“Charlestown, Dec. 16th, 1793… The body of the people repose great confidence in the Wisdom of the President—of Congress, & of the heads of Departments. May they have Wisdom to direct them! The President’s speech meets with much approbation—It is worthy of himself—We have somegrumbletoniansamong us—who, when the French are victorious, speak loud & saucy—but when they meet with a check—sing small.—They form a sort of political Thermometer, by whh we can pretty accurately determine, what is,in their opinion, the state of French politics.—The Frenchcausehas no enemies here,—their conduct has many.—There are some who undistinguishly [sic] & unboundedly approve both—& most bitterly denounce, asAristocrats, all who do not think as they do.—This party, whh is not numerous—nor as respectable as it is numerous—are about forming a Democratic Club—whh I think they call “the Massts. Constitutional Society”—I don’t know their design, but suppose they consider themselves asguardiansof theRights of Man—& overseers of the President, Congress, & you gentlemen in the several principal departments of State—to see that you don’t infringe upon the Constitution.—They don’t like, nor see through your borrowing so much money of Holland—They are very suspicious about all money matters….Your friend,JedhMorse.”Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 5.[238]Annals of Congress, vol. iv, p. 787.[239]The President’s address was printed in full in leading New England journals.Cf.for example,Columbian Centinel, Nov. 29, 1794;Independent Chronicle, Dec. 1, 1794;Connecticut Courant, Dec. 1, 1794.[240]Columbian Centinel, Dec. 6, 10, 1794;Connecticut Courant, Dec. 8, 24, 1794.[241]Columbian Centinel, Dec. 13, 1794.[242]Ibid., Dec. 20, 1794.[243]Independent Chronicle, Sept. 18, 1794.Cf.also issues of this paper for Sept. 1, 4, 8, and 15, Dec. 4, 8, and 15, 1794.[244]Ibid., Aug. 25, 1794.[245]Ibid., Dec. 8, 1794.[246]Independent Chronicle, Dec. 11, 1794.[247]Ibid., Nov. 27, 1794.[248]Cf. supra,pp. 89et seq.[249]Cf.Independent Chronicle, Dec. 22, 25, and 29, 1794; Jan. 8 and 15, 1795.[250]Ibid., Jan. 12, 1795.[251]Ibid., Jan. 15, 1795.[252]A more detached and better balanced judgment of the importance of the part played by the clergy in the suppression of the Democratic Societies is that recorded by William Bentley: “When I consider the rash zeal with which the clergy have embarked in the controversy respecting Constitution & Clubs, I could not help thinking of a place in this Town, called Curtis’ folly. The good man attempting to descend a steep place, thought it best to take off one pair of his oxen & tackle them behind. But while the other cattle drove down hill, they drew the others down hill backwards & broke their necks. Had the French clergy continued with the people & meliorated their tempers they would have served them & the nobility.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 130.)[253]That a certain depth of impression was made upon the mind of Jedediah Morse by the agitation that developed over these secret organizations will appear from the following letter which he wrote to Oliver Wolcott, late in 1794. It is quite true that the letter shows no trace of apprehension as respects the future; but the man’s interest had been keenly solicited and the future was to have suggestions and appeals of its own.“Charlestown, Dec. 17th, 1794My dear Sir:I take the liberty to enclose you Mr. Osgood’s Thanksgiving sermon, with whh I think you will be pleased. It will evince that the sentiments of the clergy this way (for so far as I am acquainted he (Mr. Osgood) speaks the sentiments of nine out of ten of the clergy) agree with those of the President, Senate, & house of Representatives, in respect to the Self-created Societies. The Thanksgiving sermons in Boston & its vicinity, with only two or three exceptions, all breathed the same spirit—though their manner was not so particular & pointed as Mr. Osgood’s. His sermon is now the general topic of conversation—it has grievously offended the Jacobins.—Poor fellows! they seem to be attacked on all sides. They must I think feel it to be a truth—that “there is no peace for the wicked.”—They still make a noise—but it is like the groans of despair.I could wish, if you think it proper, that the sermon might, in a suitable way, be put into the hands of ourmost worthy President, with this remark accompanying it, that the clergy in this Commonwealth generally approve of the same sentiments. I wish it because it may possibly add to his satisfaction—& will certainly to our honor in his view….Your friend,JedhMorse.”To Oliver Wolcott, Comptroller of the U. S. Treasy.Philadelphia, Pa.”Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 9. The explicit proof that the mind of this man, whose personality is of large importance for the purpose in hand, received permanent impressions from the activities of the Democratic Societies, on account of which he found it not difficult to conceive of like secret combinations a few years later, is found in his references to the political clubs in his Fast Day sermon of May 9, 1798, p. 24.Cf.also “Note F,” p. 67, of hisThanksgiving Sermonof Nov. 29, 1798.[254]An interesting coincidence appears in this connection. The treaty was actually concluded on the very day that President Washington made his address dealing with the uprising in western Pennsylvania (November 19, 1794). It was not submitted to the Senate, however, until June 8 of the following year. On June 24, 1795, it was recommended by that body for ratification, with a special reservation as to the twelfth article.Cf.Macdonald,Documentary Source Book of American History, p. 244. The promulgation of the treaty came later, as will appear. For comment on the popular resentment which the public announcement of the provisions of the treaty stirred up,cf.McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 212et seq.For contemporary newspaper reports of the situation,cf.theIndependent Chronicle, July 9, 13, 16, 23 and 27, 1795. For pertinent observations by Jedediah Morse regarding the apprehensions which the vehement popular disapproval of the treaty awakened in his mind,cf.Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 11.[255]William Bentley, whose Democratic leanings must not be overlooked, delivered himself in characteristic fashion: “The public indignation is roused, & the papers begin to talk of lost liberties…. The Secrecy under which this business has been covered has served to exasperate the public mind, upon the discovery…. The bells tolled on the 4 of July instead of ringing, & a mournful silence prevailed through the City. In this Town the men who hold securities under the government are sufficiently influential against the disquiets & angry expressions of more dependent people.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 146.)[256]Independent Chronicle, July 16, 1795.[257]Cf.reprint of the handbill circulated at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in theIndependent Chronicleof July 20, 1795.[258]Cf.extracts from the speech of Fisher Ames in the House of Representatives, April 28, 1796. Quoted by Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, pp. 145et seq.[259]As a matter of fact, as far as Congress was concerned, the discussion over the treaty was continued for some time to come, because of the measures that were necessary to be taken to put the treaty into effect.Cf.Bassett,The Federalist System, p. 134. The country, however, showed a disposition to accept the treaty as inevitable when the President’s signature was finally affixed.[260]McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 248et seq.Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i, p. 161.[261]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 153et seq.[262]Travelers from abroad who were in the country at this time remarked the extreme virulence of public and private discussion. De La Rochefoucault-Liancourt,Travels through the United States of North America, vol. ii, pp. 231et seq.Cf. ibid., pp. 75et seq., 256, 359, 381; vol. iii, pp. 23, 33et seq., 74et seq., 156, 163et seq., 250, 274, 366et seq.Cf.Weld,Travels through the States of North America … during the years 1795, 1796, and 1797, p. 62. Writing specifically of the excited state of the public mind in February, 1796, the latter observer of our national life said: “It is scarcely possible for a dozen Americans to sit together without quarrelling about politics, and the British treaty, which had just been ratified, now gave rise to a long and acrimonious debate. The farmers were of one opinion, and gabbled away for a long time; the lawyers and the judge were of another, and in turns they rose to answer their opponents with all the power of rhetoric they possessed. Neither party could say anything to change the sentiments of the other one; the noisy contest lasted till late at night, when getting heartily tired they withdrew, not to their respective chambers, but to the general one that held five or six beds, and in which they laid down in pairs. Here the conversation was again revived, and pursued with as much noise as below, till at last sleep closed their eyes, and happily their mouths at the same time….” (Ibid., pp. 58et seq.) Such unfavorable reflections are not to be dismissed as representing prejudiced views of the case. A habit of intolerance toward political opponents and of all men who shared contrary opinions, had become one of the characteristics of the times. The agitation over the treaty went far toward fixing this habit. The Alien and Sedition Acts, which came a little later, were the result of an unrestrained freedom of discussion scarcely more perceptible when they were passed in 1798 than at the time of the heat produced by the treaty.[263]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 226, Oliver Ellsworth’s letter to Oliver Wolcott. Ellsworth reports that the “argument and explanation [of the treaty], that ‘’tis a damned thing made to plague the French,’ has by repetition, lost its power.” This could have been true only in a local sense.[264]Cf.McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 227et seq., for an ample discussion of this view of the situation.[265]That this fierce indictment of “British faction” and appeal to republican sentiment was by no means without practical effect, is shown in the result of the general election of 1796. The outcome of that election gave ground for great encouragement to the Democrats; for while their hero and idol, Thomas Jefferson, was not summoned to the presidency, none the less, to the deep chagrin of the Federalists, his opponent, John Adams, received his commission to succeed Washington on the basis of a majority in the electoral college of only three votes. There could be no question that a spirit of confident and undaunted republicanism was abroad in the land, and the good ship Federalism was destined to encounter foul weather. The state contest held in Massachusetts that same year was even more ominous. After a campaign marked by great vigor on the part of the Federalists, in an effort to rally popular support to their candidate, Increase Sumner, it developed that Samuel Adams, whose enemies had stressed the charge that he desired to enjoy a life tenure of the gubernatorial office, was reelected by a handsome Democratic majority of 5,000 votes.Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 161. Jedediah Morse showed himself to be a fairly astute prognosticator in connection with this election. He is found writing Wolcott, in October, 1795, to the effect that he is conscious of the fact that a severe storm is brewing. It is his conviction that the storm has been gathering for some time and is now about to burst forth. “Disorganizers” have been behind the opposition to the treaty. They have worked subterraneanly, trying to keep opposition alive.Cf.Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 14.[266]Cf. supra,p. 93.[267]As early as the winter of 1795 William Bentley made the disgusted comment: “The Clergy are now the Tools of the Federalists.”Diary, vol. ii, p. 129. Commencing with the participation of the clergy in the discussion over the treaty, Democrat newspapers like theIndependent Chroniclebegan to administer mild rebukes to the clergy for the unwisdom of their conduct in favoring the British.Cf.the issue of theChroniclefor July 20, 1795, for one of the earliest utterances of this sort. The spirit of resentment grew apace. Three years later this spirit of moderation had been fully discarded, and the clergy were being lashed unmercifully for their folly. For typical outbursts of this character,cf.theIndependent Chronicleof Dec. 3, 1798. Jedediah Morse paid tribute to the political concern and service of the clergy in a letter to Wolcott, written Dec. 23, 1796: “Very few of ye Clergy of my acquaintance seem disposed to pray for the success of the French, since they have so insidiously and wickedly interferred in the management of our political affairs, & I apprehend the complexion of the thanksgiving sermons throughout N Engd. this year, are different from those of the last, in respect to this particular. I can speak of more than one with authority.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 20.)[268]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 121.