The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 1 (of 9)
by Thomas Jefferson · English · Gutenberg #45847 · 1,362,129 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 1 (of 9)
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 1 (of 9)
Author: Thomas Jefferson
Editor: H. A. Washington
Release date: May 31, 2014 [eBook #45847]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45847
Credits: Produced by David Edwards, Melissa McDaniel, and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, VOL. 1 (OF 9) ***
Transcriber's Note:
Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has been preserved.
Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.
Many spelling inconsistencies were noted and unchanged in the text
(e.g. Geisner/Geismer, Eldridge/Elbridge, Williamsburg/Williamsburgh,
Thoulouse/Toulouse, Albermarle/Albemarle).
On page 20, "becames destructive" should possibly be "becomes
destructive".
Evident errors in the printing of the letter from the Count de
Vergennes on pages 73 and 74 have been left as printed.
On page 117, "public powder" should possibly be "public power".
On page 271, "Crochet" should possibly be "Crocket".
On page 582, the date May 27 is repeated.
Inconsistent punctuation in the legal citations (pages 147 to 162),
has been left as printed.
[Illustration: Th. Jefferson]
THE
WRITINGS
OF
THOMAS JEFFERSON:
BEING HIS
AUTOBIOGRAPHY, CORRESPONDENCE, REPORTS, MESSAGES,
ADDRESSES, AND OTHER WRITINGS, OFFICIAL
AND PRIVATE.
PUBLISHED BY THE ORDER OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS
ON THE LIBRARY,
FROM THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS,
DEPOSITED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
WITH EXPLANATORY NOTES, TABLES OF CONTENTS, AND A COPIOUS INDEX
TO EACH VOLUME, AS WELL AS A GENERAL INDEX TO THE WHOLE,
BY THE EDITOR
H. A. WASHINGTON.
VOL. I.
NEW YORK:
H. W. DERBY, 625 BROADWAY.
1861.
Entered, according by Act of Congress, in the year 1853, by
TAYLOR & MAURY,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of
Columbia.
STEREOTYPED BY
THOMAS B. SMITH
216 William St., N. Y.
PREFACE.
Mr. Jefferson having, by his last will and testament, bequeathed to
his grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, all his manuscript papers,
Congress, by an act of the 12th of April, 1848, made an appropriation
for the purpose of purchasing them for the Government; and, by the
same act, an additional appropriation was made to print and publish
them under the direction and supervision of the Joint Committee on
the Library. It is under the authority of this act that the present
publication is made. The immense mass of manuscript left by Mr.
Jefferson having been deposited with the Editor, he has carefully gone
through the whole, and selected from it, for the present publication,
everything which possesses permanent public interest either on account
of its intrinsic value, or as matter of history, or as illustrating
the character of the distinguished Author, or as embodying his views
upon the almost infinite variety of topics, philosophical, moral,
religious, scientific, historical, and political, so ably discussed
by him--thus making this work a complete depository of the writings
of Thomas Jefferson. Under the view which the Editor has taken of his
editorial duties, and the instructions of the Library Committee, he has
not felt himself at liberty to encumber the publication with matter of
his own farther than is necessary to illustrate the text. Such notes as
have been appended will, therefore, be found to be purely explanatory
and historical in their character. Under the impression that the value
of such publications as the present depends much upon facility of
reference, a particular Index has been appended to each volume as well
as a general Index to the whole.
CONTENTS TO VOL. I.
BOOK I.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 1.
APPENDIX TO AUTOBIOGRAPHY, 111.
BOOK II.
PART I--LETTERS WRITTEN BEFORE HIS MISSION TO
EUROPE--(1773-1783), 181.
PART II--LETTERS WRITTEN WHILE IN EUROPE--(1784-1790), 338.
Adams, John, letters written to, 205, 356, 358, 365, 370,
376, 378, 416, 436, 437, 460, 486, 492, 497, 510, 501,
511, 529, 569, 584, 591.
Aranda, Count de, letter written to, 470.
Auberteuil, Hilliard d', 535.
Bancroft, Dr., letter written to, 535.
Bannister, J. Jr., letter written to, 466.
Bellini, Mr., letter written to, 443.
Buchanan and Hay, letter written to, 578.
Campbell, Colonel, letter written to, 295.
Carmichael, William, letters written to, 392, 469, 473, 551,
579.
Carr, Peter, letter written to, 395.
Cary, Colonel A., letters written to, 197, 507.
Castries, Monsieur de, letters written to, 361, 374.
Cathalan, Monsieur, letter written to, 600.
Chastellux, Chevalier de, letters written to, 321, 339.
Commissioners of the French Treasury, letter written to, 519.
Crevecœur, Monsieur de, letter written to, 594.
Delegates in Congress, from Georgia, letter written to, 500.
Delegates in Congress, from Virginia, letters written to,
287, 307.
Desbordes, Monsieur, letter written to, 462.
Drayton, William, letter written to, 554.
Dumas, W. F., letters written to, 528, 552.
Dumas and Short, letter written to, 415.
Forrest, Colonel Uriah, letter written to, 338.
Franklin, Dr. Benjamin, letters written to, 204, 448, 525.
Franklin, W. T., letter written to, 555.
French and Nephew, letter written to, 362.
Gates, Major General, letters written to, 238, 251, 254, 260,
262, 266, 268, 275, 294, 314.
Geisner, Baron, letter written to, 427.
Gerry, Eldridge, letters written to, 454, 556.
Governor of Georgia, letter written to, 499.
Governor of Maryland, letter written to, 343.
Governor of Virginia, letters written to, 402, 513, 599.
Greene, Major General, letter written to, 509.
Hartley, David, letter written to, 422.
Henry, Patrick, letter written to, 212.
Hogendorp, letter written to, 463.
Hopkinson, F., letters written to, 440, 503.
Humphreys, Colonel, letters written to, 496, 559.
Izard, R., letter written to, 441.
Jay, John, letters written to, 332, 339, 344, 380, 384, 403,
408, 452, 457, 522, 537, 538, 543, 545, 571, 573, 574,
582, 602.
Jones, John Paul, letters written to, 391, 594.
Jones, Joseph, letter written to, 353.
La Fayette, letters written to, 311, 579, 596.
La Luzerne, Chevalier de, letter written to, 326.
Lambe, Mr., letter written to, 581.
La Morleine, Monsieur, letter written to, 578.
Langdon, John, letter written to, 428.
La Valee, Monsieur de, letter written to, 429.
La Rouene, Marquis de, letter written to, 512.
Lee, Richard Henry, letters written to, 204, 540.
Livingston, Robert R., letters written to, 320, 327, 330,
331.
---- From, 329, 331.
Madison, James, letters written to, 315, 324, 412, 431, 446,
531.
Marbois, Monsieur de, letter written to, 297.
Mathews, Colonel, letter written to, 233.
McPherson, Charles, letter written to, 195.
Monroe, James, letters written to, 317, 345, 358, 405, 526,
564, 586, 605.
---- From, 316.
O'Bryan, Richard, letter written to, 477.
Osgood, Samuel, letter written to, 450.
Otto, Mr., letter written to, 558
Page, John, letters written to, 181, 184, 186, 188, 189, 190,
191, 193, 210, 399, 548.
Pleasants, T., letter written to, 563.
Poncens, Marquis de, letter written to, 430.
Portail, Monsieur du, letter written to, 357.
President of Congress, letters written to, 285, 287, 299,
300, 301, 302, 303, 304.
Price, Dr., letter written to, 376.
Randolph, Edmund, letters written to, 312, 433.
Randolph, John, letters written to, 200, 202.
Riedesel, General de, letter written to, 240.
Rittenhouse, David, letters written to, 210, 515.
Ross, James, letter written to, 560.
St. Victour and Bettinger, letter written to, 570.
Seward, W. W., letter written to, 478.
Short, William, letter written to, 372.
Small, Dr. William, letter written to, 198.
Steptoe, Mr., letter written to, 323.
Stevens, General Edward, letters written to, 244, 250, 252,
253, 274, 278.
Stewart, A., letter written to, 517.
Style, Dr., letter written to, 363.
Thompson, Charles, letters written to, 354, 542.
Thulemeyer, Baron de, letters written to, 368, 469.
Trist, Mrs., letter written to, 394.
Unger, John Louis de, letter written to, 278.
Van Staphorst, N. & J., letters written to, 369, 461, 471.
Vergennes, Count de, letters written to, 385, 456, 479, 490,
537, 547, 577.
Washington, George, letters written to, 221, 225, 230, 231,
232, 235, 237, 239, 241, 243, 249, 255, 257, 265, 267,
268, 270, 271, 276, 279, 282, 291, 292, 296, 297, 304,
305, 309, 313, 325, 333.
---- From, 328.
Wythe, George, letter written to, 211.
----* (address lost), 207, 246, 272, 289.
BOOK I.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY, WITH APPENDIX.
INTRODUCTORY TO BOOK I.
In the arrangement which has been adopted, Book I. comprises the
Autobiography and Appendix. The Autobiography extends to the 21st of
March, 1790, when Mr. Jefferson arrived in New York to enter upon the
duties of the Department of State, and embraces a variety of important
subjects, such as the rise and progress of the difficulties between
Great Britain and her North American Colonies--the circumstances
connected with the Declaration of Independence--the debates in Congress
upon the adoption thereof, as reduced to writing by Mr. Jefferson
at the time--the history of the Articles of Confederation--early
stages of the French Revolution--revision of the Penal Code of
Virginia--abolition of her laws of Primogeniture--overthrow of her
Church Establishment--Act of Religious Freedom, &c.--all matter
interesting in itself, but rendered particularly so by the fact that
it comes from one who was himself a chief actor in the scenes which he
describes.
BOOK I.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY, WITH APPENDIX.
JANUARY 6, 1821. At the age of 77, I begin to make some memoranda, and
state some recollections of dates and facts concerning myself, for my
own more ready reference, and for the information of my family.
The tradition in my father's family was, that their ancestor came to
this country from Wales, and from near the mountain of Snowdon, the
highest in Great Britain. I noted once a case from Wales, in the law
reports, where a person of our name was either plaintiff or defendant;
and one of the same name was secretary to the Virginia Company. These
are the only instances in which I have met with the name in that
country. I have found it in our early records; but the first particular
information I have of any ancestor was of my grandfather, who lived
at the place in Chesterfield called Ozborne's, and owned the lands
afterwards the glebe of the parish. He had three sons; Thomas who died
young, Field who settled on the waters of Roanoke and left numerous
descendants, and Peter, my father, who settled on the lands I still
own, called Shadwell, adjoining my present residence. He was born
February 29, 1707-8, and intermarried 1739, with Jane Randolph, of
the age of 19, daughter of Isham Randolph, one of the seven sons of
that name and family, settled at Dungeoness in Goochland. They trace
their pedigree far back in England and Scotland, to which let every one
ascribe the faith and merit he chooses.
My father's education had been quite neglected; but being of a strong
mind, sound judgment, and eager after information, he read much
and improved himself, insomuch that he was chosen, with Joshua Fry,
Professor of Mathematics in William and Mary college, to continue
the boundary line between Virginia and North Carolina, which had been
begun by Colonel Byrd; and was afterwards employed with the same Mr.
Fry, to make the first map of Virginia which had ever been made, that
of Captain Smith being merely a conjectural sketch. They possessed
excellent materials for so much of the country as is below the blue
ridge; little being then known beyond that ridge. He was the third
or fourth settler, about the year 1737, of the part of the country in
which I live. He died, August 17th, 1757, leaving my mother a widow,
who lived till 1776, with six daughters and two sons, myself the
elder. To my younger brother he left his estate on James River, called
Snowden, after the supposed birth-place of the family: to myself, the
lands on which I was born and live.
He placed me at the English school at five years of age; and at the
Latin at nine, where I continued until his death. My teacher, Mr.
Douglas, a clergyman from Scotland, with the rudiments of the Latin and
Greek languages, taught me the French; and on the death of my father, I
went to the Reverend Mr. Maury, a correct classical scholar, with whom
I continued two years; and then, to wit, in the spring of 1760, went to
William and Mary college, where I continued two years. It was my great
good fortune, and what probably fixed the destinies of my life, that
Dr. William Small of Scotland, was then professor of Mathematics, a man
profound in most of the useful branches of science, with a happy talent
of communication, correct and gentlemanly manners, and an enlarged and
liberal mind. He, most happily for me, became soon attached to me, and
made me his daily companion when not engaged in the school; and from
his conversation I got my first views of the expansion of science,
and of the system of things in which we are placed. Fortunately, the
philosophical chair became vacant soon after my arrival at college,
and he was appointed to fill it _per interim_: and he was the first
who ever gave, in that college, regular lectures in Ethics, Rhetoric
and Belles lettres. He returned to Europe in 1762, having previously
filled up the measure of his goodness to me, by procuring for me, from
his most intimate friend, George Wythe, a reception as a student of
law, under his direction, and introduced me to the acquaintance and
familiar table of Governor Fauquier, the ablest man who had ever filled
that office. With him, and at his table, Dr. Small and Mr. Wythe, his
_amici omnium horarum_, and myself, formed a _partie quarree_, and to
the habitual conversations on these occasions I owed much instruction.
Mr. Wythe continued to be my faithful and beloved mentor in youth,
and my most affectionate friend through life. In 1767, he led me into
the practice of the law at the bar of the General court, at which I
continued until the Revolution shut up the courts of justice.[1]
In 1769, I became a member of the legislature by the choice of the
county in which I live, and so continued until it was closed by the
Revolution. I made one effort in that body for the permission of the
emancipation of slaves, which was rejected: and indeed, during the
regal government, nothing liberal could expect success. Our minds were
circumscribed within narrow limits, by an habitual belief that it was
our duty to be subordinate to the mother country in all matters of
government, to direct all our labors in subservience to her interests,
and even to observe a bigoted intolerance for all religions but
hers. The difficulties with our representatives were of habit and
despair, not of reflection and conviction. Experience soon proved
that they could bring their minds to rights, on the first summons of
their attention. But the King's Council, which acted as another house
of legislature, held their places at will, and were in most humble
obedience to that will: the Governor too, who had a negative on our
laws, held by the same tenure, and with still greater devotedness to
it: and, last of all, the Royal negative closed the last door to every
hope of amelioration.
On the 1st of January, 1772, I was married to Martha Skelton, widow
of Bathurst Skelton, and daughter of John Wayles, then twenty-three
years old. Mr. Wayles was a lawyer of much practice, to which he was
introduced more by his great industry, punctuality, and practical
readiness, than by eminence in the science of his profession. He was
a most agreeable companion, full of pleasantry and good humor, and
welcomed in every society. He acquired a handsome fortune, and died
in May, 1773, leaving three daughters: the portion which came on
that event to Mrs. Jefferson, after the debts should be paid, which
were very considerable, was about equal to my own patrimony, and
consequently doubled the ease of our circumstances.
When the famous Resolutions of 1765, against the Stamp-act, were
proposed, I was yet a student of law in Williamsburgh. I attended the
debate, however, at the door of the lobby of the House of Burgesses,
and heard the splendid display of Mr. Henry's talents as a popular
orator. They were great indeed; such as I have never heard from any
other man. He appeared to me to speak as Homer wrote. Mr. Johnson, a
lawyer, and member from the Northern Neck, seconded the resolutions,
and by him the learning and the logic of the case were chiefly
maintained. My recollections of these transactions may be seen page 60
of the life of Patrick Henry, by Wirt, to whom I furnished them.
In May, 1769, a meeting of the General Assembly was called by the
Governor, Lord Botetourt. I had then become a member; and to that
meeting became known the joint resolutions and address of the
Lords and Commons, of 1768-9, on the proceedings in Massachusetts.
Counter-resolutions, and an address to the King by the House of
Burgesses, were agreed to with little opposition, and a spirit
manifestly displayed itself of considering the cause of Massachusetts
as a common one. The Governor dissolved us: but we met the next day in
the Apollo[2] of the Raleigh tavern, formed ourselves into a voluntary
convention, drew up articles of association against the use of any
merchandise imported from Great Britain, signed and recommended them
to the people, repaired to our several counties, and were re-elected
without any other exception than of the very few who had declined
assent to our proceedings.
Nothing of particular excitement occurring for a considerable time,
our countrymen seemed to fall into a state of insensibility to our
situation; the duty on tea, not yet repealed, and the declaratory act
of a right in the British Parliament to bind us by their laws in all
cases whatsoever, still suspended over us. But a court of inquiry held
in Rhode Island in 1762, with a power to send persons to England to be
tried for offences committed here, was considered, at our session of
the spring of 1773, as demanding attention. Not thinking our old and
leading members up to the point of forwardness and zeal which the times
required, Mr. Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Francis L. Lee, Mr. Carr and
myself agreed to meet in the evening, in a private room of the Raleigh,
to consult on the state of things. There may have been a member or two
more whom I do not recollect. We were all sensible that the most urgent
of all measures was that of coming to an understanding with all the
other colonies, to consider the British claims as a common cause to
all, and to produce a unity of action: and, for this purpose, that a
committee of correspondence in each colony would be the best instrument
for inter-communication: and that their first measure would probably
be, to propose a meeting of deputies from every colony, at some central
place, who should be charged with the direction of the measures which
should be taken by all. We, therefore, drew up the resolutions which
may be seen in Wirt, page 87. The consulting members proposed to me to
move them, but I urged that it should be done by Mr. Carr, my friend
and brother-in-law, then a new member, to whom I wished an opportunity
should be given of making known to the house his great worth and
talents. It was so agreed; he moved them, they were agreed to _nem.
con._, and a committee of correspondence appointed, of whom Peyton
Randolph, the speaker, was chairman. The Governor (then Lord Dunmore)
dissolved us, but the committee met the next day, prepared a circular
letter to the speakers of the other colonies, inclosing to each a
copy of the resolutions, and left it in charge with their chairman to
forward them by expresses.
The origination of these committees of correspondence between the
colonies has been since claimed for Massachusetts, and Marshall[3] has
given into this error, although the very note of his appendix to which
he refers, shows that their establishment was confined to their own
towns. This matter will be seen clearly stated in a letter of Samuel
Adams Wells to me of April 2nd, 1819, and my answer of May 12th. I
was corrected by the letter of Mr. Wells in the information I had
given Mr. Wirt, as stated in his note, page 87, that the messengers
of Massachusetts and Virginia crossed each other on the way, bearing
similar propositions; for Mr. Wells shows that Massachusetts did not
adopt the measure, but on the receipt of our proposition, delivered at
their next session. Their message, therefore, which passed ours, must
have related to something else, for I well remember Peyton Randolph's
informing me of the crossing of our messengers.[4]
The next event which excited our sympathies for Massachusetts, was
the Boston port bill, by which that port was to be shut up on the 1st
of June, 1774. This arrived while we were in session in the spring
of that year. The lead in the House, on these subjects, being no
longer left to the old members, Mr. Henry, R. H. Lee, Fr. L. Lee,
three or four other members, whom I do not recollect, and myself,
agreeing that we must boldly take an unequivocal stand in the line with
Massachusetts, determined to meet and consult on the proper measures,
in the council-chamber, for the benefit of the library in that room.
