April 23, 1808.
My ideas on the questions relative to the active letter of Marque stated in your letter of yesterday, are as follows:
1st. Letters of Marque have been considered, ever since the decisions of 1703, to be of a mixed character, but that the commercial character predominates; and as a commercial vessel of private property we have in some cases since the proclamation of July, considered them as not included in its restrictions.
2d. The law of 1794, June 5th, certainly exempts the enlistment of foreigners in this country on board the vessels of their sovereign, from the penalties of that law, and leaves the subject merely under the law of nations. By that law the right of enlistment in a neutral country, given to both belligerents if they can devise equal advantage from it, is no breach of neutrality, but otherwise becomes questionable. We may, justly, I think, permit a vessel of either nation to supply its desertions by new engagements; but we should be cautious as to permitting them to increase their number, to carry away more than they brought in.
3d. It is difficult to draw a line between the two cases where the collector should consult the government, and where the district attorney. Where a case is political, rather than legal, or where it arises even on alawwhose object is rather political than municipal, the government should be consulted; and where the district attorney is the proper resort, still it should be on consultation by the collector, and not by the party interested. Affectionate salutations.
April 23, 1808.
Notes on the British claims in the Mississippi territory.
1803, March 3d, act of Congress gave to March 31, 1804, to exhibit their claims on grants.
1804, March 27, act of Congress gave to November 30, 1804, and allowed transcripts instead of originals, &c.
1805, March 2d, act of Congress gave to December 1, 1805, to file their grants. And in fact to Jan 1, 1807, time when the sale might begin.
1807, December 15, the British claimants memorialize again.
On no one of the acts did the British claimant take any step towards specifying his claim or its location, but remained inactive till the time was expired, and then remonstrated to his government that we had not given them time sufficient. And on the last of 1805, instead of having come forward with his claims, ready to avail himself of the third term which was then to be asked, and which was granted nominally to December 1, 1805, but in effect to January 1, 1807, he stays at home inactive, and on the 15th of December, 1807, again gives in a memorial that we have not given time enough, but still takes no step to inform us what and where his claim is.
Although these titles may have been confirmed by treaty, yet they could not thereby be intended to be withdrawn from the jurisdiction or conditions on which lands are held even by citizens. It is evident that these claimants are speculators, whose object is to make what profit they can out of the patronage of the government, but to make no sacrifice of themselves either of money or trouble. They are entitled, therefore, to no further notice from either government. However, Mr. Erskine may be informedverbally, that as the day of commencing sales of lands there is now put off to January 1, 1809, if any of these claimants will, before that day, file their claim, with itsprecise location, the executive is authorized to suspend the sale of any particular parcels, and will as to that, till the proper authoritycan decide on the title, but that the settlement of that country in general, is too pressing to be delayed one day by claims under the circumstances of these.
April 23, 1808.
The leading object of the enclosed application from the owners of the Topaz, is to send witnesses and documents to save the property of the ship and cargo seized. But as the Topaz would be insufficient to bring home the whole property if cleared, the permission of sending a vessel may be on the ordinary ground of bringing home the property. But do the restrictions of the embargo laws (for I have them not) inhibit the passing from port to port as proposed in the enclosed? And do they admit, (in case the Topaz and her cargo are condemned,) that the vessel sent out should bring home other property to cover the expenses of the ineffectual voyage? On these questions I must ask your opinion, as General Smith will call on me to-morrow. The questions had been brought to me originally by Mr. Taylor, because he happened to come at a moment when you were confined. Affectionate salutes.
April 24, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson returns the enclosed to Mr. Rodney, with thanks for the communication. It is very evident that our embargo, added to the exclusions from the Continent, will be most heavily felt in England and Ireland. Liverpool is remonstrating, and endeavoring to get the other posts into motion. Yet the bill confirming the orders of council is ordered to a third reading, which shows it will pass. Congress has just passed an additional embargo law, on which if we act as boldly as I am disposed to do, we can make it effectual. I think the material parts of theenclosed should be published. It will show our people that while the embargo gives us double rations, it is starving our enemies. This six months' session has worn me down to a state of almost total incapacity for business. Congress will certainly rise to-morrow night, and I shall leave this for Monticello on the 5th of May, to be here again on the 8th of June. I salute you with constant affection and respect.
Washington, April 24, 1808.
Dear Sir,—So uncertain has been the situation of our affairs with England, and yet so much bearing would they have on those with the Indians, that I have delayed answering your favor of October 5th until I could see a little way before me. At present I think a continuance of our peace till the next meeting of Congress (November) probable. I have now addressed a message to the Indians in the north-west, in which I inform them of our differences with England, and of the uncertainty how they will issue. Assure them of the continuance of our friendship, and advise them in any event to remain quiet at home, taking no part in our quarrel, and declaring unequivocally that if any nation takes up the hatchet against us, we will drive them from the land of their fathers, and never more permit their return. With respect to the prophet, I really believe the opinion you formed of his views is correct. But we have heard so many different stories since, that we are awaiting some information which we expect to receive before we make up a definitive opinion. This much, however, we determine; and he might know that if we become dissatisfied that his views are friendly, we shall extend to him all the patronage and good offices in our power, and shall establish a store in his new settlement; and particularly if we find him endeavoring to reform the morality of the Indians, and encourage them in industry and peace, we shall do what we canto render his influence as extensive as possible. I had been in hopes that a change in the British ministry would have produced a revocation of the orders of council, which called for our embargo, and an European peace, so as to have removed all danger of our being dragged into the war. But our advices to the 14th of March show they still retained a good majority in Parliament. Should they continue in office, our peace will continue uncertain. Accept my salutations, and assurances of great esteem and respect.
April 30, 1808.
Case of the Fleusburg.