[269]Pamphleteers and newspaper writers were much more explicit.The Pretensions of Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency Examined: and the Charges against John Adams Refuted, was one of the well known political pamphlets of the day. According to Gibbs, in hisMemoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 379, it was prepared by Oliver Wolcott and William Smith, the latter of South Carolina. It marshalled the reasons why Jefferson should not be elected to the presidency. Among these “reasons” the charge of a close alliance between Jefferson and the men of the country who were notoriously interested in the cause of irreligion was boldly affirmed.Cf.page 36et seq.This pamphlet was published in 1796. Later the charge of impiety was lodged against Jefferson with great frequency. Typical utterances of this nature may be found in theLibrary of American Literature, vol. iv, pp. 249–251: “The Imported French Philosophy” (from “The Lay Preacher” of Joseph Dennie). This disquisition was much quoted in the newspapers of the day. From the position that the leaders of the Democrats were irreligious, it was easy for the Federalists to glide over to the position that the spirit of infidelity, believed to be spreading far and wide through the country, was consciously and deliberately backed by the restless and unscrupulous elements which, in the view of the Federalists, formed the opposition.The Connecticut Courantof January 19, 1795, reflects this attitude. “The French”, it is asserted, “are mad in their pursuit of every phantom which disordered intellects can image. Having set themselves free from all human control, they would gladly scale the ramparts of heaven, and dethrone ALMIGHTY JEHOVAH. Our own Democrats would do just so,if they dare.”Cf.also the issue of theCourantfor January 5, the same year, for a characterization of the program of the Democrats as “a crazy system of Anti-Christian politics.” The offence given to the Democrats by such accusations was great. No man, perhaps, stated the stinging resentment which they felt better than Benjamin Franklin Bache in hisAuroraof August 15, 1798: “No part of the perfidy of the faction, the insidious monarchical faction, which dishonors our country, and endangers our future peace, is so bare faced as their perpetual railing about a party acting in concert with France—a party ofdemocratsandJacobins—a party ofdisorganizersandatheists—a party inimical to our independence! What is the plain intent of these impudent and ignorant railings? It is to impose upon the ignorant, to collect and concentre in our focus all thevice,pride,superstition,avarice, andambitionin the United States, in order to weigh down by the union of such a phalanx of iniquity, all that is virtuous and free in the nation.” Abraham Bishop, whose repudiation of the Federalist charge that Jefferson was to be the High Priest of Infidelity was particularly vehement, saw in this cry that an alliance had been made between the forces of democracy and the forces of infidelity, the evidences of a shameless hypocrisy that stripped its makers of all right to be styled Christians. The cry that infidelity abounded meant nothing more nor less than that new electioneering methods were being employed.Oration Delivered in Wallingford on the 11th of March, 1801… by Abraham Bishop, pp. 36, 37.[270]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 93et seq.In similar strain, Jefferson wrote Adams a day later, offering his best wishes for his administration, but with the thought of the impending “storm” still well fixed in his mind.Cf. ibid., pp. 95et seq.Cf.Jefferson’s letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush,ibid., pp. 113et seq.[271]The following clause in the treaty seemed to afford ample protection to the rights of France: “Nothing in this treaty contained shall, however, be construed or operate contrary to former and existing public treaties with other sovereigns or states.” (United States Statutes at Large, vol. viii, p. 128: Article XXV of the treaty.) But France was unable to blind her eyes to the practical consideration that her European enemy, Great Britain, and an American government, suspicious of if not positively antagonistic to French influence, were to be the interpreters of the treaty.[272]Annals of Congress, vol. vii, p. 103.[273]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 416, letter of Uriah Tracy to Oliver Wolcott.[274]Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i. pp. 232et seq., Ames’ letter to Timothy Pickering.[275]Cf. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 127et seq., letter of Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney. Even Jefferson’s steadfast faith and loyalty to France was momentarily put to rout.[276]Cf.Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Gray Otis, vol. i, p. 69, letter of Otis to Gen. William Heath. This letter was published in full in theMassachusetts Mercuryof April 17, 1798.[277]Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Gray Otis, vol. i, p. 69.[278]The Works of John Adams, vol. viii, pp. 615, 620. President Adams was fully persuaded that French notions of domination “comprehended all America, bothnorthandsouth”. (Ibid.)Cf.alsoAnnals of Congress, vol. vii, p. 1147, speech of Otis on Foreign Intercourse;American Historical Association Report for 1896, p. 807, Higginson’s letter to Pickering.[279]One of the pamphlets of the day, frequently referred to, much quoted in the newspapers, and evidently much read, bore the horrific title:The Cannibals’ Progress; or the Dreadful Horrors of French Invasion, as displayed by the Republican Officers and Soldiers, in their Perfidy, rapacity, ferociousness & brutality, exercised towards the Innocent inhabitants of Germany. Translated from the German, by Anthony Aufrer(e), Esq.…The Connecticut Courant, in announcing a new edition of this work as just off the press, offered the following description of its character: “This work contains a circumstantial account of the excesses committed by the French Army in Suabia. At the present moment, when our country is in danger of being overrun by the same nation, our people ought to be prepared for those things, which they must expect, in case such an event should happen. The pamphlet should be owned by every man, and read in every family. They will there find, from an authentic source, that the consequences of being conquered by France, or even subjected to their government, are more dreadful than the heart of man can conceive. Murder, robbery, burning of towns, and the violation of female chastity, in forms too dreadful to relate, in instances too numerous to be counted, are among them. Five thousand copies of this work were sold in Philadelphia in a few days, and another edition of ten thousand is now in the press in that city.”Cf.the issue of theCourantfor July 2, 1798. Another book of horrors which deserves mention in this connection, although it came to public attention in America a little later, was the following:The History of the Destruction of the Helvetic Union and Liberty. By J. Mallet Du Pan. This work was first printed in England in 1798, and the following March was reprinted in Boston. A sentence or two taken from the author’s preface will convey a fair notion of its nature: “In the Helvetic History, every Government may read its own destiny, and learn its duty. If there be yet one that flatters itself that its existence is reconcilable with that of the French Republic, let it study this dreadful monument of their friendship. Here every man may see how much weight treaties, alliances, benefactions, rights of neutrality, and even submission itself, retain in the scales of that Directory, who hunt justice from the earth, and whose sanguinary rapacity seeks plunder and spreads ruin alike on the Nile as on the Rhine, in Republican Congresses as well as in the heart of Monarchies.” LikeThe Cannibals’ Progress, this work was much quoted in the newspapers and caught the sympathetic eye of many clergyman, Jedediah Morse among the number. July 29, 1799, Chauncey Goodrich, of Hartford, Connecticut, wrote Oliver Wolcott to the effect that “the facts … in Du Pan, Robinson, Barruel, have got into every farm house; they wont go out, till the stories of the indian tomahawk & war dances around their prisoners do.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. v, 77.) Nathaniel Ames did not think highly of the veracity ofThe Cannibals’ Progress, yet he paid tribute to its influence in the following fashion: “July 31, 1798. Judge Metcalf with his cockade on came down to see Gen. Washington expecting to get a Commission to fight the French & infatuated at the slanders of the Progress of the Cannibals that the French skin Americans, to make boots for their Army, &c.” (Dedham Historical Register, vol. ix: Diary of Ames, p. 24.)[280]Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, pp. 176et seq., gives a brief but entertaining account of the political jockeying on the part of our government which lay back of Monroe’s recall and the despatch of Pinckney to France.[281]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. ii, pp. 15et seq.Cf.McMaster,History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 368et seq.[282]Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i, p. 225, letter of Ames to H. G. Otis. Ames’ comment on the discomfiture of the Democrats was characteristically vigorous: “The late communications [i. e., the X. Y. Z. despatches] have only smothered their rage; it is now a coal-pit, lately it was an open fire. Thacher would say, the effect of the despatches is only like a sermon in hell to awaken conscience in those whose day of probation is over, to sharpen pangs which cannot be soothed by hope.”[283]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, p. 228, Jefferson’s letter to Edmund Pendleton.[284]The elation of Jedediah Morse over the turn affairs seemed to be taking was great. Under date of May 21, 1798, he wrote Wolcott, dilating on “the wonderful and happy change in the public mind. Opposition is shrinking into its proper insignificance, stripped of the support of its deludedhonestfriends. I now feel it is an honour to be an American.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 23.)[285]Jedediah Morse was far from comfortable over the unwillingness of the President to proceed with vigor in handling affairs with France. An ill-concealed vein of impatience is discoverable in the following letter which he wrote to Wolcott, under date of July 13, 1798: “He [Washington] will unite allhonestmen among us. It gladdens the hearts of some at least, to my knowledge, of our deluded, warm democrats. They say, ‘Washington is a good man—an American, & we will rally round his standard!’ … The rising & unexpected spread of the American spirit has dispelled all gloom from my mind, respecting our country. I rejoyce at the crisis, because I believe, the issue will be, theextinction of French influence among us, & if this can be effected, treasure & even blood, will not be spilt in vain.—The government is strengthening every day, by the confidence and assertions of the people.—We are waiting with almost impatience tohave war declared agt. France, that we may distinguish more decidedly between friends & foes among ourselves. I believe there is energy enough in government to silence, & if necessaryexterminate its obstinate & dangerous enemies.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 27.) Eleven months later Morse expressed to Wolcott his grave fears on account of the disposition of the national government to reciprocate the “pacific overtures of the French govt.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 24.) It is not Frencharms, but their “principles” which he holds in dread. (Cf. ibid.) Back of the fire-eating spirit of this New England clergyman was a genuine moral and religious concern.[286]The texts of these various acts may be found inUnited States Statutes at Large, vol. i, pp. 566–569, 570–572, 577–578, 596–597. The Naturalization Act extended from five to nineteen years the period of residence necessary for aliens who wished to become naturalized; that is to say, fourteen years of residence, to be followed by an additional five years of residence after the declaration of intention to become a citizen had been filed. It is obvious that this measure was intended to defeat the process by which the Democrats had been absorbing the foreign vote. The Act Concerning Aliens empowered the President “to order all such aliens as he should judge dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, or should have reasonable grounds to suspect were concerned in any treasonable or secret machinations against the government thereof, to depart out of the territory of the United States within such a time as should be expressed in such order.” Penalties in the form of heavy imprisonment and the withdrawal of the opportunity to become citizens were attached. The Act Respecting Alien Enemies gave the president power when the country was in a state of war to cause the subjects of the nation at war with the United States “to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.” The Sedition Act, not only in point of time but in sinister significance as well, stood at the apex of this body of legislation. It provided that fines and imprisonments were to be imposed upon men who were found guilty of unlawfully combining or conspiring for opposition to measures of government, or for impeding the operation of any law in the United States, or for intimidating an officer in the performance of his duty. The penalty was to be a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding five years. Penalties were also provided for publishing false, scandalous, and malicious writings against the government.[287]At the time the country numbered among its population a very large number of aliens. French refugees from the West Indies, to the number of perhaps 25,000, were here.Cf.Report of the American Historical Association for 1912: “The Enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Laws,” by F. M. Anderson, p. 116. England, also, had her quota of citizens here, not a few of whom were fugitives from justice, and some of whom, like William Cobbett and J. Thomson Callender (cf.McMaster,History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, p. 338), either drew the fire of the advocates of French principles or busied themselves in the affairs of government on this side of the ocean. The amount of scurrilous abuse, aimed at the heads of government, which issued from the public press had become appalling. No innuendoes were too indelicate, no personalities too coarse, no slanders too malicious, no epithets too vile to be of service in the general campaign of villification. The prostitution of the public press in America has never been more abject than it was at the close of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. (Duniway,The Development of Freedom of the Press in Massachusetts, pp. 143, 144.) Unfortunately, Federalists compromised their position and scandalized their cause by writing as scurrilous and libelous articles as their enemies; but the agencies of administration were in their hands, and, as the Democrats charged, their offences were not noticed.