FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[25]The following is the record:—“According to appointment, at eleven o'clock I set out for the city-hall in my coach, preceded by Colonel Humphreys and Major Jackson in uniform (on my two white horses), and followed by Messrs. Lear and Nelson in my chariot, and Mr. Lewis, on horseback, following them. In their rear were the chief justice of the United States, and secretary of the treasury and war departments, in their respective carriages, and in the order they are named. At the outer door of the hall I was met by the doorkeepers of the senate and house, and conducted to the door of the senate chamber; and passing from thence to the chair through the senate on the right, and house of representatives on the left, I took my seat. The gentlemen who attended me followed and took their stand behind the senators, the whole rising as I entered. After being seated, at which time the members of both houses also sat I arose (as they also did) and made my speech, delivering one copy to the president of the senate, and another to the speaker of the house of representatives; after which, and being a few moments seated, I retired, bowing on each side to the assembly (who stood) as I passed, and descending to the lower hall, attended as before, I returned with them to my house.”[26]The following were the amounts: New Hampshire, $300,000; Massachusetts, $4,000,000; Rhode Island, $200,000; Connecticut, $1,600,000; New York, $1,200,000; New Jersey, $800,000; Pennsylvania, $2,200,000; Delaware, $200,000; Maryland, $800,000; Virginia, $3,000,000; North Carolina, $2,400,000; South Carolina, $4,000,000; Georgia, $300,000.[27]South Carolina joined New England in favor of Hamilton's scheme.

[25]The following is the record:—“According to appointment, at eleven o'clock I set out for the city-hall in my coach, preceded by Colonel Humphreys and Major Jackson in uniform (on my two white horses), and followed by Messrs. Lear and Nelson in my chariot, and Mr. Lewis, on horseback, following them. In their rear were the chief justice of the United States, and secretary of the treasury and war departments, in their respective carriages, and in the order they are named. At the outer door of the hall I was met by the doorkeepers of the senate and house, and conducted to the door of the senate chamber; and passing from thence to the chair through the senate on the right, and house of representatives on the left, I took my seat. The gentlemen who attended me followed and took their stand behind the senators, the whole rising as I entered. After being seated, at which time the members of both houses also sat I arose (as they also did) and made my speech, delivering one copy to the president of the senate, and another to the speaker of the house of representatives; after which, and being a few moments seated, I retired, bowing on each side to the assembly (who stood) as I passed, and descending to the lower hall, attended as before, I returned with them to my house.”

[25]The following is the record:—

“According to appointment, at eleven o'clock I set out for the city-hall in my coach, preceded by Colonel Humphreys and Major Jackson in uniform (on my two white horses), and followed by Messrs. Lear and Nelson in my chariot, and Mr. Lewis, on horseback, following them. In their rear were the chief justice of the United States, and secretary of the treasury and war departments, in their respective carriages, and in the order they are named. At the outer door of the hall I was met by the doorkeepers of the senate and house, and conducted to the door of the senate chamber; and passing from thence to the chair through the senate on the right, and house of representatives on the left, I took my seat. The gentlemen who attended me followed and took their stand behind the senators, the whole rising as I entered. After being seated, at which time the members of both houses also sat I arose (as they also did) and made my speech, delivering one copy to the president of the senate, and another to the speaker of the house of representatives; after which, and being a few moments seated, I retired, bowing on each side to the assembly (who stood) as I passed, and descending to the lower hall, attended as before, I returned with them to my house.”

[26]The following were the amounts: New Hampshire, $300,000; Massachusetts, $4,000,000; Rhode Island, $200,000; Connecticut, $1,600,000; New York, $1,200,000; New Jersey, $800,000; Pennsylvania, $2,200,000; Delaware, $200,000; Maryland, $800,000; Virginia, $3,000,000; North Carolina, $2,400,000; South Carolina, $4,000,000; Georgia, $300,000.

[27]South Carolina joined New England in favor of Hamilton's scheme.

TOP

arrival of jefferson at the seat of government—his republicanism shocked—monarchical sentiments entertained by some—hamilton induces jefferson to support his financial measures—location of the seat of government agreed upon—jefferson's suspicions—his dislike of hamilton—washington unsuspicious of dissention in his cabinet—birth of thefederalandrepublicanparties—slavery and the slave-trade discussed—the result—difficulties with the indian tribes—negotiations and war—relations with great britain and spain—secret service—gouverneur morris and major beckwith.

