FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[41]Hildreth's History of the United States, Second Series, i, 405.[42]An eye-witness of the scene when Washington read his annual message to Congress has left a pleasant account of it on record. “As the president alighted, and, ascending the steps, paused upon the platform, looking over his shoulder, in an attitude that would have furnished an admirable subject for the pencil, he was preceded by two gentlemen bearing long white wands, who kept back the eager crowd that pressed on every side to get a nearer view. At that moment I stood so near that I might have touched his clothes; but I should as soon have thought of touching an electric battery. I was penetrated with a veneration amounting to the deepest awe. Nor was this the feeling of a schoolboy only; it pervaded, I believe, every human being that approached Washington; and I have been told that, even in his social and convivial hours, this feeling, in those who were honored to share them, never suffered intermission. I saw him a hundred times afterward, but never with any other than that same feeling. The Almighty, who raised up for our hour of need a man so peculiarly prepared for its whole dread responsibility, seems to have put an impress of sacredness upon His own instrument. The first sight of the man struck the heart with involuntary homage, and prepared everything around him to obey. When he 'addressed himself to speak,' there was an unconscious suspension of the breath, while every eye was raised in expectation.“The president, having seated himself, remained in silence, serenely contemplating the legislature before him, whose members now resumed their seats, waiting for the speech. No house of worship, in the most solemn pauses of devotion, was ever more profoundly still than that large and crowded chamber.“Washington was dressed precisely as Stuart has painted him in Lord Lansdowne's full-length portrait—in a full suit of the richest black velvet, with diamond knee-buckles, and square silver buckles set upon shoes japanned with the most scrupulous neatness, black silk stockings, his shirt ruffled at the breast and wrists, a light dress-sword; his hair profusely powdered, fully dressed, so as to project at the sides, and gathered behind in a silk bag, ornamented with a large rose of black riband. He held his cocked hat, which had a large black cockade on one side of it, in his hand, as he advanced toward the chair, and when seated, laid it on the table.“At length, thrusting his hand within the side of his coat, he drew forth a roll of manuscript, which he opened, and rising held it in his hand, while, in a rich, deep, full, sonorous voice, he read his opening address to Congress. His enunciation was deliberate, justly emphasized, very distinct, and accompanied with an air of deep solemnity, as being the utterance of a mind profoundly impressed with the dignity of the act in which it was occupied, conscious of the whole responsibility of its position and action, but not oppressed by it.”[43]This was George A. Washington, to whom had been intrusted the management of affairs at Mount Vernon during the master's absence at the seat of government. He was seized with alarming symptoms of pulmonary disease early in 1792. He was greatly beloved by Washington, and his sickness gave the president much pain, and was a frequent topic in letters to his friends. To Lafayette he wrote as early as June, 1792:—“I am afraid my nephew George, your old aid, will never have his health perfectly re-established. He has lately been attacked with the alarming symptoms of spitting large quantities of blood, and the physicians give no hopes of restoration, unless it can be effected by a change of air and a total dereliction from business, to which he is too anxiously attentive. He will, if he should be taken from his family and friends, leave three fine children, two sons and a daughter. To the eldest of the boys he has given the name of Fayette, and a fine-looking child he is.”To General Knox he wrote:—“I thank you most sincerely for the medicine you were so obliging as to send for my nephew, and for the sympathetic feeling you express for his situation. Poor fellow! neither, I believe, will be of any avail. Present appearances indicate a speedy dissolution. He has not been able to leave his bed, except for a few moments to sit in an arm-chair, since the fourteenth or fifteenth of last month. The paroxysm of the disorder seems to be upon him, and death, or a favorable turn to it, must speedily follow.”The sufferer was then residing upon a small estate in Hanover. He lingered for several weeks, and then expired; and on the twenty-fourth of February Washington wrote to his widow:—“My Dear Fanny: To you, who so well knew the affectionate regard I had for our departed friend, it is unnecessary to describe the sorrow with which I was afflicted at the news of his death, although it was an event I had expected many weeks before it happened. To express this sorrow with the force I feel it, would answer no other purpose than to revive in your breast that poignancy of anguish, which by this time I hope is abated. The object of this letter is to convey to your mind the warmest assurance of my love, friendship, and disposition to serve you. These I also profess to bear in an eminent degree for your children.”He then invites her to make Mount Vernon the home of herself and children. “You can go to no place,” he said, “where you will be more welcome, nor to any where you can live at less expense or trouble.”The young widow appears to have declined the offer of a home at Mount Vernon, preferring to keep house in Alexandria, but offering to resign the charge of her eldest son, Fayette, into Washington's keeping. In March the president wrote to her, saying:—“The carriage which I sent to Mount Vernon for your use I never intended to reclaim; and now, making you a formal present of it, it may be sent for whenever it suits your convenience and be considered as your own. I shall, when I see you, request that Fayette may be given up to me, either at that time or as soon after as he is old enough to go to school. This will relieve you of that portion of attention which his education would otherwise call for.”—Mount Vernon and its Associations, pages 264, 265.[44]The Life of Thomas Jefferson, by Henry S. Randall, LL.D., ii, 128.[45]Sparks's Washington, x, 533, 534.[46]The following is copy of the proclamation:—“Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, on the one part, and France on the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require that they should, with sincerity and good faith, adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerent powers;“I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those powers respectively; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.“And I do hereby also make known, that whosoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the laws of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said powers, or by carrying to them any of those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations with respect to the powers at war, or any of them.“In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, 1793, and of the independence of the United States the seventeenth.“George Washington”

[41]Hildreth's History of the United States, Second Series, i, 405.

[42]An eye-witness of the scene when Washington read his annual message to Congress has left a pleasant account of it on record. “As the president alighted, and, ascending the steps, paused upon the platform, looking over his shoulder, in an attitude that would have furnished an admirable subject for the pencil, he was preceded by two gentlemen bearing long white wands, who kept back the eager crowd that pressed on every side to get a nearer view. At that moment I stood so near that I might have touched his clothes; but I should as soon have thought of touching an electric battery. I was penetrated with a veneration amounting to the deepest awe. Nor was this the feeling of a schoolboy only; it pervaded, I believe, every human being that approached Washington; and I have been told that, even in his social and convivial hours, this feeling, in those who were honored to share them, never suffered intermission. I saw him a hundred times afterward, but never with any other than that same feeling. The Almighty, who raised up for our hour of need a man so peculiarly prepared for its whole dread responsibility, seems to have put an impress of sacredness upon His own instrument. The first sight of the man struck the heart with involuntary homage, and prepared everything around him to obey. When he 'addressed himself to speak,' there was an unconscious suspension of the breath, while every eye was raised in expectation.“The president, having seated himself, remained in silence, serenely contemplating the legislature before him, whose members now resumed their seats, waiting for the speech. No house of worship, in the most solemn pauses of devotion, was ever more profoundly still than that large and crowded chamber.“Washington was dressed precisely as Stuart has painted him in Lord Lansdowne's full-length portrait—in a full suit of the richest black velvet, with diamond knee-buckles, and square silver buckles set upon shoes japanned with the most scrupulous neatness, black silk stockings, his shirt ruffled at the breast and wrists, a light dress-sword; his hair profusely powdered, fully dressed, so as to project at the sides, and gathered behind in a silk bag, ornamented with a large rose of black riband. He held his cocked hat, which had a large black cockade on one side of it, in his hand, as he advanced toward the chair, and when seated, laid it on the table.“At length, thrusting his hand within the side of his coat, he drew forth a roll of manuscript, which he opened, and rising held it in his hand, while, in a rich, deep, full, sonorous voice, he read his opening address to Congress. His enunciation was deliberate, justly emphasized, very distinct, and accompanied with an air of deep solemnity, as being the utterance of a mind profoundly impressed with the dignity of the act in which it was occupied, conscious of the whole responsibility of its position and action, but not oppressed by it.”