[288]Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Cray Otis, vol. i, pp. 106et seq.Morison’s treatment of this tempestuous period is characterized by keen discrimination and fine balance. It is one of the most satisfying as well as one of the most vivid accounts of the situation to be found.[289]Connecticut Courant, July 8, 1799.[290]Independent Chronicle, Dec. 3, 1798.[291]Report of the American Historical Association for 1912: “The Enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Laws,” by F. M. Anderson, pp. 115et seq.Cf.The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 256et seq., 262, letters of Monroe to Jefferson.[292]Anderson, who appears to have made a painstaking examination of the available records, states his conclusions thus: “I have made a special effort to discover every possible instance and to avoid confusing Federal and State cases. There appears to have been about 24 or 25 persons arrested. At least 15, and probably several more, were indicted. Only 10, or possibly 11, cases came to trial. In 10 the accused were pronounced guilty. The eleventh case may have been an acquittal, but the report of it is entirely unconfirmed.” (Report of the American Historical Association for 1912, p. 120.Cf.Bassett,The Federalist System, p. 264.) An important phase of the judicial aspects of the situation, as respects the forming of public opinion, was the widespread publication in the newspapers of the charges made to grand juries by Federal judges who exerted themselves to defend the alien and sedition laws, and whose utterances received caustic criticism at the hands of Democrat writers.[293]Duniway,The Development of Freedom of the Press in Massachusetts, pp. 145, 146.[294]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 331et seq., Jefferson’s letter to Elbridge Gerry.[295]The report of this episode may be found in theConnecticut Courantof May 14, 1798.Cf.The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 252et seq., Jefferson’s letter to Madison.[296]Ibid.[297]An Answer to Alexander Hamilton’s Letter, Concerning the Public Conduct and Character of John Adams, Esq., President of the United States, New York, 1800, p. 3. In this connection it may be noted that as ardent and hopeful a Democrat as Nathaniel Ames seriously contemplated the outbreak of civil war in the United States as the result of the tense party situation near the end of 1798.Cf.Dedham Historical Register, Diary of Ames, vol. ix, p. 63.[298]The Works of Alexander Hamilton, vol. vii, pp. 374–377: Fragment on the French Revolution. The Fragment is undated. It could not have been written later than 1804, of course. There are some slight traces that it was compiled at the time the excitement over the Illuminati was prevalent in America.[299]Forestier,Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande, p. 103. This author, upon whose recent painstaking researches much reliance is placed in this chapter, relates that one traveler who was in Bavaria at this time, found 28,000 churches and chapels, with pious foundations representing a total value of 60,000,000 florins. Munich, a city of 40,000 inhabitants, had no less than 17 convents. When a papal bull, issued in 1798, authorized the elector to dispose of the seventh part of the goods of the clergy, the Bavarian government, in executing the pope’s directions, deducted 25,000,000 florins, and it was remarked that this amount did not equal the sum which had been agreed upon.Cf. ibid., pp. 103et seq.[300]Forestier,op. cit., p. 108: “Dans aucun pays du monde, si l’on excepte le Paraguay, les fils de Loyola n’avaient obtenu une victoire plus complète, ni conquis une autorité plus grande.”Cf.Mounier,De l’influence attribuée aux Philosophes aux franc-maçons et aux illuminés sur la révolution de France, p. 189.[301]Ibid., pp. 109, 100. Duhr, B.,Geschichte der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge im 16. Jahrhundert, Freiburg, 1907, discusses the earlier development. The work of F. J. Lipowsky,Geschichte der Jesuiten in Baiern, München, 1816, 2 vols., is antiquated and is little more than a chronicle.[302]Engel,Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, p. 29.[303]The suppression of the Jesuits by Pope Clement XIV, in 1773, did not greatly diminish the influence and power of the order in Bavaria. Refusing to accept defeat, the new intrigues to which they gave themselves inspired in their enemies a new sense of their cohesion, with the result that they appeared even more formidable than before their suppression.[304]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 105et seq.[305]Forestier,op. cit., p. 19.[306]Ibid., p. 18.Cf.Engel,op. cit., pp. 19, 28, 29.[307]In the person of Maximilian Joseph, Bavaria found an elector whose earlier devotion to liberal policies gave promise of fundamental reforms. Agriculture and manufactures were encouraged; judicial reforms were undertaken; the despotism of the clergy was resisted. The founding of the Academy of Science at Munich, in 1759, represented a definite response to the spirit of theAufklärung. However, the elector was not at all minded to break with the Catholic faith. All efforts to introduce Protestant ideas into the country were vigorously opposed by the government. In the end the elector’s program of reform miscarried. At the time of his death, in 1777 (the date given by Forestier, p. 106, is incorrect;cf.Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, vol. xxi. p. 30; also Brockhaus,Konversations-Lexikon, vol. xi. p. 683.), the absolute power of the clergy remained unshattered.[308]Forestier,op. cit., p. 107.[309]As a result of this effort, George Weishaupt, father of Adam, came to the University of Ingolstadt as professor of imperial institutions and criminal law.[310]Engel,op. cit., pp. 19et seq.[311]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 19et seq.Cf.Engel,op. cit., pp. 20et seq.[312]Ibid., pp. 22et seq.[313]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 16et seq.[314]Forestier,op. cit., p. 18.[315]Ibid.[316]Ickstatt withdrew from direct participation in the affairs of the University of Ingolstadt in 1765, but he continued to exercise a controlling influence over the policies of the institution for some time to come. The son of one of his former pupils, Lori, a man of liberal notions, was later chosen co-director of the institution, and with him Weishaupt made common cause in his campaign against the Jesuits.[317]Forestier,op. cit., p. 21.Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 33.[318]No clearer illustration of Weishaupt’s lack of nobility is needed than his treatment of his protector and patron, Ickstatt. Owing to a marriage which he had contracted in 1773, against the wishes of Ickstatt, a decided chill came over the relations between the two men. All considerations of gratitude were carelessly tossed aside by Weishaupt. Later, in utter disregard of the anticlericalism of his benefactor, Weishaupt entered into an intrigue with the Jesuit professor Stadler, to obtain a coveted ecclesiastical position for the latter. Ickstatt, hearing of this, renounced Weishaupt as an ingrate. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 22et seq.[319]Engel,op. cit., p. 31.[320]Forestier,op. cit., p. 21.[321]Ibid.Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 32.[322]Ibid., p. 22.[323]Ibid., p. 25.[324]Ibid.[325]The motives which led Weishaupt to consider the formation of a secret organization of the general character indicated were not all of a kind. In part they were creditable, in part discreditable. That he had a genuine interest in the cause of liberalism and progress, born largely of the personal discomfort and injury he had experienced at the hands of intolerance and bigotry, there can be no honest doubt. But a thirst for power was also a fundamental element in his nature. The despotic character of the order which he attempted to build up is in itself a sufficient proof of this. Besides, the cast of his personal affairs at the time the organization was launched smacks loudly of the mans over-weening vanity and yearning for personal conquest. His break with Ickstatt had been followed by a breach between him and Lori on account of the constant recriminations in which Weishaupt engaged against his enemies in the university. The secret alliance he had formed with the Jesuit Stadler likewise soon dissolved. His complaints because of alleged infringements of his freedom of speech as a teacher were vehement. His interference in university affairs outside the proper sphere of his authority was frequent and involved him in numerous acrimonious verbal battles. (Engel seeks to relieve Weishaupt of part of the odium of these charges by shifting somewhat of the burden to other shoulders. (Cf.Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, pp. 29–54.) His partiality is, however, sufficiently accounted for by the fact that at the time his work was published, he was the head of the revived Order of the Illuminati.Cf. op. cit., p. 467;cf.Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. iii: article, “Illuminaten”). Yet none of these experiences brought home to the mind of Weishaupt that he was to blame. As to the matter of motive, Forestier’s comment is much to the point: “Ainsi le hardi confesseur de la vérité se trouvait seul à lutter visière levée contre la tourbe des bigots. Une volonté moins bien trempée aurait laissé sombrer dans une résignation inerte ou dans la manie de la persécution ce modeste professeur d’une Université sans prestige, perdu dans un coin de la Bavière, mal payé, mal vu de la majorité de ses collègues, mal noté par le Curateur, surveillé, soupçonné par tous ceux que scandalisait le radicalisme de ses opinions. Mais l’âme de Weishaupt disposait de deux puissants ressorts: la soif du prosélytisme et la volonté de puissance.” (Op. cit., pp. 25et seq.) The view adopted by Kluckhohn is not essentially different: “Rachsucht, Ehrgeiz, Herrschbegier mischten sich in ihm mit dem Drange, grosses zu wirken und ein Woltäter der Menschheit zu werden.” (Herzog-Plitt,Real-Encyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 2. Aufl., vol. vi, Leipzig, 1880: article, “Illuminaten,” p. 699.)[326]Forestier,op. cit., p. 28. Weishaupt readily detected the disparate character of current Freemasonry, and for a brief time he was enthusiastic over the project of developing a rarified type of Masonry to which only men of superior talents should be admitted. For the reasons given, the idea was abandoned.[327]Ibid., p. 29.[328]Forestier,op. cit., p. 75. The teaching function of the order is well set out by Forestier in the following: “Faire de l’homme actuel, resté sauvage et férocement égoïste sous le vernis d’une civilisation apparante, un être véritablement sociable, c’est-à-dire respectueux des droits de ses semblables et amène dans ses rapports avec eux, enseigner à ses membres ‘l’art de réaliser le bien sans trouver d’opposition, de corriger leurs défauts, d’ecarter les obstacles, d’attaquer le mal à la racine, de faire en un mot ce que jusqu’à présent l’éducation, l’enseignement de la morale, les lois civiles et la religion même ont été incapables d’accomplir,’ leur apprendre ‘à soumettre leurs désirs au contrôle de la raison,’ tel est donc en dernière analyse ce que L’Ordre considère comme sa fin suprême. Société d’enseignement par les occupations qu’il impose à ses adeptes, il est essentiellement, par le but qu’il se propose, un institut d’éducation sociale.” (Op. cit., p. 78.)[329]It was Weishaupt’s original purpose to style the new order the “Perfectibilists”, but this he later renounced as too bizarre and lacking in the element of mystery.[330]Forestier,op. cit., p. 46: “Au moment où Weishaupt avait fondé son Ordre, l’organisation de tout le Système était à peine ébauchée dans son esprit. Quand il s’était subitement décidé à jeter les bases de son édifice, il avait hâtivement rédigé des Statuts provisoires, se promettant de les remanier et d’arrêter définitivement dans le silence du cabinet le plan général.”Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 90: “Die ersten Ordensstatuten, welche einen Einblick geben über das, was Weishaupt wollte, bestanden nur kurze Zeit; sie waren recht dürftig und unklar.” It was not until Baron Knigge came to his assistance, four years later, that Weishaupt was able to rescue the organization of the society from the mire of puerility into which his impractical nature had plunged it.[331]Engel,op. cit., pp. 56et seq.The recruiting of women, Jews, pagans, monks, and members of other secret organizations was forbidden. Weishaupt preferred the enrollment of men who were between the ages of 18 and 30.[332]Cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, pp. 49, 50, 56.[333]Ibid., p. 26.[334]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, pp. 61–65.[335]Ibid., p. 63. From time to time the Novice was required to submit to his superiors notations he had made upon interesting portions of books which he had read, in order that his instruction might be properly directed.Cf. ibid., pp. 62, 65. In the pursuit of the art or science that he had chosen as his principal occupation, he was expected to keep in close touch with his enroller.[336]Ibid., p. 31.[337]Forestier,op. cit., p. 61.[338]Ibid., pp. 61–64.[339]Forestier,op. cit., p. 64.[340]Ibid., p. 65.[341]Ibid.