Our laws permit a foreigner to hold any property in our country, except lands. A foreigner may contract for a ship to be built for him, so that she will be his from the time of laying the keel; or he may contract so as that she shall be his only when launched, or when rigged, &c. The act of delivery to him or his agents fixes, in that case, the moment when she becomes his property. If the Fleusburg was delivered to the agent of the Danish merchant, by such an act of delivery as by our laws will transfer personal property, before the 22d of December, she was then Danish property. The statement says that a bill of building and sale, dated December 10th, proved her to be then Danish property. If the collector shall find that she was actually Danish property before December 22d, I should think her entitled as a foreign vessel. I suppose she did not take out an American register. This would be corroborative proof that, though built in America, she was not meant to be, nor ever became, an American bottom; for I presume the register is what completes the American bottom. The matter of fact should be proved to the collector.
Rhode Island Packets.
The pretension that the navigation from Newport to New York is entirely a navigation of rivers, bays, and sounds, wouldtake from language all kind of certainty. There is not one point of the coast of Rhode Island, from which a perpendicular line does not lead into the main ocean. A very small proportion of these would lead across Block Island. But to say that Block Island covers the whole coast from Martha's Vineyard to Long Island, so as to make it a Sound, is too gross for any one who casts his eyes on the maps. The difference of regulation, too, between bay-craft and coasting vessels, since the act of April 25th, is very inconsiderable.
April 29, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson will thank General Dearborne to consider the enclosed. The writer appears to have that sincere enthusiasm for his undertaking which will ensure success. The education of the common people around Detroit is a most desirable object, and the proposition of extending their views to the teaching the Indian boys and girls to read and write, agriculture and mechanic trades to the former, spinning and weaving to the latter, may perhaps be acceded to by us advantageously for the Indians, and the bounties paid for them be an aid to the other objects of the institution. Affectionate salutations.
April 30, 1808.
Notes on such parts of Fronda's letter of April 26th, 1808, as are worth answering:—
I. I know of no recent orders to Governor Claiborne as to the navigation of the Mississippi, Uberville, and Pontchartrain; he should specify them, but he may be told that no order has ever been given contrary to the rights of Spain. These rights are, 1st, a treaty right that "the ships of Spain coming directly fromSpain or her colonies, loaded onlywith the produceor manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the ports of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States, &c." 2d. A right of innocent passage from the mouth of the Mississippi to 31° of latitude, exactly commensurate with our right of innocent passage up the rivers of Florida to 31° of latitude.
II. In answer to his question whether we consider Mobile among the ports of the United States, he may be told that so long as we consider the question whether the Perdido is not the eastern boundary of Louisiana, as continuing in a train of amicable proceedings for adjustment, so long that part only of the river Mobile, which is above 31° of latitude, will be considered among the ports of the United States, withholding the exercise of jurisdiction on our part within the disputed territory, on the general principle of letting things remain instatu quo pendente lite.
There is nothing else in this letter worth answering.
Washington, April 30, 1803.
Sir,—Your favor of the 11th of July came to hand a little before the meeting of Congress, and soon after I received the apparatus for stylographic writing, which you were so kind as to send me, for which I pray you to receive my particular thanks.
The invention is certainly very ingenious, and while it compares advantageously with all others in other circumstances, it has an unrivalled preference as being so much more profitable. I had never heard of the invention till your letter announced it, for these novelties reach us very late, which renders your attentions on the occasion more acceptable, and more entitled to the acknowledgments which I now tender. The decrees and ordersof the belligerent nations having amounted nearly to declarations that they would take our vessels wherever found. Congress thought it best in the first instance to break off all intercourse with them. They adjourned on Monday last, having passed an act authorizing me to suspend the embargo whenever the belligerents should revoke their decrees or orders as to us. The embargo must continue, therefore, till they meet again in November, unless the measures of the belligerents should change. When they meet again, if these decrees and orders still continue, the question which they will have to decide will be, whether a continuance of the embargo or war will be preferable. In the meantime great advances are making in the establishment of manufactures. Those of cotton will, I think, be so far proceeded on, that we shall never again have to recur to the importation of cotton goods for our own use. I tender you my salutations, and the assurances of my great respect.
Washington, May 2, 1808.
Dear General,—A safe conveyance offering by a special messenger to Paris, I avail myself of it to bring up my arrears to my foreign correspondents. I give them the protection of your cover, but to save the trouble of your attention to their distribution, I give them an inner cover to Mr. Harden, whose attentions heretofore have encouraged me to ask this favor of him. But should he not be with you, I must pray you to open my packages to him, and have them distributed, as it is of importance that some of them should be delivered without delay. I shall say nothing to you on the subject of our foreign relations, because you will get what is official on that subject from Mr. Madison.
During the present paroxysm of the insanity of Europe, we have thought it wisest to break off all intercourse with her. Weshall, in the course of this year, have all our seaports, of any note, put into a state of defence against naval attacks. Against great land armies we cannot attempt it but by equal armies. For these we must depend on a classified militia, which will give us the service of the class from twenty to twenty-six, in the nature of conscripts, composing a body of about 250,000, to be specially trained. This measure, attempted at a former session, was passed at the last, and might, I think, have been carried by a small majority. But considering that great innovations should not be forced on a slender majority, and seeing that the general opinion is sensibly rallying to it, it was thought better to let it lie over to the next session, when, I trust, it will be passed. Another measure has now twice failed, which I have warmly urged, the immediate settlement by donation of lands, of such a body of militia in the territories of Orleans and Mississippi, as will be adequate to the defence of New Orleans. We are raising some regulars in addition to our present force, for garrisoning our seaports, and forming a nucleus for the militia to gather to. There will be no question who is to be my successor. Of this be assured, whatever may be said by newspapers and private correspondences. Local considerations have been silenced by those dictated by the continued difficulties of the times. One word of friendly request: be more frequent and full in your communications with us. I salute you with great friendship and respect.
Washington, May 2, 1808.