We were under conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from
the lethargy into which they had fallen, as to passing events; and
thought that the appointment of a day of general fasting and prayer
would be most likely to call up and alarm their attention. No example
of such a solemnity had existed since the days of our distresses in the
war of '55, since which a new generation had grown up. With the help,
therefore, of Rushworth, whom we rummaged over for the revolutionary
precedents and forms of the Puritans of that day, preserved by him,
we cooked up a resolution, somewhat modernizing their phrases, for
appointing the 1st day of June, on which the port-bill was to commence,
for a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer, to implore Heaven to
avert from us the evils of civil war, to inspire us with firmness
in support of our rights, and to turn the hearts of the King and
Parliament to moderation and justice. To give greater emphasis to our
proposition, we agreed to wait the next morning on Mr. Nicholas, whose
grave and religious character was more in unison with the tone of our
resolution, and to solicit him to move it. We accordingly went to him
in the morning. He moved it the same day; the 1st of June was proposed;
and it passed without opposition. The Governor dissolved us, as
usual. We retired to the Apollo, as before, agreed to an association,
and instructed the committee of correspondence to propose to the
corresponding committees of the other colonies, to appoint deputies to
meet in Congress at such place, _annually_, as should be convenient,
to direct, from time to time, the measures required by the general
interest: and we declared that an attack on any one colony, should
be considered as an attack on the whole. This was in May. We further
recommended to the several counties to elect deputies to meet at
Williamsburgh, the 1st of August ensuing, to consider the state of the
colony, and particularly to appoint delegates to a general Congress,
should that measure be acceded to by the committees of correspondence
generally. It was acceded to; Philadelphia was appointed for the place,
and the 5th of September for the time of meeting. We returned home, and
in our several counties invited the clergy to meet assemblies of the
people on the 1st of June, to perform the ceremonies of the day, and
to address to them discourses suited to the occasion. The people met
generally, with anxiety and alarm in their countenances, and the effect
of the day, through the whole colony, was like a shock of electricity,
arousing every man, and placing him erect and solidly on his centre.
They chose, universally, delegates for the convention. Being elected
one for my own county, I prepared a draught of instructions to be given
to the delegates whom we should send to the Congress, which I meant
to propose at our meeting.[5] In this I took the ground that, from
the beginning, I had thought the only one orthodox or tenable, which
was, that the relation between Great Britain and these colonies was
exactly the same as that of England and Scotland, after the accession
of James, and until the union, and the same as her present relations
with Hanover, having the same executive chief, but no other necessary
political connection; and that our emigration from England to this
country gave her no more rights over us, than the emigrations of the
Danes and Saxons gave to the present authorities of the mother country,
over England. In this doctrine, however, I had never been able to get
any one to agree with me but Mr. Wythe. He concurred in it from the
first dawn of the question, What was the political relation between
us and England? Our other patriots, Randolph, the Lees, Nicholas,
Pendleton, stopped at the half-way house of John Dickinson, who
admitted that England had a right to regulate our commerce, and to
lay duties on it for the purposes of regulation, but not of raising
revenue. But for this ground there was no foundation in compact, in any
acknowledged principles of colonization, nor in reason: expatriation
being a natural right, and acted on as such, by all nations, in all
ages. I set out for Williamsburg some days before that appointed for
our meeting, but was taken ill of a dysentery on the road, and was
unable to proceed. I sent on, therefore, to Williamsburgh, two copies
of my draught, the one under cover to Peyton Randolph, who I knew would
be in the chair of the convention, the other to Patrick Henry. Whether
Mr. Henry disapproved the ground taken, or was too lazy to read it (for
he was the laziest man in reading I ever knew) I never learned: but
he communicated it to nobody. Peyton Randolph informed the convention
he had received such a paper from a member, prevented by sickness from
offering it in his place, and he laid it on the table for perusal. It
was read generally by the members, approved by many, though thought too
bold for the present state of things; but they printed it in pamphlet
form, under the title of "A Summary View of the Rights of British
America." It found its way to England, was taken up by the opposition,
interpolated a little by Mr. Burke so as to make it answer opposition
purposes, and in that form ran rapidly through several editions. This
information I had from Parson Hurt, who happened at the time to be
in London, whither he had gone to receive clerical orders; and I was
informed afterwards by Peyton Randolph, that it had procured me the
honor of having my name inserted in a long list of proscriptions,
enrolled in a bill of attainder commenced in one of the Houses of
Parliament, but suppressed in embryo by the hasty step of events, which
warned them to be a little cautious. Montague, agent of the House of
Burgesses in England, made extracts from the bill, copied the names,
and sent them to Peyton Randolph. The names, I think, were about
twenty, which he repeated to me, but I recollect those only of Hancock,
the two Adamses, Peyton Randolph himself, Patrick Henry, and myself.[6]
The convention met on the 1st of August, renewed their association,
appointed delegates to the Congress, gave them instructions very
temperately and properly expressed, both as to style and matter;[7]
and they repaired to Philadelphia at the time appointed. The splendid
proceedings of that Congress, at their first session, belong to general
history, are known to every one, and need not therefore be noted here.
They terminated their session on the 26th of October, to meet again
on the 10th of May ensuing. The convention, at their ensuing session
of March, '75, approved of the proceedings of Congress, thanked their
delegates, and reappointed the same persons to represent the colony
at the meeting to be held in May: and foreseeing the probability that
Peyton Randolph, their president, and speaker also of the House of
Burgesses, might be called off, they added me, in that event, to the
delegation.
Mr. Randolph was, according to expectation, obliged to leave the chair
of Congress, to attend the General Assembly summoned by Lord Dunmore,
to meet on the 1st day of June, 1775. Lord North's conciliatory
propositions, as they were called, had been received by the Governor,
and furnished the subject for which this assembly was convened. Mr.
Randolph accordingly attended, and the tenor of these propositions
being generally known, as having been addressed to all the governors,
he was anxious that the answer of our Assembly, likely to be the first,
should harmonize with what he knew to be the sentiments and wishes of
the body he had recently left. He feared that Mr. Nicholas, whose mind
was not yet up to the mark of the times, would undertake the answer,
and therefore pressed me to prepare it. I did so, and, with his aid,
carried it through the House, with long and doubtful scruples from
Mr. Nicholas and James Mercer, and a dash of cold water on it here
and there, enfeebling it somewhat, but finally with unanimity, or
a vote approaching it. This being passed, I repaired immediately to
Philadelphia, and conveyed to Congress the first notice they had of
it. It was entirely approved there. I took my seat with them on the
21st of June. On the 24th, a committee which had been appointed to
prepare a declaration of the causes of taking up arms, brought in their
report (drawn I believe by J. Rutledge) which, not being liked, the
House recommitted it, on the 26th, and added Mr. Dickinson and myself
to the committee. On the rising of the House, the committee having not
yet met, I happened to find myself near Governor W. Livingston, and
proposed to him to draw the paper. He excused himself and proposed
that I should draw it. On my pressing him with urgency, "we are as
yet but new acquaintances, sir," said he, "why are you so earnest for
my doing it?" "Because," said I, "I have been informed that you drew
the Address to the people of Great Britain, a production, certainly,
of the finest pen in America." "On that," says he, "perhaps, sir, you
may not have been correctly informed." I had received the information
in Virginia from Colonel Harrison on his return from that Congress.
Lee, Livingston, and Jay had been the committee for that draught.
The first, prepared by Lee, had been disapproved and recommitted. The
second was drawn by Jay, but being presented by Governor Livingston,
had led Colonel Harrison into the error. The next morning, walking in
the hall of Congress, many members being assembled, but the House not
yet formed, I observed Mr. Jay speaking to R. H. Lee, and leading him
by the button of his coat to me. "I understand, sir," said he to me,
"that this gentleman informed you, that Governor Livingston drew the
Address to the people of Great Britain." I assured him, at once, that
I had not received that information from Mr. Lee, and that not a word
had ever passed on the subject between Mr. Lee and myself; and after
some explanations the subject was dropped. These gentlemen had had some
sparrings in debate before, and continued ever very hostile to each
other.
I prepared a draught of the declaration committed to us. It was too
strong for Mr. Dickinson. He still retained the hope of reconciliation
with the mother country, and was unwilling it should be lessened by
offensive statements. He was so honest a man, and so able a one, that
he was greatly indulged even by those who could not feel his scruples.
We therefore requested him to take the paper, and put it into a form
he could approve. He did so, preparing an entire new statement, and
preserving of the former only the last four paragraphs and half of
the preceding one. We approved and reported it to Congress, who
accepted it. Congress gave a signal proof of their indulgence to
Mr. Dickinson, and of their great desire not to go too fast for any
respectable part of our body, in permitting him to draw their second
petition to the King according to his own ideas, and passing it with
scarcely any amendment. The disgust against this humility was general;
and Mr. Dickinson's delight at its passage was the only circumstance
which reconciled them to it. The vote being passed, although further
observation on it was out of order, he could not refrain from rising
and expressing his satisfaction, and concluded by saying, "there is but
one word, Mr. President, in the paper which I disapprove, and that is
the word _Congress;_" on which Ben Harrison rose and said, "There is
but one word in the paper, Mr. President, of which I approve, and that
is the word _Congress_."
On the 22d of July, Dr. Franklin, Mr. Adams, R. H. Lee, and myself,
were appointed a committee to consider and report on Lord North's
conciliatory resolution. The answer of the Virginia Assembly on that
subject having been approved, I was requested by the committee to
prepare this report, which will account for the similarity of feature
in the two instruments.
On the 15th of May, 1776, the convention of Virginia instructed their
delegates in Congress, to propose to that body to declare the colonies
independent of Great Britain, and appointed a committee to prepare a
declaration of rights and plan of government.
[8]In Congress, Friday, June 7, 1776. The delegates from Virginia
moved, in obedience to instructions from their constituents, that the
Congress should declare that these United colonies are, and of right
ought to be, free and independent states, that they are absolved
from all allegiance to the British crown, and that all political
connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought
to be, totally dissolved; that measures should be immediately taken
for procuring the assistance of foreign powers, and a Confederation be
formed to bind the colonies more closely together.
The House being obliged to attend at that time to some other business,
the proposition was referred to the next day, when the members were
ordered to attend punctually at ten o'clock.
Saturday, June 8. They proceeded to take it into consideration, and
referred it to a committee of the whole, into which they immediately
resolved themselves, and passed that day and Monday, the 10th, in
debating on the subject.
It was argued by Wilson, Robert R. Livingston, E. Rutledge, Dickinson,
and others--
That, though they were friends to the measures themselves, and saw the
impossibility that we should ever again be united with Great Britain,
yet they were against adopting them at this time:
That the conduct we had formerly observed was wise and proper now, of
deferring to take any capital step till the voice of the people drove
us into it:
That they were our power, and without them our declarations could not
be carried into effect:
That the people of the middle colonies (Maryland, Delaware,
Pennsylvania, the Jerseys and New York) were not yet ripe for bidding
adieu to British connection, but that they were fast ripening, and, in
a short time, would join in the general voice of America:
That the resolution, entered into by this House on the 15th of May,
for suppressing the exercise of all powers derived from the crown, had
shown, by the ferment into which it had thrown these middle colonies,
that they had not yet accommodated their minds to a separation from the
mother country:
That some of them had expressly forbidden their delegates to consent
to such a declaration, and others had given no instructions, and
consequently no powers to give such consent:
That if the delegates of any particular colony had no power to declare
such colony independent, certain they were, the others could not
declare it for them; the colonies being as yet perfectly independent of
each other:
That the assembly of Pennsylvania was now sitting above stairs, their
convention would sit within a few days, the convention of New York was
now sitting, and those of the Jerseys and Delaware counties would meet
on the Monday following, and it was probable these bodies would take up
the question of Independence, and would declare to their delegates the
voice of their state:
That if such a declaration should now be agreed to, these delegates
must retire, and possibly their colonies might secede from the Union:
That such a secession would weaken us more than could be compensated by
any foreign alliance:
That in the event of such a division, foreign powers would either
refuse to join themselves to our fortunes, or, having us so much in
their power as that desperate declaration would place us, they would
insist on terms proportionably more hard and prejudicial:
That we had little reason to expect an alliance with those to whom
alone, as yet, we had cast our eyes:
That France and Spain had reason to be jealous of that rising power,
which would one day certainly strip them of all their American
possessions:
That it was more likely they should form a connection with the
British court, who, if they should find themselves unable otherwise
to extricate themselves from their difficulties, would agree to a
partition of our territories, restoring Canada to France, and the
Floridas to Spain, to accomplish for themselves a recovery of these
colonies:
That it would not be long before we should receive certain information
of the disposition of the French court, from the agent whom we had sent
to Paris for that purpose:
That if this disposition should be favorable, by waiting the event of
the present campaign, which we all hoped would be successful, we should
have reason to expect an alliance on better terms:
That this would in fact work no delay of any effectual aid from such
ally, as, from the advance of the season and distance of our situation,
it was impossible we could receive any assistance during this campaign:
That it was prudent to fix among ourselves the terms on which we should
form alliance, before we declared we would form one at all events:
And that if these were agreed on, and our Declaration of Independence
ready by the time our Ambassador should be prepared to sail, it would
be as well as to go into that Declaration at this day.
On the other side, it was urged by J. Adams, Lee, Wythe, and others,
that no gentleman had argued against the policy or the right of
separation from Britain, nor had supposed it possible we should
ever renew our connection; that they had only opposed its being now
declared:
That the question was not whether, by a Declaration of Independence, we
should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a
fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or parliament of England, we had always been
independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy
from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of
imposing them, and that so far, our connection had been federal only,
and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the King, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but
that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the last act of
Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by
his levying war on us, a fact which had long ago proved us out of his
protection; it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and
protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:
That James the II. never declared the people of England out of his
protection, yet his actions proved it, and the Parliament declared it:
No delegates then can be denied, or ever want, a power of declaring an
existing truth:
That the delegates from the Delaware counties having declared their
constituents ready to join, there are only two colonies, Pennsylvania
and Maryland, whose delegates are absolutely tied up, and that these
had, by their instructions, only reserved a right of confirming or
rejecting the measure:
That the instructions from Pennsylvania might be accounted for from the
times in which they were drawn, near a twelvemonth ago, since which the
face of affairs has totally changed:
That within that time, it had become apparent that Britain was
determined to accept nothing less than a _carte-blanche_, and that the
King's answer to the Lord Mayor, Aldermen and Common Council of London,
which had come to hand four days ago, must have satisfied every one of
this point:
That the people wait for us to lead the way:
That _they_ are in favor of the measure, though the instructions given
by some of their _representatives_ are not:
That the voice of the representatives is not always consonant with
the voice of the people, and that this is remarkably the case in these
middle colonies:
That the effect of the resolution of the 15th of May has proved this,
which, raising the murmurs of some in the colonies of Pennsylvania
and Maryland, called forth the opposing voice of the freer part of the
people, and proved them to be the majority even in these colonies:
That the backwardness of these two colonies might be ascribed, partly
to the influence of proprietary power and connections, and partly, to
their having not yet been attacked by the enemy:
That these causes were not likely to be soon removed, as there seemed
no probability that the enemy would make either of these the seat of
this summer's war:
That it would be vain to wait either weeks or months for perfect
unanimity, since it was impossible that all men should ever become of
one sentiment on any question:
That the conduct of some colonies, from the beginning of this contest,
had given reason to suspect it was their settled policy to keep in
the rear of the confederacy, that their particular prospect might be
better, even in the worst event:
That, therefore, it was necessary for those colonies who had thrown
themselves forward and hazarded all from the beginning, to come forward
now also, and put all again to their own hazard:
That the history of the Dutch Revolution, of whom three states only
confederated at first, proved that a secession of some colonies would
not be so dangerous as some apprehended:
That a declaration of Independence alone could render it consistent
with European delicacy, for European powers to treat with us, or even
to receive an Ambassador from us:
That till this, they would not receive our vessels into their ports,
nor acknowledge the adjudications of our courts of admirality to be
legitimate, in cases of capture of British vessels:
That though France and Spain may be jealous of our rising power,
they must think it will be much more formidable with the addition of
Great Britain; and will therefore see it their interest to prevent
a coalition; but should they refuse, we shall be but where we are;
whereas without trying, we shall never know whether they will aid us or
not:
That the present campaign may be unsuccessful, and therefore we had
better propose an alliance while our affairs wear a hopeful aspect:
That to wait the event of this campaign will certainly work delay,
because, during the summer, France may assist us effectually, by
cutting off those supplies of provisions from England and Ireland, on
which the enemy's armies here are to depend; or by setting in motion
the great power they have collected in the West Indies, and calling our
enemy to the defence of the possessions they have there:
That it would be idle to lose time in settling the terms of alliance,
till we had first determined we would enter into alliance:
That it is necessary to lose no time in opening a trade for our people,
who will want clothes, and will want money too, for the payment of
taxes:
And that the only misfortune is, that we did not enter into alliance
with France six months sooner, as, besides opening her ports for the
vent of our last year's produce, she might have marched an army into
Germany, and prevented the petty princes there, from selling their
unhappy subjects to subdue us.
It appearing in the course of these debates, that the colonies of New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and South Carolina
were not yet matured for falling from the parent stem, but that they
were fast advancing to that state, it was thought most prudent to wait
a while for them, and to postpone the final decision to July 1st; but,
that this might occasion as little delay as possible, a committee was
appointed to prepare a Declaration of Independence. The committee were
John Adams, Dr. Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert R. Livingston, and
myself. Committees were also appointed, at the same time, to prepare a
plan of confederation for the colonies, and to state the terms proper
to be proposed for foreign alliance. The committee for drawing the
Declaration of Independence, desired me to do it. It was accordingly
done, and being approved by them, I reported it to the House on Friday,
the 28th of June, when it was read, and ordered to lie on the table.
On Monday, the 1st of July, the House resolved itself into a committee
of the whole, and resumed the consideration of the original motion
made by the delegates of Virginia, which, being again debated through
the day, was carried in the affirmative by the votes of New Hampshire,
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland,
Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia. South Carolina and Pennsylvania
voted against it. Delaware had but two members present, and they
were divided. The delegates from New York declared they were for it
themselves, and were assured their constituents were for it; but that
their instructions having been drawn near a twelvemonth before, when
reconciliation was still the general object, they were enjoined by them
to do nothing which should impede that object. They, therefore, thought
themselves not justifiable in voting on either side, and asked leave to
withdraw from the question; which was given them. The committee rose
and reported their resolution to the House. Mr. Edward Rutledge, of
South Carolina, then requested the determination might be put off to
the next day, as he believed his colleagues, though they disapproved
of the resolution, would then join in it for the sake of unanimity.