[342]Ibid., p. 66. It was in the mind of Weishaupt to make a sort of free university out of this grade. He himself declared: “In der nächsten Klasse [i. e., Minervals], dächte ich also eine Art von gelehrter Academie zu errichten: in solcher wird gearbeitet, an Karakteren, historischen, und lebenden, Studium der Alten, Beobachtungsgeist, Abhandlungen, Preisfragen, und in specie mache ich darinnen jeden zum Spion des andern und aller. Darauf werden die Fähigen zu den Mysterien herausgenommen, die in dieser Klasse etliche Grundsätze und Grunderfordernisse zum menschlichen glückseligen Leben sind.” (Quoted by Engel from Weishaupt’s correspondence with Zwack, p. 76.) The grade Minerval is therefore to be regarded as designed to supply the opportunitypar excellencefor imparting the revolutionary ideas of which the founder of the order boasted. Under the direction of their superiors the Minervals were to continue the study of the humanities which they began as Novices; they were to study the works of the ancients, to prepare dissertations upon subjects in those fields to which their special talents were suited,etc.,—in a word, to show themselves worthy of membership in an academy of savants.Cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 216.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 74. Weishaupt entertained extremely ambitious notions of a system of special libraries under the control of the order, and in which the literary and scientific productions of the order should be assembled and preserved.Cf.Der ächte Illuminat, p. 46.[343]Forestier,op. cit., p. 66.[344]The fantastic element in Weishaupt’s mind is well illustrated at this point. In view of the fact that he particularly sought the recruitment of youths between the ages of 15 and 20 years (cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 261), it is difficult to see the possibility of sustained satisfaction in such associations. We shall see later that Baron Knigge substantially modified the character of the organization in this particular. Weishaupt did not scruple to employ outright deception with reference to the reputed age and power of the order to enhance in the minds of the members the sense of the value of these secret associations. Forestier,op. cit., p. 82.[345]Ibid., p. 66.[346]Der ächte Illuminat, p. 94. The notion that the supreme heads of the order, whose identity of course was concealed from the members, were individuals of exceptional purity, was kept before the minds of the “illuminated” Minervals as an added incentive.[347]From two to four Minervals were given to each Illuminated Minerval, to receive his instructions in the principles and objects of the order. The selection of these pupils in a given instance was supposed to be based upon their openness to the influence of their particular instructor.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 70et seq.[348]Ibid., p. 71. The principle of espionage was an important element in the administration of the order. Weishaupt acknowledged his indebtedness to the ideal of organization which the Society of Jesus had set before him (Cf.Endliche Erklärungen, pp. 60et seq.Cf.Forestier, pp. 97–99), and the principle of one member spying upon another was apparently borrowed from that source. It was Weishaupt’s theory that dissimulation and hypocrisy could best be eradicated by proving to the members of the organization the inutility of such courses of life in view of the incessant surveillance under which all the members lived. (Cf.Der ächte Illuminat, p. 102.) Accordingly the Novice was left to surmise just how many eyes of unknown superiors might be upon him. The duty imposed upon the Illuminated Minerval of informing upon his disciples has been noted above. Weishaupt seems never to have surmised that this policy of espionage would tend to kill mutual confidence and fraternal regard at the roots.[349]Forestier,op. cit., p. 71.[350]Weishaupt’s conception of the content of these terms left room for a recognition of the benefits to be derived from society, but denied the value of the state. Man had moved forward, not backward, from his primitive condition. The satisfaction of his needs had supplied the motive force to his progress. In the state of nature, it is quite true, man enjoyed the two sovereign goods, equality and liberty. However, his disposition and desires were such that a continuance in the state of nature was impossible. The condition of misery into which he came resulted from his failure to acquire the art of controlling his faculties and curbing his passions, and from the injustice which he suffered the state to impose upon him. With the erection of the state had come the notions of the subjection of some men to the power and authority of others, the consequent loss of the unity of the race, and the replacement of the love of humanity with nationalism, or patriotism. But political revolutions were not needed to accomplish the emancipation of the race; such revolutions had always proved sterile because they touched nothing deeper than the constitutions of states. Man’s nature needed to be reconstituted. To bring life under the control of reason would enable men again to possess themselves of equality and liberty. A return to man’s primitive state is both impossible and undesirable. Social life is a blessing. Only let men learn to govern themselves by the light of reason, and civil authority, having been found utterly useless, will quickly disappear. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 311–316.[351]Der ächte Illuminat, pp. 110, 123.[352]Forestier,op. cit., p. 78.[353]Forestier,op. cit., p. 80.[354]In view of the connections which the enemies of the order later made between the Illuminati and the French Revolution, it is worthy of particular emphasis that Weishaupt eschewed the principle of effecting reform by political revolution, and definitely committed himself to the ideal of moral and intellectual reformation. The slow process of ameliorating the unhappy condition of humanity through the leavening influence of the ideas propagated in the order,i. e., by reshaping private and public opinion, was the pathway which Weishaupt chose.Der ächte Illuminat, pp. 10, 205. Such, at least, was the theory in the case. In practise the order abandoned the policy of non-intervention and sought to influence government by putting its members in important civil positions. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 329et seq.[355]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 339.[356]Ibid., p. 279.[357]Forestier,op. cit., p. 88. The anticlerical spirit of the order did not receive an official emphasis commensurate with its importance and weight, doubtless because of Weishaupt’s desire to work under cover against his enemies as completely as possible. Forestier’s comment seems thoroughly just: “Il ne faut pas oublier que Weishaupt en fondant sa Societé n’avait pas songé seulement à faire le bonheur de l’humanité, mais qu’il avait cherché aussi à trouver des alliés dans la lutte qu’il soutenait à Ingolstadt contre le parti des ex-Jésuites. A côté du but officiellement proclamé, l’Ordre avait un autre but, auquel on pensait d’autant plus qu’on en parlait moins.” (Op. cit., 87.Cf. ibid., pp. 92, 110.)[358]Ibid., p. 90.[359]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 216. The order was to be used in the circulation of anticlerical and antireligious books and pamphlets, and the work of the priests and the monks was to be held in mind as constituting the chief obstacle to intellectual and moral progress. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 91, 92.[360]Ibid., p. 317.[361]Ibid., p. 318.[362]Forestier,op. cit., p. 318. This was treated as the esoteric doctrine of Christ, coming to the surface here and there in His teachings and acts, and revealed in thedisciplina arcaniof the early church. It is only when this secret teaching is grasped that the coherence of Jesus’ utterances and the significance of the true doctrines of man’s fall and his resurrection can be understood. It was because man abandoned the state of nature that he lost his dignity and his liberty. In other words, he fell because he ceased to fight against his sensual desires, surrendering himself to the rule of his passions. His work of redemption will be accomplished when he learns to moderate his passions and to limit his desires. The kingdom of grace is therefore a kingdom wherein men live in reason’s light.[363]“Par ses divers caractères avoués ou secrets, l’Ordre des Illuminés était l’expression d’une époque et d’un milieu. Le Système né dans le cerveau de Weishaupt avait trouvé des adeptes en Bavière parce qu’il répondait aux aspirations et satisfaisait les haines de la classe cultivée dans ce pays.” (Ibid., p. 99.)[364]These new centers were Munich, Regensburg, Freising, and Eichstätt. For data concerning the early enrollment of recruits,cf. ibid., pp. 30et seq.[365]Ibid., p. 45.[366]The termAreopagitewas applied to the men who shared with Weishaupt the supreme direction of the order. Each was assigned a pseudonym. With one exception, Xavier Zwack (Danaus), they seem to have been men of very ordinary ability. Forestier,op. cit., p. 232.[367]Ibid., pp. 231et seq., 112et seq.[368]Weishaupt’s original plan had been to leave the matter of financial support to the discretion of the members.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 16. Time, however, proved the imprudence of this arrangement, and hence fixed dues, very modest in their character, were imposed. Forestier, pp. 130et seq.[369]Ibid., pp. 132et seq.[370]Engel gives the date of the admission of Knigge as July, 1780.Cf.Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, p. 114. Forestier is less specific.Les Illuminés de Bavière, &c., p. 217.[371]Baron Knigge (born near Hannover, October 16, 1752; died at Bremen, May 6, 1796) was a man of considerable distinction in his day. He had studied law at Göttingen, and later had been attached to the courts of Hesse-Cassel and Weimar. Retiring subsequently to private life, he made his home successively at Frankfort-on-the-Main, Heidelberg, Hannover, and Bremen. He was an author of note, a writer of romance, popular philosophy, and dramatic poetry. His best known work,Ueber den Umgang mit Menschen(Hannover, 1788), a volume filled with a discussion of practical principles and maxims of life and characterized by a narrow and egoistical outlook, enjoyed a considerable notoriety in its time. (Knigge’s complete works were assembled and published in twelve volumes at Hannover, 1804–1806). He had a decided bias for secret societies, and at the earliest moment that his age permitted had joined a lodge of the Strict Observance, one of the Masonic branches of the period. The Strict Observance was particularly devoted to the reform of Masonry, with special reference to the elimination of the occult sciences which at the time were widely practised in the lodges, and the establishment of cohesion and homogeneity in Masonry through the enforcement of strict discipline, the regulation of functions,etc.(Later, the leaders of the Strict Observance found themselves compelled to yield to the popular clamor for the occult sciences which were all but universal in European Freemasonry, and adopted them. Their presence and practice had been influential in attracting Knigge to the Masonic system.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 207.) Knigge’s Masonic career proved to be of such a nature as to leave him restless and unsatisfied. Because he was not permitted to enjoy the advancement in the order of the Strict Observance that he coveted, he temporarily lost his interest in Masonry only to have it revived a little later by being chosen to assist in the establishment of a new Masonic lodge at Hanau. Meantime his interest in the subjects of theosophy, magic, and particularly alchemy, grew apace. On this account he was led to make an effort to affiliate himself with the Rosicrucians, a branch of Freemasonry notorious for the absurdity of its pretensions and its shameless pandering to the popular desire for occultism. Knigge’s advance did not happen to be received with favor; and the result was that, finding himself compelled for the moment to be content with his membership in the Strict Observance, he renounced his interest in alchemy and devoted his reflections to the development of a form of Masonry which should teach men rules of life by the observance of which they might gradually regain that perfection from which their original parents fell. It was at the moment when Knigge’s mind was occupied with this project that his membership in the Order of the Illuminati was solicited.Cf.Forestier, pp. 214et seq.As to the personality of the man, the following estimate by Forestier is excellent: “ … gentilhomme democrate, dilettante par temperament, homme de lettres par necessité, ecrivain abondant et mediocre, publiciste, moraliste, romancier sentimental et satirique, … un personnage interessant moins encore en lui-meme que comme representant d’une caste en dissolution.” (Op. cit., p. 202.)
“Charlestown, Dec. 16th, 1793… The body of the people repose great confidence in the Wisdom of the President—of Congress, & of the heads of Departments. May they have Wisdom to direct them! The President’s speech meets with much approbation—It is worthy of himself—We have somegrumbletoniansamong us—who, when the French are victorious, speak loud & saucy—but when they meet with a check—sing small.—They form a sort of political Thermometer, by whh we can pretty accurately determine, what is,in their opinion, the state of French politics.—The Frenchcausehas no enemies here,—their conduct has many.—There are some who undistinguishly [sic] & unboundedly approve both—& most bitterly denounce, asAristocrats, all who do not think as they do.—This party, whh is not numerous—nor as respectable as it is numerous—are about forming a Democratic Club—whh I think they call “the Massts. Constitutional Society”—I don’t know their design, but suppose they consider themselves asguardiansof theRights of Man—& overseers of the President, Congress, & you gentlemen in the several principal departments of State—to see that you don’t infringe upon the Constitution.—They don’t like, nor see through your borrowing so much money of Holland—They are very suspicious about all money matters….Your friend,JedhMorse.”