“The president, having seated himself, remained in silence, serenely contemplating the legislature before him, whose members now resumed their seats, waiting for the speech. No house of worship, in the most solemn pauses of devotion, was ever more profoundly still than that large and crowded chamber.

“Washington was dressed precisely as Stuart has painted him in Lord Lansdowne's full-length portrait—in a full suit of the richest black velvet, with diamond knee-buckles, and square silver buckles set upon shoes japanned with the most scrupulous neatness, black silk stockings, his shirt ruffled at the breast and wrists, a light dress-sword; his hair profusely powdered, fully dressed, so as to project at the sides, and gathered behind in a silk bag, ornamented with a large rose of black riband. He held his cocked hat, which had a large black cockade on one side of it, in his hand, as he advanced toward the chair, and when seated, laid it on the table.

“At length, thrusting his hand within the side of his coat, he drew forth a roll of manuscript, which he opened, and rising held it in his hand, while, in a rich, deep, full, sonorous voice, he read his opening address to Congress. His enunciation was deliberate, justly emphasized, very distinct, and accompanied with an air of deep solemnity, as being the utterance of a mind profoundly impressed with the dignity of the act in which it was occupied, conscious of the whole responsibility of its position and action, but not oppressed by it.”

[43]This was George A. Washington, to whom had been intrusted the management of affairs at Mount Vernon during the master's absence at the seat of government. He was seized with alarming symptoms of pulmonary disease early in 1792. He was greatly beloved by Washington, and his sickness gave the president much pain, and was a frequent topic in letters to his friends. To Lafayette he wrote as early as June, 1792:—“I am afraid my nephew George, your old aid, will never have his health perfectly re-established. He has lately been attacked with the alarming symptoms of spitting large quantities of blood, and the physicians give no hopes of restoration, unless it can be effected by a change of air and a total dereliction from business, to which he is too anxiously attentive. He will, if he should be taken from his family and friends, leave three fine children, two sons and a daughter. To the eldest of the boys he has given the name of Fayette, and a fine-looking child he is.”To General Knox he wrote:—“I thank you most sincerely for the medicine you were so obliging as to send for my nephew, and for the sympathetic feeling you express for his situation. Poor fellow! neither, I believe, will be of any avail. Present appearances indicate a speedy dissolution. He has not been able to leave his bed, except for a few moments to sit in an arm-chair, since the fourteenth or fifteenth of last month. The paroxysm of the disorder seems to be upon him, and death, or a favorable turn to it, must speedily follow.”The sufferer was then residing upon a small estate in Hanover. He lingered for several weeks, and then expired; and on the twenty-fourth of February Washington wrote to his widow:—“My Dear Fanny: To you, who so well knew the affectionate regard I had for our departed friend, it is unnecessary to describe the sorrow with which I was afflicted at the news of his death, although it was an event I had expected many weeks before it happened. To express this sorrow with the force I feel it, would answer no other purpose than to revive in your breast that poignancy of anguish, which by this time I hope is abated. The object of this letter is to convey to your mind the warmest assurance of my love, friendship, and disposition to serve you. These I also profess to bear in an eminent degree for your children.”He then invites her to make Mount Vernon the home of herself and children. “You can go to no place,” he said, “where you will be more welcome, nor to any where you can live at less expense or trouble.”The young widow appears to have declined the offer of a home at Mount Vernon, preferring to keep house in Alexandria, but offering to resign the charge of her eldest son, Fayette, into Washington's keeping. In March the president wrote to her, saying:—“The carriage which I sent to Mount Vernon for your use I never intended to reclaim; and now, making you a formal present of it, it may be sent for whenever it suits your convenience and be considered as your own. I shall, when I see you, request that Fayette may be given up to me, either at that time or as soon after as he is old enough to go to school. This will relieve you of that portion of attention which his education would otherwise call for.”—Mount Vernon and its Associations, pages 264, 265.

“I am afraid my nephew George, your old aid, will never have his health perfectly re-established. He has lately been attacked with the alarming symptoms of spitting large quantities of blood, and the physicians give no hopes of restoration, unless it can be effected by a change of air and a total dereliction from business, to which he is too anxiously attentive. He will, if he should be taken from his family and friends, leave three fine children, two sons and a daughter. To the eldest of the boys he has given the name of Fayette, and a fine-looking child he is.”

To General Knox he wrote:—

“I thank you most sincerely for the medicine you were so obliging as to send for my nephew, and for the sympathetic feeling you express for his situation. Poor fellow! neither, I believe, will be of any avail. Present appearances indicate a speedy dissolution. He has not been able to leave his bed, except for a few moments to sit in an arm-chair, since the fourteenth or fifteenth of last month. The paroxysm of the disorder seems to be upon him, and death, or a favorable turn to it, must speedily follow.”

The sufferer was then residing upon a small estate in Hanover. He lingered for several weeks, and then expired; and on the twenty-fourth of February Washington wrote to his widow:—

“My Dear Fanny: To you, who so well knew the affectionate regard I had for our departed friend, it is unnecessary to describe the sorrow with which I was afflicted at the news of his death, although it was an event I had expected many weeks before it happened. To express this sorrow with the force I feel it, would answer no other purpose than to revive in your breast that poignancy of anguish, which by this time I hope is abated. The object of this letter is to convey to your mind the warmest assurance of my love, friendship, and disposition to serve you. These I also profess to bear in an eminent degree for your children.”

He then invites her to make Mount Vernon the home of herself and children. “You can go to no place,” he said, “where you will be more welcome, nor to any where you can live at less expense or trouble.”

The young widow appears to have declined the offer of a home at Mount Vernon, preferring to keep house in Alexandria, but offering to resign the charge of her eldest son, Fayette, into Washington's keeping. In March the president wrote to her, saying:—

“The carriage which I sent to Mount Vernon for your use I never intended to reclaim; and now, making you a formal present of it, it may be sent for whenever it suits your convenience and be considered as your own. I shall, when I see you, request that Fayette may be given up to me, either at that time or as soon after as he is old enough to go to school. This will relieve you of that portion of attention which his education would otherwise call for.”—Mount Vernon and its Associations, pages 264, 265.

[44]The Life of Thomas Jefferson, by Henry S. Randall, LL.D., ii, 128.

[45]Sparks's Washington, x, 533, 534.

[46]The following is copy of the proclamation:—“Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, on the one part, and France on the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require that they should, with sincerity and good faith, adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerent powers;“I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those powers respectively; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.“And I do hereby also make known, that whosoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the laws of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said powers, or by carrying to them any of those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations with respect to the powers at war, or any of them.“In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, 1793, and of the independence of the United States the seventeenth.“George Washington”

[46]The following is copy of the proclamation:—

“Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, on the one part, and France on the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require that they should, with sincerity and good faith, adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerent powers;“I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those powers respectively; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.“And I do hereby also make known, that whosoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the laws of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said powers, or by carrying to them any of those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations with respect to the powers at war, or any of them.“In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, 1793, and of the independence of the United States the seventeenth.“George Washington”

“I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those powers respectively; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.

“And I do hereby also make known, that whosoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the laws of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said powers, or by carrying to them any of those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations with respect to the powers at war, or any of them.

“In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, 1793, and of the independence of the United States the seventeenth.

“George Washington”

TOP

genet's arrival and reception at charleston—his object in landing there—he commissions privateers—operations of two vessels—arrival ofl'embuscadeat philadelphia—genet's reception at philadelphia—he presents his credentials—a banquet in his honor—democratic clubs—extravagances—scenes in new york—conservative feeling triumphant—hamilton's views of the french revolution—genet's speech on presentation to the president—jefferson's suspicions—his unkind treatment of washington—genet's official letter—his demands not complied with—action of the cabinet concerning his privateering schemes.

Genet, as we have observed, landed at Charleston, in South Carolina, instead of a port near the seat of the government to which he came accredited. The circumstance was not regarded of much consequence at the time, as it might have been the result of accident; but the development of his designs, in accordance with secret instructions from his government, soon revealed the fact that he chose that southern port for his destination, because its contiguity to the West Indies would give it peculiar convenience as a resort for privateers, the employment of which was a part of the programme of his diplomatic functions.