The ultimate question, whether the House would agree to the resolution
of the committee, was accordingly postponed to the next day, when it
was again moved, and South Carolina concurred in voting for it. In the
meantime, a third member had come post from the Delaware counties, and
turned the vote of that colony in favor of the resolution. Members of a
different sentiment attending that morning from Pennsylvania also, her
vote was changed, so that the whole twelve colonies who were authorized
to vote at all, gave their voices for it; and, within a few days,[9]
the convention of New York approved of it, and thus supplied the void
occasioned by the withdrawing of her delegates from the vote.
Congress proceeded the same day to consider the Declaration of
Independence, which had been reported and lain on the table the Friday
preceding, and on Monday referred to a committee of the whole. The
pusillanimous idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms
with, still haunted the minds of many. For this reason, those passages
which conveyed censures on the people of England were struck out,
lest they should give them offence. The clause too, reprobating the
enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance
to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain
the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to
continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe, felt a little
tender under those censures; for though their people had very few
slaves themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers
of them to others. The debates, having taken up the greater parts of
the 2d, 3d, and 4th days of July, were, on the evening of the last,
closed; the Declaration was reported by the committee, agreed to by
the House, and signed by every member present, except Mr. Dickinson.
As the sentiments of men are known not only by what they receive,
but what they reject also, I will state the form of the Declaration
as originally reported. The parts struck out by Congress shall be
distinguished by a black line drawn under them[10] and those inserted
by them shall be placed in the margin, or in a concurrent column.
A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of
America, in _General_ Congress assembled.
When, in the course of human events,
it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bands which
have connected them with another, and
to assume among the powers of the earth
the separate and equal station to which
the laws of nature and of nature's God
entitle them, a decent respect to the
opinions of mankind requires that they
should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self evident:
that all men are created equal; that they
are endowed by their creator with
[certain] [_inherent and_] inalienable rights; that
among these are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness; that to secure
these rights, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed;
that whenever any form of government
becomes destructive of these ends, it
is the right of the people to alter
or to abolish it, and to institute new
government, laying its foundation on such
principles, and organizing its powers
in such form, as to them shall seem
most likely to effect their safety and
happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate
that governments long established should
not be changed for light and transient
causes; and accordingly all experience
hath shown that mankind are more disposed
to suffer while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by abolishing
the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and
usurpations, [_begun at a distinguished
period and_] pursuing invariably the
same object, evinces a design to reduce
them under absolute despotism, it is
their right, it is their duty to throw
off such government, and to provide new
guards for their future security. Such
has been the patient sufferance of these
colonies; and such is now the necessity
[alter] which constrains them to [_expunge_]
their former systems of government. The
history of the present king of Great Britain
[repeated] is a history of [_unremitting_] injuries
[all having] injuries and usurpations, [_among_ which
appears no solitary fact to contradict
the uniform tenor of the rest, but all
have_] in direct object the establishment of
an absolute tyranny over these states. To
prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid
world [_for the truth of which we pledge a
faith yet unsullied by falsehood_.]
He has refused his assent to laws the
most wholesome and necessary for the
public good.
He has forbidden his governors to
pass laws of immediate and pressing
importance, unless suspended in their
operation till his assent should be
obtained; and, when so suspended, he has
utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for
the accommodation of large districts
of people, unless those people would
relinquish the right of representation in
the legislature, a right inestimable to
them, and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies
at places unusual, uncomfortable, and
distant from the depository of their
public records, for the sole purpose of
fatiguing them into compliance with his
measures.
He has dissolved representative houses
repeatedly [_and continually_] for
opposing with manly firmness his
invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time after
such dissolutions to cause others to
be elected, whereby the legislative
powers, incapable of annihilation, have
returned to the people at large for their
exercise, the state remaining, in the
meantime, exposed to all the dangers of
invasion from without and convulsions
within.
He has endeavored to prevent the
population of these states; for that
purpose obstructing the laws for
naturalization of foreigners, refusing to
pass others to encourage their migrations
hither, and raising the conditions of new
appropriations of lands.
[obstructed] He has [_suffered_] the administration of
[by] justice [_totally to cease in some of these
states_] refusing his assent to laws for
establishing judiciary powers.
He has made [_our_] judges dependent on
his will alone for the tenure of their
offices, and the amount and payment of
their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of new
offices, [_by a self-assumed power_]
and sent hither swarms of new officers
to harass our people and eat out their
substance.
He has kept among us in times of peace
standing armies [_and ships of war_]
without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the military
independent of, and superior to, the
civil power.
He has combined with others to subject
us to a jurisdiction foreign to our
constitutions and unacknowledged by our
laws, giving his assent to their acts
of pretended legislation for quartering
large bodies of armed troops among us;
for protecting them by a mock trial from
punishment for any murders which they
should commit on the inhabitants of these
states; for cutting off our trade with
all parts of the world; for imposing
taxes on us without our consent; for
[in many cases] depriving us [ ] of the benefits of trial
by jury; for transporting us beyond seas
to be tried for pretended offences;
for abolishing the free system of
English laws in a neighboring province,
establishing therein an arbitrary
government, and enlarging its boundaries,
so as to render it at once an example
and fit instrument for introducing
the same absolute rule into these
[colonies] [_states_]; for taking away our charters,
abolishing our most valuable laws, and
altering fundamentally the forms of
our governments; for suspending our own
legislatures, and declaring themselves
invested with power to legislate for us
in all cases whatsoever.
[by declaring us He has abdicated government here
out of his [_withdrawing his governors, and
protection, and declaring us out of his allegiance and
waging war against protection_.]
us.]
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our
coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed
the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large
armies of foreign mercenaries to complete
the works of death, desolation and
tyranny already begun with circumstances
[scarcely paralleled of cruelty and perfidy [ ] unworthy the
in the most barbarous head of a civilized nation.
ages, and totally]
He has constrained our fellow citizens
taken captive on the high seas, to bear
arms against their country, to become
the executioners of their friends and
brethren, or to fall themselves by their
hands.
[excited domestic He has [ ] endeavored to bring on the
insurrection among inhabitants of our frontiers, the
us, and has] merciless Indian savages, whose known
rule of warfare is an undistinguished
destruction of all ages, sexes and
conditions [_of existence_.]
[_He has incited treasonable
insurrections of our fellow citizens,
with the allurements of forfeiture and
confiscation of our property._
_He has waged cruel war against human
nature itself violating its most sacred
rights of life and liberty in the
persons of a distant people who never
offended him, captivating and carrying
them into slavery in another hemisphere,
or to incur miserable death in their
transportation thither. This piratical
warfare, the opprobium of INFIDEL
powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN
king of Great Britain. Determined to
keep open a market where MEN should
be bought and sold, he has prostituted
his negative for suppressing every
legislative attempt to prohibit or to
restrain this execrable commerce. And
that this assemblage of horrors might
want no fact of distinguished die, he is
now exciting those very people to rise
in arms among us, and to purchase that
liberty of which he has deprived them,
by murdering the people on whom he also
obtruded them: thus paying off former
crimes committed against the LIBERTIES
of one people, with crimes which he
urges them to commit against the LIVES
of another_.]
In every stage of these oppressions we
have petitioned for redress in the most
humble terms: our repeated petitions have
been answered only by repeated injuries.
A prince whose character is thus marked
by every act which may define a tyrant
[free] is unfit to be the ruler of a [ ] people
[_who mean to be free. Future ages
will scarcely believe that the hardiness
of one man adventured, within the short
compass of twelve years only, to lay a
foundation so broad and so undisguised
for tyranny over a people fostered and
fixed in principles of freedom._]
Nor have we been wanting in attentions to
our British brethren. We have warned them
from time to time of attempts by their
[an unwarrantable] legislature to extend [_a_] jurisdiction over
[us] [_these our states_]. We have reminded
them of the circumstances of our
emigration and settlement here, [_no
one of which could warrant so strange
a pretension: that these were effected
at the expense of our own blood and
treasure, unassisted by the wealth or
the strength of Great Britain: that in
constituting indeed, our several forms
of government, we had adopted one common
king, thereby laying a foundation for
perpetual league and amity with them: but
that submission to their parliament was
no part of our constitution, nor ever in
idea, if history may be credited: and_,]
[have] we [ ] appealed to their native justice and
[and we have magnanimity [_as well as to_] the ties of our
conjured them by] common kindred to disavow these usurpations
[would inevitably] which [_were likely to_] interrupt our
connection and correspondence. They
too have been deaf to the voice of
justice and of consanguinity, [_and
when occasions have been given them,
by the regular course of their laws,
of removing from their councils the
disturbers of our harmony, they have, by
their free election, re-established them
in power. At this very time too, they
are permitting their chief magistrate to
send over not only soldiers of our common
blood, but Scotch and foreign mercenaries
to invade and destroy us. These facts
have given the last stab to agonizing
affection, and manly spirit bids us
to renounce forever these unfeeling
brethren. We must endeavor to forget our
former love for them, and hold them as
we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in
war, in peace friends. We might have been
a free and a great people together; but a
communication of grandeur and of freedom,
it seems, is below their dignity. Be it
so, since they will have it. The road to
happiness and to glory is open to us too.
We will tread it apart from them, and_]
[We must therefore] acquiesce in the necessity which denounces
our [_eternal_] separation [ ]!
[and hold them as we
hold the rest of
mankind, enemies in
war, in peace friends.]
We therefore the representatives We, therefore, the
of the United States of representatives of the United
America in General Congress States of America in General
assembled, do in the name, and Congress assembled, appealing to
by the authority of the good the supreme judge of the world
people of these [_states reject for the rectitude of our
and renounce all allegiance and intentions, do in the name, and
subjection to the kings of Great by the authority of the good
Britain and all others who may people of these colonies,
hereafter claim by, through or solemnly publish and declare,
under them; we utterly dissolve that these united colonies are,
all political connection which and of right ought to be free
may heretofore have subsisted and independent states; that
between us and the people or they are absolved from all
parliament of Great Britain: allegiance to the British crown,
and finally we do assert and and that all political
declare these colonies to be connection between them and the
free and independent states_,] state of Great Britain is, and
and that as free and independent ought to be, totally dissolved,
states, they have full power to and that as free and independent
levy war, conclude peace, states, they have full power to
contract alliances, establish levy war, conclude peace,
commerce, and to do all other contract alliances, establish
acts and things which commerce, and to do all other
independent states may of right acts and things which
do. independent states may of right
do.
And for the support of this And for the support of this
declaration, we mutually pledge declaration, with a firm
to each other our lives, our reliance on the protection of
fortunes, and our sacred honor. divine providence, we mutually
pledge to each other our lives,
our fortunes, and our sacred
honor.
The Declaration thus signed on the 4th, on paper, was engrossed on
parchment, and signed again on the 2d of August.
[Some erroneous statements of the proceedings on the Declaration of
Independence having got before the public in latter times, Mr. Samuel
A. Wells asked explanations of me, which are given in my letter to him
of May 12, '19, before and now again referred to.[11] I took notes in
my place while these things were going on, and at their close wrote
them out in form and with correctness, and from 1 to 7 of the two
preceding sheets, are the originals then written; as the two following
are of the earlier debates on the Confederation, which I took in like
manner.[12]]
On Friday, July 12, the committee appointed to draw the articles
of Confederation reported them, and, on the 22d, the House resolved
themselves into a committee to take them into consideration. On the
30th and 31st of that month, and 1st of the ensuing, those articles
were debated which determined the proportion, or quota, of money which
each state should furnish to the common treasury, and the manner of
voting in Congress. The first of these articles was expressed in the
original draught in these words. "Art. XI. All charges of war and
all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence, or
general welfare, and allowed by the United States assembled, shall
be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the
several colonies in proportion to the number of inhabitants of every
age, sex, and quality, except Indians not paying taxes, in each colony,
a true account of which, distinguishing the white inhabitants, shall
be triennially taken and transmitted to the Assembly of the United
States."
Mr. Chase moved that the quotas should be fixed, not by the number of
inhabitants of every condition, but by that of the "white inhabitants."
He admitted that taxation should be always in proportion to property,
that this was, in theory, the true rule; but that, from a variety of
difficulties, it was a rule which could never be adopted in practice.
The value of the property in every State, could never be estimated
justly and equally. Some other measure for the wealth of the State
must therefore be devised, some standard referred to, which would be
more simple. He considered the number of inhabitants as a tolerably
good criterion of property, and that this might always be obtained.
He therefore thought it the best mode which we could adopt, with one
exception only: he observed that negroes are property, and as such,
cannot be distinguished from the lands or personalities held in those
States where there are few slaves; that the surplus of profit which
a Northern farmer is able to lay by, he invests in cattle, horses,
&c., whereas a Southern farmer lays out the same surplus in slaves.
There is no more reason, therefore, for taxing the Southern States on
the farmer's head, and on his slave's head, than the Northern ones on
their farmer's heads and the heads of their cattle; that the method
proposed would, therefore, tax the Southern States according to their
numbers and their wealth conjunctly, while the Northern would be taxed
on numbers only: that negroes, in fact, should not be considered as
members of the State, more than cattle, and that they have no more
interest in it.
Mr. John Adams observed, that the numbers of people were taken by this
article, as an index of the wealth of the State, and not as subjects
of taxation; that, as to this matter, it was of no consequence by
what name you called your people, whether by that of freemen or of
slaves; that in some countries the laboring poor were called freemen,
in others they were called slaves; but that the difference as to the
state was imaginary only. What matters it whether a landlord, employing
ten laborers on his farm, gives them annually as much money as will
buy them the necessaries of life, or gives them those necessaries at
short hand? The ten laborers add as much wealth annually to the State,
increase its exports as much in the one case as the other. Certainly
five hundred freemen produce no more profits, no greater surplus for
the payment of taxes, than five hundred slaves. Therefore, the State
in which are the laborers called freemen, should be taxed no more than
that in which are those called slaves. Suppose, by an extraordinary
operation of nature or of law, one half the laborers of a State
could in the course of one night be transformed into slaves; would
the State be made the poorer or the less able to pay taxes? That the
condition of the laboring poor in most countries, that of the fishermen
particularly of the Northern States, is as abject as that of slaves.
It is the number of laborers which produces the surplus for taxation,
and numbers, therefore, indiscriminately, are the fair index of wealth;
that it is the use of the word "property" here, and its application
to some of the people of the State, which produces the fallacy. How
does the Southern farmer procure slaves? Either by importation or by
purchase from his neighbor. If he imports a slave, he adds one to the
number of laborers in his country, and proportionably to its profits
and abilities to pay taxes; if he buys from his neighbor, it is only a
transfer of a laborer from one farm to another, which does not change
the annual produce of the State, and therefore, should not change its
tax: that if a Northern farmer works ten laborers on his farm, he can,
it is true, invest the surplus of ten men's labor in cattle; but so may
the Southern farmer, working ten slaves; that a State of one hundred
thousand freemen can maintain no more cattle, than one of one hundred
thousand slaves. Therefore, they have no more of that kind of property;
that a slave may indeed, from the custom of speech, be more properly
called the wealth of his master, than the free laborer might be called
the wealth of his employer; but as to the State, both were equally its
wealth, and should, therefore, equally add to the quota of its tax.
Mr. Harrison proposed, as a compromise, that two slaves should be
counted as one freeman. He affirmed that slaves did not do as much work
as freemen, and doubted if two effected more than one; that this was
proved by the price of labor; the hire of a laborer in the Southern
colonies being from 8 to £12, while in the Northern it was generally
£24.
Mr. Wilson said, that if this amendment should take place, the Southern
colonies would have all the benefit of slaves, whilst the Northern ones
would bear the burthen: that slaves increase the profits of a State,
which the Southern States mean to take to themselves; that they also
increase the burthen of defence, which would of course fall so much
the heavier on the Northern: that slaves occupy the places of freemen,
and eat their food. Dismiss your slaves, and freemen will take their
places. It is our duty to lay every discouragement on the importation
of slaves; but this amendment would give the _jus trium liberorum_
to him who would import slaves: that other kinds of property were
pretty equally distributed through all the colonies: there were as
many cattle, horses and sheep, in the North as the South, and South
as the North; but not so as to slaves: that experience has shown that
those colonies have been always able to pay most, which have the most
inhabitants, whether they be black or white; and the practice of the
Southern colonies has always been to make every farmer pay poll taxes
upon all his laborers, whether they be black or white. He acknowledges,
indeed, that freemen work the most; but they consume the most also.
They do not produce a greater surplus for taxation. The slave is
neither fed nor clothed so expensively as a freeman. Again, white women
are exempted from labor generally, but negro women are not. In this,
then, the Southern States have an advantage as the article now stands.
It has sometimes been said, that slavery is necessary, because the
commodities they raise would be too dear for market if cultivated by
freemen; but now it is said that the labor of the slave is the dearest.
Mr. Payne urged the original resolution of Congress, to proportion the
quotas of the States to the number of souls.
Dr. Witherspoon was of opinion, that the value of lands and houses
was the best estimate of the wealth of a nation, and that it was
practicable to obtain such a valuation. This is the true barometer
of wealth. The one now proposed is imperfect in itself, and unequal
between the States. It has been objected that negroes eat the food of
freemen, and, therefore, should be taxed; horses also eat the food of
freemen; therefore they also should be taxed. It has been said too,
that in carrying slaves into the estimate of the taxes the State is to
pay, we do no more than those States themselves do, who always take
slaves into the estimate of the taxes the individual is to pay. But
the cases are not parallel. In the Southern colonies slaves pervade the
whole colony; but they do not pervade the whole continent. That as to
the original resolution of Congress, to proportion the quotas according
to the souls, it was temporary only, and related to the moneys
heretofore emitted: whereas we are now entering into a new compact, and
therefore stand on original ground.
August 1. The question being put, the amendment proposed was
rejected by the votes of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island,
Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, against those of
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina. Georgia was
divided.
The other article was in these words. "Art. XVII. In determining
questions, each colony shall have one vote."
