CHAPTER I.

Firſt ſeſſion of the fourth Congreſs.—Reſolution propoſed by Mr. S. Smith for checking the Britiſh treaty.—Hints reſpecting that paper.—Attempts to involve America in a French war.—Sketch of the ſtate of France, by Edmund Burke.—Contraſt between her and the United States.—Scanty pay of the Federal army.—Fatal effects of a rupture with France.—Camillus.—His miſ • akes as to the ſtate of Europe.—Mr. Pinckney.—His opinion of the advantage of delaying a Britiſh treaty.—Attempts to irritate France.—Extreme danger of doing ſo.—Real authors of the miſunderſtanding.— Montgaillard's prediction.—Notice to the patrons of a certain gazette.—Concluding remarks.

AT the beginning of the year 1796, the fourth Congreſs of the United States were in their firſt ſeſſion. On the 4th of January, Mr. Samuel Smith laid on the table of the Repreſentatives a reſolution in theſe words: That from and after the _____ day of _____ it ſhall not be lawful for any foreign ſhip or veſſel to land in the territories of the United States any goods, wares, or merchandize other than the produce of that country to which the ſhip or veſſel belongs. This propoſal was profeſſedly pointed at the treaty of commerce with Britain, which had been ſigned at London on the 19th of November, 1794, by Mr. John Jay, as envoy on the part of America. Mr. S. Smith oppoſed that inſtrument. He ſaid in Congreſs, that, within two years, it might be expected to deſtroy the ſhipping of this country. The fifteenth article of the treaty has theſe words: Nor ſhall any prohibition be impoſed on the exportation or the importation of any articles to or from the territories of the two parties reſpectively, which ſhall not equally extend to all other nations. Thus the reſolution was in ſtrict harmony with the conditions of the treaty; yet, if the United States ſhall ever carry it into execution, the treaty itſelf will, in ſome meaſure, be at an end. Britain could find a thouſand effective ways of expreſſing her diſguſt at this regulation, which would incommode her much more than the other maritime ſtates of Europe. Still ſhe would have leſs reaſon to complain than any nation in the world, becauſe the reſolution is grounded on the principle aſſumed in the Engliſh act of navigationOn the 2d of September, 1793, the French Convention paſſed a ſimilar act. Its operation is only ſuſpended on account of the war. By the firſt article, no foreign commodities can be imported into France, but in French veſſels, or in thoſe of the country which produces them, or of the country from which they are uſually firſt exported. By the ſecond, no foreign veſſel can convey from one port of France or her colonies to another, any of their produce. Third, every French veſſel muſt have her officers and three-fourths of her crew Frenchmen. It is amazing that the court of Verſailles did not adopt this rule an hundred years ago. It will, in a ſhort time, double or quadruple the number of French ſeamen. Were other omens averted, this law is an epitaph on the naval ſupremacy of Britain. See an eloquent report by BARRERE..

The treaty in queſtion has produced many volumes of elaborate inveſtigation. Since the new conſtitution, no other ſubject has excited ſo general an effort of the ingenuity, the eloquence, and the paſſions of America. It was this emergency which marked out the preſent year as more eminently deſerving of hiſtorical notice. The matter itſelf daily grows in importance, as this tranſaction has brought the United States to the verge of a French war. Few have leiſure to read, and ſtill fewer have information or even capacity adequate to comprehend a great part of the complicated arguments employed for or againſt it. To attempt a detail of the topics on each ſide would be a voluminous, and by this time, almoſt an uſeleſs undertaking. The public has already become ſatiated with eſſays, letters, memorials, replies, obſervations, features, reports, addreſſes, views, vindications, defences, paragraphs, reſolutions, petitions, explanations, proceedings of town meetings, motions, and ſpeeches. Within the ſhort ſpace of eighteen months, the argument has entirely ſhifted its place. The ſtreſs of the debate can be no longer about whether the Britiſh treaty is advantageous or prejudicial to American commerce; but whether it is worth preſerving at the riſk of a French war. That the Directory of Paris have this object ſomewhat in their eye is moſt likely. The recall of their ambaſſador, citizen Adet, was a broad intimation of their deſign. In Europe, ſuch a ſtep is the profeſſed ſignal for hoſtilities. It is as certain that a party in this country are ſolicitous of driving the United States into that conteſt. If a croud of other evidences could be forgotten, their abſence is ſupplied by the letter from ſecretary Pickering to Mr. Pinckney our ambaſſador to the French republic. At the ſame time, attempts are conſtantly made to decry the power of France. When a French general chances to retreat, the newſpapers of the party teem with exultation. The republic at large is invariably repreſented as a rendezvous of ruffians, a nuiſance to civilized ſociety. It is impoſſible that the French ſhould fail of being offended at ſuch unprovoked inſolence. They hire no gazettes in Paris to revile America. They do not fill libraries in cenſuring our political characters. Yet our federal prints attack, on every occaſion, both the republic and all her friends, in the moſt vulgar ſtyle of abuſe. Even the miniſterial prints of London, the organs of Roſe and Dundas, are, by many degrees, leſs inſolent in their invective, and leſs brutal in their reproachFor inſtance, a late correſpondent in the Gazette of the United States writes thus: That contemptible and drunken vagabond TOM PAINE, who is notoriouſly deſtitute of every honeſt principle, religious, moral, or political, has crowned his career of impudence and falſehood, &c.—This creature of avaricious poverty and deranged ambition, would ſet the world on fire, if he could find ſixpence by the fight, and advocate the climate and government of hell to be popular there.—He was, at the commencement of our troubles, a decided friend to the meaſures of Great Britain. After the war, his firſt attack was upon the tranquility of Great Britain: but here he was diſgracefully defeated. [It will be time enough to ſpeak of his defeat when the bank of England begins to pay its notes in gold and ſilver. The preſent paper-money plan is like trying to croſs the Atlantic in a cork jacket.] I regret there was found any man in the United States ſo baſe and hoſtile to the peace and honour of his country, as to publiſh this letter of infamy; the letter from Paine to general Waſhington, printed by Mr. Bache. The peace of the country runs no hazard, and as little awaits the honour of the general. On the 14th of December, 1796, Dr. Ames obſerved in Congreſs, that the character is fixed in hiſtory! Paine, therefore, has come too late..

Before going farther, we ſhall glance at the character and actual ſtate of the French, whom Mr. Pickering and his friends are ſo anxious to degrade. In preparing for a quarrel it is eſſential to be acquainted with the talents and reſources of your antagoniſt. The ſituation of our citizens, thinly diſperſed over an immenſe continent, affords a peculiar avenue to deception. It has been employed with diligence againſt the republic. On a topic of ſuch univerſal Importance candid explanation can hardly be tedious. No better authority will be required than that of Edmund Burke. Two letters from him on this head have been recently printed. A few detached ſentences, extracted from whole ſheets to the ſame purpoſe, will place the reſources of France in a juſt light, and ſhew what the United States have to expect in a conteſt with her. Out of the tomb of the murdered monarchy in France, has ariſen a vaſt, tremendous, unformed ſpectre, in a far more terrific guiſe than any which ever yet overpowered the imagination and ſubdued the fortitude of man.—The republic has actually conquered the fineſt parts of Europe, has diſtreſſed, diſunited, deranged, and broke to pieces all the reſt.—We have not in the ſlighteſt degree, impaired the ſtrength of the common enemy, (France), in any one of thoſe points in which his particular force conſiſts.—The regicide has received our advances with ſcornThe letters were publiſhed before Malmeſbury went to Paris.!— If things ſhould give us the comparative happineſs of a ſtruggle, I ſhall be found dying by the ſide of Mr. Pitt.—Spain is a province of the jacobin empire.—Her crown is a fief of regicide.— We have not conſidered, as we ought, the dreadful energy of a ſtate in which the property has nothing to do with the government.—The diſcovery is dreadful, the mine exhauſtleſs.—A republic of a character the moſt reſtleſs, the moſt enterpriſing, the moſt impious, the moſt fierce and bloody, the moſt hypocritical and perfidious, the moſt bold and daring that has ever been ſeen, or indeed that can be conceived to exiſt!

Mr. Burke is far from being ſingular in his panic. Major Cartwright, in his work, entitled, The Commonwealth in Danger, ſhews the folly of England depending for ſafety, ſolely on her fleet. The French may give battle by ſea, be defeated, and loſe twenty ſhips of the line, without material injury. They know that the Engliſh muſt be crippled and return to port. The road is then open, and they diſembark in Britain what troops they pleaſe. The major adds, that, previous to the victory of the 1ſt of June, 1794, admiral Howe was reviled for not beating the French fleet; but even then, he only did ſo becauſe the French came purpoſely in his way. They alſo, by ſacrificing a few ſhips of the line, gained their object. This was to ſecure the arrival of an American convoy with proviſions. Arthur Young, a third writer of eminence, has demonſtrated the depth of his deſpair by the following propoſal; viz. that England ſhould raiſe an army of five hundred thouſand men; and that they, as well as their officers, muſt all be men of property. He ſays that nothing elſe can ſave the country from a French conqueſt. This was above two years agoSee An Idea of the preſent State of France, printed ſometime previous to March, 1795.. Theſe authorities confirm the lamentations of Mr. Burke. As to his picture of what France can perform, we may judge by what ſhe hath ſuffered. In March, 1795, Dumourier printed at Hamburgh, a very intereſting pamphlet on the ſtate of the war. He therein ſays, that, in December, 1794, a report was laid before the Convention of the number of ſoldiers whom France had loſt by her three campaigns. They were ſtated at ſix hundred and fifty thouſand. Dumourier adds, that this computation was by one-third part leſs than the truth; and that, including emigration, famine, and the ſcaffold, France had then loſt twelve hundred thouſand men, in the flower of life, beſides aged perſons, women and children. Compared with this havoc of the human ſpecies, the waſte of any other modern war is but trifling. The king of Pruſſia eſtimates that the war of 1756, which laſted ſeven years, deſtroyed, in the whole, and in all parts of the world, only about a million of ſoldiers. To the twelve hundred thouſand Frenchmen we may ſafely add eight hundred thouſand from the allied armies; ſince the latter were equally numerous with the republicans, and beſides were beaten. We have thus about two millions of deaths, in two years and four months, or above eight hundred thouſand per annum; ſo that the preſent war is at leaſt five times more deſtructive than that of 1756.

No other nation or government that the world ever ſaw, could have ſupported ſuch enormous loſſes as the French have endured; yet their ſtrength appears undiminiſhed, and every campaign adds to the catalogue of their conqueſts. It is not leſs than madneſs for a party in America to be hiring newſpapers to revile ſuch a terrible people. They are not only moſt formidable from their phyſical ſtrength, but from the peculiar ſtructure of their government. It is ſyſtematic; ſays Mr. Burke, it is ſimple to its principle; it has unity and conſiſtency in perfection. [Congreſs have refuſed to impoſe a land tax. Nay ſome of them, with ſurpriſing hardineſs, declare ſuch a meaſure impracticable, though land taxes are at this moment paid in perhaps every ſtate of the union. Pennſylvania has three or four. Oppoſed to this frivolity, this puppet-ſhew of legiſlation, obſerve what Burke tells of France:] In that country, entirely to cut off a branch of commerce, to extinguiſh a manufacture, to deſtroy the circulation of money, to violate credit, to ſuſpend the courſe of agriculture, even to burn a city or to lay waſte a province of their own, does not coſt them a moment's anxiety.—Going ſtraight forward to its end, unappalled by peril, unchecked by remorſe, deſpiſing all common maxims and all common means, that hideous phantom overpowered thoſe who could not believe it poſſible ſhe could at all exiſt!

This is the ſort of enemy whom we may chance to encounter, as the price of the Britiſh treaty, and the epiſtle of Mr. Pickering. When in parliament, Mr. Burke was conſidered as the beſt informed member of the Houſe of Commons. He has long been the oracle of Engliſh ariſtocracy. He is a penſioner to Pitt, and would be ſorry to overcharge the picture of French power.

It is ſerving America, to make a ſhort compariſon between the relative force of the two nations. The French, in only four years, have overcome the German empire, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the Netherlands, comprehending not leſs than fifty millions of people. The United States, white, black and yellow, have not five millions. The French have drubbed three Britiſh kingdoms, with their population of fourteen millions, and cruſhed numerous conſpiracies and rebellions in the heart of their country. The revolt of La Vendee alone coſt as much fighting as paſſed in America during the revolution. Pichegru, in one campaign, did what Marlborough, though conſtantly victorious, could not accompliſh in ten.

In 1794, France maintained nearly eleven hundred thouſand fighting men, and was, in 1795, to have ſixty thouſand cannoneersCarey's edition of Guthrie's Geography, vol. ii. p. 699.. In 1797, America, by the report of Oliver WolcotP. 18., was to require an army of three thouſand five hundred and twenty-four men, including officers, cadets, artificers, and twenty-ſeven ſurgeons. Even this handful coſt infinite haggling in CongreſsThe particulars will appear in the next volume.; and the greateſt anxiety how they were to be paid. The French are the beſt appointed troops, perhaps, in the world. From an immenſe diſtance, they have been often tranſported in waggons to the field of battle. The pay of American regulars is abſolute beggary. The privates have a ration per day worth twenty cents, or ſeventy two dollars and eighty cents a year. Their pay is four dollars per month, or forty-eight dollars a year. An annual ſuit of clothes are valued at twenty-five dollars, ſo that the accounts ſtands thus;     Dolls. Cts. Rations,   72 80 Pay,   48   Clothes,   25     Total, 145 80

Every man who can handle an axe may gain double the ſum, and have his victuals into the bargain. For ſuch a pittance our ſoldiers, in war, penetrate the wilderneſs to fight an enemy who give no quarter. In peace they are cooped up in garriſons from whence they dare not ſtray above a gun ſhot, and where they have been often in the utmoſt diſtreſs for neceſſaries. Thouſands of horſes, in attempting to carry ſupplies through the deſart, have conſumed their loads, and died of hungerMr. S. Smith ſtated this, laſt winter, in Congreſs.. General Wayne, it is ſaid, loſt his life at lake Erie, for want of two ounces of caſtor oil.

Such is the preſent balance by land between the regular forces of France and the United States. They are as one man to three or four hundred. Our expences equal or exceed our revenues. Congreſs have refuſed to attempt a land tax. All other ſources are about exhauſted; and a war with France, by the ruin of our commerce, would certainly cut off a great part of thoſe ariſing from it. Nine parts in ten of the public taxes proceed from the duties on impoſt and tonnage. In the land tax debates of Congreſs, laſt winter, Mr. Harper ſtrangely ſaid, that, if at war with France, our trade would not, in his opinion, ſuffer more than it does already. He inferred that our revenues would not, by that event, be materially reduced.

If we look at the ſea there is no proſpect of ſucceſs in a conteſt with France. We have on the ſtocks three frigates. Of their navy an exact account cannot here be given, but it has, for a century, been the ſecond in Europe. It lately was ſaid to contain three hundred and thirty-ſeven veſſels. An hundred and twenty one were ſhips of the line. Of theſe the leaſt carry ſeventy four gunsCarey's edition of Guthrie's Geography, vol. ii. p. 696.. They would, in a conteſt with America, be ſeconded by Spain, Portugal, and Holland. Againſt this immenſity of numbers, our Lilliput ſquadron would be like three piſmires in the gullet of a crocodile, or three grains of chaff in the charge of a ſix pounder. But then our privateers can deſtroy their commerce! Yes. And they ſhall deſtroy ours. Thus, as Henry Fielding ſays, we ſell a blind horſe and receive a bad note in payment. Our ſeaport towns, from Portland to Savannah, will be ſucceſſively transformed into a range of bonfires. The ſhutting up of the Mediterranean and the weſtern waters would compoſe but an atom in the Alps of our calamity. In a ſtruggle with France alone, unſupported by her allies, we could not muſter a tenth part of her force either by land or ſea. Mr. Pitt computed, in the Houſe of Commons, that the campaign of 1794, coſt the republic an hundred and fifty millions ſterling. Ours with the Wyandots were eſtimated at a million of dollars yearly. The burden produced infinite diſcontent, and an earneſt deſire of peace. France, at an annual charge three or ſix hundred times greater, continues to fight and to conquer, to trample every enemy, and to dictate the terms of every peace. To contend, if we can help it, with this republican Typhoeus would, in raſhneſs, reſemble the laſt ſtruggles of Jeruſalem and Palmira. On the altars of Titus and Aurelian we might read with probability the proſpect before us.

As a political writer, Alexander Hamilton holds the ſame rank in America that Burke enjoys in England; and it would be injuring the logic of his party not to give his opinion. Camillus, No. vii. was publiſhed in the ſummer of 1795, and contains a ſurvey of Europe extremely different from that of Mr. Burke. It cannot be denied that ſhe (Britain) is triumphant on the ocean; that the acquiſitions which ſhe has made upon France are hitherto greater than thoſe which France has made upon her. The reduction of two or three iſlands in the Weſt Indies is not worth notice in this conteſt, where the independence of Britain is in imminent danger. When No. vii. was written, the French had conquered Holland, and the Auſtrian Netherlands. Holland, ſays Mr. Burke, is to England a matter of value ineſtimable. Letter I. By the conqueſt of the low countries, France forms a ſemicircle around the Britiſh iſlands. Hence, while the fleet of England lies wind-bound at Spithead, or is in any other given ſituation, the French, by taking an oppoſite point of the compaſs, can, at their leiſure, diſembark an army on the coaſt of Britain or Ireland. For excluding them, an hundred ſhips of the line and an hundred canoes would be of equal importance. This, by the way, points out the folly of a favourite Britiſh maxim, that he who is maſter by ſea is maſter by land. While the Netherlands, therefore, continue a part of the republic, it is frivolous to ſpeak of Britiſh conqueſts in the Eaſt or Weſt Indies, or indeed any where elſe. They ſignify no more "Than Caeſar's arm, when Caeſar's head is off."

If, on the one hand, ſhe (Britain) owes an immenſe debt, on the other ſhe poſſeſſes an immenſe credit, which there is no ſymptom of being impaired. Britiſh credit has become, in a Britiſh mind, an article of faith, and is no longer an object of reaſon. [Thus Camillus tells us that the creditors of England are fools. The proſpects of a merchant are not very hopeful, when no man of prudence will truſt him. Yet ſuch is the condition of England as deſcribed by its advocate.] Her government poſſeſſes, internally, as much vigor, and has as much national ſupport, as it perhaps ever had at any former period of her hiſtory. Alarmed by the unfortunate exceſſes in France, moſt men of property cling to the government, and carry with them the great bulk of the nation, almoſt the whole of the farming intereſt, and much the greateſt proportion of other induſtrious claſſes.

Mr. Burke has the advantage of being on the ſpot; and he diſſents entirely from Mr. Hamilton. He eſtimates the number of Britiſh citizens who think for themſelves, at four hundred thouſand. Of theſe he computes that eighty thouſand are pure jacobins, utterly incapable of amendment.— On theſe, no reaſon, no argument, no example, no venerable authority, can have the ſlighteſt influence. They deſire a change, and they will have it if they can.—This minority is great and formidable. I do not know whether, if I aimed at the total overthrow of a kingdom, I ſhould wiſh to be encumbered with a larger body of partiſans Letter I. The London Courier, of the 26th of December, 1796, affirms, that theſe two letters were publiſhed by the connivance of the miniſter. Burke has penſions to the effective amount of about four thouſand pounds ſterling, ſo that this ſuppoſition becomes highly probable. Thus the authority of Pitt is ſuperadded to that of Burke, and they explode the opinion of Camillus. Each ſucceeding campaign is an additional nail driven into the head of monarchy. Every new tax makes a number of new enemies. Here we perceive three diſtinct cauſes for a Britiſh revolution. Theſe are, a ſuperior and implacable enemy on the continent, whoſe local poſition makes a Britiſh navy uſeleſs; a national debt, which by this time approaches to four hundred millions ſterling, and of which the very intereſt can be paid only in paper; and a party within the country whoſe enmity cannot be extinguiſhed, and who, by the confeſſion of their enemies, are abundantly numerous for the deſtruction of any government in the world. Among her allies, ſays Camillus, are the two greateſt powers of Europe, France excepted; namely, Ruſſia and Auſtria. Spain and Sardinia make a common cauſe with her. The two latter have been turned by France into mere ſtepping ſtones in her path to the dominion of Europe. Ruſſia never gave any help, more or leſs, to the crowned coalition. Catharine is now dead; and her ſon has declined any concern with it. But even if he did ſend an army to the Rhine, Britain would be obliged to pay them. As for Auſtria, Jaſper Wilſon, in his celebrated letter to Mr. Pitt, ſays, that, before the preſent war began, the Emperor was offering nine per cent for money, ſo that by this time he muſt be as much entangled in debt as England herſelf. Nothing but arbitrary power could enable him to pay even a ſingle regiment. This will not hold out long. She (France) cannot, without great difficulty, from their geographical poſition, make any farther acquiſitions upon the territories of Auſtria. Carnot is a better geographer than Mr. Hamilton. Since this prediction, Moreau and Jourdan have penetrated into the heart of Germany. They have ſubdued a multitude of its princes, and were within a ſmall matter of reaching Vienna. As to Italy, Buonaparte has eclipſed every commander ſince Teleſinus and Sylla engaged under the walls of Rome. Hear what Burke ſays: The over-running of Lombardy, the ſubjugation of Piedmont, the poſſeſſion of its impregnable fortreſſes, the ſeizing on all the neutral ſtates of Italy, our expulſion from Leghorn, inſtances renewed for our expulſion from Genoa, Spain rendered ſubject to them and hoſtile to us, Portugal bent under the yoke, half the empire over-run and ravagedLetter I.. This is the picture of 1796. Yet, in reliance on the political foreſight of Camillus, a numerous party in the United States have filled, and continue to fill their newſpapers with ſcurrilous calumnies againſt the French nation. They inſulted her ambaſſador, even after he had been recalled; and, as if this had not been enough to enſure a rupture, Mr. Pickering ſent a letter to Mr. Pinckney in France which is more in the tone of a libel than a diplomatic paper. When the blind lead the blind, we know the ſequel. With regard to Europe, Mr. Hamilton is, in all his views, miſtaken. This lamp of political wiſdom, has conducted America to the edge of a precipice from which General Waſhington ſaw fit to retire. It is of conſequence to expoſe the ſophiſtry of Mr. Hamilton, that our enlightened citizens may ſee by what ignorance they have been led into the preſent criſis. We ſhall, on this account, pick up two or three others of his miſtakes.

"Britain and her poſſeſſions are eſſentially ſafe," ſays Camillus, while ſhe maintains a decided maritime ſuperiority. Burke, in one of his letters, ſpeaking of the war of 1689, ſays, that in two years three thouſand veſſels were taken from the Engliſh trade. In every war, the commerce of Britain ſuffers prodigiouſly. The preſent ſtate of the Weſt Indies ſhews that a ſuperior fleet cannot always preſerve her iſlands. Witneſs the recapture of Guadaloupe, the conflagration of St. Vincents, Grenada, and St. Lucia! But the expedition of Hoche, to Ireland, is the beſt refutation of Mr. Hamilton. Some people ſpeak of the Britiſh navy as if it could be preſent every where at the ſame time. If twenty-five thouſand Frenchmen had diſembarked at Bantry bay, a march of two days would have brought them to Corke, a city as large as Philadelphia, diſaffected to government, and beſides entirely defenceleſs. Another week would be ſufficient for reaching Dublin. The temper of its citizens appears by a letter from the viceroy. He boaſts of having a militia of two thouſand barriſters, attornies, merchants, and ſuch people. But theſe men would not mount guard, if they durſt employ the poorer claſſes to do ſo for them. Dublin has between two and three hundred thouſand inhabitants, and if the bulk of them had been well affected, the militia might have amounted to twenty thouſand. His lordſhip ſays that the whole militia of the iſland are about twenty-five thouſand. This is a pitiful portion in a population of four millions

His lordſhip tells us, that when the ſoldiers went off to Bantry Bay, in queſt of the French, he granted their wives four pence per day till they returned. This was certainly a ſplendid allowance, and well worth fighting for. In a pamphlet printed in 1794, ſir Henry Clinton ſays, that the army is now waiting to receive a very ſmall ſhare of plunder taken at the ſiege of Charleſtown!

The great take care of themſelves at leaſt. The hiſtory of The Crimes of the Kings of England, relates that the family of Mr. Pitt enjoy places and penſions to the amount of eighty-one thouſand pounds ſterling a year.

. It is hard to ſay whether the catholics of Connaught or the proteſtants of Ulſter would feel the greateſt impatience to join an invader. Thus the left arm of England would be cut off without, perhaps, even the honour of a battle. This is the eſſential ſafety that Mr. Hamilton ſpeaks about.

In defiance of geography and hiſtory, Camillus next endeavours to undervalue the conqueſt of the Netherlands. France muſt be ſtill more fatigued and exhauſted even than her adverſaries. Her acquiſitions cannot materially vary this concluſion; the Low Countries muſt have been pretty well emptied before they fell into her hands. He has more to the ſame effect. They are inhabited by about ſix millions of induſtrious people, among the richeſt in the world. The acquiſition was of immenſe importance. If Bruſſels and Amſterdam had been reduced to aſhes, and if a famine like thoſe produced by Britiſh monopolies in Bengal, had whitened the whole country with the bones of its inhabitants, Camillus might have ſome reaſon for this inſinuation. The French did not think that Holland was emptied, as appears from their firſt requiſition. Among other articles, they demanded two hundred thouſand quintals of wheat, ſeventy-five millions of pounds weight of hay, fifty millions ditto of oats, and hundred and fifty thouſand pairs of ſhoes, two hundred thouſand ſhirts, with ſtraw, breeches, coats, waiſtcoats, overalls, hats, and ſo forth, all in one month, beſides twelve thouſand oxen to be furniſhed within two months. This enumeration ſhews the inaccuracy of Camillus, and what may be expected if the French diſembark at Mud iſland.

The Britiſh government maintains a proud and diſtant reſerve, repels every idea of peace, and inflexibly purſues the path of war. Mr. Burke's two letters are half filled with lamentations for the debaſement of England. They hold out a ludicrous refutation of Alexander Hamilton. The regicides were the firſt, ſaith St. Edmund, to declare war. We are the firſt to ſue for peace.— The ſpeech from the throne in the opening of the ſeſſion of 1795, threw out oglings and glances of tenderneſs. Leſt this coquetting ſhould ſeem too cold and ambiguous, the violent paſſion for a relation to the regicides, produced, &c. This is the proud and diſtant reſerve deſcribed by Camillus.— I do not know a more mortifying ſpectacle than to ſee the aſſembled majeſty of the crowned heads of Europe waiting as patient ſuitors in the anti-chamber of Regicide. They wait, it ſeems, until the ſanguinary tyrant, Carnot, ſhall have ſnorted away the indigeſted fumes of the blood of his ſovereign. The remainder of this ſcene is admirably painted; but our envoy, Mr. Pinckney, is not, it appears, admitted even to the anti-chamber. He has been deſired to quit the country. At this ſecond humiliation it might not have been amiſs to pauſe and not to ſquander away the fund of our ſubmiſſions. A report from the Committee of Agriculture at London affirms, that the lands lying waſte in Britain, could be encreaſed in value by twenty millions ſterling a year! They deferred this acquiſition to manufacture French kings.— At Baſle, it was thought proper that Great Britain ſhould appear at this market, and bid with the reſt for the mercy of the people-king. This is that republic which the American emiſſaries of England are ſo buſy in provoking.

Mr. Burke then relates two fruitleſs applications made by England, the one at Berlin, by our friend Robert Hammond, and the other at Paris through the Daniſh ambaſſador. Both were rejected. It might be thought that here, at length, we had touched the bottom of humiliation; our lead was brought up covered with mud. But in the loweſt deep, a lower deep was to open for us ſtill more profound abyſſes of diſgrace and ſhame. However, i • we leaped!.—The queſtion is not now how we are to be affected with it in regard to dignity. That is gone. I ſhall ſay no more about it. Light lie the earth on the aſhes of Engliſh pride Britain has good reaſon to be tired of this war. A late London newſpaper ſays, that, from 1775 to 1782, incluſive, there were three thouſand ſeven hundred and forty-two bankruptcies; and from 1793 to 1796, incluſive, three thouſand ſix hundred and eight. Thus four years of the preſent quarrel have done as much harm to the mercantile credit as eight years of the laſt.!

We can now anſwer the query of Camillus. How happens it that France with all her victories has not yet been able to extort peace! She never aſked for it. It is probable, ſays he, the negociation (Jay's treaty) received its firſt impreſſion and even its general outline anterior to the principal part of the diſaſters ſuſtained by the coaleſced powers in the courſe of the laſt campaign (1794). If Jay had been warranted, as he was not, to make a treaty ſuch as he did, its firſt impreſſion would have been ſketched in America before he ſet out. But, as lately obſervedAmerican Annual Regiſter, Chapter 8., the time choſen for making it was highly improper. Camillus, in ancient or modern annals, will hardly find that, with views merely commerical, any nation ever choſe ſo hazardous a time for entering into a treaty. This conſideration alone ſhould have laid the bargain on its back, at leaſt till the concluſion of a peace. It was juſt like building a houſe cloſe to another which is on fire. During the reſidence of Jay in England, every poſt brought him news of French victories. Hence, even if the outline of his paper had been ſketched before the conqueſt of Flanders, that deciſive event ſhould have taught him to make a pauſe. A ſuſpenſion of ſigning the treaty for only three months could not have ruined America. Theſe things were as huge as high Olympus. They pierced the deafeſt ear. They thruſt themſelves on the dulleſt underſtanding.

The letter of Mr. Pinckney above referred to clearly admits the advantages that might have been gained by delay. The buſineſs, upon the whole, ſays he, has been concluded more beneficially for us than I had any hope we could obtain by negociation ſix months ago, and, in my opinion, places us in a more advantageous ſituation than we ſhould have been in by becoming parties to the war. If ſo much had been acquired by one delay of ſix months, reaſon pointed out a ſecond poſtponement. Britain has been ever ſince going down hill, and had the affair been to begin at this time, we might have had any terms that could be deſired. The latter part of the above citation obliquely implies that America had no choice between a treaty and a war. The ſuppoſition gives a poor ſpecimen of the writer's diſcernment. How gladly ſome people would be at getting into war appears from the Aurora of the 5th of April 1797.— A correſpondent in the Centinel, ſays, that the people of this country are not YET ripe for an alliance offenſive and defenſive with Great Britain, but ſuggeſts that the event is probable. This paſſage points more clearly than uſual at the ultimate purpoſe of a certain party. If the alliance above recommended were to take place, the beſt fortune that we could look for would be that of Ulyſſes in the den of the Cyclops; we ſhould be reſerved as the laſt morſel. If any motive can drive out of our fancy a Britiſh alliance, it is to read the recent fate of the allies of England, as deſcribed by Mr. Burke. They (the French) have hitherto conſtantly declined any other than a treaty with a ſingle power.—In that light the regicide power finding each of them inſulated and unprotected, with great facility gives the law to them all. By this ſyſtem, for the preſent, an incurable diſtruſt is ſown amongſt the confederates; and in future all alliance is rendered impracticable. It is thus they have treated with Pruſſia, with Spain, with Sardinia, with Bavaria, with the eccleſiaſtical ſtates, with Saxony; and here we ſee them refuſe to treat with Great Britain in any other mode. Suppoſe that we ſhall have entered into the alliance recommended by the Centinel, and that Britain, within ſix months, patches up a ſeparate peace, while Hoche's huſſars are whetting their ſabres in the barracks of Dublin. America would then make but a ſorry figure in a ſolitary negociation. Beſides, we cannot truſt our ally. This appears by an extract from the journals of Congreſs, in the year 1779. "We are contending, ſay they, againſt a kingdom crumbling to pieces How does this agree with Camillus?, a nation without public virtue, and a people ſold and betrayed by their own repreſentatives; againſt a prince governed by his paſſions, and a miniſtry without conſiſtency or wiſdom; againſt armies half paid, and generals half truſted [theſe were two flagrant falſehoods], againſt a government equal only (obſerve this only) to plans of plunder, conflagration, and murder, a government noted for its violations of the rights of religion, juſtice, humanity, and mankind, and revolting from the protection of Providence!"—"Our armies in Flanders ſwore terribly," ſaid uncle Toby, "but nothing like this!" As for Providence, the people of England held frequent faſt days for military ſucceſs. This delicate ſpecimen of the mob-ſtile was part of a letter from Congreſs to their conſtituents, and was draughted, at their deſire, by Mr. John Jay. They ſhould have ſaid nothing about half-paid armies, till they had been half able to pay their own. Several continental officers, on caſting up the difference between dirty paſteboard and hard ſilver, found, during the war, that they were fighting for about one cent per dayThis is affirmed by a gentleman, in Philadelphia who was one of them.. Yet they continued to ſupport the cauſe, and to ſink money in it. But the object of the above quotation is to point out the conſiſtency of our envoy, and how notably the ſtile of 1779 agrees with that of 1794. Only poor fifteen years have converted a horde of demons, for that is the amount of his billingſgate deſcription, into the moſt upright people in the world.

We have remarked on the haſte with which Mr. Jay cloſed his treaty, and how much might have been won by deferring it. But the conduct of the negociator is eclipſed by that of the great body of the people. It does not appear that the poſſibility of a rupture with France ever once came into the conception of moſt of our citizens. A majority in the Houſe of Repreſentatives of Congreſs did indeed foreſee or fear it. One of them was aſked why they did not ſtate it in their ſpeeches, inſtead of many trifles, which were advanced againſt the treaty. He replied that they did not think it prudent. The Hamiltonians would inſtantly have accuſed them of encouraging the French to begin a war with this country.

This is the very deſign of ſome of that party themſelves. When a man calls hard names at his neighbour he is underſtood as deſiring to quarrel. Mr. Monroe, American ambaſſador to France, conducted himſelf with prudence and popularity. In December 1796, he preſented letters of recall, and bade farewell to the Executive Directory, in the moſt amicable terms. His addreſs was received with reſpect and cordiality. He congratulated the nation on their victories, and their new conſtitution, in terms not as ſtrong, by twenty degrees, as thoſe of Mr. Waſhington on receiving the French flag. The Gazette of the United States, for the 29th of March, 1797, ſcolds him for this act of civility ſo contraſted to the inſolence of Mr. Pickering. Though you could crouch, and kneel, and lick, and fawn, on ſuch an occaſion, your fellow citizens can feel nothing for you but contempt; and for the Directory, who require of the United States an act that would proſtrate them in the duſt, the utmoſt indignation. There is much more in this ſtile. The alleged act referred to, is, that the Directory refuſed to admit an American miniſter till the United States had redreſſed their grievances.

As for the contempt and indignation ſo fiercely ſpoke about, a different tone may ſoon be found neceſſary. Mantua is at length given up. Five Auſtrian armies have been deſtroyed, and an hundred thouſand priſoners taken, during a ſingle campaign in Italy. Compared to this work, the American revolution was mere ſcratching. The Emperor cannot pay his troops with Engliſh bank notes. He muſt either make an immediate peace, or be dethroned. It does not appear that the United States could, in one ſummer, raiſe five, or indeed two ſuch armies, in defence of the frontier of Canada; and it is likely enough that the French may reclaim that province from England, and require this country to reſtore its ancient boundaries. They would enter upon ſuch a ſcheme with every advantage. They have already a numerous colony of their own people in Canada, who are acquainted with it as well as the New Englanders. They have always exceeded the Britiſh in the art of gaining the Indians. The war with the ſavages has been computed to coſt yearly a million of dollars; but with a French army to ſupport them, a campaign might devour fifty millions. The ceſſion of Canada would be one of the leaſt wonderful events of the preſent war. A great part of the people of New England have been uncomonly ſolicitious to exaſperate the republic, and, after the treatment which they have alſo diligently beſtowed on the ſouthern ſtates, and their numerous menaces of disjunction, the latter might chuſe to give themſelves but ſmall concern in the diſpute. On the ſouth-eaſtern frontier, the United States are ſtill more vulnerable. Were Victor Hughes, with three or four battalions of black troops, to land on the coaſt of Virginia, the horrors of St. Domingo would immediately be renewed. Georgia ſtill continues to import negroes; a practice deſerving the ſevereſt reprobation.

When we conſider the terror, which France has, for three years paſt, inſpired in Europe, the conqueſt of Canada, and the extenſion of its limits, will ſeem but as duſt in the balance. The brutal inſolence with which the republicans are treated in the Columbian Centinel, can ariſe only from an unacquaintance with the poſſible extent of danger to New England. Count Montgaillard is a French royaliſt. His enmity to the revolution is as ſincere as that of any printer or preacher in the eaſtern ſtates. In 1794, he publiſhed a pamphlet on The Neceſſity of continuing the war. The generation, ſays he, which is to invade and deſtroy Europe has now reached the twelfth year of its age. It was born in the very midſt of a revolution [that of America perhaps]; it has ſeen all the epocha of this [the French] revolution; it has inhaled all its principles, and it has ſucked in every poiſon by which it was infected.—Where is the treaty of peace which can conſtrain this riſing generation to renounce ſo horrible a conqueſt. He inſiſts, like Burke, that the war muſt be continued; he even affirms, that the republic muſt be ſubdued. When this piece appeared, the French had not conquered Lombardy. They had not plundered one-half of Germany; and the bank of England had not ſtopt payment. Arthur Young, in the pamphlet already cited, ſpeaks in the ſame tone. Activity, vigour, and energy, ſuch as the world has not ſeen, are exerted to ſpread deſtruction.—The late manifeſtation of the French power is too tremendous to be conſidered but with alarm and terror. The independence of Europe is at ſtake. He ſays that the war had, at that time, coſt France thirteen hundred thouſand men. Every nation fears her, except America, or rather the tories, and the monied intereſt of our country. William Cobbet has ſet up a gazette in this city, for the expreſs end of reviling France. He does not conceal his deſign of bringing the nation into a French war. Sincerity is always reſpectable, and he cannot, as an editor, be charged with a want of that virtue. If we are plunged into ſuch a ſituation, his ſubſcribers, and not Mr. Cobbet, muſt be held accountable for the miſchief that he has done. It will be nothing wonderful, if, before three years elapſe, a French fleet ſhall anchor in the Delaware, and compel Philadelphia to deliver to the republic both him and them. Myriads of precedents of this kind are to be found in hiſtory.

Dr. Ames once obſerved, in Congreſs, that "this country is riſing into a giant's ſtrength." He was right. Ten years more of peace will double the population of the whole range of weſtern ſtates from Vermont to Tennaſſee. Above an hundred and fifty thouſand people are annually added to our numbers, and the ratio of increaſe is conſtantly augmenting. It will ſoon amount to two hundred thouſand yearly, or perhaps it has already reached that proportion. This is an advantage enjoyed with equal happineſs by no other nation. The additional ſwarms will, for centuries to come, have no want of room.

"The world is all before them, where to chooſe "Their place of reſt."

They will not, for the ſake of ſubſiſtence, be compelled to bury themſelves forever in mines, or unwholeſome manufactoriesIn England, exceſſive labour kills perhaps as many people as her foreign wars. See Buchan's Domeſtic Medicine., or to ruſh into mercenary regiments. Whatever profeſſion they ſhall chooſe, a moderate portion of induſtry can hardly fail to ſupply a plentiful competence. But a foreign war, and moſt eſpecially a French war, will aſſuredly retard, and may finally blaſt this faireſt harveſt of felicity that the human race hath ever ſeen. Recurring to the metaphor of Dr. Ames, it would be madneſs to expoſe the atlantean infant of America to the arm of a giant, whoſe limbs are completely formed, whoſe joints are firmly knit in his tremendous maturity of manhood. Let us forbear then to imitate, while we condemn the inſolence of Genet, or to propagate the exploded calumnies of Fauchet. Let us no longer whet the edge and embitter the venom of our faith by reviling a diſtant nation for having, like moſt of ourſelves, granted an univerſal right of conſcience. To ſpeak plainly, ſome of the holders of public ſtock, with Alexander Hamilton in their van, have excited this clamour. Witneſs the letters of PHOCION

Alias, Dr. William Smith. The author of An Examination of the late Proceedings in Congreſs, as to Mr. Hamilton's conduct, ſays that the doctor holds between three and four hundred ſhares in the bank of the United States, and has obtained diſcounts ad libitum. The bank was incorporated by an act dated the 25th of February, 1791. A ſhare contains four hundred dollars. Three hundred ſhares come thus to an hundred and twenty thouſand dollars. In five years, from the 1ſt of January, 1792, to the 1ſt of January, 1797. Dr. Smith would draw nine thouſand ſix hundred dollars per annum, at eight per cent.; in whole, forty-eight thouſand dollars of intereſt. Add this to the principal ſum, and, with the advantage of diſcounts, we may reckon ſafely, that he has netted in whole at leaſt two hundred thouſand dollars.

