Page 166; bottom line. Leave out "Et c'est une autre economie," &c. The reason of this, is, that in 1784, purchases of lands were to be made of the Indians, which were accordingly made. But in 1785, they did not propose to make any purchase. The money desired in 1785, five thousand dollars, was probably to pay agents residing among the Indians, or balances of the purchases of 1784. These purchases will not be made every year; but only at distant intervals, as our settlements are extended; and it may be regarded as certain, that not a foot of land will ever be taken from the Indians, without their own consent. The sacredness of their rights, is felt by all thinking persons in America, as much as in Europe.
Page 170. Virginia was quotaed the highest of any State in the Union. But during the war, several States appear to have paid more, because they were free from the enemy, whilst Virginia was cruelly ravaged. The requisition of 1784, was so quotaed on the several States, as to bring up their arrearages; so that when they should have paid the sums then demanded, all would be on an equal footing. It is necessary to give a further explanation of this requisition. The requisitions of one million and two hundred thousand dollars, of eight millions, and two millions, had been made during the war, as an experiment, to see whether, in that situation, the States could furnish the necessary supplies. It was found they could not. The money was thereupon obtained by loans in Europe; and Congress meant, by their requisition of 1784, to abandon the requisitions of one million and two hundred thousand dollars, and of two millions, and also one-half of the eight millions. But as all the States, almost, had made some payments in part of that requisition, they were obliged to retain such a proportion of it, as would enable them to call for equal contributions from all the others.
Page 170. I cannot say how it has happened, that the debt of Connecticut is greater than that of Virginia. The latter is the richest in productions, and, perhaps, made greater exertions to pay for her supplies in the course of the war.
Page 172. "Les Americains sevant aprés une banqueroute," &c. The objections made to the United States, being here condensed together in a short compass, perhaps, it would not be improper to condense the answers in as small a compass, in some such form as follows. That is, after the words "aucun espoir," add, "But to these charges it may be justly answered, that those are no bankrupts who acknowledge the sacredness of their debts, in their just and real amount, who are able, within a reasonable time, to pay them, and who are actually proceeding in that payment; that they furnish, in fact, the supplies necessary for the support of their government; that their officers and soldiers are satisfied, as the interest of their debt is paid regularly, and the principal is in a course of payment; that the question, whether they fought ill, should be asked of those who met them at Bunker's hill, Bennington, Stillwater, King's mountain, the Cowpens, Guilford, and the Eutaw. And that the charges of ingratitude, madness, infidelity and corruption, are easily made by those to whom falsehoods cost nothing; but that no instances, in support of them, have been produced, or can be produced."
Page 187. "Les officiérs et les soldats ont eté payés," &c. The balances due to the officers and soldiers have been ascertained, and a certificate of the sum given to each; on these, the interest is regularly paid; and every occasion is seized of paying the principal, by receiving these certificates as money, whenever public property is sold, till a more regular and effectual method can be taken, for paying the whole.
Page 191. "Quoique la loi dont nous parlons, ne s'observe plus en Angleterre." "An alien born may purchase lands or other estates, but not for his own use; for the King is thereupon entitled to them." "Yet an alien may acquire a property in goods, money and other personal estate, or may hire a house for his habitation. For this is necessary for the advancement of trade." "Also, an alien may bring an action concerning personal property, and may make a will, and dispose of his personal estate." "When I mention these rights of an alien, I must be understood of alien friends only, or such whose countries are in peace with ours; for alien enemies have no rights, no privileges, unless by the King's special favor, during the time of war." Blackstone, B. 1. c. 10, page 372. "An alien friend may have personal actions, but not real; an alien enemy shall have neither real, personal, or mixed actions. The reason why an alien friend is allowed to maintain a personal action, is, because he would otherwise be incapacitated to merchandise, which may be as much to our prejudice as his." Cunningham's law dict. title, Aliens. The above is the clear law of England, practiced from the earliest ages to this day, and never denied. The passage quoted by M. de Meuisnier from 2 Blackstone, c. 26, is from his chapter, "Of title to things personal by occupancy." The word "personal," shows, that nothing in this chapter relates to lands, which are real estate; and, therefore, this passage does not contract the one before quoted from the same author, (1 Bl. c. 10.) which says, that the lands of an alien belong to the King. The words, "of title by occupancy," show, that it does not relate to debts, which, being a moral existence only, cannot be the subject of occupancy. Blackstone, in this passage, (B. 2. c. 26.) speaks only of personal goods of an alien, which another may find, and seize as prime occupant.