After a tedious journey of a fortnight from Richmond, Mr. Jefferson arrived at the seat of government on the twenty-first of March, when the debate on the assumption of the state debts was at its bitterest point. He had returned to America after several years of diplomatic service in France, with a sincere desire to spend the remainder of his days in private life. But he was met at the house of his brother-in-law, on his way from Norfolk (where he landed) to his home at Monticello, by Washington's letter, already mentioned, inviting him to his cabinet as secretary of state. The diplomat was disappointed. He had seen, and in a degree had participated in, the opening act in the drama of the French revolution. He had, as we have observed, become deeply enamored of the leaders in the revolt, and the political sentiments they had proclaimed; and he preferred to remain in France, if he was to be continued in public employment. But the terms of Washington's invitation were such, that Jefferson's sense of duty and reverence for the president would not allow him to refuse, and after due deliberation he accepted the office.

On his arrival at New York, Jefferson found many things to surpriseand startle him. A wonderful change had apparently taken place in political life during his residence in Europe; and being thoroughly imbued with republican principles and a deep-seated hatred of monarchy, his suspicions and jealousies were most painfully alive. He saw dangers to the state lurking in every recess where the full light of clear perceptions did not fall. “I found a state of things,” he wrote some years afterward, “which, of all I had contemplated, I least expected. I had left France in the first year of her revolution, in the fervor of natural rights and zeal for reformation. My conscientious devotion to these rights could not be heightened, but it had been aroused and excited by daily exercise. The president received me cordially, and my colleagues and circle of principal citizens apparently with welcome. The courtesies of dinner-parties given me, as a stranger newly arrived among them, placed me at once in their familiar society. But I can not describe the wonder and mortification with which the table conversations filled me. Politics were the chief topic, and a preference of kingly over republican government was evidently the favorite sentiment. An apostate I could not be, nor yet a hypocrite; and I found myself, for the most part, the only advocate on the republican side of the question, unless among the guests there chanced to be some member of that party from the legislative houses.”

That there were men of character in the United States at that time who desired a monarchical form of government, evidence is not wanting. Some of them had been loyalists during the war. Washington spoke of them in 1787, before the assembling of the convention that framed the federal constitution, as men who either had “not consulted the public mind,” or who lived “in a region more productive of monarchical ideas than was the case in the southern states.” But that any officer of the government, on Jefferson's arrival, had a desire for kingly rule, there is no positive evidence. The most earnest advocate for a strong, energetic, consolidated government, was Alexander Hamilton; yet he never expressed adesirefor a monarchical government in America. In hisspeech in the constitutional convention on the eighteenth of June, 1787, he lauded the British constitution as the best ever devised by man, and said that he doubted whether anything short of a government like that of Great Britain (a constitutional monarchy) would do in America. These sentiments were uttered when everything like order appeared to be on the verge of destruction, and a strong arm, independent of the popular will, seemed necessary for the establishment of public strength and individual security. The crisis was passed, the federal constitution was formed, and Hamilton gave it his zealous support. Yet, to the close of his life, he considered the constitution too weak to perform the great duties assigned it.

Hamilton was always frank and unreserved in the expression of his political views; and immediately after Jefferson's arrival at the seat of government, the secretary of the treasury pressed upon his attention the importance of the assumption of the state debts—a measure which had been rejected. “He observed,” says Jefferson in his account of the matter, “that the members of the administration ought to act in concert; that though this question was not of my department, yet a common duty should make it a common concern; that the president was the centre on which all administrative questions ultimately rested; that, the question having been lost by a small majority only, it was probable that an appeal from me to the judgment and discretion of some of my friends might effect a change in the vote, and the machinery of government, now suspended, might be again set in motion.”

To this Jefferson replied that he was a stranger to the whole matter; that if the rejection of the proposition really, as Hamilton alleged, endangered the Union, it was important to reconsider it; and then proposed that the secretary of the treasury should meet two or three friends at table the next day to discuss the subject. The dinner and the discussion took place; and it was “finally agreed,” says Jefferson, “that whatever importance had been attached to the rejection of this proposition, the preservation of the Union and of concord among the states was more important, and that therefore it would be better that the vote of rejection shouldbe rescinded, to effect which, some members should change their votes.”

