Mr. Jefferson acknowledged that he favored the establishment of Freneau's newspaper for reasons already alluded to,[38] because he thought juster views of European affairs might be obtained through publications from the Leyden Gazette than any other foreign source.
“On the establishment of his paper,” said Mr. Jefferson, “I furnished him with the Leyden Gazettes, with an expression of my wish that he would always translate and publish the material intelligence they contained; and I continued to furnish them from time to time, as regularly as I received them. But as to any other direction or indication of my wish, how his press should be conducted, what sort of intelligence he should give, what essays encourage, I can protest, in the presence of Heaven, that I never did by myself or any other, directly or indirectly, write, dictate, or procure any one sentiment or sentence to be inserted in his or any other gazette, to which my name was not affixed, or that of my office.”
While Jefferson avowed his desire for harmony in the cabinet, he felt the lash of Hamilton too keenly to accept reconciliation with him. He avowed his intention to retire from his office at the close of the president's term; and intimating an intention to make an appeal to the country over his own signature, he said: “To a thorough disregard of the honors and emoluments of office I join as great a value for the esteem of my countrymen; and conscious of having merited it by an integrity which can not be reproached, and by an enthusiastic devotion to their rights and liberty, I will not suffer my retirement to be clouded by the slanders of a man whose history, from the moment at which history can stoop to notice him, is a tissue of machinations against the liberty of the country which has not only received and given him bread, but heaped its honors on his head.”[39]
The spirit of Jefferson's letter afforded Washington no hope for reconciliation between the secretaries. The contrast between his and Hamilton's was remarkable. Hamilton held affectionate, courteous, forbearing, and patriotic language toward the president; Jefferson's exhibited much of the opposite qualities; and his implacable hatred of the man whom he had scourged into active retaliation is very marked. It gave Washington great pain, for he had the highest esteem for the contestants.
At that time there were grave reasons why officers of the cabinet should for the moment forget personal difficulties, and come as a unit to the aid of the president. There were signs of disorder, and violence, and serious insurrection in the land. The excise law enacted in 1791, and modified and made less offensive during the last session of Congress, was yet vehemently opposed in some parts of the country. In western Pennsylvania, in particular, hostility to it had become the sentiment of an organized party, and combinations were formed to prevent the execution of it. A public meeting was held at Pittsburgh on the twenty-first of August, at which resolutions were adopted disapproving of the law, and appointing a committee to correspond with other committees in different parts of the Union on the subject. It was really a rebellious movement, as the temper of their closing resolution indicated.[40]
Information of these proceedings having reached the secretary of the treasury, he sent to the president all necessary papers on the subject for his information, assuring him that he should submit to the attorney-general the question whether the persons composing the meeting at Pittsburgh had not committed an indictable offence. He gave it as his opinion that it was expedient to exert the full form of the law against the offenders. “If this is not done,” he said, “the spirit of disobedience will naturally extend, and the authority of the government will be prostrated. Moderation enough has been shown: it is time to assume a different tune.” In subsequent letters he recommends the issuing of a proclamation on the subject by the president, and sent a draft of one to Washington. The president approved the measure, submitted it to Jefferson, and on the fifteenth of September he issued a proclamation, countersigned by the secretary of state, in which he warned all persons to desist from such unlawful combinations and proceedings, and requiring all courts, magistrates, and officers to bring the offenders to justice. Copies of this proclamation were sent to the governor of Pennsylvania, and also to the chief magistrates of North and South Carolina, where a similar defiance of law has been manifested.
In this matter Washington proceeded with great prudence and caution. He felt indignant at the great outrage thus offered to the government, but was unwilling to employ force while more peaceful measures were left untried. “I have no doubt,” he said, “the proclamation will undergo many strictures; and, as the effect proposed may not be answered by it, it will be necessary to look forward in time to ulterior arrangements:” that is to say, the employment of regular troops as a last resort.
As Washington intimated it might not, the proclamation produced no salutary effect. Too many of the civil magistrates themselves were concerned in the insurrectionary movements, and the few who were not were totally incapable of maintaining the sovereignty of the laws. With moderation the government instituted legal proceedings against the offenders; liquors distilled in the rebellious counties were seized on their way to market by revenue officers; and the agents of the army were directed to purchase only those spirits upon which a duty had been paid. Having their interests thus touched, the manufacturers of liquors would gladly have complied with the laws, but the people would not allow them. Subsequently, more serious defiance of the laws in western Pennsylvania compelled the president to order a military force into that region. This we will consider hereafter.
At the middle of October, Washington made another and last effort to restore peace to his cabinet. Jefferson had recently returned to Philadelphia, and his first care was to forward to the president extracts from his letter written while the adoption of the constitution was pending, Washington wrote to him on the eighteenth, and said: “I did not require the evidence of the extracts, which you enclosed to me, to convince me of your attachment to the constitution of the United States, or of your disposition to promote the general welfare of this country: but I regret, deeply regret, the difference in opinions which have divided you and another principal officer of the government, and I wish devoutly there would be an accommodation of them by mutual yieldings.
“A measure of this sort would produce harmony and consequent good in our public councils. The contrary will inevitably introduce confusion and serious mischiefs—and for what? Because mankind can not think alike, but would adopt different means to attain the same end. For I will frankly and solemnly declare, that I believe the views of both of you to be pure and well meant, and that experience only will decide with respect to the salutariness of the measures which are the subjects of dispute. Why, then, when some of the best citizens in the United States—men of discernment, uniform and tried patriots, who have no sinister views to promote, but are chaste in their ways of thinking and acting—are to be found some on one side and some on the other of the questions which have caused these agitations, should either of you be so tenacious of your opinions as to make no allowances for those of the other? I could, and indeed was about to, add more on this interesting subject, but will forbear, at least for the present, after expressing a wish that the cup which has been presented to us may not be snatched from our lips by a discordance of action, when I am persuaded there is no discordance in your views. I have a great, a sincere esteem and regard for you both, and ardently wish that some line may be marked out by which both of you could walk.”