The world ſays that theſe ſhares in the bank were formed by an accumulation of Congreſs certificates, which the doctor bought from the continental army at eighteen pence or two ſhillings per pound. They may have originally coſt him ten thouſand dollars. As Hamilton was the progenitor of this maſter-piece of finance, the doctor has been active in diſplaying his gratitude.

! Theſe people tremble for their paper, which no well informed citizen will ever think of moleſting; and, quite overſhooting the mark, they wiſh to preſerve it by plunging the continent into a Britiſh alliance and a French war. The latter is only another name for a ſecond American revolution. Were Pichegru at Elkton to-morrow, many citizens would feel more than a ſpirit of reſiſtance. The public can trace the contrivers of ſuch a calamity; and, before oppoſing the houſe-breaker from without, they would perhaps begin with puniſhing thoſe who had turned the key. It has already been proved in the Aurora, that the flambeau diſpatch of Mr. Pickering contains elaborate miſquotation and direct untruth. Our ſecretary takes the ſhorteſt way to provoke the rage of a conqueror alike inflexible in defeat and ſucceſs, intoxicated with the homage, enriched with the ſpoils of Europe, and yet unexhauſted by his thouſand victories.

In this chapter the narrative of the year 1796 has made ſmall progreſs, but ſomething perhaps has been gained in point of information. The motion of general Smith, with which it ſet out, regarding the Britiſh treaty, introduced ſome reflections on the extreme hazard of a French war, and on the temerity or perfidy of thoſe who have led the United States into ſo critical a ſituation. The authority of Edmund Burke, and other intelligent Engliſh writers, was next appealed to with regard to the power of that republic, as a counterpoiſe to the ſyſtematic and voluminous fallacies of Camillus. This induced naturally to a comparative view of the reſpective force of the two nations by land and ſea; and the immeaſurable inferiority of America was the reſult of examination. The ſhameful attempts made to widen the breach between the two countries was illuſtrated by additional remarks. We have cloſed with pointing out the peculiar advantages that America may hope for, beyond any other nation, from the continuance of peace; and we have ſeen ſome of the motives of that party, who, under pretended zeal for her conſtitution, wiſh to diſturb her tranquility. To elucidate the numberleſs advantages of a pacific ſyſtem a great deal yet remains to be ſaid. So much untruth and deception have been ſtudiouſly heaped on the ſubject, that much previous labour is required to remove the rubbiſh, before even the foundation of a narrative can be properly ſketched out. The moſt painful portion of the taſk is to beſtow cenſure on perſons or parties, and ſometimes to hold up even a large majority of the nation in a light not extremely reputable. Flattery to the prejudices and vices of the public has hitherto been the bane of almoſt every hiſtorian. This fault ſhall, in the preſent work, be avoided as much as poſſible, though at the requiſite expence of diſpleaſing the violent of every party. When we ſometimes ſtop to criticiſe the paragraph or eſſay in a newſpaper, it ſhould be remembered that to theſe publications the people of the United States do moſt univerſally reſort for political knowledge. By ſeeing detected ſome dozens of notorious fictions in that ſhape, perſons at a great diſtance from ſources of accurate information may come to acquire the habit of thinking more boldly for themſelves, and of demanding evidence before they believe an aſſertion.

The enſuing chapter will partly conſiſt of ſpecimens of federal compoſition, as a key to the projects and talents of that party. The next three chapters proceed to ſome remarks on the mode of ſuppreſſing the weſtern inſurrection, of repelling the ſavages on the ſouth-weſtern frontier, of compiling the preſent national debt, and of negotiating Jay's treaty. The city of Waſhington, and the treatment of the late continental army, will merit and receive ſome inveſtigation. Theſe topics are intimately connected with the buſineſs of the ſeſſion of Congreſs about to be deſcribed. Without ſome prefatory explanations of this kind, a reader might find himſelf in the ſame ſtate of embarraſſment, as if he were to begin a peruſal of Homer, at the thirteenth book of the Iliad.

The firſt five introductory chapters having been employed on political ſubjects, we ſhall be prepared to go on with the journal of Congreſs. As variety is the ſoul of enjoyment, and as this work is intended for the entertainment of every claſs of people, an intermediate and miſcellaneous chapter will be given on the preſent internal ſtate of America. A ſwarm of books of travels, in this country will, among other articles of amuſement, be brought on the tapis, and ſome of their injurious or abſurd obſervations with reſpect to America will be candidly explained. To ourſelves refutation may be unneceſſary, but ſeveral copies of the preſent work will be ſent to Europe, where it may chance to be reprinted. This part of the volume will there ſerve as a vindication of America againſt the errors of thoſe, who either did not perceive truth, or did not chuſe to tell it.

A work of the preſent kind has been much wanted. We complain that newſpaper details are imperfect, prejudiced, and contradictory. Theſe charges are true, but the printer cannot avoid affording foundation for them. The narrative of to-morrow is often at variance with that of to-day: and neither he nor his readers can, ſometimes, be certain which to prefer. Like Penelope, an editor muſt frequently unravel at night the labour of the morning; while the public, amidſt the ſhreds and fragments of information, can hardly determine what to believe or to reject.

The mere bulk of a daily newſpaper makes its mode of information often intricate, and ſometimes inacceſſible. A folio volume of twelve hundred and forty-eight pages may damp the curioſity of the boldeſt reader. No one newſpaper can relate every thing. The proprietor generally wiſhes, as far as he conveniently can, to decline publiſhing what his competitors have already given to the world. Almoſt every ſheet is, likewiſe, half filled with advertiſements which are entirely uſeleſs to moſt readers. Theſe defects in newſpapers cannot, by diligence or candour, be entirely ſhunned. But they point out the expediency of an annual compilation, where ſelection, brevity, and arrangement can more eaſily find place. Many citizens of Philadelphia take in ſix daily newſpapers at an yearly expence of about fifty dollars. Three different prints are a common ſupply. Not one-half or perhaps one-tenth part of their contents are read; and they are ſometimes caſt into the fire without being opened. After ſuch a waſte of money, a charge of one or two dollars for a yearly publication cannot be held extravagant. The compiler of ſuch a book has the greateſt advantage in coming at a diſtance behind the events which he is to relate. He can expatiate on the ignorance of ſtateſmen who, at eaſter, did not exactly foreſee what was to happen next chriſtmas, and which, a twelve month after it has paſt, he ſees very diſtinctly. He is amazed at the dulneſs of news-printers, who, with ten diſcordant accounts of a battle before them, did not, for ſome hours, diſtinguiſh the right one. With judgement and induſtry, he may write an uſeful performance; and, by ſome addreſs, he can look extremely wiſe at the expence of his predeceſſors.

CHAPTER II.

Character of Mr. Gallatin.—Connecticut poetry.— Major Jackſon.—John Watts.—The Boſton Federal Orrery.—Curtius.—His exaggerated ſtatement of Britiſh reſources.—Remarks on paper money.—Cauſes of the preference of Britain to France in the federal party.—Democratical conſpiracy developed by Curtius.—Defence of Jefferſon, Madiſon, Giles, Parker, Chriſtie, &c.—Fables from Pittſburgh.—Curious preſentment by a grand jury in Georgia.—Purity of Boſton.

AS to Gallatin, the ſeditious Gallatin! What ſhall I ſay? How ſhall I deſcribe that compound of vice and depravity, that diſciple of meanneſs, corruption, debauchery, and idleneſs. He is a foreigner by birth and education. [Of courſe, he muſt be a raſcal]. For ſome time after his arrival in this country, he wandered about the diſtrict of Maine, like Cain, a fugitive and vagabond, deſtitute of the means of honeſt ſubſiſtence.—The writer of this felt the effects of his own liberality for months afterwards!— Unable to pay for a lodging, or to purchaſe the neceſſaries of life, it was his cuſtom to ſleep in barns, and under the foliage of hedges, and not unuſually in the arms of ſome ſhameful ſtrumpet. The fragments of the kitchen ſatiſfied the cravings of hunger. We find him next among the inſurgents of the weſtern counties in Pennſylvania. The late whiſky rebellion there is principally attributed to him. There is ten times more of this trumpery. It is copied from the Kennebeck Intelligencer; and was publiſhed about the beginning of the year 1797 to defeat the re-election of Mr. Dearborne, a member of Congreſs for Maſſachuſetts. This is one ſample of the federal eloquence of New England. If Mr. Gallatin had wiſhed for an opportunity of inflaming the public, he could not have choſen a better topic than American finance. Yet his treatiſe on it is written in the moſt harmleſs ſtile, and ſeems to evince an unuſual degree of good nature and forbearance.

About the ſame time with this production, the Connecticut Courant contained Guillotina, a ſeries of rhimes, written by one Trumbull. They were republiſhed in a Providence newſpaper. A few lines will ſhew in what kind of kennel this Connecticut muſe dabbles; and how wretchedly a certain party labour under a dearth of decent advocates.

"Once more my fond attentions turn, "Where Pennſylvania's patriots burn. "See Mifflin ſtretching out the laws, "To aid the anti-federal cauſe."

This refers to the ſcandalous artifices employed in Pennſylvania to ſtop the arrival of the poſt at this city with votes for electors at the late election of Preſident, and to the activity of governor Mifflin in detecting a variety of frauds made uſe of by the federal party. If Trumbull had felt any ſenſe of common honeſty, or common ſhame, he would not have ſtirred the aſhes of a ſtory ſo diſhonourable to his friends.

"See him with Barclay, John, and Dallas, "(Poor Pennſylvania keeps no gallows) "Play many a democratic prank, "In fleecing Pennſylvania bank."

One may ſay, with parſon Adams, I would rather be the ſubject of ſuch verſes, than the author. Several months before this piece appeared, Mr. Dallas had publiſhed a certificate that the bank of Pennſylvania was, at the time referred to, in his debt. This fact could not be unknown to the libeller of Hartford. But old braſs will make a new pan, ſays the proverb. A fiction, though refuted in proſe, may have a joyful reſurrection in verſe. The polite introduction of the gallows ſhews how ſtrongly ſome of the federal party thirſt for blood. They have given more than one intimation to that purpoſe. The New-York Gazette has an eſſay by William Wilcocks, dated the 15th of November, 1796. Surely, ſays he, the guillotine has not done all its duty! He rails at the machine in France, yet recommends the ſetting up of another in America, for that is his plain inference. Some people ſhould not, in common prudence, be ſo forward to ſpeak of banks, till they give a ſatisfactory account of their connection with Alexander Hamilton, and his bank of the United States. The books of transfer at the treaſury, and the books at the bank, are held ſecret under the obligation of an oath, on all perſons who uſe or inſpect them, not to reveal the names or amount of ſtock holdersSee An Examination of the late Proceedings in Congreſs, reſpecting the official conduct of the Secretary of the Treaſury, dated 8th of March, 1793, p. 25.. So much concealment can hardly be for an honourable purpoſe. The righteous are bold as a lion. Trumbull proceeds thus: "When Fauchet kept an open mint, "They doubtleſs had a finger in't.

This is another exploded untruth. The rhymer goes on at this rate through five columns of ribbaldry. The lines now cited are ſufficient to ſhew the claſſical diſcernment of his friends, and what ſort of aid they will ſtoop to receive. Swanwick, Giles, Gallatin, and a long liſt of that party are reviled ſadly. Dr. Franklin, his grandſon, Mr. Bache, and Thomas Paine meet with the ſame uſage. General Waſhington, as uſual, is thoroughly ſoaked in the treacle of panegyric. But when the Preſident notified his intention to reſign, the party ſoon began to change their tune. Wilcocks has ſaid that the fulſome adulation of the Preſident on the reception of the French flag was the moſt derogatory part of his adminiſtrationAurora, 31ſt December, 1796..

The charge of being a fulſome ſycophant does not entirely agree with the ſuperb encomiums, which Wilcocks has ſo frequently plaiſtered upon General Waſhington. This veering about lets us into the real character of ſome people, and how little they care about the General, when his reputation ceaſes to promote their private ends.

But this revolt was overbalanced by Major William Jackſon, ſurveyor of the port of Philadelphia. The ſpeech of the Preſident, on the 8th of December, 1796, was followed up, next day, by the Major, with a puff in one of our newſpapers. It begins thus. To attempt an illuſtration of a ſubject in itſelf ſo illumined as the ſpeech of our moſt excellent Preſident were an arrogance which we utterly diſclaim. He goes on white-waſhing for a conſiderable length. The diſtant ſettler on the Miſſiſſippi beholds with exultation that his happineſs forms a conſideration in the mind of the government, co-equal with that of his fellow citizen on the Atlantic. He is equally entitled to protection; for his welfare is eſſential to the union. Hence exultation would be miſplaced. A Preſident and other officers of government are paid for doing their duty; and, if they fail of performing it to public ſatisfaction, there are, if we could only believe ſo, abundance of men as good as the beſt of them. Major Jackſon here points at the Spaniſh treaty; but he might have reflected that the ſame adminiſtration, by the weakeſt and meaneſt ſpecies of trimming, has induced the danger of a French war, and if that happens, the weſtern waters will be more completely blocked up than ever.

Is there a ſeaman belonging to the United States, or a connection of that valuable claſs of citizens, whoſe vows are not offered for the good of him, whoſe head and heart have been ſo much occupied with their concerns? This was an unfortunate topic. But the Major, as a military man, knows that the weakeſt part of a fortification has moſt need of defence. Where is the veteran whoſe boſom does not beat in reſponſive applauſe to the eulogium of Waſhington on military ſkill? If, at the creation of the public debt, he had taken a ſingle ſtep to ſave them from indigence, if he had refuſed to ſign the ſtatute of limitations, and ſome other laws not much betterAmerican Annual Regiſter, chap. v. and xi., their boſoms would have been more likely to beat. No peculiar ſhare of blame in this buſineſs lies on the Preſident. The great body of the people have betrayed entire indifference about the old ſoldiers, otherwiſe ſuch acts never could have paſt. At the ſame time money is unaccountably waſted on ſavages. John Watts, a Creek warrior, boaſts of having taken thirty-three ſcalps. In the latter part of 1796, this fellow, and a number of others, came to Philadelphia, where they feaſted at an expence of four thouſand dollarsThis is ſtated on the authority of Mr. Chriſtopher Greenup, a repreſentative from Kentucky. The writer has not yet ſeen the accompt.. Thus much for Major Jackſon.

Nothing is, in itſelf, more comtemptible, and nothing tends more certainly to defeat its own purpoſe, than extravagant praiſe. Encomium never appeared in a more farcical ſhape, than it has often aſſumed in poetry. Of this ſort of writing the Boſton Federal Orrery afforded a miſerable ſpecimen, in the Gratulatory Addreſs on the birth-day of the Preſident, in February, 1796.

If a ſtranger knew nothing elſe of the hiſtory of the American war, than what he could glean from this copy of verſes, he would infer, that General Waſhington had ſingly, and excluſively, exterminated the Britiſh armies in a perſonal combat. In the laſt line of the firſt ſtanza, this rhymer of Maſſachuſetts calls him the "Godlike Waſhington." This is ſomething worſe than mere nonſenſe. It approaches to indecency and profanation.

In the third ſtanza we meet with a parallel between General Waſhington and —: let the reader, if he can, conjecture the counter part of this compariſon! Moſes, the Jew, is introduced as not ſuperior in legiſlative or military merits, to the leader in our revolution. As if that were not enough, there follows a parallel between the Preſident and the Creator of the Univerſe; and though this ſtyle may ſeem ridiculous, incredible, and mad, it has abſolutely been adopted by the bard of the Boſton Federal Orrery. After alluding to the miraculous paſſage of the Red ſea, he adds, that "By night your pillar, and your cloud by day," "He (the Preſident) fought your battles."

Here is an attempt to blend the ſervices and exertions of the American colonies with the omniſcient ſuperintendancy of the Supreme Being. Effrontery or impiety cannot proceed much farther. Of ſuch panegyriſts, Dr. Edward Young has obſerved, that "Their praiſe degrades, as if a fool ſhould mean, "By ſpitting in your face, to make it clean!

For the ſake of completeneſs, our author ſhould have run a compariſon of Mount Vernon with Mount Sinai, the Delaware at Trenton and the Arabian Gulph. Between ſuch impious jargon and legitimate poetry, there is the ſame diſtinction as between the trowel of a bricklayer, and the pencil of Titian.

About the ſame time, another piece of excellence, too ſingular to be forgotten, appeared in a Philadelphia newſpaper. Here it is: ADVICE TO COUNTRY POLITICIANS. Go weed your corn, and plow your land, And by Columbia's intereſt ſtand, Caſt prejudice away; To able heads leave ſtate affairs, Give railing o'er and ſay your prayers, For ſtores of corn and bay.

This is the firſt ſtanza of that brilliant production. American farmers are very obligingly adviſed to give over railing. The writer muſt by this word mean remonſtrating againſt the treaty of Mr. Jay. As to able heads, five-ſixths of the members of Congreſs are farmers, and hence this admonition applies to them. They had better, as it ſeems, go home and mind their ploughs. The next and concluding ſtanza runs, or hobbles, in the following words.

"With politics ne'er break your ſleep, "But ring your hogs, and ſhear your ſheep, "And rear your lambs and calves; "And Waſhington will take due care, "That Britons never more ſhall dare "Attempt to make you ſlaves."

The felicity of the rhime in calves and ſlaves, proves that the auricular accuracy of this laureate keeps pace with his other qualifications. It is a very handſome compliment to the farmers of the United States to tell them that their underſtandings are juſt equal to putting a ring into the ſnout of a hog. The odes of Horace, and Martial's epigrams, were written in the ſink of Roman tyranny; yet, they contain nothing correſpondent with the abject vulgarity of this advice. The piece is, from firſt to laſt, a ſtupid inſult on the feelings of a free country. This Philadelphian bard ſeems a formidable rival to the vileſt ſycophant that ever licked up the ſpittle of deſpotiſm.

The people of America boaſt loudly of their freedom, and of their ſuperiority, in this reſpect, to every other nation; yet the ſpirit of ſervility in writing birth-day verſes, exceeds all bounds.

One of the gazettes of this city, after the birth-day in February, 1795, had another piece of the ſame ſhabby ſtrain. It filled two entire columns; and, which ſhews the wretchedneſs, or rather non-entity of literary taſte, it was printed, in at leaſt one other newſpaper.

Alluding to the friends of democratic ſocieties, this poet calls them ſorcerers in their cells. After raving through this compariſon for a few impudent lines, worthy of Webſter and his Minerva, we are told that "Already Waſhington, like Atlas ſtands, "Alone ſupporting empire with his hands; "Alone, the prop of all this vaſt machine, "The mortal hero of the immortal ſcene.

The genius of Columbia (this is the new-fangled rhyming name for America), then bounces into the following exclamation: "Chaos will come, when Waſhington expires, "Hide Freedom's ſun, and quench her ſtarry fires. "A gift ſo fatal, why ſhould I retain? "Realms ſo accurſt, why ſhould my power ſuſtain? "No, let theſe regions to the deep be hurl'd. "Take back, unfathom'd ocean, take your world."

A charming propoſal undoubtedly! that nature ſhall diſſolve on the death of an American p •••• dent. There is reaſon to think that neither Geo • ge the third, nor any of his predeceſſors, was ever ſoluted with ſuch execrable buffoonery. If the decalogue had ſaid, Thou ſhalt not write nonſenſe, this author muſt have been a diſmal ſinner. It is the happy privilege of an American, that he may prattle and print, in what way he pleaſes, and without any one to make him afraid.

Auguſtus Caeſar found it for his intereſt to be bountiful and grateful to Virgil and Horace. Their verſes, like ſtepping ſtones acroſs the mire, partly ſaved his name from that reproach, through which it has waded down to poſterity. The reputation of our Preſident requires not the help of poetical crutches. To him we may apply what the king of Pruſſia, in his memoirs, hath ſaid of his brother Henry: The higheſt encomium which we can beſtow, is an impartial narrative of his actions.

As a ſketch of the current ſtile, we ſhall notice one other writer of the day. Curtius publiſhed twelve letters in defence of Jay's treaty. The points now to be inveſtigated, refer to what he ſays about the relative force of France and Britain, and the violent manner in which he ſpeaks of thoſe who differ from his political opinions.

As an evidence of the greatneſs of Britain, Curtius, No. vii. ſays, that her Eaſt-India territories yield an annual revenue of more than eight millions ſterling. Camillus, alſo, No. vii. lays much weight upon the ſhips from India to England in 1795, having cargoes computed to be worth between four and five millions ſterling. While an alliance with that country is recommended, and ſuch accounts given of its wealth and power, only a few words are needful to ſet the matter right. Three-fourths of this revenue go to the expence of ſupporting the government of the country; part is abſorbed by inveſtments and commercial charges, and the remainder is conſumed in paying the intereſt of the Indian debts of the company. By the lateſt advices received, on the 16th of June, 1795, from India, they were owing, in that part of the world, ſeven millions three hundred thouſand pounds ſterling. This was ſtated in the Houſe of Commons, on the above date, by Mr. Dundas. The company owe likewiſe another enormous debt in England, a part of which, under the name of bonded, amounted then to two millions ſterling. Thus, when the company have paid the charges of government, the intereſt of their debts, and mercantile expences, they are, by ſeveral millions ſterling, worſe than nothing. They have been often on the brink of bankruptcy, and would have ſtopt payment many years ago, if Parliament had not lent them, in advance, large ſums of moneySee Smith's Wealth of Nations.. It is hard to think that ſuch an eſtabliſhment can add to the real ſtrength of a nation. Camillus and Curtius need not build much on that ſource of oppoſition to France

As the world in general appear to be miſtaken on this head, the following ſtatements, laid before Parliament by Dundas, are inſerted. They are for two different years; and ſhew how little England has, in reality, gained by her catalogue of Oriental crimes.

General ſtate of revenues and charges in India. Total of the revenues of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, 1793-4, as above ſtated, £. 8,294,399 Charges of ditto, (including 66,358l. ſupplies to Bencoolen, &c.) 6,181,504 Revenues more than charges, 2,112,895 Intereſt on debts paid from this ſum, 458,043 Surplus revenues, 1,654,852 Add—import, ſales, and certificates, 475,994 Sums applicable to inveſtments, payment of commercial charges, &c. (excluſive of 20,000l. gained by iſſuing notes, 2,130,846 Eſtimates for 1794-5. Total revenues of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, eſtimated 1794-5, £. 7,790,807 Total charges, ditto, (including 104,632l. ſupplies to Bencoolen, &c.) 5,923,063   1,867,744 Deduct intereſt on debts, per No. XVI. 437,047 Eſtimated ſurplus revenue, 1,430,697 Add No. XV. Eſtimated ſales of imports, and amount of certificates, 380,669 Amount eſtimated to be applicable to inveſtments, payment of commercial charges, &c. &c. 1,811,366

On the 24th of May, 1791, Charles Fox ſaid, in the Houſe of Commons, that the company's debts amounted to ſixteen millions eight hundred thouſand pounds ſterling. Theſe details agree in ſubſtance with the ſummary in the text. Much noiſe was made both for and againſt Jay's conduct on account of the ſtipulations reſpecting the Eaſt India trade. When it is obſerved how little even the Eaſt India company can make, who are maſters of India itſelf, a ſuſpicion may be excited, that this branch of commerce was not worth much contention. American ſhips can ſail to China, without leave of England; and that is the moſt important branch of the Oriental market.

.

When Curtius ſpeaks of Europe, he ſtumbles in the ſame way as Camillus. Great Britain, though her army was deſtroyed in the Netherlands, retains all her activity and reſourcesTo fill up theſe armies, the country was, in ſome places, half depopulated. On the 24th of March, 1795, Mr. Sheridan informed the Houſe of Commons, that one magiſtrate had atteſted twenty-one thouſand recruits. About the ſame time it was ſtated in the houſe, that Mancheſter, ſince the war began, had loſt twelve thouſand people.. Government has not been compelled to diſtreſs her trade to man her navy. She never manned twenty ſail of the line, at one time, without diſtreſſing trade. A general preſs is the ſure conſequence of ſuch an equipment. The ſcarcity of ſeamen has been very great. Again. Her debt has indeed been augmented; but ſtill immenſe ſums of money (of paper he ſhould have ſaid) are offered, and the only queſtion with government is, whoſe money ſhall be received on loan. That is on account of the extravagant premiums. As for money, all the gold and ſilver coin in England would not pay above one-nineteenth part of the debts that ſhe has contracted. If the iſland could be divided into three equal ſhares, it would require one of them to ſatisfy the public creditors. Britain, at this moment, maintains as commanding an attitude among the powers of the earth, as at any former period. Only two pages before, Curtius had ſaid, that her land forces were defeated and cut to pieces, the laſt campaign (1794), is undeniable; and there is no queſtion that any combat by land would be decided in favour of France. When England won the battles of Blenheim, Quebec, and Minden, ſhe was equally ſuperior at ſea. Curtius has no ground to compare the preſent attitude to that of any former period.

With the ſame judgment this writer rejects all danger of a Britiſh revolution. If England cannot be happy enough to make a peace, ſhe will be excluded from every port in Europe, as ſhe is at preſent from two-thirds of them; and then her commerce and her power muſt decline together. It is worth while to conſider the effects of this turn in her affairs on the ſituation of America. One of the conſequences muſt be the exploſion of her paper money. The quantity in circulation may be in England about three times, and in Scotland ſixty times greater than that of gold and ſilver. This is a rough gueſs. Every year of war augments the quantity of paper. The firſt effects of a national bankruptcy would be an utter deſtruction of credit. Currency would again be reſtricted to the precious metals; and they would increaſe to three, four, or five times the value that they now bear. The ſilver ſix-pence, which, in London, would not, laſt winter, buy a pound of beef, will then purchaſe three, four, or five pounds, as was the caſe fifty or an hundred years ago. Hence it follows, that the manufactures of Britain will fall ſurpriſingly in their prices, becauſe the ſame quantity of labour that formerly was worth half a guinea, will then probably be offered for three or four ſhillings, or leſs. Another cauſe muſt cheapen Britiſh exports. The country being rid of public debt, will, of courſe, caſt off a great proportion of her taxes; for, at this time, including the expence of the collection of revenue to pay its intereſt, the debt requires about ſixteen millions ſterling per annum. Even now the manufactures of the United States cannot, in many caſes, bear a competition in point of cheapneſs with thoſe of Britain. But a ſudden fall of one-half of the former rate, or perhaps a ſtill greater reduction muſt put an end to them, unleſs their coſt can alſo be leſſened. The price of ſo many commodities having ſunk ſo faſt, they will, of courſe, drag all other kinds of property after them, till matters ſhall be reſtored to their common level, becauſe the ſituation would be too forced and unnatural for any length of endurance. The price of flour, for example, could not long continue at eight or ten dollars, in America, while England raiſed it for two or three. The value of lands, houſes, and perſonal labour ſinking with ſuch rapidity would produce numerous failures, and the quantity of money afloat being more than was wanted, the precious metals, as on ſimilar occaſions, would drive paper out of the market. This muſt, in ſome degree, give a check to banking: Another claſs of people would ſuffer eſſentially, and that is the holders of public ſtock. From its nature the fall would be more ſeverely felt in this than moſt other property. Land, when equally ploughed, will yield as large a crop as now, whatever might be the want of money. The ſcarcity of houſes in the ſea port towns, would prevent them from ſtanding empty. Good tradeſmen are always needful and muſt be paid a ſubſiſtence. But ſtock being entirely unproductive of itſelf, unleſs as to the intereſt paid by the public, its decline in price would operate as a real loſs, ſince it is only worth what it can bring in the market.

Thus the ruin of the Britiſh ſyſtem of funds, and paper money, would run the hazard of ſhaking the ſame ſyſtems in the United States. This appears to be the reaſon why perſons connected with them have ſuch a violent prepoſſeſſion for Britiſh ſucceſs, and ſo ſtrong an averſion to the aſcendancy of France. The deſtruction of public credit in that country, ſoon after the revolution began, and the mixture of deſpotiſm and anarchy which have ſince prevailed, inſpired every holder of ſtocks with horror. A conſiderable number of theſe public creditors were from the eaſtern ſtates, and but few from the ſouthern. The whole influence of the fiſcal corps, was directed againſt the French revolution. As a requiſite counterpoiſe, the party wiſhed to caſt America into the arms of Britain. The bankers and ſtock-holders were joined by two other claſſes. The one of theſe conſiſted of Britiſh tories, who had been permitted to continue here in the war, or who had returned ſince the end of it. Another order of men, in whom the motives of the former were often blended, had frequent occaſion for the diſcounting of bills, to ſupport their credit. Within a few years, ſince banks became numerous, there has ariſen an extreme ſpirit of mercantile ſpeculation, which could only expand its flight on the wings of paper-money. All theſe ſorts of people, with a few exceptions, and all on whom they had influence, joined in reprobating the French revolution. Alexander Hamilton has always been conſidered as the leader of this party. His official powers gave him a very conſiderable ſway in the management of the public funds, and the bank of the United States. Under him, the party have acted, or are thought to have acted with ſyſtem and ſpirit. But while they were thus loudly declaiming, and often with juſtice, againſt the ſhocking barbarities perpetrated in France, many of them have forfeited their pretenſions to purity, by promoting, to the utmoſt of their ſkill, a civil war among the United States themſelves, and likewiſe a quarrel with the republic. Their deſigns have been gradually developed by the courſe of events; and it has at length been fairly confeſſed, both by their words and actions, that they are willing to go to war with France. They dread her example as contagious for the deſtruction of their financial fabric, which they conſtantly mention not by its proper name, but as the conſtitution.

Having premiſed theſe particulars, we ſhall now quote ſome of the expreſſions that Curtius adopts in his twelfth letter. There is a confederation of characters, from New-Hampſhire to Georgia, arrayed in oppoſition, either to the conſtitution of the United States, to its adminiſtration, or to particular men in office. The oppoſition of the principal men in this confederacy can be traced to ſome known cauſes, originally of a perſonal nature. Diſappointment in application for ſome office, or the failure of ſome favourite ſcheme in their political ſyſtem, has converted many of the friends of the late revolution into determined oppoſers of the general ſyſtem of the preſent adminiſtration.

This charge is daily repeated in an infinity of different ſhapes. No facts are ſpecified by Curtius, except an indiſtinct reference to Genet. The conduct of this ambaſſador is entirely unexampled in the hiſtory of civilized nationsCarey's edition of Guthrie's Geography, vol. ii. p. 294.. He was received with tumultuous hoſpitality, and childiſh exultation. But when it was diſcovered that he wanted to plunge the nation into a war with Britain, this envoy inſtantly ſunk into neglect. Curtius ſays, that his views were counteracted by the Preſident, ſeconded by the northern ſtates. One would imagine that the militia of New-England had been ordered to march, that the legiſlatures had taken ſome important ſtep, or at leaſt that their members in Congreſs had introduced ſome motion to the houſe, which led the way for recalling the French miniſter. Not one of theſe circumſtances ever happened. The impertinence and indiſcretion of Genet were, in a few months, viſible to all men of ſenſe. His importance ſhrunk immediately to nothing. As to ſeconding, it was manifeſted in no way by New-England, unleſs ſcurrilous newſpaper paragraphs deſerve that name. Even this commodity was as plentifully beſtowed at New-York and Philadelphia, as at Boſton. The reign of Genet was very ſhort. He arrived in this city on the 17th of May, 1793, and his recall was ſolicited by the American Secretary of State in a letter dated the 16th of Auguſt following. This letter, though different indeed from the ſtile of Timothy Pickering's epiſtle to Pinckney, was as ſharp as decorum would permit. The one haggles like a ruſty knife. The other cuts like a razor. The next news from France was, that, if Genet had returned home, Robeſpierre would have made him look out at the little national window. Even the letter deſiring his recall was not ſo much as wrote by a native of New-England, though Henry Knox, as Secretary at War, was then a member of the American cabinet. Neither did Alexander Hamilton, though alſo in office, write any part of it; for the diſpatch has none of his entangled periods. It was drawn by Thomas Jefferſon of Virginia. The ſtory of the Preſident being ſeconded by the northern ſtates is, therefore, an entire falſehood.

The hiſtory of Genet has been thus examined, becauſe it is the only fact to which Curtius refers. We now go back to his quotation, and ſhall begin with what he calls a confederation of characters arrayed againſt the conſtitution, &c.

The moſt eminent perſonage of the party accuſed is Thomas Jefferſon, the ſingle man who aſſiſted the Preſident in driving Genet out of office. But if the democrats, as, for the ſake of diſtinction, we muſt call them, were ſo violently attached to Genet, they muſt have held his antagoniſt Jefferſon in the utmoſt abhorence. Yet this is ſo far from being the caſe, that, at the diſtance of four years, their reſpect and friendſhip are unabated. Thus, as to Genet, the charge againſt the great body of the democrats involves a groſs contradiction. Whether a few individuals do ſtill admire what he did, cannot be worth enquiring. If he was often in the wrong, he was ſometimes in the right. The wretched attack made upon him by John Jay and Rufus King was only fit for two old women in a chimney corner. It diſgraced the national character of America, by ſhewing what weak men had been elected as a chief juſtice and a ſenator.

Curtius ſpeaks of the principal men in this confederacy, and their diſappointment in application for ſome office. Neither can this apply to Jefferſon. He had been ambaſſador to France. He was then Secretary of State. Little more was to be had. Sometime after he reſigned his office. The reſignation was voluntary. This appears from the choice of a ſucceſſor to him. Randolph was of the ſame party and principles; which proves that the Preſident only choſe him becauſe Jefferſon would no longer keep the office.

As to the failure of ſome favourite ſcheme in their political ſyſtem, of this alſo Mr. Jefferſon ſtands clear. His retirement was heard of with general regret. Nay, ſo much does he poſſeſs the confidence of every ſtate in the union, that Mr. Adams was perhaps the only man on the continent who could have had a tolerable chance againſt him for the preſidency. It is ſingular that the principal perſon of a confederacy againſt government ſhould poſſeſs the eſteem even of its friends.

We muſt enquire among the repreſentatives in Congreſs for the ſecond leader of the confederation of characters. This is James Madiſon, eſq of Virginia. Mr. Vans Murray ſaid, ſome years ago, in Congreſs, that he might be called the father of the preſent conſtitution. It would be ſtrange if he was already impatient to ſtrangle his own offspring. Of the private character of the man it is needleſs to ſpeak, for the ſtock-holding newſpapers confine themſelves to an incomprehenſible jargon about conſpiracies. He certainly had no hand in promoting the popularity of citizen Genet. He was in Virginia during the period of the citizen's importance. It is doubtful if they were ever in the ſame room together. The claſſical elegance, and logical acuteneſs of Madiſon bear the ſame reſemblance to the ſcampering fuſtian of Genet which Madeira has to ditch-water. It is impoſſible that two perſons ſo contraſted in every thing intellectual could have agreed, for a ſingle day, in any confederation. Beſides, Mr. Madiſon is in cloſe friendſhip with Mr. Jefferſon, who put an end to the citizen. Diſappointment in application for ſome office cannot be imputed to this gentleman, unleſs the office can be named which he was diſappointed of obtaining. Very few places in the gift of the Preſident would have been a temptation. Mr. Jefferſon did not, as Secretary of State, ſave money. By abſence from his eſtate, he very likely loſt as much as he received for reſiding in Philadelphia. If Mr. Madiſon had undertaken an office in this city worth two thouſand dollars a year, it would have been of no pecuniary advantage to him, while his plantation was lying half waſted for want of his preſence. But none of the federal hacks has ever pretended that Mr. Madiſon met with a repulſe in ſolicitation. They ſay that he has been in the pay of France. Yet he juſt now deſpitefully gives up his ſeat in Congreſs, thus robbing the accuſation of the laſt rag which covered its nakedneſs. He never had a cent from the government of this country, excepting his ſix dollars per day. As to favourite ſchemes, Mr. Madiſon, at leaſt for the laſt four years, has been as often in a majority as out of it.

Thus we have got over the firſt and ſecond heads of the confederation. The third in order is William B. Giles, another Virginian. Almoſt all which has been ſaid of Mr. Madiſon ſuits him. He never applied for any office. Perhaps the executive has not one to beſtow, that, in a pecuniary light, would deſerve his acceptance. He has an independent fortune. He is a lawyer of eminence. He could make a handſome income by his profeſſion, if he choſe to ſtay at home, and mind that only. He could live on his own farm in Virginia for a tenth part of the money which he muſt ſpend in attending Congreſs. To ſuch a man ſix dollars a day, or any place that the executive could give him, is not an object; and nothing but ſheer ignorance can excuſe a party writer for holding ſuch language about him.

If we look over the other members who have often voted in oppoſition to executive oracles, the ſame obſervations as to perſonal independence apply to perhaps every one of them. For inſtance, Gabriel Chriſtie is a merchant in Havre de Grace, a village at the mouth of the Suſquehannah. If he wants to recommence planter, he has a large farm of his own a few miles up the river, in one of the moſt healthy and deſirable ſpots in Maryland. Such a man could gain nothing by confuſion, nor could the executive offer him almoſt any poſt poſſeſſing a lucrative temptation. An office in Philadelphia, or any where out of his own country, with a ſalary of fifteen hundred dollars a year would be as a feather. The caſe is ſimilar with Meſſrs. Baldwin, Blount, Heath, Page, Parker, New, Nicholas, Macon, M'Dowell, Carnes, Venable, Preſton, and others. They have either independent property, or lucrative profeſſions, or both. They could gain nothing by diſturbing government. They never made the ſmalleſt attempt of the kind; nor has any of the ſcribblers, who abuſed them in wholeſale, ever pretended to ſpecify a ſingle fact, and much leſs to bring evidence of a ſingle fact, that looked like a confederacy againſt government. Such malicious nonſenſe may do very well for a Connecticut tavern, a Kennebeck Journal, or a town meeting of Stockbridge, when our patriotic citizens are toaſting John Jay and the papers! It may ſuit Samuel Dexter in a circle at the dancing ſchool, or Daniel Buck in an addreſs to ſome mob, who are ringing the town bells for joy at his return to Vermont.

After the words ſeconded by the northern ſtates, Curtius proceeds thus. But the party which originally rallied under that man, (Genet) ſtill exiſts, and forms a league co-extenſive with the United States, connected in all its parts, and acting by a ſingle impulſe. Dr. Swift, ſpeaking of Gulliver's Travels, ſays, that they contained a lie at every ſecond word. If a ſingle word could convey an untruth, Curtius would be an unrivalled maſter in that ſort of brevity. The party, ſuch as it is, exiſted in all its vigour, for ſeveral years before Genet landed on this continent, a fact known to every perſon who has croſſed even the threſhold of American hiſtory. As for the ſingle impulſe, if the confederates were always to behave to each other with common civility, there might be ſome poſſibility of the charge being true. But they are conſtantly differing among themſelves on ſerious topics. For example, Colonel Parker, on the 10th of February, 1797, made an able and earneſt ſpeech in defence of the three frigates. He was ſupported, manibus pedibuſque, by John Swanwick, who, if cartloads of ſlander can beſtow diſtinction, ſhines like a ſtar of the firſt magnitude in the democratical zodiac. They were oppoſed by three of their confederates, Meſſrs. Chriſtie, Nicholas, and Giles. The poor frigates were kicked about, as if they had been ſo many waſhing tubs. Nicholas wiſhed them to rot on the ſtocks, as an inſtructive monument of national folly. Chriſtie did not care if they were reduced to aſhes. Giles declared that he always had oppoſed, and always ſhould oppoſe them, in every ſtage, and every ſhape. This is only one inſtance out of fifty or an hundred, that occur in every ſeſſion, where the gentlemen ſtigmatized as acting by a ſingle impulſe, do ſhew very plainly that they value not one farthing the opinions of each other; but ſpeak immediately from their own caprice or conviction. We go back to Curtius.