At that time the question, Where shall the seat of the federal government be permanently located? was a subject of violent contest, the people in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, wishing it to be in their respective states. Debates had run high upon the subject in Congress, and the public press had discussed it vigorously. It being observed at Jefferson's dinner-party that a reconsideration of the assumption bill, and its adoption, would be “a bitter pill” to the southern states, it was proposed that “some concomitant measure should be adopted to sweeten it a little to them.” The location of the seat of government was chosen as the soother. The contest had narrowed, geographically, so that it lay between Philadelphia on the Delaware and Georgetown on the Potomac. It was proposed to give it to Philadelphia for ten years, and to Georgetown permanently thereafter, believing that “that might, as an anodyne, calm in some degree the ferment which might be excited by the other measure alone.” “Two of the Potomac members agreed to change their votes,” says Jefferson, “and Hamilton undertook to carry the other point. In doing this, the influence he had established over the eastern members, with the agency of Robert Morris with those of the middle states, effected his side of the engagement.” The assumption bill was carried, and the location of the seat of government was settled. Congress agreed to make Philadelphia its residence for ten years, during which time the public buildings should be erected at some point on the Potomac that the president might select. Subsequently a territory ten miles square, lying on both sides of the Potomac in Maryland and Virginia, was ceded by those states to the United States, and called the district of Columbia. Thus the matter was settled.

When Jefferson's sensitive republicanism took the alarm to which we have alluded, he became suspicious of all around him. His feelings toward Hamilton changed, until he considered him a monarchist in principle, and regarded all his financial schemes as intended to strengthen the general government, centralize power, andmake the treasury the controlling lever of public affairs, the chief of which, with almost autocratic puissance, might direct everything to suit his own political views. With this impression, retrospection made him angry and resentful. He regarded the manner in which Hamilton had procured his aid in effecting the measure of assumption as a snare by which he had been entrapped, and he characterized the measure itself as a fiscal manœuvre, to which he had “ignorantly and innocently been made to hold the candle.”

This was the beginning of those dissentions in his cabinet which afterward gave the president so much trouble. They had grown to mischievous proportions at a time when he believed there was perfect harmony among his constitutional advisers. He had never experienced the sentiment of jealousy himself, and he was the last man to suspect it in others; and at the time when Jefferson and Hamilton were regarding each other with a spirit of rivalry, Washington wrote to Lafayette, saying: “Many of your old acquaintances and friends are concerned with me in the administration of this government. By having Mr. Jefferson at the head of the department of state, Mr. Jay of the judiciary, Hamilton of the treasury, and Knox of war, I feel myself supported by able coadjutors who harmonize extremely well.”

Out of the rivalry between Jefferson and Hamilton, and the conflict of their opinions respecting the national jurisprudence and French politics, grew the two political parties known respectively, for about twenty years, asFederalandRepublican. We shall observe that growth as we progress in our narrative.

While Congress and the nation were agitated by discussions concerning the public debt, another topic elicited a still more exciting discussion: it was African slavery and the slave-trade. Slavery then existed in all the states of the Union except Massachusetts, in whose constitution a clause had been inserted for the purpose of tacitly abolishing the system from the commonwealth. Pennsylvania had adopted measures with the same view, and had been imitated by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, had prohibited the furtherimportation of slaves; and in Virginia and Maryland restrictions upon emancipation had been repealed. A desire to get rid of the system appeared to prevail throughout the Union. The Presbyteries of New York and Pennsylvania, composing a united synod, had constituted themselves as the general assembly of the Presbyterian church in America; and that representative body issued a pastoral letter in 1788, in which they strongly recommended the abolition of slavery, and the instruction of negroes in letters and religion. The Methodist church, then rising into notice, even refused slaveholders a place in their communion; and the Quakers had made opposition to slavery a part of their discipline. In these benevolent movements Washington sympathized; for he desired to see the system extinguished by some just method.

It was only a few days after the commencement of the debate on the public debt, that a petition from the yearly meeting of the Quakers of Pennsylvania and Delaware, with another from that of New York, was laid before the house of representatives. A motion for reference to a special committee caused a warm debate, and some of those who opposed its reception spoke sneeringly of “the men in the gallery,” who were the Quaker deputation appointed to look after the petition.[28]It was laid upon the table that day; and at the opening of the session on the following morning, another petition on the same subject, from the Pennsylvania society for the abolition of slavery, was presented. It was signed by Benjamin Franklin (president of the society), then in the last weeks of his life. The petition was read, and then the Quaker memorial was called up. The excitement in the house was very great. The movement was denominated an improper interference with state rights, or at least an act of imprudence; and Judge Burke, of South Carolina, declared that if these memorials were entertained by commitment, the act would “sound an alarm and blow the trumpet of sedition through the southern states.”

