits are all on the side of Great Britain; and, what seems to have had more weight with them than all the rest, and to have been most pressed, that the treaty is made with the design to oppress the French, in open violation of our treaty with that nation, and contrary, too, to every principle of gratitude and sound policy? In time, when passion shall have yielded to sober reason, the current may possibly turn; but, in the meanwhile, this government, in relation to France and England, may be compared to a ship between the rocks of Scylla and Charybdis. If the treaty is ratified, the partisans of the French, or rather of war and confusion, will excite them to hostile measures, or at least to unfriendly sentiments; if it is not, there is no foreseeing all the consequences which may follow as it respects Great Britain."
"It is not to be inferred from hence that I am disposed to quit the ground I have taken, unless circumstances more imperious than have yet come to my knowledge should compel it, for there is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily. But these things are mentioned to show that a close investigation of the subject is more than ever necessary, and that they are strong evidences of the necessity of the most circumspect conduct in carrying the determination of government into effect, with prudence as it respects our own people, and with every exertion to produce a change for the better from Great Britain."
"The memorial seems well designed to answer the end proposed, and by the time it is revised and new dressed you will probably (either in the resolutions, which are or will be handed to me, or in the newspaper publications, which you promised to be attentive to) have seen all the objections against the treaty which have any real force in them, and which may be fit subjects for representation in the memorial, or in the instructions, or both. But how much longer the presentation of the memorial can be delayed without exciting unpleasant sensations here, or involving serious evils elsewhere, you, who are at the scene of information and action can decide better than I. In a matter, however, so interesting and pregnant with consequences as this treaty, there ought to be no precipitation, but, on the contrary, every step should be explored before it is taken and every word weighed before it is uttered or delivered in writing."
"The form of the ratification requires more diplomatic experience and legal knowledge than I possess or have the means of acquiring at this place, and, therefore, I shall say nothing about it. I am, etc."
The answer to the selectmen of Boston, already referred to, is too characteristic to be omitted. It is as follows:
"To the Selectmen of the Town of Boston."
"United States, July 28, 1795.
"Gentlemen.—In every act of my administration I have sought the happiness of my fellow-citizens. My system for the attainment of this object has uniformly been to overlook all personal, local, and partial considerations; to contemplate the United States as one great whole; to consider that sudden impressions, when erroneous, would yield to candid reflection, and to consult only the substantial and permanent interests of our country. Nor have I departed from this line of conduct on the occasion which has produced the resolutions contained in your letter of the 13th instant."
"Without a predilection for my own judgment, I have weighed with attention every argument which has at any time been brought into view. But the constitution is the guide which I can never abandon. It has assigned to the President the power of making treaties, with the advice and consent of the Senate. It was doubtless supposed that these two branches of government would combine, without passion and with the best means of information, those facts and principles upon which the success of our foreign relations will always depend; that they ought not to substitute for their own conviction the opinions of others, or to seek truth through any channel but that of a temperate and well-informed investigation." "Under this persuasion, I have resolved on the manner of executing the duty before me. To the high responsibility attached to it, I freely submit; and you, gentlemen, are at liberty to make these sentiments known, as the ground of my procedure. While I feel the most lively gratitude for the many instances of approbation from my country, I can no otherwise deserve it than by obeying the dictates of my conscience."
"With due respect, I am, gentlemen, your obedient
"George Washington."
In nearly the same terms Washington replied to other committees and public bodies who thought proper to remonstrate against his exercising the constitutional right of signing the treaty.
In the afternoon of the 11th of August (1795), Washington arrived in Philadelphia, and, on the next day, the question respecting the immediate ratification of the treaty was brought before the Cabinet. Randolph, Secretary of State, maintained, singly, the opinion that, during the existence of the provision order, and during the war between Britain and France, this step ought not to be taken. This opinion, however, did not prevail. The resolution was adopted to ratify the treaty immediately and to accompany the ratification with a strong memorial against the provision order, which should convey, in explicit terms, the sense of the American government on that subject. By this course the views of the executive were happily accomplished. The order was revoked and the ratifications of the treaty were exchanged.
Washington was most probably determined to adopt this course by the extreme intemperance with which the treaty was opposed and the rapid progress which this violence was apparently making. It was obvious that, unless this temper could be checked, it would soon become so extensive and would arrive at such a point of fury as to threaten dangerous consequences. It was obviously necessary either to attempt a diminution of its action, by rendering its exertions hopeless and by giving to the treaty the weight of his character and influence, or to determine ultimately to yield to it. A species of necessity, therefore, seems to have been created for abandoning the idea, if it was ever taken up, of making the ratification of the treaty dependent on the revocation of the provision order. The soundness of the policy which urged this decisive measure was proved by the event. The confidence which was felt in the judgment and virtue of Washington induced many who, swept away by the popular current, had yielded to the common prejudices, to re-examine and discard opinions which had been too hastily embraced; and many were called forth by a desire to support the administration in measures actually adopted, to take a more active part in the general contest than they would otherwise have pursued. The consequence was that more moderate opinions respecting the treaty began to prevail.