Thus, in the infancy of our empire, the bane of all republics, is already diffuſed over our country, and poiſons the whole body politic! [It is natural that weak or ignorant people ſhould find their heads half cracked, while they hear of ſuch terrible phantoms.] Faction is a diſeaſe, which has proved fatal to all popular governments; but in America it has aſſumed an aſpect more formidable than in any other country. [He aſſigns ſome fooliſh reaſons, and then adds:] But in America, faction has aſſumed conſiſtency and ſyſtem. It is a conſpiracy perpetually exiſting, an oppoſition organized and diſciplined, for the purpoſes of defeating the regular exerciſe of the conſtitutional powers of our government, whenever a meaſure does not pleaſe the ſecret leaders of the confederacy.

Curtius ought to name thoſe ſecret leaders, and to give ſome traits of the progreſs of this conſpiracy. In his labyrinthian ſtile, it is impoſſible ever to take a faſt hold. He is one of the moſt decent writers of the federal party; and this is the univerſal way in which they make an aſſault on private characters. In the laſt four years of chiming, they have hardly advanced four intelligible aſſertions. Their charges glide from the graſp of ſtraight inquiry, like the ſhade of Anchiſes from the embrace of his ſon. The Tom Thumb tale about Fauchet bribing Randolph, has been ſafely conducted to its grave in the American Annual Regiſter. As for the weſtern inſurrection, Findley, in his hiſtory of it, has ſhewed that Gallatin was ſo far from being an inſurgent, that he had a principal ſhare in preventing miſchief. It is deplorable that a party ſo pregnant with charges ſhould be ſo unfortunate in their few attempts at ſpecification. Already, ſays Curtius, are the heads of our government denounced as traitors; already is our country threatened with civil war.—If the oppoſers of the treaty can poſſibly embroil our country in civil war, it will be effected.

There is a conſiderable ſameneſs in the dialect of the Hamiltonians. Their conſtant cry is the danger of a civil war; and the uſual menace a disjunction of the eaſtern from the ſouthern ſtates. This railing comes excluſively from the eaſtern and ſome parts of the middle ſtates. To the ſouth of Pennſylvania no newſpaper embattles itſelf againſt the Yankees. Of the three daily prints in Baltimore, not one is attached cloſely to either party. A majority of the inhabitants voted for Jay's bantling. In the whole country, down to Georgia, you meet with no gazette lying and raving in the ſtile of Curtius and the Columbian Centinel. The Virginians encourage no newſprinter to balance accounts in black ball with Webſter; or to proclaim the people of New-England bankrupts, ſwindlers, conſpirators, and traitors. They are not, with the monotony of a magpie, eternally croaking about the danger of rebellion. Their ſouls do not ſit ſo much upon thorns as thoſe of their eaſtern fellow citizens. There appears to be leſs vinegar in their compoſition. At leaſt, by judging from the ſtate of the preſs, in theſe oppoſite quarters of the union, a byſtander would make that inference. Envy may have ſome ſhare in this barking. The population of Maſſachuſetts and Connecticut is ſtationary, and their territory is but ſmall. From New-York, incluſive, all the ſtates to the ſouthward, excepting threeNew-Jerſey, Delaware, and Maryland., have an immenſe extent of new land, which holds out the certain proſpect of augmented wealth, population, and importance.

The relative proportion of exports from the middle and ſouthern ſtates has augmented greatly, and muſt continue to do ſo. Boſton, formerly as populous as Philadelphia, hath ſtill but about twenty thouſand inhabitants, while thoſe of its late rival have augmented to ſixty thouſand. New-York, which formerly was much its inferior, hath fifty thouſand. But Baltimore is the moſt provoking inſtance of recent aſcendency. This town aroſe, but as yeſterday, from a marſh; and rivals or eclipſes the wealth and population of the metropolis of New-England. Virginia is twelve times larger than Maſchuſetts; and has already double her population. So great a difference of numbers did not exiſt in the cenſus, of 1775, and it is hourly augmenting. "Like ancient ladies when refus'd a kiſs," Theſe two New-England ſtates are not perhaps pleaſed to foreſee the decline of their conſequence. Whatever may be the cauſe, the rancour of many of their citizens againſt the ſouthern ſtates appears to be of the bittereſt kind. Judging from the Columbian Centinel, a foreigner might be led to believe that the latter have ſubſcribed a ſolemn league of revolution; that troops have been raiſed, and magazines formed; that half our citizens are preparing to butcher the reſt; that Madiſon is a ſecond Cataline, and Giles a Caeſar Borgia. A conſiderable minority in New-England agree with the politics of Virginia. In May, 1794, the inhabitants of Boſton held a very numerous town-meeting, at which, by a great majority, they agreed to recommend to Congreſs to prolong the embargo. An additional ſixty days of famine would have put an effectual end to Britiſh piracies in the Weſt Indies; and would likewiſe have been of more ſervice to France than an aid of ten thouſand land forces, and ten ſhips of the line. A copy of the Boſton reſolutions, ſigned by the town clerk, was tranſmitted not only to their repreſentative, Dr. Ames, but a ſecond alſo, ſuperſcribed to Mr. Madiſon, Colonel Parker, and Mr. Giles. This told pretty plainly that they truſted the three latter gentlemen farther, in that inſtance, than their own repreſentative. Perhaps, however, this town-meeting conſiſted likewiſe of conſpirators. Aves unius generis facile congregantur. The fooliſh word jacobin is rung in endleſs changes; while Curtius gravely declares that private aſſociations are formed and extending their influence over our country. All this is the vileſt traſh imaginable.

The calumny of the federal patriots is not confined to the ſouthern ſtates. The whiſky riots in the weſtern counties of Pennſylvania have ſupplied them with a happy fund for declamation. Of their labours in this line, accept the following ſpecimen.

In a Philadelphia newſpaper of the 8th of March, 1796, there is inſerted an extract of a letter, dated Pittſburgh, the 25th of February preceding, which contains unexpected intelligence. The extract extends to one third of a column, and repreſents the weſtern counties, as having relapſed into a ſtate of anarchy. It is generally believed, ſays the writer, that near half the men in this country have croſſed the river to take poſſeſſion of whatever land they could get. This town is almoſt empty! Some large parties are gone with an intent to clear all before them, where the land is good. Reports from the woods ſay, that a ſtrong party coming to a houſe, they turn out the weaker, and a ſtronger coming on turn them out, ſo that ſome houſes change their owners two or three times a day. This makes about a fourth part of the extract, which is all exactly in the ſame ſtyle, though ſome paſſages ſoar quite above comprehenſion.

No farther intelligence about this tumult reached us, till the 28th of March brought forth a ſecond extract of an epiſtle from Pittſburgh, dated the 12th of March. It corroborates the former news, affirming that the poor people are paſſing the Alleghany in legions with their families to reſide, and eſtabliſh actual ſettlements, &c. Both letters, but the ſecond in particular, have a multiplicity of ranting bombaſtical phraſes, which would be apt to make their veracity ſuſpected. Both of them ſpeak much about a Mr. —, who is doing ſome inexplicable wonders. Both contain a profuſion of ſuch egregious nonſenſe, and malicious falſehood, that they are in themſelves, an hundred and fifty degrees beneath animadverſion.

No further notice was taken in any newſpaper about this inſurrection. Hence it is natural to infer that both pieces came from the ſame pen, and that both were written with one raſcally view, that of ſpreading a falſe alarm among the people in the Atlantic regions of the union. If ſuch revolutionary wonders were going forward, beyond the mountains, it was ſtrange that nobody ſhould hear about them but one correſpondent. It is the buſineſs of every good citizen, to pluck up by the roots ſuch incendiary ſlander. There ſeems a double barbarity in ripping open the ſcar of a wound that is but juſt ſkinned over.

The bad effect of ſuch reports was very well deſcribed in Congreſs by Mr. Baldwin. On the 1ſt of December, 1794, this gentlemen obſerved that in a country ſo extenſive as America, and where the people are ſo widely ſcattered, it was a work of immenſe difficulty to have a regular and accurate account of the meaſures of government communicated through every part of the union. It can ſcarcely be conceived, ſaid he, by thoſe who have no call to viſit the interior and more retired parts of the country, how much the peace of ſociety is diſturbed by the malicious propagation of political falſehood. The moſt wicked lies are kept in circulation, for months together, and before they can be effectually contradicted, the people have become almoſt frantic. For example, Mr. Baldwin mentioned, (and editors of newſpapers in every part of the union, ought to quote this part of his obſervations, as a caveat in future,) that it had been aſſerted that a poll tax of forty ſhillings per head, has been laid on all the inhabitants, that the exciſe has been extended to wheat, to looms, and to inſtruments of huſbandry, and that the late draughts of the eighty thouſand militia, are ſold to France to carry on the war! It is probable, that riots and inſurrections are fomented by theſe rumours more than by all other cauſes. If a conſtant and regular publication of all that is done could reach every part of the United States, it would be an effectual, and, perhaps the only cure for theſe miſchiefs. The people of this extenſive country have, for theſe ten years, enjoyed all the eſſential benefits of ſociety, on very eaſy terms. A man with five or ſix hundred acres of land is ſcarcely called upon for a dollar of taxes in a year. Perhaps no people on earth ever enjoyed ſo fully the advantages of ſociety with ſo few burdens. Is it not a diſtreſſing conſideration, that when we have ſo few real evils, we ſhould create to ourſelves imaginary ones, that give us ſo much uſeleſs uneaſineſs? Some wrong meaſures have taken place, and hereafter will take place, and nobody can expect that any kind of conduct will give univerſal ſatisfactionIn the courſe of the diſcuſſion of this day, Mr. Hillhouſe having ſpoke for ſome time, Mr. Dayton roſe next. He began by remarking, that it could not be expected that he was to make any obſervations on what had been ſaid by the member juſt ſitten down, as he did not hear ten words which the gentleman ſaid. This was owing to noiſe made by members in the houſe..

But a very ſmall difference is perceivable in the ſcale of morality from one end to another of America. Of this remark the Yazoo buſineſs afforded a notable inſtance. By an act paſt in January, 1795, a junto in the aſſembly of Georgia ſold to four companies of land-jobbers ſome vacant lands of that ſtate. On the 2d of March, 1795, Mr. Harper ſaid in Congreſs that the ſale covered thirty millions of acres of the fineſt land in the world, and moſt admirably ſituated for commerce and emigration. It might, every foot of it, be made worth half a dollar per acre. Its ſettlement would tend to open the Miſſiſſippi navigation. Theſe thirty millions of acres had been ſold, he ſaid, for five hundred thouſand dollars! A more villainous tranſaction cannot be conceived. Yet, ſtrange to tell! many perſons in the religious town of Boſton were deeply concerned in buying from theſe purchaſers. The newſpapers ſaid • at the ſpeculators of that place had agreed to give ſome millions of dollars for a part of this booty. The reader knows that the bargain hath ſince been ſet aſide, but that does not leſſen the infamy of thoſe connected with it. The following extract from the preſentment of the grand jury of Chatham county in Georgia, at the October term of 1796, gives an entertaining picture of the parties concerned.

We further and abominably preſent thoſe abominable and iniquitous grants of pine barren land, which have been palmed upon foreigners and northern citizens, the plats of which have been decorated generally with timber not found on them; and moſt of the pretended tracts ſold are not in exiſtence, to the injury of the character of the ſtate, and the honeſt citizens thereof; nine-tenths of whom behold the ſpeculation with the utmoſt abhorrence, conſidering the meaſure calculated to injure their reputation and to cheat the unwary, to add to the pelf of a few men, who are void of principle and honour, and who would ſacrifice their country and its rights to increaſe their own property. We are ſorry to ſay, that among thoſe characters, are thoſe high in office in the United States; and two judges thereof, to wit, James Wilſon of the Supreme Court of the United States, and Nathaniel Pendleton, of the Diſtrict Court of this ſtate, together with James Gunn, Senator from this ſ •• te to Congreſs, have been foremoſt in influencing the legiſlature which paſſed the pretended Yazoo law, bartering the rights of this ſtate, and the moſt fertile tract in the United States, for a mere ſong; and which, if it were to be deemed legal, thoſe concerned have ſold for ten times as much, which the ſtate, by proper management, might have put into her treaſury.

We congratulate our fellow citizens, however, on the virtue of the laſt legiſlature, which declared the ſaid pretended ſale, conſtitutionally null and void, as fraudulent and corrupt, and we hope our fellow citizens at large, will now exhibit their virtue, by ſending ſuch men only to the next legiſlature, as are known to be free from ſpeculation, and will reſpect our rights by continuing and confirming the annulling law. It is only by a firmneſs of conduct in the citizens at large, on this important occaſion, that our rights can be reſpected in Congreſs, and at home; that this ſpecies of gambling can be diſcountenanced, and ſpeculating ſharpers be defeated, which is as much to be deſired, on account of morality and our riſing generation, as the future repoſe of ſociety, and the reputation of our growing community.

We further preſent on this head the attempt by Alexander Moultrie and others to drag this ſtate into the federal court, to anſwer a ſuit in equity, under a former pretended Yazoo ſale. We abhor both ſpeculations alike, and we recommend to the officers of the ſtate, who may have been ſerved with copies of the bill filed in the ſaid ſuit, to make no anſwer thereto until the next meeting of the legiſlature, who we hope will remonſtrate to Congreſs on this ſubject. We cannot ſuppoſe the ſtate liable to be ſued, and in this caſe we hope ſhe will preſerve her dignity, by refuſing an anſwer, particularly in a court where the judges have been guiding the laſt ſpeculations, and where ſhe can conſequently expect no juſtice. We hope that the amendment to the conſtitution, ſo unanimouſly entered into by Congreſs, againſt the ſuability of a ſtate, will not be leaped over to anſwer the vile purpoſes of the moſt infamous ſpeculation.

The above preſentment gives no ſublime notion of American juriſprudence, even at its fountain head. What follows will ſhew the pollution of ſome of its inferior ſtreams. In a work like this, the wrongs of the poor ought not to be overlooked; and the ſtory is inſerted at this place leſt, in the ſubſequent preſs of matter, it might chance to be forgotten. The particulars are taken from a letter addreſſed to the printer of the Georgia and Auguſta Chronicle, dated Hancock county, 30th of April, 1796, and ſigned Henry Boyle. They ſerve to ſhew what outrages may be perpetrated, in this country, under the ſanction of public juſtice.

Sometime in laſt fall, Abner Pierce was committed to jail, and as it ſeems in Hancock county, on ſuſpicion of ſtealing a mare, the property of Ward Darnel. He remained in irons till the ſitting of the ſuperior court, but could not have his trial. The only evidence againſt him was the oath of Darnel, while two other perſons ſwore that they were witneſſes to his having received the mare from Darnel, in virtue of a mutual agreement. After being confined for a conſiderable time, public juſtice had not leiſure to do its duty, by giving him a trial.

This poor man was on the point of lying in jail till the next ſuperior court; conſequently, ſays the letter, as the impriſonment would have amounted to nearly twelve months, lying ſummer and winter in the dungeon, chained in irons, without one bit of fire to thaw the froſt off his frozen limbs, and only one oath againſt him, two in his favour, humanity ſhrinks at the idea

What uſe could there be for keeping the man in irons? A good ſtone wall would have anſwered well enough. But perhaps the priſon was made of boards. About forty years ago, a wooden jail in Virginia, with a priſoner for debt confined in it, took fire. The alarm ſpread. The jailor, in haſtily turning the key, ſpoiled the lock. The priſoner, ſeeing all efforts for his releaſe to be in vain, ſtript off his clothes, thruſt them through the bars of the door, which was of iron, and bade the keeper carry them, as being all which he had, to his family. He then retired to a corner of the priſon, lay down, and periſhed in the flames,

If a man was to be kept a twelve-month in-irons, and then to be hanged, for ſtealing one horſe, what ſhall we make of the old Congreſs, and their agents, who forcibly pilfered ſo many that are yet unpaid for? Nay, what is to be ſaid of the third and fourth Congreſs, who have rejected many ſcores or hundreds of ſuch claims, after admitting them to be juſt? At the ſame time, we are giving John Adams, FOURTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS to buy furniture for his houſe. The latter motion went through the Repreſentatives by ſixty-three votes againſt twenty-ſeven. It was impoſſible to withſtand the pathos of Mr. Samuel Sitgreaves, when deſcribing the crazy bedſteads, the broken chairs, the ragged linen, the moth-eaten curtains, the ruſty ſaucepans, and the fractured waterpots, that General Waſhington was to leave behind him in Market-ſtreet. But, had it been a ſoldier with a wooden leg, who, reſiding at the diſtance of three hundred leagues, had only juſt heard of the ſtatute of limitations; or had it been a widow, like Ami Darden, whoſe only horſe had been dragged from her plough, while her children were ſtarving, Mr. Sitgreaves might as well have addreſſed the north-weſt wind.

. What makes the affair ſtill worſe, the priſoner had a wife and two ſmall children. They had neither cow nor horſe, nor any viſible means of ſubſiſtence, except his labour. Four perſons entered themſelves as ſecurities to the amount of twelve hundred dollars, that this Abner Pierce ſhould attend at the next ſuperior court. Mr. Boyle, who ſubſcribes this letter, was one of the juſtices of peace who granted his liberation. For ſuch an office of benevolence and of equity, he has been abuſed in a newſpaper, and publiſhed, in his own defence, the letter above abridged.

The following is another anecdote of oppreſſion, and of ſo ſingular a kind, that it ought to be recorded for the honour of the eighteenth century. A negro man from the coaſt of Guinea had been ſold to a farmer on the ſouthern line of North-Carolina. In the fall of 1793, he applied to a black boy and girl, the property of an adjacent planter, to give him ſome victuals. In return he aſſured them that he would perform a charm to ſoften the ſeverity of their maſter. He gave them a callibaſh full of the feathers and claws of birds, mixed with negro men's nails. This was buried under the threſhold of the planter's door. He was, at that time ſick, or fell ill ſoon after; and having ordered the boy to be puniſhed for ſome offence, the latter ſaid that, if he was pardoned, he would tell what had made his maſter ill. The concealment was immediately diſcovered, along with ſome of the ſame materials which had been ſtuck about the ſick man's bed. The necromancer was conſequently taken up. This was on a Saturday. He was tried on the next Monday, by a jury of three free-holders, convicted of witchcraft, and hanged on the Tueſday. The boy and girl were whipt and branded in the forehead with a red hot iron. One of theſe children was eleven, and the other thirteen years of age. The ſtory has made noiſe, and an indiſtinct account of it with ſome remarks, appeared in the newſpapers, a conſiderable time after the perpetration of the murder. The narrative is here given on the authority of a gentleman of veracity in Pennſylvania, who was on the ſpot ſoon after. A neighbouring magiſtrate obſerved to him that he had no doubt as to the guilt of the priſoner. He was ſorry for being from home at the time of the execution, as he ſhould have made his own negroes attend it. He added, by way of conſolation, that the owner of the ſlave would not be any great loſer by the affair, becauſe the ſtate was to grant him ſeventy pounds of damagesIn Jamaica, ſeveral black people have been executed for witchcraft..

We ſhall cloſe this chapter with a few miſcellaneous remarks. In the profound debates of December, 1796, about whether Americans were the freeſt and moſt enlightened people in the world, Dr. Ames ſaid that, by all which he could learn, the people in Europe who could read were but as numerous as thoſe in America who could not read. In plainer words, he meant to ſtate that the people in the new world had twenty times more commonly a decent education than thoſe in the old one. Mr. Giles agreed with him in thinking that Americans were wiſer than the reſt of mankind, but he did not believe it modeſt or becoming to divulge the ſecret; for a ſecret it hitherto has been, and, ſince the reſolution was negatived, it is likely to remain ſo. The very morning after the doctor made the above remark, Mr. Bache printed a deciſive ſpecimen of the ſuperiority of the American intellect. A woman in New-Hampſhire was accuſed, and perſecuted for being a witch. A man who had beaten her, was, juſt before this debate, brought to trial. The wicked bench laughed at the charge of witchcraft. In revenge, a mob of the wiſeſt men on earth were on the point of pulling down the court houſe.

Connecticut is uſually held up as the mirror of true republicaniſm, the centrical point, the very focus of federal virtue. Take the following inſtance. In ſpring, 1796, during the debates on the Britiſh treaty, a newſpaper of that ſtate, which has been already citedAmerican Annual Regiſter, chap. ix., had the following moſt extraordinary paragraph.

We are informed, by a gentleman from the upper part of the county of Hampſhire, that a regimental review was held, if we are not miſtaken, at Conway. As the people were informed that ſome communications of a political nature, were to be made to them, upon the parade, a very general attendance was obſerved, of all ages, from ſixteen years to ſixty. The communications were read to them while under arms, and they were then called upon to expreſs their ſentiments, which was done without any heſitation. The unanimous voice of the people preſent was, that, before they would ſubmit to a proſtration of the conſtitution, by the preſent majority in the Houſe of Repreſentatives, they would MARCH TO PHILADELPHIA; uphold the conſtitution and the Preſident; and cauſe the treaty with Great Britain to be carried into effect.

It would have been curious to ſee this army ſet out from Hartford with Trumbull, as a ſecond Alcaeus at their head, chanting the paean of battle. Before they had got within an hundred miles of this city, Pennſylvania might perhaps have furniſhed them with materials for a Connecticut Aeneid; and truly the cauſe to be celebrated, and the bard who was to ſing, were two objects ſo worthy of each other, that the world has not ſeen a more ſuitable conjunction.

All the intemperate expreſſions of democratic ſocieties, and Aqua vitae reformers, do not come within ſight of the effrontery and inſolence of this ſingle paragraph. A body of men aſſemble in arms at a review. They declare that they will march to Philadelphia. overbear the majority of the Houſe of Repreſentatives, and uphold the conſtitution, and the Preſident. By the way, it was time that a public ſervant of ſuch dangerous popularity ſhould be removed from his office. The reſignation of General Waſhington merits the inexpreſſible gratitude of his country. But what better was the Conway review than the meeting at Braddock's field? Indeed it was much worſe; for the whiſky boys did not, like this federal gang, make an explicit avowal of rebellion.

If the deſcription drawn by Morſe of New-Englanders be faithful, nothing but ſuch behaviour is to be looked for. They are indeed, ſays he, often jealous to exceſs; a circumſtance which is a fruitful ſource of imaginary grievances, and of innumerable ſuſpicions, and unjuſt complaints againſt government.—A very conſiderable part of the people have either too little or too much learning to make peaceable ſubjects. They know enough, however, to make them think that they know a great deal, when in fact they know but little.— Hence originates that reſtleſs, litigious complaining ſpirit, which forms a dark ſhade in the character of New-England menThe American Geography, London edition of 1792, p. 146.. This is the account given by one of their own parſons.

Morſe hath obligingly announced his own principles. The clergy (of Connecticut) who are numerous, and as a body very reſpectable, have hitherto preſerved a kind of ariſtocratical balance in the very democratical government of this ſtate; which has happily operated as a check upon the overbearing ſpirit of republicaniſm The American Geography, London edition of 1792, p. 219.. What a precious deliverance that muſt be! It is not ſurpriſing that this ſtate vomited up, during the revolution, ſuch a multitude of the moſt inveterate cut-throat tories.

In New-England," ſays Morſe, "learning is more generally diffuſed among all ranks of people than in any other part of the globe Ibid. p. 145.. His univerſal geography ſhews how little Morſe himſelf knows about many parts of the globe. He farther adds that another very valuable ſource of information to the people is the newſpapers, of which not leſs than thirty thouſand are printed every week in New-EnglandIbid.. Philadelphia has now, beſides other prints, eight daily newſpapers. They work off about forty thouſand ſheets of paper in a weekIn the firſt ſeſſion of the fourth Congreſs, the Houſe of Repreſentatives coſt the public for newſpapers, twelve hundred dollars! ; ſo that the people of this city muſt be ſtill wiſer if poſſible, than the New-Englanders; who have only one daily newſpaper in the whole country.

But newſpapers, and eſpecially ſome of thoſe in New-England, do not always tend to illuminate; they often miſlead. Thus, about the memorable month of April, 1796, a number of the Columbian Centinel had an article that begins thus.

MR. RUSSEL,

I ſend you another extract from Philadelphia, too important to be kept private. You may therefore inſert it, &c.

This important packet is by far too long, as well as too ſtupid, for republication entire, but a few detached parts may ſerve as a ſpecimen.

The writer ſets out by alluding to the diſgraced ſituation of Congreſs and our country. A majority in the houſe are liſted under Madiſon and Gallatin; or rather Gallatin and Madiſon, for the latter has become ſo changed as to be only a ſecond to the former, a devoted tool to him in overturning the government.—A majority of the houſe are arrayed, under ſuch leaders, to oppoſe and pull down the Preſident. Their aim is to deſtroy the executive, to uſurp to the houſe all the power given by the conſtitution to them excluſively.

The Houſe of Repreſentatives, or a majority of them, have never been liſted under Mr. Madiſon or any body elſe; as little has Mr. Madiſon been liſted under Mr Gallatin, as a devoted tool to aid him in overturning the government. No reaſon is aſſigned, and no proof is offered, that a majority in Congreſs had any ſuch deſign; and the reſult ſhewed that a majority of the repreſentatives would ſubmit to ratify the treaty. What then becomes of their pretended enliſtment?

As for pulling down of the Preſident, the expreſſion is highly impertinent, and intended only to inflame the feelings of the public. Did a Britiſh Houſe of Commons ever ſcruple, or did they even forbear, to diſcuſs the merits of a foreign treaty? No! And yet it ſeems that to do ſo in America is to pull down the Preſident, and overturn the conſtitution. If the conduct of Congreſs in making this enquiry was culpable, the conſtitution is de facto overturned already. It is laid in ruins at the feet of the executive. The writer goes on to tell us that, ſince 1781, Mr. Madiſon has been a devoted tool to the French intereſt and government, the abject tool or the active hireling of the tyrant of the day. He is charged with unwearied endeavours to plunge this country into the preſent war in aid of France.

There is more ribbaldry to the ſame purpoſe, and all equally impudent and nonſenſical. What muſt be the ſtate of mind among the readers of this honeſt Centinel, if they digeſt ſuch a morſel? An hundred legiſlators never yet aſſembled, without often differing in opinion from each other. The people without doors are alſo much divided on almoſt every great topic, and we may as well conceit them to be bribed as their repreſentatives.

If the citizens of New-England are ſo much wiſer than their neighbours, it muſt certainly appear in the choice of their repreſentatives in Congreſs. The ſuperiority is not always conſpicuous. In the debate on the ſnuff exciſe, in ſpring 1794, ſome members from that part of the union, and eſpecially Mr. Sedgwick, affirmed, that a land tax was injuſt and impracticable, and that Americans would never ſubmit to it The words were taken down at the time, by the author.. It was impoſſible for any member to give a more conſummate proof of ignorance or ſtupidity. The conſtitution of Maſſachuſetts itſelf, the very ſtate that ſent Mr. Sedgwick to the houſe, authoriſes the aſſembly to impoſe and levy proportional and reaſonable aſſeſſments, rates, and taxes, upon all the inhabitants of, and perſons reſident, and eſtates lying within the ſaid commonwealthPart 2d. chap. i. ſec. i. article 4.. Such taxes are actually paid, yet Mr. Sedgwick has often declared that they never could be raiſed, This conveyed a groſs reflection upon the country. In point of argument, the gentleman might as well have whiſtled yanky doodle to the legiſlators of America. This remark has no reference to Meſſrs. Henderſon, Harper, and a certain venerable majority in the ſecond ſeſſion of the fourth Congreſs.

While the people of Maſſachuſetts have been ſo anxious about the preſervation of the federal conſtitution, they ſhould reviſe their own. Morſe ſays, that the religion of Maſſachuſetts is eſtabliſhed, by their excellent conſtitution, on a moſt liberal and tolerant plan. The preſent horrible oppreſſion of baptiſts, and other ſectaries, contradicts this aſſertionSee American Annual Regiſter, chap. ix..

When the Trojan fugitives, driven aſhore on the coaſt of Africa, ſolicited aid from the queen of Carthage, Dido, in her anſwer, tells them, that, acquainted with misfortunes, ſhe had learned to ſuccour the miſerable. A higher authority than that of Virgil, has alſo declared, that, by the ſadneſs of the countenance the heart is made better. A ſhoal of metaphyſicians, moral philoſophers, and divines, in volumes of five hundred or a thouſand pages, have likewiſe told us, that adverſity ſoftens and refines the heart.

By far the greater part of the world is full of miſery; government, a few of the republics excepted, is nothing but robbery reduced to a ſyſtem. Life itſelf has emphatically, and juſtly, been termed a vale of tears. Theſe truths are not only trite, but they have been ſtale, and even mouldy, for twenty centuries.

Now, as adverſity is ſo common every where, and ſo ſupreme an antidote for thawing the ice of ſelfiſhneſs, as poets have loaded avarice with ridicule in this world, and as divines have menaced it with perdition in the next, our natural concluſion, from theſe powerful and coaleſcing cauſes, muſt be, that this bleſſed planet is pregnant with ſympathy, charity, liberality, and the entire bead-roll of benevolent ſenſibilities. Amen.

Theſe remarks have occurred on reading the account of a very melancholy affair which took place in the latter end of February, 1796, at Hingham, in the ſtate of Maſſachuſetts. The following particulars of it are abridged from a letter written by one of the profeſſors in the univerſity at Cambridge, dated the 23d of February, and printed in a late Boſton newſpaper.

About two months before the date of the letter, a young foreigner called on this profeſſor, and introduced himſelf by ſaying, that he wanted to become acquainted with ſome ſcientific man. The ſubject which he brought on was pneumatics and mechanics. He converſed with the profeſſor fluently, in French, Dutch, and Latin. After a conference, of which part is related, he took his leave, and, by agreement, paid a ſecond viſit to the profeſſor in three days. We ſhall now quote verbatim a part of the account of him, as given by the writer of the letter.

From his good figure, polite and eaſy manners, I concluded he was ſome unfortunate emigrant from the continent of Europe, probably in the ſervice of the monarchy, who, deſtitute of money and friends, choſe to apply ſome of the principles he had learnt at college, to the purpoſe of procuring ſubſiſtence by a novel exhibition. On this account, I never aſked him his name or nation?

On what account? He was deſtitute of money and friends, and he wanted to procure ſubſiſtence by the exhibition of a novel mechanical apparatus; and, therefore, this American philoſopher did not venture to aſk him his name or nation.

"'Twas pitiful! 'twas wond'rous pitiful!"

That the profeſſor in a college ſhould be capable of mean ungentlemany conduct, we know by frequent perſonal experience; but, that any man ſhould wiſh to bring himſelf forward to the public in ſo humiliating a point of view, is rather uncommon. Is it a crime to be in want of money? Is it culpable to attempt earning ſubſiſtence by exhibiting an apparatus of mechaniſm? Both theſe liberal and manly doctrines are avowed by this Cambridge profeſſor. Such treatment of a foreigner, a man of learning, and, above all, a fellow creature in diſtreſs, is diſgraceful not only to the individual who acted ſo, but, from his alacrity in telling the ſtory, it reflects a ſarcaſm on the country to which he belongs. A reader in Europe will be tempted to think very meanly of the general caſt of our ideas. Was the profeſſor afraid that this foreigner would eclipſe him in the eyes of his pupils, by his intended ſhew? How eaſy would it have been for the profeſſor to have found employment of ſome decent kind for a well educated man, who underſtood four languages! It is truſted that every reader will heartily deſpiſe ſuch a froſt-bitten pedagogue.

The chilling reception that he encountered, was undoubtedly the reaſon why this ill-fated wanderer fell into deſpair, and ſhot himſelf. He left a letter addreſſed to the profeſſor, wherein he ſtates, that his want of money, and the failure of his plans for obtaining ſubſiſtence, had determined him to put an end to his life.

The profeſſor ſpeaks of him thus:

The writings and drawings which he left directed to me, are ſo far from evincing a deranged mind, that they intimate a cool and vigorous intellect; being executed not merely with taſte, but mathematical exactneſs.—I have never heard any thing againſt his character, but have ſeen ſome evidences of his humanity, in giving freedom to his ſlave, after binding him to a trade by which he could get his living. How much is it to be regretted that a man ſo gifted, ſhould have met with ſuch beaſtly treatment!

The profeſſor concludes by citing the exit of this gentleman as a proof, that nature, without the commanding voice of religion, has left the nobleſt of her works imperfect. What part of the chriſtian religion taught this perſon to keep a ſtranger at a diſtance, becauſe he is in diſtreſs? To repel ſuch ſordid ideas, and to extend the feelings of humanity, is the only intelligible or rational purpoſe of religion.

The name of this victim to raſhneſs was Iberkin. He was probably a German, there is, at leaſt, ſuch a name in Pruſſia. The letter-writer is Dr. Benjamin Waterhouſe, Profeſſor of Medicine at Cambridge. Leyden gave him education; Rhode-Iſland had the diſhonour of his birth.

The people of New-England boaſt much of their ſuperior hoſpitality to ſtrangers; of which this anecdote holds up a ſhocking ſample.

Before this ſorry pedant ſpeaks a ſecond time of religion, let him read the parable of the good Samaritan. In the Levite, who paſſed by on the other ſide, he will trace the intellectual pedigree of his own mind. When ſuch a character preſents itſelf to mankind, as a paragon of piety, it is both our right and duty to wrench the vizor from the features of deformity, and to adminiſter that typographical drubbing, which has been ſo hardily courted, and ſo richly deſerved.

CHAPTER III.

Federal artifices to promote a French quarrel.— Howe's landing at the head of Elk.—Jacobins not worſe than other people.—Burgoyne's picture of the Britiſh Eaſt-India Company.—Recent ſtoppage of the bank of England.—Robeſpierre eclipſed by Pitt.—Amount of the yearly rental of Britain.— Note on the ſtate-houſe of Hartford.—Number of the public creditors of England.—The triumph of Camillus.—Moral certainty of American indemnification for Britiſh piracy.—Mercantile apathy for the ſufferings of American ſeamen.—Impreſſment at Jeremie.—Pinckney.—Jay.—Neck or nothing forgeries of Pitt.—Dependence of the Britiſh Weſt-Indies on the United States.—Fallacies of Camillus. —What Jay ſhould have ſaid to Grenville.

AMONG other artifices employed by the federal party to exaſperate the people of this country againſt the French republic, one is, their aſſertion that the United States were indebted for the aid of France to the perſonal benevolence of Louis. This is conſtantly held up as a reaſon for deteſting the revolution; and mountains of ribbaldry have, from that ground, been diſcharged on its authors. Some notice has already been taken of this errorBritiſh Honour and Humanity, p. 14. American Annual Regiſter, chap. viii.. Mr. Burke, in the letters above quoted, goes fully through it. He ſays that even when Louis came to the throne, the revolution ſtrongly operated in all its cauſes. The politicians of France had been compelled to deſpiſe their kings. From quarrelling with the court, they began to complain of monarchy itſelf; as a ſyſtem of government too variable for any regular plan of national aggrandizement. They obſerved, that, in that ſort of regimen, too much depended on the perſonal character of the prince.—They compared with mortification the ſyſtematic proceedings of a Roman Senate with the fluctuations of a monarchy.—What cure for the radical weakneſs of the French monarchy, but in a republic? Out the word came; and it never went back.— The different effects of a great military and ambitious republic, and of a monarchy of the ſame deſcription were conſtantly in their mouths. After a long detail of circumſtances, Edmund goes on in theſe words: Theſe ſentiments were not produced, as ſome think, by their American alliance. The American alliance was produced by their republican principles and republican policy. Several pages are ſpent on this ſubject, and every thing proves that the alliance of France with America was the work of the republican party, not of the king. After this explanation, no man who prefers truth to fiction will deafen the public about their obligations to Louis, or the guilt of putting him to death. It was at worſt not more criminal than the unavenged murder ſo lately committed in the jail of PhiladelphiaAmerican Annual Regiſter, chap. X.. We print weekly whole columns of reproach againſt French armies; yet, when five thouſand of theſe troops marched down Front-ſtreet, in their way to the capture of Cornwallis, it is ſtill remembered with what proſtration of gratitude they were welcomed by the ſurrounding citizens. The French ambaſſador was looked up to as a tutelar divinity. His landing from Europe was announced by the diſcharge of cannon, by fire-works and illuminations. His preſence was eſſential at every public entertainment. He was the arbiter of politics, of faſhion, and of taſte. But our turn has been ſerved, and citizen Adet can deſcribe the reverſe of the medal. Daniel Defoe, ſpeaking of his country, ſays: "Ingratitude, a devil of black renown, "Poſſeſs'd her very early as his own!"

Yet there is nothing quite ſo paltry as this conduct of ours, even in the ſable hiſtory of England. In a compariſon with Britiſh armies, the French cannot loſe much. When Howe landed at the head of Elk, many perſons in that neighbourhood had prepared the beſt entertainment which they could afford for the reception of their deliverers. They brought the Engliſh ſoldiers to their tables. The inſtant that dinner was over, the gueſts began to plunder. It was affirmed, at the time, that in an extent of a few miles, they took away ſixteen hundred horſes. It was a common practice, when one of the regulars met an American, to aſk him the time of day. When he pulled out his watch, it was wreſted from his fingers. The tories were ſo much aſhamed of this treatment, that they were never heard to complain, and at the diſtance of twenty years, many of them are yet as firm in loyalty as ever.

Alexander Hamilton and Co. are in the habit of making compariſons between France and England to the advantage of the latter. A celebrated writer of the federal phalanx obſerves, that the French have ranſacked the coffers of the rich, ſtripped poverty of its very rags, robbed the infant of its birth-right, wrenched the crutch from tottering old age, and, joining ſacrilege to burglary, have plundered the altars of GodA New Year's Gift for the Democrats, p. 1.. All this, and much more is true; and declamations of that ſort have been a powerful means with the Britiſh intereſt for exaſperating the people of America. But, coming home for a compariſon, the citizens of this ſtate would not think themſelves fairly painted in a picture of the Paxton boys, butchering innocent Indians in the priſon of Lancaſter. A few ſentences will ſhew that, in general morality, the Britiſh are as bad as other people, and often much worſe than many.

Mr. Howard ſays, that the annual average of executions in London only, for twenty-three years, was between twenty-nine and thirty. In all the ſeven provinces, ſays he, there are ſeldom more executions than from four to ſix. The United Provinces are, by common calculation, three times more populous than London. They ſhould, in proportion, have ninety executions per annum, inſtead of which there are but five. Mr. Howard gives an hundred other facts of the ſame nature. This may help in aſcertaining the balance of domeſtic morality.

As for politics, no jacobin can leſs diſguiſe his appetite for blood and plunder than the common run of Britiſh hiſtorians. The late war againſt Tipoo Saib is ſpoke of as follows: No period appeared more favourable to humble Tipoo. The Nizam and the Mahrattas both declared themſelves ready TO CRUSH THE RISING POWER OF MYSOREGuthrie's Geographical Grammar, fourteenth London edition▪ p. 686.. The latter words are, as printed by the author, in capitals. He proceeds at conſiderable length, in the moſt ſordid and inſolent tone of exultation. No highwayman could ſpeak in plainer language. To humble Tipoo! This creed vindicates every thing that the French have done, or can do. Thus, after the earthquake at Liſbon, Spain, might have ſent an army to humble Portugal. France, in the midſt of peace, might as juſtly diſembark an hundred thouſand men at Plymouth or Dover, to humble England. Thus, in all ages, has the moſt deteſtable ſophiſtry, been exerted to vindicate the commencement of unjuſt and deſtructive wars. Guthrie ſays, that this war coſt Tipoo forty-nine thouſand men. A famine deſtroyed perhaps ten times that number. Nothing but the wildeſt ignorance of hiſtory could make our citizens believe that the French are worſe than their neighbours. It is of the higheſt importance to remove this miſtake, which has become ſuch a favourite handle of party.