Genet came in the French frigateL'Embuscade, and was received with most enthusiastic rejoicings by Governor Moultrie and the citizens of Charleston. This reception, acting upon his ardent nature, made him forgetful of his relations to the government to which he was sent; and with a zeal untempered by sound judgment, and a mind mistaking the evanescent demonstrations of personal respect, and the exhibition of popular feeling toward the French republic in that southern city for the settled convictions ofthe American people, he commenced the performance of his duties under his secret instructions, before he laid his credentials before the United States government, and asked for his reception as the representative of his nation. By these private instructions, assuming that the American executive might not be sufficiently compliant with the wishes of the French government, he was authorized to employ, with thepeopleof the United States, the same policy which had been so successfully used in Europe in producing revolutions.

Genet was provided with blank commissions, both naval and military; and while enjoying the flattering attentions at Charleston for several days, he undertook to authorize the fitting out and arming of vessels in that port as privateers, to depredate upon the commerce of England and other nations at war with France. For this purpose he granted commissions, enlisted men, and, by authority assumed by him under a decree of the convention, he constituted all consuls of France the heads of courts of admiralty, to try, condemn, and authorize the sale of all property seized by the privateer cruisers sailing under Genet'sletters of marque. Two of these privateers, manned chiefly by Americans, soon put to sea under the French flag, cruised along the Carolina coasts, and captured many homeward-bound British vessels and took them into the port of Charleston. The frigate in which Genet came to America became one of these privateers, and proceeded northward toward Philadelphia, plundering the sea on her way.

The French minister travelled to Philadelphia by land, and reached that city on the sixteenth of May. His journey was like a continued ovation. The whole country through which he passed, electrified by the French Revolution, appeared alive with excitement; and the honors which the republicans, in their antipathy to aristocracy, had been anxious to withhold from Washington because it was man-worship, were lavished upon the person of the representative of the French republic without stint. On approaching Philadelphia he was met at Gray's ferry, on the Schuylkill, by a considerable number of persons, who had come to welcome him tothe federal capital, and to escort him to his lodgings;[47]and on the following day he received addresses from several societies and from the citizens at large, who waited upon him in a body.

Meanwhile,L'Embuscadehad arrived at Philadelphia with a British vessel, calledThe Grange, as a prize; and intelligence of Genet's unwarrantable proceedings at Charleston in authorizing privateers had been received. Yet so wild and unthinking was the popular enthusiasm that appeared on the surface of society, that scarcely a word in condemnation of his conduct was offered. On the contrary, these things appeared to increase the zeal of his political sympathizers, and made Genet's reception, in some respects, more flattering to his personal and national pride. In a letter to Madison at this time, Jefferson, influenced by the exultation of the movement, and in apparent forgetfulness of the serious offence which the ardent Genet had committed against the dignity of the United States and the courtesy of nations, wrote:—

“The war between France and England seems to be producing an effect not contemplated. All the old spirit of 1776, rekindling the newspapers from Boston to Charleston, proves this; and even the monocrat papers are obliged to publish the most furious philippics against England. A French frigate took a British prize (theGrange) off the capes of Delaware, the other day, and sent her up here. Upon her coming into sight, thousands and thousands of theyeomanryof the city crowded and covered the wharves. Never was there such a crowd seen there; and when the British colors were seen reversed, and the French flying above them, they burst into peals of exultation. I wish we may be able to repress the spirit of the people within the limits of a fair neutrality.... We expect Genet daily.”

So eager were the republicans of Philadelphia to do honor to Genet, that, before he had presented his credentials to the president, he was invited to an evening feast. Indeed, preparations for his reception and the “republican dinner” had been made several days before, and this invitation was only a part of the programme. Genet was delighted by this demonstration—a demonstration (arranged chiefly by the labors of Peter S. Duponceau, who came to America originally as the secretary of Baron Steuben, and who was now secretary of a secret society of Frenchmen, which met at Barney M'Shane's, sign of the bunch of grapes, number twenty-three North Third street) that should strike with terror the “cowardly, conservative, Anglo-men, and monarchists,” led by President Washington; and his joy was heightened by reading an approving history of the proceedings in Freneau's paper, the organ of the secretary of state. He even seemed for a moment to doubt the expediency of presenting his credentials at all, because Washington was evidently not ready to comply with all his wishes, and he believed that the whole American people were friends of France, and the enemies of all her opponents.

Genet, however, did present his credentials on the nineteenth of May, and was officially accredited. In that ceremony his pride was touched and his enthusiasm was abated. He found in the presence of Washington an atmosphere of dignity and greatness wholly unexpected, and thoroughly overpowering. He felt his littleness in the presence of that noble representative of the best men and the soundest principles of the American republic, and he returned from the audience abashed and subdued; for the genuine courtesy exhibited by the president, and the words of sincere friendship for the French nation which he uttered, had touched Genet's sensibilities; while the severe simplicity and dignity of manner, and the absence of that effervescent enthusiasm in the midst of which he had been cast since his arrival, administered rebuke alike to the adulators in public places, and his own pretentious aspirations. He had come with secret instructions to foment war between the United States and England for the benefit of France, but that singleinterview with Washington made him feel, for the time, that his efforts must result in failure; for the word of the chief magistrate was yet almost as omnipotent as law with the greater portion of his countrymen.

Genet was relieved of the chill by the evening banquet, where all was enthusiasm and boisterous mirth. It was given at Oeller's hotel, and quite a large number of republicans were at the board. A patriotic ode written in French, by Duponceau, and translated into English by Freneau, was sung; and the Marseilles hymn was chanted by Genet and the company, the minister adding two stanzas composed by himself, and having special reference to the navy. This followed the reception of a deputation of sailors from the frigateL'Embuscade, who, when they entered the room, were received by the guests with a “fraternal embrace.” The table was decorated with the tree of liberty and the French and American flags; and after the last regular toast of the evening was given, thebonnet rouge, or red cap of liberty, was placed first upon the head of Genet, and then upon each one present in turn, the recipient being expected, under the inspiration of the emblem of freedom, to utter a patriotic sentiment. The national flags were finally delivered to the French sailors, who “swore to defend till death these tokens of liberty, and of American and French fraternity.”

To the superficial observer, the great mass of the people seemed carried away with a monomaniac frenzy. Democratic societies were founded in imitation of Jacobin clubs; everything that was respectable in society was denounced as aristocratic; politeness was looked upon as a sort oflese republicanisme; the common forms of expression in use by thesans culotteswere adopted by their American disciples; the title “citizen” became as common in Philadelphia as in Paris; and in the newspapers it was the fashion to announce marriages as partnerships between “Citizen” Brown, Smith, or Jones, and the “citess,” who had been wooed to such an association. Entering the house of the president, Citizen Genet was astonished and indignant at perceiving in the vestibule a bust of Louis XVI, whom his friends had beheaded, and he complained of this“insult to France.” At a dinner, at which Governor Mifflin was present, a roasted pig received the name of the murdered king, and the head, severed from the body, was carried round to each of the guests, who, after placing the liberty cap on his own head, pronounced the word “Tyrant!” and proceeded to mangle with his knife that of the luckless creature doomed to be served for so unworthy a company! One of the democratic taverns displayed as a sign a revolting picture of the mutilated and bloody corpse of Marie Antoinette.[48]

Nor was this enthusiasm confined to Philadelphia. In his admirable daguerreotype of old New York, the venerable Doctor Francis has given a vivid picture, from memory, of the effect of Genet's arrival and sojourn in the country. Speaking of the arrival ofL'Embuscade, he says: “The notoriety of the event and its consequences enables me to bring to feeble recollection many of the scenes which transpired in this city at that time: the popular excitement and bustle; the liberty cap; theentréeof Citizen Genet; the red cockade; the song of theCarmagnole, in which with childish ambition I united; therencontrewith theBostonfrigate, and the commotion arising from Jay's treaty. Though I can not speak earnestly from actual knowledge, we must all concede that these were the times when political strife assumed a formidable aspect—when the press most flagrantly outraged individual rights and domestic peace—when the impugners of the Washingtonian administration received new weapons, with which to inflict their assaults upon tried patriotism, by every arrival from abroad announcing France in her progress. The federalists and the anti-federalists now became the federal and the republican party; theCarmagnolesung every hour of every day in the streets, and on stated days at the Belvidere Club-house, fanned the embers and enkindled that zeal which caused the overthrow of many of the soundest principles of American freedom. Even the yellow fever, which, from its novelty and its malignity, struck terror into every bosom, and was rendered more lurid by the absurd preventive means of burning tarand tar-barrels in almost every street, afforded no mitigation of party animosity; and Greenleaf with hisArgus, Freneau with hisTime-Piece, and Cobbett with hisPorcupine Gazette, increased the consternation, which only added to the inquietude of the peaceable citizen, who had often reasoned within himself that a seven-years' carnage, through which he had passed, had been enough for one life.”