Page 193. "Le remboursement presentera des difficultés des sommes considerables," &c. There is no difficulty nor doubt on this subject. Every one is sensible how this is to be ultimately settled. Neither the British creditor, nor the State, will be permitted to lose by these payments. The debtor will be credited for what he paid, according to what it was really worth at the time he paid it, and he must pay the balance. Nor does he lose by this; for if a man who owed one thousand dollars to a British merchant, paid eight hundred paper dollars into the treasury, when the depreciation was at eight for one, it is clear he paid but one hundred real dollars, and must now pay nine hundred. It is probable, he received those eight hundred dollars for one hundred bushels of wheat, which were never worth more than one hundred silver dollars. He is credited, therefore, the full worth of his wheat. The equivoque is in the use of the word "dollar."
Page 226. "Qu' on abolisse les privileges du clergé." This privilege, originally allowed to the clergy, is now extended to every man, and even to women. It is a right of exemption from capital punishment, for the first offence, in most cases. It is, then, a pardon by the law. In other cases, the Executive gives the pardon. But when laws are made as mild as they should be, both those pardons are absurd. The principle of Beccaria is sound. Let the legislators be merciful, but the executors of the law inexorable. As the term "privileges du clergé" may be understood by foreigners, perhaps, it will be better to strike it out here, and substitute the word "pardon."
Page 239. "Les commissaries veulent," &c. Manslaughter is the killing a man with design, but in a sudden gust of passion, and where the killer has not had time to cool. The first offence is not punished capitally, but the second is. This is the law of England and of all the American States; and is not now a new proposition. Those laws have supposed that a man, whose passions have so much dominion over him, as to lead him to repeated acts of murder, is unsafe to society: that it is better he should be put to death by the law, than others, more innocent than himself, on the movements of his impetuous passions.
Ibid. "Mal-aisé d'indiquer la nuance precise," &c. In forming a scale of crimes and punishments, two considerations have principal weight. 1. The atrocity of the crime. 2. The peculiar circumstances of a country, which furnish greater temptations to commit it, or greater facilities for escaping detection. The punishment must be heavier to counterbalance this. Were the first the only consideration, all nations would form the same scale. But, as the circumstances of a country have influence on the punishment, and no two countries exist precisely under the same circumstances, no two countries will form the same scale of crimes and punishments. For example; in America, the inhabitants let their horses go at large, in the uninclosed lands, which are so extensive, as to maintain them altogether. It is easy, therefore, to steal them, and easy to escape. Therefore, the laws are obliged to oppose these temptations with a heavier degree of punishment. For this reason, the stealing of a horse in America, is punished more severely, than stealing the same value in any other form. In Europe, where horses are confined so securely, that it is impossible to steal them, that species of theft need not be punished more severely than any other. In some countries of Europe, stealing fruit from trees is punished capitally. The reason is, that it being impossible to lock fruit trees up in coffers, as we do our money, it is impossible to oppose physical bars to this species of theft. Moral ones are, therefore, opposed by the laws. This, to an unreflecting American, appears the most enormous of all the abuses of power; because, he has been used to see fruits hanging in such quantities, that, if not taken by men, they would rot: he has been used to consider them, therefore, as of no value, and as not furnishing materials for the commission of a crime. This must serve as an apology for the arrangements of crimes and punishments, in the scale under our consideration. A different one would be formed here; and still different ones in Italy, Turkey, China, &c.