The Life of George Washington, Vol. 5 (of 5)
J >> John Marshall >> The Life of George Washington, Vol. 5 (of 5)Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25
Mr. Genet was exhorted not to relax in his endeavours to maintain the
just rights of his country; and was assured that, in the affections of
the people, he would find a firm and certain support.
These principles and opinions derived considerable aid from the
labours and intrigues of certain societies, who had constituted
themselves the guardians of American liberty.
The manner in which that attention of the conduct of those invested
with the power which is essential in balanced governments, may safely
be employed, had been so misconceived, that temporary and detached
clubs of citizens had occasionally been formed in different parts of
the United States, for the avowed purpose of watching the conduct of
their rulers. After the adoption of the constitution, some slight use
was made, by its enemies, of this weapon; and, in the German
Republican Society particularly, many of the most strenuous opponents
of the administration were collected.
[Sidenote: Democratic societies formed.]
The force and power of these institutions had been fully developed,
and their efficacy in prostrating existing establishments clearly
ascertained by the revolution in France. The increased influence which
they derived from corresponding with each other, had been
unequivocally demonstrated; and soon after the arrival of Mr. Genet, a
democratic society was formed in Philadelphia on the model of the
Jacobin club in Paris. An anxious solicitude for the preservation of
freedom, the very existence of which was menaced by a "European
confederacy transcendent in power and unparalleled in iniquity;" which
was endangered also by "the pride of wealth and arrogance of power,"
displayed within the United States; was the motive assigned for the
association. "A constant circulation of useful information, and a
liberal communication of republican sentiments, were thought to be the
best antidotes to any political poison with which the vital principle
of civil liberty might be attacked:" and to give the more extensive
operation to their labours, a corresponding committee was appointed,
through whom they would communicate with other societies, which might
be established on similar principles, throughout the United States.
Faithful to their founder, and true to the real objects of their
association, these societies continued, during the term of their
existence, to be the resolute champions of all the encroachments
attempted by the agents of the French republic on the government of
the United States, and the steady defamers of the views and measures
of the American executive.
Thus strongly supported, Mr. Genet persisted in his construction of
the treaties between the two nations; and, in defiance of the positive
determination of the government, continued to act according to that
construction.
The President was called to Mount Vernon by urgent business, which
detained him less than three weeks; and, in his absence, the heads of
departments superintended the execution of those rules which had been
previously established.
In this short interval, a circumstance occurred, strongly marking the
rashness of the minister of France, and his disrespect to the
executive of the United States.
The Little Sarah, an English merchantman, had been captured by a
French frigate, and brought into the port of Philadelphia, where she
was completely equipped as a privateer, and was just about to sail on
a cruise under the name of _le petit Democrat_, when the secretary of
the treasury communicated her situation to the secretaries of state
and of war; in consequence of which, Governor Mifflin was desired to
cause an examination of the fact. The warden of the port was directed
to institute the proper inquiries; and late in the evening of the
sixth of July, he reported her situation, and that she was to sail the
next day.
[Sidenote: Genet calculates upon the partialities of the American
people for France and openly insults their government.]
In pursuance of the instructions which had been given by the
President, the governor immediately sent Mr. Secretary Dallas for the
purpose of prevailing on Mr. Genet to relieve him from the employment
of force, by detaining the vessel in port until the arrival of the
President, who was then on his way from Mount Vernon. Mr. Dallas
communicated this message to the French minister in terms as
conciliatory as its nature would permit. On receiving it, he gave a
loose to the most extravagant passion. After exclaiming with vehemence
against the measure, he complained, in strong terms, and with many
angry epithets, of the ill treatment which he had received from some
of the officers of the general government, which he contrasted with
the cordial attachment that was expressed by the people at large for
his nation. He ascribed the conduct of those officers to principles
inimical to the cause of France, and of liberty. He insinuated that,
by their influence, the President had been misled; and observed with
considerable emphasis, that the President was not the sovereign of
this country. The powers of peace and war being vested in congress, it
belonged to that body to decide those questions growing out of
treaties which might involve peace or war; and the President,
therefore, ought to have assembled the national legislature before he
ventured to issue his proclamation of neutrality, or to prohibit, by
his instructions to the state governors, the enjoyment of the
particular rights which France claimed under the express stipulations
of the treaty of commerce. The executive construction of that treaty
was neither just nor obligatory; and he would make no engagement which
might be construed into a relinquishment of rights which his
constituents deemed indispensable. In the course of this vehement and
angry declamation, he spoke of publishing his correspondence with the
officers of government, together with a narrative of his proceedings;
and said that, although the existing causes would warrant an abrupt
departure, his regard for the people of America would induce him to
remain here, amidst the insults and disgusts that he daily suffered in
his official character from the public officers, until the meeting of
congress; and if that body should agree in the opinions and support
the measures of the President, he would certainly withdraw, and leave
the dispute to be adjusted between the two nations themselves. His
attention being again called by Mr. Dallas to the particular subject,
he peremptorily refused to enter into any arrangements for suspending
the departure of the privateer, and cautioned him against any attempt
to seize her, as she belonged to the republic; and, in defence of the
honour of her flag, would unquestionably repel force by force.