“Much I saw—much has been told me by the old inhabitants now departed,” says Doctor Francis. “When the entire American nation, nay, when the civilized world at large, seemed electrified by the outbreak of the Revolution in France, it necessarily followed, as the shadow does the substance, that the American soul, never derelict, could not but enkindle with patriotic warmth at the cause of that people whose loftiest desire was freedom—of that people who themselves had, with profuse appropriation, enabled that very bosom, in the moment of hardest trial, to inhale the air of liberty. Successive events had now dethroned the monarchy of France, and the democratic spirit was now evolved in its fullest element. It was not surprising that the experienced and the sober champions who had effected the great revolution of the colonies should now make the cause of struggling France their own; and as victors already in one desperate crisis, they seemed ready to enter into a new contest for the rights of man. The masses coalesced and co-operated. Cheering prospects of sympathy and of support were held out in the prospective to their former friends and benefactors abroad. Jealousy of Britain—affection for France—was now the prevailing impulse, and the business of the day was often interrupted by tumultuous noises in the streets. Groups of sailors might be seen collected on the docks and at the shipping, ready to embark on a voyage of plunder; merchants and traders, in detached bodies, might be seen discussing the hazards of commerce; the schools liberated from their prescribed hours of study, because of some fresh report ofL'Embuscadeor ofGenet; the schoolmaster uttering in his dismissal a new reason for the study of the classics, by expounding with oracular dignity to his scholars,Vivat Respublica,broadly printed as the caption of the playbill or the pamphlet just issued.”[49]

But, fortunately for the United States, there were many strong, sober, and patriotic men, who had looked calmly upon the storms of the French Revolution, and wisely interpreted its portents. On the same day when Genet was received by the president and feasted by the republicans, an address was presented to Washington, signed by three hundred of the principal merchants and other “solid men” of Philadelphia, declaring their high sense of the wisdom and goodness which dictated his late proclamation of neutrality; and that the signers, believing that nothing was necessary to the happiness of the United States but a continuance of peace, not only would heed that proclamation themselves, but discountenance, in the most pointed manner, any contrary disposition in others. In his reply, Washington, with his usual dignity and discretion, expressed a hope that, in the critical juncture of public affairs, the people would evince as much freedom in pursuing peace, as they had previously displayed valor in vindicating their just rights.

The conservative class to whom we have alluded was composed of the best materials of American society. They were firm, consistent, and quiet; and while the noise that attended the demonstrations in favor of the French Revolution appeared to the shallow and timid as the voice of the nation, a very large majority of the people doubtless sympathized with the restraining measures of the president.

Among those who had wisely interpreted the teachings of the Revolution in France, and deprecated the infatuation of his countrymen who had adopted the doctrines of the Jacobins, was Hamilton. To a friend who had expressed his sorrow because of the aspect of the public feeling at that time, he revealed his views freely—views which were held in common with Washington and the great conservative party of which he was the head. “I agree with you,” Hamilton said, “in the reflections you make on the tendency of public demonstrations of attachment to the cause ofFrance. 'Tis certainly not wise to expose ourselves to the jealousy and resentment of the rest of the world, by a fruitless display of zeal for that cause. It may do us much harm, and it can do France no good (unless, indeed, we are to embark in the war with her, which nobody is so hardy as to avow, though some secretly machinate it). It can not be without danger and inconvenience to our interests, to impress on the nations of Europe an idea that we are actuated by thesame spiritwhich has, for some time past, fatally misguided the measures of those who conduct the affairs of France, and sullied a cause once glorious, and that might have been triumphant. The cause of France is compared with that of America during its late Revolution. Would to Heaven that the comparison were just. Would to Heaven that we could discern in the mirror of French affairs the same decorum, the same gravity, the same order, the same dignity, the same solemnity, which distinguished the cause of the American Revolution. Clouds and darkness would not then rest upon the issue as they now do. I own I do not like the comparison. When I contemplate the horrid and systematic massacres of the second and third of September; when I observe that a Murat and a Robespierre, the notorious prompters of those bloody scenes, sit triumphantly in the convention and take a conspicuous part in its measures—that an attempt to bring the assassins to justice has been abandoned; when I see an unfortunate prince, whose reign was a continued demonstration of the goodness and benevolence of his heart, of his attachment to the people of whom he was the monarch, who, though educated in the lap of despotism, had given repeated proofs that he was not the enemy of liberty, brought precipitately and ignominiously to the block without any substantial proof of guilt, as yet disclosed—without even an authentic exhibition of motives, in decent regard to the opinions of mankind; when I find the doctrines of atheism openly advanced in the convention, and heard with loud applauses; when I see the sword of fanaticism extended to force a political creed upon citizens who were invited to submit to the arms of France as the harbingers of liberty; when I behold the hand of rapacity outstretched toprostrate and ravish the monuments of religious worship, erected by those citizens and their ancestors; when I perceive passion, tumult, and violence, usurping those seats where reason and cool deliberation ought to preside—I acknowledge that I am glad to believe there is no real resemblance between what was the cause of America and what is the cause of France; that the difference is no less great than that between liberty and licentiousness. I regret whatever has a tendency to confound them, and I feel anxious, as an American, that the ebullitions of inconsiderate men among us may not tend to involve our reputation in the issue.”[50]

Genet had scarcely reached the seat of government, before his conduct in authorizing the fitting out of privateers, and the capture ofThe GrangebyL'Embuscade, called forth complaints from Mr. Hammond, the British minister at Philadelphia. Genet, in his address to the president on presenting his credentials, had disavowed any wish to involve the United States in the pending war.

“We wish you to do nothing,” he said, “but what is for your own good, and we will do all in our power to promote it. Cherish your own peace and prosperity. You have expressed a willingness to enter into a more liberal commerce with us; I bring full powers to form such a treaty, and a preliminary decree of the National Convention to lay open our country and its colonies to you, for every purpose of utility, without your participating in the burden of maintaining and defending them. We see in you the only person on earth who can love us sincerely, and merit to be so loved.”

This was uttered while the secret instructions in his pocket authorized him to foment discord between the United States and Great Britain; to set the government of our republic at defiance, if necessary; and in the face of his open insult to the government by his acts at Charleston. And yet Mr. Jefferson, apparently blinding his eyes to passing events in Genet's brief career here, said in a letter to Madison, in reference to the French minister's speech, “It was impossible for anything to be more affectionate, more magnanimous,than the purport of Genet's mission.... He offers everything and asks nothing.”