In a letter from Mount Vernon of the 20th of September (1795), addressed to General Knox, who had communicated to him the change of opinion which was appearing in the eastern States, Washington expressed in warm terms the pleasure derived from that circumstance, and added:
"Next to a conscientious discharge of my public duties, to carry along with me the approbation of my constituents would be the highest gratification of which my mind is susceptible. But the latter being secondary, I cannot make the former yield to it, unless some criterion more infallible than partial (if they are not party) meetings can be discovered as the touchstone of public sentiment. If any person on earth could, or the great Power above would, erect the standard of infallibility in political opinions, no being that inhabits this terrestrial globe would resort to it with more eagerness than myself, so long as I remain a servant of the public. But as I have hitherto found no better guide than upright intentions and close investigations, I shall adhere to them while I keep watch, leaving it to those who will come after me to explore new ways, if they like, or think them better."
If the ratification of the treaty increased the number of its open advocates, it seemed also to give increased acrimony to the opposition. Such hold had Washington taken of the affections of the people that even his enemies had deemed it generally necessary to preserve, with regard to him, external marks of decency and respect. Previous to the mission of Mr. Jay, charges against Washington, though frequently insinuated, had seldom been directly made; and the cover under which the attacks upon his character were conducted evidenced the caution with which it was deemed necessary to proceed. That mission visibly affected the decorum which had been usually observed toward him, and the ratification of the treaty brought sensations into open view which had long been ill concealed. His military and political character was attacked with equal violence, and it was averred that he was totally destitute of merit, either as a soldier or a statesman. The calumnies with which he was assailed were not confined to his public conduct; even his qualities as a man were the subjects of detraction. That he had violated the constitution in negotiating a treaty without the previous advice of the Senate, and in embracing within that treaty subjects belonging exclusively to the Legislature, was openly maintained, for which an impeachment was publicly suggested; and that he had drawn from the treasury for his private use more than the salary annexed to his office was asserted without a blush. This last allegation was said to be supported from extracts from the treasury accounts which had been laid before the Legislature, and was maintained with the most persevering effrontery.
Though Wolcott, the Secretary of the Treasury, denied that the appropriations made by the Legislature had ever been exceeded, the atrocious charge was still confidently repeated, and the few who could triumph in any spot which might tarnish the luster of Washington's fame felicitated themselves on the prospect of obtaining a victory over the reputation of a patriot, to whose single influence they ascribed the failure of their political plans. With the real public, the confidence felt in the integrity of Washington remained unshaken, but so imposing was the appearance of the documents adduced as to excite an apprehension that the transaction might be placed in a light to show that some indiscretion, in which he had not participated, had been inadvertently committed.
This state of anxious suspense was of short duration. Hamilton, late Secretary of the Treasury, during whose administration of the finances this peculation was said to have taken place, came forward with a full explanation of the fact. It appeared that Washington himself had never touched any part of the compensation annexed to his office, but that the whole was received and disbursed by the gentleman who superintended the expenses of his household. That it was the practice of the treasury, when a sum had been appropriated for the current year, to pay it to that gentleman occasionally, as the situation of the family might require. The expenses at some periods of the year exceeded and at others fell short of the allowance for the quarter, so that at some times money was paid in advance on account of the ensuing quarter, and at others, that which was due at the end of the quarter was not completely drawn out. The secretary entered into an examination of the constitution and laws to show that this practice was justifiable, and illustrated his arguments by many examples in which an advance on account of money appropriated to a particular object, before the service was completed, would be absolutely necessary. However this might be, it was a transaction in which Washington, personally, was unconcerned.
When possessed of the entire facts, the public viewed with just indignation this attempt to defame a character which was the nation's pride. Americans felt themselves involved in this atrocious calumny on their most illustrious citizen, and its propagators were frowned into silence.
Meantime several changes were taking place in Washington's Cabinet. Edmund Randolph, the Secretary of State, resigned his office on the 19th of August, 1795, immediately after the ratification of Jay's treaty, which he had opposed. The circumstances which led to his resignation were by no means creditable to him, but as they brought out in bold relief one of Washington's noblest traits—his perfect openness and candor—we are induced to notice them in detail.
A letter addressed to his government in October, 1794, by Fauchet, the minister of the French republic, was intercepted by the captain of a British frigate and forwarded to Mr. Hammond, by whom it was delivered, about the last of July, to Mr. Wolcott, the Secretary of the Treasury, who, on the arrival of Washington in Philadelphia, placed it in his hands. This letter alluded to communications from Randolph, which, in the opinion of Washington, were excessively improper. The éclaircissements which the occasion required were followed by the resignation of the secretary. For the purpose, he alleged, of vindicating his conduct, he demanded a sight of a confidential letter which had been addressed to him by Washington, and which was left in the office. His avowed design was to give this, as well as some others of the same description, to the public, in order to support the allegation that, in consequence of his attachment to France and to liberty, he had fallen a victim to the intrigues of a British and an aristocratic party. The answer given to this demand was a license which few politicians, in turbulent times, could allow to a man who had possessed the unlimited confidence of the person giving it. "I have directed," said Washington, "that you should have the inspection of my letter of the 22nd of July, agreeable to your request; and you are at full liberty to publish, without reserve, any and every private and confidential letter I ever wrote you; nay, more—every word I ever uttered to or in your presence from whence you can derive any advantage in your vindication."