On receiving the report of Mr. Dallas, Governor Mifflin ordered out
one hundred and twenty militia, for the purpose of taking possession
of the privateer; and communicated the case, with all its
circumstances, to the officers of the executive government. On the
succeeding day, Mr. Jefferson waited on Mr. Genet, in the hope of
prevailing on him to pledge his word that the privateer should not
leave the port until the arrival of the President. The minister was
not less intemperate with Mr. Jefferson than he had been with Mr.
Dallas. He indulged himself, in a repetition of nearly the same
passionate language, and again spoke, with extreme harshness, of the
conduct of the executive. He persisted in refusing to make any
engagements for the detention of the vessel; and, after his rage had
in some degree spent itself, he entreated that no attempt might be
made to take possession of her, as her crew was on board, and force
would be repelled by force.
He then also said that she was not ready to sail immediately. She
would change her position, and fall down the river a small distance on
that day; but was not yet ready to sail.
In communicating this conversation to Governor Mifflin, Mr. Jefferson
stated his conviction that the privateer would remain in the river
until the President should decide on her case; in consequence of
which, the governor dismissed the militia, and requested the advice of
the heads of departments on the course which it would be proper for
him to pursue. Both the governor and Mr. Jefferson stated, that in
reporting the conversation between Mr. Genet and himself, Mr. Dallas
had said that Mr. Genet threatened, in express terms, "to appeal from
the President to the people."
Thus braved and insulted in the very heart of the American empire, the
secretaries of the treasury, and of war, were of opinion that it was
expedient to take immediate provisional measures for establishing a
battery on Mud Island, under cover of a party of militia, with
directions, that if the vessel should attempt to depart before the
pleasure of the President should be known concerning her, military
coercion should be employed to arrest her progress.
The secretary of state dissenting from this opinion, the measure was
not adopted. The vessel fell down to Chester before the arrival of the
President, and sailed on her cruise before the power of the government
could be interposed.
On the 11th of July the President reached Philadelphia, and requested
that his cabinet ministers would convene at his house the next day at
nine in the morning.
Among the papers placed in his hands by the secretary of state, which
required immediate attention, were those which related to the Little
Democrat. On reading them, a messenger was immediately despatched for
the secretary, but he had retired, indisposed, to his seat in the
country. Upon hearing this, the President instantly addressed a letter
to him, of which the following is an extract. "What is to be done in
the case of the Little Sarah, now at Chester? Is the minister of the
French republic to set the acts of this government at defiance _with
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 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."
In answer to this letter, the secretary stated the assurances which
had on that day been given to him by Mr. Genet, that the vessel would
not sail before the President's decision respecting her should be
made. In consequence of this information, immediate coercive measures
were suspended; and in the council of the succeeding day it was
determined to retain in port all[6] privateers which had been equipped
by any of the belligerent powers within the United States. This
determination was immediately communicated to Mr. Genet; but, in
contempt of it, the Little Democrat proceeded on her cruise.
[Footnote 6: They were particularly enumerated, and the
decision was also extended to the ship Jane, an English
armed merchantman, alleged by Mr. Genet to be a privateer,
and the governor was requested to attend to her, and if he
found her augmenting her force and about to depart, to cause
her to be stopped.
The Jane had augmented her armament by replacing four old
gun-carriages with new ones, and opening two new portholes.
The request of the British consul that these alterations
might be allowed was peremptorily rejected, and directions
were given that she should be restored precisely to the
situation in which she entered the port. Had she attempted
to sail without obeying these orders, Governor Mifflin had
taken measures to stop her at Mud Island.]
In this, as in every effort made by the executive to maintain the
neutrality of the United States, that great party which denominated
itself "THE PEOPLE," could perceive only a settled hostility to France
and to liberty, a tame subserviency to British policy, and a desire,
by provoking France, to engage America in the war, for the purpose of
extirpating republican principles.[7]
[Footnote 7: See note No. III. at the end of the volume.]
The administration received strong additional evidence of the
difficulty that would attend an adherence to the system which had been
commenced, in the acquittal of Gideon Henfield.