The question was mainly a constitutional one, but the debates took great latitude. It was finally agreed to commit the memorials, by a vote of forty-three to eleven. They were referred to a committee consisting of one member from each of the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

A month afterward, that committee reported seven resolutions: first, that the general government was expressly restrained from prohibiting the carrying on of the slave-trade until the year 1808; second, that by a fair construction of the constitution, Congress was equally restrained from interfering with slavery, in the matter of emancipation, in the several states; third, that Congress had no power to interfere in the internal regulations of slavery in the several states; fourth, that Congress had the right, by virtue of the revenue laws, to levy a tax of ten dollars upon every person imported as property under the special permission of any of the states; fifth, that Congress had power to regulate or to interdict the African slave-trade, carried on by citizens of the United States for the supply of foreign countries; sixth, that Congress had the right to prohibit foreigners from fitting out vessels in the United States, to be employed in the supply of foreign countries with slaves from Africa; seventh, that Congress would exercise their authority to its full extent, to promote the humane objects set forth in the memorial of the Quakers.

This report called forth zealous and sometimes angry debates for a whole week, when it was finally agreed, at the suggestion of Fisher Ames, seconded by Madison and others, by a vote of twenty-nine to twenty-five, to enter the report at length upon the journal of the house, where it might be consulted in the future, and to take no further action. Thus ended the first agitation of the still pending “slavery question” in Congress. In a letter to Doctor Stuart,in June, referring to a complaint of the tardiness of Congress, Washington remarked: “The introduction of the Quaker memorial respecting slavery was, to be sure, not onlyill-timed, but occasioned a great waste of time. The final decision thereon, however, was as favorable as the proprietors of this species of property could well have expected, considering the light in which slavery is viewed by a large part of this Union.”

While topics of a domestic nature agitated the public mind and occupied the attention of the national legislature, the foreign relations of the government (in which expression may be included the relations with hostile Indian tribes) were far from satisfactory. We have already alluded to the hostile attitude of some of the tribes in the northwest and southwest, among whom it was suspected British emissaries were at work. Those of the southwest, especially the Creek nation, had been in a disturbed state for some time, and difficulties with the authorities of Georgia had caused an open rupture a little earlier than the period in question. The Creeks were governed by an accomplished chief, Alexander M'Gillivray, the son of a loyalist Scotchman, of that name, and a Creek woman of a leading family. He had been well educated, and his father designed him for commercial pursuits. He loved study more than ledgers; and his father owning large possessions in Georgia, the young man looked forward to wealth and social position. But the revolution swept all away. His father's property was confiscated, and young M'Gillivray took refuge with the Creeks, his heart filled with hatred of the republicans. He was brave, fluent in speech, popular with the leading men, and soon rose to the rank of head chief; and no doubt he stirred up his nation to assume an attitude hostile to the Americans.

The Creeks, with M'Gillivray at their head, had also established a close alliance with the Spaniards, who held possession of Florida. The Spanish governor of that province courted the young half-blood chief, and he was honored with a colonelcy in the military service of Spain. Through the Spaniards, the Creeks could readily obtain arms and ammunition in exchange for their furs; and thus, in pointof strength, they were the most formidable enemies to the United States among the Indian nations.

Good policy caused the United States government to send commissioners to treat with the Creeks; and in the autumn of 1789, General Lincoln, Colonel Humphries, and David Griffin—a commission appointed by Washington—met deputies of that confederacy on the Oconee, to hold a treaty. M'Gillivray was at the head of the deputation. He received the American commissioners kindly, and expressed a desire for friendship; but when he found that they did not propose to restore to the Creeks their lands about which they had disputed with the Georgians, he abruptly ended the conference, promising, however, to remain peaceable until further negotiations could be had.

In March, 1790, Washington despatched Colonel Marinus Willett on a new mission to the Creeks. He succeeded in persuading M'Gillivray to go to New York, to carry on negotiations there. Attended by twenty-eight sachems, chiefs, and warriors, he arrived at the federal capital on the twenty-third of June, having been received with much attention at the principal towns on the line of his journey. The members of the Tammany society of New York, arrayed in Indian costume, escorted M'Gillivray and his party into the city; and the Creek chief, being the son of a Scotchman, was made an honorary member of the St. Andrew's society.

These attentions, and the gracious manner in which he was received by the president, made a deep impression on M'Gillivray's mind. General Knox, the secretary of war, was appointed to negotiate with him. A satisfactory treaty, founded upon mutual concessions, was made; and one of the last acts of Washington during the second session of the first Congress was the approval of that treaty. It was signed by the contracting parties on the seventh of August, and was ratified on the thirteenth, the day after Congress adjourned.