“Charlestown, Dec. 16th, 1793
… The body of the people repose great confidence in the Wisdom of the President—of Congress, & of the heads of Departments. May they have Wisdom to direct them! The President’s speech meets with much approbation—It is worthy of himself—We have somegrumbletoniansamong us—who, when the French are victorious, speak loud & saucy—but when they meet with a check—sing small.—They form a sort of political Thermometer, by whh we can pretty accurately determine, what is,in their opinion, the state of French politics.—The Frenchcausehas no enemies here,—their conduct has many.—There are some who undistinguishly [sic] & unboundedly approve both—& most bitterly denounce, asAristocrats, all who do not think as they do.—This party, whh is not numerous—nor as respectable as it is numerous—are about forming a Democratic Club—whh I think they call “the Massts. Constitutional Society”—I don’t know their design, but suppose they consider themselves asguardiansof theRights of Man—& overseers of the President, Congress, & you gentlemen in the several principal departments of State—to see that you don’t infringe upon the Constitution.—They don’t like, nor see through your borrowing so much money of Holland—They are very suspicious about all money matters….
Your friend,
JedhMorse.”
Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 5.
[238]Annals of Congress, vol. iv, p. 787.
[239]The President’s address was printed in full in leading New England journals.Cf.for example,Columbian Centinel, Nov. 29, 1794;Independent Chronicle, Dec. 1, 1794;Connecticut Courant, Dec. 1, 1794.
[240]Columbian Centinel, Dec. 6, 10, 1794;Connecticut Courant, Dec. 8, 24, 1794.
[241]Columbian Centinel, Dec. 13, 1794.
[242]Ibid., Dec. 20, 1794.
[243]Independent Chronicle, Sept. 18, 1794.Cf.also issues of this paper for Sept. 1, 4, 8, and 15, Dec. 4, 8, and 15, 1794.
[244]Ibid., Aug. 25, 1794.
[245]Ibid., Dec. 8, 1794.
[246]Independent Chronicle, Dec. 11, 1794.
[247]Ibid., Nov. 27, 1794.
[248]Cf. supra,pp. 89et seq.
[249]Cf.Independent Chronicle, Dec. 22, 25, and 29, 1794; Jan. 8 and 15, 1795.
[250]Ibid., Jan. 12, 1795.
[251]Ibid., Jan. 15, 1795.
[252]A more detached and better balanced judgment of the importance of the part played by the clergy in the suppression of the Democratic Societies is that recorded by William Bentley: “When I consider the rash zeal with which the clergy have embarked in the controversy respecting Constitution & Clubs, I could not help thinking of a place in this Town, called Curtis’ folly. The good man attempting to descend a steep place, thought it best to take off one pair of his oxen & tackle them behind. But while the other cattle drove down hill, they drew the others down hill backwards & broke their necks. Had the French clergy continued with the people & meliorated their tempers they would have served them & the nobility.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 130.)
[253]That a certain depth of impression was made upon the mind of Jedediah Morse by the agitation that developed over these secret organizations will appear from the following letter which he wrote to Oliver Wolcott, late in 1794. It is quite true that the letter shows no trace of apprehension as respects the future; but the man’s interest had been keenly solicited and the future was to have suggestions and appeals of its own.
“Charlestown, Dec. 17th, 1794My dear Sir:I take the liberty to enclose you Mr. Osgood’s Thanksgiving sermon, with whh I think you will be pleased. It will evince that the sentiments of the clergy this way (for so far as I am acquainted he (Mr. Osgood) speaks the sentiments of nine out of ten of the clergy) agree with those of the President, Senate, & house of Representatives, in respect to the Self-created Societies. The Thanksgiving sermons in Boston & its vicinity, with only two or three exceptions, all breathed the same spirit—though their manner was not so particular & pointed as Mr. Osgood’s. His sermon is now the general topic of conversation—it has grievously offended the Jacobins.—Poor fellows! they seem to be attacked on all sides. They must I think feel it to be a truth—that “there is no peace for the wicked.”—They still make a noise—but it is like the groans of despair.I could wish, if you think it proper, that the sermon might, in a suitable way, be put into the hands of ourmost worthy President, with this remark accompanying it, that the clergy in this Commonwealth generally approve of the same sentiments. I wish it because it may possibly add to his satisfaction—& will certainly to our honor in his view….Your friend,JedhMorse.”To Oliver Wolcott, Comptroller of the U. S. Treasy.Philadelphia, Pa.”
“Charlestown, Dec. 17th, 1794
My dear Sir:
I take the liberty to enclose you Mr. Osgood’s Thanksgiving sermon, with whh I think you will be pleased. It will evince that the sentiments of the clergy this way (for so far as I am acquainted he (Mr. Osgood) speaks the sentiments of nine out of ten of the clergy) agree with those of the President, Senate, & house of Representatives, in respect to the Self-created Societies. The Thanksgiving sermons in Boston & its vicinity, with only two or three exceptions, all breathed the same spirit—though their manner was not so particular & pointed as Mr. Osgood’s. His sermon is now the general topic of conversation—it has grievously offended the Jacobins.—Poor fellows! they seem to be attacked on all sides. They must I think feel it to be a truth—that “there is no peace for the wicked.”—They still make a noise—but it is like the groans of despair.
I could wish, if you think it proper, that the sermon might, in a suitable way, be put into the hands of ourmost worthy President, with this remark accompanying it, that the clergy in this Commonwealth generally approve of the same sentiments. I wish it because it may possibly add to his satisfaction—& will certainly to our honor in his view….
Your friend,
JedhMorse.”
To Oliver Wolcott, Comptroller of the U. S. Treasy.
Philadelphia, Pa.”
Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 9. The explicit proof that the mind of this man, whose personality is of large importance for the purpose in hand, received permanent impressions from the activities of the Democratic Societies, on account of which he found it not difficult to conceive of like secret combinations a few years later, is found in his references to the political clubs in his Fast Day sermon of May 9, 1798, p. 24.Cf.also “Note F,” p. 67, of hisThanksgiving Sermonof Nov. 29, 1798.
[254]An interesting coincidence appears in this connection. The treaty was actually concluded on the very day that President Washington made his address dealing with the uprising in western Pennsylvania (November 19, 1794). It was not submitted to the Senate, however, until June 8 of the following year. On June 24, 1795, it was recommended by that body for ratification, with a special reservation as to the twelfth article.Cf.Macdonald,Documentary Source Book of American History, p. 244. The promulgation of the treaty came later, as will appear. For comment on the popular resentment which the public announcement of the provisions of the treaty stirred up,cf.McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 212et seq.For contemporary newspaper reports of the situation,cf.theIndependent Chronicle, July 9, 13, 16, 23 and 27, 1795. For pertinent observations by Jedediah Morse regarding the apprehensions which the vehement popular disapproval of the treaty awakened in his mind,cf.Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 11.
[255]William Bentley, whose Democratic leanings must not be overlooked, delivered himself in characteristic fashion: “The public indignation is roused, & the papers begin to talk of lost liberties…. The Secrecy under which this business has been covered has served to exasperate the public mind, upon the discovery…. The bells tolled on the 4 of July instead of ringing, & a mournful silence prevailed through the City. In this Town the men who hold securities under the government are sufficiently influential against the disquiets & angry expressions of more dependent people.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 146.)
[256]Independent Chronicle, July 16, 1795.
[257]Cf.reprint of the handbill circulated at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in theIndependent Chronicleof July 20, 1795.
[258]Cf.extracts from the speech of Fisher Ames in the House of Representatives, April 28, 1796. Quoted by Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, pp. 145et seq.
[259]As a matter of fact, as far as Congress was concerned, the discussion over the treaty was continued for some time to come, because of the measures that were necessary to be taken to put the treaty into effect.Cf.Bassett,The Federalist System, p. 134. The country, however, showed a disposition to accept the treaty as inevitable when the President’s signature was finally affixed.
[260]McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 248et seq.Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i, p. 161.
[261]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 153et seq.
[262]Travelers from abroad who were in the country at this time remarked the extreme virulence of public and private discussion. De La Rochefoucault-Liancourt,Travels through the United States of North America, vol. ii, pp. 231et seq.Cf. ibid., pp. 75et seq., 256, 359, 381; vol. iii, pp. 23, 33et seq., 74et seq., 156, 163et seq., 250, 274, 366et seq.Cf.Weld,Travels through the States of North America … during the years 1795, 1796, and 1797, p. 62. Writing specifically of the excited state of the public mind in February, 1796, the latter observer of our national life said: “It is scarcely possible for a dozen Americans to sit together without quarrelling about politics, and the British treaty, which had just been ratified, now gave rise to a long and acrimonious debate. The farmers were of one opinion, and gabbled away for a long time; the lawyers and the judge were of another, and in turns they rose to answer their opponents with all the power of rhetoric they possessed. Neither party could say anything to change the sentiments of the other one; the noisy contest lasted till late at night, when getting heartily tired they withdrew, not to their respective chambers, but to the general one that held five or six beds, and in which they laid down in pairs. Here the conversation was again revived, and pursued with as much noise as below, till at last sleep closed their eyes, and happily their mouths at the same time….” (Ibid., pp. 58et seq.) Such unfavorable reflections are not to be dismissed as representing prejudiced views of the case. A habit of intolerance toward political opponents and of all men who shared contrary opinions, had become one of the characteristics of the times. The agitation over the treaty went far toward fixing this habit. The Alien and Sedition Acts, which came a little later, were the result of an unrestrained freedom of discussion scarcely more perceptible when they were passed in 1798 than at the time of the heat produced by the treaty.
[263]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 226, Oliver Ellsworth’s letter to Oliver Wolcott. Ellsworth reports that the “argument and explanation [of the treaty], that ‘’tis a damned thing made to plague the French,’ has by repetition, lost its power.” This could have been true only in a local sense.
[264]Cf.McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 227et seq., for an ample discussion of this view of the situation.
[265]That this fierce indictment of “British faction” and appeal to republican sentiment was by no means without practical effect, is shown in the result of the general election of 1796. The outcome of that election gave ground for great encouragement to the Democrats; for while their hero and idol, Thomas Jefferson, was not summoned to the presidency, none the less, to the deep chagrin of the Federalists, his opponent, John Adams, received his commission to succeed Washington on the basis of a majority in the electoral college of only three votes. There could be no question that a spirit of confident and undaunted republicanism was abroad in the land, and the good ship Federalism was destined to encounter foul weather. The state contest held in Massachusetts that same year was even more ominous. After a campaign marked by great vigor on the part of the Federalists, in an effort to rally popular support to their candidate, Increase Sumner, it developed that Samuel Adams, whose enemies had stressed the charge that he desired to enjoy a life tenure of the gubernatorial office, was reelected by a handsome Democratic majority of 5,000 votes.Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 161. Jedediah Morse showed himself to be a fairly astute prognosticator in connection with this election. He is found writing Wolcott, in October, 1795, to the effect that he is conscious of the fact that a severe storm is brewing. It is his conviction that the storm has been gathering for some time and is now about to burst forth. “Disorganizers” have been behind the opposition to the treaty. They have worked subterraneanly, trying to keep opposition alive.Cf.Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 14.
[266]Cf. supra,p. 93.
[267]As early as the winter of 1795 William Bentley made the disgusted comment: “The Clergy are now the Tools of the Federalists.”Diary, vol. ii, p. 129. Commencing with the participation of the clergy in the discussion over the treaty, Democrat newspapers like theIndependent Chroniclebegan to administer mild rebukes to the clergy for the unwisdom of their conduct in favoring the British.Cf.the issue of theChroniclefor July 20, 1795, for one of the earliest utterances of this sort. The spirit of resentment grew apace. Three years later this spirit of moderation had been fully discarded, and the clergy were being lashed unmercifully for their folly. For typical outbursts of this character,cf.theIndependent Chronicleof Dec. 3, 1798. Jedediah Morse paid tribute to the political concern and service of the clergy in a letter to Wolcott, written Dec. 23, 1796: “Very few of ye Clergy of my acquaintance seem disposed to pray for the success of the French, since they have so insidiously and wickedly interferred in the management of our political affairs, & I apprehend the complexion of the thanksgiving sermons throughout N Engd. this year, are different from those of the last, in respect to this particular. I can speak of more than one with authority.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 20.)