July 30, 31, August 1. Present forty-one members. Mr. Chase observed
this article was the most likely to divide us, of any one proposed
in the draught then under consideration: that the larger colonies
had threatened they would not confederate at all, if their weight in
Congress should not be equal to the numbers of people they added to the
confederacy; while the smaller ones declared against a union, if they
did not retain an equal vote for the protection of their rights. That
it was of the utmost consequence to bring the parties together, as,
should we sever from each other, either no foreign power will ally with
us at all, or the different States will form different alliances, and
thus increase the horrors of those scenes of civil war and bloodshed,
which in such a state of separation and independence, would render
us a miserable people. That our importance, our interests, our peace
required that we should confederate, and that mutual sacrifices should
be made to effect a compromise of this difficult question. He was of
opinion, the smaller colonies would lose their rights, if they were
not in some instances allowed an equal vote; and, therefore, that a
discrimination should take place among the questions which would come
before Congress. That the smaller States should be secured in all
questions concerning life or liberty, and the greater ones, in all
respecting property. He, therefore, proposed, that in votes relating to
money, the voice of each colony should be proportioned to the number of
its inhabitants.
Dr. Franklin thought, that the votes should be so proportioned in
all cases. He took notice that the Delaware counties had bound up
their delegates to disagree to this article. He thought it a very
extraordinary language to be held by any State, that they would not
confederate with us, unless we would let them dispose of our money.
Certainly, if we vote equally, we ought to pay equally; but the smaller
States will hardly purchase the privilege at this price. That had
he lived in a State where the representation, originally equal, had
become unequal by time and accident, he might have submitted rather
than disturb government; but that we should be very wrong to set out
in this practice, when it is in our power to establish what is right.
That at the time of the Union between England and Scotland, the latter
had made the objection which the smaller States now do; but experience
had proved that no unfairness had ever been shown them: that their
advocates had prognosticated that it would again happen, as in times of
old, that the whale would swallow Jonas, but he thought the prediction
reversed in event, and that Jonas had swallowed the whale; for the
Scotch had in fact got possession of the government, and gave laws
to the English. He reprobated the original agreement of Congress to
vote by colonies, and, therefore, was for their voting, in all cases,
according to the number of taxables.
Dr. Witherspoon opposed every alteration of the article. All men
admit that a confederacy is necessary. Should the idea get abroad
that there is likely to be no union among us, it will damp the minds
of the people, diminish the glory of our struggle, and lessen its
importance; because it will open to our view future prospects of
war and dissension among ourselves. If an equal vote be refused, the
smaller States will become vassals to the larger; and all experience
has shown that the vassals and subjects of free States are the most
enslaved. He instanced the Helots of Sparta, and the provinces of
Rome. He observed that foreign powers, discovering this blemish, would
make it a handle for disengaging the smaller States from so unequal
a confederacy. That the colonies should in fact be considered as
individuals; and that, as such, in all disputes, they should have an
equal vote; that they are now collected as individuals making a bargain
with each other, and, of course, had a right to vote as individuals.
That in the East India Company they voted by persons, and not by their
proportion of stock. That the Belgic confederacy voted by provinces.
That in questions of war the smaller States were as much interested
as the larger, and therefore, should vote equally; and indeed, that
the larger States were more likely to bring war on the confederacy,
in proportion as their frontier was more extensive. He admitted that
equality of representation was an excellent principle, but then it
must be of things which are co-ordinate; that is, of things similar,
and of the same nature: that nothing relating to individuals could
ever come before Congress; nothing but what would respect colonies.
He distinguished between an incorporating and a federal union. The
union of England was an incorporating one; yet Scotland had suffered
by that union; for that its inhabitants were drawn from it by the
hopes of places and employments: nor was it an instance of equality of
representation; because, while Scotland was allowed nearly a thirteenth
of representation, they were to pay only one fortieth of the land tax.
He expressed his hopes, that in the present enlightened state of men's
minds, we might expect a lasting confederacy, if it was founded on fair
principles.
John Adams advocated the voting in proportion to numbers. He said that
we stand here as the representatives of the people: that in some States
the people are many, in others they are few; that therefore, their
vote here should be proportioned to the numbers from whom it comes.
Reason, justice and equity never had weight enough on the face of the
earth, to govern the councils of men. It is interest alone which does
it, and it is interest alone which can be trusted: that therefore the
interests within doors, should be the mathematical representatives of
the interests without doors: that the individuality of the colonies is
a mere sound. Does the individuality of a colony increase its wealth
or numbers? If it does, pay equally. If it does not add weight in the
scale of the confederacy, it cannot add to their rights, nor weigh
in argument. A. has £50, B. £500, C. £1000 in partnership. Is it just
they should equally dispose of the moneys of the partnership? It has
been said, we are independent individuals making a bargain together.
The question is not what we are now, but what we ought to be when our
bargain shall be made. The confederacy is to make us one individual
only; it is to form us like separate parcels of metal, into one common
mass. We shall no longer retain our separate individuality, but become
a single individual as to all questions submitted to the confederacy.
Therefore, all those reasons, which prove the justice and expediency of
equal representation in other assemblies, hold good here. It has been
objected that a proportional vote will endanger the smaller States.
We answer that an equal vote will endanger the larger. Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, are the three greater colonies.
Consider their distance, their difference of produce, of interests,
and of manners, and it is apparent they can never have an interest
or inclination to combine for the oppression of the smaller: that the
smaller will naturally divide on all questions with the larger. Rhode
Island, from its relation, similarity and intercourse, will generally
pursue the same objects with Massachusetts; Jersey, Delaware, and
Maryland, with Pennsylvania.
Dr. Rush took notice, that the decay of the liberties of the Dutch
republic proceeded from three causes. 1. The perfect unanimity
requisite on all occasions. 2. Their obligation to consult their
constituents. 3. Their voting by provinces. This last destroyed the
equality of representation, and the liberties of Great Britain also are
sinking from the same defect. That a part of our rights is deposited in
the hands of our legislatures. There, it was admitted, there should be
an equality of representation. Another part of our rights is deposited
in the hands of Congress: why is it not equally necessary there should
be an equal representation there? Were it possible to collect the
whole body of the people together, they would determine the questions
submitted to them by their majority. Why should not the same majority
decide when voting here, by their representatives? The larger colonies
are so providentially divided in situation, as to render every fear
of their combining visionary. Their interests are different, and their
circumstances dissimilar. It is more probable they will become rivals,
and leave it in the power of the smaller States to give preponderance
to any scale they please. The voting by the number of free inhabitants,
will have one excellent effect, that of inducing the colonies to
discourage slavery, and to encourage the increase of their free
inhabitants.
Mr. Hopkins observed, there were four larger, four smaller, and
four middle-sized colonies. That the four largest would contain more
than half the inhabitants of the confederated States, and therefore,
would govern the others as they should please. That history affords
no instance of such a thing as equal representation. The Germanic
body votes by States. The Helvetic body does the same; and so does
the Belgic confederacy. That too little is known of the ancient
confederations, to say what was their practice.
Mr. Wilson thought, that taxation should be in proportion to wealth,
but that representation should accord with the number of freemen. That
government is a collection or result of the wills of all: that if any
government could speak the will of all, it would be perfect; and that,
so far as it departs from this, it becomes imperfect. It has been said
that Congress is a representation of States, not of individuals. I say,
that the objects of its care are all the individuals of the States.
It is strange that annexing the name of "State" to ten thousand men,
should give them an equal right with forty thousand. This must be the
effect of magic, not of reason. As to those matters which are referred
to Congress, we are not so many States; we are one large State. We
lay aside our individuality, whenever we come here. The Germanic
body is a burlesque on government; and their practice, on any point,
is a sufficient authority and proof that it is wrong. The greatest
imperfection in the constitution of the Belgic confederacy is their
voting by provinces. The interest of the whole is constantly sacrificed
to that of the small States. The history of the war in the reign of
Queen Anne sufficiently proves this. It is asked, shall nine colonies
put it into the power of four to govern them as they please? I invert
the question, and ask, shall two millions of people put it in the power
of one million to govern them as they please? It is pretended, too,
that the smaller colonies will be in danger from the greater. Speak
in honest language and say, the minority will be in danger from the
majority. And is there an assembly on earth, where this danger may not
be equally pretended? The truth is, that our proceedings will then be
consentaneous with the interests of the majority, and so they ought
to be. The probability is much greater, that the larger States will
disagree, than that they will combine. I defy the wit of man to invent
a possible case, or to suggest any one thing on earth, which shall
be for the interests of Virginia, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, and
which will not also be for the interest of the other States.[13]
These articles, reported July 12, '76, were debated from day to day,
and time to time, for two years, were ratified July 9, '78, by ten
States, by New Jersey on the 26th of November of the same year, and
by Delaware on the 23d of February following. Maryland alone held off
two years more, acceding to them March 1, '81, and thus closing the
obligation.
Our delegation had been renewed for the ensuing year, commencing
August 11; but the new government was now organized, a meeting of the
legislature was to be held in October, and I had been elected a member
by my county. I knew that our legislation, under the regal government,
had many very vicious points which urgently required reformation, and
I thought I could be of more use in forwarding that work. I therefore
retired from my seat in Congress on the 2d of September, resigned
it, and took my place in the legislature of my State, on the 7th of
October.
On the 11th, I moved for leave to bring in a bill for the establishment
of courts of justice, the organization of which was of importance. I
drew the bill; it was approved by the committee, reported and passed,
after going through its due course.
On the 12th, I obtained leave to bring in a bill declaring tenants in
tail to hold their lands in fee simple. In the earlier times of the
colony, when lands were to be obtained for little or nothing, some
provident individuals procured large grants; and, desirous of founding
great families for themselves, settled them on their descendants in fee
tail. The transmission of this property from generation to generation,
in the same name, raised up a distinct set of families, who, being
privileged by law in the perpetuation of their wealth, were thus formed
into a Patrician order, distinguished by the splendor and luxury
of their establishments. From this order, too, the king habitually
selected his counsellors of State; the hope of which distinction
devoted the whole corps to the interests and will of the crown. To
annul this privilege, and instead of an aristocracy of wealth, of more
harm and danger, than benefit, to society, to make an opening for the
aristocracy of virtue and talent, which nature has wisely provided for
the direction of the interests of society, and scattered with equal
hand through all its conditions, was deemed essential to a well-ordered
republic.--To effect it, no violence was necessary, no deprivation of
natural right, but rather an enlargement of it by a repeal of the law.
For this would authorize the present holder to divide the property
among his children equally, as his affections were divided; and
would place them, by natural generation, on the level of their fellow
citizens. But this repeal was strongly opposed by Mr. Pendleton, who
was zealously attached to ancient establishments; and who, taken all
in all, was the ablest man in debate I have ever met with. He had not
indeed the poetical fancy of Mr. Henry, his sublime imagination, his
lofty and overwhelming diction; but he was cool, smooth and persuasive;
his language flowing, chaste and embellished; his conceptions quick,
acute and full of resource; never vanquished: for if he lost the main
battle, he returned upon you, and regained so much of it as to make it
a drawn one, by dexterous manœuvres, skirmishes in detail, and the
recovery of small advantages which, little singly, were important all
together. You never knew when you were clear of him, but were harassed
by his perseverance, until the patience was worn down of all who had
less of it than himself. Add to this, that he was one of the most
virtuous and benevolent of men, the kindest friend, the most amiable
and pleasant of companions, which ensured a favorable reception to
whatever came from him. Finding that the general principle of entails
could not be maintained, he took his stand on an amendment which he
proposed, instead of an absolute abolition, to permit the tenant in
tail to convey in fee simple, if he chose it; and he was within a few
votes of saving so much of the old law. But the bill passed finally for
entire abolition.
In that one of the bills for organizing our judiciary system, which
proposed a court of Chancery, I had provided for a trial by jury of all
matters of fact, in that as well as in the courts of law. He defeated
it by the introduction of four words only, "_if either party choose_."
The consequence has been, that as no suitor will say to his judge,
"Sir, I distrust you, give me a jury," juries are rarely, I might
say, perhaps, never, seen in that court, but when called for by the
Chancellor of his own accord.
The first establishment in Virginia which became permanent, was
made in 1607. I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until
about 1650. The first brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship;
after which the English commenced the trade, and continued it until
the revolutionary war. That suspended, _ipso facto_, their further
importation for the present, and the business of the war pressing
constantly on the legislature, this subject was not acted on finally
until the year '78, when I brought in a bill to prevent their further
importation. This passed without opposition, and stopped the increase
of the evil by importation, leaving to future efforts its final
eradication.
The first settlers of this colony were Englishmen, loyal subjects to
their king and church, and the grant to Sir Walter Raleigh contained
an express proviso that their laws "should not be against the true
Christian faith, now professed in the church of England." As soon
as the state of the colony admitted, it was divided into parishes,
in each of which was established a minister of the Anglican church,
endowed with a fixed salary, in tobacco, a glebe house and land
with the other necessary appendages. To meet these expenses, all the
inhabitants of the parishes were assessed, whether they were or not,
members of the established church. Towards Quakers who came here,
they were most cruelly intolerant, driving them from the colony by the
severest penalties. In process of time, however, other sectarisms were
introduced, chiefly of the Presbyterian family; and the established
clergy, secure for life in their glebes and salaries, adding to these,
generally, the emoluments of a classical school, found employment
enough, in their farms and school-rooms, for the rest of the week, and
devoted Sunday only to the edification of their flock, by service, and
a sermon at their parish church. Their other pastoral functions were
little attended to. Against this inactivity, the zeal and industry
of sectarian preachers had an open and undisputed field; and by the
time of the revolution, a majority of the inhabitants had become
dissenters from the established church, but were still obliged to pay
contributions to support the pastors of the minority. This unrighteous
compulsion, to maintain teachers of what they deemed religious errors,
was grievously felt during the regal government, and without a hope
of relief. But the first republican legislature, which met in '76, was
crowded with petitions to abolish this spiritual tyranny. These brought
on the severest contests in which I have ever been engaged. Our great
opponents were Mr. Pendleton and Robert Carter Nicholas; honest men,
but zealous churchmen. The petitions were referred to the committee
of the whole house on the state of the country and, after desperate
contests in that committee, almost daily from the 11th of October to
the 5th of December, we prevailed so far only, as to repeal the laws
which rendered criminal the maintenance of any religious opinions,
the forbearance of repairing to church, or the exercise of any mode
of worship; and further, to exempt dissenters from contributions to
the support of the established church; and to suspend, only until the
next session, levies on the members of that church for the salaries
of their own incumbents. For although the majority of our citizens
were dissenters, as has been observed, a majority of the legislature
were churchmen. Among these, however, were some reasonable and liberal
men, who enabled us, on some points, to obtain feeble majorities. But
our opponents carried, in the general resolutions of the committee
of November 19, a declaration that religious assemblies ought to be
regulated, and that provision ought to be made for continuing the
succession of the clergy, and superintending their conduct. And, in the
bill now passed, was inserted an express reservation of the question,
Whether a general assessment should not be established by law, on every
one, to the support of the pastor of his choice; or whether all should
be left to voluntary contributions; and on this question, debated at
every session, from '76 to '79, (some of our dissenting allies, having
now secured their particular object, going over to the advocates of a
general assessment,) we could only obtain a suspension from session to
session until '79, when the question against a general assessment was
finally carried, and the establishment of the Anglican church entirely
put down. In justice to the two honest but zealous opponents who have
been named, I must add, that although, from their natural temperaments,
they were more disposed generally to acquiesce in things as they
are, than to risk innovations, yet whenever the public will had once
decided, none were more faithful or exact in their obedience to it.
The seat of our government had originally been fixed in the peninsula
of Jamestown, the first settlement of the colonists; and had been
afterwards removed a few miles inland to Williamsburg. But this was at
a time when our settlements had not extended beyond the tide waters.
Now they had crossed the Alleghany; and the centre of population was
very far removed from what it had been. Yet Williamsburg was still the
depository of our archives, the habitual residence of the Governor and
many other of the public functionaries, the established place for the
sessions of the legislature, and the magazine of our military stores;
and its situation was so exposed that it might be taken at any time in
war, and, at this time particularly, an enemy might in the night run
up either of the rivers, between which it lies, land a force above, and
take possession of the place, without the possibility of saving either
persons or things. I had proposed its removal so early as October, '76;
but it did not prevail until the session of May, '79.
Early in the session of May, '79, I prepared, and obtained leave to
bring in a bill, declaring who should be deemed citizens, asserting the
natural right of expatriation, and prescribing the mode of exercising
it. This, when I withdrew from the house, on the 1st of June following,
I left in the hands of George Mason, and it was passed on the 26th of
that month.
In giving this account of the laws of which I was myself the mover
and draughtsman, I, by no means, mean to claim to myself the merit
of obtaining their passage. I had many occasional and strenuous
coadjutors in debate, and one, most steadfast, able and zealous; who
was himself a host. This was George Mason, a man of the first order
of wisdom among those who acted on the theatre of the revolution,
of expansive mind, profound judgment, cogent in argument, learned in
the lore of our former constitution, and earnest for the republican
change on democratic principles. His elocution was neither flowing nor
smooth; but his language was strong, his manner most impressive, and
strengthened by a dash of biting cynicism, when provocation made it
seasonable.
Mr. Wythe, while speaker in the two sessions of 1777, between his
return from Congress and his appointment to the Chancery, was an able
and constant associate in whatever was before a committee of the whole.
His pure integrity, judgment and reasoning powers, gave him great
weight. Of him, see more in some notes inclosed in my letter of August
31, 1821, to Mr. John Saunderson.[14]
Mr. Madison came into the House in 1776, a new member and young; which
circumstances, concurring with his extreme modesty, prevented his
venturing himself in debate before his removal to the Council of State,
in November, '77. From thence he went to Congress, then consisting
of few members. Trained in these successive schools, he acquired
a habit of self-possession, which placed at ready command the rich
resources of his luminous and discriminating mind, and of his extensive
information, and rendered him the first of every assembly afterwards,
of which he became a member. Never wandering from his subject into vain
declamation, but pursuing it closely, in language pure, classical and
copious, soothing always the feelings of his adversaries by civilities
and softness of expression, he rose to the eminent station which he
held in the great National Convention of 1787; and in that of Virginia
which followed, he sustained the new constitution in all its parts,
bearing off the palm against the logic of George Mason, and the fervid
declamation of Mr. Henry. With these consummate powers, were united
a pure and spotless virtue which no calumny has ever attempted to
sully. Of the powers and polish of his pen, and of the wisdom of his
administration in the highest office of the nation, I need say nothing.
They have spoken, and will forever speak for themselves.
So far we were proceeding in the details of reformation only; selecting
points of legislation, prominent in character and principle, urgent,
and indicative of the strength of the general pulse of reformation.