My very dear General,—A safe conveyance offering by a special messenger to Paris, Mr. Barnes has requested me to avail you of it, by sending a remittance of a thousand dollars, for which a draught is under cover. I shall not write to you on the subject of our foreign relations, because of the dangers by sea and the dangers by land. During the present paroxysm ofthe insanity of Europe, we have thought it wisest to break off all intercourse with her. We shall, in the course of this year, have all our seaports of any note put into a state of defence against naval attacks. Against great land armies we cannot attempt it but by equal armies. For these we must depend on a classified militia, which will give us the service of the class from twenty to twenty-six, in the nature of conscripts, composing a body of about 250,000, to be specially trained. This measure, attempted at a former session, was passed at the last, and might, I think, have been carried by a small majority; but considering that great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities, and seeing that the public opinion is sensibly rallying to it, it was thought better to let it lie over to the next session, when I trust it will be passed. Another measure has now twice failed, which I have warmly urged, the immediate settlement by donation of lands of such a body of militia in the territories of Orleans and Mississippi, as will be adequate to the defence of New Orleans. We are raising some regulars in addition to our present force, for garrisoning our seaports, and forming a nucleus for the militia to gather to. There will be no question who is to be my successor. Of this be assured, whatever may be said by newspapers and private correspondences; local considerations have been silenced by those dictated by the continued difficulties of the times. I salute you with sincere and constant friendship and great respect.
May 3, 1808.
I enclose you a petition from a woman (Mary Barnett) who complains that her son of thirteen years of age, is detained against her will in the naval military service. Having never before received an application of the kind in that department, I know not what are the rules there. But in the land service we have had many cases of enlistments of infants, and there the law is considered to be, and our practice in conformity, as follows:An infant is considered as incapable of binding himself by enlistment, and may at any time be reclaimed by a parent, guardian, next friend, or may quit of his own accord, on complaint from a parent, &c. We direct the officer to inquire into the fact of infancy, and if he believes him under age he discharges him. If he believes him of full age, we advise the parent, &c., that he may take out a Habeas Corpus, and have the fact tried before an impartial judge: if enlisted with the consent of the parent, &c., it must be by indentures as prescribed by law for an apprentice or servant, this being the only mode of obligation in which the law will compelspecificexecution. In case of a verbal or a common written subscription of engagement, even with consent of the parent,damagesonly can be recovered for withdrawing from it. I presume the rules in the Navy Department must be the same, as we must conform ourselves to the law in all departments. I directed the woman to call on me again to-morrow. Will you be so good as to enable me to give her an answer? Affectionate salutations.
Washington, May 4, 1808.
Sir,—I duly received your favor of April 18th, covering an Act of the legislature of New York, appropriating $100,000 to aid and expedite the defence of the city and port of New York, and $20,000 to aid in and contribute to the defence of the northern and western frontiers, and expressing a desire to receive an opinion on the application of those sums.
In carrying into execution the provisions of Congress, at their last session, for fortifying on a just view of the relative importance of the places, combined with their degree of exposure, and capability of defence, and in such way as to require a moderate permanent force of regulars, relying much, in case of sudden attack on the aid of the militia. Among theobjects of our care, New York stands foremost in the points of importance and exposure; and, if permitted, we shall provide such defences for it as, in our opinion, will render it secure against attacks by sea. The particulars of what is proposed to be done can be made known to you by Colonel Williams, as it is probable these may not comprehend everything which the anxieties of the citizens might think of service in their defence. I suggest for your consideration, the idea of applying the fund appropriated to this object, by your legislature, to such supplementary provisions as in your judgment might be necessary to render ours adequate to fulfil the views and confidence of your citizens. Of this however, you are the best judge. But I cannot omit to urge that no time should be lost in deciding on so much of the plan proposed by the Secretary at War, as depends on a cession from the State authorities.
It appears to me that it would be well to have a post on the Saint Lawrence, as near our line as a commanding position could be found, that it might afford some cover for our most advanced inhabitants. But if a rupture takes place now, such a post would too soon lose all its value, to be worth building at this time. It is only in the event of a solid accommodation with Great Britain, and their retaining their present possessions, that it might become worthy of attention. I do not know that the $20,000 appropriated by the State of New York, "to aid in, and contribute to, the defence of the northern and western frontiers," could be better applied than as supplementary to our provisions in this quarter also. We cannot, for instance, deliver out our arms to the militia, until called into the field. Yet it would be a great security had every militia man on these frontiers a good musket in his hands. However, here again your Excellency is the best judge, and I have hazarded these ideas as to the application of the appropriations, only on the wish you expressed that I would do it, and on my own desire to interchange ideas with frankness, and without reserve with those charged, in common with myself with the public interests. I beg leave to tender you the assurances of my high esteem and respect.
May 5, 1808.
Great and Good Friend,—Having learnt the safe arrival of your Royal Highness at the city of Rio Janeiro, I perform with pleasure the duty of offering you my sincere congratulations by Mr. Hill, a respected citizen of the United States, who is specially charged with the delivery of this letter.
I trust that this event will be as propitious to the prosperity of your faithful subjects as to the happiness of your Royal Highness, in which the United States of America have ever taken a lively interest. Inhabitants now of the same land, of that great continent which the genius of Columbus has given to the world, the United States feel sensibly that they stand in new and closer relations with your Royal Highness, and that the motives which heretofore nourished the friendly relations which have so happily prevailed, have acquired increased strength on the transfer of your residence to their own shores. They see in prospect, a system of intercourse between the different regions of this hemisphere of which the peace and happiness of mankind may be the essential principle. To this principle your long-tried adherence, for the benefit of those you governed, in the midst of warring powers, is a pledge to the new world that its peace, its free and friendly intercourse, will be your chief concern. On the part of the United States I assure you, that these which have hitherto been their ruling objects, will be most particularly cultivated with your Royal Highness and your subjects at Brazil, and they hope that that country so favored by the gifts of nature, now advanced to a station under your immediate auspices, will find, in the interchange of mutual wants and supplies, the true aliment of an unchanging friendship with the United States of America.