Of all writers, Burke is the fitteſt to be quoted on this head. I never, ſays he, ſhall ſo far injure the janiſarian republic of Algiers as to put it in compariſon, for every ſort of crime, turpitude, and oppreſſion, with the jacobin republic of Paris. Yet, when ſpeaking 〈◊〉 England, this author has afforded a ſtill more complete idea of depravity. There has not been in this century any foreign peace or war, in its origin, the fruit of popular deſire, except the war that was made with Spain in 1739. [This is the grand aſſertion of Paine that government dragged England into ſuch quarrels for the ſake of augmenting public debt, and pillaging the public purſe. He adds.] I examined the original documents.—They perfectly ſatisfied me of the extreme injuſtice of that war. [This ſhews the rooted corruption of the people.] Some years after, it was my fortune to converſe with many of the principal actors againſt that miniſter (Walpole), and with thoſe who principally excited that clamour. None of them, no not one, did in the leaſt defend the meaſure, or attempt to juſtify their conduct. They condemned it as freely as they would have done in commenting upon any proceeding in hiſtoryLetter I.. Every man muſt ſee that theſe authors of the war of 1739, were as execrable as the French Directory poſſibly can be.

This is a ſufficient reply to the endleſs barking of Webſter and Camillus about jacobin principles. Let us add one word more about this war of 1739. Guthrie ſays, that the Engliſh took three thouſand four hundred and thirty-four prizes. They loſt three thouſand two hundred and thirty-eight. Thus we learn that a navy cannot protect an extenſive commerce. Engliſh trade has, in the preſent ſtruggle, ſuffered ſtill more ſeverely. A Britiſh navy of ſix hundred ſail cannot ſecure Britiſh ſhipping. Six frigates have an hundred times leſs capability to protect the commerce of America.

In 1772, an enquiry took place before the Houſe of Commons, as to the conduct of the Eaſt-India company. Burgoyne was chairman of the committee. He ſays, that ſuch a ſcene of iniquity, rapine, and injuſtice, ſuch unheard of cruelties, ſuch open violations of every rule of morality, every tie of religion, and every principle of good government was never before diſcovered; and that, through the whole of the inveſtigation, he could not find a ſingle ſpot whereon to lay his finger, it being all equally one maſs of moſt unheard of villainies, and the moſt notorious corruptionEvidences of our tranſactions in the Eaſt-Indies, &c. by Mr. Parker. Printed at London in 1782.. This paſſage occurs in the firſt of more than three hundred pages, all in the ſame ſtyle. By accounts tranſmitted from Haſtings, it was proved, that, in five or ſix years, the ſervants of the company had deſtroyed, ſtarved, or driven away, a greater number of people, than were contained, collectively, in all the Britiſh colonies. After ſuch a review we need not be ſcared at the cruelty of jacobins.

One inceſſant reproach to the French has been the breach of public credit. Our ally is deſcending, with haſty leaps, to the ſame level. On the 27th of February, 1797, the privy council of George the third, by an arbitrary order, forbade the bank of England from iſſuing any caſh in payment, until the ſenſe of parliament could be taken on that ſubject. The reaſon given is, an apprehenſion of a want of ſufficient caſh to anſwer the exigencies of the public ſervice. If government had forbidden the bank to pay gold and ſilver as the intereſt of the public debt, this would have been no worſe than a ſimple confeſſion of bankruptcy. But they ſtep in between the bank and its private creditors, and ſay, You ſhall not pay your private debts. We muſt have the money to pay our own ſalaries, and to ſupport our ſtanding armies; to defray the charge of barracks built in defiance of law; and to clear off the bills of a prince who has defrauded his miſtreſſes, inſulted his two wives, who are both alive Britiſh Honour and Humanity, p. 44.! hired newſpapers to calumniate his mother, and attempted to keep his father for life in a ſtrait waiſtcoat.

Parliament have an equal right to interfere between any debtor and creditor in the kingdom. Thus, all the requiſitions of Robeſpierre are rivalled at a ſingle ſtroke. With equal juſtice they may ſay to every farmer, you ſhall pay no rent to your landlord. Pitt is in the highway to ſubſtantiate Mr. Sedgwick's univerſal aſſeſſmentSee Appendix, No. II.. No legiſlature on earth ever hazarded a more glaring act of iniquity. It is as extenſive in its operation, as deteſtable in its object. Every individual in Britain will feel the effects of this ſtoppage. Aſſociations of bankers and manufacturers may, and will for a time, keep up the price of paper; but the firſt loan wanted for 1798, will ring the knell to its interment.

The act of parliament that has followed this order of council, affects, in a tender point, the mercantile intereſt of the United States; and, as ſhall be preſently explained, it ſtrikes at one of the pillars of the Britiſh treaty. Much pains are employed to repreſent it as of a temporary nature, and to convince the public that credit will quickly come round to the former ſituationThe tories who ſay ſo do not believe it. The rate of exchange on England was formerly above par, which is one hundred and ſixty-ſix and two thirds per cent. It has now (May 10th, 1797,) ſunk to an hundred and twenty-five, and an hundred and thirty. When a bill returns under proteſt from England, the indorſee is intitled to twenty per cent. of damages. People now refuſe to grant ſuch bills, unleſs with this proviſo, that they ſhall not be liable to the uſual penalty of non-payment.. On this account, it cannot be regarded as deſultory to ſtate, in this place, ſome deciſive facts, of which a few are not generally known in America.

The national bankruptcy of England is not a matter which has come ſuddenly to a criſis. Its inevitable approach was diſtinctly foreſeen and deſcribed. Mr. William Morgan, an eminent writer on Engliſh finances, publiſhed, in the beginning of 1796, Facts addreſſed to the people of Great Britain. From a long ſeries of arguments and calculations, the following particulars have been abridged.

Mr. Pitt eſtimates the yearly rents of all the landed eſtates in Britain, at twenty-five millions ſterling. But the land tax, at four ſhillings in the pound, though comprehending houſes, places, and penſions, gives only one million nine hundred thouſand pounds. Mr. Morgan believes that the yearly rents do not exceed eighteen millions. The actual expenſes wanted, in 1796, even for a peace eſtabliſhment, were twenty-two millions. Thus, even a year ago, the public taxes were equal to the whole landed rents of Britain. It was, however, found difficult or impoſſible to raiſe the twenty-two millions eſſential for the national credit, even ſuppoſing that the war had ended in January, 1796. In February, 1795, taxes were laid to the expected amount of ſixteen hundred and forty-five thouſand pounds. In December following, others were alſo propoſed to the amount of eleven hundred and twenty-three thouſand pounds. Yet the intereſt of many millions of debt ſtill remained to be provided for. From the firſt eſtabliſhment of the conſolidated fund, in 1786, till the commencement of the preſent war, the expenditure invariably exceeded the revenue. The deficiencies in the ſix years preceding the war, amounted to nearly ſeven millions ſterling. The blank was ſupplied by loans, and extraordinary but caſual receipts. In the firſt three years of the war, new taxes were laid to the amount of about four millions, and ſtill the annual deficiencies increaſed. In 1795, they came nearly to two millions. It is probable, therefore, ſays Mr. Morgan, that annual loans will become neceſſary, in future, to provide for the ordinary expences of a peace eſtabliſhment; and theſe loans, by requiring new taxes, will produce further deficiencies; ſo that, by borrowing each year, not only to pay the deficiencies of the preceding year, but alſo the intereſt on the deficiencies in former years, the national debt will be increaſing, at compound intereſt, in the ſame manner as it is reduced; but with this alarming difference, that the operations in the one caſe, are ten times more powerful than in the other. If theſe are likely to be the effects of the public debt, with the expenditure only of a peace eſtabliſhment, or on the ſuppoſition that the war were immediately cloſed, what muſt be the conſequences of obſtinately perſiſting in a ſyſtem of profuſion, which, if long continued, would ruin any country, however unimpaired its ſtrength and reſources?

Men who deſire uſeful knowledge will not tire of this quotation. It is certainly better entertainment than to ring invidious changes on the purity of Connecticut

The hiſtory of the new ſtate-houſe at Hartford, exhibits a delectable ſpecimen of this commodity. The aſſembly poſſeſſed a claim on the ſtate of New-York for almoſt fifteen hundred thouſand acres of land, which are worth three or four millions of dollars. In 1795, they ſold this claim for a few thouſand pounds, to a private company. See American Annua • Regiſter, chap. x. If they believed their title to be groundleſs, they were no better than a gang of coiners, who ſell b • d ſhillings at half price. If the law-ſuit of this company ſhall be ſucceſsful, New-York will hardly ſubmit to the deciſion, but on the point of the bayonet. Thus it follows, that for the dirty conſideration of a few thouſand pounds, the legiſlature of Connecticut has put the union in danger of a civil war. With theſe facts before their eyes, and with an effrontery that tranſcends all deſcription, many writers extol the ſuperlative federaliſm of Connecticut; and poor Samuel Dexter, as one of his reaſons for ſupporting the ſugar and ſnuff exciſe, ſaid in Congreſs, in 1794, that all the members of that ſtate voted for it.

If from the aſſembly themſelves, we turn to their conſtituents, the proſpect does not improve. The ſale of theſe fifteen hundred thouſand acres, if the ſtate had a real right to them, was an act of outrageous robbery on their fellow citizens; it was a ſecond Yazoo buſineſs. When the people of Georgia found their property invaded, they elected a new aſſembly, eraſed the ſwindling law from the public records, proclaimed its infamous authors, and ordered their attorney-general to proſecute ſenator James Gunn, as one of the conſpirators. This was acting like men; but the citizens of Connecticut, when in a ſimilar ſituation, truckle under legiſlative treachery; while Pelham, and Trumbull, and Webſter, and a ſwarm of other ſcribblers from that quarter, rack their ingenuity in reviling, as a race of inferior and degraded beings, the people of the ſouthern ſtates.

, and the wickedneſs of Virginia. Since theſe remarks were publiſhed by Mr. Morgan, a campaign has elapſed more diſaſtrous, if poſſible, to England, than any of the former. Her ſituation has, uniformly, ſunk from bad to worſe. What, in the end of 1795, was but expectation, has, in 1797, been converted into hiſtory. Many people in America ſeem to be intoxicated with the ſuperior information and abilities of Mr. Hamilton. The extravagant predictions and aſſertions of himſelf, and his auxiliaries, about Britiſh pride, and power, and opulence, have become too deſpicable for refutation. If Camillus really believed what he wrote reſpecting them, he muſt have been very ignorant. If he knew more than he choſe to tell, his conduct demands a harſher name. Another citation from Mr. Morgan will, perhaps, repay a peruſal.

The competition of rapacious loan-mongers to ſhare in the ſpoils of the country, ſupported by the fictitious credit of paper-money, may perhaps enable the miniſter to triumph in the facility with which the public debts are accumulated, and the temporiſing expedient of ineffectual taxation may ſerve him as a proof of our inexhauſtible reſources to provide for thoſe taxes; but a ſyſtem founded upon deluſion, muſt end in diſappointment and ruin. It was the boaſt of a French miniſter of finance, that the American war was carried on during his adminiſtration, without impoſing a new tax upon the French people; and it was this very circumſtance which produced the revolution. He borrowed immenſe ſums annually, and endeavoured to provide for them by the ineffectual means of economy; for, in that country, taxation had then arrived at its limits. A ſyſtem of economy, under a government which exiſted by corruption, neceſſary failed. New loans became neceſſary to pay the intereſt of former loans. The maſs of debt continued to accumulate, till at length it overwhelmed public credit, and buried the government in its ruins.

As the government and the bank of England cannot at preſent command ſpecie, the next queſtion is, at what time, or from what ſource, have they a proſpect of getting it? The debts of the former are about three hundred and eighty millions ſterling. Paine gueſſes the paper of the bank of England at ſixty millions. Several other great banks had ſtopt before it, and the banks of Scotland and that of Ireland, have ſtopt ſince. In an affair of uncertainty, but of enormous magnitude, we may conjecture that eighty millions ſterling, in bank notes have been blocked up. This added to the debt will make four hundred and ſixty millions. Oppoſed to this world of paper, George Chalmers, an authority to be truſted in this caſe, ſays, that the Britiſh dominions have a circulation of twenty millions in gold and ſilver. Thus credit ſtands like an inverted pyramid, of which paper is the baſe. But ſince that calculation, the quantity of hard money has been reduced. Beſides, every guinea, and every ſixpence, will now hide itſelf. Suppoſe that the bank has at preſent in its coffers two millions ſterling, and that this money is to be reſerved for public exigencies. Two months only of the approaching campaign will exhauſt it. The caſh will dive into the pockets of thoſe who furniſh the ſupplies, and they will hold it, with the gripe of death, till the alarm has become to an iſſue. It is hard to ſee from whence money can be expected. The emperor will not replace his wages. In the mean while, confidence muſt by degrees decline. Tradeſmen muſt be thrown idle, from the want of a proper medium to pay them; and, after every expedient has been tried, an univerſal bankruptcy will enſue. Unleſs France ſhall grant England a peace, the campaign of 1798 will require another loan. Paper cannot be ſent to the Eaſt and Weſt-Indies, even were its character ſound at home. The precious metals cannot be had, and public credit will of neceſſity expire. We ſee that ſix years before the war, the miniſter after every exertion, was annually borrowing great part of a million ſterling to pay the intereſt of old debts. This practice alone would, in time, have produced inſolvency; but, when there is ſuperadded the hiſtory of the laſt four years, probability riſes to demonſtration. In 1791, Mr. Rayment publiſhed a ſtatement of the number of the public creditors of England, taken from the books. It amounted to an hundred and twenty-ſeven thouſand three hundred and one perſons▪ About an hundred and twenty or thirty millions ſterling have been added to the debt, ſo that we may now compute the creditors as being at leaſt an hundred and ſixty thouſand. The bankruptcies of 1793 came perhaps to twenty millions ſterling. Thoſe made by the ſtoppage of paper money will be at leaſt twenty times greater. Every man in Britain, who is worth five guineas, will be affected more or leſs. The ſhock muſt convulſe every nerve in the maſs of property. Thus much for Britiſh credit. We now come to apply theſe remarks with reſpect to Jay's treaty. The Philadelphian addreſs to the Preſident, thanking him for having ſigned it, ſpeaks of indemnity (the ſubſcribers meant to ſay indemnification) therein ſtipulated for paſt loſſes. The New-York chamber, in their reſolutions of the 21ſt of July, 1795, congratulate themſelves on a fair compenſation for the ſpoliations upon our commerce, Curtius in his fourth letter, truſts that juſt claims will be ſupported, and juſt damages paid! The fifteenth number of Camillus is occupied on this ſubject. He quotes the ſeventh article of the treaty, by which, referring to the piracies on American commerce, his Britannic majeſty undertakes to cauſe the ſame to be paid to ſuch claimant in ſpecie, without any deduction, after the amount has been aſcertained. The plan, ſays Camillus, affords a moral certainty of ſubſtantial juſtice.—The indemnification which may be awarded, is to be paid fully, immediately, and without de tour by the Britiſh government itſelf. Say ye impartial and enlightened, if all this be not as it ought to have been!

In ſhort, the hope of recovering payment for the ſhips and cargoes was the greateſt cauſe for the treaty becoming popular among American merchants. Its advocates inceſſantly held out this article as an object of exultation. When handling it Camillus riſes above his wonted compoſure, and one apoſtrophe may well enough anſwer another. Say ye impartial and enlightened, after the preceding explanation of Engliſh finances, do ye expect one farthing from the king of England? Do ye fancy that a monarch who is fifteen months in arrears to the wench who ſcours his water cloſetOn the 18th of April, 1796, Mr. Grey ſaid in parliament, that the civil liſt was FIVE QUARTERS in arrears. George the Third has many millions ſterling at command. His refuſing to pay theſe arrears, proves him to be one of the meaneſt beings that ever diſgraced human nature., whoſe government is three hundred and eighty millions ſterling in debt, and who can pay its intereſt in nothing but paper, do ye fancy that ſuch a perſon will ſend over his money to indemnify American merchants.

Dr. Ames, in his renowned ſpeech in Congreſs on the treaty, delivered himſelf with more caution. Five millions of dollars, ſaid he, and probably more, on the ſcore of ſpoliations committed on our commerce, depend upon the treaty. The treaty offers the only proſpect of indemnity This word means only pardon for a crime. Thus, when Charles the Second ſigned the act of oblivion and indemnity, the cavaliers called it an act of oblivion to his friends, and indemnity to his enemies.. Such redreſs is promiſed as the merchants place ſome confidence in. Will you interpoſe and fruſtrate that hope! That hope, to borrow the ſtyle of Bunyan, hath ſince arrived in doubting caſtle, and will ſoon be in the graſp of giant deſpair.

One feels leſs for the misfortunes of ſome of the merchants on account of their ingratitude to their ſeamen. The neglect of Jay to ſecure an article in favour of theſe people, even when it was offered by Grenville, has already been ſtated to the publicBritiſh honour and humanity, p. 41.. It was diſgraceful to have accepted of ſuch a treaty at all, without an ample compenſation to every one of theſe men, who had been impriſoned, hand-cuffed, ſtarved and flogged, while acting in American ſervice. The printed reſolutions of the chamber of commerce at New-York and Boſton approve the treaty in general terms, without the ſmalleſt notice of this infamous omiſſion. The indemnity addreſſers of Philadelphia drop not one word of alarm or ſympathy for the dangers or ſufferings of ſome thouſands of mariners. On the 14th of April, 1797, alſo, when the merchants of Philadelphia preſented an addreſs to Congreſs in favour of the treaty, that paper contains not one glimmering of compaſſion or even of reference to the ſufferings of their ſeamen. Five millions of dollars, and the principal part of their remaining fortunes, form the excluſive burden of the ſong. Never did the ſordid ſpirit of mercantile adventure diſplay itſelf in more repulſive colours. Woe be to that country whoſe counſels are governed by merchants, or by prieſts! When the Senate ſaw an article about the Weſt Indian trade which they did not like, they refuſed to accept it. But they overlooked this hideous chaſm about ſeamen, though in every view of juſtice, honour, humanity, and even of commercial intereſt, it was by many degrees more important than the other. This is preciſely the way in which Congreſs and the country have treated their old continental ſoldiers; ſo that no part of our enlightened citizens has a title to condemn the reſt.

It may be anſwered, but what could you do! The reply is ready. The immediate reſtoration of every American ſeaman, or a ſerious and vigorous effort to that end, ſhould have been demanded and obtained, before making a ſingle clauſe of any treaty. Farther, every one of them ſhould have received a liberal compenſation for the time during which they had been confined in Britiſh veſſels. We have not heard of ſuch compenſation being either given, or ſought. If any ſcruple was to be entertained on the part of Britain about making ſuch reparation, it contradicted common reaſon to believe that negociation with ſuch people could end in ſatisfaction. Figure the caſe that a crimp kidnaps your ſon on the ſtreets of London, and ſends him to the Eaſt Indies as a recruit. This offender owns the fact, and without engaging to reſtore the young man, he aſks you to enter into an agreement for a freight of cotton or tobacco. You would not liſten to ſuch a propoſal till ſecurity was given for the redemption of your ſon; or, if you did liſten, the whole world would pronounce you an unnatural barbarian. Of Britiſh impreſſments, the following inſtance is not, perhaps, worſe nor better than an hundred others. It is inſerted merely as a ſample.

On the 29th of July, 1795, Cyprian Cook, maſter of the ſloop Criſis, of Norwich, in Connecticut, and Elijah Clarke, a paſſenger in the veſſel, emitted depoſitions at New-London, of which here follows an abridgement. On the 4th of July, preceding, the Criſis, and above twenty other American veſſels were lying at anchor in the port of Jeremie, in Hiſpaniola. The Hermione, an Engliſh frigate, came into the port, anchored, and ſent her boats to board the Americans. Every man in the veſſels, was taken away, excepting the captains and mates. They were, to the number of ſixty or ſeventy, kept on board and faſting, during forty-eight hours. They were examined, one by one, and five only were diſmiſſed, becauſe, as the Engliſh captain obſerved, they were unfit for ſervice. All theſe men were Americans born, excepting two Danes, who had been naturalized here. This outrage happened ſeven months and an half after ſigning of the treaty; and it ſhews how ſincerely England deſpiſed our envoy and thoſe who ſent him. Tame ſubmiſſion to ſuch treatment was the very exceſs of national diſgrace. But, after Jay had declined to write an article in favour of our ſailors, they were ſure of meeting with the worſt uſage. It is ſtrange that Jay did not burn the copy of his card, making a demand in their behalf, and of the conſenting reply of Grenville. The Preſident had very good reaſon to be aſhamed of laying ſuch a correſpondence before the Houſe of Repreſentatives. It is ſuppoſed that ſome thouſands of American ſeamen have been treated like the above at port Jeremie

Some Engliſh newſpapers of 1796, ſay, that the preſs gangs employed in Britain, amount to nine thouſand men. A great part of theſe fellows are themſelves ſailors, and every one of them, from the nature of the ſervice, muſt be robuſt and able-bodied. Their ſituation requires better wages, and better living, than that of a foot ſoldier. They can hardly coſt the country leſs, in one ſhape or other, than two ſhillings ſterling per day. On ſhip board, or in uſeful manufactures, they would be worth at leaſt an equal ſum. Thus each of theſe kidnappers ſinks daily four ſhillings ſterling, which, between poſitive and negative loſs, they might expend or earn for ſociety. Nine thouſand men, at a loſs of four ſhillings per head, make a ſinking fund of eighteen hundred pounds ſterling a day. This, multiplied by the number of days in a year, gives ſix hundred and fifty-ſeven thouſand pounds per annum, for the charge of preſs gangs. It is an ordinary computation in Britain, that every impreſſed man coſts, upon a medium, an hundred pounds ſterling, before he is got into actual ſervice.

Yet, in ſpite of this ſtrange work, in order to man her navy, the queen of iſles labours under the greateſt difficulty for hands, that ſhe has perhaps ever known. To preſs American ſeamen is very conſiſtent with her Algerine code of morality, but entirely repugnant to her common maxims of policy. The excluſion of foreign mariner, from her ports and ſhipping, is the great object of her act of navigation. Her breach of it ariſes from neceſſity more than choice.

.

Camillus, in No. vi. points out many difficulties in the way of a complete protection for our mariners. It is likely enough that the article, if inſerted, would have been broken; and real difficulties might have occurred in the buſineſs. But even decorum required ſuch a clauſe. Camillus has advanced ſome aſſertions that are abſolutely untrue. He ſays that Great Britain has accordingly perſeveringly declined any definitive arrangement on the ſubject; notwithſtanding earneſt and reiterated efforts of our government.—Our miniſter plenipotentiary, Mr. Pinckney, it is well known, has long had this matter in charge, and has ſtrenuouſly exerted himſelf to have it placed upon ſome acceptable footing; but his endeavours have been unſucceſsful. By Thomas Pinckney, and his efforts, we need not ſet much ſtore. While France was in the very act of driving the allies to perdition, Jay, by the moſt abſurd, or perſidious miſconduct, put his hand to the treaty, when, if he had only waited ſix weeks, till the approaching conqueſt of Holland had been completed, he might have had almoſt any terms worth aſking. Pinckney was ſilly enough to approve of his management in making ſo good a bargain. Neither of theſe precious envoys would buy largely in the funds, when there was a certainty of their tumbling. Yet they clapped up a treaty, when every moment of delay was ineſtimable to America. This is the ſcandalous way in which our buſineſs hath been tranſacted. The affair had hung over ten years, and then was finiſhed at a moment of infinite impropriety. Such miſerable botching the world has probably never ſeen before.

Camillus foreſaw the objection as to the very unſeaſonable period of ſigning the treaty. In No. vii. he defends it thus. It will be uſeful to go back to the periods when the negociation began and ended. Our envoy arrived in England, and entered upon the buſineſs of his miſſion, at the moment when there was a general elation on account of the naval victory gained by Lord Howe, and previous to thoſe important ſucceſſes, which have terminated in the conqueſt of Holland; and the treaty was concluded by the 19th of November laſt, prior to the laſt mentioned event, and the defection of the king of Pruſſia. The poſture of things at the time of the negociation, and not at this time, is the ſtandard to try its merits.

It will indeed be uſeful to go back; for every line of this argument is contradicted by undiſputed facts. The Preſident's meſſage to Congreſs about his having appointed Jay, was dated the 16th of April, 1794. The king of Pruſſia, in the beginning of that month, had publiſhed a curious manifeſto ſtating his reaſons for quitting his allies. Pitt afterwards gave him twelve hundred thouſand pounds to make him return to the combat. He took the money, but never performed his promiſe. Inſtead of that, he went into Poland to beſiege Warſaw. He left indeed his quota as a prince of the German empire; but they alſo were annihilated, along with an Auſtrian army, at Kaiſerſlautern, in a battle which laſted incluſively night and day, from the 12th to the 15th of July, 1794; in the end, the republicans plunged through the loaded Pruſſian batteries at the point of the bayonet. Surely, Mr. Hamilton imagines that nobody reads newſpapers except himſelf. In November, 1794, when Jay ſigned this paper, • ederic William had, for many months, been abuſed in the daily prints of London, as a deſerter from the cauſe of morality, and regular government. Thus Camillus ſtands detected of an intentional and notorious falſehood.

As to the general elation about lord Howe's victory, the French were equally ſatisfied, and with better reaſon. An American ambaſſador ought to have been poſſeſſed of more penetration than the porters and chairmen whom Pitt or his runne • ired, upon that joyful occaſion, to break the windows of John Wilkes and lord Stanhope.

Again, Camillus ſays that Jay entered upon the buſineſs of his miſſion previous to thoſe important ſucceſſes which terminated in the conqueſt of Holland. This is another ſtupendous untruth, like that about the king of Pruſſia. A few facts and dates will prove it to be ſo. On the 26th of April, 1794, Pichegru totally beat Clairfait at Moucron, and killed ſix thouſand of his troops. In the courſe of a few weeks, a number of other deſperate battles enſued. The allies did whatever brave men, and able officers could do; but the French, by their numbers, their enthuſiaſm, and their talents, fairly drove them out of the field. So early as the 19th of May, 1794, the emperor printed an addreſs to the inhabitants of Bruſſels, in a tone almoſt as dejected as the king of Pruſſia's farewell manifeſto. The armies continued almoſt conſtantly fighting till the 26th of June, when the French gained the battle of Fleurus. This completely turned the ſcale. The grand Auſtrian army immediately ſent off their baggage, and, in the courſe of a few days, thirty thouſand people fled from Bruſſels. From that day forward every man in England, excepting Jay, muſt have foreſeen the conqueſt of Holland. Though Jay had entered upon the buſineſs of his miſſion before the fate of Flanders was decided, it was his duty to have ſpun out the buſineſs and to have taken the utmoſt advantage of that invaluable contingency. Camillus, by advancing, in Jay's defence, the above palpable fictions, has expoſed without reinforcing the weakneſs of the cauſe.

But Camillus ſhould alſo have defended the Senate of Congreſs. They certainly did not approve of the treaty till after the defection of the king of Pruſſia, and the ſurrender of Amſterdam. They did not ratify till the 24th of June, 1795. In the above quotation, Camillus plainly implies, that, after the defection and reduction, &c. better terms might have been had. The queſtion then comes to be why the Senate did not ſtand out to get them? They ſent back an article. They ſhould have amended and ſent back others. The true reaſon was, firſt, that ſome of the Senators were ſeriouſly and ſubſtantially ignorant about the real ſtate of politics in Europe; for, after the reduction of the ſeven United Provinces, a fear of England attacking America was but the eye of childhood; that fears a painted devil. Secondly, the ratification was an object of party. Jay had been ſent over in deſpite of a majority in the Houſe of Repreſentatives; and to have refuſed the ratification of a treaty planned under the auſpices of Mr. Hamilton, would have caſt irrecoverable ridicule on their whole connections. For this reaſon twenty ſenators, leſs pardonable, if ſuch a thing can be, than Jay himſelf, agreed to what he had done; and, as Junius obſerves, though royal favour cannot remove mountains of infamy, it undoubtedly leſſens, for it divides the burden.

But, independent of French victories, Jay muſt have known that Pitt, from his dreadful want of money, could not hold out for any conſiderable time. Much has been ſaid as to the danger of England (forſooth!) declaring war againſt the United States. To ſhew the dreadful plight that ſhe was in, the following particulars are taken from a ſeries of reſolutions read in the houſe of commons by Mr. Smith, on the 22d of February, 1796.

In September, 1795, Walter Boyd, junior, was requeſted by Pitt to advance him a million ſterling. He did ſo, and by agreement, he was to draw bills on the lords commiſſioners of the treaſury, which they were to accept. Now comes the aſtoniſhing part of the tranſaction. Bills for ſeven hundred thouſand pounds were drawn in London, bearing a falſe date at Hamburgh, ſeveral weeks preceding the real time of framing them. Walter Boyd is not engaged in any houſe of buſineſs at Hamburgh, ſo that he might as well have pretended to draw bills from the moon. Theſe forgeries, proſeſſing to be foreign bills, were written upon unſtamped paper. They were, ſays Mr. Smith, of ſuch a nature and deſcription, as the bank of England would have refuſed to diſcount for any commercial houſe whatever, and ſuch as it would have been injurious to the credit of any private houſe, to have negociated. Theſe are civil words, but, in plain Engliſh, any other parties of ſuch a plot, but the miniſter and his friends, would infallibly have been hanged.

It was plain that a government adopting ſuch infamous expedients to raiſe money, muſt have been upon its laſt legs. With ſuch facts in view, it is amazing how completely ſome of the ableſt men in America were deceived about it. Of all the arguments in favour of the Britiſh treaty, none was more loudly repeated than the danger of a war with Britain. War, ſaid Dr. Ames, might be delayed, but could not be prevented. The cauſes of it would remain, would be aggravated, would be multiplied, and ſoon become intollerable. More captures, more impreſſments, would ſwell the liſt of our wrongs, and the current of our rage. [If England had declared war againſt the United States, in conſequence of the repreſentatives rejecting the treaty, ſhe would have become bankrupt before the next Chriſtmas.] The progreſs of wealth and improvement is wonderful, and ſome will think too rapid. Bache's debates, vol▪ ii. p. 332. [Witneſs the enormous bankruptcies in October, 1796, and the intolerable ſcarcity of money ever ſince. The country is thriving undoubtedly, but not the more from the extravagant ſpirit of over-trading] The vaſt crop of our neutrality is all ſeed-wheat, and is ſown again to ſwell, almoſt beyond calculation, the future harveſt of proſperity. And in this progreſs what ſeems to be fiction is found to fall ſhort of experience. And, in this progreſs, the bank of the United States, unleſs its diſcounts are extremely circumſpect, will go to the family-vault of thoſe in London, Edinburgh, and Dublin. The reign of paper is paſt in Europe, and, as a matter of courſe, its expiration in America will happen ſooner or latter. In caſe of any ſerious rupture with France, and after the unparalelled ruin that is overſpreading England, every man here will directly inſiſt on metal for his bank notes. A • the vaſt crop of our neutrality, the privateers of France and England have reaped a very great part of it.

We ſhall now go back to Mr. Smith's reſolutions, and cite another proof of the utter incapacity of England, in June 1796, to have attacked America. The profits of the contractors, ſays he, at the expence of the nation, have been ſo exorbitantly ſwelled, as to have riſen even before the depoſit was made thereon, to an amount greatly exceeding the depoſit itſelf, viz. on a loan of eighteen millions, to the enormous and incredible ſum of, two millions, one hundred and ſixty thouſand pounds ſterling.

No man could imagine that ſuch a ſyſtem was to hold out, any more than the gambling intereſt of five per cent. per month, ſo frequently paid of late in the ſea port towns of America. Both theſe ways of raiſing money reſembled the reſource of the culprit, who ſaid that he could eſcape the gallows by cutting his throat in priſon.

Another inſtance ſhall be given of the hurry in which Pitt was to ſecure the loan for 1796, and of the extreme impatience with which the people of England ſaw the war prolonged.

When the bankers of London agreed to lend a ſum of money to the miniſter, the cuſtom was to give them credit in the public funds to a certain amount. The current price of ſtock, at the time of making the bargain, determined the quantity of it to be given for the new advances of the creditors. Thus, if the three per cents were at eighty, the ſame proportion of them would buy ten thouſand pounds, that would only buy ſeven thouſand five hundred, if the ſtocks were at ſixty per cent. It was hence the great aim of every premier to raiſe them as high as poſſible, before his loan, and it was uſual to caſt proſpects of peace, into ſome royal ſpeech or meſſage, by which they were ſure of being raiſed. But, on the 27th of November, 1795, Mr Pitt, with a precipitancy that wears the fouleſt aſpect, cloſed a loan for eighteen millions with Mr. Boyd. A meſſage that he muſt have foreſeen, came on the 8th of December, thereafter, from George the Third to parliament, telling his earneſt deſire of peace. The funds inſtantly got up ſo high that the quantity given for the loan, roſe in its value, nine hundred thouſand pounds ſterling. This was juſt ſo much money loſt to the public, and gained to the bankers, who probably run halves with Pitt himſelf. So rapid a riſe in the funds, on the ſlender proſpect of peace, ſhewed how very little the Britiſh were by this time diſpoſed or indeed enabled for a war with America. I conſider all thoſe war arguments that have been made uſe of," ſaid Mr. Chriſtie, as nothing more than the old ſtory of raw-head-and-bloody-bones, much fitter to be uſed by an old woman to quiet a croſs child, than to convince any of the enlightened members of this houſe of the propriety of this meaſureBache's Debates, vol, ii. p. 351..

Events have ſince proved that the dread of war was a mere chimera, as the public credit of England had become too feeble to ſupport ſuch a ſhock. But, independent of that, and admitting our legiſlators to have been, as many of them were, very ſhamefully ignorant of the ſtate of Engliſh finance, ſtill America had another ſtring to her bow that would have reduced Britain to any reaſonable terms. The Weſt-India Royal Gazette, of the 7th of October, 1794, contains a memorial to Henry Dundas from the Weſt-Indian planters and merchants. They ſtate, at much length, how impoſſible it is for them to ſubſiſt unleſs by ſupplies of proviſions from this country. Hence an embargo on exportation would have reduce • them directly to famine. There is not room here to inſert the whole memorial, though every line of it well deſerves attention; but the following paſſages will ſhew how ſilly it was in members of Congreſs to ſtand up and make ſpeeches about the danger of an attack from England in the ſhape of open war.

The Britiſh Weſt-India iſlands," ſays the memorial, "containing about five hundred thouſand black, and about fifty thouſand white inhabitants, have been for many years, greatly dependant for food upon a ſupply of flour, rice, Indian corn, oatmeal, bread, and other articles of dry proviſions, received by a ſpeedy channel, and in quantities proportionate to their want, from the countries now under the ſovereignty of the United States of America; by no internal reſource can they render themſelves independent of ſuch a ſupply, excepting by a total change of their agricultural ſyſtem, at the expence of their commerce and revenue of the mother country; and experience dearly bought, on ſuch occaſions, has now ſufficiently evinced, that, by no other external channel, can ſuch a ſupply, adequate to their wants, and ſuited to the emergency of circumſtances, be obtained.

With ſuch a document ſtaring in his face, how could a repreſentive pretend to ſay that he was afraid of Britain declaring hoſtilities? Or how could two-third of the people in this country fall into ſo fooliſh a tremor on that head? It argues very little either for the ſound information, or the good ſenſe of our citizens. The American alarm did not begin till eighteen months after the date of this memorial, till the Britiſh miniſter had begun to forge bills, and till the bank of England was within a year of its diſſolution.

Beſides the important articles of food, timber for the purp • of building their houſes and manufactories, and ſtaves and heading, of which to form packages for their produce: horſes and other cattle for agricultural uſes (the indiſpenſible vehicles of thoſe benefits which Great Britain derives from theſe iſlands) cannot, in many caſes, be obtained at all; and in no caſe, on reaſonable and advantageous terms, excepting by an intercourſe with the United States of America.

The whole paper goes on the ſame principles, that the Britiſh Weſt-Indies are abſolutely at the mercy of the United States.

The Britiſh colonies of Canada, Nova-Scotia, and St. John, inſtead of ſupplying the Weſt-India iſlands with timber and proviſions, have, upon a fair experience, been found, nearly at all times, to conſume their own productions of theſe articles; and, upon ſome occaſions, even to need a ſupply from their neighbours of the United States.

The contents of this memorial are ſo pleaſing as well as important, that one could wiſh to have it framed in glaſs, and hung up in every farmer's kitchen in the country, as an invincible antidote againſt the return of the federal mania of April and May, 1796. Every ſtep of inveſtigation diſcovers more clearly the utter ignorance, negligence, or corruption of his excellency John Jay. This envoy might have dictated his own terms about the Weſt-India trade, yet it was in this very quarter that he conſented to a ſtipulation which even the capacious gulp of our Senate could not, or durſt not, ſwallow. By the twelfth article, we were not to keep the Britiſh iſlands from ſtarving by freighting any veſſels larger than ſeventy tons!

Many obſtacles ſtand in the way of the Weſt-India colonies, obtaining lumber and proviſions from Great-Britain, or any other country in Europe; more particularly the precarious circumſtances of ſuch a ſupply; its diſtance in time of emergency, and the periſhable nature of the articles of food, which forbids a proviſion of large ſtores from a reſource ſo remote; and even were it practicable for the colonies to exiſt under a dependance of the neceſſaries of life and cultivation, upon means ſo uncertain, yet the enormous expence of thoſe means, particularly in reſpect to lumber, muſt prevent their cultivating their lands to any beneficial purpoſe either to themſelves, in the firſt inſtance, or finally to Great Britain.

The Britiſh colonies have found, in an intercourſe with the United States, a market for their ſuperfluous produce beyond the European conſumption, and particularly for the article of rum; for which, at different times, the European market would not afford the coſt of package and tranſport.

Thus far we have about one-fourth part of the memorial. We now plainly ſee that the more iſlands which England conquered in the Weſt-Indies, the more ſhe was dependant on this country, for their means of ſubſiſtence, for timber to build houſes, for ſtaves and heading, as likewiſe for taking off a great part of the Weſt-Indian productions that would not bear the expence of being conveyed to Europe. The planters and merchants proceed to complain heavily of the mode of intercourſe then permitted between the continent and the iſlands. It is difficult to do juſtice to their ideas but in their own words. Here follows part of what they ſay.

Since the ſeparation of the United States from Great Britain, their intercourſe with our iſlands having been reſtricted to Britiſh veſſels only, the price of lumber and proviſions at the Weſt-India markets, under the moſt favourable circumſtances of peace and regular ſupply, has ariſen from fifty to an hundred per cent.

This, by the way, ſhews the tyrannical ſpirit of the Britiſh government, and how every other part of the empire is ſacrificed to the plan of aggrandizing the mother country. The memorial goes on in theſe words.

The intercourſe, while confined to Britiſh veſſels, has, for various reaſons, been principally carried on by a direct trade between the iſlands and the United States, in veſſels conſtructed and fitted for the purpoſe, which muſt evidently have the advantage over veſſels employed in the circuitous trade from Great-Britain; as the laſt could not be at once proper for the tranſport of lumber from America to the iſlands, and for that of produce from the iſlands of Great Britain; nor afford means of barter in rum and molaſſes, nor be navigated on equally advantageous terms with thoſe ſmaller veſſels, nor equally ſuit their expedition to the wants of the iſlands and to the ſtate of markets.