“Yet I know,” Jefferson added, “that the offers will be opposed, and suspect they will not be accepted. In short, my dear sir, it is impossible for you to conceive what is passing in our conclave; and it is evident thatone or two[meaning Hamilton and Knox] at least, under pretence of avoiding war on the one side, have no great antipathy to run foul of it on the other, and to make a part in the confederacy of princes against human liberty.” Thus, on all occasions, the secretary of state ungenerously charged those of his official associates who could not lovingly embrace the bloody French Jacobins as brothers, with monarchical principles, and designs to subvert the government of the United States. To Washington he expressed the same suspicions; and, from his own record in hisAnas, he appears to have been rebuked by the president, and to have persisted in a most unfriendly course. “He [the president] observed,” he said, “that if anybody wanted to change the form of our government into a monarchy, he was sure it was only a few individuals, and that no man in the United States would set himself against it more than himself; but that this was not what he was afraid of—his fears were from another quarter—that there was more danger of anarchy being introduced.”

Washington, according to the same record, then spoke with great warmth concerning the hostility of Freneau as manifested in his newspaper. He despised all personal attacks upon himself; but, he said, not a solitary act of the government had escaped the slanderer's assaults. He adverted to the fact that Freneau (evidently for the impudent purpose of insulting Washington) sent him three of his papers every day; and Mr. Jefferson records these facts in a way that shows the enjoyment he seemed to derive from such evidences of great annoyance displayed by the president. “He was evidently sore and worn,” wrote Mr. Jefferson, “and I took his intention to be, that I should interpose in some way with Freneau—perhaps withdraw his appointment of translating clerk in my office. But I will not do it.”

“It appears to us,” says Mr. Irving,[51]“rather an ungracious determination on the part of Jefferson to keep this barking cur in his employ, when he found him so annoying to the chief, whom he professed, and we believe with sincerity, to revere.[52]Neither are his reasons for so doing satisfactory, savoring as they do of those strong political suspicions already noticed. 'His [Freneau's] paper,' observed he, 'has saved our constitution, which was galloping fast into monarchy, and has been checked by no means so powerfully as by that paper. It is well and universally known that it has been that paper which checked the career of the monocrats. The president, not sensible of the designs of the party, has not, with his usual good sense andsang froid, looked on the efforts and effects of this free press, and seen that though some bad things have passed through it to the public, yet the good have preponderated immensely.'”

On the day succeeding his presentation to the president, Genet addressed an official letter to Mr. Jefferson, announcing his mission, as follows:—

“Single, against innumerable hordes of tyrants and slaves who menace her rising liberty, the French nation would have a right to reclaim the obligations imposed on the United States by the treaties she has contracted with them, and which she has cemented with her blood; but strong in the greatness of her means, and of the power of her principles, not less redoubtable to her enemies than the virtuous arm which she opposes to their rage, she comes, in the very time when the emissaries of our common enemies are making useless efforts to neutralize the gratitude, to damp the zeal, to weaken or cloud the view of your fellow-citizens; she comes, I say, that generous nation, that faithful friend, to labor still to increase the prosperity and add to the happiness which she is pleased to see them enjoy.“The obstacles raised with intentions hostile to liberty, by the perfidious ministers of despotism—the obstacles whose object was to stop the rapid progress of the commerce of the Americans and the extension of their principles, exist no more. The French republic, seeing in them but brothers, has opened to them, by the decrees now enclosed, all her ports in the two worlds; has granted them all the favors which her own citizens enjoy in her vast possessions; has invited them to participate the benefits of her navigation, in granting to their vessels the same rights as her own; and has charged me to propose to your government to establish, in a truly family compact—that is, in a national compact—the liberal and fraternal basis on which she wishes to see raised the commercial and political system of two people, all whose interests are blended. I am invested, sir, with the powers necessary to undertake this important negotiation, of which the sad annals of humanity offer no example before the brilliant era at length opening on it.”[53]

“The obstacles raised with intentions hostile to liberty, by the perfidious ministers of despotism—the obstacles whose object was to stop the rapid progress of the commerce of the Americans and the extension of their principles, exist no more. The French republic, seeing in them but brothers, has opened to them, by the decrees now enclosed, all her ports in the two worlds; has granted them all the favors which her own citizens enjoy in her vast possessions; has invited them to participate the benefits of her navigation, in granting to their vessels the same rights as her own; and has charged me to propose to your government to establish, in a truly family compact—that is, in a national compact—the liberal and fraternal basis on which she wishes to see raised the commercial and political system of two people, all whose interests are blended. I am invested, sir, with the powers necessary to undertake this important negotiation, of which the sad annals of humanity offer no example before the brilliant era at length opening on it.”[53]

Notwithstanding the boast, in this letter, of his country being “strong in the greatness of her means,” Genet had opened his diplomatic correspondence by a request for immediate payment, by anticipation, of the remaining installments of the debt due France by the United States, amounting to two millions, three hundred thousand dollars, and offered, as an inducement, to invest the amount in provisions and other American products, to be shipped partly to the St. Domingo, and partly to France. But neither his propositions for an alliance nor his application for money were received with favor. The United States government well knew that his assurance that the offered relaxation of commercial restrictions, as a boon of pure good will toward the Americans, was only a convenient plan for obtaining needed supplies. The request for money was met by a candid statement by the secretary of the treasury, that his government had no means of anticipating the payment of the French debt, except by borrowing money in Europe, which could not be done then on reasonable terms. Hamilton also told Genet that, even were there no other obstacle, the anticipation of payment at that time might be regarded by Great Britain as a breach of neutrality.

This reply greatly offended the French minister, and he threatened to make the debt to France available for his purpose, by giving assignments of it in payment for provisions and other supplies. Hamilton calmly replied that his government would decidedly object to that procedure, and expressed a hope that, in a matter of mutual concern, nothing would be done but by mutual consent.

While the British minister, in view of the dereliction of duty on the part of his government, manifested in its omission to comply with some of the stipulations of the treaty of 1783, should have been comparatively silent, the grounds of some of his complaints were too obviously just, not to be seriously considered. Cabinet meetings were accordingly held, and the subject was fully discussed. The capture ofThe Grangewithin American waters (in Delaware bay), and the demand, not only for its restitution, but of all others captured on the high seas by the privateers authorized by Genet, made by the British minister, was the chief topic. It was unanimously agreed thatThe Grangeshould be restored, but there was a difference of opinion respecting the others. Hamilton and Knox, assuming, as a basis for argument, that it is the duty of a neutral nation to remedy every injury sustained by armaments fitted out in its ports, were of opinion that the government should interpose to restore the prizes. Jefferson and Randolph contended that the case should be left to the decision of courts of justice; arguing, that if the courts should decide the commissions given by Genet to be invalid, they would, as a matter of course, order restitution to be made.[54]

Washington reserved his decision upon this point, and took time to deliberate. The cabinet had agreed unanimously that the jurisdiction of every independent nation, within the limits of its own territory, being of a nature to exclude the exercise of any authority therein by any foreign power, the proceedings complained of, not being warranted by any treaty, were usurpations of national sovereignty and violations of neutral rights, a repetition of which it was the duty of the government to prevent. Also, that the efficacy of the laws should be tried against those citizens of the United States who had joined in perpetrating the offence. These principles being considered as settled, the president directed the secretary of state to communicate the fact to the ministers of France and Great Britain. Circular letters, also, were addressed to the governors of several states requiring their co-operation, with military force if necessary, to carry out the principles and rules agreed upon.