I pray to God, great and good friend, that in your new abode you may enjoy health, happiness, and the affections of your people, and that He will always have you in His safe and holy keeping.
Done at Washington, &c.
Washington, May 6, 1808.
Sir,—The evasions of the preceding embargo laws went so far towards defeating their objects, and chiefly by vessels clearing out coast-wise, that Congress, by their act of April 25th, authorized the absolute detention of all vessels bound coast-wise with cargoes exciting suspicions of an intention to evade those laws. There being few towns on our sea-coast which cannot be supplied with flour from their interior country, shipments of flour become generally suspicious and proper subjects of detention. Charleston is one of the few places on our seaboard which need supplies of flour by sea for its own consumption. That it may not suffer by the cautions we are obliged to use, I request of your excellency, whenever you deem it necessary that your present or any future stock should be enlarged, to take the trouble of giving your certificate in favor of any merchant in whom you have confidence, directed to the collector of any port, usually exporting flour, from which he may choose to bring it, for any quantity which you may deem necessary for consumption beyond your interior supplies, enclosing to the Secretary of the Treasury at the same time a duplicate of the certificate as a check on the falsification of your signature. In this way we may secure a supply of the real wants of our citizens, and at the same time prevent those wants from being made a cover for the crimes against their country which unprincipled adventurers are in the habit of committing. I trust, too, that your excellency will find an apology for the trouble I propose to give you, in that desire which you must feel in common with all our worthy citizens, that inconveniences encountered cheerfully by them for the interests of their country, shall not be turned merely to the unlawful profits of the most worthless part of society. I salute your excellency with assurances of my high respect and consideration.
May 6, 1808.
In the outset of the business of detentions, I think it impossible to form precise rules. After a number of cases shall have arisen they may probably be thrown into groups and subjected to rules. The great leading object of the Legislature was, and ours in execution of it ought to be, to give complete effect to the embargo laws. They have bidden agriculture, commerce, navigation, to bow before that object, to be nothing when in competition with that. Finding all their endeavors at general rules to be evaded, they finally gave us the power of detention as the panacea, and I am clear we ought to use it freely that we may, by a fair experiment, know the power of this great weapon, the embargo. Therefore, to propositions to carry flour into the Chesapeake, the Delaware, the Hudson, and otherexportingplaces, we should say boldly it is not wanted there for consumption, and the carrying it there is too suspicious to be permitted. In consequence of the letters to the Governors of the flour-importing States, we may also say boldly that there being no application from the Governor is a proof it is not wanting in those States, and therefore must not be carried. As to shuffling of cotton, tobacco, flax seed, &c., from one port to another, it may be some trifling advantage to individuals to change their property out of one form into another, but it is not of a farthing's benefit to the nation at large, and risks their great object in the embargo. The want of these at a particular place should be very notorious to the collector and others, to take off suspicion of illicit intentions. Dry goods of Europe, coal, bricks, &c., are articles entirely without suspicion. I hazard these things for your consideration, and I send you a copy of the letter to the Governors, which may be communicated in form to the collectors to strengthen the ground of suspicion. You will be so good as to decide these cases yourself, without forwarding them to me. Whenever you are clear either way, so decide; where you are doubtful, consider me as voting for detention, being satisfied that individuals ought to yield their private interests to this great public object.
Monticello, May 12, 1808.
Dear Sir,—My journey and two days' detention on the road by high waters, gave me time to reflect on our canal at New Orleans, on which I will therefore hazard some thoughts.
I think it has been said that the Mississippi, at low water, is many feet lower opposite New Orleans than Lake Pontchartrain. But the fact is impossible, being in contradiction to the laws of nature; two beds of dead water connected with the same ocean, in vicinity to one another, must each be in the level of that ocean, and consequently of one another. Although Pontchartrain receives the Amite and some other small streams, they probably do little more than supply its evaporation. No doubt, however, that the lake must receive the small ebb and flow of the sea. The Mississippi, on the contrary, even at its lowest tide, always flows downwards to and beyond its mouth; it must, then, at New Orleans, be one, two, or three feet higher than the sea, and consequently than Pontchartrain.
If a simple canal were cut from that of Carondelet to the Mississippi without lock or gate, there would be two risks. 1. That in high water of the Mississippi the current would be too strong for a gun-boat to ascend or descend. This might perhaps be remedied by the draught of horses. 2. The force of such a current, (unless the whole canal were lined with brick or masonry,) might convert the canal into a bay, one of an unknown size, and involve New Orleans in it.
On the whole, I suspect our plan is pretty obvious: suppose we want six feet water; make a canal of that depth below the lowest ebb of Pontchartrain from the lake to where the lock is to be placed,—then bring a canal from the river to the lock, the depth of which shall be six feet below the lowest water of the Mississippi ever known; at the back there will be a descent, suppose of one, two or three feet, or any other number. The lock remedies that. If the lock were near the lake it would lessen the work by giving nearly the whole length to the shallowestcanal, and it would probably be in a more tranquil and safe situation. But it might be inconvenient, perhaps unsafe, to the sides of the Mississippi canal, to permit such a depth of water as would be in it, through its whole length, at the time of the high water of that river. Of the best position, therefore, of the lock, the superintendent must judge on the spot, as he must indeed of the correctness of all the preceding conjectures, formed without a knowledge of the localities. They are hazarded merely to give us some fixed notions of the nature of the enterprize, and are submitted to your consideration. I salute you with affectionate respect.
Monticello, May 15, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I received yesterday the enclosed letter from a Mr. Wood, of New York. I should suppose the fruits of Europe stood nearly on the ground of the dry goods of Europe, not tempting evasion by exorbitant prices, nor defeating the object of the embargo in any important degree, even if a deviation should take place. I send it to yourself for decision and answer, in order that there may be an uniformity in the decisions. I am really glad to find the collector so cautious, and hope others will be equally so, and I place immense value in the experiment being fully made, how far an embargo may be an effectual weapon in future as well as on this occasion. I salute you with affection and respect.