Upon the breaking out of a war with France, theſe ſmall and defenceleſs veſſels have either fallen a prey to the enemy, or been employed in other trades; and this cannot be accounted a circumſtance accidental, or that admits of future remedy; ſince the nature of the intercourſe in queſtion forbids an eſtabliſhment of regular convoys to and from all the iſlands at ſuch times as may be ſuited to their wants; and the immenſe expence of outfit, ſeamen's wages, and inſurance, diſcourage adventure in a trade attended with ſuch imminent riſk, and which, if a ſupply by ſuch means were even poſſible, muſt ſwell the expence beyond thoſe bounds which the cultivators in thoſe iſlands can poſſibly ſupport.

There is next ſtated the frequent and invincible neceſſity which the governors of the Weſt-India iſlands find of opening their ports to American veſſels to prevent inſtant ſtarvation; and yet proviſions and other articles of immediate neceſſity are ſometimes ſold at three hundred per cent. beyond the average price. For this, and other reaſons above ſtated, they ſolicit a more extended intercourſe with America. They repreſent the impoſſibility of providing food from their lands, and the peculiar diſtreſs under which they labour during the preſent war. Under ſuch diſadvantages a perſeverance in the preſent ſyſtem of their intercourſe with America muſt form an accumulation of burden, which will entirely preclude a fair competition with their rivals in cultivation, will ſtimulate and aſſiſt the progreſs of cultivation in the Dutch and Spaniſh ſettlements, and immediately tend to the diſtreſs and ruin of the inhabitants of the Britiſh Weſt-India colonies, and of the numerous claſſes of their fellow ſubjects in Great Britain and Ireland connected with and dependant upon them.

The memorial alſo repreſents the good policy of encouraging America to perſevere in her agricultural ſyſtem, and expreſſes fears that the depreſſion of her intercourſe with the iſlands may have a tendency of driving her to manufactures. They add, our ſyſtem of excluſive poſſeſſion of thoſe benefits has been found, in times of emergency, impracticable, and the participation which, at ſuch times, we have granted to America, has had neither the merit of a conceſſion with that country, nor the advantage of effectual relief to ourſelves.

It is needleſs to ſeek farther evidence of the Britiſh Weſt-Indies exiſting wholely at our good will; and how highly England values that part of her acquiſitions appears from her ſolicitude to extend them.

In the debate, in parliament, about the beginning of 1796, on the bill for aboliſhing the ſlave-trade, in the Houſe of Commons, Mr. Dundas ſtated the imports from the Britiſh Weſt-Indies, in 1795, to be as follows: eight millions eight hundred thouſand pounds ſterling; revenue ariſing on this amount, one million ſix hundred and twenty-four thouſand; ſhipping employed in that trade, ſix hundred and ſixty-four veſſels; tonnage, one hundred and fifty-three thouſand; ſeamen eight thouſand; exports from Great-Britain, to the Weſt-Indies, in 1794, three millions ſeven hundred and forty thouſand pounds, employing ſeven hundred veſſels; tonnage, one hundred and ſeventy-ſeven thouſand; ſeamen, twelve thouſand; produce of the iſlands imported to Britain and re-exported, three millions ſeven hundred thouſand pounds.

On the 10th of February, 1797, Mr. Parker, when defending the plan of building American frigates, obſerved that, ſince the beginning of the war, not a ſingle Britiſh Weſt-India fleet had been homeward bound which theſe ſix frigates were not ſtrong enough to have taken. Such was the known track of the trade-winds that they were obliged to come within ſeven days ſailing of this coaſt. The French were in the ſame condition, ſo that we might have been as formidable to either of theſe powers as Algiers is.

The ſtopping of this enormous trade muſt have ruined the credit of Britain. She would not, therefore, have been haſty in declaring war againſt the country, after the dreadful campaign of 1794. On the 10th of February of that year, Dorcheſter had, indeed, made an addreſs to the Indians, wherein he ſtated the poſſibility of a war, in the courſe of the year, between England and the United States. But this was, moſt likely, a mere decoy for our executive. On the 26th of May following, Grenville and Dundas denied, in Parliament, any knowledge of this performance. They certainly lied, for they refuſed to produce a copy of Dorcheſter's inſtructions; and, as Fox obſerved in reply, his lordſhip was not a perſon who would hazard ſuch a conduct without proper authority. This diſavowal by Dundas and Grenville ſhews that they were afraid to acknowledge the ſpeech; and that a rupture with the United States would have been regarded in the old country with univerſal reprobation. Grenville even pretended to deny the poſſibility of ſuch a harangue having ever been delivered. What an impoſtor! But this agrees very well with the forgery of Boyd's Hamburg billsThe ſatellites of the miniſter have about as much honour and honeſty as himſelf. The Telegraph of the 30th of March, 1795, relates, that, on a late trial at Thetford, it came out that a member of Parliament pocke • ed three hundred pounds ſterling a year for franking letters to a banking-houſe..

Camillus, No. v. overlooks every circumſtance of this kind that ſhews how much Pitt would have been afraid of an American war. He tries to play upon our prudence and our fears. When ſpeaking of the claim for negroes carried away by the Britiſh from New-York, at the end of the late war, he ſays no conſideration of honour forbid (forbade) the renunciation; every calculation of intereſt invited to it. The evils of war for one month would outweigh the advantage, if, at the end of it, there was a certainty of attainment. But was war the alternative? Yes, war or diſgrace. —If nothing had reſulted [from Jay's voyage, he means,] was there any choice but repriſals? Should we not have rendered ourſelves ridiculous and contemptible in the eyes of the whole world by forbearing them?

The neceſſity that Camillus deſcribes did not exiſt; though we have loſt leſs by a ſhabby ſtate of peace, than we muſt have done by a ſucceſsful war. But wiſdom would have choſen a middle courſe. Jay might have addreſſed Grenville in terms like theſe. You have wronged the United States in a variety of ſhapes. Your offers of redreſs are evaſive or inſolent. We ſhall not declare war againſt you. There is a ſhorter and a cheaper way. America has no treaty of commerce with England. She cannot be accuſed of breaking any, by ſtopping the exportation of proviſions to your Weſt-India iſlands. We know that your fifty thouſand whites, and five hundred thouſand blacks cannot find bread or pork for their dinners, or timber to build their houſes, or ſtaves for their caſks, or even horſes or cattle, but by ſending for them to our continent. Beſides large quantities of their rum, we alſo take ſeveral productions that will not bear the expence of a conveyance to Europe. This market they will forfeit, and ninety days of an embargo in our ports will make them die of hunger as faſt as your victims on the glacis of TanjoreSee Burke on the creditors of the nabob of Arcot.. We ſhall farther give notice to France that, for ready money, ſhe may get whatever ſupplies ſhe can want, on exporting them in her own bottoms. If you wantonly proclaim hoſtilities againſt us, we ſhall follow the maxim of the Celtic chief, neither to ſeek the battle, nor ſlain it when it comes Fingal.. Twenty thouſand of our militia, would, in a few weeks, drive your handful of regulars out of Canada, and you could not, at preſent, ſpare a fleet or an army to recover it. We ſhould thus put an end to Indian wars, by tearing up the root from whence they ſpring. After driving Victor Hughes out of Guadaloupe, you might burn ſome of our towns on the ſea coaſt, as you did in the laſt war. But then we ſhall infallibly deſtroy your nine millions ſterling per annum of imports from the Weſt-Indies, and the ſixteen hundred thouſand pounds of revenue derived from them. This would be a mortal ſtroke to your finances, and ſo take your choice.

In No xv. Camillus treats of the compenſation afforded by the ſeventh article of Jay's treaty for Britiſh piracies on American commerce. Since the apoplexy of Britiſh paper the word compenſation ſounds like mockery. But Camillus would have it believed that Pitt never intended the confiſcation of our veſſels. Theſe terms, legal adjudication, were certainly not equivalent, upon any rational conſtruction, to condemnation.—Yet the Britiſh Weſt-India courts of admiralty appear to have generally acted upon the term as ſynonimous to condemnation.—The Britiſh cabinet have diſavowed this conſtruction of the Weſt-India courts; and have, as we have ſeen, by a ſpecial act of interference, opened a door, &c.

The ſtile of Mr. Hamilton is ſo prolix, he has ſuch ſkill at beating out his guinea into an acre of gold leafThis can really be done., that it is inconvenient to quote him at full length. But he means to have it underſtood, that the Weſt-India judges acted againſt the underſtanding and wiſhes of P • t. The latter muſt have been a very great blockhead, if he could not write a dozen intelligible lines, eſpecially on a ſubject of ſuch immenſe importance. But every man, Camillus and the tories excepted, can ſee at once the bottom of the ſtory. The object was to ſeize American ſhipping for the treble purpoſe of enriching the Engliſh, of humbling America, and diſtreſſing France. Yet the orders were to be drawn in a ſhuffling form, that Pitt, if he ſhould afterwards find it adviſeable to diſown them, as he did Dorcheſter's inſtructions, might have a chink to creep through. We may be ſure that judges, and officers of the navy, acted from a perfect acquaintance with Pitt's real intention▪ and, when colonel Hamilton tries to perſuade us of the contrary, it is only adding inſult to robbery. When the object had been attained, it was very eaſy for Pitt to deny his orders. In a future chapter ſhall be inſerted a regular hiſtory of the whole of theſe inſtructions. A ſecond ſet was publiſhed by the cabinet of London on the 8th of January, 1794. They were very little better than the firſt. A former edition, juſt about as bad, had been iſſued on the 8th of June, 1793, under which alſo ſome bucaneering was committed. Thus the court of London acted upon a ſyſtem, and it was very wrong in Camillus to caſt the blame on the judges in the Weſt-Indies. As for the above door that has been opened, it coſts two hundred and fifty pounds ſterling to get in. Divine juſtice never diſplayed itſelf more ſplendidly than by the chaſtiſement of Britiſh pride. Since the ſtorming of the Baſtile, the moſt auſpicious event in the annals of Europe is the fall of the bank of England.

Among the inflammatory topics of the federal party, no one has had a more powerful effect than the attempt of Genet to involve this country in hoſtilities with England. The force of the objection ſhall be admitted; but any other envoy, ſituated like Genet, would have rejoiced in ſecuring the alliance of America. This was the very part which Dr. Franklin acted at the court of France; and the ultimate conſequences of his miſſion overturned the French monarchy. Nothing, therefore, can be more impenetrably ſtupid than to advance, as Mr. Hamilton and his hacks conſtantly do, this deſign of involving us in an Engliſh war, as a charge of peculiar atrocity againſt Genet and the republic. This was the very path formerly purſued by the United States; and it would, under ſimilar circumſtances, have been attempted by any nation or any ambaſſador under heaven. This identical trap had been laid by the old Congreſs and Franklin for the French cabinet, ſo that it was perfectly natural for France to endeavour at obtaining a retaliation. While Genet muſt be condemned, Mr. Hammond was equally culpable. His perfidious and inſolent propoſal to Mr. Randolph, previous to the ratifition of Jay's treatyAmerican Annual Regiſter, chap. viii., was more affronting to the executive feelings, if any ſuch feelings exiſted, than the moſt frantic menaces uttered by Genet. A compliance by General Waſhington would have caſt him completely into the lee-way of the Britiſh ambaſſador. The poſſeſſion of ſuch a ſecret muſt have been of immenſe value to the Britiſh cabinet. It would have been a rudder by which our executive muſt have ſteered wherever Hammond choſe to lead him; for it diſcovery was ſure to have interred even the popularity of Waſhington. If this diſgraceful project had come from Genet, the Gazette of the United States would have played a weekly tune upon that fiddle to the end of this century. But, originating with Pitt, not a ſingle word will be heard about it from the federal preſſes.

Mr. Waſhington has made an uncommon parade about the impartiality of his conduct between France and England. As the former ſaved him from the chance of aſcending a gibbet, to which he had been deſtined by the Parliament of Britain, he cannot derive much honour from an utter oblivion of his political obligations. But the fact is, that he has preferred Britain to France. This will appear from what follows.

In 1793, when Genet came here, he was directed, by his inſtructions, to open negociations for a commercial treaty. They direct him to tell the American government that the executive council are inclined to extend the latitude of the propoſed commercial treaty. Another idea was to break up the colonial and monopolizing ſyſtems of all nations, and emancipate the new world. Camillus, No. xxiv. calls the latter a mad ſcheme and a political chimera. Theſe expreſſions betray Mr. Hamilton's general caſt of thinking. His feelings are ſo perfectly Britiſh, and monarchical, that it ſeems inconceivable how he ever came to ſight, as he did, for the American revolution. Mexico and Braſil are juſt as well entitled to freedom as New-York and Pennſylvania. Their emancipation would be an immenſe benefit both to the inhabitants of thoſe countries themſelves, and to mankind at large. So far from being chimerical, the event is probableThe French had actually prepared a manifeſto intituled, Les Francaiſe Libres le leurs fr • res de la LOUISIANE. In one place they ſay, Le deſpotiſme Eſpagnol a ſurpaſſe en atrocité, en ſtupidité tous les deſpotiſms connus. [Spaniſh deſpotiſm exceeds all others in atrocity and ſtupidity.] Ce government qui a rendu le nom Eſpagnol execrable ſur tout le continent de l'Amerique. —[This government, which has rendered the Spaniſh name execrable over the whole continent of America, &c.] Such orators would ſoon have found an audience.; and it would thrill with joy the heart of every man who is not completely petrified againſt the pleaſure of ſeeing his fellow creatures happy. In the laſt age, Camillus would have defended the divine right of kings. In England, he would vindicate the Guinea trade, as in America he ſighs over the memory of the Baſtile; while John Jay, and Rufus King, and Jedidiah Morſe, and the whole prieſthood of Connecticut, heave reſponſive notes of ſorrowThe reverend doctor has a pulpit at Charleſtown, in Maſſachuſetts. A mob in that place burnt the Britiſh treaty. Their paſtor, hearing what was going on, haſted into the ſtreet to prevent them. He preſently returned to his houſe with a black eye.. Were theſe regions of the new world independent, a rapid influx of the precious metals would pour into this country; and Mr. Hamilton's bank of the United States might then be able, upon a month's warning, to give hard dollars for one-fortieth part of the notes which it hath in circulation. So far from ſuch an emancipation being chimerical, it is next to certain of taking place. If the French do not atchieve this great event, the tide of federal population, rolling weſtward, will begin it in leſs than a century.

Returning to Preſident Waſhington and Genet, we obſerve that the former refuſed to enter into any treaty, becauſe the Senate were not ſitting at the time when the French envoy made the propoſal. Yet, in the following ſpring, while the Senate were in ſeſſion, and without ever once conſulting them, did this identical George Waſhington take John Jay from the bench of the Supreme Court of this country, and ſend him to England, where, as we all know, he made a treaty. It was impoſſible for the French to avoid being affronted at ſuch duplicity. They could no longer put truſt in a man capable of ſuch naked inconſiſtency. Here is inſerted evidence of the fact.

The Senate being then in receſs, and not to meet again till the fall, I appriſed Mr. Genet, that the participation, in matters of treaty, given by the conſtitution to that branch of our government, would, of courſe, delay any definitive anſwer to his friendly propoſition. As he was ſenſible of this circumſtance, the matter has been underſtood to lie over, till the meeting of the Senate. —The Preſident will meet them (the executive of France), as ſoon as he can do it in the forms of the conſtitutionSee a letter from Mr. Jefferſon, then Secretary of State, to Mr. Morris, dated Auguſt 23, 1793, in The Preſident's Meſſage, &c. Carey's edition, p. 88..

Gentlemen of the Senate.—I HAVE THOUGHT PROPER TO NOMINATE JOHN JAY, as envoy extraordinary from the United States to his Britannic majeſtyJournals of Congreſs, April 16, 1794..

The Preſident's meſſage is of conſiderable length, but the few words above quoted contain its eſſence. In the left hand column he ſays, that he cannot enter into any negociation for a treaty till the meeting of the Senate. No words can be plainer or ſtronger than thoſe which he employs. The oppoſite column ſpeaks an oppoſite language. It is ungenerous to triumph over the ruins of declining fame. Upon this account, not a word more ſhall be ſaid about the matter. The bare circumſtances ſupercede any attempt either to exaggerate or demonſtrate. Nothing but the neceſſity of explanation could have, at all, brought the ſubject forward.

While this ſheet was going to preſs, (16th May, 1797,) Preſident Adams has delivered a ſpeech at the opening of the firſt ſeſſion of the fifth Congreſs. He ſays that the conduct of the government has been juſt and IMPARTIAL to foreign nations. With reſpect to France, what has been above cited refutes the aſſertion. The ſpeech conſiſts entirely of a complaint againſt the republic. It forms a kind of poſtſcript to Pickering's letter to Pinckney. Not a word eſcapes the Preſident about Britiſh piracy, which continues to expand in full bloſſom. The very day before this ſpeech was pronounced, the Philadelphia Gazette contained a curious example of the relative amity of France and England. The French had carried about ſixteen American veſſels into Jean Rabel. The Britiſh cut out theſe veſſels, and it was expected that they would be ſent to Jamaica for trial. There can be no doubt of their being tried ſomewhere; and the chance is, that moſt, if not the whole▪ of them will be confiſcated.

When Mr. Munroe, had his farewell audience of the executive directory, Barras glanced with contempt at the Britiſh treaty, and the Britiſh intereſt by which it had been brought about. Mr. Adams has muſtered up this into an alarming inſult againſt our country, and an attempt to ſow domeſtic diſſenſion. He reprobates ſuch a ſtyle in the bittereſt terms, as ſtudiouſly marked with indignities towards the government of the United States. It evinces a diſpoſition to ſeparate the people of the United States from the government; to perſuade them that they have different affections, principles, and intereſts, from thoſe of their fellow-citizens, and thus to produce diviſions fatal to our peace.

This ſpeech does not come within the period aſſigned to the preſent volume; but it forms a branch of the plan already explained for provoking a French war. A caſe exactly ſimilar to this of Barras and Munroe happened, ſome years ago, between lord Grenville and Thomas Pinckney. The former mentioned to the latter, in the moſt overbearing manner, the influence of a jacobin faction in America. Choiſeul or Neckar would not have upbraided an Engliſh envoy with the riots excited by John Wilkes or George Gordon. If the American executive of 1793, had felt even the moſt glimmering ſpark of national dignity, the inſult would have been reſented. If Pinckney himſelf had been penetrable by reproach, he would have cut Grenville ſhort. My lord, he might have ſaid, England has many jacobins. Scotland has perhaps a ſtill larger proportion, and the number is hourly augmenting. The Iriſh are a jacobin nation. They are as ripe for a revolution, as a peach ever was for dropping. Confine your ſolicitude to them, and leave us to get rid, as quietly as we can, of your correſpondent, Alexander Hamilton, and his funding cancer of ſix per cent.

Mr. Pinckney pocketed the ſtigma. He ſent home the precious notice of a jacobin faction in America. The executive, proud of ſuch a corroboration to his own doctrine, ſent it to Congreſs; and the letter was read to the Houſe of Repreſentatives without one murmur of diſdain. That Pinckney ſhould have endured ſuch mockery was bad. That General Waſhington ſhould have tranſferred the indignity to his own ſhoulders, without any muttering, was a great deal worſe. The abject ſilence of the repreſentatives, when the paper was read, betrayed an equal extinction of any formidable ſpirit.

Barras could not have wiſhed for a better precedent in his ſpeech to Munroe. The etiquette of federal degradation had been eſtabliſhed at London. It had been approved by the Preſident and Congreſs. Barras, with a thouſand reaſons for reſentment, while Grenville had not one, was highly excuſable for giving us a repetition of the doſe.

The Preſident affects to briſtle up at the mention of American parties. He knows that there are ſuch, and an alluſion to them was not ſeparating the people from the government. The Britiſh treaty was ſqueezed through the Senate by a party of twenty againſt a party of ten; and two of the former, on account of their perſonal characters, would hardly be admitted as evidences in a court of juſtice

Extract from the journals of the Kentucky legiſlature, November 21, 1795. On motion, reſolved, that a committee ought to be appointed to draught a memorial to Congreſs, ſetting forth that HUMPHREY MARSHALL, one of our Senators from this ſtate, has been publicly charged with being guilty of perjury, and requeſting that an inveſtigation may be made on the ſubject, and that, if the fact be ſufficiently proved, he ought to be expelled from the Senate. And a committee was appointed, &c.

Of Mr. Gunn, ſome notice hath already been taken.

. In the Houſe of Repreſentatives the treaty eſcaped by a ſingle vote. Every ſecond number of Camillus repreſents America as full of deſperate incendiaries. The Gazette of the United States is an egg hatched under the very wing of the Senate. It produces a conſtant ſtream of invective againſt the republic, and againſt every man in this country who has approved of the French revolution. On the part of Barras the ſarcaſm was perfectly fair. We had no right or pretence to complain about it.

The Houſe of Repreſentatives have ſet out with a direct breach of one of their ſtanding rules. This is that in ALL caſes where others than members of the houſe are eligible, there ſhall be a previous nomination.

The propriety of adopting this rule will be happily illuſtrated by a recent circumſtance, which occurred within the walls of that houſe. In the ſecond ſeſſion of the third Congreſs, Mr. Sedgwick preſented a petition from a perſon who wanted to be appointed as their ſhort hand writer. It was afterwards known that this man David Hogan, editor of the State-Trials of Pennſylvania. had, ſometime before, been publicly tried at Baltimore, and baniſhed, as a receiver of ſtolen goods. Had a ſtenographer been, at that time, choſen by ballot, Mr. Sedgwick might have probably brought himſelf into the dilemma of voting for this honeſt candidate. Such an inſtance has, to be ſure, nothing to do with the ſucceſsful candidate in the election here referred to; but it ſhews what may fall within the chapter of poſſibilities.

Mr. Giles urged the juſtice of naming the candidates beforehand, that gentleman might have an opportunity of balancing, in their own minds, the merit of each. This looked like fairneſs. The propoſal was reſiſted by Dr. William Smith of South-Carolina. That ſtate hath, in the fifth Congreſs, ſent two members of the ſame name and ſurname. The one here meant is the writer of PHOCION'S letters. This is the man who diſpatched pilot boats, while Congreſs met at New-York, to Charleſton. The object of this maritime embaſſy was to buy up continental certificates. They were obtained at eighteen pence or half a crown per pound. They were then funded by the doctor at twenty ſhillings. By a ſpecial act of Congreſs, to which he gave his vote, an hundred and twenty or an hundred and fifty thouſand dollars of his precious commodity were transferred from the public ſtocks into the ſtock of the bank of the United States. There the Doctor draws eight per cent. of intereſt for the nominal amount of a ſum of which the principal originally coſt him but ten per cent. In plainer words, he advanced as it were ten dollars to ſerve his country, and, by various ſteps, he now draws an yearly intereſt for them, at the moderate rate of eight dollars. A nation cannot help flouriſhing, when under the auſpices of ſuch a diſintereſted legiſlator.

The point in view, by the breach of the above ſtanding rule, was, to remove Mr. John Beckley from his office as Clerk of Congreſs, an office which he has held ever ſince the operation of the new government. There was not a member in the houſe, who could, even in the ſmalleſt degree, impeach his official conduct. This made it neceſſary to exclude him by a ſilent vote. The motion was carried by forty-one voices againſt forty. Mr. Beckley may now, like Sully, find leiſure to write an hiſtory of the abominations to which he has been a witneſs. His talents are equal to the taſk, and he cannot render America a more important ſervice.

From what has been ſaid about the ſale of certificates, it is not inferred that every purchaſer of them, at an inferior price, acted diſhoneſtly. No certainty exiſted of their being funded by the new government, and much leſs of their being funded at the full nominal value. It was a lottery whereof no one could tell the proportion of prizes. The blame in ſpeculating reſted entirely with thoſe members of Congreſs who bought up the certificates at a cheap rate, with the view of thereafter voting for their being funded at the full price; or who gave ſuch a vote with an eye to ſubſequent purchaſes. Among other defects of the new government, one was that the Houſe of Repreſentatives conſiſted only of ſixty-five members. This number was too ſmall, and twenty, joined together, by the ſacred bond of paper-jobbing, were next to certain of carrying any point about which they were anxious.

On the 1ſt of January, 1790, this domeſtic debt amounted, in principal and intereſt, to forty millions, two hundred and fifty-ſix thouſand dollarsGallati • , p. 96.. A majority of each houſe voted for funding the whole maſs at its nominal value. How many millions belonged to themſelves cannot be aſcertained until the arrival of that day, which is to diſcloſe all human ſecrets. Thus did the nation ſuffer a dozen or perhaps thirty ſpeculators to ſit as judges upon their own job.

A member of Congreſs might, on this occaſion, be very fitly compared to an attorney whom you ſend into court to make the beſt compoſition that he can with your juſt creditors. They had heard of your being partly inſolvent, and offer to tranſfer their claims for an eighth part of their nominal amount. It is the buſineſs of your agent to take advantage of this juncture; inſtead of which he clandeſtinely buys up all thoſe debts againſt you, at the reduced price, for which his funds afford him ability. To ſhelter himſelf in a croud, he encourages other adventurers to buy up all the remaing debts againſt you in the ſame way. He then comes forward, in name of himſelf and his aſſociates, and compels you to give a mortgage for forty millions of dollars, when he could, in reality, have rid you of the whole ſum for five millions. You would not think that ſuch an attorney had diſcharged his truſt with fidelity. You never would employ him again. It is even poſſible that he might be turned out of his profeſſion. Within the laſt twenty years, Mr. Alexander M'Kenzie, an attorney at Edinburgh, was employed to ſell an eſtate. At the time and place publicly appointed, no purchaſer appeared, and Mr. M'Kenzie bought it up in his own name. Several of his brethren, men above being ſuſpected of colluſion, attended the whole tranſaction, and gave evidence that they had no jealouſy of unfair dealing. The price itſelf, though alledged to be ſomewhat low, was not much under the mark. Yet the Court of Seſſion declared that no factor could buy and ſell at the ſame time. They reverſed the bargain, and the houſe of peers confirmed their decree. But, if Mr. M'Kenzie had been directed to buy an eſtate at its market price of two thouſand five hundred pounds, and if he had firſt procured it for himſelf, and thereafter forced his client to pay twenty thouſand pounds for itThis proportion of one to eight is laid down by Mr. Gallatia as the medium difference between the market price, and the full amount at which the certificates were funded., his gown would have been torn from his ſhoulders. The firſt glance from the bench would have announced the annihilation of his ſcheme.

Of the above forty millions of dollars, a ſmall part was funded at only three per cent. though with the proſpect of certain advantages, needleſs here to be explained, which were ſuppoſed to place it on a level in value with the remainder of the debt. Another part, though but a ſmall one, was funded in name of original creditors, the men with palſies and rheumatiſms caught on board of the Old Jerſey, with wooden legs and weather-beaten faces, whoſe very looks are diſguſting to a friend of order. Theſe heroes promoted an American revolution, when we were fifty times leſs heavily taxed than any other ſubjects of the Britiſh crown. They began a rebellion when its expence, for a ſingle week, exceeded the value of all the taxes that England had either got or aſked for the preceding twenty years. HUNC tu Romane caveto. After ſuch doings, they are unfit to be truſted under any government.

For the ſake of round numbers, and to be conſiderably under the fact, ſuppoſe that only twenty four millions of dollars, out of the above forty, had been funded in the name of purchaſers at half a crown per pound. The intereſt, at ſix per cent. comes to fourteen hundred and forty thouſand dollars per annum. If this ſum had remained in the pockets of thoſe who pay it, we ſhould have been ſaved from many of the burdenſome taxes which are ſo heavy on the inhabitants of the ſea-port towns; and more or leſs ſo upon every part of the country. Again, thoſe traders or manufacturers, who pay ſuch taxes, muſt always add more than the net addition, to indemnify themſelves for the trouble which attends it, as well as for the advance of moneyThis circumſtance has been fully explained, and proved in The Political Progreſs of Britain. . The enormous dearth of labour muſt partly be deduced from this cauſe, and it produces, in an hundred different ways, inconvenience and backwardneſs to all ſorts of buſineſs. The expence of collecting or borrowing the money forms alſo a ſerious item; and all theſe together, make a real loſs to the public, by theſe twenty-four millions of dollars, not merely of fourteen hundred and forty thouſand dollars, but of at leaſt three millions. This equals the whole principal ſum that the buyers of the twenty-four millions advanced. Thus nominally we pay about fifty per cent. but in reality, at the loweſt, an hundred per cent. of intereſt for the ſum truly given before hand.

The common body of creditors muſt have been very glad to ſee ſix millions of dollars. This would have doubled their principal and made a very ſnug adventure. Judging by the ſtatute of limitations, and other deſperate leaps of congreſſional economy, we may be perfectly ſure that other creditors would not have got one ſixpenee more than they really advanced, if it had not been to ſerve as a ſcreen for the full gratification of Camillus and his myrmidons. They have ever ſince been conſtantly haranguing the public about conſpiracies. The greateſt rogue always turns king's witneſs, ſays the proverb. Nothing, ſince the new conſtitution, has, within an hundred degrees, as much the appearance of a conſpiracy as this certificate buſineſs, unleſs, perhaps, the uproar which forced Congreſs to ratify the Britiſh treaty.

This was the dawning ſcene of that government whoſe wiſdom and virtue have reſounded through the four quarters of the globe. The annals of ancient or modern finance record not a more deformed tranſaction. In the black luxuriance of Roman rapine, a more pregnant field never exerciſed the ferocious contempt of Claudian, or the majeſtic ſeverity of Juvenal. If imperial Rome could boaſt of her Sejanus, and Byzantium of her Rufinus, the the future hiſtorian of federal glory, may brighten the tints of his canvas, and refreſh the verdure of his laurel, by the congenial names of Hamilton Exciſe has gone down in other countries, and it SHALL go down in this. Theſe were the words of Camillus, then Secretary of the Treaſury, to Mr. Iſaac Jones, of Philadelphia, when conſulted about the ſnuff act. and of Smith.

CHAPTER IV.

Britiſh piracies on American ſhipping in 1796.—Caſe of the ſchooner John.—Of Capt. Samuel Green — Britiſh privateers built in the United States.— Skirmiſh in Port Jeremie between the Americans and Capt. Reynolds.—Impreſſments by the Severn, the Hermoine, and the Reg • lus.—Twelve Americans whipt.—Caſe of the brig Fanny.—Of the ſhip Bacchus.—The Swallow.—The Paragon.—The Voluptas.—The Lydia.—The Hannah.—Fray at Liverpool; and rout of a preſs-gang.—The Friendſhip.—The Ocean.—Letter from Samuel Bayard.— The brig Polly.—Vigilance of the American tories.—The Hannah of Baltimore.—The ſhip Diana, of New-York.—The ſhip Polly, Captain Mayo.

MR. BACHE has compiled two volumes of ſpeeches on Jay's treaty, which were made in the Houſe of Repreſentatives of Congreſs, in ſpring, 1796. It would have been a ſervice of ſtill more conſequence to this country, if he had reprinted a collection of the various narratives of Britiſh piracy on American veſſels in the Weſt-Indies. This monument of bucanneering might have ſerved as an uſeful curb to national vanity, and have taught us, if not quite incurable on that ſide, to apprehend the meanneſs of our preſent maritime condition. The devaſtation has been going on, with different degrees of violence, ſince the ſummer of 1793. A complete account of theſe piracies would very far exceed our preſent limits. A few examples are here ſelected from the maſs; and beginning with the early part of the year 1796; ſeveral miſcellaneous anecdotes and obſervations being occaſionally interſperſed.

A Salem newſpaper, of March 8th, mentions the arrival of the ſchooner John, captain Philip Saunders, from Jamaica. While he lay there, an Engliſh officer and five men, from a ſloop of war, came on board to impreſs his crew. Only one of them happened to be on board, beſides the mate and a boy. The reſt were on ſhore on buſineſs. The gang t • the ſailor. On being told that he was an Ameri • ••• y replied that they knew this, but wanted 〈◊〉 and would have them, whatever might be the conſequence. Captain Saunders went on board of the • l •• p of war, to reclaim his ſeaman. The commander told him to go back to his own veſſel, make out his account of the wages due to the hand, and ſend them and his clothes to the ſloop. In caſe of non-compliance, he was threatened with a ſlogging. Whether he obeyed this order, we are not told. The reſt of the crew were ſecreted on ſhore by the captain, for ten days, till the ſloop of war ſailed, as her declared deſign was to impreſs the whole. During this time, the ſchooner lay expoſed to the weather, as well as the inſults of the ſloop of war, without any perſon to take care of her, except the captain, his mate, and the boy. The ſloop's crew conſiſted of eighty-ſeven men. Of theſe, thirty-five were ſaid to be Americans, who had been impreſſed in the Weſt-Indies. Such, at the diſtance of twenty months, was the ſucceſs of Jay's appeal to the magnanimity of George Guelph, and of his kiſſing the hand of the meat, drink, ſnuff, and diamond-loving dame. Captain Saunders further informed, that ſeveral veſſels belonging to the ſouthern ſtates, were lying at Jamaica, when he left it, without ſeamen to navigate them home. The crews had been impreſſed.

The ſame poſt brought an article from the Minerva, which is in admirable uniſon with the preceding narrative. An entertainment had been given, a few months before, at Amſterdam, where, the portrait of our beloved Waſhington, was exhited as the chief decoration of the room. Webſter then gives a long rhapſody, pronounced by ſome Dutchman, on the Preſident, As a Cato in council; a Caeſar in the field; a Hercules in the political tempeſt; the ſcourge and admiration of proud Albion; Columbia's bulwark, &c. &c. Mynheer ſhould rather have ſaid the joſſing-block of proud Albion, from which ſhe vaulted into the ſaddle of ſea-robbery; for now, ſince the mountain of compenſation hath been happily brought to bed of its mouſe, all parties muſt, in their hearts, agree, that, from the day when Jefferſon left his officeThe 1ſt of January, 1794., our Britiſh concerns could not have been more wretchedly managed than they actually have been. If Hercules had permitted Cacus to keep his ſtolen oxen, the inſertion of his name would have been more intelligible. As for Caeſar and Cato—but it is needleſs to tread upon imbecility.

Early, as it ſeems, in the year 1796, captain Samuel Green made a voyage from Norfolk, in Virginia, to Martinico. He had the command of a faſt-ſailing ſchooner, of three bundred barrels burden, and carried a cargo for the Britiſh at that iſland. On his arrival, the conſignee ſhewed him a bill of ſale of the veſſel, and told him, that he was no longer maſter, becauſe the ſchooner was bought for the Britiſh government, and to be fitted out as a privateer. If captain Green choſe to remain on board, he was told that he might have employment. This offer he refu • ed. Several of the ſailors were impreſſed by the Britiſh. Others were enticed to enter as volunteers in the different ſhips. This was the treament which other American crews, in the ſame trade, met with as well as his. Theſe privateers, when thus fitted out, were to intercept our ſhipping in their way to the Weſt-Indies. Thus the United States furniſhed privateers and ſeamen for the deſtruction of their own commerce. This is one proof, among many, of the indifference of ſome American owners to the perſonal ſafety of their ſailors. Captain Green arrived from Martinico at Baltimore, about the 14th of March, 1796. He related the above particulars to Colonel Lowry of that town, who gave them for publication to the author. Put the caſe, that a merchant of Liverpool were to freight a veſſel for Calais or Peterſburg, with the previous but concealed certainty before him, that the ſhip was to be ſold; the captain turned adrift without warning, and the crew to be ſeduced or preſſed into the Ruſſian or the French ſervice. The atteſted recital of ſuch a fact would make the owner completely odious to the public. But, in this country, a ſeries of ſuch tranſactions does not excite the ſmalleſt emotion, or even attention. About twenty-five years ago, an Engliſh ſailor at Dantzie, was entrapped by a recruiting party, belonging to the late king of Pruſſia. The man got a letter conveyed to England, and though Frederic poſſeſſed, in all its vigour, the faculty of retention, yet he found it neceſſary to give Jack his freedom. The ſtory was printed in the Engliſh newſpapers, and became, for a ſhort time, a topic of converſation. Compare this ſenſibility to national rights, with the ſelfiſh American apathy, and ſay which of the two countries has the greateſt appearance of being enlightened.

A newſpaper of this city, of the 15th of March, 1796, contained a narrative ſubſcribed by Jacob Peterſon, maſter of the ſloop Polly, of Philadelphia. He ſays that, on the 29th of January, 1796, he arrived at cape Nicola Mole, where he had ſcarcely caſt anchor, when the Syren, a Britiſh ſixty-four, preſſed one of his beſt ſeamen. On the 31ſt, he ſailed for Jeremie. While he remained in that port, about nine o'clock in the evening, of the 9th of February, captain Reynolds, of the Harriot, a Britiſh armed ſhip in government ſervice, manned his boat and preſſed ſeveral American ſeamen from different ſhips in the harbour. He began with the ſhip Carolina, of Baltimore, captain Luſher.

Next day, Reynolds, when on ſhore, ſwore that he would that night make a ſweep among the Americans. The latter, hearing of this threat, aſſembled themſelves into two veſſels that lay in the harbour, one of them the brig Richard and James of Philadelphia, and the other the ſchooner Eliza of Baltimore. About nine o'clock in the evening, a boat full of armed men was obſerved coming from the Harriot towards the Eliza. She was hailed and enjoined to keep her diſtance. Reynolds cauſed his men to fire. This was returned; and, after ſometime, the boat went off. She came back with a freſh ſupply of men, and again found it prudent to retire. The people in the Eliza then went on board of the Richard and James. Reynolds went on ſhore, obtained a reinforcemt, and came back to a third aſſault. Finding the Eliza deſerted he gave up the attempt. In this conteſt, the Britiſh ſaid that they had ſeventeen men killed or wounded. The Americans had one killed, and one wounded.

The above account, as to what happened at port Jeremie, was almoſt immediately confirmed by the arrival of captain Webb, of the brig Nymph. Captain Webb added, that the Americans had preſented a petition to the commandant at Jeremie, admiral Murray, for the recovery of their impreſſed men, and ſatisfaction for the behaviour of Reynolds. Murray anſwered, that he had given no orders for the impreſs, and that he would uſe his influence to get the men reſtored; but, when captain Webb left Jeremie, there was no appearance of that taking place. The anſwer of Murray was mere mockery. Reynolds durſt not have fired a piſtol againſt the real inclination of the admiral. A Britiſh officer, in the river Thames, durſt no more impreſs a ſeaman without orders, than he durſt ſet fire to the city. For the bare loſs of ſo many men, independent of other circumſtances, he would have been called to a moſt ſevere account, even at Jeremie, unleſs he had acted by expreſs orders, or connivance.

On this affair, Webſter has a curious paragraphMinerva, March 17, 1796.. In ſpite of his Britiſh penſion, it was neceſſary to ſave appearances, by ſaying ſomething about it. Accordingly he obſerves, that, heretofore, this villainous buſineſs has been juſtified under the pretence, that the men were Britiſh ſubjects, and indeed this has often been the fact; but theſe lawleſs fellows now openly, and avowedly take Americans. The heretofore inſinuates an untruth; becauſe, from the beginning, multitudes of Americans were taken without any ſuch pretence. As the admiral, ſays Webſter, did not juſtify him (Reynolds) it is poſſible the inſulted Americans may obtain redreſs, and we preſume [and what is your reaſon for that preſumption?], all impreſſments are made without orders from the Britiſh government. [The beſt and only redreſs will be, when the French ſhall burn Plymouth and Dover.]—Their conduct is now, if poſſible, aggravated, as it is a direct violation of the treaty; which, to England, is of equal concern with the violation of a pancake. As for acting without orders, that is the conſtant ſ • am. Dorcheſter was ſaid to act without orders, when, on the 10th of February, 1794, he made his famous or infamous ſpeech to the ſavages. Simcoe, undoubtedly, acted alſo without orders, when he ſent a body of Britiſh regulars and Detroit militia, to aſſiſt the Indians in aſſaulting fort Recovery. The rank and file, with their faces blacked, and the three Britiſh officers dreſſed in ſcarlet, who kept at a diſtance, in the rear, and directed the motions of the Putawatimes, were certainly acting likewiſe without orders. Nay farther, Henry Knox, late Secretary at War, did infallibly act without orders, when he refuſed to give the newſprinters a copy of the long and important letter from Wayne, giving evidence of theſe facts

This is not a hearſay. Not more than a ſixth part of the letter could be obtained. The late Mr. Andrew Brown, was in the War-Office, trying to get a full tranſcript for the Philadelphia Gazette, and both he and others met with a refuſal. They received, beſides a liſt of the killed and wounded, only ſome ſcraps which make up a paragraph of about thirty lines. Nothing was ſuffered to tranſpire in the public prints that could place the behaviour of Simcoe in a proper light.