Notwithstanding that Randolph was under the strongest personal obligations to Washington, he did not hesitate, in his lame attempt to vindicate himself, to resort to violent abuse of his late friend and patron. Washington is said to have lost his temper on reading Randolph's calumnies, {2} as well he might, for it is difficult to conceive of blacker ingratitude than he suffered on this occasion. Late in life Randolph seems to have been sensible of the enormity of his conduct. On the 2nd of July, 1810, he used the following language in a letter to the Hon. Bushrod Washington: "I do not retain the smallest degree of that feeling which roused me fifteen years ago against some individuals. For the world contains no treasure, deception, or charm which can seduce me from the consolation of being in a state of good will toward all mankind, and I should not be mortified to ask pardon of any man with whom I have been at variance for any injury which I may have done him. If I could now present myself before your venerated uncle it would be my pride to confess my contrition that I suffered my irritation, let the cause be what it might, to use some of those expressions respecting him which, at this moment of my indifference to the ideas of the world, I wish to recall, as being inconsistent with my subsequent conviction. My life will, I hope, be sufficiently extended for the recording of my sincere opinion of his virtues and merit, in a style which is not the result of a mind merely debilitated by misfortune, but of that Christian philosophy on which alone I depend for inward tranquility."
Washington offered the vacant post to Patrick Henry, who was prevented by private considerations from undertaking its duties. Rufus King, Gen. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, and two or three others were asked to enter the Cabinet as Secretary of State, but they declined. Finally Colonel Pickering, who had temporary charge of the post, was formally appointed in December of the present year. James McHenry succeeded Colonel Pickering as Secretary of War. Mr. Bradford's death, in August, caused a vacancy in the attorney-generalship, which was also filled in December by the appointment of Charles Lee, of Virginia. This office had been previously offered to General Pinckney, Colonel Carrington, of Virginia, and Governor Howard, of Maryland.
In August of this year (1795), General Wayne concluded a treaty of peace, at Greenville, with the chiefs of the Wyandots, Delawares, Chippeways, and other Indian tribes. By this treaty the Indians ceded the post of Detroit and a considerable tract of adjacent land to the United States. A tract of land was ceded on the main, to the north of the island on which the post of Michilimackinac stood, measuring six miles on lakes Huron and Michigan, and extending three miles back from the water of the lake or strait. De Bois Blanc, or White Wood Island, was also ceded—the voluntary gift of the Chippeways.
The foreign affairs of the United States had now begun to assume a more favorable aspect. A treaty was concluded with Spain on the 27th of October (1795). It was confined principally to the two great subjects in dispute, and was styled a treaty of friendship, limits, and navigation. By this the line between the United States and east and west Florida was settled, and the western boundary of the United States, which separated them from the Colony of Louisiana, was fixed in the middle of the channel of the Mississippi river to the thirty-first degree of north latitude; and it was also agreed that the navigation of that river, from its source to the ocean, should be free only to the subjects and citizens of the two countries.
It was further stipulated that both parties should use all the means in their power to maintain peace and harmony among the Indian nations on their borders, and both parties bound themselves to restrain, even by force, the Indians within their limits from acts of hostilities against the other, and it was also agreed that neither party would thereafter make any treaties with those who did not live within their respective limits. Provision was also made that free ships should make free goods, and that no citizen or subject of either party should take a commission or letters of marque for arming any vessel, to act as a privateer, from their respective enemies, under the penalty of being considered and punished as a pirate.
Thus, after a tedious and unpleasant negotiation of about fifteen years, the boundaries between the countries belonging to the United States and Spain, in America, were settled, and the right of navigating every part of the Mississippi, a right so essential to the interests of our vast western territory, was secured to the United States.
In November (1795) Washington had the gratification to bring to a close the long negotiations with the Dey of Algiers, by which peace was established with those piratical marauders and the release of American captives obtained. This was accomplished through the agency of Colonel Humphreys, Joel Barlow, and Mr. Donaldson, and about 120 prisoners were released from cruel bondage, some of whom had been in this ignominious condition more than ten years.
During the recess of Congress Washington paid a visit to Mount Vernon, which lasted from the middle of September (1795) till near the end of October. During this time his attention was divided between the concerns of his estate and the public affairs of that exciting period.
1. Footnote: Marshall
2. Footnote: See Dr. Griswold's "Republican Court." Also, Sparks "Writings of Washington," vol. XI, pp. 54, 479.