Meanwhile, the aspect of Indian affairs in the country northwest of the Ohio, into which a stream of emigration was rapidly flowing, claimed the serious consideration of the government. A territorialgovernment for that region had been ordained in 1787, and the domain was called the northwest territory. General Arthur St. Clair was appointed governor. As we have observed, the Indians in that vicinity had shown much hostility to the Americans ever since the close of the Revolution. They were encouraged by Sir John Johnson, then Indian agent on that frontier, and by Sir Guy Carleton, who was again governor of Canada, to insist upon re-establishing the Ohio as the Indian boundary. They swarmed upon the banks of that river, waylaid the boats of emigrants, and even crossed the stream and made incursions into Kentucky, to attack frontier stations there. The president was convinced, by long experience with the Indians, that on the failure of negotiations with them, sound policy and true economy, not less than humanity, required the immediate employment of force, which should go as a scourge into the very heart of their country. Such were now the relations between the northwestern tribes and the United States; and in the autumn, a military force eleven hundred strong, under the command of General Harmer, was directed by the president to march against the Miami village on the Scioto, where Chilicothe now stands. After some successes and defeats the Americans withdrew, and the Indians became more insolent and bold.

At this time a general European war appeared inevitable. A long-pending controversy between Spain and Great Britain remained unsettled. It was believed that France would side with Spain; and it was thought to be a favorable time for the United States to press upon Great Britain the necessity of complying with the yet unfulfilled articles of the treaty of 1783. Accordingly, as early as January, 1790, Gouverneur Morris, then in Paris, was commissioned by Washington to proceed to London, as private agent of the United States, to sound the British ministry on the subject. At that time there was no diplomatic intercourse between the United States and Great Britain. Mr. Adams had returned home, and the court of St. James had never sent a minister to the United States. Morris opened a communication with the English minister for foreign affairs, but was unable to make much satisfactory progressfor some time. As late as the first of July, Washington made the following record in his diary:

“Having put into the hands of the vice president of the United States the communication of Mr. Gouverneur Morris, who had been empowered to make informal inquiries how well disposed the British ministry might be to enter into commercial relations with the United States, and to fulfil the articles of peace respecting our western posts, and the slaves which had been carried from this country, he expressed his approbation that this step had been taken, and added that the disinclination of the British cabinet to comply with the two latter and to evade the former, as evidently appears from the correspondence of Mr. Morris with the duke of Leeds (the British minister for foreign affairs), was of a piece with their conduct toward him whilst minister at that court, and just what he expected, and that to have it ascertained was necessary.“He thought, as a rupture between England and Spain was almost inevitable, that it would be our policy and interest to take part with the latter, as he was very apprehensive that New Orleans was an object with the former of their possessing, which would be very injurious to us; but he observed, at the same time, that the situation of our affairs would not justify the measure, unless the people [of the United States] themselves should take the lead in the business.”

“He thought, as a rupture between England and Spain was almost inevitable, that it would be our policy and interest to take part with the latter, as he was very apprehensive that New Orleans was an object with the former of their possessing, which would be very injurious to us; but he observed, at the same time, that the situation of our affairs would not justify the measure, unless the people [of the United States] themselves should take the lead in the business.”

This was also considered a favorable time for the United States to urge upon Spain their claims to the free navigation of the Mississippi river. Mr. Carmichael, the American chargé d'affaires at the court of Madrid, was instructed not only to press this point with earnestness, but to use his best endeavors to secure the unmolested use of that river in future, by obtaining a cession of the island of New Orleans and of the Floridas, offering as an equivalent the sincere friendship of the United States, by which the territories of Spain west of the Mississippi might be secured to that government.

Evidence was not wanting that Great Britain apprehended an alliance of the United States with Spain in the war that seemed to be impending; and also that, in the event of war, the arms of GreatBritain would be directed against the Spanish settlements in America, to the disadvantage of the United States. Sir Guy Carleton (now Lord Dorchester) was continued in the government of Canada. He had asked leave to pass through New York on his way to England. It was readily granted. And now, under the pretext of making a formal acknowledgment for the contest, he despatched his aid-de-camp, Major Beckwith, to sound the American government, and ascertain, if possible, its disposition toward the two disputing nations.

Major Beckwith first approached Hamilton, the secretary of the treasury. After acknowledging the courtesy of the United States government in offering to comply with the wishes of Lord Dorchester, he observed that the prospect of a war between Great Britain and Spain would prevent or defer his lordship's departure for England.

“He next proceeded to observe,” says Hamilton in his written report of the interview which he laid before the president, “that Lord Dorchester had been informed of a negotiation commenced on the other side of the water, through the agency of Mr. Morris; mentioning, as the subscriber understood principally by way of proof of Lord Dorchester's knowledge of the transaction, that Mr. Morris had not produced any regular credentials, but merely a letter from the president directed to himself; that some delays had intervened, partly on account of Mr. Morris's absence on a trip to Holland, as was understood, and that it was not improbable these delays and some other circumstances may have impressed Mr. Morris with an idea of backwardness on the part of the British ministry. That his lordship, however, had directed him to say that an inference of this sort would not, in his opinion, be well founded, as he had reason to believe that the cabinet of Great Britain entertained a disposition, not only toward a friendly intercourse, but toward an alliance with the United States.”