When I left Congress, in '76, it was in the persuasion that our whole
code must be reviewed, adapted to our republican form of government;
and, now that we had no negatives of Councils, Governors, and Kings
to restrain us from doing right, that it should be corrected, in all
its parts, with a single eye to reason, and the good of those for
whose government it was framed. Early, therefore, in the session
of '76, to which I returned, I moved and presented a bill for the
revision of the laws, which was passed on the 24th of October; and on
the 5th of November, Mr. Pendleton, Mr. Wythe, George Mason, Thomas
L. Lee, and myself, were appointed a committee to execute the work.
We agreed to meet at Fredericksburg to settle the plan of operation,
and to distribute the work. We met there accordingly, on the 13th
of January, 1777. The first question was, whether we should propose
to abolish the whole existing system of laws, and prepare a new and
complete Institute, or preserve the general system, and only modify it
to the present state of things. Mr. Pendleton, contrary to his usual
disposition in favor of ancient things, was for the former proposition,
in which he was joined by Mr. Lee. To this it was objected, that to
abrogate our whole system would be a bold measure, and probably far
beyond the views of the legislature; that they had been in the practice
of revising, from time to time, the laws of the colony, omitting the
expired, the repealed, and the obsolete, amending only those retained,
and probably meant we should now do the same, only including the
British statutes as well as our own: that to compose a new Institute,
like those of Justinian and Bracton, or that of Blackstone, which was
the model proposed by Mr. Pendleton, would be an arduous undertaking,
of vast research, of great consideration and judgment; and when reduced
to a text, every word of that text, from the imperfection of human
language, and its incompetence to express distinctly every shade of
idea, would become a subject of question and chicanery, until settled
by repeated adjudications; and this would involve us for ages in
litigation and render property uncertain, until, like the statutes
of old, every word had been tried and settled by numerous decisions,
and by new volumes of reports and commentaries; and that no one of
us, probably, would undertake such a work, which to be systematical,
must be the work of one hand. This last was the opinion of Mr. Wythe,
Mr. Mason, and myself. When we proceeded to the distribution of the
work, Mr. Mason excused himself, as, being no lawyer, he felt himself
unqualified for the work, and he resigned soon after. Mr. Lee excused
himself on the same ground, and died, indeed, in a short time. The
other two gentlemen, therefore, and myself divided the work among
us. The common law and statutes to the 4 James I. (when our separate
legislature was established) were assigned to me; the British statutes,
from that period to the present day, to Mr. Wythe; and the Virginia
laws to Mr. Pendleton. As the law of Descents, and the criminal law
fell of course within my portion, I wished the committee to settle
the leading principles of these, as a guide for me in framing them;
and, with respect to the first, I proposed to abolish the law of
primogeniture, and to make real estate descendible in parcenary to the
next of kin, as personal property is, by the statute of distribution.
Mr. Pendleton wished to preserve the right of primogeniture, but seeing
at once that that could not prevail, he proposed we should adopt
the Hebrew principle, and give a double portion to the elder son. I
observed, that if the eldest son could eat twice as much, or do double
work, it might be a natural evidence of his right to a double portion;
but being on a par in his powers and wants, with his brothers and
sisters, he should be on a par also in the partition of the patrimony;
and such was the decision of the other members.
On the subject of the Criminal law, all were agreed, that the
punishment of death should be abolished, except for treason and murder;
and that, for other felonies, should be substituted hard labor in the
public works, and in some cases, the _Lex talionis_. How this last
revolting principle came to obtain our approbation I do not remember.
There remained, indeed, in our laws, a vestige of it in a single case
of a slave; it was the English law, in the time of the Anglo-Saxons,
copied probably from the Hebrew law of "an eye for an eye, a tooth
for a tooth," and it was the law of several ancient people; but the
modern mind had left it far in the rear of its advances. These points,
however, being settled, we repaired to our respective homes for the
preparation of the work.
In the execution of my part, I thought it material not to vary the
diction of the ancient statutes by modernizing it, nor to give rise
to new questions by new expressions. The text of these statutes had
been so fully explained and defined, by numerous adjudications, as
scarcely ever now to produce a question in our courts. I thought it
would be useful, also, in all new draughts, to reform the style of the
later British statutes, and of our own acts of Assembly; which, from
their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case
within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied
efforts at certainty, by _saids_ and _aforesaids_, by _ors_ and by
_ands_, to make them more plain, are really rendered more perplexed
and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to the lawyers
themselves. We were employed in this work from that time to February,
1779, when we met at Williamsburg, that is to say, Mr. Pendleton, Mr.
Wythe and myself; and meeting day by day, we examined critically our
several parts, sentence by sentence, scrutinizing and amending, until
we had agreed on the whole. We then returned home, had fair copies made
of our several parts, which were reported to the General Assembly,
June 18, 1779, by Mr. Wythe and myself, Mr. Pendleton's residence
being distant, and he having authorized us by letter to declare his
approbation. We had, in this work, brought so much of the Common law
as it was thought necessary to alter, all the British statutes from
_Magna Charta_ to the present day, and all the laws of Virginia,
from the establishment of our legislature, in the 4th Jac. 1. to the
present time, which we thought should be retained, within the compass
of one hundred and twenty-six bills, making a printed folio of ninety
pages only. Some bills were taken out, occasionally, from time to
time, and passed; but the main body of the work was not entered on
by the legislature until after the general peace, in 1785, when, by
the unwearied exertions of Mr. Madison, in opposition to the endless
quibbles, chicaneries, perversions, vexations and delays of lawyers and
demi-lawyers, most of the bills were passed by the legislature, with
little alteration.
The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which
had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the
latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with
some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular
proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be
universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure
from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was
proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read,
"a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our
religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof
that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection,
the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and
Infidel of every denomination.
Beccaria, and other writers on crimes and punishments, had satisfied
the reasonable world of the unrightfulness and inefficacy of the
punishment of crimes by death; and hard labor on roads, canals and
other public works, had been suggested as a proper substitute. The
Revisors had adopted these opinions; but the general idea of our
country had not yet advanced to that point. The bill, therefore,
for proportioning crimes and punishments, was lost in the House of
Delegates by a majority of a single vote. I learned afterwards, that
the substitute of hard labor in public, was tried (I believe it was
in Pennsylvania) without success. Exhibited as a public spectacle,
with shaved heads and mean clothing, working on the high roads,
produced in the criminals such a prostration of character, such
an abandonment of self-respect, as, instead of reforming, plunged
them into the most desperate and hardened depravity of morals and
character. To pursue the subject of this law.--I was written to in
1785 (being then in Paris) by directors appointed to superintend the
building of a Capitol in Richmond, to advise them as to a plan, and
to add to it one of a Prison. Thinking it a favorable opportunity
of introducing into the State an example of architecture, in the
classic style of antiquity, and the Maison quarrée of Nismes, an
ancient Roman temple, being considered as the most perfect model
existing of what may be called Cubic architecture, I applied to M.
Clerissault, who had published drawings of the Antiquities of Nismes,
to have me a model of the building made in stucco, only changing
the order from Corinthian to Ionic, on account of the difficulty of
the Corinthian capitals. I yielded, with reluctance, to the taste of
Clerissault, in his preference of the modern capital of Scamozzi to
the more noble capital of antiquity. This was executed by the artist
whom Choiseul Gouffier had carried with him to Constantinople, and
employed, while Ambassador there, in making those beautiful models of
the remains of Grecian architecture which are to be seen at Paris. To
adapt the exterior to our use, I drew a plan for the interior, with
the apartments necessary for legislative, executive, and judiciary
purposes; and accommodated in their size and distribution to the form
and dimensions of the building. These were forwarded to the Directors,
in 1786, and were carried into execution, with some variations, not
for the better, the most important of which, however, admit of future
correction. With respect to the plan of a Prison, requested at the
same time, I had heard of a benevolent society, in England, which had
been indulged by the government, in an experiment of the effect of
labor, in _solitary confinement_, on some of their criminals; which
experiment had succeeded beyond expectation. The same idea had been
suggested in France, and an Architect of Lyons had proposed a plan of
a well-contrived edifice, on the principle of solitary confinement.
I procured a copy, and as it was too large for our purposes, I drew
one on a scale less extensive, but susceptible of additions as they
should be wanting. This I sent to the Directors, instead of a plan of
a common prison, in the hope that it would suggest the idea of labor
in solitary confinement, instead of that on the public works, which
we had adopted in our Revised Code. Its principle, accordingly, but
not its exact form, was adopted by Latrobe in carrying the plan into
execution, by the erection of what is now called the Penitentiary,
built under his direction. In the meanwhile, the public opinion was
ripening, by time, by reflection, and by the example of Pennsylvania,
where labor on the highways had been tried, without approbation, from
1786 to '89, and had been followed by their Penitentiary system on the
principle of confinement and labor, which was proceeding auspiciously.
In 1796, our legislature resumed the subject, and passed the law for
amending the Penal laws of the commonwealth. They adopted solitary,
instead of public, labor, established a gradation in the duration
of the confinement, approximated the style of the law more to the
modern usage, and, instead of the settled distinctions of murder and
manslaughter, preserved in my bill, they introduced the new terms of
murder in the first and second degree. Whether these have produced more
or fewer questions of definition, I am not sufficiently informed of our
judiciary transactions to say. I will here, however, insert the text of
my bill, with the notes I made in the course of my researches into the
subject.[15]
The acts of Assembly concerning the College of William and Mary,
were properly within Mr. Pendleton's portion of our work; but these
related chiefly to its revenue, while its constitution, organization
and scope of science, were derived from its charter. We thought that
on this subject, a systematical plan of general education should be
proposed, and I was requested to undertake it. I accordingly prepared
three bills for the Revisal, proposing three distinct grades of
education, reaching all classes. 1st. Elementary schools, for all
children generally, rich and poor. 2d. Colleges, for a middle degree
of instruction, calculated for the common purposes of life, and such
as would be desirable for all who were in easy circumstances. And, 3d,
an ultimate grade for teaching the sciences generally, and in their
highest degree. The first bill proposed to lay off every county into
Hundreds, or Wards, of a proper size and population for a school, in
which reading, writing, and common arithmetic should be taught; and
that the whole State should be divided into twenty-four districts,
in each of which should be a school for classical learning, grammar,
geography, and the higher branches of numerical arithmetic. The second
bill proposed to amend the constitution of William and Mary college,
to enlarge its sphere of science, and to make it in fact a University.
The third was for the establishment of a library. These bills were not
acted on until the same year, '96, and then only so much of the first
as provided for elementary schools. The College of William and Mary
was an establishment purely of the Church of England; the Visitors
were required to be all of that Church; the Professors to subscribe
its thirty-nine Articles; its Students to learn its Catechism; and one
of its fundamental objects was declared to be, to raise up Ministers
for that church. The religious jealousies, therefore, of all the
dissenters, took alarm lest this might give an ascendancy to the
Anglican sect, and refused acting on that bill. Its local eccentricity,
too, and unhealthy autumnal climate, lessened the general inclination
towards it. And in the Elementary bill, they inserted a provision which
completely defeated it; for they left it to the court of each county to
determine for itself, when this act should be carried into execution,
within their county. One provision of the bill was, that the expenses
of these schools should be borne by the inhabitants of the county,
every one in proportion to his general tax rate. This would throw on
wealth the education of the poor; and the justices, being generally
of the more wealthy class, were unwilling to incur that burden, and
I believe it was not suffered to commence in a single county. I shall
recur again to this subject, towards the close of my story, if I should
have life and resolution enough to reach that term; for I am already
tired of talking about myself.
The bill on the subject of slaves, was a mere digest of the existing
laws respecting them, without any intimation of a plan for a future
and general emancipation. It was thought better that this should be
kept back, and attempted only by way of amendment, whenever the bill
should be brought on. The principles of the amendment, however, were
agreed on, that is to say, the freedom of all born after a certain
day, and deportation at a proper age. But it was found that the public
mind would not yet bear the proposition, nor will it bear it even at
this day. Yet the day is not distant when it must bear and adopt it,
or worse will follow. Nothing is more certainly written in the book
of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain
that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government.
Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction
between them. It is still in our power to direct the process of
emancipation and deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degree,
as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be, _pari
passu_, filled up by free white laborers. If, on the contrary, it is
left to force itself on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held
up. We should in vain look for an example in the Spanish deportation or
deletion of the Moors. This precedent would fall far short of our case.
I considered four of these bills, passed or reported, as forming a
system by which every fibre would be eradicated of ancient or future
aristocracy; and a foundation laid for a government truly republican.
The repeal of the laws of entail would prevent the accumulation and
perpetuation of wealth, in select families, and preserve the soil
of the country from being daily more and more absorbed in mortmain.
The abolition of primogeniture, and equal partition of inheritances,
removed the feudal and unnatural distinctions which made one member
of every family rich, and all the rest poor, substituting equal
partition, the best of all Agrarian laws. The restoration of the rights
of conscience relieved the people from taxation for the support of a
religion not theirs; for the establishment was truly of the religion
of the rich, the dissenting sects being entirely composed of the less
wealthy people; and these, by the bill for a general education, would
be qualified to understand their rights, to maintain them, and to
exercise with intelligence their parts in self-government; and all this
would be effected, without the violation of a single natural right of
any one individual citizen. To these, too, might be added, as a further
security, the introduction of the trial by jury into the Chancery
courts, which have already ingulfed, and continue to ingulf, so great
a proportion of the jurisdiction over our property.
On the 1st of June, 1779, I was appointed Governor of the Commonwealth,
and retired from the legislature. Being elected, also, one of
the Visitors of William and Mary college, a self-electing body, I
effected, during my residence in Williamsburg that year, a change
in the organization of that institution, by abolishing the Grammar
school, and the two professorships of Divinity and Oriental languages,
and substituting a professorship of Law and Police, one of Anatomy,
Medicine and Chemistry, and one of Modern languages; and the charter
confining us to six professorships, we added the Law of Nature and
Nations, and the Fine Arts to the duties of the Moral professor, and
Natural History to those of the professor of Mathematics and Natural
Philosophy.
Being now, as it were, identified with the Commonwealth itself, to
write my own history, during the two years of my administration, would
be to write the public history of that portion of the revolution within
this State. This has been done by others, and particularly by Mr.
Girardin, who wrote his Continuation of Burke's History of Virginia,
while at Milton, in this neighborhood, had free access to all my
papers while composing it, and has given as faithful an account as
I could myself. For this portion, therefore, of my own life, I refer
altogether to his history. From a belief that, under the pressure of
the invasion under which we were then laboring, the public would have
more confidence in a Military chief, and that the Military commander,
being invested with the Civil power also, both might be wielded with
more energy, promptitude and effect for the defence of the State, I
resigned the administration at the end of my second year, and General
Nelson was appointed to succeed me.
Soon after my leaving Congress, in September, '76, to wit, on the last
day of that month, I had been appointed, with Dr. Franklin, to go
to France, as a Commissioner, to negotiate treaties of alliance and
commerce with that government. Silas Deane, then in France, acting
as[16] agent for procuring military stores, was joined with us in
commission. But such was the state of my family that I could not leave
it, nor could I expose it to the dangers of the sea, and of capture
by the British ships, then covering the ocean. I saw, too, that the
laboring oar was really at home, where much was to be done, of the
most permanent interest, in new modelling our governments, and much
to defend our fanes and fire-sides from the desolations of an invading
enemy, pressing on our country in every point. I declined, therefore,
and Dr. Lee was appointed in my place. On the 15th of June, 1781, I had
been appointed, with Mr. Adams, Dr. Franklin, Mr. Jay, and Mr. Laurens,
a Minister Plenipotentiary for negotiating peace, then expected to
be effected through the mediation of the Empress of Russia. The same
reasons obliged me still to decline; and the negotiation was in fact
never entered on. But, in the autumn of the next year, 1782, Congress
receiving assurances that a general peace would be concluded in the
winter and spring, they renewed my appointment on the 13th of November
of that year. I had, two months before that, lost the cherished
companion of my life, in whose affections, unabated on both sides, I
had lived the last ten years in unchequered happiness. With the public
interests, the state of my mind concurred in recommending the change
of scene proposed; and I accepted the appointment, and left Monticello
on the 19th of December, 1782, for Philadelphia, where I arrived on
the 27th. The Minister of France, Luzerne, offered me a passage in the
Romulus frigate, which I accepting; but she was then lying a few miles
below Baltimore, blocked up in the ice. I remained, therefore, a month
in Philadelphia, looking over the papers in the office of State, in
order to possess myself of the general state of our foreign relations,
and then went to Baltimore, to await the liberation of the frigate from
the ice. After waiting there nearly a month, we received information
that a Provisional treaty of peace had been signed by our Commissioners
on the 3d of September, 1782, to become absolute, on the conclusion of
peace between France and Great Britain. Considering my proceeding to
Europe as now of no utility to the public, I returned immediately to
Philadelphia, to take the orders of Congress, and was excused by them
from further proceeding. I, therefore, returned home, where I arrived
on the 15th of May, 1783.
On the 6th of the following month, I was appointed by the legislature
a delegate to Congress, the appointment to take place on the 1st of
November ensuing, when that of the existing delegation would expire.
I, accordingly, left home on the 16th of October, arrived at Trenton,
where Congress was sitting, on the 3d of November, and took my seat on
the 4th, on which day Congress adjourned, to meet at Annapolis on the
26th.
Congress had now become a very small body, and the members very remiss
in their attendance on its duties, insomuch, that a majority of the
States, necessary by the Confederation to constitute a House even for
minor business, did not assemble until the 13th of December.
They, as early as January 7,1782, had turned their attention to the
moneys current in the several States, and had directed the Financier,
Robert Morris, to report to them a table of rates, at which the foreign
coins should be received at the treasury. That officer, or rather his
assistant, Gouverneur Morris, answered them on the 15th, in an able
and elaborate statement of the denominations of money current in the
several States, and of the comparative value of the foreign coins
chiefly in circulation with us. He went into the consideration of
the necessity of establishing a standard of value with us, and of the
adoption of a money Unit. He proposed for that Unit, such a fraction
of pure silver as would be a common measure of the penny of every
State, without leaving a fraction. This common divisor he found to be
1-1440 of a dollar, or 1-1600 of the crown sterling. The value of a
dollar was, therefore, to be expressed by 1,440 units, and of a crown
by 1,600; each Unit containing a quarter of a grain of fine silver.
Congress turning again their attention to this subject the following
year, the Financier, by a letter of April 30, 1783, further explained
and urged the Unit he had proposed; but nothing more was done on it
until the ensuing year, when it was again taken up, and referred to a
committee, of which I was a member. The general views of the Financier
were sound, and the principle was ingenious on which he proposed to
found his Unit; but it was too minute for ordinary use, too laborious
for computation, either by the head or in figures. The price of a loaf
of bread, 1-20 of a dollar, would be 72 units.
A pound of butter, 1-5 of a dollar, 288 units.