FOOTNOTES:[47]The number of people who met and welcomed Genet at Gray's ferry was greatly exaggerated, as usual on such occasions, by the friends of the movement. It was called “a great concourse of citizens,” but Hamilton, who was then in Philadelphia, and whose truthfulness has never been questioned, placed the number at an insignificant figure. In a letter to a friend, he said, “It is seldom easy to speak with absolute certainty in such cases, but from all I could observe, or have been able to learn, I believe the number would be stated high at a hundred persons.” Of a meeting convened at evening to receive Mr. Genet, Hamilton said, “From forty to one hundred persons give you the extremes of the number present.” On the ensuing evening a much greater number attended. Altogether the demonstration, innumbers, was a failure.[48]Griswold'sRepublican Court, page 350.[49]Old New York, or Reminiscences of the past Sixty Years, pages 115-119, inclusive.[50]Hamilton's Works, v. 566.[51]Life of Washington, v. 164.[52]A little later, Jefferson wrote to Madison: “The president is not well; little lingering fevers have been hanging about him for a week or ten days, and affect his looks most remarkably. He is also extremely affected by the attacks made and kept up on him in the public papers. I think he feels these things more than any other person I ever yet met with. I am sincerely sorry to see them.” How utterly insincere appears the last clause of this paragraph, compared with the one next preceding it! The most scurrilous of the attacks alluded to proceeded from Freneau, a clerk in Mr. Jefferson's office![53]Letter to Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, dated “Philadelphia, May 23d, 1793, second year of the republic.”[54]“During these proceedings,” says Chief-Justice Jay, “the circuit court was held at Richmond by the chief justice, who in his charge to the grand jury explained the obligations of the United States as a neutral nation, and directed the jury to present all persons within their district guilty of violating the laws of nations with respect to any of the belligerent powers. The charge was well calculated to strengthen the government, by letting the public perceive that the supreme court would fearlessly discharge its duty, in punishing acts forbidden by the neutral position of the nation.”—Life and Writings of John Jay, i. 302.

[47]The number of people who met and welcomed Genet at Gray's ferry was greatly exaggerated, as usual on such occasions, by the friends of the movement. It was called “a great concourse of citizens,” but Hamilton, who was then in Philadelphia, and whose truthfulness has never been questioned, placed the number at an insignificant figure. In a letter to a friend, he said, “It is seldom easy to speak with absolute certainty in such cases, but from all I could observe, or have been able to learn, I believe the number would be stated high at a hundred persons.” Of a meeting convened at evening to receive Mr. Genet, Hamilton said, “From forty to one hundred persons give you the extremes of the number present.” On the ensuing evening a much greater number attended. Altogether the demonstration, innumbers, was a failure.

[48]Griswold'sRepublican Court, page 350.

[49]Old New York, or Reminiscences of the past Sixty Years, pages 115-119, inclusive.

[50]Hamilton's Works, v. 566.

[51]Life of Washington, v. 164.

[52]A little later, Jefferson wrote to Madison: “The president is not well; little lingering fevers have been hanging about him for a week or ten days, and affect his looks most remarkably. He is also extremely affected by the attacks made and kept up on him in the public papers. I think he feels these things more than any other person I ever yet met with. I am sincerely sorry to see them.” How utterly insincere appears the last clause of this paragraph, compared with the one next preceding it! The most scurrilous of the attacks alluded to proceeded from Freneau, a clerk in Mr. Jefferson's office!

[53]Letter to Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, dated “Philadelphia, May 23d, 1793, second year of the republic.”

[54]“During these proceedings,” says Chief-Justice Jay, “the circuit court was held at Richmond by the chief justice, who in his charge to the grand jury explained the obligations of the United States as a neutral nation, and directed the jury to present all persons within their district guilty of violating the laws of nations with respect to any of the belligerent powers. The charge was well calculated to strengthen the government, by letting the public perceive that the supreme court would fearlessly discharge its duty, in punishing acts forbidden by the neutral position of the nation.”—Life and Writings of John Jay, i. 302.

TOP

genet's letter to the secretary of state on the subject of treaty guaranties—the question reconsidered by the cabinet—their decision and genet's anger—genet supported and misled by the republicans—his indecorous correspondence with the secretary of state—madness of the populace—hamilton and madison—position of the government assailed—washington on the democratic societies—called to mount vernon—genet fits out a privateer at philadelphia—measures to prevent her sailing—washington returns to philadelphia—a cabinet council—genet defies the government—one of the american privateers acquitted—washington laments the disaffection of the people, but swerves not—determination to have genet recalled—proceedings in the cabinet—washington's wrath.

The action of the cabinet gave umbrage to Genet, and he wrote a spirited letter to the secretary of state. He assented to the restoration of “The Grange,” she having been captured within American waters, but he protested most vehemently against all interference on the part of the United States with the privateers at sea. He alleged that they were armed and furnished by French residents in Charleston, were commanded by French officers, or Americans who knew of no law or treaty to restrain their action, and that they had gone to sea with the consent of the governor of South Carolina. He argued, that as the treaty of commerce secured to the parties the right of bringing prizes into each other's ports, it followed that their right to the control and disposal of prizes so brought in, was conceded to each. As the treaty of 1778 only forbade each party allowingenemiesto fit out privateers in their respective ports, it was fair to conclude that there was also conceded a mutual right in the parties themselves to fit out privateers in the ports of the other. He insisted that the Americans on board the privateershad, for the time, entered the service of France and renounced the protection of the United States, and that therefore they were no longer responsible to their own government for their acts.

Notwithstanding the want of decorum in some portions of Genet's letter, the president and his cabinet reconsidered the questions at issue in the light of the minister's arguments. Their opinions remained unchanged, and Genet was informed that the privateer then in the Delaware, bearing his name, must forthwith leave American waters; that orders had been sent to all the ports of the United States for the seizure of all vessels fitted out as privateers, and to prevent the sale of any prizes captured by such vessels; and also for the arrest of Henfield and Singleterry, two Americans, who had enlisted on board theCitizen Genetat Charleston.

The decision and action of the cabinet made Genet very angry, and he resolved not to acquiesce in it. He was led to believe that the great body of the American people, grateful for what France had done in times past, were ready to go all lengths in his favor, short of actual war. He had heard clamors among the people, and read violent paragraphs in the republican newspapers against the position of neutrality taken by the government, and he resolved to encourage privateering, and to defend his position before the American people by his pen. At that time, Freneau's paper was assisted in its warfare upon the administration by another called theGeneral Advertiser, known afterward as theAurora. It was edited by a grandson of Doctor Franklin, whose French education caused him to favor the fanaticism of that people in their revolutionary movements. It was sometimes more virulent in its vituperation than Freneau'sGazette, and both urged Genet to go forward, heedless of the executive and his cabinet, at the same time charging Washington himself with an intention of joining in the league of kings against the French republic.[55]

“I hope,” said a writer in Freneau's paper, “the minister of France will act with firmness and spirit. Thepeopleare his friends, or the friends of France, and he will have nothing to apprehend;for,as yet, the people are the sovereigns of the United States. Too much complacency is an injury done to his cause; for, as every advantage is already taken of France (not by thepeople), further condescension may lead to further abuse. If one of the leading features of our government is pusillanimity, when the British lion shows his teeth, let France and her minister act as becomes the dignity of their cause, and the honor and faith of nations.[56]

The arrest and indictment of the two Americans on board theCitizen Genetadded greatly to the irritation of the French minister. “The crime laid to their charge,” said Genet in a letter to Jefferson on the first of June—“the crime which my mind can not conceive, and which my pen almost refuses to state, is the serving of France, and defending with her children the common glorious cause of liberty.

“Being ignorant of any positive law or treaty which deprives Americans of this privilege, and authorizes officers arbitrarily to take mariners in the service of France from on board their vessels, I call upon your intervention, sir, and that of the president of the United States, in order to obtain the immediate releasement of the above mentioned officers, who have acquired, by the sentiments animating them, and by the act of their engagement, anterior to every act to the contrary, the right of French citizens, if they have lost that of American citizens. I renew at the same time, sir, the requisition which I made in favor of another French officer, detained for the same cause and for the same object.”

To this appeal Jefferson replied by sending Genet a copy of the opinion of the attorney-general of the United States, who decided that the prisoners had acted in violation of treaties, and were guilty of an indictable offence. In a subsequent note, the secretary of state reiterated the opinion of the president that it was the right of every nation, and the duty of neutral nations, to prohibit acts of sovereignty within their limits, injurious to either of the belligerent powers; that the granting of military commissions within the United States by any foreign authority was an infringement of their sovereignty, especially when granted to American citizens as an inducement to act against the duty which they owed to their country; and that it was expected that the French privateers would immediately leave the waters of the United States.