But, on the 21ſt of November, 1794, it was thought proper to read this diſpatch to Congreſs, with ſome depoſitions that had likewiſe been kept ſecret. The latter ſhewed, in the ſtrongeſt light, the extreme averſion of the Indians to fight Wayne, and the artifices of the Britiſh to make them do ſo. A perſon who overheard the papers read obtained, a conſiderable time after, permiſſion to copy them from the repoſitories of Congreſs. So late as May, 1796, they were ſucceſſively printed in the Maryland Journal, the Aurora, and the Argus. Mr. M'Henry, now Secretary at War, being greatly ſurpriſed at their appearance, wrote a letter to one of theſe printers, entreating to know which of his clerks in the war-office had betrayed official confidence; and aſſuring the printer, that if he would give up the name of this correſpondent, the mode of diſcovery ſhould be concealed. Such is the minute vigilance of the American cabinet! and ſo culpable it is to let the people become acquainted with their own buſineſs! In reply, the Secretary was aſſured of the entire innocence of all his clerks, and adviſed to proceed with his inquiries.

.

On the 15th of March, 1796, Mr. Samuel Smith, preſented to the Houſe of Repreſentatives a proteſt taken by captain John Green, of a Baltimore brig, trading to the Weſt-Indies. He depoſed that, when he was at cape Nichola Mole, he was on board a ſchooner from Virginia, where he ſaw two of the crew, native Americans, impreſſed by the officers of the Britiſh ſhip Severn. One of the men was afterwards returned as unfit for duty. The commander of the Severn ſaid, that he was authorized, by the late treaty, to take all ſeamen who had not protections from the United States. In ſaying this, he paid a compliment to Jay's treaty which it does not merit. All ſeamen, whether with protections or without them, are alike unnoticed by that paper. On preſenting this proteſt, an inſignificant debate enſued in the houſe. The queſtion was, whether it ſhould be referred to the ſelect committee on American ſeamen, or to the Secretary at War, that the Preſident might make ſuitable repreſentations to the Britiſh government. It was remitted to the committee. Congreſs might as well have deliberated, whether the proteſt ſhould be caſt under the table, or into the fire.

The Philadelphia newſpapers of the 18th of March, related that captain M'Keever, of the brig Amiable Creole, ſailed from Port-au-Prince, on the 25th of February, preceding. The captain ſaid that, while he lay there, the Hermione frigate preſſed, from time to time, a vaſt number of American ſeamen out of different veſſels. On a moderate calculation, two-thirds of his crew were Americans.

The Regulus, another frigate, preſſed all hands of all nations indiſcriminately, who could not produce protections. Thoſe who refuſed to do duty were whipt. Four days before capt. M'Keever left Port-au-Prince, twelve American ſeamen were returned on ſhore from the Regulus, after receiving ſeveral laſhings for having utterly refuſed to do duty on board of her. The reſt of the impreſſed men, in theſe two frigates, had found it prudent to comply with Britiſh orders. This was the treatment of our ſeamen fifteen months after the ſigning of Jay's treaty, and before Congreſs began to debate on the propriety of accepting it.

REMARKS from the brig Fanny's log-book, William Swinburn, maſter, from the Weſt-Indies, arrived at New-York, on the 21ſt of March, 1796.

On Thurſday, January 28, 1796, at five P. M. was boarded off St. George's bay, Grenada, by the Zebra's boat (a Britiſh ſloop of war), who impreſſed one of the people, John Burt, being born in the United States, and having a regular protection. I accordingly made application to the commanding officer, in expectation of getting him clear, but to none effect; their anſwer was, they wanted men and muſt ha • e them.

On Monday, February 8th, at two P. M. was boarded by the Mermaid's boat, a Britiſh frigate, who impreſſed one of the men (he not being a Britiſh ſubject), and overhauled us very ſtrictly on ſuſpicion of my having ſailors ſtowed away. That ſame night I went on board to ſolicit for my man. After communicating to the captain my errand, he told me he was certain I had men ſtowed away, and he would ſend his boat on board, and overhaul us from keel to gunnel; and, after giving me much abuſive language, ſaid, he would flog me, and all I had on board. Accordingly, the Mermaid's boat came on board with a great many hands, hove the long boat out of the chocks, hoiſted up twenty-two barrels of beef, moved part of the ballaſt, and, as the ſaying is, turned every thing upſide down. They went on board, firſt being convinced I had no people ſtowed away. I ſhortly after went on board the Mermaid to ſee if they would ſend the boat and crew on board to ſtow the cargo in its proper place, as I had no people to do it, and put the boat in the chocks, &c. and after diſtreſſing me all they could, with reſpect to my people, I was told they had done with me, and bid me go about my buſineſs, and get people where I could.

Shortly after I had got on board my veſſel, the Charlotte, captain Williams, a Britiſh ſloop of ten guns, ſent her boat on board, who overhauled us, &c. On the 9th, at meridian, with much difficulty weighed anchor, and made ſail, as I could get no redreſs, and no probability of getting hands.

Shortly after was brought too by a ſhot from the above ſloop, and after we hove the ſails to the maſts, and brought too, ſhe fired no leſs than half a dozen muſket ſhot, aimed right at us; but providentially we received no hurt from them, though I heard the whiſtle of ſeveral of the • alls.

After we had laid ſome time, they ſent the boat on board, who rummaged and overhauled; but ſeeing they could find nothing, they returned on board.

On Thurſday, the 11th, at nine A. M. ſaw a ſloop to the leeward, which ſhortly knew to be the ſame ſloop, that had boarded us two days before, in St. George's bay.

When ſhe came within a league of us ſhe fired, and continued to do ſo, as long as the guns would bear, ſhe reaching one way and we the other. When ſhe got into our wake ſhe tacked but did not come up with us until two P. M. when we tacked, and ſhe fetched us and brought us too with another ſhot. I received a great deal of abuſive language from the captain without giving any reaſons.

He curſed and damned the Americans and ſaid they were their greateſt enemies. He ſaid he had fired twelve ſhot at us, that I ſhould pay two dollars for the firſt, and double for every one after: however, I not being willing to comply with this unreaſonable requeſt, and ſeeing he had no buſineſs to have fired at us, as he had boarded us the day before, and as he did not think fit to ſend his boat on board, he ſuffered us to ſet ſail.

This is a ſhort ſpecimen of the uſage we meet with from the Britiſh cruizers in the Weſt-Indies. All which I can atteſt to; and much more if required.

WILLIAM SWINBURN.

On the 28th of March, 1796, the ſhip Bacchus, captain George, arrived at Philadelphia. On the 20th he was boarded by the Thetis, a Britiſh frigate. She preſſed his mate and cabin boy, on a ſuſpicion of their being Britiſh ſubjects. The boy was an indented apprentice.

As it is proper to do juſtice to all parties, it may here be noticed that, at this time, captain Burnet, of the brig George, arrived in Philadelphia from Kingſton, and brought a complaint of the French privateers. He ſaid that ſeveral of them were cruiſing off Jamaica, when he left it. They were very troubleſome to American veſſels, ſometimes plundering them of their ſea ſtores, and otherwiſe behaving with the greateſt inſolence. No farther particulars are ſpecified; and this is the firſt complaint againſt France, or at moſt the ſecond, which hath as yet occurred in collecting materials for the preſent ſummary of piracies. At the ſame time, ſeveral articles of Britiſh rapine have been omitted for want of room. So contraſted at that period, was the conduct of theſe two nations to this country!

A gentleman at Kingſton in Jamaica, in a letter to the printers of the Maryland Journal, dated the 25th of February, 1796, gave the following particulars. The Argonaut man of war of ſixty-four guns, had, a few days before, ſent into Kingſton, two American veſſels. The one was the ſchooner Swallow, captain Stubbs, from Cape Francois to Boſton. Her cargo conſiſted of cotton and coffee, with ſix thouſand dollars in ſpecie. The whole property belonged to Mr. Triſdale of Boſton. The other veſſel was the ſchooner Paragon of Norfolk, laden with coffee, and owned by Mr. Moſes Myers of that town. In June, 1794, coffee coſt in retail, at Philadelphia, about a ſhilling per pound. In June, 1795, it had got up to one ſhilling and four pence. By November, 1796, if not ſooner, it roſe to two ſhillings and four pence. The piracies juſt now ſtated, which are only part of hundreds of the ſame kind, explain, very fully, the cauſe of this alteration. The writer of the above letter added that both veſſels were libelled, and that indeed none need expect to eſcape that fate, whatever might be the final verdict about them. The very delay, diſappointment, and riſe of inſurance, in conſequence of ſuch alarms, impoſe a ruinous tax on the owners, while, in the mean time, the ſailors were frequently preſſed. Sometimes they were ſwept off by the yellow fever; and cargoes of a periſhable nature were often deſtroyed while the ſhip waited for a deciſion.

The ſame letter adds that the ſchooner Voluptas, Jonathan Hall, maſter, of Baltimore, had been ſent into Kingſton, by the Severn of forty-four guns. She had on board a valuable cargo of coffee and cotton, and part of an outward bound freight of proviſions, with a large ſum of money. The ſupercargo, Mr. Duncan, was going from Gonaives to the Platform, to purchaſe coffee to load the ſloop for Baltimore The pretence for ſending in the Voluptas was, that ſhe carried proviſions for an enemy's port. At this time, the captain of the Severn had kept Mr. Duncan a priſoner for fifty-two days, and threatened to try him, as a Britiſh ſubject, for high treaſon; although he had with him a certificate of his being an American citizen.

Captain Hall, and Mr. Duncan had been ſent priſoners from cape Nichola Mole to Port Royal, on board of the Lark man of war. On their paſſage, they were put upon two-thirds of the Britiſh ſeamen's allowance of ſalt beef and bread. One of them, the letter does not ſay which, happening to ſleep in the next birth to the lieutenant, had his watch and money ſtolen out of his pocket. It was their opinion that the Severn had deſigned to ſend the ſchooner to the bottom, for ſhe run ſo near as to carry away their bowſprit.

A few days before the writing of this letter, the ſhip Lydia, Robert Blount, maſter, from Portſmouth in New-Hampſhire, had arrived at Kingſton. About four leagues to windward of Port-Royal, he had been boarded by the Regulus. She took away his mate, and four men. They were all natives of Portſmouth, married, and had regular protections. Before taking them on board, the Britiſh captain ſent his ſurgeon into the Lydia, to examine the men, and ſee if they were in good health. The Regulus had preſſed above fifty ſeamen, went to Port-au-Prince, and from thence to England; ſo that when the Portſmouth ſailors were to ſee their families, or whether they were ever to ſee them at all, was extremely doubtful.

The ſame correſpondent gives an account of the conduct of a French privateer to an American brig which, on the 14th of February, had come into Kingſton. This privateer had taken the Britiſh ſhip Barzillai, captain Blackburn, which left Kingſton on the 3d of February, and was taken on the 7th, in ſight of Port Royal But the misfortune is, that men will oppoſe imagination to fact. Though we ſee Great Britain predominant on the ocean, though we obſerve her pertinaciouſly reſiſting the idea of pacification with France, &c. Camillus, No. v. A valuable predominancy, when her veſſels were captured in ſight of her own ports, and almoſt in • ight of her ſhips of war!. The French put Blackburn, with his whole private property, on board of the brig. In his trunk were two bags of money; the plate of the ſhip's cabin; and two bills of exchange to the amount in whole of eight hundred pounds. The Frenchman ſaid that he diſdained to take any thing from a priſoner, and wiſhed him a good voyage to Kingſton. From the brig this jacobin took a barrel of beef, and paid fifteen dollars for it. Thus far the letter to the printers of the Maryland journal.

A Philadelphia print of the 26th of March, 1796, contained an extract of a letter dated March 2d, from Bermuda. The writer mentions that the ſhip Hannah, captain Hoare, from Philadelphia to France, was, on the 24th of February, taken by the Lynx ſloop of war. She ſtript the Hannah of her whole crew, excepting the mate, the cook, and the cabin boy, and ſent her into Bermuda. Moſt of the hands impreſſed had protections. The captain of the Lynx had ſpoke, on the day before, with the Roebuck of Philadelphia, and ſaid that he was prevented from taking her by a violent gale of wind.

An article dated Salem, the 22d of March, gives what is called verbal information by captain Blacker. Part of it is in ſubſtance as follows:

On the night of the 22d of January, 1796, the preſs gang at Liverpool crimped an American ſeaman, having previouſly ſerved ſeveral others in the ſame way. Two hundred and fifty American ſailors aſſembled, went to the houſe of rendezvous of the gang, and reſcued their companion. They placed the officers of the impreſs in the centre of the room, obliged them to uncover, and give three cheers to the United States. On the 27th, another American was impreſſed. His countrymen again aſſembled, reſcued the man, killed one of the gang, threw another into the dock, where he was drowned and ſeverely beat the remainder, who fled.

On the 2d of February, the American captains were called before the mayor and magiſtrates of Liverpool. They were admoniſhed to keep their crews in order. They made an anſwer which muſt have occurred to any body excepting a member of Congreſs vindicating appropriations for the Britiſh treaty. The account adds that, from thence forward, the Americans were unmoleſted.

About the 29th of March, 1796, the ſhip Friendſhip, captain Atkins, arrived at Norfolk. The captain ſaid that, within the capes of Cheſapeake, he was boarded by a boat from the Thetis, captain Cochran, which preſſed a man who had been naturalized for ten years paſt. As the Cheſapeake is within the territory of the United States, the Britiſh might as decently have taken him from the ſtreets of Philadelphia. A letter from New-York to a merchant in Philadelphia, dated the 2d of April, informed that his ſhip, the Ocean, captain Vredenburgh, had been taken on the 31ſt ult. and ſent into Halifax by La Prevoyance, a Britiſh frigate. The whole crew, at the time of writing the letter, were detained on board of the frigate, except the maſter, the firſt mate and a boy. The Ocean was from Havre-de-Grace, and the frigate took her, not far from the Highlands, with a pilot on board. The Argus, of April 4th, ſays, that before ſhe was diſmiſſed for Halifax, ſeveral paſſengers were moſt graciouſly permitted to jump into the long boat, and come up to New-York. When captain Vredenburgh remonſtrated, the Britiſh captain told him that this conduct was juſtified by Jay's treaty. The Minerva ſays that the Ocean was taken three days before ſhe made land. But the Connecticut goddeſs of wiſdom is diſtinguiſhed for want of veracityWebſter is a native of that ſtate.. It is at leaſt very uncommon to take in a pilot, at ſuch a diſtance from ſhore; and it is agreed that the Ocean had one. While the Britiſh were thus plundering American ſhipping, Mr. Pickering received a letter from Mr. Samuel Bayard, dated London, 29th of December, 1795. The following extract appeared, on the 31ſt of March, 1796, in the Philadelphia Gazette.

In the courſe of this next month, the Judge of the Admiralty has authorized us to expect an order for the reſtitution of the veſſels and cargoes ſeized and ſold by ſir J. Jarvis and ſir Charles Grey, at Martinico, St. Lucia and Guadaloupe.

In the Court of Appeals, alſo, two illegal ſentences of the Vice-Admiralty Courts, in the Weſt-Indies, have lately been annulled, and the conduct of the judges ſeverely cenſured by the Lords commiſſioners of appeals.

This intelligence, as if worth a peruſal, was communicated by Mr. Pickering to the Committee of Merchants in this city, appointed to ſuperintend the buſineſs of indemnification. Nothing but the blindneſs of intereſted hope, could have drawn any comfort from ſuch an account. The attainment of an object is at a very indefinite diſtance, when the parties are only authorized to expect. The annulling of two piracies, out of five or ſix hundred, was merely caſting a tub to the whale. As for the cenſure beſtowed on the Weſt-Indian judges, how much it was in earneſt, and how much it was reſpected, appears from their perſiſting, at that very moment, to proceed in the ſame track. There could not be a more palpable deluſion, though indeed the thinneſs of the diſguiſe almoſt precludes it from that name. The Britiſh had been plundering American merchantmen for almoſt three years. A treaty, which was to ſtop every proceeding of the kind, had been ratified eight months before. Yet ſtill piracy and impreſsment went on at full vigour. But when we conſider the uncommonly petrified ideas of many merchants in the ſea-ports of America, nothing but the moſt ſnivelling timidity could be looked for. In ſummer, 1793, Britiſh effrontery declared the French republic in a ſtate of ſiege; and, under that pretence, confiſcated American veſſels freighted for any French port with proviſions, as if France and her colonies had only been ſome fortified town with an area of a ſquare mile. At that criſis, merchants of eminence in this city were to be found who vindicated that enormous robbery. If, in a ſimilar ſituation, any citizen of London had harboured ſuch feelings, the certainty of public abhorrence would at leaſt have forced him to hold his tongue. When captain Barney, about that time, made a voyage to the Weſt-Indies, and declared his determination, if attacked, of giving battle to the ſucceſſors of Blackbeard, the tory party in Philadelphia were violent in his condemnation. A report having reached the continent, that the Engliſh at Jamaica had reſolved to hang him, it was ſolemnly pronounced, in this city, to be perfectly right; and that he was an incendiary who wanted to embroil the two countries. It was to be expected that ſuch people would abominate the American Annual Regiſter as the verieſt catch-penny that ever was publiſhed, the mere tittle tattle of jacobiniſm See Gazette of the United States.. They are welcome to feel no excitement except that of diſguſt at any thing it contains; for, if it had met with their approbation, it would have completely diſguſted its author, and that claſs of people whom he is chiefly deſirous of pleaſing. It cannot eſcape obſervation that the above notice from Bayard contains not one ſyllable about the impreſſment of ſailors. This blank in Jay's treaty, and Bayard's commiſſion, may be compared to the capitulation of a general, who, without a ſingle ſtipulation about protecting the ſick and wounded men of his army, thinks of nothing but the ſecurity and free departure of his baggage.

Captain Paulding, of the brig Polly, in a letter to his owners, at New-York from Curracoa, dated March 3d, ſays that he had been ſent into Grenada, by the Favourite ſloop of war, after ſhe had taken from him all his hands, with ſailing orders, letters, invoices, and bills of lading. He was detained for ſome weeks. At length he had orders to depart, but could not recover his papers. His cargo was, he ſays, conſiderably damaged by his detention. He does not tell whether he got back any of his men, which is very unlikely, or by what means he worked the veſſel to Curracoa.

The Maryland Journal, of the 13th of April, 1797, has an extract of a letter from an American ſeaman, dated Spithead, December • 6th, 1795, on board the ſhip Aſſiſtance, in which ſhe had been detained from the 20th of October preceding. The man belonged to the Hannah of Baltimore, Captain Weſcott. This veſſel, with four other Americans, had been carried into St. John's, Newfoundland. He expreſſed a hope that the Hannah would be liberated. The printers added, that the ſticklers for Britiſh amity might, upon calling at their office, ſee the original letter. This intimation was needful in the caſe where ſuch an article had not been copied from ſome other print; for in Baltimore, Philadelphia, and perhaps in every ſea-port town in the union, a number of people are conſtantly ready to browbeat and even ruin any printer who publiſhes articles unfavourable to Britain. Thus, at the death of Dr. Franklin, a newſpaper of this city obſerved, that the flags of the ſhips in the Delaware were lowered. The printer unthinkingly ſubjoined that even the Britiſh, A lady, who is very nearly related to Dr. Franklin, had occaſion, ſince his death, to make a voyage to England. In ſeveral faſhionable companies ſhe met with the coldeſt treatment, as being connected with the family of a rebel! If George the Third eſcapes the dagger or the ſcaffold, his moſt faithful ſubjects in Philadelphia, and they are not few in number, will have a notable opportunity for bowing and ſcraping, on his alighting at Oeller's hotel. did ſo. Next day, ſeveral of his ſubſcribers came into his office, and, with many reproaches threw up his paper. The author had the ſtory from himſelf. Indeed no better ſtate of ſociety can be expected in our ſea-ports, where the whole maſs of Britiſh tories, who had been doing the utmoſt miſchief in their power to this country during the revolution, were permitted, almoſt univerſally, without diſtinction, to return and mix upon a level with the republican citizens. In private morals, they were juſt as good as other people. But, in a political light, they were at beſt concealed, and often profeſſed enemies. In private life, no man would lodge under his roof an incendiary who, for eight years, had been attempting to burn his houſe. At the laſt election for Congreſs, in the county of Philadelphia, one of the moſt officious of the federal managers had formerly acted as a Britiſh guide. He was, for this offence, tried by the ſtate, and very nearly hanged. A ſhoal of ſimilar examples might be traced.

The next article in the ſame Maryland Journal, ſhews in what ſubjugation the tories hold the preſs. Captain Herring, from Jamacia, had informed the printers that, when the Britiſh captured and ſent into that iſland American veſſels, the ſailors were either turned aſhore to ſtarve; or preſſed into the Britiſh ſervice. He added that all of them received the moſt indignant treatment from theſe tyrannical ſea monſters. For inſerting ſuch harſh language, the printers made a long and humble apology. This timidity betrays a feature of degradation unknown in France or England. Was it ever heard of that a Britiſh mariner, on returning home from a French jail, durſt not publiſh his complaints in a Britiſh newſpaper; or that the editor would be forced to apologize for giving him a cornerJuſt below, in the ſame column, there follows a ſtring of reſolutions from Cumberland county, in the ſtate of Maryland, in favour of Jay's treaty. They ſay that the eſteem of his fellow-citizens is the only reward, which he (the Preſident) is willing to receive for his unexampled ſervices. It ſignifies nothing to chime over this impertinent fable of the Preſident ſerving his country for nothing. Yet though he has aſked and received the laſt cent of his two hundred thouſand dollars, beſides thirteen thouſand ſix hundred, to aſſiſt him in ſetting up a houſe, the friends of order will never ceaſe to prate that he would accept of no ſalary.?

Captain Herring, abovementioned, furniſhed the printer of the Journal with the following liſt of veſſels left at Kingſton, on the 8th of March laſt, which were all prizes to the Argonaut, Schooners Voluptas, Hall, Baltimore; Active, Compton, do.; Adelaine, Stanley, do.; Fortitude, Roſs, do.; Swallow, Stubbs, Boſton; Paragon, —, Norfolk; and a number of other veſſels, belonging to ſeveral ports in the United States; in all FIFTY-FIVE.

The infatuation and ſtupidity of a certain ſet of people in this country ſurpaſſes all deſcription. They embrace every opportunity to revile and exaſperate the French, to whom we were at firſt indebted for independence, and who, at this moment, are the ſhield which ſaves us from the implacable fury of Britain.

On the other hand, though they cannot deny the ſcandalous conduct of our bleſſed mother country, they do no not wiſh, if they can help it, to hear a ſingle word upon the ſubject. Language of this kind, can, they ſay, be productive of no good; and it may irritate Britain, with whom, you know, we are in amity.

A letter from Norfolk, dated 4th, and publiſhed in the Philadelphia Gazette on the 11th of April, 1796, has theſe words.

A veſſel, yeſterday, returned from the Mole, which carried out ſome of the horſes, and loſt about one half of them. Alſo a ſloop from here, arrived there with only four horſes alive; and a brig from here loſt about one half of the cargo of horſes which ſhe carried out, the reſt were all ſickly.

The next paragraph ſhews the difference of behaviour at this time, between the French and Engliſh privateers. A French cruizer fell in with the ſchooner Little John, ſent her into the Havannah, and detained her five days. The French took half a puncheon of rum, a barrel of bread, and a ſpyglaſs. The captain gave an order for the amount upon his agent in Philadelphia.

NORFOLK, APRIL 4.

We ſtop the preſs to mention the arrival of captain Wanton Steer, of the brig Charlotte, in twenty-four days from Port Royal, Martinique: from him we have obtained the following:

That the ſhip Diana, of New-York, David Chadeayne, maſter, on his paſſage from the Eaſt-Indies to New-York, was boarded by his Britannic majeſty's brig Pelican, captain J. C. Searle, who ſent an officer and crew on board, and took out the mate, ſix people, and carried her into Port Royal, where on the 6th of March, while in their poſſeſſion, ſhe caught fire and was burnt to the water's edge, with all her cargo, of immenſe value!

The following article is here copied from a Boſton newſpaper, of the 7th of April, 1796.

MORE BRITISH AMITY.

Captain Elkanah Mayo, who arrived in town this week from New-York, has favoured us with the following account of the cruel treatment he and his men received from the officers and men of the Britiſh frigate La Pique, at Barbadoes, in December laſt, viz. Captain Mayo, in the ſhip Polly, of Cape Ann, homeward bound, from a whaling voyage, was drove in by ſtreſs of weather to Barbadoes, where he lay near three weeks for the arrival of ſome Americans to freight his oil home; during which time, the Britiſh frigate La Pique arrived there from a cruiſe, and in two days after, preſſed two of his hands. Captain Mayo applied to the governor for protection, who cauſed the men to be releaſed; three days after, captain Mayo's boat, being aſhore with three men waiting for him, the frigate's barge hauled in cloſe to his boat, and boarded him with • utlaſſes, to preſs the men by force. The men called on captain Mayo, from the ſhore, who run to the boat for their relief, where he found the crew of the Britiſh frigate with the tiller of their barge, beating his men over their heads, with ſaid tiller, till the blood guſhed from their mouths and noſes, and otherwiſe mangling them in a barbarous and ſhocking manner. Captain Mayo ſprung into the boat and cleared it of the Britiſh crew. The commanding officer, who was then on the wharf, ſaid he would have every man aboard the ſhip. Mr. Woodruff, with whom captain Mayo did buſineſs, being on the wharf, offered his bonds to the captain of the frigate that he would bring his protections on ſhore. Captain Mayo then went on board his ſhip to bring his protections. While he was on board, the commanding officer of the frigate, and all the reſt of the officers, got into their barge, waiting for captain Mayo, who was returning with all his protections; they boarded him; the commanding officer jumped into captain Mayo's boat with his drawn cutlaſs, and dragged by force all his men into their barge, and then preſented his cutlaſs to capt. Mayo's breaſt, and ordered him into the barge, which he refuſed; after which he pricked him ſeveral times in the breaſt, and then towed him on board the frigate; he put capt. Mayo's men into the hole among his men who were ſick with the yellow fever; he then ordered a pair of irons to be fixed on captain Mayo, which were not, however, fixed; he kept him on the quarter-deck until evening, then ordered captain Mayo's boat to be hauled up, and ordered him on board alone. Capt. Mayo requeſted him to let him have a man to go with him, which the captain of the frigate refuſed; then ſaid he would caſt him off, and let him go adrift, he told him he might periſh at ſea, to which he replied, he hoped he would. Captain Mayo told him he would not go, unleſs he caſt him off, he then took his barge, and towed captain Mayo on board his own ſhip; the next morning captain Mayo went to the governor, and complained of the officers' conduct; the governor ordered his men to be immediately releaſed, who were accordingly ſent on ſhore. Four days after, three of his men were taken with the yellow fever, which they took while on board the frigate, and which ſpread through captain Mayo's ſhip's company: four of his men died of the fever, the reſt were obliged to leave the ſhip, and he hired negroes to pump her. Captain Mayo then chartered veſſels as he could find them to take his men and cargo to the United States. This baſe conduct of our new-treaty-allies occaſioned the loſs of eight thouſand dollars to his owners.

I, the ſubſcriber, do teſtify to the above account, ELKANAH MAYO.

While the Britiſh were going on at this rate, a letter, dated January 17th, was received in Philadelphia, from Samuel Bayard, agent for the United States, at London, on the buſineſs of reſtitution. Mr. Bayard writes thus:

As ſoon as miniſtry learn the line of conduct, which the Houſe of Repreſentatives mean to purſue, I am perſuaded their conduct, as it regards us, will be leſs fluctuating. Should the houſe coincide with the Preſident and Senate, every thing here will go well: ſhould obſtacles, on the other hand, be thrown in the way by the popular branch of the government, I doubt whether the weſtern poſts will be ſurrendered, or reſtitution made of our captured property. However, I truſt that every man who has any regard to the honour, the faith, or intereſt of his country, will ſee the neceſſity of carrying the treaty fully into effect, ſo far as regards the United States.

The ſcope of the letter is, that, if Congreſs appropriated for Mr. Jay's treaty, compenſation would be made for the piracies in the Weſt-Indies. If they did not, the prizes would be kept. This plainly infers, that the Britiſh were acting as conſummate bucanneers. For, whether the treaty paſt or not, they had no title to have taken theſe veſſels. But the ſuperior talents of Mr. Jay had happily interwoven two matters totally diſtinct. If you ſign this treaty of commerce, you ſhall get compenſation for the veſſels. If not, we ſhall have them to ourſelves. Before entering upon the old ſtory of debts due to Britain; of the weſtern poſts, and of matters relative to the laſt war; before plunging into treaties of amity, the recent ſeizure of the veſſels ſhould have been fully and ſeparately ſettled. If that could be done, it was time enough to get into a treaty. If it could not be done, the way for America was to have ſtood by in wait for contingencies, while an embargo on proviſions would have laid the Britiſh Weſt-Indies proſtrate at her feet. Inſtead of this obvious policy, matters the moſt diſtinct were all jumbled together; and the bait of compenſation made America ſnap at the gilded hook.

In juſtice to Mr. Jay, it muſt be believed that his conduct was affected by ſome reaſons not yet communicated to the public. The application of the following anecdote cannot be miſtaken. It ſhews the frequent appeals that Pitt makes to Macedonian logic.

On the 9th of February, 1794, colonel Whitlock wrote a letter to general Lavaux, who commanded at Port-au-Paix, in St. Domingo. He required Lavaux to deliver up the town, the forts, and ſhipping. He then, in the name of the Britiſh government, adds thus: The ſum of FIVE THOUSAND CROWNS TOURNOIS ſhall be paid to you in perſon, or depoſited in the bank of England, payable to your order.

In his anſwer, Lavaux ſays, permit me now to complain to yourſelf, of the indignity you have offered me, in thinking me ſo vile, ſo flagitious, ſo baſe, as not to reſent, &c. He concludes with ſending Whitlock a challenge immediately to meet and fight him. See New Annual Regiſter for 1794, Hiſtory, p. 338.

But if Port-au-Paix was worth five thouſand crowns to England, Jay's treaty was worth fifty millions. The Repreſentatives were in the direct way to the deſtruction of the Britiſh Weſt-Indies. A ſuſpenſion of commercial intercourſe, and an embargo, would have reduced both England and thoſe colonies to the utmoſt difficulty. Theſe two meaſures would have broke no treaty, nor afforded any pretence for a quarrel, and they would have humbled England too much to leave her any appetite for the wanton declaration of hoſtilities. All this was ſo evident, the track purſued by the Repreſentatives was marked with ſuch luminous circumſtances of invitation, that nothing but ignorance, corruption, or the moſt abject imbecility of underſtanding, could miſtake it.

Like Sennacherib's angel, Camillus interfered to ſuggeſt an expreſs libel on Congreſs, to tarniſh the character, to undermine the intereſt, and to hamſtring the vengeance of America. With a meſſage ſo welcome, ſo neceſſary, to the very being of the court of London, Jay muſt have been a favourite gueſt. And, after the ſacrifices which he made, if he did not pay due attention to the future independence of his family, he is a greater ſimpleton than the world can poſſibly think him to be.

Suppoſe that one of her neighbours hath broke into a widow's wheatfield, nightly, for months together, and carried off or deſtroyed her crops. An envoy is ſent to demand ſatisfaction. The robber anſwers that he has old accounts to ſettle with the landlady, that he wants a wife, and that, if ſhe will agree to a ſettlement, and at the ſame time let him have her hand, he will enter into one ſweeping treaty for the whole. Any ſervant girl would ſee the abſurdity of this jumbling propoſal. She would reply, that intermarriage might come time enough, when former complaints were cleared up. But the object of Mr. Hamilton and his friends was, right or wrong, to have a Britiſh treaty; and the preſent one could not have been got through, but for entwiſting it with the proſpect of compenſation.

On the 8th of April, 1796, a Philadelphia print contained the following extract of a letter from London, dated February 2d.

I this moment came from the court of admiralty, where the firſt caſe of the captures at Martinique, by Grey and Jervis, was tried this morning: it was reverſed, which will be a precedent for all the others, and a point gained for all of us that have caſes in the courts here. And now they ſay, on Saturday next, the lords will ſit, and will go on to try the legality of the condemnations in the Weſt-Indies.

As to the point gained for all of us, there is yet very little progreſs made, nor is it of much concern to the claimants whether there is or not. The above, and Mr. Bayard's letter, are quoted chiefly becauſe they contain not even one ſingle, ſolitary, word, about the relief of the ſailors, who had been torn from their families, and their country, ſtarved, hand-cuffed, and flogged, to make them enrol in the Britiſh ſervice of aſſaſſination. If this book falls into the hands of any of that claſs of people, they are entreated to reflect for what ſort of owners, and what ſort of a country, they are braving the hardſhips of a mariner's life. We have ſeen how tranquilly Camillus gets over their enormous wrongs. Yet, when a Britiſh creditor in the American funds was concerned, he could ſpeak about them like a man who was in earneſt. No powers of language, ſays he, at my command, can expreſs the abhorrence I feel at the idea of violating the property of individuals, which, in an authorized intercourſe, in time of peace, has been confided to the faith of our government.— In my view, every moral, and every political ſentiment, unite to conſign it to execration. Camillus, No. 28. Compare this glowing ſtyle with the frigid accents in which he obſerves, that it was impoſſible to help the impreſſment of American ſeamen. They ſhould be at leaſt as near our hearts, as the mere pecuniary intereſt of an Engliſh creditor in the American funds. This will be granted by every friend to the country; and, on this principle, every moral and political ſentiment will conſign to execration, Jay and his treaty, wherein the ſafety of our mariners has been totally neglected. As for the twenty treaty-making ſenators, they are neither worſe nor better than the numerous bodies of our citizens, who thanked the Preſident for ſigning this monument of American apathy—an inſtrument by which thouſands and ten thouſands of ſeamen were conſigned to Britiſh mercy. There is no deſertion of fellow-countrymen ſo thoroughly diſgraceful in the annals of any independent people under heaven. A century of heroiſm could hardly wipe out the ſtain. Fifty-five American ſhips are captured by a ſingle Britiſh corſair,The Argonaut. See above. more than a twelvemonth after a treaty of amity had been ſigned, and above ſix months after it had been fully ratified. With ſuch intelligence ſtaring in their faces, while every newſpaper, for eighteen months preceding, had been ſuffocated with ſimilar information, the FREEST and moſt enlightened nation in the world, compelled their repreſentatives, for fear of a Britiſh war! to appropriate for the treaty.

As Mr. Hamilton has betrayed ſo much concern for Britiſh creditors, it may be aſked why he does not feel equal intereſt in the ſtate of Maryland? Before the war that province had veſted conſiderable ſums of money in the bank of England. On the 17th of December, 1795, a ſelect committee reported to the legiſlature of that ſtate, that they have no information as to the probability of their recovering the ſtocks in the bank of England, to which they claim a title. When Jay took ſo much care for the ſafety of Britiſh creditors in American funds, he might likewiſe have paid ſome attention to the intereſt of Maryland in the Britiſh funds.

The tenth article of the treaty contains a plain commentary on this ſtoppage of Maryland property. It ſays that neither the debts due from individuals of the one nation to individuals of the other, nor ſhares nor monies which they may have in the public funds, or in the public or private banks, ſhall ever, in any event of war or national difference, be ſequeſtered or confiſcated, it being unjuſt and impolitic, &c. Why then did England ſequeſtrate, or with what pretence of decency does ſhe continue to keep the funds of Maryland? When the Senate and Executive ſigned the treaty, they might ſurely have thought of this important omiſſion. But this article has even a worſe fault The words unjuſt and impolitic contain a direct libel on Mr. Dayton, and that party in the Houſe of Repreſentatives, who, in March, 1794, had propoſed to ſequeſtrate Britiſh debts, as a ſecurity for American compenſation. The Senate and Preſident ratified this inſult on the Repreſentatives, though, as being a ſolemn act of government, it contained an attack on the American legiſlature, a million of times more flagrant than the tranſitory ſquib of Barras. Yet the latter is to be made the handle for a French war, while the former, becauſe it came from Britain, was pocketed in ſilence. If an Engliſh miniſter had ſubſcribed a treaty conveying ſuch a direct reference to, and ſuch an abrupt cenſure of any previous motion in parliament, the parties aggrieved would have taken the matter up. But indeed no Engliſh miniſter dared to have made ſuch a digreſſion. In diſcuſſing the treaty, none of the Repreſentatives adverted to this tacit reproach. The pulſe of national dignity ſeems to beat higher in England than in the United States.

Camillus clamours loudly about the iniquity of America in neglecting the payment of debts due to Britain, before the laſt war. What here follows, on that head, was related to the author, in January 1796, by Mr. James Madiſon.

Much noiſe has been made about the juſtice of America, in neglecting the payment of debts due to Britain before the laſt war. In Virginia, it was formerly uſual for the planters, in that country, to conſign their cargoes of tobacco to a correſpondent in Britain, who was veſted with a diſcretionary power of ſelling them as high as poſſible. It was often obſerved, that when two planters had each of them, at the ſame time, ſent cargoes of tobacco of equally good quality to England, the one received perhaps twenty pounds the hogſhead, and his neighbour not more than four pounds. There was no regularity or equality in the prices, and this gave riſe to complaints and ſuſpicions.

Sometime ago, a gentleman, in Virginia, brought a counter-action againſt his Britiſh creditor, in one of the courts of that ſtate. His plea was, that the creditor and conſignee had actually ſold his tobacco in Europe at a much higher price than he had ſtated in balancing their accounts. The facts alledged were clearly proved, and the jury gave a verdict for damages to the amount of thirty thouſand dollars.

CHAPTER V.

Federal plan for a French War.—Specimen of French juſtice.—The Sea Horſe.—The Muſquito.—Remarks on the Britiſh treaty by Mr. Gallatin.—Reply by Mr. Tracy.—Hints on the Weſtern inſurrection. —Caſe of the brig Maria, captain Wilmans. —The ſchooner William, captain Scott.— Deſpotic influence of the tories in American ſeaports. —Elegant ſtyle in ſome of their publications. —The Polly, captain Wade.—The Edward and William, captain Jones.—The Ariel.—The brig Siſters.—Capture of the brig Jay, by the French, and barbarous treatment of the captain.—Mr. JAY'S INSTRUCTIONS.—Extracts from them NEVER BEFORE PUBLISHED.—Proofs of his NEGLECT OF ORDERS. —Anecdotes relative to the Britiſh treaty.

THIS chapter begins with a few inſtances of the maritime conduct of France and England, that occurred about, or previous to, the commencement of the year 1796. They had been omitted for the ſake of brevity. But while this work is printing off, Preſident Adams, and a formidable phalanx in the fifth Congreſs, are driving the federal chariot, at full ſpeed, to the brink of a French war. One great pretence for this meaſure is the republican robberies on our ſhipping in the Weſt-Indies. But if it can be proved that our commerce endured greater injury, in 1796, from England, than it hath ſince done from France, and that the government of laſt year took very ſmall concern about the outrages of the former, while it has conſtantly exaggerated thoſe of the latter, the reader will gradually be convinced of a conſpiracy perpetually exiſtingSupra Chap. II. to embroil this country with France, and to entangle her in an alliance with the guinea-note monarchy of BritainPrivate letters from north Britain give curious details about the decline of paper money. Take a guinea-note to the butcher, and you muſt either lay • ut the whole with him, or go without your change. He parts with no ſilver. The only place where hard money has a chance to be had is at the ale houſe, where, after you ſpend half a crown, the landlord ſometimes gives twenty ſhillings in caſh for your guinea-note. Theſe traits come exactly to the point. They portend the future peace of Europe. A gentleman who left Dublin on the 2d of March, ſays, that Corke guinea-bank-notes were then at eighteen ſhillings hard money. Other bank paper had alſo fallen..