[268]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 121.
[269]Pamphleteers and newspaper writers were much more explicit.The Pretensions of Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency Examined: and the Charges against John Adams Refuted, was one of the well known political pamphlets of the day. According to Gibbs, in hisMemoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 379, it was prepared by Oliver Wolcott and William Smith, the latter of South Carolina. It marshalled the reasons why Jefferson should not be elected to the presidency. Among these “reasons” the charge of a close alliance between Jefferson and the men of the country who were notoriously interested in the cause of irreligion was boldly affirmed.Cf.page 36et seq.This pamphlet was published in 1796. Later the charge of impiety was lodged against Jefferson with great frequency. Typical utterances of this nature may be found in theLibrary of American Literature, vol. iv, pp. 249–251: “The Imported French Philosophy” (from “The Lay Preacher” of Joseph Dennie). This disquisition was much quoted in the newspapers of the day. From the position that the leaders of the Democrats were irreligious, it was easy for the Federalists to glide over to the position that the spirit of infidelity, believed to be spreading far and wide through the country, was consciously and deliberately backed by the restless and unscrupulous elements which, in the view of the Federalists, formed the opposition.The Connecticut Courantof January 19, 1795, reflects this attitude. “The French”, it is asserted, “are mad in their pursuit of every phantom which disordered intellects can image. Having set themselves free from all human control, they would gladly scale the ramparts of heaven, and dethrone ALMIGHTY JEHOVAH. Our own Democrats would do just so,if they dare.”Cf.also the issue of theCourantfor January 5, the same year, for a characterization of the program of the Democrats as “a crazy system of Anti-Christian politics.” The offence given to the Democrats by such accusations was great. No man, perhaps, stated the stinging resentment which they felt better than Benjamin Franklin Bache in hisAuroraof August 15, 1798: “No part of the perfidy of the faction, the insidious monarchical faction, which dishonors our country, and endangers our future peace, is so bare faced as their perpetual railing about a party acting in concert with France—a party ofdemocratsandJacobins—a party ofdisorganizersandatheists—a party inimical to our independence! What is the plain intent of these impudent and ignorant railings? It is to impose upon the ignorant, to collect and concentre in our focus all thevice,pride,superstition,avarice, andambitionin the United States, in order to weigh down by the union of such a phalanx of iniquity, all that is virtuous and free in the nation.” Abraham Bishop, whose repudiation of the Federalist charge that Jefferson was to be the High Priest of Infidelity was particularly vehement, saw in this cry that an alliance had been made between the forces of democracy and the forces of infidelity, the evidences of a shameless hypocrisy that stripped its makers of all right to be styled Christians. The cry that infidelity abounded meant nothing more nor less than that new electioneering methods were being employed.Oration Delivered in Wallingford on the 11th of March, 1801… by Abraham Bishop, pp. 36, 37.
[270]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 93et seq.In similar strain, Jefferson wrote Adams a day later, offering his best wishes for his administration, but with the thought of the impending “storm” still well fixed in his mind.Cf. ibid., pp. 95et seq.Cf.Jefferson’s letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush,ibid., pp. 113et seq.
[271]The following clause in the treaty seemed to afford ample protection to the rights of France: “Nothing in this treaty contained shall, however, be construed or operate contrary to former and existing public treaties with other sovereigns or states.” (United States Statutes at Large, vol. viii, p. 128: Article XXV of the treaty.) But France was unable to blind her eyes to the practical consideration that her European enemy, Great Britain, and an American government, suspicious of if not positively antagonistic to French influence, were to be the interpreters of the treaty.
[272]Annals of Congress, vol. vii, p. 103.
[273]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 416, letter of Uriah Tracy to Oliver Wolcott.
[274]Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i. pp. 232et seq., Ames’ letter to Timothy Pickering.
[275]Cf. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 127et seq., letter of Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney. Even Jefferson’s steadfast faith and loyalty to France was momentarily put to rout.
[276]Cf.Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Gray Otis, vol. i, p. 69, letter of Otis to Gen. William Heath. This letter was published in full in theMassachusetts Mercuryof April 17, 1798.
[277]Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Gray Otis, vol. i, p. 69.
[278]The Works of John Adams, vol. viii, pp. 615, 620. President Adams was fully persuaded that French notions of domination “comprehended all America, bothnorthandsouth”. (Ibid.)Cf.alsoAnnals of Congress, vol. vii, p. 1147, speech of Otis on Foreign Intercourse;American Historical Association Report for 1896, p. 807, Higginson’s letter to Pickering.
[279]One of the pamphlets of the day, frequently referred to, much quoted in the newspapers, and evidently much read, bore the horrific title:The Cannibals’ Progress; or the Dreadful Horrors of French Invasion, as displayed by the Republican Officers and Soldiers, in their Perfidy, rapacity, ferociousness & brutality, exercised towards the Innocent inhabitants of Germany. Translated from the German, by Anthony Aufrer(e), Esq.…The Connecticut Courant, in announcing a new edition of this work as just off the press, offered the following description of its character: “This work contains a circumstantial account of the excesses committed by the French Army in Suabia. At the present moment, when our country is in danger of being overrun by the same nation, our people ought to be prepared for those things, which they must expect, in case such an event should happen. The pamphlet should be owned by every man, and read in every family. They will there find, from an authentic source, that the consequences of being conquered by France, or even subjected to their government, are more dreadful than the heart of man can conceive. Murder, robbery, burning of towns, and the violation of female chastity, in forms too dreadful to relate, in instances too numerous to be counted, are among them. Five thousand copies of this work were sold in Philadelphia in a few days, and another edition of ten thousand is now in the press in that city.”Cf.the issue of theCourantfor July 2, 1798. Another book of horrors which deserves mention in this connection, although it came to public attention in America a little later, was the following:The History of the Destruction of the Helvetic Union and Liberty. By J. Mallet Du Pan. This work was first printed in England in 1798, and the following March was reprinted in Boston. A sentence or two taken from the author’s preface will convey a fair notion of its nature: “In the Helvetic History, every Government may read its own destiny, and learn its duty. If there be yet one that flatters itself that its existence is reconcilable with that of the French Republic, let it study this dreadful monument of their friendship. Here every man may see how much weight treaties, alliances, benefactions, rights of neutrality, and even submission itself, retain in the scales of that Directory, who hunt justice from the earth, and whose sanguinary rapacity seeks plunder and spreads ruin alike on the Nile as on the Rhine, in Republican Congresses as well as in the heart of Monarchies.” LikeThe Cannibals’ Progress, this work was much quoted in the newspapers and caught the sympathetic eye of many clergyman, Jedediah Morse among the number. July 29, 1799, Chauncey Goodrich, of Hartford, Connecticut, wrote Oliver Wolcott to the effect that “the facts … in Du Pan, Robinson, Barruel, have got into every farm house; they wont go out, till the stories of the indian tomahawk & war dances around their prisoners do.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. v, 77.) Nathaniel Ames did not think highly of the veracity ofThe Cannibals’ Progress, yet he paid tribute to its influence in the following fashion: “July 31, 1798. Judge Metcalf with his cockade on came down to see Gen. Washington expecting to get a Commission to fight the French & infatuated at the slanders of the Progress of the Cannibals that the French skin Americans, to make boots for their Army, &c.” (Dedham Historical Register, vol. ix: Diary of Ames, p. 24.)
[280]Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, pp. 176et seq., gives a brief but entertaining account of the political jockeying on the part of our government which lay back of Monroe’s recall and the despatch of Pinckney to France.
[281]Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. ii, pp. 15et seq.Cf.McMaster,History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 368et seq.
[282]Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. i, p. 225, letter of Ames to H. G. Otis. Ames’ comment on the discomfiture of the Democrats was characteristically vigorous: “The late communications [i. e., the X. Y. Z. despatches] have only smothered their rage; it is now a coal-pit, lately it was an open fire. Thacher would say, the effect of the despatches is only like a sermon in hell to awaken conscience in those whose day of probation is over, to sharpen pangs which cannot be soothed by hope.”
[283]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, p. 228, Jefferson’s letter to Edmund Pendleton.
[284]The elation of Jedediah Morse over the turn affairs seemed to be taking was great. Under date of May 21, 1798, he wrote Wolcott, dilating on “the wonderful and happy change in the public mind. Opposition is shrinking into its proper insignificance, stripped of the support of its deludedhonestfriends. I now feel it is an honour to be an American.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 23.)
[285]Jedediah Morse was far from comfortable over the unwillingness of the President to proceed with vigor in handling affairs with France. An ill-concealed vein of impatience is discoverable in the following letter which he wrote to Wolcott, under date of July 13, 1798: “He [Washington] will unite allhonestmen among us. It gladdens the hearts of some at least, to my knowledge, of our deluded, warm democrats. They say, ‘Washington is a good man—an American, & we will rally round his standard!’ … The rising & unexpected spread of the American spirit has dispelled all gloom from my mind, respecting our country. I rejoyce at the crisis, because I believe, the issue will be, theextinction of French influence among us, & if this can be effected, treasure & even blood, will not be spilt in vain.—The government is strengthening every day, by the confidence and assertions of the people.—We are waiting with almost impatience tohave war declared agt. France, that we may distinguish more decidedly between friends & foes among ourselves. I believe there is energy enough in government to silence, & if necessaryexterminate its obstinate & dangerous enemies.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 27.) Eleven months later Morse expressed to Wolcott his grave fears on account of the disposition of the national government to reciprocate the “pacific overtures of the French govt.” (Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 24.) It is not Frencharms, but their “principles” which he holds in dread. (Cf. ibid.) Back of the fire-eating spirit of this New England clergyman was a genuine moral and religious concern.
[286]The texts of these various acts may be found inUnited States Statutes at Large, vol. i, pp. 566–569, 570–572, 577–578, 596–597. The Naturalization Act extended from five to nineteen years the period of residence necessary for aliens who wished to become naturalized; that is to say, fourteen years of residence, to be followed by an additional five years of residence after the declaration of intention to become a citizen had been filed. It is obvious that this measure was intended to defeat the process by which the Democrats had been absorbing the foreign vote. The Act Concerning Aliens empowered the President “to order all such aliens as he should judge dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, or should have reasonable grounds to suspect were concerned in any treasonable or secret machinations against the government thereof, to depart out of the territory of the United States within such a time as should be expressed in such order.” Penalties in the form of heavy imprisonment and the withdrawal of the opportunity to become citizens were attached. The Act Respecting Alien Enemies gave the president power when the country was in a state of war to cause the subjects of the nation at war with the United States “to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.” The Sedition Act, not only in point of time but in sinister significance as well, stood at the apex of this body of legislation. It provided that fines and imprisonments were to be imposed upon men who were found guilty of unlawfully combining or conspiring for opposition to measures of government, or for impeding the operation of any law in the United States, or for intimidating an officer in the performance of his duty. The penalty was to be a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding five years. Penalties were also provided for publishing false, scandalous, and malicious writings against the government.
[287]At the time the country numbered among its population a very large number of aliens. French refugees from the West Indies, to the number of perhaps 25,000, were here.Cf.Report of the American Historical Association for 1912: “The Enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Laws,” by F. M. Anderson, p. 116. England, also, had her quota of citizens here, not a few of whom were fugitives from justice, and some of whom, like William Cobbett and J. Thomson Callender (cf.McMaster,History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, p. 338), either drew the fire of the advocates of French principles or busied themselves in the affairs of government on this side of the ocean. The amount of scurrilous abuse, aimed at the heads of government, which issued from the public press had become appalling. No innuendoes were too indelicate, no personalities too coarse, no slanders too malicious, no epithets too vile to be of service in the general campaign of villification. The prostitution of the public press in America has never been more abject than it was at the close of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. (Duniway,The Development of Freedom of the Press in Massachusetts, pp. 143, 144.) Unfortunately, Federalists compromised their position and scandalized their cause by writing as scurrilous and libelous articles as their enemies; but the agencies of administration were in their hands, and, as the Democrats charged, their offences were not noticed.