“Major Beckwith then proceeded to speak of the particular cause of the expected rupture between Spain and Great Britain, observing it was one in which all commercial nations must be supposed tofavor the views of Great Britain. That it was therefore presumed, should a war take place, that the United States would find it to their interest to take part with Great Britain rather than with Spain.”

Major Beckwith then, in the name of Lord Dorchester, disclaimed any influence, under the sanction of British authorities, over the western tribes, unfavorable to the interests of the citizens of the United States; and concluded by producing a letter signed by Dorchester, which contained sentiments similar to those expressed by the bearer, with an assurance that “his lordship knew too well the consequences of such a step, to have taken it without a previous knowledge of the intentions of the cabinet.”

Washington's impression of this semi-official overture from Great Britain is expressed in the following record in his diary on the eighth of July: “The aspect of this business, in the moment of its communication to me, appeared simply and no other than this: 'We did not incline to give any satisfactory answer to Mr. Morris, who wasofficiallycommissioned to ascertain our intentions with respect to the evacuation of the western posts within the territory of the United States, and other matters, until by this unauthenticated mode we can discover whether you will enter into an alliance with us, and make common cause against Spain. In that case we will enter into a commercial treaty with you, andpromise perhapsto fulfil what we already stand engaged to perform.'”

The president referred the matter to his cabinet, with a request that they would give it their serious consideration. They did so; and on the fourteenth it was agreed to treat Beckwith's communications very civilly—to intimate, delicately, that they carried no marks official or authentic; nor, in speaking of alliance, did they convey any definite meaning by which the precise object of the British cabinet could be discovered. “In a word,” says Washington in his diary, “that the secretary of the treasury was to extract as much as he could from Major Beckwith, and to report to me, without committing, by any assurances whatever, the government of the United States, leaving it entirely free to pursue, unreproached,such a line of conduct in the dispute as her interest and honor shall dictate.”

It was evident that the British government were willing that their relations with the United States should remain unchanged, until they should perceive what course European affairs were likely to take. For about nine months Morris remained in London, endeavoring to accomplish the objects of his mission; but, at the end of that time, the views of the British government, on all the main topics of discussion, were as much hidden in a cloud of uncertainty as when he first presented Washington's letter to the duke of Leeds, as his credentials. The powers given to Mr. Morris were withdrawn; because, to further press the subject of a commercial treaty, or the exchange of ministers, or the evacuation of the western posts, on the part of the United States, would be useless and dishonorable; and it was resolved to pause in action until the government had become strong enough to speak in decisive tones, and prepare to maintain words with works.

Finding the French government, then embarrassed by its own internal difficulties, disinclined to take part in the quarrel with Great Britain, Spain, unable alone to cope with her foe, yielded every point in the controversy, and the dispute was settled.

FOOTNOTES:[28]In his diary under date of March the sixteenth, 1790, Washington recorded: “Exercised on horseback, between ten and twelve o'clock; previous to this, I was visited (having given permission) by Mr. Warner Mifflin, one of the people called Quakers, active in pursuit of the measures laid before Congress for emancipating the slaves. After much general conversation, and an endeavor to remove the prejudices which, he said, had been entertained of the motives by which the attending deputations from their society were actuated, he used arguments to show the immorality, injustice, and impolicy of keeping these people in a state of slavery; with declarations, however, that he did not wish for more than a gradual abolition, or to see any infraction of the constitution to effect it. To these I replied, that as it was a matter which might come before me for official decision, I was not inclined to express any sentiments on the merits of the question before this should happen.”

[28]In his diary under date of March the sixteenth, 1790, Washington recorded: “Exercised on horseback, between ten and twelve o'clock; previous to this, I was visited (having given permission) by Mr. Warner Mifflin, one of the people called Quakers, active in pursuit of the measures laid before Congress for emancipating the slaves. After much general conversation, and an endeavor to remove the prejudices which, he said, had been entertained of the motives by which the attending deputations from their society were actuated, he used arguments to show the immorality, injustice, and impolicy of keeping these people in a state of slavery; with declarations, however, that he did not wish for more than a gradual abolition, or to see any infraction of the constitution to effect it. To these I replied, that as it was a matter which might come before me for official decision, I was not inclined to express any sentiments on the merits of the question before this should happen.”