A letter from Port-au-Paix, dated the 18th of December, 1795, to a merchant in Philadelphia, Has the following particulars. Anthoine Chaplin, captain of the Guillotine, a French privateer, had maltreated captain M'Keever of the American ſhip James. For that and a ſimilar offence againſt the ſhip Molleville, of St. Thomas, Chaplin was fined in two hundred dollars, and all damages that might accrue from the illegal capture of theſe veſſels. His privateer was confiſcated; and the pirate himſelf was condemned to fifteen months of impriſonment in irons. I this day ſaw him, ſays the letter-writer, chained with a negro working in the ſtreet, in the ſame kind of dreſs in which he forced captain M'Keever to leave the privateer and go on board an American veſſel. So much for our Laveaux's juſtice.

Anthoine Chaplin was leſs culpable than Reynolds, and other Engliſh kidnappers. His puniſhment was immediate and complete; but we have never heard a ſingle inſtance of a Britiſh offender meeting with ſuch a check. At the time here ſpoke of, the American executive had ſigned Jay's treaty, to the extreme joy of England, and the utmoſt provocation of France. Yet the former continued to rob America, and the latter did notThe moſt ſolid argument then urged againſt the French in the Weſt-Indies was, that they had taken many American cargoes upon credit, and either paid an inferior price, or exacted a delay that became equivalent to no payment at all. But we have never been told of their flogging American ſeamen, to make them enter into the republican ſervice. The convulſive ſtate of the French Weſt-Indies was well known. Anarchy, conflagration, and maſſacre, ſtrode ſucceſſively from one iſland to another. If a merchant in Philadelphia, choſe to ſend his cargo to ſuch a market, he could expect no better reception, nor did he, in all caſes, merit much ſympathy. Theſe ſpeculators raiſed the price of flour from ſeven dollars per barrel, to fifteen, to the utter oppreſſion of the labouring poor in this and other ſeaport towns. In Britain, neither the laws, nor even the people would have endured ſuch foreſtalling.. For what reaſon was Laveaux able to execute juſtice, while admiral Murray could only promiſe to uſe his influence? Thus Pichegru might have promiſed to uſe his influence with one of his own corporals. The fact ſeems to have been this. The Directory ſtill valued federal friendſhip as ſomething; while Pitt held it as nothing.

On the 4th of January, the ſchooner Hiram, captain Brooks, arrived at Hartford in Connecticut. He related, that the Sea Horſe, captain Smith, from Guadaloupe for Boſton, had all her crew, excepting the maſter and firſt mate, taken out by an Engliſh ſhip. She was ſent to Antigua, and releaſed, but her crew were detained on board of the ſhip that took them.

A more complete account of the ſufferings of captain Smith and his people, was given by himſelf, dated Baltimore, January 5th, 1796. On the 13th of November, preceding, he was taken by the frigate Reſource, captain Watkins. Five of his men, two of whom had the fever, were impreſſed. A prize-maſter and four men were put on board of the Sea-Horſe. They confined captain Smith for three days below, under the guard of two men with drawn cutlaſſes, and loaded piſtols. While captain Smith was on board of the Reſource, he was ill treated by a midſhipman; and told him that he would not be inſulted by a boy. Captain Watkins ſaid, that, if he had heard the expreſſion, he would have tied up and flogged Smith for daring to inſult his majeſty's officer. To the feelings of an enlightened federaliſt, this language may be acceptable. Watkins offered him two hundred pounds, and a ſhare of the prize-money, to ſay that the ſhip was French property. At Antigua, the firſt mate of the Sea Horſe died, and the preſident cauſed his body to be thrown into the ſea. He alſo ſent a pilot and negroes on board to carry the veſſel out to ſea. Captain Smith offered to knock them down. The preſident ſent for him, and threatened to cauſe the fort to fire into the veſſel, if ſhe did not go out to ſea, either with men or without them. On Smith's refuſal, the preſident ſaid that he would have him confined. What a ſplendid blaze of Britiſh honour and hoſpitality! And how fondly would Noah Webſter have chuckled over it, if the ſcene had only paſt in a French port inſtead of an Engliſh one! Watkins had brought three other American prizes into Antigua. He cut them out of a port in Guadaloupe; and, their regiſters being in the office on ſhore, he boaſted of them as a ſure prey. They were, notwithſtanding, diſcharged. How captain Smith got hands to work his veſſel to Baltimore does not appear. Two leagues from Cape Henry, he was boarded by admiral Murray, who, as if the poor man had not already ſuffered enough, took from him Wilkinſon Gilt, a mate whom he had ſhipped at Antigua. Somebody called citizen Hughes, is ſincerely thanked for ſupplying him with part of a crew. But whether this was Victor Hughes, or where the help was given, we are left in the dark.

On the 8th of January, 1796, the brig Experience, captain Houſton, arrived from Port-au-Prince at Philadelphia. He informed, that three Britiſh ſhips of war, at the former place, preſſed every American who could not produce a protection. They were chiefly manned with American ſeamen. A number of our veſſels, lying at Port-au-Prince, were in a moſt diſtreſſed ſituation for want of hands.

A letter from St. Kitts, dated 4th January, 1796, and received by a merchant of Philadelphia, ſays, that the brig Fame, captain Medlin, of this port, was about to ſail for it. The letter adds, that ſhe had been plundered by a French privateer, but gives no particulars.

On the 17th of January, the Muſquito, captain Harſhaw, arrived at Baltimore from Bourdeaux. On the voyage, he was met by the Huſſar, a Britiſh frigate. His keys were taken, his cheſts broke up, and every thing ſtolen that the Britiſh could lay their hands on. They alſo drank a caſe of his wine, and preſſed the Muſquito's mate, and one of the hands, who was an American.

Thus far we have inſtances of Britiſh piracy, formerly overlooked or omitted, as obſerved in the beginning of this chapter. The reader muſt have become tired with this uniform and diſguſting tale of our commercial degradation. As a relief to the melancholy picture, let us turn, for a moment, to the debates on the Britiſh treaty. The enthuſiaſm of attachment which it inſpired, forms one of the moſt ſingular phenomena in the hiſtory of the human mind. Many of its ſanguine advocates were men unſuſpected of a ſiniſter deſign.

On the 26th of April, 1796, Mr. Gallatin, in ſpeaking of the Britiſh treaty, had theſe words:

The fact was uncontroverted, that the Britiſh ſtill continued to impreſs our ſeamen and to capture our veſſels. If they pretended to juſtify that conduct by the treaty, it became neceſſary to obtain an explanation of the doubtful articles; if there was nothing in the treaty to juſtify it, their acts were acts of hoſtility; were an infraction of that treaty; and even, according to the doctrine of thoſe gentlemen who thought that, in common caſes, the houſe had no diſcretion, the treaty once broken by one party, was no longer binding on the other; and it was the right as well as the duty of this houſe, not to proceed to paſs the laws neceſſary to carry it into effect, until ſatisfactory aſſurances were obtained, that theſe acts ſhould ceaſe, and until Great Britain had evinced a friendly diſpoſition towards usBache's Debates, vol. ii. p. 266..

It was impoſſible to conceive a plainer, or a more ſubſtantial argument. Theſe few lines contain juſt enough to have convinced an audience of acceſſible underſtandings, of the propriety of ſuſpending proceedings toward fulfilling the Britiſh treaty, till an effectual check had been given to Britiſh piracy. On the 27th of April, Mr. Tracy roſe in anſwer to Mr. Gallatin. Two paſſages ſhall be here given from his ſpeech. The firſt is as follows:

It had been acknowledged, by Mr. Gallatin, that a new negociation, at preſent, cannot be expected. Great Britain poſſeſſes the poſts, the confidence of the Indians, the many millions of dollars deſpoiled from our commerce, the benefits of our trade, and proceeds to make more invaſions on our property and our rights, and yet the gentleman ſays we will not go to war! What would be the American conduct under ſuch a ſtate of things? Would they tamely ſee their government ſtrut, attempt to look big, call hard names; and the moment they were faced, like an over-grown lubberly boy, ſhrink into a corner? Is this, he aſked, the American character? He thought himſelf acquainted with a part of the United States, too well, to believe they merited ſuch a character; the people where he was moſt acquainted, whatever might be the character in other parts of the union, were not of the ſtamp to cry Hoſannah to day, and crucify to-morrow; they will not dance round a whiſky pole one day, and curſe their government, and, upon hearing of a military force, ſneak into a ſwamp. No, ſaid Mr. Tracy, my immediate conſtituents, whom I very well know, underſtand their rights, and will defend them, and if they find that the government either cannot, or will not protect them, they will at leaſt attempt to protect themſelves. And he could not feel thankful to Mr. Gallatin for coming all the way from Geneva, to give Americans a character of puſillanimityBache's Debates, vol. ii. p. 295..

This rhapſody makes up with ill-nature what it wants in meaning. From the firſt part of it, where the gentleman ſpeaks of the injuries committed on this country by England, one would ſuppoſe, that he was going to recommend an immediate exertion of American vengeance. But, ſo far from that, he only recommended that we ſhould kiſs the Britiſh rod by inſtantly appropriating for Jay's treaty. The bluſtering ſound of his words, and the abject proſtration of his ideas form a ſtriking contraſt. His compariſon between Connecticut and the weſtern counties of Pennſylvania is a maſter-piece of vulgar calumny. That the people of the former ſtate are as brave as any in the union has never been denied; and the convention of Saratoga will, for ages to come, be remembered and cited as a monument of their courage. But this ought not to be converted into a handle for reproach, and much leſs for ſlander, againſt other ſtates. As to the weſtern inſurrection, it is time that we ſhould begin to ſpeak truth about it. The way in which that affair was ſuppreſſed did, in itſelf, diſcredit the government of the country. The late king of Pruſſia would not have thought all the military conduct diſplayed about it, worth an enſign's commiſſion. Here are a few ſpecimens of the federal army.

On Thurſday the 13th of November, there were about forty perſons brought to Parkiſon's houſe, by order of general White; he directed to put the damned raſcals in the cellar, to tie them back to back, to make a fire for the guard, but to put the priſoners back to the father end of the cellar, and to give them neither victuals nor drink. The cellar was wet and muddy, and the night cold; the cellar extended the whole length, under a log-houſe, which was neither floored, nor the openings between the logs daubed. They were kept there until Saturday morning, and then marched to the town of Waſhington. On the march, one of the priſoners, who was ſubject to convulſions, fell into a fit: but when ſome of the troop told general White of his ſituation, he ordered them to tie the damned raſcal to a horſe's tail, and drag him along with them, for he had only feigned having the fits. Some of his fellow priſoners, however, who had a horſe, diſmounted, and let the poor man ride: he had another fit before he reached Waſhington. This march was about twelve miles. The poor man, who had the fits, had been in the American ſervice, during almoſt the whole of the war with Great Britain.

General White has not denied this accuſation, nor proſecuted the hiſtorian who records it. Hence we muſt admit the ſtatement to be true; and New Jerſey may congratulate herſelf on the acquiſition or production of a ſecond DUKE OF CUMBERLAND. Mr. Findley gives ſome farther traits of this federal hero. Stockdale was forbid, on the peril of of his life, to adminiſter any comfort to his neighbours, though they were periſhing with cold, and famiſhing with hunger. The general treated the priſoners, as they arrived, with the moſt inſulting and abuſive language, cauſing them all to be tied back to back, except one man, who held a reſpectable rank, and who, however, was ſaid to be one of the moſt guilty in his cuſtody. One of the neareſt neighbours, who had a child at the point of dying, and obſerving that they were bringing in the whole neighbourhood priſoners, without regard to guilt or innocence, went and gave himſelf up to general White, expecting that, as he was conſcious there was no charge againſt him, he would be permitted to return to his family on giving bail, but he alſo was inhumanly thrown into the cellar, tied with the reſt, and refuſed the privilege of ſeeing his dying child; nor was he permitted to attend its funeral, until after many entreaties he obtained that liberty, accompanied with the moſt horrid oaths and imprecations. Of the ſmall honour acquired in this expedition, a great part falls to the ſnare of captain John Dunlap, of this city. Captain Dunlap and his party, while they behaved with the greateſt dexterity in taking the priſoners, treated them with as much politeneſs and attention as their ſituation would admit of, and engaged their gratitude by accompanying unavoidable ſeverity with humanityFindley's Hiſtory of the Inſurrection, p. 202.. At Carliſle, a p •• t of our army, after a hearty dinner, were on the point of ſetting fire to the town, and of charging each other with the bayonet. Mr. Tracy is left to judge whether ſuch conduct was not as bad as that of dancing round a whiſky pole. But when the member attempts to ſtigmatize the whole conſtituents of Mr. Gallatin, as rebels and poltroons, it is hard to find, within the compaſs of decency, a term ſuitable to his behaviour.

Mr. Tracy farther complained of Mr. Gallatin for having ſaid that the negociation with Great Britain was begun in fear, carried on through fear, and the treaty made by the ſame motive; when it arrived in this country the Senate ſanctioned it, and the Preſident placed his ſignature to it from fear▪ and now there was an attempt to obtain the ſanction of the Houſe of Repreſentatives from fear. All theſe expreſſions, in an unqualified manner, the gentleman had applied to this country, in its moſt important tranſactions, by its moſt important characters, and to crown all, we were to defeat the treaty, and ſit down quietly under injuries the moſt irritating, and not attempt a redreſs, or to do any thing like going to war. Under impreſſions made by ſuch declarations, he had ſaid what he had, and he now ſaid, he wiſhed to look in the face of Mr. Gallatin, or Mr. Heiſter, or any other, who dared ſay, the American character was that of cowardice. He would ſay again and again, it was madneſs, or worſe, to ſuppoſe we could defeat this treaty and avoid a war.

What Mr. Gallatin ſays about fear is perfectly true. Mr. Tracy always takes it for granted, that America had no medium between the acceptance of Mr. Jay's treaty and a Btitiſh war. An embargo for four months would have reduced the mother country to our terms, without occaſion for the firing of a piſtol.

Mr. Tracy next denies the reality of Britiſh impreſſments. He took this opportunity to aſk for the proofs of ſuch tranſactions, as impreſſing our ſeamen, by the Britiſh government. He declared he knew of none; and had never heard one inſtance of the Britiſh government either avowing the right, or practiſing upon it, of impreſſment of an American into their ſea ſervice; many inſtances had occurred of complaints to the government, and all were immediately redreſſed; and, although it was become very faſhionable to calumniate the Britiſh government, he was impelled, from his own belief and conviction on the ſubject, to ſay, that no ſuch inſtance had ever taken place or would ever, of the Britiſh government, juſtifying the impreſſment of natives of the United States, or one who was an acknowledged citizen. Is it not unfair, ſaid Mr. Tracy, to attribute to the government unauthorized miſconduct of individuals, far removed from the ſeat and controul of the government? It was equally unreaſonable to ſay, that we were not protected by the treaty, and ſhould not be, when the Britiſh government had promiſed to pay for all former depredations made in that way upon our commerce, was it not reaſonable to ſuppoſe, they would prevent or pay for any ſuch depredation now made? And they certainly would prevent all ſuch, which were not from the confuſion of war rendered inevitable.

As for the proofs of impreſſment, the gentleman is referred to the depoſition of Cyprian Cook, emitted at Norwich in Connecticut. As for his never hearing of one inſtance, where the Britiſh government avowed the right of impreſſing, or practiſed upon it, the inference muſt be, that Mr. Tracy has ears of a particular conſtruction. Whether Mr. Pitt himſelf aſſerted the right is of no conſequence. The Britiſh, in the Weſt-Indies, univerſally avowed and practiſed upon it. Mr. Tracy ſays that all complaints to government were immediately redreſſed. He ſhould have told us what redreſs was obtained in the caſe related by captain Cook. He then mounts upon that favourite topic of the Britiſh officers acting without orders. Compenſation cloſes the chorus. We now proceed with the liſt of Britiſh piracies, leaving Mr. Tracy to deny their exiſtence, as long as he ſhall think proper.

A Philadelphia newſpaper, of the 8th of April, 1796, informs, that the brig Maria Wilman, of Baltimore, captain Oaks, was taken in Tortola by the Bull Dog ſloop, and there ſold at auction. She was from Demarara, bound to Baltimore, with a cargo of ſugar and coffee. It farther ſays, that, on Monday, the 11th of April, 1796, the brig Charlotte, of Providence, arrived at Baltimore, in thirteen days from Martinique. Captain Watts, of the ſchooner Alexandria, of Alexandria, came paſſenger, along with a number of other Americans. Their veſſels had been contracted for, and they were obliged to leave them. This corroborates the account already given by captain Samuel Green. In ſummer, 1793, Gideon Henfield and John Singletary had been arreſted on board of the Citizen Genet, a French privateer, lying in the Delaware, and Henfield was tried in this city, ſoon after, for having enliſted in the French ſervice. In ſpite of a buſtle made by government, he was acquitted. In the eye of reaſon, it ſeems equally culpable to have ſold privateers to Britain, yet no notice has been taken of that practice.

A paragraph from Fredericſburg, dated April 1ſt, 1796, ſays, that, laſt week, arrived in the river, the ſchooner William, captain John Scott, from Baſſaterre, St. Kitts. He ſaid that on the 23d of February, between nine and ten o'clock in the evening, in Baſſaterre road, he was boarded by a boat with five men with cutlaſſes. They belonged to a Britiſh armed ſloop lying there. They ordered William M'Coy, a native of Fredericſburg, into the boat; but, being prevented from taking him, they went back to the ſloop. Immediately after, they returned with their commander, one Williams, and an additional number of men, armed with piſtols and cutlaſſes. They took away from the ſchooner, John Mansfield, William M'Coy, and two blacks. Next morning, captain Scott went on ſhore, and proved theſe people to be citizens of the United States. He could recover only the two blacks. Every American at the port ſhared a ſimilar fate. A Baltimore ſchooner was ſtript of all her hands, excepting the mate and a boy.

A practice had for ſometime prevailed at Norfolk, in Virginia, of ſending horſes to the Britiſh Weſt-Indies to mount their cavalry. This, if not a breach of neutrality, was at beſt a plain enough indication to France that we preferred the moſt petty ſelf-intereſt to any ſucceſs on her ſide. A Kingſton newſpapaper, of the 23d of February, 1796, has the following article. Captain Huntington reports, that, when he left America, admiral Murray, with his ſquadron, was lying in Hampton road, waiting to convoy the horſes that were purchaſed for the dragoons in St. Domingo. Two articles, dated Philadelphia, April 12th, ſay, that three of theſe veſſels, with their freights of horſes, were taken by the French, and ſent into Cape Francois. This is the only capture by the French of American ſhipping that has yet occurred in compiling the laſt or the preſent chapter.

The Federal Gazette of Baltimore, of the 15th of April, 1796, contains a letter from Tortola. The writer mentions the irregular proceedings of the Britiſh court of admiralty in that iſland, reſpecting American captures. The captains of the ſhips of war were permitted to detain the maſters and ſupercargoes of the prizes as priſoners on board of their veſſels, till they were deprived of opportunities for employing proper counſel. Enormous coſts were granted, of which the bench received a ſhare. Some particular circumſtances of injuſtice are mentioned in the caſe of the Maria Wilman, captain Oaks, who, in the ſame newſpaper, is noticed as having, at this time, arrived ſafe with his veſſel at Baltimore. It is likely that he wrote this very letter; but perhaps neither he nor his owners durſt avow it, for fear of offending the Britiſh party. In an independent country, this dread may ſeem ſtrange, yet nothing is more notoriouſly true, than that ſuch influence is extremely active and formidable. Every mercantile man, and every newſprinter, who dares to ſpeak, with energy, of the inſolence and rapine of the Queen of Iſles, runs imminent hazard of perſecution. The Britiſh tories, in our ſeaport towns, ſeconded by the American intereſt, will ſpare no toil or expence to make him inſolvent and infamous. General deſcription cannot convey a complete picture of their proceedings. Their own pencil furniſhes the beſt portrait. Here follows an extract from a federal electioneering hand-bill. An hundred years hence, it may be hoped, that Americans will turn over ſuch outcaſts of typography, with the ſame contemptuous pity as an Engliſhman of the preſent age looks back on the ſallies of Settle and Tom BrowneSee Johnſon's Life of Dryden..

To the Citizens of New-York.

Jacobin men and jacobin meaſures are all hollow and rotten. An inſtructive inſtance has juſt occurred. The bank of Pennſylvania was eſtabliſhed in oppoſition to the bank of the United States. A jacobin preſident, ſecretary, and a majority of jacobin directors were appointed. The iſſue has diſcloſed a ſcene of jacobin villainy. It turns out, that the preſident, ſecretary, and the notable John Swanwick, have fraudently, and by colluſion, drawn out of the bank one hundred and ſeventy thouſand dollars more than they had a right to. John Swanwick, the famous French American democrat, whom the good democrats in Philadelphia have lately made a member of Congreſs, in oppoſition to the prudent and honeſt part of the city, now appears in his true colour, an unprincipled ſwindler. Such is the authentic intelligence juſt received from Philadelphia. And yet a large body of citizens, many good but deluded ones, are ſtraining every nerve to place once more in Congreſs the ariſtocratic, democratical, jacobinical, Edward Livingſton. Pauſe, fellow-citizens; be aſſured time will prove to his moſt infatuated followers, that he is as rotten and hollow as his compeers.

Poſterity, if this page chances to reach them, will naturally aſk where lies the propriety of reprinting ſuch rubbiſh? The anſwer is, that ſuch writings were, in December, 1796, propagated at New-York, with the approbation of a very numerous party. The deſign was, to defeat the re-election of Mr. Livingſton as repreſentative in Congreſs for that city; and while any remembrance of this handbill ſhall remain, its authors and its abettors muſt be abhorred by every honeſt man.

The bank of Pennſylvania was not eſtabliſhed in oppoſition to the bank of the United States. The field of competition was alike open to every perſon. It has never been ſaid that the Pennſylvania bank uſed an unfair means to rival or injure the bank of the United States. The latter is here referred to, as if it were ſomething ſacred; and yet the holders of its ſtock are aſhamed or afraid of telling their namesSupra, chap. ii.. Mr. Swanwick did not, in the cloſe of 1796, nor for a long time before it, owe the Pennſylvania bank a dollar. Here he is charged as an unprincipled ſwindler, for having made fraudulent draughts out of it. Thoſe who voted for his election oppoſed the honeſt part of this city. But even if it had been all as true as it was falſe, this had nothing to do with the election of Livingſton, any more than the idle ſtory of Mr. Gallatin, ſleeping under hedges, afforded a reaſon for rejecting general DearbourneIbid.. The ſame tiſſue of defamation, falſehood, and vulgarity, runs through a very large proportion of the writings of the federal party. So many different ſamples are here given to convince people, at a diſtance from the ſcene, that theſe are not partial ſpecimens. One would think that the friends of order have imported a cargo of Coſſacks or Hottentots to act as their penmen. Their encomiums are, if poſſible, more loathſome than their invective. To cenſure Preſident Waſhington is ranked, by the Columbian Centinel, with ridiculing ********, or black-guarding the BibleAurora, January 4th, 1797..

Recurring again to the caſe of the Baltimore brig, it may well be ſuppoſed, that captain Oaks was afraid of provoking ſuch a ſwarm of ſcorpions. For the ſame obvious and weighty reaſon many narratives of Britiſh piracy have been ſecreted, by the ſufferers, from the public prints. Of the fifty-five ſhips taken by the Argonaut, perhaps no regular account of the capture of ſix has appeared in any newſpaper.

The Maryland Journal, of the 2d of May, 1796, gives the following account as from captain Wade of the ſchooner Polly, from Jamacia. He ſays, that from the 20th of February to the 1ſt of April, thirteen American prizes had been ſent into Kingſton. Three of theſe were ſchooners, belonging to Oliver and Thomſon, of Baltimore. Another was a new copper-bottomed ſhip from Baltimore to Calcutta.

On the 3d of May, the ſchooner Edward and William, captain Levin Jones, arrived at Baltimore, in nineteen days from Port-au-Paix. In the paſſage, ſhe met with a brig from Port-au-Prince bound for New-London. The people told captain Jones, that five of them had been impreſſed by a Britiſh frigate. On the 28th of April, they were chaſed by another, but night coming on they got out of her way.

On the ſame day, the Ariel, captain Fiſher, arrived at Baltimore from Jacquemel. He had ſpoke to the ſchooner Elizabeth, of Philadelphia, from Jamaica. The captain gave him an account of twenty-ſeven American veſſels carried into that iſland for trial, and of two carried into the Mole, which were to be ſent to Jamaica. He adds, that all veſſels to or from French iſlands were ſeized.

On the 17th of April, the brig Siſters, captain Brent, arrived in Hampton roads from Guernſey. She had, on the 12th of March, been boarded by the Thetis, a Bermudian corſair. Theſe pirates took out the maſter and crew, rummaged the veſſel, broke up all the letters and papers, and, after three hours, permitted her to proceed.

BOSTON, APRIL 16. By an arrival, on Saturday, of a veſſel from Curracoa, we received the following proteſt of Hugh Wilſon, maſter of American brig called the Jay, belonging to Baltimore; who being duly ſworn before the notary royal and public of St. Bartholomew, declareth:—

That, having got his veſſel captured and condemned, as hereafter will appear, and having had his log-book and all the papers belonging to the veſſel and to himſelf taken from him, all to the ſhipping articles and a ſmall memorandum book of his private diſburſements, he is obliged to give his declaration from memory, and to the beſt of his recollection, viz. that, on the 10th of April laſt, 1795, he ſailed in ſaid brig from St. Pierre, in the iſland of Martinique, bound to Antigua: that, on the 12th of ſaid month, in the morning, he was boarded by the French armed ſchooner called, (as near as he could recollect) the Alhenienne, commanded by one Paſcal from Guadaulope, under the lee of which iſland the brig then was, and in the evening was carried into Baſſaterre road, in ſaid laſt iſland. That the ſame deponent and all his crew were immediately put on board a French ſloop of war, where they were detained about eight or ten days, without knowing what was the intention of the French to do with the ſaid brig, and without ever having been heard or examined. That the deponent and the ſupercargo, Mr. John Starck, were ſent on ſhore and conducted to the interpreter or linguiſter, who told them the brig Jay and her remaining cargo, conſiſting in corn and ſtaves, had already been condemned, and who furniſhed Mr. Starck with a copy of the condemnation. That Mr. Starck was put at liberty; but the deponent was, the next day, thrown into Baſſaterre goal, where he remained about ten days, after which he was drove out of the ſaid goal and put in chains, on board a ſmall French ſchooner bound to Point-a-Petre, the deponent lying all the paſſage (about ſixty hours), with eight priſoners more chained to the ſame bar, in the hold of ſaid ſchooner, upon the ſtone ballaſt, with a very ſcanty and indifferent food. That, having arrived in ſuch a ſituation at Point-a-Petre, the deponent was immediately put on board one of the priſonſhips in the harbour, where he was detained for near eight months, that is to ſay, until the 1ſt inſtant, (January 1796) when captain Wheeler, of the brig Peggy, of New-York, having obtained permiſſion to pick out American ſailors, that might be found on board of the different priſon ſhips, came along ſide the ſhip, where the deponent was detained. That having made his caſe known to him, he the ſaid captain Wheeler took the deponent along with him, and put him on board the ſaid brig Peggy. That on the 11th inſt. or thereabout, the deponent went in ſaid brig from Point-a-Petre, and arrived in this harbour of Guſtavia yeſterday, the 13th inſt. without yet knowing what has become of his veſſel, the brig Jay, her cargo, or any thing belonging to her, and without ever having been heard, either in behalf of ſaid property or of himſelf, during all the time of near nine months, he was detained in Guadaloupe, plundered of every thing belonging to him, and not left a ſecond ſhirt to put on; that, during his detention in Point-a-Petre, captain Lyle of Baltimore, as he paſſed by the ſaid priſonſhip, having ſeen and recollected the deponent, had applied to the commiſſaire de guerre in his behalf, but in vain, as ſaid captain Lyle afterwards told the deponent.

[Here follows the proteſt of the judge and notary public, declaring the capture and condemnation to be contrary to the law of nations, and of humanity; the whole is dated at Guſtavia, (St. Bartholomew) the 14th January, 1796.]

The inſertion of the preceding article, ought to vindicate this work from the ſuſpicion of a deſire to conceal or palliate the injuries committed againſt American commerce by the French republic. Nothing of that nature has been intentionally overlooked; for the only object of the author is the diſcovery and publication of truth, without the ſmalleſt concern what nation, or what individual may chance to appear in an unfavourable light. From this inſtance of French piracy, we return to Britiſh depredations.

A paragraph, dated Norfolk, April 26th, 1796, mentions the arrival of the ſchooner Eleanor, captain Jackſon. He gave an account of the Huſſar, a Britiſh frigate, having captured the ſhip Alexander of Yorktown, captain Orr, from Liſbon to Norfolk. The crew were taken on board of the Huſſar, and the ſhip herſelf was ſent to Halifax. The Maryland Journal, of the 2d of May, gives account of the ſchooner Betſey of Boſton, captain Philips. She was taken by the Britiſh, but re-captured by the crew, who delivered up the Britiſh as priſoners to the French, at Jacquemel. The ſame newſpaper tells of the ſeizure of the ſhip Alexander, of Baltimore, by the Britiſh. She was bound from Demarara for Baltimore. The captors ſent her into Grenada, where the cargo was libelled. Here is alſo a ſtatement from captain Wade of the ſchooner Polly, of thirteen ſail of Americans which had been ſent into Kingſton, Jamaica, between the 20th of February, and the 1ſt of April, 1796. One of theſe veſſels was bound from Baltimore to Calcutta.

It ſeems amazing that, in the face of ſuch injuries, any member of Congreſs could recommend appropriations for the Britiſh treaty. Public curioſity has been excited by the concealment of Mr. Jay's inſtructions. Acceſs has been obtained to this paper, and leave has been given to make an abſtract of every material part of it. This, though not in form, yet in ſubſtance, will anſwer the end in view.

Some notice has already been taken of the ſingular conduct of the executive in refuſing to treat with Genet becauſe the Senate were not then ſitting, and thereafter, while they actually were in ſeſſion, of his reſolving to enter into a Britiſh negociation, and nominating Mr. Jay as envoy, without giving the Senate previous intimation of ſuch a deſign. The meſſage does not aſk either advice or conſent, but abruptly declares that he has thought proper. This is not the conſtitutional ſtyle of aſking advice, or conſent. The departure from the ſpirit of the conſtitution is obvious.

The meſſage was received by the Senate on the 16th of April, 1794. On the 17th, a motion was made in the following words: that previous to going into the conſideration of the nomination of a ſpecial envoy to the court of Great Britain, the Preſident of the United States be requſted to inform the Senate of the whole buſineſs with which the propoſed envoy is to be charged. This motion was negatived. Thus the advice and conſent of the Senate, as required by the conſtitution, were overlooked. Without conſulting them, the Preſident reſolved to enter into a negociation, and named an envoy. When he ſent down the meſſage to the Senate as to his having done ſo, he did not let them know what the negociation was to be about. If the words advice and conſent mean any thing, it muſt ſurely be that the Senate are to be previouſly acquainted with and conſulted upon the buſineſs that an ambaſſador is going to undertake. There can be no other rational explanation of the phraſe. The Senate could not pretend to give their advice about the expediency of commencing a treaty, when they did not know the terms on which it was to begin. Yet ſuch is the ſpirit in a majority of that body that they refuſed, as appears above, to requeſt a communication from the Preſident upon this pohnt. They had a title to have demanded ſuch an ecclairciſement. In private life, it would be mockery to aſk a man to conſent to any buſineſs, without firſt telling him the ſcope of it. Without ſuch knowledge it is impoſſible that he can give any thing deſerving the name either of advice or conſent.

On the 19th of April a motion was made in the Senate of which the following is part. That to permit judges of the Supreme Court to hold, at the ſame time, any other office or employment emanating from, and holden at the pleaſure of the Executive, is contrary to the ſpirit of the conſtitution, and, as tending to expoſe them to the influence of the Executive, is miſchievous and impolitic. This motion paſſed in the negative, ten to ſeventeen. On the 27th of November, 1794, Dr. William Smith objected in Congreſs to the democratic ſociety of this city, the holding of ſuch a doctrine. But its being ſupported by ſo large a part of the Senate ought at leaſt to have ſoftened the ſeverity of his cenſure.

We now come to the inſtructions of our envoy. Of theſe an entire copy cannot, as above ſtated, be obtained; but permiſſion has been procured to make a copious abſtract. They ſet out with directing Mr. Jay to obtain redreſs for the piracies committed on our commerce by authority of inſtructions from the king and council. He is next enjoined to draw to a concluſion all points of difference concerning the peace of 1783. The Executive then expreſſes a wiſh, that the debts, the intereſt claimed upon them, and all things relating to them, be put outright in a diplomatic diſcuſſion, as being certainly of a judicial nature to be decided by our courts. If this point could not be obtained, he was to ſupport the doctrines of government, with arguments proper for the occaſion, and with that attention to his former public opinions, which ſelf-reſpect will juſtify. This phraſe, as to former public opinions, does not ſeem very happy. Mr. Jay, as a judge, had declared, from the bench that the Engliſh were juſtified in detaining the weſtern poſts, on account of the debts due to Britain. Hence, attention to his former opinions, would lead him to vindicate the latter, at the expence of America.

The inſtructions proceed to ſay, that, the Britiſh government, having denied their abetting the Indians, we muſt, of courſe, acquit them. But we have ſatisfactory proofs, ſome of which, however, cannot, as you will diſcover, be well uſed in public, that Britiſh agents are guilty of ſtirring up, and aſſiſting, with arms, ammunition, and warlike implements, the different tribes of Indians againſt us.

It is incumbent upon that government to reſtrain theſe agents, as a forbearance to reſtrain them, cannot be interpreted otherwiſe than as a determination to countenance them. Mr. Jay was farther directed to inſiſt, that the Indians dwelling in the territories of one, ſhall not be interfered with by the other. He was likewiſe enjoined, to explain the pacific wiſhes of America, in caſe that he ſhould find the court of London equally diſpoſed for amity. Mr. Jay was, beſides, inſtructed to mention the dangerous effect that might be produced upon the minds of the citizens of America, by the continuation of outrages in the Weſt-Indies, while, at the ſame time, our courts gave entire authority to claims for Britiſh debts. Mr. Jay was, in particular, enjoined to conſider the inexecution and infraction of the treaty, as ſtanding on diſtinct grounds from the vexations and ſpoliations; ſo that no adjuſtment of the former, is to be influenced by the latter. Mr. Jay was, in the next place, inſtructed, if he ſhould be able to obtain ſatisfaction, as to the treſpaſſes on the treaty of 1783, and as to the Weſt-Indian piracies, to ſound the Britiſh miniſtry on the ſubject of a commercial treaty. If he found this ſubject eligible, he was eſpecially directed to inſiſt upon the following points.

1. Reciprocity in navigation, and particularly to the Weſt-Indies, and even to the Eaſt-Indies.

The admiſſion of wheat, fiſh, ſalt-meat, and other great ſtaples, upon the ſame footing with the admiſſion of the great Britiſh ſtaples in American ports.

3. FREE SHIPS TO MAKE FREE GOODS.

4. Proper ſecurity for the ſafety of neutral commerce in other reſpects; and particularly, by declaring proviſions never to be contraband, except in the ſtrongeſt poſſible caſe; as the blockade of a port; or, if attainable, by aboliſhing contraband altogether. By defining a blockade, if contraband, muſt continue, in ſome degree, as it is defined in the armed neutrality. By reſtricting the opportunities of vexation, in viſiting veſſels, and bringing under ſtricter management privateers, and expediting recoveries againſt them for miſconduct.

5. Exemption of emigrants, particularly manufacturers, from reſtraintEvery body knows how admirably this point has been attended to..

6. Free export of arms and military ſtores.

7. The excluſion of the term "the moſt favoured nation," as being productive of embarraſſment.

8. The convoy of merchant ſhips, by the public ſhips of war, where it ſhall be neceſſary, and they be holding the ſame courſe.

9. It is anxiouſly to be deſired, that the fiſhing grounds now engroſſed by the Britiſh, ſhould be opened to the citizens of the United States.

10. The intercourſe with England makes it neceſſary that the diſability ariſing from alienage, in caſes of inheritance ſhould be put on a liberal footing; or rather aboliſhed.

11. You may diſcuſs the ſale of prizes in our ports, while we are neutral; and this, perhaps, may be added to the conſiderations which we have to give, beſides thoſe of reciprocity.

12. Proper ſhelter, defence, and ſuccour, againſt pirates, ſhipwreck, &c.

13. Full ſecurity for the retiring of the citizens of the United States from the Britiſh dominions in caſe a war ſhould break out.

14. No privateering commiſſions to be taken out by the ſubjects of the one, or the citizens of the other party, againſt each otherIt is hard to gueſs what our Executive could mean by this injunction. In caſe of a rupture between this country and England, the chief way in which we can affect her intereſt, muſt be by attacking her commerce. Hence a ſtipulation for reſtricting our own efforts in that quarter, has not an extreme appearance of perſpicuity..

15. Conſuls to be admitted in Europe, the Weſt and Eaſt-Indies.

16. In caſe of an Indian war, none but the uſual ſupplies in peace ſhall be furniſhed.

17. In peace, no troops to be kept within a limited diſtance from the lakes.

18. No ſtipulation whatever is to interfere with our obligations to France.

19. A treaty is not to be continued beyond fifteen years.

The above enumeration preſented, in a general point of view, the objects which our Executive conſidered as deſirable to be comprehended in a commercial treaty. But Mr. Jay was eſpecially cautioned not to expect that a treaty could be poſitively effected with ſo great a variety of advantages in favour of America. Here it is difficult to ſuppreſs the feelings of ſurpriſe, at ſo very injudicious a choice of the time for making a commercial treaty with Britain. Something has been ſaid upon that ſubject already, and to which the reader is referred.

The ſixth chapter of an act of Parliament, paſt in the 28th year of the reign of George the third, mentions certain articles which may be carried from the United States to the Britiſh Weſt-Indies, in Britiſh bottoms; and certain others which may be conveyed from the Britiſh Weſt-Indies to the United States in Britiſh bottoms. Mr. Jay was enjoined, if practicable, to obtain the ſame privilege, in both caſes, for American bottoms. But ſuch treaty, inſtead of the uſual clauſe of ratification, was to contain the following. This treaty ſhall be obligatory and concluſive, when the ſame ſhall be ratified by his Britannic majeſty of the one part, and by the Preſident of the United States, by and with the advice and conſent of the Senate, of the other.

But if a treaty of commerce could not be formed upon a baſis as advantageous as that above ſtated, Mr. Jay was prohibited from concluding or ſigning any ſuch; it being conceived that it would not be expedient to do any thing more than to digeſt with the Britiſh miniſtry, the articles of ſuch a treaty, as they appeared willing to accede to, referring them here for conſideration and further inſtruction, previous to a formal concluſion.

From this part of Mr. Jay's inſtructions, the plain inference ſeems to be, that he was not at liberty to ſign any treaty at all, till it had been previouſly remitted to this country for examination. Indeed it was plainly enough admitted, in the Houſe of Repreſentatives, that our envoy had exceeded his powers.