[288]Morison,The Life and Letters of Harrison Cray Otis, vol. i, pp. 106et seq.Morison’s treatment of this tempestuous period is characterized by keen discrimination and fine balance. It is one of the most satisfying as well as one of the most vivid accounts of the situation to be found.
[289]Connecticut Courant, July 8, 1799.
[290]Independent Chronicle, Dec. 3, 1798.
[291]Report of the American Historical Association for 1912: “The Enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Laws,” by F. M. Anderson, pp. 115et seq.Cf.The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 256et seq., 262, letters of Monroe to Jefferson.
[292]Anderson, who appears to have made a painstaking examination of the available records, states his conclusions thus: “I have made a special effort to discover every possible instance and to avoid confusing Federal and State cases. There appears to have been about 24 or 25 persons arrested. At least 15, and probably several more, were indicted. Only 10, or possibly 11, cases came to trial. In 10 the accused were pronounced guilty. The eleventh case may have been an acquittal, but the report of it is entirely unconfirmed.” (Report of the American Historical Association for 1912, p. 120.Cf.Bassett,The Federalist System, p. 264.) An important phase of the judicial aspects of the situation, as respects the forming of public opinion, was the widespread publication in the newspapers of the charges made to grand juries by Federal judges who exerted themselves to defend the alien and sedition laws, and whose utterances received caustic criticism at the hands of Democrat writers.
[293]Duniway,The Development of Freedom of the Press in Massachusetts, pp. 145, 146.
[294]The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 331et seq., Jefferson’s letter to Elbridge Gerry.
[295]The report of this episode may be found in theConnecticut Courantof May 14, 1798.Cf.The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vii, pp. 252et seq., Jefferson’s letter to Madison.
[296]Ibid.
[297]An Answer to Alexander Hamilton’s Letter, Concerning the Public Conduct and Character of John Adams, Esq., President of the United States, New York, 1800, p. 3. In this connection it may be noted that as ardent and hopeful a Democrat as Nathaniel Ames seriously contemplated the outbreak of civil war in the United States as the result of the tense party situation near the end of 1798.Cf.Dedham Historical Register, Diary of Ames, vol. ix, p. 63.
[298]The Works of Alexander Hamilton, vol. vii, pp. 374–377: Fragment on the French Revolution. The Fragment is undated. It could not have been written later than 1804, of course. There are some slight traces that it was compiled at the time the excitement over the Illuminati was prevalent in America.
[299]Forestier,Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande, p. 103. This author, upon whose recent painstaking researches much reliance is placed in this chapter, relates that one traveler who was in Bavaria at this time, found 28,000 churches and chapels, with pious foundations representing a total value of 60,000,000 florins. Munich, a city of 40,000 inhabitants, had no less than 17 convents. When a papal bull, issued in 1798, authorized the elector to dispose of the seventh part of the goods of the clergy, the Bavarian government, in executing the pope’s directions, deducted 25,000,000 florins, and it was remarked that this amount did not equal the sum which had been agreed upon.Cf. ibid., pp. 103et seq.
[300]Forestier,op. cit., p. 108: “Dans aucun pays du monde, si l’on excepte le Paraguay, les fils de Loyola n’avaient obtenu une victoire plus complète, ni conquis une autorité plus grande.”Cf.Mounier,De l’influence attribuée aux Philosophes aux franc-maçons et aux illuminés sur la révolution de France, p. 189.
[301]Ibid., pp. 109, 100. Duhr, B.,Geschichte der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge im 16. Jahrhundert, Freiburg, 1907, discusses the earlier development. The work of F. J. Lipowsky,Geschichte der Jesuiten in Baiern, München, 1816, 2 vols., is antiquated and is little more than a chronicle.
[302]Engel,Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, p. 29.
[303]The suppression of the Jesuits by Pope Clement XIV, in 1773, did not greatly diminish the influence and power of the order in Bavaria. Refusing to accept defeat, the new intrigues to which they gave themselves inspired in their enemies a new sense of their cohesion, with the result that they appeared even more formidable than before their suppression.
[304]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 105et seq.
[305]Forestier,op. cit., p. 19.
[306]Ibid., p. 18.Cf.Engel,op. cit., pp. 19, 28, 29.
[307]In the person of Maximilian Joseph, Bavaria found an elector whose earlier devotion to liberal policies gave promise of fundamental reforms. Agriculture and manufactures were encouraged; judicial reforms were undertaken; the despotism of the clergy was resisted. The founding of the Academy of Science at Munich, in 1759, represented a definite response to the spirit of theAufklärung. However, the elector was not at all minded to break with the Catholic faith. All efforts to introduce Protestant ideas into the country were vigorously opposed by the government. In the end the elector’s program of reform miscarried. At the time of his death, in 1777 (the date given by Forestier, p. 106, is incorrect;cf.Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, vol. xxi. p. 30; also Brockhaus,Konversations-Lexikon, vol. xi. p. 683.), the absolute power of the clergy remained unshattered.
[308]Forestier,op. cit., p. 107.
[309]As a result of this effort, George Weishaupt, father of Adam, came to the University of Ingolstadt as professor of imperial institutions and criminal law.
[310]Engel,op. cit., pp. 19et seq.
[311]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 19et seq.Cf.Engel,op. cit., pp. 20et seq.
[312]Ibid., pp. 22et seq.
[313]Forestier,op. cit., pp. 16et seq.
[314]Forestier,op. cit., p. 18.
[315]Ibid.
[316]Ickstatt withdrew from direct participation in the affairs of the University of Ingolstadt in 1765, but he continued to exercise a controlling influence over the policies of the institution for some time to come. The son of one of his former pupils, Lori, a man of liberal notions, was later chosen co-director of the institution, and with him Weishaupt made common cause in his campaign against the Jesuits.
[317]Forestier,op. cit., p. 21.Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 33.
[318]No clearer illustration of Weishaupt’s lack of nobility is needed than his treatment of his protector and patron, Ickstatt. Owing to a marriage which he had contracted in 1773, against the wishes of Ickstatt, a decided chill came over the relations between the two men. All considerations of gratitude were carelessly tossed aside by Weishaupt. Later, in utter disregard of the anticlericalism of his benefactor, Weishaupt entered into an intrigue with the Jesuit professor Stadler, to obtain a coveted ecclesiastical position for the latter. Ickstatt, hearing of this, renounced Weishaupt as an ingrate. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 22et seq.
[319]Engel,op. cit., p. 31.
[320]Forestier,op. cit., p. 21.
[321]Ibid.Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 32.
[322]Ibid., p. 22.
[323]Ibid., p. 25.
[324]Ibid.
[325]The motives which led Weishaupt to consider the formation of a secret organization of the general character indicated were not all of a kind. In part they were creditable, in part discreditable. That he had a genuine interest in the cause of liberalism and progress, born largely of the personal discomfort and injury he had experienced at the hands of intolerance and bigotry, there can be no honest doubt. But a thirst for power was also a fundamental element in his nature. The despotic character of the order which he attempted to build up is in itself a sufficient proof of this. Besides, the cast of his personal affairs at the time the organization was launched smacks loudly of the mans over-weening vanity and yearning for personal conquest. His break with Ickstatt had been followed by a breach between him and Lori on account of the constant recriminations in which Weishaupt engaged against his enemies in the university. The secret alliance he had formed with the Jesuit Stadler likewise soon dissolved. His complaints because of alleged infringements of his freedom of speech as a teacher were vehement. His interference in university affairs outside the proper sphere of his authority was frequent and involved him in numerous acrimonious verbal battles. (Engel seeks to relieve Weishaupt of part of the odium of these charges by shifting somewhat of the burden to other shoulders. (Cf.Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, pp. 29–54.) His partiality is, however, sufficiently accounted for by the fact that at the time his work was published, he was the head of the revived Order of the Illuminati.Cf. op. cit., p. 467;cf.Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. iii: article, “Illuminaten”). Yet none of these experiences brought home to the mind of Weishaupt that he was to blame. As to the matter of motive, Forestier’s comment is much to the point: “Ainsi le hardi confesseur de la vérité se trouvait seul à lutter visière levée contre la tourbe des bigots. Une volonté moins bien trempée aurait laissé sombrer dans une résignation inerte ou dans la manie de la persécution ce modeste professeur d’une Université sans prestige, perdu dans un coin de la Bavière, mal payé, mal vu de la majorité de ses collègues, mal noté par le Curateur, surveillé, soupçonné par tous ceux que scandalisait le radicalisme de ses opinions. Mais l’âme de Weishaupt disposait de deux puissants ressorts: la soif du prosélytisme et la volonté de puissance.” (Op. cit., pp. 25et seq.) The view adopted by Kluckhohn is not essentially different: “Rachsucht, Ehrgeiz, Herrschbegier mischten sich in ihm mit dem Drange, grosses zu wirken und ein Woltäter der Menschheit zu werden.” (Herzog-Plitt,Real-Encyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 2. Aufl., vol. vi, Leipzig, 1880: article, “Illuminaten,” p. 699.)
[326]Forestier,op. cit., p. 28. Weishaupt readily detected the disparate character of current Freemasonry, and for a brief time he was enthusiastic over the project of developing a rarified type of Masonry to which only men of superior talents should be admitted. For the reasons given, the idea was abandoned.
[327]Ibid., p. 29.
[328]Forestier,op. cit., p. 75. The teaching function of the order is well set out by Forestier in the following: “Faire de l’homme actuel, resté sauvage et férocement égoïste sous le vernis d’une civilisation apparante, un être véritablement sociable, c’est-à-dire respectueux des droits de ses semblables et amène dans ses rapports avec eux, enseigner à ses membres ‘l’art de réaliser le bien sans trouver d’opposition, de corriger leurs défauts, d’ecarter les obstacles, d’attaquer le mal à la racine, de faire en un mot ce que jusqu’à présent l’éducation, l’enseignement de la morale, les lois civiles et la religion même ont été incapables d’accomplir,’ leur apprendre ‘à soumettre leurs désirs au contrôle de la raison,’ tel est donc en dernière analyse ce que L’Ordre considère comme sa fin suprême. Société d’enseignement par les occupations qu’il impose à ses adeptes, il est essentiellement, par le but qu’il se propose, un institut d’éducation sociale.” (Op. cit., p. 78.)
[329]It was Weishaupt’s original purpose to style the new order the “Perfectibilists”, but this he later renounced as too bizarre and lacking in the element of mystery.
[330]Forestier,op. cit., p. 46: “Au moment où Weishaupt avait fondé son Ordre, l’organisation de tout le Système était à peine ébauchée dans son esprit. Quand il s’était subitement décidé à jeter les bases de son édifice, il avait hâtivement rédigé des Statuts provisoires, se promettant de les remanier et d’arrêter définitivement dans le silence du cabinet le plan général.”Cf.Engel,op. cit., p. 90: “Die ersten Ordensstatuten, welche einen Einblick geben über das, was Weishaupt wollte, bestanden nur kurze Zeit; sie waren recht dürftig und unklar.” It was not until Baron Knigge came to his assistance, four years later, that Weishaupt was able to rescue the organization of the society from the mire of puerility into which his impractical nature had plunged it.
[331]Engel,op. cit., pp. 56et seq.The recruiting of women, Jews, pagans, monks, and members of other secret organizations was forbidden. Weishaupt preferred the enrollment of men who were between the ages of 18 and 30.