A prosecution had been instituted against this person who had enlisted
in Charleston on board a French privateer equipped in that port, which
had brought her prizes into the port of Philadelphia. This prosecution
had been directed under the advice of the attorney general, who was of
opinion, that persons of this description were punishable for having
violated subsisting treaties, which, by the constitution, are the
supreme law of the land; and that they were also indictable at common
law, for disturbing the peace of the United States.
It could not be expected that the democratic party would be
inattentive to an act so susceptible of misrepresentation. Their
papers sounded the alarm; and it was universally asked, "what law had
been offended, and under what statute was the indictment supported?
Were 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 if they were already sunk to such a state of
degradation, were 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, combating for
liberty against the combined despots of Europe?"
As the trial approached, a great degree of sensibility was displayed;
and the verdict in favour of Henfield was celebrated with extravagant
marks of joy and exultation. It bereaved the executive of the strength
to be derived from an opinion, that punishment might be legally
inflicted on those who should openly violate the rules prescribed for
the preservation of neutrality; and exposed that department to the
obloquy of having attempted a measure which the laws would not
justify.
About this time, a question growing out of the war between France and
Britain, the decision of which would materially affect the situation
of the United States, was presented to the consideration of the
executive.
It will be recollected that during the war which separated America
from Britain, the celebrated compact termed the _armed neutrality_ was
formed in the north of Europe, and announced to the belligerent
powers. A willingness to acquiesce in the principles it asserted, one
of which was that free bottoms should make free goods, was expressed
by the governments engaged in the war, with the single exception of
Great Britain. But, however favourably the United States, as a
belligerent, might view a principle which would promote the interests
of inferior maritime powers, they were not willing, after the
termination of hostilities, to enter into engagements for its support
which might endanger their future peace; and, in this spirit,
instructions were given to their ministers in Europe.
This principle was ingrafted into the treaty of commerce with France;
but no stipulation on the subject had been made with England. It
followed, that, with France, the character of the bottom was imparted
to the cargo; but with Britain, the law of nations was the rule by
which the respective rights of the belligerent and neutral were to be
decided.
Construing this rule to give security to the goods of a friend in the
bottoms of an enemy, and to subject the goods of an enemy to capture
in the bottoms of a friend, the British cruisers took French property
out of American vessels, and their courts condemned it as lawful
prize.
Mr. Genet had remonstrated against the acquiescence of the American
executive in this exposition of the law of nations, in such terms as
he was accustomed to employ; and on the 9th of July, in the moment of
the contest respecting the Little Democrat, he had written a letter
demanding an immediate and positive answer to the question, what
measures the President had taken, or would take, to cause the American
flag to be respected? He observed, that "as the English would continue
to carry off, with impunity, French citizens, and French property
found on board of American vessels, without embarrassing themselves
with the philosophical principles proclaimed by the President of the
United States," and as the embarrassing engagements of France deprived
her of the privileges of making reprisals at every point, it was
necessary for the interests of both nations, quickly to agree on
taking other measures.
Not receiving an immediate answer, Mr. Genet, towards the close of
July, again addressed the secretary of state on the subject. In this
extraordinary letter, after complaining of the insults offered to the
American flag by seizing the property of Frenchmen confided to its
protection, he added, "your political rights are counted for nothing.
In vain do the principles of neutrality establish, that friendly
vessels make friendly goods; in vain, sir, does the President of the
United States endeavour, by his proclamation, to reclaim the
observation of this maxim; in vain does the desire of preserving peace
lead to sacrifice the interests of France to that of the moment; in
vain does the thirst of riches preponderate over honour in the
political balance of America: all this management, all this
condescension, all this humility, end in nothing; our enemies laugh at
it; and the French, too confident, are punished for having believed
that the American nation had a flag, that they had some respect for
their laws, some conviction of their strength, and entertained some
sentiment of their dignity. It is not possible for me, sir, to paint
to you all my sensibility at this scandal which tends to the
diminution of your commerce, to the oppression of ours, and to the
debasement and vilification of republics. It is for Americans to make
known their generous indignation at this outrage; and I must confine
myself to demand of you a second time, to inform me of the measures
which you have taken, in order to obtain restitution of the property
plundered from my fellow citizens, under the protection of your flag.
It is from our government they have learnt that the Americans were our
allies, that the American nation was sovereign, and that they knew how
to make themselves respected. It is then under the very same sanction
of the French nation, that they have confided their property and
persons to the safeguard of the American flag; and on her, they submit
the care of causing those rights to be respected. But if our fellow
citizens have been deceived, if you are not in a condition to maintain
the sovereignty of your people, speak; we have guaranteed it when
slaves, we shall be able to render it formidable, having become
freemen."
On the day preceding the date of this offensive letter, the secretary
of state had answered that of the 9th of July; and, without noticing
the unbecoming style in which the decision of the executive was
demanded, had avowed and defended the opinion, that "by the general
law of nations, the goods of an enemy found in the vessels of a friend
are lawful prize." This fresh insult might therefore be passed over in
silence.