A horse or bullock, of eighty dollars value, would require a notation
of six figures, to wit, 115,200, and the public debt, suppose of eighty
millions, would require twelve figures, to wit, 115,200,000,000 units.
Such a system of money-arithmetic would be entirely unmanageable for
the common purposes of society. I proposed, therefore, instead of this,
to adopt the Dollar as our Unit of account and payment, and that its
divisions and sub-divisions should be in the decimal ratio. I wrote
some Notes on the subject, which I submitted to the consideration of
the Financier. I received his answer and adherence to his general
system, only agreeing to take for his Unit one hundred of those he
first proposed, so that a Dollar should be 14 40-100, and a crown 16
units. I replied to this, and printed my notes and reply on a flying
sheet, which I put into the hands of the members of Congress for
consideration, and the Committee agreed to report on my principle. This
was adopted the ensuing year, and is the system which now prevails. I
insert, here, the Notes and Reply, as showing the different views on
which the adoption of our money system hung.[17] The divisions into
dimes, cents, and mills is now so well understood, that it would be
easy of introduction into the kindred branches of weights and measures.
I use, when I travel, an Odometer of Clarke's invention, which divides
the mile into cents, and I find every one comprehends a distance
readily, when stated to him in miles and cents; so he would in feet and
cents, pounds and cents, &c.
The remissness of Congress, and their permanent session, began to
be a subject of uneasiness; and even some of the legislatures had
recommended to them intermissions, and periodical sessions. As
the Confederation had made no provision for a visible head of the
government, during vacations of Congress, and such a one was necessary
to superintend the executive business, to receive and communicate with
foreign ministers and nations, and to assemble Congress on sudden and
extraordinary emergencies, I proposed, early in April, the appointment
of a committee, to be called the "Committee of the States," to consist
of a member from each State, who should remain in session during the
recess of Congress: that the functions of Congress should be divided
into executive and legislative, the latter to be reserved, and the
former, by a general resolution, to be delegated to that Committee.
This proposition was afterwards agreed to; a Committee appointed, who
entered on duty on the subsequent adjournment of Congress, quarrelled
very soon, split into two parties, abandoned their post, and left
the government without any visible head, until the next meeting in
Congress. We have since seen the same thing take place in the Directory
of France; and I believe it will forever take place in any Executive
consisting of a plurality. Our plan, best, I believe, combines wisdom
and practicability, by providing a plurality of Counsellors, but a
single Arbiter for ultimate decision. I was in France when we heard of
this schism, and separation of our Committee, and, speaking with Dr.
Franklin of this singular disposition of men to quarrel, and divide
into parties, he gave his sentiments, as usual, by way of Apologue. He
mentioned the Eddystone lighthouse, in the British channel, as being
built on a rock, in the mid-channel, totally inaccessible in winter,
from the boisterous character of that sea, in that season; that,
therefore, for the two keepers employed to keep up the lights, all
provisions for the winter were necessarily carried to them in autumn,
as they could never be visited again till the return of the milder
season; that, on the first practicable day in the spring, a boat put
off to them with fresh supplies. The boatmen met at the door one of
the keepers, and accosted him with a "How goes it, friend? Very well.
How is your companion? I do not know. Don't know? Is not he here? I
can't tell. Have not you seen him to-day? No. When did you see him? Not
since last fall. You have killed him? Not I, indeed." They were about
to lay hold of him, as having certainly murdered his companion; but
he desired them to go up stairs and examine for themselves. They went
up, and there found the other keeper. They had quarrelled, it seems,
soon after being left there, had divided into two parties, assigned the
cares below to one, and those above to the other, and had never spoken
to, or seen, one another since.
But to return to our Congress at Annapolis. The definitive treaty of
peace which had been signed at Paris on the 3d of September, 1783,
and received here, could not be ratified without a House of nine
States. On the 23d of December, therefore, we addressed letters to
the several Governors, stating the receipt of the definitive treaty;
that seven States only were in attendance, while nine were necessary
to its ratification; and urging them to press on their delegates the
necessity of their immediate attendance. And on the 26th, to save time,
I moved that the Agent of Marine (Robert Morris) should be instructed
to have ready a vessel at this place, at New York, and at some Eastern
port, to carry over the ratification of the treaty when agreed to.
It met the general sense of the House, but was opposed by Dr. Lee,
on the ground of expense, which it would authorize the Agent to incur
for us; and, he said, it would be better to ratify at once, and send
on the ratification. Some members had before suggested, that seven
States were competent to the ratification. My motion was therefore
postponed, and another brought forward by Mr. Read, of South Carolina,
for an immediate ratification. This was debated the 26th and 27th.
Reed, Lee, Williamson and Jeremiah Chase, urged that ratification was
a mere matter of form, that the treaty was conclusive from the moment
it was signed by the ministers; that, although the Confederation
requires the assent of _nine States to enter into_ a treaty, yet, that
its conclusion could not be called _entrance into it_; that supposing
nine States requisite, it would be in the power of five States to
keep us always at war; that nine States had virtually authorized the
ratification, having ratified the provisional treaty, and instructed
their ministers to agree to a definitive one in the same terms, and
the present one was, in fact, substantially, and almost verbatim, the
same; that there now remain but sixty-seven days for the ratification,
for its passage across the Atlantic, and its exchange; that there was
no hope of our soon having nine States present; in fact, that this was
the ultimate point of time to which we could venture to wait; that if
the ratification was not in Paris by the time stipulated, the treaty
would become void; that if ratified by seven States, it would go under
our seal, without its being known to Great Britain that only seven had
concurred; that it was a question of which they had no right to take
cognizance, and we were only answerable for it to our constituents;
that it was like the ratification which Great Britain had received from
the Dutch, by the negotiations of Sir William Temple.
On the contrary, it was argued by Monroe, Gerry, Howell, Ellery and
myself, that by the modern usage of Europe, the ratification was
considered as the act which gave validity to a treaty, until which, it
was not obligatory.[18] That the commission to the ministers reserved
the ratification to Congress; that the treaty itself stipulated
that it should be ratified; that it became a second question, who
were competent to the ratification? That the Confederation expressly
required nine States to enter into any treaty; that, by this, that
instrument must have intended, that the assent of nine States should
be necessary, as well to the _completion_ as to the _commencement_ of
the treaty, its object having been to guard the rights of the Union in
all those important cases where nine States are called for; that by the
contrary construction, seven States, containing less than one-third
of our whole citizens, might rivet on us a treaty, commenced indeed
under commission and instructions from nine States, but formed by the
minister in express contradiction to such instructions, and in direct
sacrifice of the interests of so great a majority; that the definitive
treaty was admitted not to be a verbal copy of the provisional one,
and whether the departures from it were of substance, or not, was a
question on which nine States alone were competent to decide; that
the circumstances of the ratification of the provisional articles by
nine States, the instructions to our ministers to form a definitive
one by them, and their actual agreement in substance, do not render
us competent to ratify in the present instance; if these circumstances
are in themselves a ratification, nothing further is requisite than to
give attested copies of them, in exchange for the British ratification;
if they are not, we remain where we were, without a ratification by
nine States, and incompetent ourselves to ratify; that it was but four
days since the seven States, now present, unanimously concurred in
a resolution, to be forwarded to the Governors of the absent States,
in which they stated, as a cause for urging on their delegates, that
nine States were necessary to ratify the treaty; that in the case of
the Dutch ratification, Great Britain had courted it, and therefore
was glad to accept it as it was; that they knew our Constitution, and
would object to a ratification by seven; that, if that circumstance was
kept back, it would be known hereafter, and would give them ground to
deny the validity of a ratification, into which they should have been
surprised and cheated, and it would be a dishonorable prostitution
of our seal; that there is a hope of nine States; that if the treaty
would become null, if not ratified in time, it would not be saved by
an imperfect ratification; but that, in fact, it would not be null,
and would be placed on better ground, going in unexceptionable form,
though a few days too late, and rested on the small importance of this
circumstance, and the physical impossibilities which had prevented a
punctual compliance in point of time; that this would be approved by
all nations, and by Great Britain herself, if not determined to renew
the war, and if so determined, she would never want excuses, were this
out of the way. Mr. Read gave notice, he should call for the yeas and
nays; whereon those in opposition, prepared a resolution, expressing
pointedly the reasons of their dissent from his motion. It appearing,
however, that his proposition could not be carried, it was thought
better to make no entry at all. Massachusetts alone would have been
for it; Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and Virginia against it, Delaware,
Maryland and North Carolina, would have been divided.
Our body was little numerous, but very contentious. Day after day
was wasted on the most unimportant questions. A member, one of those
afflicted with the morbid rage of debate, of an ardent mind, prompt
imagination, and copious flow of words, who heard with impatience any
logic which was not his own, sitting near me on some occasion of a
trifling but wordy debate, asked me how I could sit in silence, hearing
so much false reasoning, which a word should refute? I observed to him,
that to refute indeed was easy, but to silence was impossible; that in
measures brought forward by myself, I took the laboring oar, as was
incumbent on me; but that in general, I was willing to listen; that
if every sound argument or objection was used by some one or other of
the numerous debaters, it was enough; if not, I thought it sufficient
to suggest the omission, without going into a repetition of what had
been already said by others: that this was a waste and abuse of the
time and patience of the House, which could not be justified. And I
believe, that if the members of deliberate bodies were to observe this
course generally, they would do in a day, what takes them a week; and
it is really more questionable, than may at first be thought, whether
Bonaparte's dumb legislature, which said nothing, and did much, may
not be preferable to one which talks much, and does nothing. I served
with General Washington in the legislature of Virginia, before the
revolution, and, during it, with Dr. Franklin in Congress. I never
heard either of them speak ten minutes at a time, nor to any but the
main point, which was to decide the question. They laid their shoulders
to the great points, knowing that the little ones would follow of
themselves. If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can
it be otherwise, in a body to which the people send one hundred and
fifty lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing,
and talk by the hour? That one hundred and fifty lawyers should do
business together, ought not to be expected. But to return again to our
subject.
Those who thought seven States competent to the ratification, being
very restless under the loss of their motion, I proposed, on the
third of January, to meet them on middle ground, and therefore moved a
resolution, which premised, that there were but seven States present,
who were unanimous for the ratification, but that they differed in
opinion on the question of competency; that those however in the
negative were unwilling that any powers which it might be supposed
they possessed, should remain unexercised for the restoration of
peace, provided it could be done, saving their good faith, and without
importing any opinion of Congress, that seven States were competent,
and resolving that the treaty be ratified so far as they had power;
that it should be transmitted to our ministers, with instructions to
keep it uncommunicated; to endeavor to obtain three months longer for
exchange of ratifications; that they should be informed, that so soon
as nine States shall be present, a ratification by nine shall be sent
them: if this should get to them before the ultimate point of time for
exchange, they were to use it, and not the other; if not, they were
to offer the act of the seven States in exchange, informing them the
treaty had come to hand while Congress was not in session; that but
seven States were as yet assembled, and these had unanimously concurred
in the ratification. This was debated on the third and fourth; and
on the fifth, a vessel being to sail for England, from this port
(Annapolis), the House directed the President to write to our ministers
accordingly.
January 14. Delegates from Connecticut having attended yesterday, and
another from South Carolina coming in this day, the treaty was ratified
without a dissenting voice; and three instruments of ratification
were ordered to be made out, one of which was sent by Colonel Harmer,
another by Colonel Franks, and the third transmitted to the Agent of
Marine, to be forwarded by any good opportunity.
Congress soon took up the consideration of their foreign relations.
They deemed it necessary to get their commerce placed with every
nation, on a footing as favorable as that of other nations; and for
this purpose, to propose to each a distinct treaty of commerce.
This act too would amount to an acknowledgment, by each, of our
independence, and of our reception into the fraternity of nations;
which, although as possessing our station of right, and in fact
we would not condescend to ask, we were not unwilling to furnish
opportunities for receiving their friendly salutations and welcome.
With France, the United Netherlands, and Sweden, we had already
treaties of commerce; but commissions were given for those countries
also, should any amendments be thought necessary. The other States to
which treaties were to be proposed, were England, Hamburg, Saxony,
Prussia, Denmark, Russia, Austria, Venice, Rome, Naples, Tuscany,
Sardinia, Genoa, Spain, Portugal, the Porte, Algiers, Tripoli, Tunis,
and Morocco.
On the 7th of May Congress resolved that a Minister Plenipotentiary
should be appointed, in addition to Mr. Adams and Dr. Franklin, for
negotiating treaties of commerce with foreign nations, and I was
elected to that duty. I accordingly left Annapolis on the 11th, took
with me my eldest daughter, then at Philadelphia (the two others being
too young for the voyage), and proceeded to Boston, in quest of a
passage. While passing through the different States, I made a point of
informing myself of the state of the commerce of each; went on to New
Hampshire with the same view, and returned to Boston. Thence I sailed
on the 5th of July, in the Ceres, a merchant ship of Mr. Nathaniel
Tracey, bound to Cowes. He was himself a passenger, and, after a
pleasant voyage of nineteen days, from land to land, we arrived at
Cowes on the 26th. I was detained there a few days by the indisposition
of my daughter. On the 30th, we embarked for Havre, arrived there on
the 31st, left it on the 3d of August, and arrived at Paris on the 6th.
I called immediately on Dr. Franklin, at Passy, communicated to him
our charge, and we wrote to Mr. Adams, then at the Hague, to join us at
Paris.
Before I had left America, that is to say, in the year 1781, I had
received a letter from M. de Marbois, of the French legation in
Philadelphia, informing me, he had been instructed by his government to
obtain such statistical accounts of the different States of our Union,
as might be useful for their information; and addressing to me a number
of queries relative to the State of Virginia. I had always made it a
practice, whenever an opportunity occurred of obtaining any information
of our country, which might be of use to me in any station, public
or private, to commit it to writing. These memoranda were on loose
papers, bundled up without order, and difficult of recurrence, when
I had occasion for a particular one. I thought this a good occasion
to embody their substance, which I did in the order of Mr. Marbois'
queries, so as to answer his wish, and to arrange them for my own
use. Some friends, to whom they were occasionally communicated, wished
for copies; but their volume rendering this too laborious by hand, I
proposed to get a few printed, for their gratification. I was asked
such a price, however, as exceeded the importance of the object. On
my arrival at Paris, I found it could be done for a fourth of what I
had been asked here. I therefore corrected and enlarged them, and had
two hundred copies printed, under the title of "Notes on Virginia."
I gave a very few copies to some particular friends in Europe, and
sent the rest to my friends in America. An European copy, by the death
of the owner, got into the hands of a bookseller, who engaged its
translation, and when ready for the press, communicated his intentions
and manuscript to me, suggesting that I should correct it, without
asking any other permission for the publication. I never had seen so
wretched an attempt at translation. Interverted, abridged, mutilated,
and often reversing the sense of the original, I found it a blotch of
errors, from beginning to end. I corrected some of the most material,
and, in that form, it was printed in French. A London bookseller, on
seeing the translation, requested me to permit him to print the English
original. I thought it best to do so, to let the world see that it was
not really so bad as the French translation had made it appear. And
this is the true history of that publication.
Mr. Adams soon joined us at Paris, and our first employment was to
prepare a general form, to be proposed to such nations as were disposed
to treat with us. During the negotiations for peace with the British
Commissioner, David Hartley, our Commissioners had proposed, on the
suggestion of Dr. Franklin, to insert an article, exempting from
capture by the public or private armed ships, of either belligerent,
when at war, all merchant vessels and their cargoes, employed merely
in carrying on the commerce between nations. It was refused by
England, and unwisely, in my opinion. For, in the case of a war with
us, their superior commerce places infinitely more at hazard on the
ocean, than ours; and, as hawks abound in proportion to game, so our
privateers would swarm, in proportion to the wealth exposed to their
prize, while theirs would be few, for want of subjects of capture.
We inserted this article in our form, with a provision against the
molestation of fishermen, husbandmen, citizens unarmed, and following
their occupations in unfortified places, for the humane treatment of
prisoners of war, the abolition of contraband of war, which exposes
merchant vessels to such vexatious and ruinous detentions and abuses;
and for the principle of free bottoms, free goods.
In a conference with the Count de Vergennes, it was thought better to
leave to legislative regulation, on both sides, such modifications of
our commercial intercourse, as would voluntarily flow from amicable
dispositions. Without urging, we sounded the ministers of the several
European nations, at the court of Versailles, on their dispositions
towards mutual commerce, and the expediency of encouraging it by the
protection of a treaty. Old Frederic, of Prussia, met us cordially,
and without hesitation, and appointing the Baron de Thulemeyer, his
minister at the Hague, to negotiate with us, we communicated to him our
Projét, which, with little alteration by the King, was soon concluded.
Denmark and Tuscany, entered also into negotiations with us. Other
powers appearing indifferent; we did not think it proper to press them.
They seemed, in fact, to know little about us, but as rebels, who had
been successful in throwing off the yoke of the mother country. They
were ignorant of our commerce, which had been always monopolized by
England, and of the exchange of articles it might offer advantageously
to both parties. They were inclined, therefore, to stand aloof, until
they could see better what relations might be usefully instituted with
us. The negotiations, therefore, begun with Denmark and Tuscany, we
protracted designedly, until our powers had expired; and abstained
from making new propositions to others having no colonies; because our
commerce being an exchange of raw for wrought materials, is a competent
price for admission into the colonies of those possessing them; but
were we to give it, without price, to others, all would claim it,
without price, on the ordinary ground of _gentis amicissimæ_.
Mr. Adams being appointed Minister Plenipotentiary of the United
States, to London, left us in June, and in July, 1785, Dr. Franklin
returned to America, and I was appointed his successor at Paris. In
February, 1786, Mr. Adams wrote to me, pressingly, to join him in
London immediately, as he thought he discovered there some symptoms
of better disposition towards us. Colonel Smith, his secretary of
legation, was the bearer of his urgencies for my immediate attendance.
I, accordingly, left Paris on the 1st of March, and, on my arrival
in London, we agreed on a very summary form of treaty, proposing
an exchange of citizenship for our citizens, our ships, and our
productions generally, except as to office. On my presentation, as
usual, to the King and Queen, at their levées, it was impossible for
anything to be more ungracious, than their notice of Mr. Adams and
myself. I saw, at once, that the ulcerations of mind in that quarter,
left nothing to be expected on the subject of my attendance; and, on
the first conference with the Marquis of Caermarthen, the Minister for
foreign affairs, the distance and disinclination which he betrayed
in his conversation, the vagueness and evasions of his answers to
us, confirmed me in the belief of their aversion to have anything
to do with us. We delivered him, however, our Projét, Mr. Adams not
despairing as much as I did, of its effect. We afterwards, by one or
more notes, requested his appointment of an interview and conference,
which, without directly declining, he evaded, by pretences of other
pressing occupations for the moment. After staying there seven weeks,
till within a few days of the expiration of our commission, I informed
the minister, by note, that my duties at Paris required my return to
that place, and that I should, with pleasure, be the bearer of any
commands to his Ambassador there. He answered, that he had none, and,
wishing me a pleasant journey, I left London the 26th, and arrived at
Paris the 30th of April.