P. S. Will you send me sixteen copies of my letters to the Governors of Orleans, Georgia, &c., which I think you proposed to have printed? I will enclose it to the other governors with explanations.
Monticello, May 17, 1808.
Dear Sir,—Yours of the 16th came to hand last night. As the lead mines do not press in point of time, I would rather they should be the subject of a conversation on my return. It is not merely a question about the terms we have to consider, but the expediency of working them. As to the Savannah revenue cutter, I approve of the proposition in your letter, or whatever else you may think proper to be done. The regular traders to New Orleans may be admitted to go as usual, the characters of the owners being known to be safe, and provisions and lumber being excepted. Cotton perhaps may be permitted to be brought back on the consideration that its price in Europe is not likely to be such as that the adventurers may afford to pay all the forfeitures. I presume Mr. Price's application, which I enclose you, will fall under this general permission. Will you be so good as to have the proper answer given him. If we change our rule of tonnage for Mr. Murray's purpose, the next application will be for such a rate of tonnage as will allow them to bring back their property in the form of hay. General Dearborne has occasion to send a vessel to Passamaquoddy with cannon for the batteries, and perhaps provision for the troops, and has asked me to send him a blank license. But as these licenses are not signed by me, I refer him to you for the necessary arrangements.
I shall sincerely lament Cuba's falling into any hands but those of its present owners. Spanish America is at present in the best hands for us, and"Chi sta bene, non si muove"should be our motto. I salute you with affection.
Monticello, May 19, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I now return you the papers reserved from the last post. Our regular answer to Mr. Livingston may well be,that the Attorney General having given an official opinion that the right to the batture is in the United States, and the matter being now referred to Congress, it is our duty to keep the grounds clear of any adversary possession, until the Legislature shall decide on it. I have carefully read Mr. Livingston's printed memoir. He has shaken my opinion as to the line within the road having been intended as a line ofboundaryinstead of its being a line ofadmeasurementonly. But he establishes another fact by the testimony of Fendeau, very fatal to his claim; to wit, that the high-water mark,"batture, ou viennentbattreles eaux lorsqu elles sont dans leurs plus grandes croissances,"is the universal boundary of private grants on the river.
Your observations on his allegations that Gravier's grant must be under the Spanish law, because after the cession of the province by France to Spain, though before delivery of possession, are conclusive. To which may be added, that Louis XIV. having established theConstumes de Parisas the law of Louisiana, this was not changed by the mere act of transfer; on the contrary, the laws of France continued and continue to be the law of the land, except where specially altered by some subsequent edict of Spain or act of Congress. He has not in the least shaken the doctrine that the bed of the river, and all theatterrissementsor banks which arise on it by the depositions of the river, are the property of the King by a peculiarity in the law of France; so that nothing quoted from those of Spain or the Roman law is of authority on that point. Affectionate salutations.
Monticello, May 20, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I return you the papers of Fanning, Lesdernier, and Sacket. With respect to Fanning's case, the true key for the construction of everything doubtful in a law, is the intention of the law-makers. This is most safely gathered from the words, but may be sought also in extraneous circumstances, providedthey do not contradict the express words of the law. We certainly know that the Legislature meant that vessels might go out to bring home property, but not to commence a new career of commerce. The bringing home the property being the main object, if it be in an impracticable form, it expects the intention of the law to let it be commuted into a practicable form; and so from an inconvenient to a convenient form. To prevent any abuse of this accommodation, by entering into a new operation of commerce with it, the discretionary permission is left to the President. I think the conversion of the sandal wood into a more portable form in this case, is fulfilling the object of the law, and that it is immaterial whether that be done in the Friendly Islands, where the wood now is, or wherever by the way it can be better done. Consequently, that permission may be granted. I hope you will spare no pains or expense to bring the rascals of Passamaquoddy to justice, and if more force be necessary, agree on the subject with General Dearborne or Mr. Smith, as to any aid they can spare, and let it go without waiting to consult me. Let the successor to Sacket also be commissioned without waiting for my opinion, which will be yours. Should a pardon be granted to Russell, I generally but not invariably require a recommendation from the judges. I shall be ready to consider any propositions you may make for mitigating the embargo law of April 25th, but so only as not to defeat the object of the law. I shall be ready to make a distinction between provisions, timber, naval stores, and such things, as by the exaggerated prices they have got to in foreign markets, would enable infactors to pay all forfeitures and still make great profit, and cotton and such other articles as have not got to such prices. I am for going substantially to the object of the law, and no further; perhaps a little more earnestly because it is the first expedient, and it is of great importance to know its full effect.
I salute you with constant affection and respect.
Monticello, May 20, 1808.
Dear Sir,—Yours of the 14th came to hand yesterday. I do not see that we can avoid agreeing to estimates made by worthy men of our own choice for the sites of fortifications, or that we could leave an important place undefended because too much is asked for the site. And therefore we must pay what the sites at Boston have been valued at. At the same time I do not know on what principles of reasoning it is that good men think the public ought to pay more for a thing than they would themselves if they wanted it. I salute you with affection and respect.
Monticello, May 20, 1808.
Sir,—I return you my thanks for the communication by your letter of April 19th, of the resolutions of the Grand Jury of Brunswick, approving of the embargo. Could the alternative of war or the embargo have been presented to the whole nation, as it occurred to their representatives, there could have been but the one opinion that it was better to take the chance of one year by the embargo, within which the orders and decrees producing it may be repealed, or peace take place in Europe, which may secure peace to us. How long the continuance of the embargo may be preferable to war, is a question we shall have to meet, if the decrees and orders and war continue. I am sorry that in some places, chiefly on our northern frontier, a disposition even to oppose the law by force has been manifested. In no country on earth is this so impracticable as in one where every man feels a vital interest in maintaining the authority of the laws, and instantly engages in it as in his own personal cause. Accordingly, we have experienced this spontaneous aid of our good citizens in the neighborhoods where there has been occasion, asI am persuaded we ever shall on such occasions. Through the body of our country generally our citizens appear heartily to approve and support the embargo. I am also to thank you for the communication of the Wilmington proceedings, and I add my salutations and assurances of great respect.