TOP

adjournment of congress—washington's opinion of their conduct—his public labors—tour on long island—severe illness of the president—voyage to rhode island—in retirement at mount vernon—lafayette's position—key of the bastile presented to washington—washington's hopes for the future of the united states—his neutral policy foreshadowed—indian war in the west.

Congress adjourned on the twelfth of August, after a session of about seven months, during which time questions of great importance had been met, discussed, and settled; not always, it must be confessed, in a conciliatory spirit. In a partial defense of the national legislature, in a letter to Doctor Stuart, Washington remarked: “I do not mean, however, from what I have here said, to justify the conduct of Congress in all these movements; for some of their movements, in my opinion, have been injudicious, and others unseasonable; whilst the questions of assumption, residence, and other matters, have been agitated with a warmth and intemperance, with prolixity and threats, which, it is to be feared, have lessened the dignity of that body, and decreased that respect which was once entertained for it. And this misfortune is increased by many members, even among those who wish well to the government, ascribing in letters to their respective states, when they are defeated in a favorite measure, the worst motives for the conduct of their opponents, who, viewing matters through another medium, may and do retort in their turn; by which means jealousies and distrusts are spread most impolitically far and wide, and will, it is to be feared, have a most unhappy tendency to injure our public affairs, which, if wisely managed, might make us, as we are now by Europeans thought to be, the happiest people upon earth.”

The session just closed had been a season of great labor for the president. The cares of state had been many and important, and the affairs of France had occupied much of his attention. Some days his application to public business was so continuous, from early morning until evening, that he omitted his usual exercise in the open air. He managed, however, to make a tour of four days, in his carriage, upon Long Island. He travelled eastward as far as Huntington, making (as appears by his diary) careful observations of the country and its resources. He proceeded from Brooklyn, through Flatbush and New Utrecht, to Gravesend, on the extreme western point of the island, and then eastward to Jamaica by the middle road. From Jamaica he journeyed to South Hempstead, and then to Hart's tavern in Brookhaven, from which place he struck across toward the north shore of the island by Coram to Setauket. On the third day of his journey (April the twenty-third) he went through Smithstown to Huntington, where he dined; and then turning westward, he drove to Oyster bay and lodged. Early the following morning he passed through Mosquito cove, and breakfasted at Hendrick Onderdonk's, at the head of a bay, the site of the present village of Roslyn, or Hempstead harbor. He dined at Flushing, reached Brooklyn ferry before sunset, and home at twilight.

Incessant application to business made severe inroads upon the health of the president, and on the tenth of May he was seized with a severe illness, which reduced him to the verge of dissolution. He was confined to his chamber for several weeks, and it was not until the twenty-fourth of June that he was able to resume his diary. His chief difficulty was inflammation of the lungs, and he suffered from general debility until the close of the session of Congress in August. Then, accompanied by Jefferson, he made a voyage to Newport, Rhode Island, especially for the benefit of his health, and incidentally to have personal intercourse with the leading inhabitants there, he having, as we have observed, avoided the soil of Rhode Island when on his eastern tour, that state not then being a member of the Union. It had recently entered by adopting the federal constitution.

The sea-voyage was beneficial to the health of the president; and soon after his return, at the close of August, he set out with his family for Mount Vernon, there to seek repose from the turmoil of public life, and the sweet recreation which he always experienced in the midst of agricultural employments in that happy retreat. He carried with him to Mount Vernon a curious present which he received from his friend Lafayette, just before the adjournment of Congress. It was the ponderous iron key of the Bastile—that old fortress of despotism in Paris which the populace of that city captured the year before, and which had been levelled to the ground by order of the marquis, who was still at the head of the revolution in France.

Washington had watched the course of his friend with great anxiety; for he loved the marquis as a brother. The career upon which he had entered was a most difficult and perilous one. “Never has any man been placed in a more critical situation,” the Marquis de Luzerne wrote to Washington. “A good citizen, a faithful subject, he is embarrassed by a thousand difficulties in making many people sensible of what is proper, who very often feel it not, and who sometimes do not understand what it is.”

“He acts now a splendid but dangerous part,” wrote Gouverneur Morris. Lafayette himself felt the perils of his position. “How often, my well-beloved general,” he wrote to Washington early in the year, “have I regretted your sage counsels and friendly support. We have advanced in the career of the revolution without the vessel of state being wrecked against the rocks of aristocracy or faction.... At present, that which existed has been destroyed; a new political edifice is forming; without being perfect, it is sufficient to assure liberty. Thus prepared, the nation will be in a state to elect in two years a convention which can correct the faults of the constitution.” Alas! those two years had scarcely passed away before the hopeful champion of freedom was a prisoner, far away from his home, in an Austrian dungeon. But we will not anticipate.

