Washington and the American Republic, Vol. 3.

by Benson John Lossing

“The roused chief sat down on the sofa once more. He seemed conscious of his passion, and uncomfortable. He was silent; his wrath began to subside. He at length said, in an altered voice, 'This must not go beyond this room.' Another pause followed—a longer one—when he said, in a tone quite low: 'General St. Clair shall have justice. I looked hastily through the despatches—saw the whole disaster, but not all the particulars. I will hear him without prejudice: he shall have full justice.'

“'He was now,' said Mr. Lear, 'perfectly calm. Half an hour had gone by; the storm was over, and no sign of it was afterward seen in his conduct or heard in his conversation.'”[34]

“The first interview of the president with St Clair after the fatal fourth of November,” says the late Mr. Custis[35] (who was present), “was nobly impressive. The unfortunate general, worn down by age, disease, and the hardships of a frontier campaign, assailed by the press, and with the current of popular opinion setting hard against him, repaired to his chief, as to a shelter from the fury of so many elements. Washington extended his hand to one who appeared in no new character; for, during the whole of a long life, misfortune seemed 'to have marked him for her own.' Poor old St. Clair hobbled up to his chief, seized the offered hand in both of his, and gave vent to his feelings in an audible manner.”

St. Clair's case was investigated by a committee of the house of representatives, and he was honorably acquitted. But public sentiment was against him, and he resigned his commission.

The alarm on the frontier, caused by St. Clair's defeat, produced prompt and appropriate action in Congress, and an army of five thousand men for frontier service was authorized. The impetuous General Wayne (of whom Washington said, at this time, “He has many good points as an officer, and it is to be hoped that time, reflection, good advice, and above all a due sense of the importance of the trust committed to him, will correct his faults, or cast a shade over them”) was appointed commander-in-chief, and Colonel Otho H. Williams, of Maryland, and Colonel Rufus Putnam, then in the Ohio country, brigadiers under him. Wayne was then in the prime of life, being forty-seven years of age; and Washington, believing that an energetic campaign would retrieve the losses of St. Clair and produce a decisive and salutary effect upon the Indians, counted much upon the prowess and executive force of that officer. Nor was he disappointed.

Additional revenue was required to support the increased army; and upon a motion being made in Congress to call upon the secretary of the treasury to report the ways and means of raising it, the first decided opposition to that officer and the measures of the administration, in complicity with Jefferson's personal dislike of Hamilton, appeared in the national legislature. Such report was called for, however; and the discussions that ensued upon this and other topics were sometimes very acrimonious, and caused Washington much painful apprehension. The press, at the same time, was fostering party spirit with the most pernicious aliment. In the previous autumn, a paper in the interest of the republican party and in opposition to Fenno's United States Gazette, called the National Gazette, was established. Philip Freneau, a warm whig of the Revolution and a poet of considerable local eminence, who had been editor of a New York paper, and who was called to Philadelphia at that time by Mr. Jefferson to fill the post of translating clerk in the state department, was installed as editor of the new opposition paper. Jefferson patronized it for the avowed purpose of presenting to the president and the American people correct European intelligence, derived from the Leyden Gazette instead of through the alleged polluted channel of English newspapers. But it soon became the vehicle of bitter attacks upon all measures of the administration which did not originate with, or were approved by, Mr. Jefferson; and the character of the secretary became thereby seriously compromised before the American people. He was charged, with great plausibility, with being the author of many anonymous political articles in Freneau's paper; but he solemnly declared the accusation to be untrue.

1792

Congress adjourned on the eighth of May. During the session, Washington had for the first time exercised the veto power intrusted to the president by the constitution. The occasion was the passage of an apportionment bill based upon the census of the population of the United States, lately taken, which in its provisions appeared to conflict with the constitution. That instrument provided that the representatives should not exceed one for every thirty thousand persons. This ratio would leave a fraction in each state (in some more, in some less) unrepresented. To obviate this difficulty, the senate originated a bill which exhibited a new principle of apportionment. It assumed as a basis the total population of the United States, and not the population of separate states, as that upon which the whole number of representatives should be determined. This aggregate was divided by thirty thousand. The quotient giving one hundred and twenty as the number of representatives, that number was apportioned upon the several states according to their population, allotting to each one member for every thirty thousand, and distributing the remaining members, to make up the one hundred and twenty, among the states having the largest fractions. After much debate, the house concurred in the senate's bill, and it was submitted to the president for his signature. The only question that arose was as to its constitutionality. The president consulted his cabinet. Jefferson and Randolph decided that it was unconstitutional; Knox could not express a definite opinion; and Hamilton rather favored the bill. After due deliberation Washington returned it with his objections. “A few of the hottest friends of the bill,” says Jefferson in his Anas, “expressed passion, but the majority were satisfied; and both in and out of doors,” he rather ill-naturedly added, “it gave pleasure to have at length an instance of the negative being exercised.”

The distractions in his cabinet, the increasing virulence of party spirit continually manifested in Congress, and the cares of government, began to make Washington thoroughly weary of public life, and early in 1792 he resolved to retire from it at the end of the term for which he had been elected to the presidency. He had more than a year to serve; but he determined to let his resolution be made known to the public at an early day. He first announced it to his nearest friends and associates. Among these were Jefferson and Madison, the latter a representative from Virginia, and then taking the position of a republican leader in the house. To Jefferson, Washington had opened his mind on the subject as early as the close of February, at the same time saying that he should consider it unfortunate if his retirement should cause that of other great officers of the government. At that time, the president was becoming painfully aware that the differences in his cabinet were systematic, instead of incidental as at first.

With Madison, Washington held frequent conversations upon the subject of his retirement, but nothing definite was determined when they left Philadelphia at the close of the session. The president went so far, however, as to ask Madison to revolve this subject in his mind, and advise him as to the proper time and the best mode of announcing his intention to the people. But Madison always urged him to relinquish the idea for the public good, and Jefferson desired him to remain in office for the same reason.