Monticello, May 24, 1807.
Dear Sir;— * * * * * What has been already said on the subject of Casa Calvo, Yrujo, Miranda, is sufficient, and that these should be seriously brought up again argues extreme weakness in Cavallos, or a plan to keep things unsettled with us. But I think it would not be amiss to take him down from his high airs as to the right of the sovereign to hinder the upper inhabitants from the use of the Mobile, by observing, 1st, that we claim to be the sovereign, although we give time for discussion. But 2d, that the upper inhabitants of a navigable water have always a right of innocent passage along it. I think Cavallos will not probably be the minister when the letter arrives at Madrid, and that an eye to that circumstance may perhaps have some proper influence on the style of the letter, in which, if meant for himself, his hyperbolic airs might merit less respect. I think too that the truth as to Pike's mission might be so simply stated as to need no argument to show that (even during the suspension of our claims to the eastern border of the Rio Norte) his getting on it was mere error, which ought to have called for the setting him right, instead of forcing him through the interior country. [Sullivan's letter.] His view of things for some time past has been entirely distempered.
Cathcart's, Ridgeley's, Navour's, Degen's, Appleton's, Lee's, and Baker's letters, are all returned. I salute you with great affection and respect.
Monticello, May 25, 1808.
Dear Sir,—There is a subject on which I wished to speak with you before I left Washington; but an apt occasion did not occur. It is that of your continuance in office. Perhaps it is as well to submit my thoughts to you by letter. The present summer is too important in point of preparation, to leave your department unfilled, for any time, as I once thought might be done; and it would be with extreme reluctance that, so near the time of my own retirement, I should proceed to name any high officer, especially one who must be of the intimate councils of my successor, and who ought of course to be in his unreserved confidence. I think too it would make an honorable close of your term as well as mine, to leave our country in a state of substantial defence, which we found quite unprepared for it. Indeed, it would for me be a joyful annunciation to the next meeting of Congress, that the operations of defence are all complete. I know that New York must be an exception; but perhaps even that may be closed before the 4th of March, when you and I might both make our bow with approbation and satisfaction. Nor should I suppose that under present circumstances, anything interesting in your future office could make it important for you to repair to its immediate occupation. In February my successor will be declared, and may then, without reserve, say whom he would wish me to nominate to the Senate in your place. I submit these circumstances to your consideration, and wishing in all things to consult your interests, your fame and feelings, it will give me sincere joy to learn that you will "watch with me to the end." I salute you with great affection and respect.
Monticello, May 25, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I received your favor of April 22d a little before I was to leave Washington, much engaged with despatchingthe business rendered necessary by the acts of Congress just risen, and preparatory to a short visit to this place. Here again I have been engrossed with some attentions to my own affairs, after a long absence, added to the public business which presses on me here as at Washington. I mention these things to apologize for the long delay of an answer to the address of the Democratic republicans of Philadelphia, enclosed in your letter, and which has remained longer unanswered than I wished. I have been happy in my journey through the country to this place, to find the people unanimous in their preference of the embargo to war, and the great sacrifice they make, rendered a cheerful one from a sense of its necessity.
Whether the pressure on the throne from the suffering people of England, and of their Islands, the conviction of the dishonorable as well as dishonest character of their orders of council, the strength of their parliamentary opposition, and remarkable weakness of the defence of their ministry, will produce a repeal of these orders and cessation of our embargo, is yet to be seen. To nobody will a repeal be so welcome as to myself. Give us peace till our revenues are liberated from debt, and then, if war be necessary, it can be carried on without a new tax or loan, and during peace we may chequer our whole country with canals, roads, &c. This is the object to which all our endeavors should be directed. I salute you with great friendship and respect.
Monticello, May 27, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I received yesterday yours of the 23d, and now return you Woolsey's and Astor's letters. I send you one also which I have received from a Mr. Thorne, on the evasions of the embargo on Lake Champlain. The conduct of some of our officers there, and of some excellent citizens, has been very meritorious, and I will thank you to express any degree of approbationyou think proper, in my name, for Captain Mayo. Woolsey appears also to deserve assurances of approbation. If you think Thorne's suggestion of some militia at Point au Fer necessary and proper, be so good as to consult General Dearborne, who will give any order you and he approve. With respect to the coasting trade, my wish is only to carry into full effect the intentions of the embargo laws. I do not wish a single citizen in any of the States to be deprived of a meal of bread, but I set down the exercise of commerce, merely for profit, as nothing when it carries with it the danger of defeating the objects of the embargo. I have more faith, too, in the Governors. I cannot think that any one of them would wink at abuses of that law. Still, I like your circular of the 20th, and the idea there brought forward of confining the shipment to so small a proportion of the bond as may correspond with the exaggeration of price and foreign markets, and thus restrain the adventurer from gaining more than he would lose by dishonesty. Flour, by the latest accounts, I have observed, sold at about eight times its cost here, while the legal penalties are but about three prices—by restraining them to an eighth they will be balanced. But as prices rise must not our rules be varied? Had the practicability of this mode of restraint occurred before the recurrence to the Governors, I should have preferred it, because it is free from the objection of favoritism to which the Governors will be exposed, and if you find it work well in practice, we may find means to have the other course discontinued. Our course should be to sacrifice everything to secure the effect of the law, and nothing beyond that.