[332]Cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, pp. 49, 50, 56.
[333]Ibid., p. 26.
[334]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, pp. 61–65.
[335]Ibid., p. 63. From time to time the Novice was required to submit to his superiors notations he had made upon interesting portions of books which he had read, in order that his instruction might be properly directed.Cf. ibid., pp. 62, 65. In the pursuit of the art or science that he had chosen as his principal occupation, he was expected to keep in close touch with his enroller.
[336]Ibid., p. 31.
[337]Forestier,op. cit., p. 61.
[338]Ibid., pp. 61–64.
[339]Forestier,op. cit., p. 64.
[340]Ibid., p. 65.
[341]Ibid.
[342]Ibid., p. 66. It was in the mind of Weishaupt to make a sort of free university out of this grade. He himself declared: “In der nächsten Klasse [i. e., Minervals], dächte ich also eine Art von gelehrter Academie zu errichten: in solcher wird gearbeitet, an Karakteren, historischen, und lebenden, Studium der Alten, Beobachtungsgeist, Abhandlungen, Preisfragen, und in specie mache ich darinnen jeden zum Spion des andern und aller. Darauf werden die Fähigen zu den Mysterien herausgenommen, die in dieser Klasse etliche Grundsätze und Grunderfordernisse zum menschlichen glückseligen Leben sind.” (Quoted by Engel from Weishaupt’s correspondence with Zwack, p. 76.) The grade Minerval is therefore to be regarded as designed to supply the opportunitypar excellencefor imparting the revolutionary ideas of which the founder of the order boasted. Under the direction of their superiors the Minervals were to continue the study of the humanities which they began as Novices; they were to study the works of the ancients, to prepare dissertations upon subjects in those fields to which their special talents were suited,etc.,—in a word, to show themselves worthy of membership in an academy of savants.Cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 216.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 74. Weishaupt entertained extremely ambitious notions of a system of special libraries under the control of the order, and in which the literary and scientific productions of the order should be assembled and preserved.Cf.Der ächte Illuminat, p. 46.
[343]Forestier,op. cit., p. 66.
[344]The fantastic element in Weishaupt’s mind is well illustrated at this point. In view of the fact that he particularly sought the recruitment of youths between the ages of 15 and 20 years (cf.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 261), it is difficult to see the possibility of sustained satisfaction in such associations. We shall see later that Baron Knigge substantially modified the character of the organization in this particular. Weishaupt did not scruple to employ outright deception with reference to the reputed age and power of the order to enhance in the minds of the members the sense of the value of these secret associations. Forestier,op. cit., p. 82.
[345]Ibid., p. 66.
[346]Der ächte Illuminat, p. 94. The notion that the supreme heads of the order, whose identity of course was concealed from the members, were individuals of exceptional purity, was kept before the minds of the “illuminated” Minervals as an added incentive.
[347]From two to four Minervals were given to each Illuminated Minerval, to receive his instructions in the principles and objects of the order. The selection of these pupils in a given instance was supposed to be based upon their openness to the influence of their particular instructor.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 70et seq.
[348]Ibid., p. 71. The principle of espionage was an important element in the administration of the order. Weishaupt acknowledged his indebtedness to the ideal of organization which the Society of Jesus had set before him (Cf.Endliche Erklärungen, pp. 60et seq.Cf.Forestier, pp. 97–99), and the principle of one member spying upon another was apparently borrowed from that source. It was Weishaupt’s theory that dissimulation and hypocrisy could best be eradicated by proving to the members of the organization the inutility of such courses of life in view of the incessant surveillance under which all the members lived. (Cf.Der ächte Illuminat, p. 102.) Accordingly the Novice was left to surmise just how many eyes of unknown superiors might be upon him. The duty imposed upon the Illuminated Minerval of informing upon his disciples has been noted above. Weishaupt seems never to have surmised that this policy of espionage would tend to kill mutual confidence and fraternal regard at the roots.
[349]Forestier,op. cit., p. 71.
[350]Weishaupt’s conception of the content of these terms left room for a recognition of the benefits to be derived from society, but denied the value of the state. Man had moved forward, not backward, from his primitive condition. The satisfaction of his needs had supplied the motive force to his progress. In the state of nature, it is quite true, man enjoyed the two sovereign goods, equality and liberty. However, his disposition and desires were such that a continuance in the state of nature was impossible. The condition of misery into which he came resulted from his failure to acquire the art of controlling his faculties and curbing his passions, and from the injustice which he suffered the state to impose upon him. With the erection of the state had come the notions of the subjection of some men to the power and authority of others, the consequent loss of the unity of the race, and the replacement of the love of humanity with nationalism, or patriotism. But political revolutions were not needed to accomplish the emancipation of the race; such revolutions had always proved sterile because they touched nothing deeper than the constitutions of states. Man’s nature needed to be reconstituted. To bring life under the control of reason would enable men again to possess themselves of equality and liberty. A return to man’s primitive state is both impossible and undesirable. Social life is a blessing. Only let men learn to govern themselves by the light of reason, and civil authority, having been found utterly useless, will quickly disappear. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 311–316.
[351]Der ächte Illuminat, pp. 110, 123.
[352]Forestier,op. cit., p. 78.
[353]Forestier,op. cit., p. 80.
[354]In view of the connections which the enemies of the order later made between the Illuminati and the French Revolution, it is worthy of particular emphasis that Weishaupt eschewed the principle of effecting reform by political revolution, and definitely committed himself to the ideal of moral and intellectual reformation. The slow process of ameliorating the unhappy condition of humanity through the leavening influence of the ideas propagated in the order,i. e., by reshaping private and public opinion, was the pathway which Weishaupt chose.Der ächte Illuminat, pp. 10, 205. Such, at least, was the theory in the case. In practise the order abandoned the policy of non-intervention and sought to influence government by putting its members in important civil positions. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 329et seq.
[355]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 339.
[356]Ibid., p. 279.
[357]Forestier,op. cit., p. 88. The anticlerical spirit of the order did not receive an official emphasis commensurate with its importance and weight, doubtless because of Weishaupt’s desire to work under cover against his enemies as completely as possible. Forestier’s comment seems thoroughly just: “Il ne faut pas oublier que Weishaupt en fondant sa Societé n’avait pas songé seulement à faire le bonheur de l’humanité, mais qu’il avait cherché aussi à trouver des alliés dans la lutte qu’il soutenait à Ingolstadt contre le parti des ex-Jésuites. A côté du but officiellement proclamé, l’Ordre avait un autre but, auquel on pensait d’autant plus qu’on en parlait moins.” (Op. cit., 87.Cf. ibid., pp. 92, 110.)
[358]Ibid., p. 90.
[359]Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 216. The order was to be used in the circulation of anticlerical and antireligious books and pamphlets, and the work of the priests and the monks was to be held in mind as constituting the chief obstacle to intellectual and moral progress. Forestier,op. cit., pp. 91, 92.
[360]Ibid., p. 317.
[361]Ibid., p. 318.
[362]Forestier,op. cit., p. 318. This was treated as the esoteric doctrine of Christ, coming to the surface here and there in His teachings and acts, and revealed in thedisciplina arcaniof the early church. It is only when this secret teaching is grasped that the coherence of Jesus’ utterances and the significance of the true doctrines of man’s fall and his resurrection can be understood. It was because man abandoned the state of nature that he lost his dignity and his liberty. In other words, he fell because he ceased to fight against his sensual desires, surrendering himself to the rule of his passions. His work of redemption will be accomplished when he learns to moderate his passions and to limit his desires. The kingdom of grace is therefore a kingdom wherein men live in reason’s light.
[363]“Par ses divers caractères avoués ou secrets, l’Ordre des Illuminés était l’expression d’une époque et d’un milieu. Le Système né dans le cerveau de Weishaupt avait trouvé des adeptes en Bavière parce qu’il répondait aux aspirations et satisfaisait les haines de la classe cultivée dans ce pays.” (Ibid., p. 99.)
[364]These new centers were Munich, Regensburg, Freising, and Eichstätt. For data concerning the early enrollment of recruits,cf. ibid., pp. 30et seq.
[365]Ibid., p. 45.
[366]The termAreopagitewas applied to the men who shared with Weishaupt the supreme direction of the order. Each was assigned a pseudonym. With one exception, Xavier Zwack (Danaus), they seem to have been men of very ordinary ability. Forestier,op. cit., p. 232.
[367]Ibid., pp. 231et seq., 112et seq.
[368]Weishaupt’s original plan had been to leave the matter of financial support to the discretion of the members.Einige Originalschriften des Illuminaten Ordens, p. 16. Time, however, proved the imprudence of this arrangement, and hence fixed dues, very modest in their character, were imposed. Forestier, pp. 130et seq.
[369]Ibid., pp. 132et seq.
[370]Engel gives the date of the admission of Knigge as July, 1780.Cf.Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, p. 114. Forestier is less specific.Les Illuminés de Bavière, &c., p. 217.
[371]Baron Knigge (born near Hannover, October 16, 1752; died at Bremen, May 6, 1796) was a man of considerable distinction in his day. He had studied law at Göttingen, and later had been attached to the courts of Hesse-Cassel and Weimar. Retiring subsequently to private life, he made his home successively at Frankfort-on-the-Main, Heidelberg, Hannover, and Bremen. He was an author of note, a writer of romance, popular philosophy, and dramatic poetry. His best known work,Ueber den Umgang mit Menschen(Hannover, 1788), a volume filled with a discussion of practical principles and maxims of life and characterized by a narrow and egoistical outlook, enjoyed a considerable notoriety in its time. (Knigge’s complete works were assembled and published in twelve volumes at Hannover, 1804–1806). He had a decided bias for secret societies, and at the earliest moment that his age permitted had joined a lodge of the Strict Observance, one of the Masonic branches of the period. The Strict Observance was particularly devoted to the reform of Masonry, with special reference to the elimination of the occult sciences which at the time were widely practised in the lodges, and the establishment of cohesion and homogeneity in Masonry through the enforcement of strict discipline, the regulation of functions,etc.(Later, the leaders of the Strict Observance found themselves compelled to yield to the popular clamor for the occult sciences which were all but universal in European Freemasonry, and adopted them. Their presence and practice had been influential in attracting Knigge to the Masonic system.Cf.Forestier,op. cit., p. 207.) Knigge’s Masonic career proved to be of such a nature as to leave him restless and unsatisfied. Because he was not permitted to enjoy the advancement in the order of the Strict Observance that he coveted, he temporarily lost his interest in Masonry only to have it revived a little later by being chosen to assist in the establishment of a new Masonic lodge at Hanau. Meantime his interest in the subjects of theosophy, magic, and particularly alchemy, grew apace. On this account he was led to make an effort to affiliate himself with the Rosicrucians, a branch of Freemasonry notorious for the absurdity of its pretensions and its shameless pandering to the popular desire for occultism. Knigge’s advance did not happen to be received with favor; and the result was that, finding himself compelled for the moment to be content with his membership in the Strict Observance, he renounced his interest in alchemy and devoted his reflections to the development of a form of Masonry which should teach men rules of life by the observance of which they might gradually regain that perfection from which their original parents fell. It was at the moment when Knigge’s mind was occupied with this project that his membership in the Order of the Illuminati was solicited.Cf.Forestier, pp. 214et seq.As to the personality of the man, the following estimate by Forestier is excellent: “ … gentilhomme democrate, dilettante par temperament, homme de lettres par necessité, ecrivain abondant et mediocre, publiciste, moraliste, romancier sentimental et satirique, … un personnage interessant moins encore en lui-meme que comme representant d’une caste en dissolution.” (Op. cit., p. 202.)