Genet, with impudent pertinacity, denounced these doctrines as contrary to right, justice, the law of nations, and even the proclamation of neutrality by the president; and when he was informed that a French privateer, fitted out in New York, had been seized by a body of militia acting under the authority of Governor Clinton, he was greatly enraged, and demanded its immediate “restitution, with damages and interest, and also the immediate” “restitution, with damages and interest, of the French prizes arrested and seized at Philadelphia.” But the government was unmoved. The prisoners were not released, nor the vessels restored; whereupon Genet ventured to declare that he “would appeal from the president to the people.” His only excuse for this rash assertion was his utter ignorance of the character of the president and people whose actions, in concerns so momentous, he assumed to control or defy. He seemed really to have imagined that the love of France and the sentiment of republicanism were so strong among the people of the United States, that he would be able to overthrow the government. He had already said, in a letter to Jefferson, “Every obstruction by the government of the United States to the arming of French vessels must be an attempt on the rights of man, upon which repose the independence and laws of the United States; a violation of the ties which unite France and America; and even a manifest contradiction of the system of neutrality of the president; for, in fact, if our merchant-vessels or others are not allowed to arm themselves, when the French alone are resisting the league of all the tyrants against the liberty of the people, they will be exposed to inevitable ruin in going out of the ports of the United States, which is certainly not the intention of the people of America. This fraternal voice has resounded from every quarter around me, and their accents are not equivocal. They are pure as the hearts ofthose by whom they are expressed; and the more they have touched my sensibility, the more they must interest in the happiness of America the nation I represent; the more I wish, sir, that the federal government should observe, as far as in its power, the public engagements contracted by both nations, and that, by this generous and prudent conduct, they will give at least to the world the example of a true neutrality, which does not consist in the cowardly abandonment of their friends in the moment when danger menaces them, but in adhering strictly, if they can do no better, to the obligations they have contracted with them. It is by such proceedings that they will render themselves respectable to all the powers—that they will preserve their friends, and deserve to augment their numbers.”

All around the French minister there was a sea of passion while the controversy was progressing. The republican party became more and more bold in their denunciations. Open expressions of enthusiastic devotion to France, and of hatred toward all the powers at war with that republic, were heard on every side. Every measure of the government that tended to thwart the views of Genet was assailed with the most malignant zeal. The president's proclamation of neutrality, as we have observed, was branded as a “royal edict.” It was condemned as having been issued without authority, and in contradiction with the treaties with France; as contrary to the gratitude which was due to that country by the people of the United States, and out of time and unnecessary; and a series of articles written by Hamilton in support of the proclamation, over the signature ofPacificus, were assailed in another series against the proclamation, written by Madison (at the suggestion of Jefferson) over the signature ofHelvidius, as having “been read with singular pleasure and applause by the foreigners and degenerate citizens among us, who hate our republican government and the French Revolution.”

The declaration that “the duty and interest of the United States required that they should, with sincerity and good faith, adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerentpowers,” was assailed as a monstrous doctrine, and gave the greatest umbrage to Genet and his friends. The latter insisted that the French minister's demands were sanctioned by solemn treaties, and that his interpretation of the instruments was correct. The wrongs inflicted upon America by Great Britain, and the aid given to the struggling patriots by France, were recited in most pathetic terms; and the questions were significantly asked, “Shall the services of the one, as well as the injuries of the other, be forgotten? Shall a friend and an enemy be treated with equal favor? Shall neither gratitude nor resentment constitute a feature of the American character?” It was concluded that there was a natural and inveterate hostility between monarchies and republics; that the present combination against France was a combination against liberty in every part of the world; and that the destinies of America were inseparably connected with those of the French republic. They declared that the conduct of the executive, in withholding privileges to which France was said to be entitled by the most solemn engagements, was indicative of a desire to coalesce with despots in a crusade against liberty, furnishing to the French republic just motives for war; and that all her moderation and forbearance were required to restrain her from declaring it against the United States. They went so far, as we have seen, as to exhort Genet not to relax in his endeavors to maintain the just rights of his country; and he received assurances of the steady and affectionate support of the American people. Genet was taught to believe that Washington was acting under the influence of a British monarchical faction, and that everything was to be hoped from the predominance of republicanism in the new Congress then in progress of being chosen.

It was now midsummer, and the whole social and political fabric of the Union was shaken by these party contentions; and the democratic societies of which we have spoken, secret and open, were exceedingly active. “That these societies,” Washington observed, “were instituted by the artful and designing members (many of their body, I have no doubt, mean well, but know little of the real plan), primarily to sow among the people the seeds of jealousy anddistrust of the government, by destroying all confidence in the administration of it, and that these doctrines have been budding and blowing ever since, is not new to any one who is acquainted with the character of their leaders, and has been attentive to their manœuvres.

“Can anything be more absurd, more arrogant, or more pernicious to the peace of society, than for self-created bodies, forming themselves into permanent censors, and under the shade of night, in a conclave, resolving that acts of Congress, which have undergone the most deliberate and solemn discussion by the representatives of the people, chosen for the express purpose, and bringing with them from the different parts of the Union the sense of their constituents, endeavoring, as far as the nature of the thing will admit, to formtheir willinto laws for the government of the whole—I say, under these circumstances, for a self-createdpermanentbody (for no one denies the right of the people to meet occasionally to petition for, or remonstrate against, any act of the legislature) to declare thatthis actis unconstitutional, andthat actis pregnant with mischiefs, and that all who vote contrary to their dogmas are actuated by selfish motives or under foreign influence, nay, are traitors to their country? Is such a stretch of arrogant presumption to be reconciled with laudable motives, especially when we see the same set of men endeavoring to destroy all confidence in the administration, by arraigning all its acts, without knowing on what ground or with what information it proceeds?”

While the controversy was at its height, Washington was suddenly called to Mount Vernon by the death of the chief manager of his estates. He was absent a little more than a fortnight. Meanwhile, an incident occurred which brought the controversy between the United States government and the French minister to a crisis. A British merchant-vessel was captured byL'Embuscade, sent to Philadelphia, and there Genet, under the very eye of the federal authorities and in direct opposition to the decision of Washington and his cabinet, undertook to equip her as a privateer, under the new name ofLe Petite Democrat. This movement was discovered byHamilton on the sixth of July. He communicated the facts to the cabinet, with whom Washington had left the control of the public affairs during his absence, and an investigation was ordered. It was ascertained that the vessel would probably sail on a cruise the next day, and Governor Mifflin was called upon to interfere. At midnight he sent Alexander Dallas, his secretary, to request Genet to desist from his unlawful course, and to inform him that the vessel would be detained by force if he refused compliance. The minister flew into a rage, declared that the president was not the sovereign of the country, and had no right, without consulting Congress, to give such instructions as he had done to state governors; that he was a misled man, and wholly under the influence of the enemies of France and human liberty; and then again expressed his determination to appeal to the people.

Genet refused to give Mifflin any distinct pledges, and early in the morning the governor ordered out one hundred and twenty of the militia to take possession of the privateer. Mr. Jefferson, who perceived the rashness of Genet's course, now took the matter in hand, and at a personal interview tried to persuade him to detain the privateer until the president's return to the seat of government. The secretary of state was not more successful than the secretary of Governor Mifflin. Genet stormed like a madman. Jefferson was unable, most of the time, to thrust in a word, and he sat in silence while the angry minister poured out the vials of his wrath upon the United States government. He declared that any attempt to seize the vessel would be resisted by the crew; that he had been thwarted in all his plans by the government; and that he was half a mind to leave the country in disgust, as he could not be useful to his nation here. He censured the president severely, and declared that on Washington's return he should press him to convene the Congress immediately.