I enclose you an application of Neilson & Son, to which you will please to have given whatever answer is conformable to general rules. The petition of Gardner and others, masters of the Rhode Island packet ships, which I enclose you, does not specify the particular act required from us for their relief. If it be to declare that the open sea in front of their coast is a bay or a river, the matter of fact, as well as the law, renders that impossible. I really think it desirable to relieve their case, in any way which is lawful, because it is one, which though embraced bythe words of the law, is not within its object. You mention that a principal method of evading the embargo is by loading secretly and going off without clearance. The naval department must aid us against this. As I shall leave this for Washington in about ten or twelve days, I now desire the post-office there to send no letters to this place after receiving this notice. All further matters relative to the embargo will therefore be answered verbally as soon as they could by letter. I salute you with great affection and respect.
Monticello, May 29, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I received the favor of your letter, written soon after your arrival, a little before I left Washington, and during a press of business preparatory to my departure on a short visit to this place; this has prevented my earlier congratulations to you on your safe return to your own country. There, judging from my own experience, you will enjoy much more of the tranquil happiness of life, than is to be found in the noisy scenes of the great cities of Europe. I am also aware that you had at Paris additional causes of disquietude; these seem inseparable from public life, and, indeed, are the greatest discouragements to entering into or continuing in it. Perhaps, however, they sweeten the hour of retirement, and secure us from all dangers of regret. On the subject of that disquietude, it is proper for me only to say that, however unfortunate the incident, I found in it no cause of dissatisfaction with yourself, nor of lessening the esteem I entertain for your virtues and talents; and, had it not been disagreeable to yourself, I should have been well pleased that you could have proceeded on your original destination.
While I thank you for the several letters received from you during your absence, I have to regret the miscarriage of some of those I wrote you. Not having my papers here, I cannot citetheir dates by memory; but they shall be the subject of another letter on my return to Washington.
You find us on your return in a crisis of great difficulty. An embargo had, by the course of events, become the only peaceable card we had to play. Should neither peace, nor a revocation of the decrees and orders in Europe take place, the day cannot be distant when that will cease to be preferable to open hostility. Nothing just or temperate has been omitted on our part, to retard or to avoid this unprofitable alternative. Our situation will be the more singular, as we may have to choose between two enemies, who have both furnished cause of war. With one of them we could never come into contact; with the other great injuries may be mutually inflicted and received. Let us still hope to avoid, while we prepare to meet them.
Hoping you will find our cloudless skies and benign climate more favorable to your health than those of Europe, I pray you to accept my friendly salutations, and assurances of great esteem and consideration.
Monticello, May 31, 1808.
Dear Sir,—I return you all the papers received from you by yesterday's mail, except Mr. Burnley's, which I shall send by the Secretary at War. Although all the appointments below field-officers are made, it is possible some may decline, and open a way for new competition. I have observed that Turreau's letters have for some time past changed their style unfavorably. I believe this is the first occasion he has had to complain of French deserters being enlisted by us, and if so, the tone of his application is improper. The answer to him, however, is obvious as to our laws and instructions, and thedischarge, notdelivery, of the men, for which purpose I presume you will write a line to the Secretary at War. Woodward's scruples are perplexing. And they are unfounded, because, on his own principle, if a law requiresan oath to be administered, and does not say by whom, he admits it may be any judge; if, therefore, it names a person no longer in existence, it is as if it named nobody. On this construction all the territories have practised, and all the authorities of the national government,—even the Legislature. It was wrong on a second ground; no judge ever refusing to administer an oath in any useful case, although he may not consider it as strictly judicial. If it may be valid or useful, he administers"ut valeat quantum valer potest."But what is to be done? Would it not be well for you to send the case to the Attorney General, and get him to enclose his opinion to Governor Hull, who will use it with Judge Witherall, or some territorial judge or justice?
With the quarrel of Judge Vandeberg and his bar we cannot intermeddle. Mercer's querulous letter is an unreasonable one. How could his offer of service be acted on, but by putting it in the hands of those who were to act on all others?
I shall to-day direct the post-rider not to continue his route to this place after to-day, and to take your orders as to the time you would wish him to continue coming to you. I salute you with affectionate esteem and respect.
Washington, June 15, 1808.
Sir,—I have considered the letter of the director of the mint, stating the ease with which the errors of Commodore Truxton's medal may be corrected on the medal itself, and the unpracticability of doing it on the die. In my former letter to you on this subject, I observed that to make a new die would be a serious thing, requiring consideration. In fact, the first die having been made by authority of the Legislature, the medal struck, accepted, and acquiesced in for so many years, the powers given by that law are executed and at an end, and a second law would be requisiteto make a second die or medal. But I presume it will be quite as agreeable to Commodore Truxton to have his medal corrected in one way as another, if done equally well, and it certainly may be as well or better done by the graver, and with more delicate traits. I remember it was the opinion of Doctor Franklin that where only one or a few medals were to be made, it was better to have them engraved.
The medal being corrected, the die becomes immaterial. That has never been delivered to the party, the medal itself being the only thing voted to him. I say this on certain grounds, because I think this and Preble's are the only medals given by the United States which have not been made under my immediate direction. The dies of all those given by the old Congress, and made at Paris, remain to this day deposited with our bankers at Paris. That of General Lee, made in Philadelphia, was retained in the mint. I mention this not as of consequence whether the die be given or retained, but to show that there can be no claim of the party to it, or consequently to its correction. I think, therefore, the medal itself should be corrected by Mr. Reich; that this is as far as we can stretch our authority, and I hope it will be satisfactory to the Commodore. I salute you with constant affection and respect.
Washington, June 19, 1808.
Sir,—Your favor of the 4th was received on my return to this place, and the proposition of your correspondent on the subject of fortification was referred to the Secretary at War, where office and qualifications make him the proper judge of it. I enclose you his answer. The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public moneys. It is not enough that an individual and an unknown one says and even thinks he has made a discovery of the magnitude announcedon this occasion. Not only explanation, but the actual experiment must be required before we can cease to doubt whether the inventor is not deceived by some false or imperfect view of his subject. Still your patriotic attention to bring such a proposition under our notice, that it might be applied to the public good, if susceptible of it, is praiseworthy, and I return you thanks for it with the assurances of my esteem and respect.