While in London, we entered into negotiations with the Chevalier Pinto,
Ambassador of Portugal, at that place. The only article of difficulty
between us was, a stipulation that our bread stuff should be received
in Portugal, in the form of flour as well as of grain. He approved
of it himself, but observed that several Nobles, of great influence
at their court, were the owners of wind-mills in the neighborhood of
Lisbon, which depended much for their profits on manufacturing our
wheat, and that this stipulation would endanger the whole treaty. He
signed it, however, and its fate was what he had candidly portended.
My duties, at Paris, were confined to a few objects; the receipt of
our whale-oils, salted fish, and salted meats, on favorable terms;
the admission of our rice on equal terms with that of Piedmont,
Egypt and the Levant; a mitigation of the monopolies of our tobacco
by the Farmers-general, and a free admission of our productions into
their islands, were the principal commercial objects which required
attention; and, on these occasions, I was powerfully aided by all
the influence and the energies of the Marquis de La Fayette, who
proved himself equally zealous for the friendship and welfare of both
nations; and, in justice, I must also say, that I found the government
entirely disposed to befriend us on all occasions, and to yield us
every indulgence, not absolutely injurious to themselves. The Count de
Vergennes had the reputation, with the diplomatic corps, of being wary
and slippery in his diplomatic intercourse; and so he might be with
those whom he knew to be slippery, and double-faced themselves. As he
saw that I had no indirect views, practised no subtleties, meddled in
no intrigues, pursued no concealed object, I found him as frank, as
honorable, as easy of access to reason, as any man with whom I had ever
done business; and I must say the same for his successor, Montmorin,
one of the most honest and worthy of human beings.
Our commerce, in the Mediterranean, was placed under early alarm, by
the capture of two of our vessels and crews by the Barbary cruisers.
I was very unwilling that we should acquiesce in the European
humiliation, of paying a tribute to those lawless pirates, and
endeavored to form an association of the powers subject to habitual
depredations from them. I accordingly prepared, and proposed to their
Ministers at Paris, for consultation with their governments, articles
of a special confederation, in the following form:
"Proposals for concerted operation among the powers at war with the
piratical States of Barbary.
1. "It is proposed, that the several powers at war with the piratical
States of Barbary, or any two or more of them who shall be willing,
shall enter into a convention to carry on their operations against
those States, in concert, beginning with the Algerines.
2. "This convention shall remain open to any other powers, who shall,
at any future time, wish to accede to it; the parties reserving the
right to prescribe the conditions of such accession, according to the
circumstances existing at the time it shall be proposed.
3. "The object of the convention shall be, to compel the piratical
States to perpetual peace, without price, and to guarantee that peace
to each other.
4. "The operations for obtaining this peace shall be constant cruises
on their coast, with a naval force now to be agreed on. It is not
proposed that this force shall be so considerable as to be inconvenient
to any party. It is believed that half a dozen frigates, with as many
Tenders or Xebecs, one half of which shall be in cruise, while the
other half is at rest, will suffice.
5. "The force agreed to be necessary, shall be furnished by the
parties, in certain quotas, now to be fixed; it being expected, that
each will be willing to contribute, in such proportion as circumstances
may render reasonable.
6. "As miscarriages often proceed from the want of harmony among
officers of different nations, the parties shall now consider and
decide, whether it will not be better to contribute their quotas in
money, to be employed in fitting out and keeping on duty, a single
fleet of the force agreed on.
7. "The difficulties and delays, too, which will attend the management
of these operations, if conducted by the parties themselves separately,
distant as their courts may be from one another, and incapable of
meeting in consultation, suggest a question, whether it will not
be better for them to give full powers, for that purpose, to their
Ambassadors, or other Ministers resident at some one court of Europe,
who shall form a Committee, or Council, for carrying this convention
into effect; wherein, the vote of each member shall be computed in
proportion to the quota of his sovereign, and the majority so computed,
shall prevail in all questions within the view of this convention. The
court of Versailles is proposed, on account of its neighborhood to the
Mediterranean, and because all those powers are represented there, who
are likely to become parties to this convention.
8. "To save to that Council the embarrassment of personal solicitations
for office, and to assure the parties that their contributions will
be applied solely to the object for which they are destined, there
shall be no establishment of officers for the said Council, such as
Commissioners, Secretaries, or any other kind, with either salaries
or perquisites, nor any other lucrative appointments but such whose
functions are to be exercised on board the said vessels.
9. "Should war arise between any two of the parties to this convention,
it shall not extend to this enterprise, nor interrupt it; but as to
this they shall be reputed at peace.
10. "When Algiers shall be reduced to peace, the other piratical
States, if they refuse to discontinue their piracies, shall become the
objects of this convention, either successively or together, as shall
seem best.
11. "Where this convention would interfere with treaties actually
existing between any of the parties and the States of Barbary, the
treaty shall prevail, and such party shall be allowed to withdraw from
the operations against that State."
Spain had just concluded a treaty with Algiers, at the expense of
three millions of dollars, and did not like to relinquish the benefit
of that, until the other party should fail in their observance of
it. Portugal, Naples, the two Sicilies, Venice, Malta, Denmark and
Sweden, were favorably disposed to such an association; but their
representatives at Paris expressed apprehensions that France would
interfere, and, either openly or secretly, support the Barbary powers;
and they required, that I should ascertain the dispositions of the
Count de Vergennes on the subject. I had before taken occasion to
inform him of what we were proposing, and, therefore, did not think it
proper to insinuate any doubt of the fair conduct of his government;
but, stating our propositions, I mentioned the apprehensions
entertained by us, that England would interfere in behalf of those
piratical governments. "She dares not do it," said he. I pressed it
no further. The other Agents were satisfied with this indication of
his sentiments, and nothing was now wanting to bring it into direct
and formal consideration, but the assent of our government, and their
authority to make the formal proposition. I communicated to them
the favorable prospect of protecting our commerce from the Barbary
depredations, and for such a continuance of time, as, by an exclusion
of them from the sea, to change their habits and characters, from a
predatory to an agricultural people: towards which, however, it was
expected they would contribute a frigate, and its expenses, to be
in constant cruise. But they were in no condition to make any such
engagement. Their recommendatory powers for obtaining contributions,
were so openly neglected by the several States, that they declined
an engagement which they were conscious they could not fulfil with
punctuality; and so it fell through.
[19]In 1786, while at Paris, I became acquainted with John Ledyard,
of Connecticut, a man of genius, of some science, and of fearless
courage and enterprise. He had accompanied Captain Cook in his voyage
to the Pacific, had distinguished himself on several occasions by an
unrivalled intrepidity, and published an account of that voyage, with
details unfavorable to Cook's deportment towards the savages, and
lessening our regrets at his fate. Ledyard had come to Paris, in the
hope of forming a company to engage in the fur trade of the Western
coast of America. He was disappointed in this, and, being out of
business, and of a roaming, restless character, I suggested to him the
enterprise of exploring the Western part of our continent, by passing
through St. Petersburg to Kamschatka, and procuring a passage thence in
some of the Russian vessels to Nootka Sound, whence he might make his
way across the continent to the United States; and I undertook to have
the permission of the Empress of Russia solicited. He eagerly embraced
the proposition, and M. de Sémoulin, the Russian Ambassador, and more
particularly Baron Grimm, the special correspondent of the Empress,
solicited her permission for him to pass through her dominions, to the
Western coast of America. And here I must correct a material error,
which I have committed in another place, to the prejudice of the
Empress. In writing some notes of the life of Captain Lewis, prefixed
to his "Expedition to the Pacific," I stated that the Empress gave
the permission asked, and afterwards retracted it. This idea, after a
lapse of twenty-six years, had so insinuated itself into my mind, that
I committed it to paper, without the least suspicion of error. Yet I
find, on recurring to my letters of that date, that the Empress refused
permission at once, considering the enterprise as entirely chimerical.
But Ledyard would not relinquish it, persuading himself that, by
proceeding to St. Petersburg, he could satisfy the Empress of its
practicability, and obtain her permission. He went accordingly, but she
was absent on a visit to some distant part of her dominions,[20] and he
pursued his course to within two hundred miles of Kamschatka, where he
was overtaken by an arrest from the Empress, brought back to Poland,
and there dismissed. I must therefore, in justice, acquit the Empress
of ever having for a moment countenanced, even by the indulgence of an
innocent passage through her territories, this interesting enterprise.
The pecuniary distresses of France produced this year a measure
of which there had been no example for near two centuries, and the
consequences of which, good and evil, are not yet calculable. For its
remote causes, we must go a little back.
Celebrated writers of France and England had already sketched good
principles on the subject of government; yet the American Revolution
seems first to have awakened the thinking part of the French nation
in general, from the sleep of despotism in which they were sunk.
The officers too, who had been to America, were mostly young men,
less shackled by habit and prejudice, and more ready to assent to
the suggestions of common sense, and feeling of common rights, than
others. They came back with new ideas and impressions. The press,
notwithstanding its shackles, began to disseminate them; conversation
assumed new freedoms; Politics became the theme of all societies, male
and female, and a very extensive and zealous party was formed, which
acquired the appellation of the Patriotic party, who, sensible of
the abusive government under which they lived, sighed for occasions
of reforming it. This party comprehended all the honesty of the
kingdom, sufficiently at leisure to think, the men of letters, the
easy Bourgeois, the young nobility, partly from reflection, partly
from mode; for these sentiments became matter of mode, and as such,
united most of the young women to the party. Happily for the nation,
it happened, at the same moment, that the dissipations of the Queen
and court, the abuses of the pension-list, and dilapidations in the
administration of every branch of the finances, had exhausted the
treasures and credit of the nation, insomuch that its most necessary
functions were paralyzed. To reform these abuses would have overset
the Minister; to impose new taxes by the authority of the King,
was known to be impossible, from the determined opposition of the
Parliament to their enregistry. No resource remained then, but to
appeal to the nation. He advised, therefore, the call of an Assembly
of the most distinguished characters of the nation, in the hope that,
by promises of various and valuable improvements in the organization
and regimen of the government, they would be induced to authorize new
taxes, to control the opposition of the Parliament, and to raise the
annual revenue to the level of expenditures. An Assembly of Notables
therefore, about one hundred and fifty in number, named by the King,
convened on the 22d of February. The Minister (Calonne) stated to them,
that the annual excess of expenses beyond the revenue, when Louis XVI.
came to the throne, was thirty-seven millions of livres; that four
hundred and forty millions had been borrowed to re-establish the navy;
that the American war had cost them fourteen hundred and forty millions
(two hundred and fifty-six millions of dollars), and that the interest
of these sums, with other increased expenses, had added forty millions
more to the annual deficit. (But a subsequent and more candid estimate
made it fifty-six millions.) He proffered them an universal redress
of grievances, laid open those grievances fully, pointed out sound
remedies, and, covering his canvas with objects of this magnitude, the
deficit dwindled to a little accessory, scarcely attracting attention.
The persons chosen were the most able and independent characters in the
kingdom, and their support, if it could be obtained, would be enough
for him. They improved the occasion for redressing their grievances,
and agreed that the public wants should be relieved; but went into an
examination of the causes of them. It was supposed that Colonne was
conscious that his accounts could not bear examination; and it was
said, and believed, that he asked of the King, to send four members
to the Bastile, of whom the Marquis de La Fayette was one, to banish
twenty others, and two of his Ministers. The King found it shorter to
banish him. His successor went on in full concert with the Assembly.
The result was an augmentation of the revenue, a promise of economies
in its expenditure, of an annual settlement of the public accounts
before a council, which the Comptroller, having been heretofore obliged
to settle only with the King in person, of course never settled at all;
an acknowledgment that the King could not lay a new tax, a reformation
of the Criminal laws, abolition of torture, suppression of corvees,
reformation of the gabelles, removal of the interior Custom Houses,
free commerce of grain, internal and external, and the establishment of
Provincial Assemblies; which, altogether, constituted a great mass of
improvement in the condition of the nation. The establishment of the
Provincial Assemblies was, in itself, a fundamental improvement. They
would be of the choice of the people, one-third renewed every year,
in those provinces where there are no States, that is to say, over
about three-fourths of the kingdom. They would be partly an Executive
themselves, and partly an Executive Council to the Intendant, to whom
the Executive power, in his province, had been heretofore entirely
delegated. Chosen by the people, they would soften the execution
of hard laws, and, having a right of representation to the King,
they would censure bad laws, suggest good ones, expose abuses, and
their representations, when united, would command respect. To the
other advantages, might be added the precedent itself of calling the
Assemblée des Notables, which would perhaps grow into habit. The hope
was, that the improvements thus promised would be carried into effect;
that they would be maintained during the present reign, and that that
would be long enough for them to take some root in the constitution,
so that they might come to be considered as a part of that, and be
protected by time, and the attachment of the nation.
The Count de Vergennes had died a few days before the meeting of the
Assembly, and the Count de Montmorin had been named Minister of Foreign
Affairs, in his place. Villedeuil succeeded Calonne, as Comptroller
General, and Lomenie de Bryenne, Archbishop of Thoulouse, afterwards of
Sens, and ultimately Cardinal Lomenie, was named Minister principal,
with whom the other Ministers were to transact the business of their
departments, heretofore done with the King in person; and the Duke de
Nivernois, and M. de Malesherbes, were called to the Council. On the
nomination of the Minister principal, the Marshals de Segur and de
Castries retired from the departments of War and Marine, unwilling to
act subordinately, or to share the blame of proceedings taken out of
their direction. They were succeeded by the Count de Brienne, brother
of the Prime Minister, and the Marquis de La Luzerne, brother to him
who had been Minister in the United States.
A dislocated wrist, unsuccessfully set, occasioned advice from
my surgeon, to try the mineral waters of Aix, in Provence, as a
corroborant. I left Paris for that place therefore, on the 28th of
February, and proceeded up the Seine, through Champagne and Burgundy,
and down the Rhone through the Beaujolais by Lyons, Avignon, Nismes to
Aix; where, finding on trial no benefit from the waters, I concluded
to visit the rice country of Piedmont, to see if anything might be
learned there, to benefit the rivalship of our Carolina rice with
that, and thence to make a tour of the seaport towns of France, along
its Southern and Western coast, to inform myself, if anything could be
done to favor our commerce with them. From Aix, therefore, I took my
route by Marseilles, Toulon, Hieres, Nice, across the Col de Tende,
by Coni, Turin, Vercelli, Novara, Milan, Pavia, Novi, Genoa. Thence,
returning along the coast of Savona, Noli, Albenga, Oneglia, Monaco,
Nice, Antibes, Frejus, Aix, Marseilles, Avignon, Nismes, Montpellier,
Frontignan, Cette, Agde, and along the canal of Languedoc, by Bezieres,
Narbonne, Cascassonne, Castelnaudari, through the Souterrain of St.
Feriol, and back by Castelnaudari, to Toulouse; thence to Montauban,
and down the Garonne by Langon to Bordeaux. Thence to Rochefort, la
Rochelle, Nantes, L'Orient; then back by Rennes to Nantes, and up
the Loire by Angers, Tours, Amboise, Blois to Orleans, thence direct
to Paris, where I arrived on the 10th of June. Soon after my return
from this journey, to wit, about the latter part of July, I received
my younger daughter, Maria, from Virginia, by the way of London, the
youngest having died some time before.
The treasonable perfidy of the Prince of Orange, Stadtholder and
Captain General of the United Netherlands, in the war which England
waged against them, for entering into a treaty of commerce with the
United States, is known to all. As their Executive officer, charged
with the conduct of the war, he contrived to baffle all the measures of
the States General, to dislocate all their military plans, and played
false into the hands of England against his own country, on every
possible occasion, confident in her protection, and in that of the King
of Prussia, brother to his Princess. The States General, indignant at
this patricidal conduct, applied to France for aid, according to the
stipulations of the treaty concluded with her in '85. It was assured
to them readily, and in cordial terms, in a letter from the Count de
Vergennes, to the Marquis de Verac, Ambassador of France at the Hague,
of which the following is an extract:
"Extrait de la depéche de Monsieur le Comte de Vergennes à Monsieur le
Marquis de Verac, Ambassadeur de France à la Haye, du 1er Mars, 1786.
"Le Roi concourrera, autant, qu'il sera en son pouvoir, au succes de la
chose, et vous inviterez, de sa part, les patriotes de lui communiquer
leurs vues, leurs plans, et leurs envieux. Vous les assurerez, que le
roi prend un interet veritable à leurs personnes comme à leur cause,
et qu'ils peuvent compter sur sa protection. Ils doivent y compter
d'autant plus, Monsieur, que nous ne dissimulons pas, que si Monsieur
le Stadhoulder reprend son ancienne influence, le systeme Anglois ne
tardera pas de prevaloir, et que notre alliance deviendroit un être
de raison. Les Patriotes sentiront facilement, que cette position
seroit incompatible avec la dignite, comme avec la consideration de
sa majesté. Mais dans le cas, Monsieur, ou les chefs des Patriotes
auroient à craindre une scission, ils auroient le temps suffisant
pour ramener ceux de leurs amis, que les Anglomanes ont egares, et
preparer les choses de manière que la question de nouveau mise en
deliberation, soit decidee selon leurs desirs. Dans cette hypothese, le
roi vous autorise à agir de concert avec eux, de suivre la direction
qu'ils jugeront devoir vous donner, et d'employer tous les moyens
pour augmenter le nombre des partisans de la bonne cause. Il me reste,
Monsieur, de vous parler de la surete personelle des Patriotes. Vous
les assurerez, que dans tout etat de cause, le roi les prend sous
sa protection immediate, et vous ferez connoitre, partout ou vous
le jugerez necessaire, que sa Majesté regarderoit comme une offense
personnelle, tout ce qu'on entreprenderoit contre leur liberté. Il est
à presumer que ce langage, tenu avec energie, en imposera a l'audace
des Anglomanes, et que Monsieur le Prince de Nassau croira courir
quelque risque en provoquant le ressentiment de sa Majesté."[21]
This letter was communicated by the Patriots to me, when at Amsterdam,
in 1788, and a copy sent by me to Mr. Jay, in my letter to him of March
16, 1788.