Jefferson stopped him at the subject of calling a Congress, and explained to him the threefold character of the government; assuring him that all questions which had arisen between himself and the executive belonged only to that department, and that, wereCongress in session, the matters would not be carried to them, nor would they take any notice of them. Genet was surprised, and inquired if the Congress were not the sovereign? Jefferson replied that they were sovereign only in making laws; that the executive was the sovereign in executing them, and the judiciary in construing them. “But at least,” said Genet, “Congress are bound to see that the treaties are observed.” “There are very few cases,” replied Jefferson, “arising out of treaties, which Congress can take notice of. The president is to see that treaties are observed.” “To whom then is the nation to appeal, if the president decides against a treaty?” quickly inquired Genet. “The constitution has made the president the last appeal,” replied Jefferson. Genet was confounded by his own ignorance, shrugged his shoulders, and, making a bow, remarked that he would not compliment Mr. Jefferson on such a constitution.

Genet had now become cool, assured Mr. Jefferson that the privateer was not yet ready for sea, and, without promising that she should not sail before the president's return, said that it would be necessary for her to shift her position to the lower end of the town to receive supplies, and gave the secretary to understand that she would not leave before Washington's return to Philadelphia. Jefferson accepted his remarks as honest assurance, and Governor Mifflin dismissed his soldiers; but Hamilton and Knox, having no faith in the minister's word, proposed the immediate erection of a battery below the city, where Fort Mifflin stood in the Revolution, with guns mounted to prevent the privateer's going down the river. Jefferson, fearing further to offend Genet, refused to concur in this measure, and the next day the vessel went down the river as far as Chester.

Washington returned to Philadelphia on the eleventh, and received some papers, concerning the events we have just described, from Mr. Jefferson, with an intimation that they required “instant attention.” They aroused the president's indignation. “What is to be done in the case of theLittle Sarah[the original name of thePetite Democrat] now at Chester?” he asked, in a note written toMr. Jefferson on the spur of the moment. “Is the minister of the French republic to set the acts of this government at defiancewith impunity, and then threaten the executive with an appeal to the people? What must the world think of such conduct, and of the government of the United States in submitting to it?

“These are serious questions. Circumstances press for a decision, and, as you have had time to consider them (upon me they come unexpectedly), I wish to know your opinion upon them, even before to-morrow, for the vessel may then be gone.”

Mr. Jefferson assured Washington that the privateer was not yet ready for sea, and that Genet had promised that she should not sail before the decision of the president in her case should be known. In a cabinet council held the next day, it was resolved to detain in the ports of the United States all privateers which had been equipped therein, and this decision was immediately communicated to Genet. In defiance of it, the French minister sent the privateer to sea; and yet the republicans, forgetful of all national dignity, commended the representative of a foreign nation in thus offering a marked insult to the chief magistrate and the government of the republic.

At about the same time, Henfield, one of the prisoners indicted, under the advice of the attorney-general, for having enlisted on board the French privateer at Charleston, was tried. The populace, instigated by the opposition leaders, took the part of the prisoner, and the jury acquitted him. At once the opposition press heaped obloquy upon the administration, for having attempted what they were pleased to call an unlawful measure. They asked, scornfully, “What law had been offended, and under what statute was the indictment supported? Are the American people already prepared to give to a proclamation the force of a legislative act, and to subject themselves to the will of the executive? But,” they said, “if the people are already sunk to such a state of degradation, are they to be punished for violating a proclamation which had not been published when the offence was committed, if indeed it could be termed an offence to engage with France combatting for libertyagainst the combined despots of Europe?” And when the prisoner was acquitted, the event was celebrated with extravagant marks of joy and exultation.[57]

These events annoyed Washington exceedingly. He perceived the spirit of the French Revolution animating his own people, making them regardless of law and justice, and drunk with ideas that tended to anarchy and confusion. He perceived the futility of attempts to enforce laws in support of the doctrines of his proclamation of neutrality, and the disposition of a large class of people to thwart that conservative policy which he advised as being most conducive to the welfare of the state. Yet, strong in his consciousness of rectitude, he swerved not a line from his prescribed course of duty. “As it respects myself,” he said in a letter to Governor Lee on the twenty-first of July, “I care not; for I have a consolation within, that no earthly efforts can deprive me of; and that is, that neither ambitious nor interested motives have influenced my conduct. The arrows of malevolence, therefore, however barbed and well pointed, never can reach the most vulnerable point of me; though, whilst I am up as amark, they will be continually aimed. The publications in Freneau's and Bache's papers are outrages on common decency; and they progress in that style in proportion as their pieces are treated with contempt, and are passed by in silence, by those at whom they were aimed. The tendency of them, however, is too obvious to be mistaken by men of cool and dispassionate minds, and in my opinion ought to alarm them, because it is difficult to prescribe bounds to the effect.”

Matters had now reached a point where forbearance toward the insolent French minister was no longer required by the most exacting courtesy. His official communications, and public and private acts, were becoming too offensive to be longer tolerated by the government, without virtually abdicating authority and acknowledging its utter incompetency. So the president called the cabinet together at the beginning of August to consult upon the matter, when the whole official correspondence between Jefferson andGenet, and the conduct of the latter, were thoroughly reviewed. The result was, a determination that the French government should be requested to recall their minister, because he was offensive to that of the United States. Jefferson recommended great delicacy in the terms of this request; the others were favorable to a peremptory demand for his recall; while Knox, whose indignation had been thoroughly aroused by the conduct of Genet, proposed to dismiss him at once without consulting his government. It was at length agreed that a letter should be written to Gouverneur Morris, the American minister in Paris, in which should be given a statement of the case, with accompanying documents, with directions to lay the whole subject before the Executive Council of France; also that a letter, the same in substance as the one written to Morris, should be sent to Genet.

It was also proposed to publish the whole correspondence, as an appeal to the people of the United States and the world, in justification of the action of the administration. Jefferson opposed the proposition on the ground that it would make matters worse. He said Genet would appeal, also; that anonymous writers would take up the subject; that public opinion would still be divided; and there would be a difference of opinion in Congress, likewise, for the matter must be laid before them. “It would,” Jefferson said, “be a contest between the president and Genet.”

Washington took fire at this last suggestion. Wearied and annoyed by the continual dissentions in his cabinet, and the unjust abuse of his political opponents, the idea that he should stand before the world as a contestant with a man like Genet, and be subjected to the ribaldry of the press, touched his sensitive nature at the most tender point. At that moment, Knox, with peculiar mal-appropriateness, “in a foolish, incoherent sort of speech,” says Jefferson, “introduced the pasquinade, lately printed, calledThe Funeral of George Washington”—a parody on the decapitation of the French king, in which the president was represented as placed on a guillotine. “The president,” says Mr. Jefferson, “was much inflamed; got into one of those passions [which only for a momentand very rarely occurred] where he can not control himself; ran on much on the personal abuse that had been bestowed upon him; defied any man on earth to produce one single act of his, since he had been in the government, which was not done on the purest motives; that he had never repented but once the having slipped the moment of resigning his office, and that was every moment since; that he had rather be in his grave than in his present situation; that he had rather be on his farm than to be made an emperor of the world.” And yet, he said with most emphatic indignation, “they are charging me with wanting to be king!”

When Washington ceased there was a pause. All had remained silent during this burst of passion, and it was with some difficulty that the questions at issue were resumed. The president soon recovered his equanimity, and opened the subject again by saying that there was no necessity for deciding the question of an appeal to the people on Genet's recall at that moment. The propositions already agreed to respecting the letter to Gouverneur Morris might be put into execution, and events would doubtless show whether an appeal would be necessary or not. The cabinet agreed to send a circular to all the collectors of customs, instructing them in their duty respecting ships of the belligerent nations within the waters of the United States. It was also agreed that information should be communicated to the British minister that compensation would be made to the owners of British vessels captured by French privateers, fitted out within the United States, previous to the notice given to Genet that such equipments would not be allowed; but that in future the British government must regard the efforts of that of the United States, to prevent the arming of privateers within its waters, as a full discharge of all neutral obligations. At the same time, Genet was called upon to give up all the vessels captured previous to the notice above alluded to, as otherwise the French government would be held responsible for the amount of necessary indemnities; also, all vessels captured within the waters of the United States, those waters being defined as within a marine league from the exterior coast.

Back to Index Next