Washington, June 19, 1808.
Sir,—I thank you for the pamphlet containing your ideas on the subject of canals constructed of wood; but it is not in my power to give any definite opinion of its national importance. If there exists a cement which used as a lining for cisterns and aqueducts, renders them impermeable to water, (and it is affirmed that in France they are in the possession and use of such an one,) then it becomes the common question whether constructions of wood, brick, or rough stone are cheapest in the end? A question on which every man possesses materials for forming his judgment. I suspect it is the supposed necessity of using hewn stone in works of this kind which has had the greatest effect in discouraging their being undertaken. I tender you my salutations and respects.
Washington, June 21, 1808.
Sir,—Your favor of May 30th was delivered me on my return to this place, and I now enclose the prospectus of Clarkson's history with my subscription to it. I have perused with great satisfaction the Report of the Committee for the African institution. The sentiments it breathes are worthy of the eminent characterswho compose the institution, as are also the generous cares they propose to undertake. I wish they may begin their work at the right end. Our experience with the Indians has proved that letters are not the first, but the last step in the progression from barbarism to civilization. Our Indian neighbors will occupy all the attentions we may spare, towards the improvement of their condition. The four great Southern tribes are advancing hopefully. The foremost are the Cherokees, the upper settlements of whom have made to me a formal application to be received into the Union as citizens of the United States, and to be governed by our laws. If we can form for them a simple and acceptable plan of advancing by degrees to a maturity for receiving our laws, the example will have a powerful effect towards stimulating the other tribes in the same progression, and will cheer the gloomy views which have overspread their minds as to their own future history. I salute you with friendship and great respect.
Washington, June 22d, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson returns his thanks to Mr. Franklin for the address to the Society of Friends which he was so kind as to send him. The appeal both to facts and principles is strong, and their consistency will require an able advocate. Conscious that the present administration has been essentially pacific, and that in all questions of importance it has been governed by the identical principles professed by that Society, it has been quite at a loss to conjecture the unknown cause of the opposition of the greater part, and bare neutrality of the rest. The hope however that prejudices would at length give way to facts, has never been entirely extinguished, and still may be realized in favor of another administration.
Washington, June 23, 1808.
Sir,—I have duly received your favor covering a copy of the talk to the Tammany society, for which I thank you, and particularly for the favorable sentiments expressed towards myself. Certainly, nothing will so much sweeten the tranquillity and comfort of retirement, as the knowledge that I carry with me the good will and approbation of my republican fellow citizens, and especially of the individuals in unison with whom I have so long acted. With respect to the federalists, I believe we think alike; for when speaking of them, we never mean to include a worthy portion of our fellow citizens, who consider themselves as in duty bound to support the constituted authorities of every branch, and to reserve their opposition to the period of election. These having acquired the appellation of federalists, while a federal administration was in place, have not cared about throwing off their name, but adhering to their principle, are the supporters of the present order of things. The other branch of the federalists, those who are so in principle as well as in name, disapprove of the republican principles and features of our Constitution, and would, I believe, welcome any public calamity (war with England excepted) which might lessen the confidence of our country in those principles and forms. I have generally considered them rather as subjects for a mad-house. But they are now playing a game of the most mischievous tendency, without perhaps being themselves aware of it. They are endeavoring to convince England that we suffer more by the embargo than they do, and if they will but hold out awhile, we must abandon it. It is true, the time will come when we must abandon it. But if this is before the repeal of the orders of council, we must abandon it only for a state of war. The day is not distant, when that will be preferable to a longer continuance of the embargo. But we can never remove that, and let our vessels go out and be taken under these orders, without making reprisal. Yet this is the very state of things which these federal monarchists are endeavoringto bring about; and in this it is but too possible they may succeed. But the fact is, that if we have war with England, it will be solely produced by their manœuvres. I think that in two or three months we shall know what will be the issue.
I salute you with esteem and respect.
June 24, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson presents his compliments to General Wilkinson, and in answer to his letters of yesterday observes that during the course of the Burr conspiracy, the voluminous communications he received were generally read but once and then committed to the Attorney General, and were never returned to him. It is not in his power, therefore, to say that General Wilkinson did or did not denounce eminent persons to him, and still less who they were. It was unavoidable that he should from time to time mention persons known or supposed to be accomplices of Burr, and it is recollected that some of these suspicions were corrected afterwards on better information. Whether the undefined termdenunciationgoes to cases of this kind or not Thomas Jefferson does not know, nor could he now name from recollection the persons suspected at different times. He salutes General Wilkinson respectfully.
June 24, 1808.
Dear Sir,—The information given to me by Mrs. Paradise of letters to me from her grandsons, is without foundation. I have not for many years heard a tittle respecting the family at Venice. Should any information respecting them come to me I will certainly communicate it to Mrs. Paradise.
That the embargo is approved by the body of republicansthrough the Union, cannot be doubted. It is equally known that a great proportion of the federalists approve of it; but as they think it an engine which may be used advantageously against the republican system, they countenance the clamors against it. I salute you with great friendship and respect.
July 4, 1808.
General Turreau's application for two vessels to carry French subjects to France, must, I think, be granted, because under present circumstances we ought not on slight grounds to dissatisfy either belligerent. The vessels may be back before winter, and their only danger will be of stoppage by the English, who, however, have no right but to take out the French subjects.
At the same time, I think it would be well to say to General Turreau that we reluctantly let our seamen be exposed to capture, or perhaps to a voluntary engagement with one of the belligerents: that we rely, therefore, on his so proportioning the vessels to the number of passengers as merely to give them a reasonable accommodation. It would be well, too, that he should inform us after their departure, of the number of persons sent in them.
Affectionate salutes.