The object of the Patriots was, to establish a representative and
republican government. The majority of the States General were with
them, but the majority of the populace of the towns was with the Prince
of Orange; and that populace was played off with great effect, by
the triumvirate of * * * Harris, the English Ambassador, afterwards
Lord Malmesbury, the Prince of Orange, a stupid man, and the Princess
as much a man as either of her colleagues, in audaciousness, in
enterprise, and in the thirst of domination. By these, the mobs of the
Hague were excited against the members of the States General; their
persons were insulted and endangered in the streets; the sanctuary
of their houses was violated; and the Prince, whose function and
duty it was to repress and punish these violations of order, took no
steps for that purpose. The States General, for their own protection,
were therefore obliged to place their militia under the command of
a Committee. The Prince filled the courts of London and Berlin with
complaints at this usurpation of his prerogatives, and, forgetting
that he was but the first servant of a Republic, marched his regular
troops against the city of Utrecht, where the States were in session.
They were repulsed by the militia. His interests now became marshalled
with those of the public enemy, and against his own country. The
States, therefore, exercising their rights of sovereignty, deprived
him of all his powers. The great Frederic had died in August, '86. He
had never intended to break with France in support of the Prince of
Orange. During the illness of which he died, he had, through the Duke
of Brunswick, declared to the Marquis de La Fayette, who was then at
Berlin, that he meant not to support the English interest in Holland:
that he might assure the government of France, his only wish was, that
some honorable place in the Constitution should be reserved for the
Stadtholder and his children, and that he would take no part in the
quarrel, unless an entire abolition of the Stadtholderate should be
attempted. But his place was now occupied by Frederic William, his
great nephew, a man of little understanding, much caprice, and very
inconsiderate; and the Princess, his sister, although her husband was
in arms against the legitimate authorities of the country, attempting
to go to Amsterdam, for the purpose of exciting the mobs of that
place, and being refused permission to pass a military post on the
way, he put the Duke of Brunswick at the head of twenty thousand men,
and made demonstrations of marching on Holland. The King of France
hereupon declared, by his Chargé des Affaires in Holland, that if
the Prussian troops continued to menace Holland with an invasion, his
Majesty, in quality of Ally, was determined to succor that province.
In answer to this, Eden gave official information to Count Montmorin,
that England must consider as at an end its convention with France
relative to giving notice of its naval armaments, and that she was
arming generally. War being now imminent, Eden, since Lord Aukland,
questioned me on the effect of our treaty with France, in the case
of a war, and what might be our dispositions. I told him frankly,
and without hesitation, that our dispositions would be neutral, and
that I thought it would be the interest of both these powers that we
should be so; because, it would relieve both from all anxiety as to
feeding their West India islands; that England, too, by suffering us to
remain so, would avoid a heavy land war on our Continent, which might
very much cripple her proceedings elsewhere; that our treaty, indeed,
obliged us to receive into our ports the armed vessels of France,
with their prizes, and to refuse admission to the prizes made on her
by her enemies: that there was a clause, also, by which we guaranteed
to France her American possessions, which might perhaps force us into
the war, if these were attacked. "Then it will be war," said he, "for
they will assuredly be attacked." Liston, at Madrid, about the same
time, made the same inquiries of Carmichael. The Government of France
then declared a determination to form a camp of observation at Givet,
commenced arming her marine, and named the Bailli de Suffrein their
Generalissimo on the Ocean. She secretly engaged, also, in negotiations
with Russia, Austria, and Spain, to form a quadruple alliance. The Duke
of Brunswick having advanced to the confines of Holland, sent some
of his officers to Givet, to reconnoitre the state of things there,
and report them to him. He said afterwards, that "if there had been
only a few tents at that place, he should not have advanced further,
for that the King would not, merely for the interest of his sister,
engage in a war with France." But, finding that there was not a single
company there, he boldly entered the country, took their towns as
fast as he presented himself before them, and advanced on Utrecht. The
States had appointed the Rhingrave of Salm their Commander-in-Chief;
a Prince without talents, without courage, and without principle.
He might have held out in Utrecht for a considerable time, but he
surrendered the place without firing a gun, literally ran away and
hid himself, so that for months it was not known what had become of
him. Amsterdam was then attacked, and capitulated. In the meantime,
the negotiations for the quadruple alliance were proceeding favorably;
but the secrecy with which they were attempted to be conducted, was
penetrated by Fraser, Chargé des Affaires of England at St. Petersburg,
who instantly notified his court, and gave the alarm to Prussia. The
King saw at once what would be his situation, between the jaws of
France, Austria, and Russia. In great dismay, he besought the court
of London not to abandon him, sent Alvensleben to Paris to explain and
soothe; and England, through the Duke of Dorset and Eden, renewed her
conferences for accommodation. The Archbishop, who shuddered at the
idea of war, and preferred a peaceful surrender of right to an armed
vindication of it, received them with open arms, entered into cordial
conferences, and a declaration, and counter-declaration, were cooked up
at Versailles, and sent to London for approbation. They were approved
there, reached Paris at one o'clock of the 27th, and were signed that
night at Versailles. It was said and believed at Paris, that M. de
Montmorin, literally "pleuroit comme un enfant," when obliged to sign
this counter-declaration; so distressed was he by the dishonor of
sacrificing the Patriots, after assurances so solemn of protection, and
absolute encouragement to proceed. The Prince of Orange was reinstated
in all his powers, now become regal. A great emigration of the Patriots
took place; all were deprived of office, many exiled, and their
property confiscated. They were received in France, and subsisted,
for some time, on her bounty. Thus fell Holland, by the treachery
of her Chief, from her honorable independence, to become a province
of England; and so, also, her Stadtholder, from the high station of
the first citizen of a free Republic, to be the servile Viceroy of a
foreign Sovereign. And this was effected by a mere scene of bullying
and demonstration; not one of the parties, France, England, or Prussia,
having ever really meant to encounter actual war for the interest of
the Prince of Orange. But it had all the effect of a real and decisive
war.
Our first essay, in America, to establish a federative government
had fallen, on trial, very short of its object. During the war of
Independence, while the pressure of an external enemy hooped us
together, and their enterprises kept us necessarily on the alert,
the spirit of the people, excited by danger, was a supplement to the
Confederation, and urged them to zealous exertions, whether claimed
by that instrument or not; but, when peace and safety were restored,
and every man became engaged in useful and profitable occupation, less
attention was paid to the calls of Congress. The fundamental defect
of the Confederation was, that Congress was not authorized to act
immediately on the people, and by its own officers. Their power was
only requisitory, and these requisitions were addressed to the several
Legislatures, to be by them carried into execution, without other
coercion than the moral principle of duty. This allowed, in fact, a
negative to every Legislature, on every measure proposed by Congress;
a negative so frequently exercised in practice, as to benumb the action
of the Federal government, and to render it inefficient in its general
objects, and more especially in pecuniary and foreign concerns. The
want, too, of a separation of the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary
functions, worked disadvantageously in practice. Yet this state of
things afforded a happy augury of the future march of our Confederacy,
when it was seen that the good sense and good dispositions of the
people, as soon as they perceived the incompetence of their first
compact, instead of leaving its correction to insurrection and civil
war, agreed, with one voice, to elect deputies to a general Convention,
who should peaceably meet and agree on such a Constitution as "would
ensure peace, justice, liberty, the common defence and general
welfare."
This Convention met at Philadelphia on the 25th of May, '87. It sat
with closed doors, and kept all its proceedings secret, until its
dissolution on the 17th of September, when the results of its labors
were published all together. I received a copy, early in November, and
read and contemplated its provisions with great satisfaction. As not
a member of the Convention, however, nor probably a single citizen of
the Union, had approved it in all its parts, so I, too, found articles
which I thought objectionable. The absence of express declarations
ensuring freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of the
person under the uninterrupted protection of the Habeas corpus,
and trial by jury in Civil as well as in Criminal cases, excited my
jealousy; and the re-eligibility of the President for life, I quite
disapproved. I expressed freely, in letters to my friends, and most
particularly to Mr. Madison and General Washington, my approbations
and objections. How the good should be secured and the ill brought
to rights, was the difficulty. To refer it back to a new Convention
might endanger the loss of the whole. My first idea was, that the
nine States first acting, should accept it unconditionally, and thus
secure what in it was good, and that the four last should accept on
the previous condition, that certain amendments should be agreed to;
but a better course was devised, of accepting the whole, and trusting
that the good sense and honest intentions of our citizens, would make
the alterations which should be deemed necessary. Accordingly, all
accepted, six without objection, and seven with recommendations of
specified amendments. Those respecting the press, religion, and juries,
with several others, of great value, were accordingly made; but the
Habeas corpus was left to the discretion of Congress, and the amendment
against the re-eligibility of the President was not proposed. My fears
of that feature were founded on the importance of the office, on the
fierce contentions it might excite among ourselves, if continuable
for life, and the dangers of interference, either with money or arms,
by foreign nations, to whom the choice of an American President might
become interesting. Examples of this abounded in history; in the
case of the Roman Emperors, for instance; of the Popes, while of any
significance; of the German Emperors; the Kings of Poland, and the
Deys of Barbary. I had observed, too, in the feudal history, and in
the recent instance, particularly, of the Stadtholder of Holland,
how easily offices, or tenures for life, slide into inheritances. My
wish, therefore, was, that the President should be elected for seven
years, and be ineligible afterwards. This term I thought sufficient to
enable him, with the concurrence of the Legislature, to carry through
and establish any system of improvement he should propose for the
general good. But the practice adopted, I think, is better, allowing
his continuance for eight years, with a liability to be dropped at
half way of the term, making that a period of probation. That his
continuance should be restrained to seven years, was the opinion of
the Convention at an earlier stage of its session, when it voted that
term, by a majority of eight against two, and by a simple majority
that he should be ineligible a second time. This opinion was confirmed
by the House so late as July 26, referred to the Committee of detail,
reported favorably by them, and changed to the present form by final
vote, on the last day but one only of their session. Of this change,
three States expressed their disapprobation; New York, by recommending
an amendment, that the President should not be eligible a third
time, and Virginia and North Carolina that he should not be capable
of serving more than eight, in any term of sixteen years; and though
this amendment has not been made in form, yet practice seems to have
established it. The example of four Presidents voluntarily retiring
at the end of their eighth year, and the progress of public opinion,
that the principle is salutary, have given it in practice the force of
precedent and usage; insomuch, that, should a President consent to be
a candidate for a third election, I trust he would be rejected, on this
demonstration of ambitious views.
But there was another amendment, of which none of us thought at the
time, and in the omission of which, lurks the germ that is to destroy
this happy combination of National powers in the General government,
for matters of National concern, and independent powers in the States,
for what concerns the States severally. In England, it was a great
point gained at the Revolution, that the commissions of the Judges,
which had hitherto been during pleasure, should thenceforth be made
during good behavior. A Judiciary, dependent on the will of the King,
had proved itself the most oppressive of all tools, in the hands of
that Magistrate. Nothing, then, could be more salutary, than a change
there, to the tenure of good behavior; and the question of good
behavior, left to the vote of a simple majority in the two Houses of
Parliament. Before the Revolution, we were all good English Whigs,
cordial in their free principles, and in their jealousies of their
Executive Magistrate. These jealousies are very apparent, in all our
state Constitutions; and, in the General government in this instance,
we have gone even beyond the English caution, by requiring a vote
of two-thirds, in one of the Houses, for removing a Judge; a vote
so impossible, where[22] any defence is made, before men of ordinary
prejudices and passions, that our Judges are effectually independent
of the nation. But this ought not to be. I would not, indeed, make them
dependent on the Executive authority, as they formerly were in England;
but I deem it indispensable to the continuance of this government,
that they should be submitted to some practical and impartial control;
and that this, to be imparted, must be compounded of a mixture of
State and Federal authorities. It is not enough that honest men are
appointed Judges. All know the influence of interest on the mind of
man, and how unconsciously his judgment is warped by that influence.
To this bias add that of the _esprit de corps_, of their peculiar
maxim and creed, that "it is the office of a good Judge to enlarge his
jurisdiction," and the absence of responsibility; and how can we expect
impartial decision between the General government, of which they are
themselves so eminent a part, and an individual State, from which they
have nothing to hope or fear? We have seen, too, that contrary to all
correct example, they are in the habit of going out of the question
before them, to throw an anchor ahead, and grapple further hold for
future advances of power. They are then, in fact, the corps of sappers
and miners, steadily working to undermine the independent rights of the
States, and to consolidate all power in the hands of that government in
which they have so important a freehold estate. But it is not by the
consolidation, or concentration of powers, but by their distribution,
that good government is effected. Were not this great country already
divided into States, that division must be made, that each might do for
itself what concerns itself directly, and what it can so much better do
than a distant authority. Every State again is divided into counties,
each to take care of what lies within its local bounds; each county
again into townships or wards, to manage minuter details; and every
ward into farms, to be governed each by its individual proprietor.
Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we
should soon want bread. It is by this partition of cares, descending
in gradation from general to particular, that the mass of human affairs
may be best managed, for the good and prosperity of all. I repeat, that
I do not charge the Judges with wilful and ill-intentioned error; but
honest error must be arrested, where its toleration leads to public
ruin. As, for the safety of society, we commit honest maniacs to
Bedlam, so judges should be withdrawn from their bench, whose erroneous
biases are leading us to dissolution. It may, indeed, injure them in
fame or in fortune; but it saves the Republic, which is the first and
supreme law.
Among the debilities of the government of the Confederation, no one was
more distinguished or more distressing, than the utter impossibility
of obtaining, from the States, the moneys necessary for the payment
of debts, or even for the ordinary expenses of the government. Some
contributed a little, some less, and some nothing; and the last
furnished at length an excuse for the first to do nothing also. Mr.
Adams, while residing at the Hague, had a general authority to borrow
what sums might be requisite, for ordinary and necessary expenses.
Interest on the public debt, and the maintenance of the diplomatic
establishment in Europe, had been habitually provided in this way.
He was now elected Vice-President of the United States, was soon to
return to America, and had referred our bankers to me for future
counsel, on our affairs in their hands. But I had no powers, no
instructions, no means, and no familiarity with the subject. It had
always been exclusively under his management, except as to occasional
and partial deposits in the hands of Mr. Grand, banker in Paris, for
special and local purposes. These last had been exhausted for some
time, and I had fervently pressed the Treasury board to replenish
this particular deposit, as Mr. Grand now refused to make further
advances. They answered candidly, that no funds could be obtained
until the new government should get into action, and have time to make
its arrangements. Mr. Adams had received his appointment to the court
of London, while engaged at Paris, with Dr. Franklin and myself, in
the negotiations under our joint commissions. He had repaired thence
to London, without returning to the Hague, to take leave of that
government. He thought it necessary, however, to do so now, before
he should leave Europe, and accordingly went there. I learned his
departure from London, by a letter from Mrs. Adams, received on the
very day on which he would arrive at the Hague. A consultation with
him, and some provision for the future, was indispensable, while we
could yet avail ourselves of his powers; for when they would be gone,
we should be without resource. I was daily dunned by a Company who
had formerly made a small loan to the United States, the principal of
which was now become due; and our bankers in Amsterdam, had notified
me that the interest on our general debt would be expected in June;
that if we failed to pay it, it would be deemed an act of bankruptcy,
and would effectually destroy the credit of the United States, and all
future prospect of obtaining money there; that the loan they had been
authorized to open, of which a third only was filled, had now ceased
to get forward, and rendered desperate that hope of resource. I saw
that there was not a moment to lose, and set out for the Hague on the
second morning after receiving the information of Mr. Adams's journey.
I went the direct road by Louvres, Senlis, Roye, Pont St. Maxence,
Bois le duc, Gournay, Peronne, Cambray, Bouchain, Valenciennes,
Mons, Bruxelles, Malines, Antwerp, Mordick, and Rotterdam, to the
Hague, where I happily found Mr. Adams. He concurred with me at once
in opinion, that something must be done, and that we ought to risk
ourselves on doing it without instructions, to save the credit of the
United States. We foresaw, that before the new government could be
adopted, assembled, establish its financial system, get the money into
the Treasury, and place it in Europe, considerable time would elapse;
that, therefore, we had better provide at once, for the years '88, '89,
and '90, in order to place our government at its ease, and our credit
in security, during that trying interval. We set out, therefore, by
the way of Leyden, for Amsterdam, where we arrived on the 10th. I had
prepared an estimate, showing that
Florins.
There would be necessary for the year '88--531,937-10
'89--538,540
'90--473,540
------------
Total, 1,544,017-10
Florins.
To meet this,
the bankers had in hand, 79,268-2-8
and the unsold bonds
would yield, 542,800 622,068-2-8
------- -----------
Leaving a deficit of 921,949-7-4
We proposed then to borrow a million,
yielding 920,000
-----------
Which would leave a small deficiency of 1,949-7-4
Mr. Adams accordingly executed 1000 bonds, for 1000 florins each, and
deposited them in the hands of our bankers, with instructions, however,
not to issue them until Congress should ratify the measure. This done,
he returned to London, and I set out for Paris; and, as nothing urgent
forbade it, I determined to return along the banks of the Rhine, to
Strasburg, and thence strike off to Paris. I accordingly left Amsterdam
on the 30th of March, and proceeded by Utrecht, Nimeguen, Cleves,
Duysberg, Dusseldorf, Cologne, Bonne, Coblentz, Nassau, Hocheim,
Frankfort, and made an excursion to Hanau, thence to Mayence, and
another excursion to Rudesheim, and Johansberg; then by Oppenheim,
Worms, and Manheim, making an excursion to Heidelberg, then by Spire,
Carlsruh, Rastadt and Kelh, to Strasburg, where I arrived April the
16th, and proceeded again on the 18th, by Phalsbourg, Fenestrange,
Dieuze, Moyenvie, Nancy, Toul, Ligny, Barleduc, St. Diziers, Vitry,
Chalons sur Marne, Epernay, Chateau Thierri, Meaux, to Paris, where I
arrived on the 23d of April; and I had the satisfaction to reflect,
that by this journey our credit was secured, the new government was
placed at ease for two years to come, and that, as well as myself,
relieved from the torment of incessant duns, whose just complaints
could not be silenced by any means within our power.
A Consular Convention had been agreed on in '84, between Dr. Franklin
and the French government, containing several articles, so entirely
inconsistent with the laws of the several States, and the general
spirit of our citizens, that Congress withheld their ratification, and
sent it back to me, with instructions to get those articles expunged,
or modified so as to render them compatible with our laws. The Minister
unwillingly released us from these concessions, which, indeed,
authorized the exercise of powers very offensive in a free State.
After much discussion, the Convention was reformed in a considerable
degree, and was signed by the Count Montmorin and myself, on the 14th
of November, '88; not, indeed, such as I would have wished, but such as
could be obtained with good humor and friendship.
On my return from Holland, I found Paris as I had left it, still in
high fermentation. Had the Archbishop, on th
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/45847