Two months later, Lafayette wrote a most hopeful letter toWashington. “Our revolution,” he said, “pursues its march as happily as is possible with a nation which, receiving at once all its liberties, is yet subject to confound them with licentiousness.” He then spoke of the hinderances to speedy success in the establishment of a sound republican government, and said: “After having avowed all this, my dear general, I will tell you, with the same frankness, that we have made an admirable and almost incredible destruction of all the abuses, of all the prejudices; that all which was not useful to the people—all which did not come from them—has been retrenched; that, in considering the situation, topographical, moral, and political, of France, we have effected more changes in ten months than the most presumptive patriots could have hoped, and that the reports about our anarchy, our internal troubles, are greatly exaggerated.”

In conclusion, the marquis said: “Permit me, my dear general, to offer you a picture representing the Bastile, such as it was some days after I had given orders for its demolition, with the main key of the fortress of despotism. It is a tribute which I owe as a son to an adopted father—as an aid-de-camp to my general—as a missionary of liberty to its patriarch.”

The picture and key were placed in the hands of Thomas Paine, then in London, who was intending soon to visit the United States. His destination was changed to France, and after considerable delay he forwarded the precious mementoes, with a letter, in which he said:—

“I feel myself happy in being the person through whom the marquis has conveyed this early trophy of the spoils of despotism, and the first ripe fruit of American principles transplanted into Europe, to his great master and patron. When he mentioned to me the present he intended for you, my heart leaped with joy.... That the principles of America opened the Bastile is not to be doubted, and therefore the key comes to the right place.”

On the receipt of these presents early in August, Washington wrote to Lafayette, saying: “I have received your affectionate letter of the seventeenth of March by one conveyance, and the tokenof the victory gained by liberty over despotism by another; for both which testimonials of your friendship and regard, I pray you to accept my sincerest thanks. In this great subject of triumph for the new world and for humanity in general, it will never be forgotten how conspicuous a part you bore, and how much lustre you reflected on a country in which you made the first displays of your character.”

Referring in the same letter to the treaty which had been concluded with the Creeks, he said: “This event will leave us at peace from one end of our borders to the other, except when it may be interrupted by a small refugee banditti of Cherokees and Shawnees, who can be easily chastised, or even extirpated, if it shall become necessary.” He then added:—

“Gradually recovering from the distress in which the war left us, patiently advancing in our task of civil government, unentangled in the crooked politics of Europe, wanting scarcely anything but the free navigation of the Mississippi (which we must have, and as certainly shall have as we remain a nation), I have supposed that, with the undeviating exercise of a just, steady, and prudent national policy, we shall be the gainers, whether the powers of the old world may be in peace or war, but more especially in the latter case. In that case, our importance will certainly increase, and our friendship will be coveted.” The last clause foreshadows that neutral policy which Washington assumed for the government of the United States at a little later period, when great efforts were made to involve it in the meshes of European politics, by active sympathy with the democratic movements in France.

Rest at Mount Vernon was grateful to the wearied chief of the republic. Yet it was not absolute repose. As a conscientious public servant; as the chief officer of a government yet in a comparatively formative state, and charged with the highest trusts that can be committed to mortal man, he felt most sensibly the care of state, even in his quiet home on the banks of the Potomac. One subject, in particular, filled him with anxiety. He had ordered the chastisement of the Indians in the Ohio country, and troops hadgone thither for the purpose. He had deprecated a war with the deluded savages, but good policy appeared to demand it; and on the thirtieth of September an expedition set out from Fort Washington, where the city of Cincinnati now stands, under General Harmer, a veteran of the Revolution. But from that time until his arrival in Philadelphia, at the close of November, Washington remained in profound ignorance of the operations or the fate of the expedition. On the second of November he wrote to General Knox, the secretary of war, expressing his surprise that no information of the expedition had been received, and saying: “This, in my opinion, is an undertaking of a very serious nature. I am not a little anxious to know the result of it.... This matter, favorable or otherwise in the issue, will require to be laid before the Congress, that the motives which induced the expedition may appear.”

On his arrival in Philadelphia, Washington received a letter from Governor Clinton, of New York, giving an account of Harmer's ill success against the Indians, reported by Captain Brant, the celebrated Mohawk warrior of the Revolution. “If this information of Captain Brant be true,” Washington wrote to Clinton in reply, “the issue of the expedition against the Indians will indeed prove unfortunate and disgraceful to the troops, who suffered themselves to be ambuscaded.”

It was even so. The expedition, as we have already observed, failed in its efforts, and the savages took courage for future operations. An expensive war of four or five years' duration ensued.

TOP

Back to Index Next