While a hope remained that the temperate forbearance of the executive,
and the unceasing manifestations of its friendly dispositions towards
the French republic, might induce the minister of that nation to
respect the rights of the United States, and to abstain from
violations of their sovereignty, an anxious solicitude not to impair
the harmony which he wished to maintain between the two republics, had
restrained the President from adopting those measures respecting Mr.
Genet, which the conduct of that gentleman required. He had seen a
foreign minister usurp within the territories of the United States
some of the most important rights of sovereignty, and persist, after
the prohibition of the government, in the exercise of those rights. In
asserting this extravagant claim, so incompatible with national
independence, the spirit in which it originated had been pursued, and
the haughty style of a superior had been substituted for the
respectful language of diplomacy. He had seen the same minister
undertake to direct the civil government; and to pronounce, in
opposition to the decisions of the executive, in what departments of
the constitution of the United States had placed certain great
national powers. To render this state of things more peculiarly
critical and embarrassing, the person most instrumental in producing
it, had, from his arrival, thrown himself into the arms of the people,
stretched out to receive him; and was emboldened by their favour, to
indulge the hope of succeeding in his endeavours, either to overthrow
their government, or to bend it to his will. But the full experiment
had now been made; and the result was a conviction not to be resisted,
that moderation would only invite additional injuries, and that the
present insufferable state of things could be terminated only by
procuring the removal of the French minister, or by submitting to
become, in his hands, the servile instrument of hostility against the
enemies of his nation. Information was continually received from every
quarter, of fresh aggressions on the principles established by the
government; and, while the executive was thus openly disregarded and
contemned, the members of the administration were reproached in all
the papers of an active and restless opposition, as the violators of
the national faith, the partisans of monarchy, and the enemies of
liberty and of France.
The unwearied efforts of that department to preserve that station in
which the various treaties in existence had placed the nation, were
incessantly calumniated[8] as infractions of those treaties, and
ungrateful attempts to force the United States into the war against
France.
[Footnote 8: See note No. IV. at the end of the volume.]
The judgment of the President was never hastily formed; but, once made
up, it was seldom to be shaken. Before the last letter of Mr. Genet
was communicated to him, he seems to have determined to take decisive
measures respecting that minister.
[Sidenote: Rules laid down by the executive in relation to the powers
at war within the ports of the United States.]
That the course to be pursued might be well considered, the secretary
of state was requested to collect all the correspondence with him, to
be laid before a cabinet council about to be held for the purpose of
adjusting a complete system of rules to be observed by the
belligerents in the ports of the United States. These rules were
discussed at several meetings, and finally, on the third of August,
received the unanimous approbation of the cabinet. They[9] evidence
the settled purpose of the executive, faithfully to observe all the
national engagements, and honestly to perform the duties of that
neutrality in which the war found them, and in which those engagements
left them free to remain.
[Footnote 9: See note No. V. at the end of the volume.]
[Sidenote: The president requests the recall of Genet.]
In the case of the minister of the French republic, it was unanimously
agreed that a letter should be written to Mr. Morris, the minister of
the United States at Paris, stating the conduct of Mr. Genet, resuming
the points of difference which had arisen between the government and
that gentleman, assigning the reasons for the opinion of the former,
desiring the recall of the latter, and directing that this letter,
with those which had passed between Mr. Genet and the secretary of
state, should be laid before the executive of the French government.
To a full view of the transactions of the executive with Mr. Genet,
and an ample justification of its measures, this able diplomatic
performance adds assurances of unvarying attachment to France,
expressed in such terms of unaffected sensibility, as to render
it impossible to suspect the sincerity of the concluding
sentiment--"that, after independence and self-government, there was
nothing America more sincerely wished than perpetual friendship with
them."
An adequate idea of the passion it excited in Mr. Genet, who received
the communication in September, at New York, can be produced only by a
perusal of his letter addressed, on that occasion, to the secretary of
state. The asperity of his language was not confined to the President,
whom he still set at defiance, whom he charged with transcending the
limits prescribed by the constitution, and of whose accusation before
congress he spoke as an act of justice "which the American people,
which the French people, which all free people were interested to
reclaim:" nor to those "gentlemen who had been painted to him so often
as aristocrats, partisans of monarchy, partisans of England, and
consequently enemies of the principles which all good Frenchmen had
embraced with a religious enthusiasm." Its bitterness was also
extended to the secretary of state himself, whom he had been induced
to consider as his personal friend, and who had, he said, "initiated
him into mysteries which had inflamed his hatred against all those who
aspire to an absolute power."