After this injunction, the inſtructions to Mr. Jay proceed immediately in the following words. Some of the other points which it would be intereſting to comprehend in a treaty, may not be attended with difficulty. Among theſe, is the admiſſion of our commodities and manufactures generally, in the Britiſh European dominions, upon a footing equally good with thoſe of other foreign countries. At preſent, certain enumerated articles only are admitted, and though the enumeration embraces all the articles which it is of preſent conſequence to us to be able to export to thoſe dominions, yet, in proceſs of time, an extenſion of the objects may become of moment. The fixing of the privileges which we now enjoy, in the Britiſh Eaſt Indies, by toleration of the company's government, if any arrangement can be made with the conſent of the company for that purpoſe, would alſo be a valuable ingredient.

As Denmark and Sweden were upon very indifferent terms with the Britiſh miniſtry, and as Ruſſia, the nominal ally of England, had, in the American war, appeared at the head of the famous armed neutrality, it was to be expected, that ſome co-operation from that quarter would greatly tend to enforce the ſucceſs of Mr. Jay's errand. Accordingly, ſome ideas on this ſubject ſeem to have occurred to our American cabinet. But the timid and indeciſive ſtyle in which the inſtructions, as to that point, are couched, ſhews how little could be reſted upon them. Our envoy was cautioned as to entering into ſuch a negociation, if there was a danger of its being diſcovered by the Britiſh court. Now this notion of our Executive runs expreſsly counter to the common experience of mankind. For, the very dread of Jay maturing ſuch a treaty, would have been the moſt likely way to bring Grenville to favourable terms. Nothing was to be depended upon from that quarter, but through the operation of intereſt or fear; and the ſhorteſt way to make this impreſſion, was, by affecting a correſpondence with the Daniſh and Swediſh miniſters, even though America had previouſly determined to decline ſuch a conjunction. The former armed neutrality had ſtruck England with unuſual alarm, and the very dread of a ſecond combination of that ſort would have chilled the warmeſt drop of blood in the veins of the Engliſh nation. In private life, when you want to cheapen a piece of goods, the firſt argument is, that you can go to the next ſtore. But Jay was expreſsly directed to conceal any deſign of ſuch a nature. To give our Executive full juſtice, the whole paſſage, as it immediately follows the laſt quotation, is here inſerted verbatim.

You will have no difficulty in gaining acceſs to the Miniſters of Ruſſia, Denmark, and Sweden, at the court of London. The principles of the armed neutrality would abundantly cover our neutral rights. If, therefore, the ſituation of things with reſpect to Great Britain ſhould dictate the neceſſity of taking the precaution of foreign cooperation on this head; if no proſpect of accommodation ſhould be thwarted by the danger of ſuch a meaſure being known to the Britiſh court; and if an entire view of all our political relations, ſhall, in your judgment, permit the ſtep; you will ſound thoſe miniſters upon the probability of an alliance with their nations to ſupport thoſe principles. However, there can be no riſk in examining what can be concerted with Denmark and Sweden, or any other power, againſt the Algerines. It may be repreſented to the Britiſh miniſtry, how productive of perfect conciliation it might be to the people of the United States, if Great Britain would uſe her influence with the Dey of Algiers for the liberation of the American citizens in captivity, and for a peace upon reaſonable terms. It has been communicated from abroad, to be the fixed policy of Great Britain to check our trade in grain to the Mediterranean. This is too doubtful to be aſſumcd, but fit for enquiry.

As to the reſtriction in correſponding with the miniſters of Sweden and Denmark, with regard to an armed neutrality, the reader can compare the text with the commentary, and decide whether a miniſter like Jay, who had juſtified the Britiſh in detaining the weſtern poſts, was likely to negociate with the northern powers, under ſuch equivocal and tremulous injunctions.

Another part of the above paragraph, refers to getting the Britiſh miniſtry to obtain the liberation of American priſoners in Algiers. Our miniſter was to tell how productive this ſtep would be of perfect conciliation. If the Britiſh had deſired the latter, American ſailors would never have been carried as ſlaves into Barbary. It was publicly underſtood in both countries, that the court of London, by patching up the Portugueſe truce, were the real authors of the Algerine piracies. Noſtro quoque ſeculo monſtrum. To ſuch atrocious, ſuch abandoned political bloodhounds, whoſe guilt rivals the darkeſt precedent in the records of perdition, the application of this trimming, fawning ſtyle, was perfectly uſeleſs. It was like telling a highwayman how greatly you would thank him for returning your purſe. Jay, if in earneſt, ought to have aſſumed a different tone. You are not only, he might have ſaid, corſairs in perſon, but corſairs by proxy. You have not only accumulated upon our commerce every wrong that Britiſh bucanneers were capable of inflicting, but with a meanneſs and baſeneſs which no language can deſcribe, you have ſummoned to your aid the dregs of the human race. Till you make reparation, common ſenſe loudly exclaims that no treaty between us can repay the trouble of ſubſcription.

The laſt ſentence of the above extract from Jay's inſtructions, ſpeaks of ſomething as a ſecret, which was in reality known to the whole world. England adhered to the policy of checking, not merely American trade in grain to the Mediterranean, but American trade in every commodity to every quarter of the world. Lord Sheffield had even wrote a book, extremely popular in England, wherein he recommended that protection from the powers of Barbary ſhould not be granted by England to American commerce. This was, in other words, recommending that theſe robbers ſhould be turned looſe upon us, at the firſt opportunity. When Jay went to England, Lord Sheffield, the apoſtle of this project, was high in the confidence of Mr. Pitt, ſo that the conduct of the latter was merely an illuſtration of the principles of the former. Yet our Executive ſpeaks, in the inſtructions, as if this news had been conveyed by ſome ſecret channel, though the doctrine and practice of the Britiſh miniſtry were alike notorious. Nay, Mr. Tench Coxe had wrote an anſwer to Sheffield, and in particular to this Algerine plan, ſeveral years before Mr. Jay went to England. Thus our Executive might have found full evidence as to the fixed policy of Britain, in the ſtore of every bookſeller in Philadelphia. The next part of the inſtructions is in theſe words.

Such are the outlines of the conduct which the Preſident wiſhes you to purſue. He is aware that at this diſtance, and during the preſent inſtability of public events, he cannot undertake to preſcribe rules which ſhall be irrevocable; you will, therefore, conſider the ideas herein expreſſed, as amounting to recommendations only, which, in your diſcretion you may modify, as ſeems moſt beneficial to the United States, except in the following caſes, which are immutable.

1. That, as the Britiſh miniſtry will doubtleſs be ſolicitous to detach us from France, and may, probably, make ſome overtures of this kind; you will inform them that the government of the United States will not derogate from our treaties and engagements with France, and that experience has ſhewn that we can be honeſt in our duties to the Britiſh nation, without laying ourſelves under any particular reſtraints as to other nations; and,

2. That no treaty of commerce be concluded, contrary to the foregoing prohibition.

This extract concludes the inſtructions. A ſhort analyſis will evince that they are not remarkable for perſpicuity. We ſhall begin at their outſet, and attempt a ſhort ſketch of their merits.

The firſt object ſtated in the inſtructions is, to obtain redreſs for the piracies, or, as the paper terms it, for the vexations and ſpoliations committed on our commerce. The moſt atrocious of theſe vexations was the impreſſment of American ſeamen; yet, in the whole text of the inſtructions, of which about five-ſixths have been exactly cited, nothing diſtinct or deciſive is ſaid on that point. We have inſerted above, an entire copy of the whole nineteen articles upon which Mr. Jay was authoriſed to found a commercial treaty. In theſe, nothing levels at the practice of impreſſment, unleſs it can be implicated under the general phraſe, "as to the ſafety of neutral commerce," and reſtricting the opportunities of vexations in viſiting veſſels. Reſtriction is one thing, and prohibition is another; ſo that even if impreſſment had been really implied, the language was too vague and equivocal for the object. The treaty, as it now ſtands, contains not one ſingle word about the protection of American ſeamen. After Grenville and Jay had almoſt finiſhed the articles of this paper, Jay ſent a note to the Britiſh miniſter, containing eighteen corrections, or additions, that had occurred to him. Only one of them, viz. the ſixteenth, deſerves publication here. It is in theſe words.

An article ought to be added, to prevent the impreſſment of each other's people.

To this clauſe, the anſwer was thus.

Lord Grenville can ſee no reaſon whatever, why ſuch an article ſhould not be added. No farther notice was taken by Mr. Jay of the buſineſs. As to the authenticity of this ſingular correſpondence, it has been firſt had from a member of the Houſe of Repreſentatives of laſt Congreſs, who read it when lying on the table of the Senate, and the ſubſtance of it was publiſhed, laſt fall, in Britiſh Honour and Humanity. It was ſince repeated to the author by a member of the Senate. As for the merit of our envoy, in this caſe, a thouſand volumes of diplomatic hiſtory would not furniſh ſuch another inſtance of negligence in the duty of office.

The inſtructions next obſerve, that the debts due to England are to be put outright In paſſing, one cannot fail to admire the claſſical ſtyle of our cabinet. in a diplomatic diſcuſſion, as being certainly of a judicial nature to be decided by our courts. Inſtead of this Mr. Jay erected an arbitrary board of five commiſſioners. Thus American debtors were, with one daſh of his pen, deprived of the right of a trial by jury. The Preſident and Senate ratified this breach of juſtice and of law.

The inſtructions likewiſe ſay, that the Britiſh government, having denied the abetting of the Indians, we muſt, of courſe, acquit them. On the ſame principle, an American debtor, denying his debt before the five commiſſioners, they muſt, of courſe, acquit him.

Mr. Jay was alſo to conſider, the inexecution and infraction of the treaty, as ſtanding on diſtinct grounds from the vexations and ſpoliations; ſo that no adjuſtment of the former, is to be influenced by the latter. The general face of the treaty plainly ſets off the debts due to Britain, againſt the detention of the weſtern poſts, and the piracies in the Weſt-Indies. The public have been ſufficiently tired with harping upon Jay's treaty; but the buſineſs of compenſation ſtands at preſent as follows. Providing that American merchants recover their damages in a Britiſh court of admiralty, they are not to receive immediate payment. The Britiſh claims on American debtors are to be held up as a counter-poiſe; and, when the balance ſhall be ſtruck between the two claſſes of claims, the Britiſh expect and ſay, that ſeveral millions of dollars will be found in their favour. This extraordinary mode of compenſation for piracy, was related by a perſon high in office in the Britiſh ſervice, to a Senator of the preſent Congreſs, from whom the account is here given.

We now come to the queſtion, whether Mr. Jay broke his inſtructions? A few literal citations from them will decide this point. On p. 176, there has already been quoted a paragraph beginning thus: but if a treaty of commerce cannot be formed upon a baſis as advantageous as this, YOU ARE NOT TO CONCLUDE OR SIGN ANY SUCH, it being conceived, &c. The whole paragraph is ſomewhat confuſed, but it clearly enjoins a prohibition upon Mr. Jay of ſigning any treaty, unleſs he could obtain an agreement to the whole of his own terms, which the Executive, as above, ſays, could not be expected. Thus we have one ſtep.

A ſubſequent paſſage already quoted, has theſe words: you will therefore conſider the ideas herein expreſſed, as amounting to recommendations only, which in your diſcretion you may modify, as ſeems moſt beneficial to the United States, except in the two following caſes, which are IMMUTABLE.

The two caſes are above inſerted. One of them is, that no treaty of commerce be concluded or ſigned, contrary to the foregoing prohibition. Theſe are the cloſing words of the inſtructions; and hence they muſt be regarded as explanatory of what goes before them. The preceding prohibition can only allude to that paſſage where Mr. Jay is forbidden from ſigning a treaty, unleſs he obtained every thing on his own conditions. The intermediate reference to his diſcretion is inſtantly checked by the prohibition of ſigning. The caſe may then be reduced to three points.

1. Mr. Jay was prohibited from ſigning a treaty unleſs on certain terms, that were not within the compaſs of expectation.

2. Mr. Jay ſigned a treaty.

3. So far from obtaining the terms required, he agreed to a treaty almoſt entirely the reverſe of them. For inſtance, Free ſhips to make free goods is inverted. The ſecurity of emigrant manufacturers is unnoticed. No admiſſion is obtained to Britiſh fiſhing grounds. In the caſe of an Indian war, we have no reſtriction of military ſupplies from Britain to the ſavages. The free export of arms and military ſtores is forbidden, in time of war, for the eighteenth article of the treaty declares them contraband. Thus, out of the eighteen injunctions above quoted, the third, fifth, ſixth, ninth, and ſixteenth, are either neglected or contradicted; and other infractions, of an inferior nature, may readily be found. But, paſſing by ſuch trite materials, we proceed at once to the two capital points of ſecurity to American commerce and of avoiding all cauſe of offence to France. As to the firſt, the Britiſh continue at this day (June 19th, 1797,) to plunder, though two years and ſeven months have paſt over ſince Mr. Jay ſigned his treaty. With regard to the ſecond, the French were, from the firſt, highly and reaſonably exaſperated at the conditions of the treaty, and a war with that republic is likely to be the conſequence.

Thus, in all their material parts, Mr. Jay violated his powers. We aſked for a fiſh, and he gave us a ſerpent. It has been whiſpered that a ſecond ſet of inſtructions were tranſmitted to our envoy. They were never laid before the Senate, and it follows, that, if they really exiſted, which is extremely doubtful, the Senate knew nothing about them. They can form no part of our envoy's vindication, unleſs he ſhall chuſe to produce them.

The tenth article, as to the injuſtice and impolicy of ſequeſtrating Britiſh debts, was written, as it now ſtands, by Mr. Jay. This evinces, if evidence were wanting, that the whole affair was an inſtrument of party.

We have now aſcertained that Mr. Jay treſpaſſed his orders. The next queſtion is, by what motives he could be induced to do ſo? In this country it has been the cuſtom to hold up Americans as a race of ſuperior beings, and from that theory the reſult is, that, for Grenville to purchaſe our federal envoy, was impracticable. But the tenth article of the treaty, by an expreſs implication, arraigns Mr. Dayton and a conſiderable party in Congreſs, as meditating an act of injuſtice. Camillus, alſoSupra, chap. IV., in all the plenitude of his eloquence, can find no powers of language equal to the baſeneſs of the Daytonian project.

From theſe eſtimates of American purity, every man will make what inference he thinks fit, as to the probable ſale of our treaty. Speaking of this country, Thomas Paine has indeed told us that the innocence of her character, that won the hearts of all nations in her favour, may, a thouſand years hence, ſound like a romance; her inimitable virtue, as if it had never beenPaine to Waſhington, p. 8.. At the date of only ten years, from writing of the above ſentence, the tale ſounds not like a romance, to be ſure, but very like an untruth. It forms a part of that empty blabbing of national vanity, which has been remarked among every race of mankind, from Greenland to Cape Horn. Without launching into the ocean of the revolutionary virtue of the United States, let us hear what the Aſſembly of Georgia have to ſay about its ſituation, in 1796. The picture makes an intereſting part of the hiſtory of that year.

GEORGIA, BURKE COUNTY, 16th of January, 1796.

Clement Lanier, eſq one of the Repreſentatives in the legiſlature of this ſtate, who, being duly ſworn, on the Holy Evangeliſts of the Almighty God, depoſeth and ſays, that, during the laſt ſeſſion of the legiſlature of Auguſta, in the winter of the year 1795, he being a member of the Houſe of Repreſentatives, and ſitting on the ſame ſeat with Henry Grindat, another of the members of that houſe, before the ſpeaker took the chair, the ſaid Grindat recommended to him to be in favour of the ſale of the weſtern lands, for that he the ſaid Grindat, underſtood it was worthy our notice; for Mr. Thomas Wylly, a Senator from Eſſingham county, had told the ſaid Grindat, that he, the ſaid Wylly, could have eight or ten negroes for his part: and the deponent further ſaith, that, on the ſame day, in the afternoon, the ſaid Thomas Wylly, came into the lobby of the houſe, and beckoned to the deponent, who followed him out, when the converſation commenced about the Yazoo act; that at the ſame time, a Mr. Deniſon came by, and aſked what we were upon. The ſaid Wylly anſwered, the land buſineſs; the ſaid Deniſon then came up, and Wylly withdrew; that Deniſon then told the deponent, that he did not pretend to adviſe any member to be in favour of ſelling the land, but that thoſe who were in favour of ſelling it, were handſomely provided for, and that if the deponent thought proper to be in favour of ſelling, that he ſhould have part; and that the ſaid Deniſon ſaid, that he was a purchaſer of ſuch of the member's parts, as had a mind to ſell, but underſtood that ſome of the members pretended to aſk eight and ten negroes for a ſhare, or their ſhares; he ſaid he could not give ſo much, but the deponent might depend he would purchaſe: the deponent further ſaith, that, previous to any of the before recited circumſtances, Mr. William Longſtreet, one of the members of the ſaid legiſlature, frequently called on the deponent, and aſked why he was not in favour of ſelling the weſtern lands, who anſwered, he did not think it right to ſell to companies of ſpeculators. The deponent at this time, wiſhed to make further diſcovery of the conduct of the members on that ſale, and therefore affected to be inclined to come into the meaſure, and, by that means, kept up a converſation about it occaſionally; that on the day the bill received its firſt reading, before the houſe convened, ſaid Longſtreet ſpoke to the deponent to get his approbation to the ſale. The deponent aſked him to ſhew him what ſecurity the members had of the purchaſe, when the ſaid Longſtreet preſented a certificate, entitling the bearer to two ſhares of twenty-five thouſand acres each, ſigned by Nathaniel Pendleton, chairman. The deponent then told the ſaid Longſtreet, that that was not what he had formerly told him was a member's ſhare; for the ſaid Longſtreet had before ſaid, a member's ſhare was ſeventy-five thouſand acres. That the ſaid Longſtreet, then told the deponent if he would wait a few minutes, or an hour, he would bring him another certificate from Gunn's company, for the ſame number of acres. That the deponent in order to diſengage himſelf from the converſation, then ſaid the ſecurity was not ſufficient to entitle him to the land. That the ſaid Longſtreet then told the deponent that if he was not ſatisfied with the certificates, he would give him one thouſand dollars for it, or for them. The deponent then preſented the certificates to the ſaid Longſtreet, and went into the houſe, which was the laſt interview he had on the ſubject. The deponent further ſaith, that the ſhares offered him as aforeſaid, were expreſsly deſigned to induce him, the deponent, to vote for the bill for diſpoſing of the weſtern territory.

(Signed,) CLEM. LANIER. Sworn in preſence of the committee of the Houſe of Repreſentatives, before me, THOMAS LEWIS, J. P.

The above depoſition is one of thoſe publiſhed by the legiſlature of Georgia, reſpecting the Yazoo buſineſs. It was happy for America, that, in June, 1795, the terreſtrial ſpeculations of general Gunn did not prevent his attendance at Philadelphia as a ſenator. An abſence ſo fatal would have deprived this continent of the Britiſh treaty, for which he voted, of that maritime ſecurity which now conſtitutes the pride of the ſeaman, and of that compenſation in ſpecie, which now cracks the coffers of the merchant

Even if the Britiſh government could preſerve its exiſtence, this boaſted compenſation would be a very remote object. It is amuſing to hear people yet ſay, that, after a peace with the emperor, Britain will ſtill maintain her ſupremacy at ſea. France, in the firſt place, can exclude her manufactures from every country in Europe, Ruſſia, perhaps, excepted. This cuts off three-fourths, at leaſt, of Britiſh commerce, and one-half of her revenue. Second, Other objects being out of the way, France will turn her chief attention to her navy, which, in a ſhort time, may rival that of England, as it nearly did in the laſt war. Third, The exploſion of paper money, and the reduction of revenue, will ſoon diſable England from maintaining a navy, equal to what ſhe ſupports at preſent. Fourth, France has, in arms, ten or twelve hundred thouſand men. A great number of them are proprietors in the national domains. Many may be employed upon canals and other public works. But, for the internal tranquility of the republic, myriads muſt be diſcharged upon ſome foreign enterpriſe. England will moſt likely be the ſcene of action, and a leſſer effort than that which conquered Flanders, would convert her into a French province. Though the federal party in Congreſs cannot ſee the danger of this event, yet Arthur Young, and Edmund Burke, perceive it very diſtinctly.

As the friends of order are conſtantly talking of French ambition, and its effects, let th • m read the following account of the emperor. It is here copied from a London newſpaper, of March 23d, 1796.

The Auſtrian ſhare of the new partition of Poland includes four thouſand four hundred and fifteen ſquare miles of territory, two hundred and ſeven towns, four thouſand ſix hundred and five villages, and one million one hundred and ſix thouſand one hundred and ſeventy-eight ſouls. The miles muſt be of ſome German ſtandard, otherwiſe this part of Poland would be twice as populous, to its extent, as Yorkſhire. What ſhall we think of this imperial uſurper enſlaving, at one ſtroke, eleven hundred thouſand defenceleſs people? With ſuch facts before us, it is foolery to ſpeak of jacobin depredations. This is one of thoſe crowned robbers, into whoſe alliance the federal politicians wiſh to precipitate America.

.

CHAPTER VI.

Britiſh depredations continued.—Mercantile ſelfiſhneſs. —The brig Fame.—The ſchooner Andrew.— Joſhua Whiting.—The brig Columbia.—The ſloop Dove.—The May Flower.—The Eliza.—Murder of captain Boſſon.—Snuff Exciſe.—Memoirs of ALEXANDER HAMILTON, late Secretary of the Treaſury.—His ſingular mode of correſpondence with certain perſons.—Remarks on his connection with Reynolds.

TO commence this chapter, a few additional ſpecimens of Britiſh amity are inſerted. A letter from captain Thorndike Deland, dated Kingſton, 1ſt of April, 1796, to a merchant in Philadelphia, contains, for publication, a liſt of twelve American veſſels taken and carried into that port. Captain Deland farther ſays, that he had heard of twenty-ſeven other ſhips at Tortola, which were in jeopardy. He informs, that all Americans, when carried into Kingſton, were, after examination, turned aſhore, without proviſion for their ſupport. Any one having concern in a houſe, or having even a factor at St. Domingo, or any French port, was deemed a Frenchman, and his property was, on that account, condemned. On the 21ſt of April, 1796, the ſchooner William and Mary, captain Shaw, arrived at Portſmouth, New-Hampſhire, in thirty-eight days from Kingſton. When he left that place, the impreſſment of American ſeamen had not ſubſided. On the 5th of May, the ſchooner Mermaid, captain Tabet, arrived from the Mole, at New-York. His mate, a native American, was preſſed by the Regulus. Several other Americans were, at the ſame time, preſſed from different veſſels. The Mermaid had ſailed from New-York, with a load of timber, on account of the Britiſh government.

The Minerva, of the 13th of April, expreſſes ſurpriſe, that, if all the accounts of impreſſments were true, they had little or no effect in deterring American ſeamen from entering into the ſervice. In a full public meeting of merchants, in this city, laſt week, ſays Webſter, the queſtion was aſked, whether the Britiſh impreſſments had operated to diſcourage ſeamen from entering into ſervice? The reply was, that no ſuch effect had been perceived.—If ſeamen do not complain, how happens it [that] printers take up their cauſe with ſo much zeal? Seamen do complain, of which the numerous details in this volume, and which are not, perhaps, a twentieth part of the whole, compoſe an ample atteſtation. But a common ſeaman has more difficulty in changing his profeſſion, than almoſt any other perſon. This explains the general adherence to it, even in ſpite of Britiſh crimping. Webſter is angry at printers for taking up the cauſe of ſeamen with ſo much zeal. But, if they are not to be defended with ardour, upon what point ſhould zeal be excited? If circumſtances require it, the preſſes of America will continue to remonſtrate againſt ſuch wrongs, when the bones of Webſter ſhall be as rotten as his heart. As to the query ſtarted in the mercantile meeting, the members would have gained more credit by ſubſcribing to form a fund for the relief of ſuch ſeamen, or the families of ſuch ſeamen, as might be impreſſed while in their ſervice. This would have been acting like men. It would have been acting like ENGLISHMEN; for, at London or Liverpool, a propoſal of that kind would, under a ſimilar ſituation, have been adopted. But, in the United States, it ſeems that, if a merchant can only ſave himſelf, he is perfectly indifferent, what becomes of the people in his ſervice.

A Charleſton newſpaper, of the 8th of April, 1796, contains the copy of a ſentence paſt by judge Green, of Bermuda. It is dated the 6th of January preceding, and reſpected the brig Fame. In ſummer, 1795, the Fame ſailed from Charleſton, for Bourdeaux. On her return ſhe was captured, and taken into Bermuda. The veſſel and cargo were both American property. But one of the owners, who went along with her, had ſtaid behind, in France, to diſpoſe of ſome remaining part of her cargo. This accident, in the eyes of Green, transformed him into a French citizen, and, on that pretence, both ſhip and loading were confiſcated. Thus the Britiſh went on in the Weſt-Indies, while Mr. Bayard was tranſmitting to Philadelphia his important aſſurances about indemnification, and the reſentment of the London Court of Admiralty at the decrees of Green.

Reader! unleſs you are a Britiſhtory, or the Britiſh editor of the Columbian Centinel, or Harriſon Gray Otis, or Robert Goodloe Harper, or ſome other curioſity of their caſt, who is fitter for a work-houſe than a ſtate-houſe

During the preſent ſeſſion, the ſpeaker has ſignified in the houſe, that Harper ſpoke like a MADMAN. This juſtifies the text. The following traits will help to conjecture in what way congreſſional buſineſs hath ſometimes been conducted.

Previous to the election of a clerk for the Repreſentatives, in the preſent Congreſs, (Supra, chap. 3d,) Dr. Smith convened his party without doors, and they agreed in the nomination of a candidate to oppoſe Mr. Beckley. Next morning the votes were taken by ballot. The republican members had each to write the name of their candidate; but the friends of order pulled theirs ready written out of their pockets. As great part of them could know nothing of Mr. Beckley but by name, this promptitude ſhews the exactneſs of their diſcipline, and what praiſe is due to the diligence of our legiſlative Martinet.

In the Senate, matters proceed ſtill more ſtraightly. For inſtance, a few weeks ago, five reſolutions were moved in that body, and it was agreed to ballot, next day, for committees upon each of them. The federal majority conſiſted of ſeventeen; and ſo nicely had matters been aſcertained without doors, that the five committees, having each three members, were elected excluſively out of the ſeventeen. The minority have no ſhare of influence whatever. They are debarred even from the appearance of it.

Compare this plain account with the plaiſter which Mr. Adams laid upon the Senate in his late farewell addreſs. It might be condenſed into a few words. Gentlemen, you are the greateſt legiſlators in the world.—No ſir, YOU are the greateſt, and we are confident that you will make us all judges or ambaſſadors, as early as poſſible.

, you muſt revere the magnanimity of Preſident Waſhington, who, in his laſt ſpeech to Congreſs, diſdained all notice of theſe Britiſh peccadiloes.

About the 23d of April, Captain Mercer, of the ſloop Ambuſcade, arrived in this port from Bermuda. He brought a liſt of eight American veſſels with their cargoes which were condemned at that place; and of ſeven others which were libelled. One of the latter was a brig from Boſton. Captain Mercer had heard that her captain had died of abuſe which he received from the prize-maſter. A paragraph of the ſame date ſays, that, at Nevis, the ſchooner Andrew, captain Montayne, of Philadelphia, had her mate and ſeamen preſſed by a Britiſh ſchooner. They were all Americans; and had protections. The particulars are related in the captain's proteſt, as tranſmitted to his owner.

Theſe maritime anecdotes are valuable, as ſhewing the character of that people, who, in the midſt of ſuch injuries, could wiſh to appropriate for Jay's treaty. It would be vain to look in the hiſtory of England, for any meaſure ſo deplorably deſpicable. To proceed in a regular ſucceſſion, to the end of the year 1796, would occupy a large volume. At preſent, only three or four incidents of this kind ſhall be added, as they come to hand in the order of time.

Joſhua Whiting was a ſeaman on board of the American brig Samuel. At Port-au-Prince, he, and four others of the crew, were preſſed by a Britiſh frigate. Three of them, after eleven days, eſcaped by ſwimming, in the courſe of which, one man had the calf of his leg bitten off by a ſhark. Another of them was retaken, received four dozen of laſhes, and was put in irons. Whiting, and the cripple, eſcaped, after loſing their whole adventure, beſides being cruelly treated. In the Boſton Chronicle, of the 18th of April, Whiting publiſhed a narrative, of which the above is the ſubſtance. Inſtead of voting money for the treaty, Congreſs might as well have voted ſome relief of the poor man who loſt the calf of his leg, under that emblem of abaſement, that contempt of nations, that nautical DETERSORIUM, the American flag!

The brig Columbia, and the ſchooner Unity, both of Newburyport, ſailed from Port Lewis, on the 7th of March, 1796. Next day, they were brought to by the Ganges, a Britiſh ſeventy-four; and a ſchooner, attendant to the ſhip. This ſchooner, ſays the account, is one of the fifteen pilot boats built in Virginia, not long ſince, which are all employed as attendants to the Britiſh men of war. They were ſent into Montſerrat, examined, and on the 14th, diſmiſſed, upon paying forty-four pounds, four ſhillings, and ten pence, as the expence of their examination.

The ſloop Dove, of New-Haven, in Connecticut, had gone on a voyage to the Weſt-Indies. While lying at Antigua, ſhe was boarded by a boat's crew from the Narciſſus, who took away Benjamin Eaſtman. He was a native American, and as ſuch, had a protection. On the 3d of April, 1796, the maſter and mate of the Dove made oath to this fact, at New-Haven. James Smith, maſter of the May Flower, of Norfolk, publiſhed a declaration, dated the 3d of March, 1796. One of his men, an American, was impreſſed at Port Jeremie, by the Regulus. Captain Smith, himſelf, was kept, for three days, a priſoner, on board of the frigate, and half ſtarved. He left about thirty or forty American ſailors in her. Almoſt the whole of them had protections, and he ſaw ſome of them ſeverely puniſhed for attempting to eſcape. The newſpapers containing theſe miſerable details, are crammed with exulting encomiums on the number of petitioners to Congreſs, in favour of the Britiſh treaty.

On Tueſday, the 31ſt of May, 1796, the Speaker of the Houſe of Repreſentatives, laid before them, a letter from ten American captains, whoſe veſſels were then lying at Jamaica. Their ſeamen were on board of Britiſh ſhips of war, where they were treated like ſlaves. They ſaid that their brethren at Algiers were not greater objects of ſympathy. Theſe ten captains might as well have addreſſed a memorial, on the ſame ſubject, to any old woman, in any chimney corner on the continent. Congreſs have no fleet, and they can hardly raiſe money to pay the national debt. In this unparalleled ſtate of proſperity, what would you have us to do?

The Aurora of June 2d, 1796, contained a long account of the capture of the Eliza, a veſſel, American property, by the Britiſh. She ſailed from New-York, for St. Thomas's, and had orders to touch at St. Bartholomew's. She was taken by captain Cochran, of the Thetis frigate. The ſupercargo, a Daniſh ſubject, was ſtript to the ſkin. The ſhip was libelled before the Vice-Admiralty Court at Bermuda, under pretence of being French property. The trunks of the ſupercargo were ſealed up, and he was himſelf thrown pennyleſs out of the ſhip, without a ſecond ſhirt to his back. The captain and crew were put on ſhore, deſtitute of ſubſiſtence. Six or ſeven days after the ſhip and cargo had been libelled, the cattle were ſold at half their prime coſt, bought in by the agents who ſold them, and ſold a ſecond time, next day, at a conſiderable profit.

A Boſton newſpaper, of the 26th of May, contains a depoſition, dated at St. George's, the 27th of April, preceding. It was emitted by the ſecond mate of the brigantine Polly, John Boſſon, late maſter. The veſſel was on her way from Demarara, to Boſton, when the Cleopatra, a Britiſh privateer, took her. Soon after, the prize-maſter quarrelled with captain Boſſon, and wantonly beat him in a moſt ſhocking manner. This is the ſubſtance of the depoſition. Within ſix days after, captain Boſſon died of his bruiſes. He was only in the twenty-fifth year of his age.

Such was the picture of national independence and dignity that America, during 1796, exhibited by ſea. At ſome future opportunity the narrative will, perhaps, be reſumed and completed. In the mean time, theſe inſtances may be compared, by an impartial citizen, with the cenſure beſtowed by Barras, on the government of the United States. He can then attempt to decide, whether Mr. Waſhington had, laſt year, greater cauſe to complain of England, or Mr. Adams, in the preſent year, of France. We ſhall now proceed to examine ſome federal tranſactions by land. In a work embracing ſuch various objects, many points of importance are ſure of being omitted. Still, however, even an imperfect hiſtory, if candid and accurate, is better than none. The facility acquired by experience, and the reſources derived from public patronage may, hereafter, furniſh means for producing a more regular, and leſs defective, performance.

Among the memorials preſented to Congreſs, in ſpring, 1796, perhaps none deſerved more attention, than that of the ſnuff-makers of this city, reſpecting the exciſe on their manufacture. On the 5th of June, 1794, an act had paſt in Congreſs, for levying a duty of ſix cents per pound, upon all ſnuff, manufactured in the United States. As this law did not anſwer the end propoſed, it was repealed, and on the 3d of March, 1795, another was enacted in its room. By the l4ter, two thouſand two hundred and forty dollars were to be paid for every ſnuff mill, with ſtampers and grinders, and ſums proportionably leſs, for thoſe of inferior effect. As a relief to the ſnuff-maker, he received a drawback of ſix cents upon every pound of ſnuff, exported out of the country. The firſt of theſe two laws originated with Mr. Alexander Hamilton, then Secretary of the Trerſury. Both of them met with warm oppoſition in Congreſs. Both were, in an eminent degree, abſurd, oppreſſive, and impracticable. Both deſerve to be held in remembrance, as proofs of what ſhocking deſpotiſm the legiſlature, even of a free country, may poſſibly commit. They were ſaid to be laws of experiment, by thoſe who were leaſt eager in their defence. But a government has no right of making experiments in oppoſition to probability, on the property of the public. The memorial was preſented on the 9th of February, 1796, and is in theſe words.

To the Senate and Houſe of Repreſentatives of the United States, in Congreſs aſſembled: The memorial of the ſubſcribers, manufacturers of ſnuff in the city of Philadelphia, Reſpectfully repreſents,

THAT whilſt the United States exhibit an univerſal appearance of public proſperity, and of private happineſs, the memorialiſts feel deep regret and mortification upon their being once more compelled to addreſs you in the ſolitary language of diſſatisfaction. They have ſometime ago entered into a ſtruggle to ſupport a ſecond exciſe law upon their manufacture. Your predeceſſors, the late Congreſs, gave a fair trial to the firſt act, which attempted to levy a duty on ſnuff in proportion to the pound weight. This law, as the honourable Congreſs well knows, operated at once like a ſtroke of annihilation. No exciſe could be paid, at leaſt in the ſtate of Pennſylvania; for, out of ſeven ſnuff-mills, ſix were inſtantly ſhut up, to the infinite injury of the manufacturers. Their ſtock lay dead on their hands. Their cuſtomers diſperſed, and in many caſes declined to pay the outſtanding debts, becauſe the ſubſcribers, having no power to manufacture ſnuff, were unable to give them further credit. The buildings for carrying on their manufactories, erected at an expence of many thouſand dollars, were at once converted into ſepulchres of American induſtry; and, in the vain attempt to extract a revenue, where every moral and phyſical circumſtance rendered it impoſſible, ſix months of buſineſs and of human life were loſt. Even the ſeventh ſnuff-mill, which actually was entered, never paid any duty.

Every feature in the hiſtory of this firſt exciſe upon ſnuff, juſtified the energetic preſage of a gentleman, who was a member of the laſt, and is one in the preſent Houſe of Repreſentatives of Congreſs. He declared in his place that the act would terminate not in revenue, but deſtruction. The accuracy of his prediction hath been verified by experience, and fully acknowledged and atteſted on the floor of Congreſs. The effects of that memorable ſtatute were perhaps unrivalled, even in the tragical and exterminating annals of exciſe. Like a peſtilence, or a tempeſt, this law blaſted and ſwept before it every bloſſom of induſtry, and had your memorialiſts remained ever ſince entirely unmoleſted by exciſe laws, yet ſome years of good fortune would have been requiſite for enabling them to recover the ground which they had loſt.

That, with the deepeſt aſtoniſhment, the memorialiſts have, during the preſent ſeſſion, heard of ſeveral petitions preſented to Congreſs, chiefly as they believe from ſnuff-makers in the eaſt •••• ſtates, requeſting the repeal of the preſent exciſe, in order to replace it by the former law for levying the duty by the pound weight. Theſe petitioners have indeed honeſtly repreſented many inſurmountable objections to the preſent law, and which your memorialiſts admit, as well as they do. But it does not follow, that the preſent extremely oppreſſive exciſe on ſnuff ought to be ſuperceded for the ſake of adopting another ſtatute which is infinitely worſe, and which has already been tried and caſt aſide as impracticable. The ruinous effects of both theſe laws, have been fully ſtated in a ſhort hiſtory of exciſe laws, drawn up at the deſire and under the inſpection of a number of manufacturers in Philadelphia, and of which a printed copy has lately been tranſmitted to each of the members of the two houſes of Congreſs, and to the principal officers of the federal government.

In the laſt act for an exciſe upon ſnuff, a drawback of ſix cents per pound has been allowed upon the exportation. This drawback was liable to various abuſes. If not granted at all, ſnuff could not be exported after paying an exciſe, and this would tend to depreſs the American manufacturer. But, in order to be entitled to the drawback, it was requiſite to obtain a certificate of the ſnuff having been duly landed at the deſtined port: the chief exportation was to the Britiſh Weſt-Indies, where American ſnuff is contraband, and conſequently it was quite impoſſible to get the requiſite certificates. But farther, nothing could be more eaſy than to make a pretended exportation of ſnuff to ſome iſland in the Weſt-Indies, where it was not prohibited, obtain a regular certificate of its being landed, and then ſmuggle it back to this country. Thus one barrel of ſnuff, might receive twenty drawbacks. Such frauds are practiſed every day in Britain. Many merchants on the river Thames ſupport their families in ſplendor by drawbacks, procured from their government for imaginary exportations. Your memorialiſts have been aſſured, that one bale of muſlin, ſuppoſed to be worth five hundred guineas, received in this way a drawback of twelve and an half per cent forty times over, ſo that this bale earned two thouſand five hundred guineas.

Traſh of any kind, or even ſand, might be exported from the United States, under the name of ſnuff, and obtain the ſix cents per pound of drawback. Frauds of this kind could not be prevented without a multiplicity of inſpectors, whoſe ſalaries would ſwallow up the revenue.

That the eighty-fourth and ninety-third ſections of the Britiſh tobacco exciſe act of 1789, fully ſhew, to what length impoſtures of this ſort have been carried in that country. The former of theſe two clauſes, inflicts a penalty of two hundred pounds, for the mixture of cut walnut leaves, of hops, of ſycamore, or ony other leaves or herbs, with the leaves of tobacco. The injunctions in the ninety-third ſection, againſt mixing ſnuff with other materials, are ſtill more pointed. The penalty of two hundred pounds is levied for mixing with ſnuff, any fuſtick, yellow honey, touch-wood, log-wood, red or guinea-wood, braziletto or Jamaica-wood, Nicaragua-wood, Saunders-wood or any other ſort of wood, or any walnut tree leaves, hops, ſycamore, or any other leaves or herbs. This ſingular enumeration aſcertains how far ſuch practices have gone.

That there is another material objection to the preſent mode of granting a drawback. The price of different kinds of ſnuff differs very conſiderably, and yet the ſame drawback of ſix cents is granted, without diſtinction, upon all kinds. Richard Gernon & Co. in their petition, ſtate, that the ſnuff which they have been exporting is worth ten cents per pound, beſides the ſix cents of drawback. Thus its value, after paying the duty, would be about one ſhilling and three pence per pound. The memorialiſts are now ſelling ſnuff at two ſhillings and ſix pence and three ſhillings per pound, and were they to export it, a drawback of at leaſt twelve cents per pound would be neceſſary to put them on a level with Gernon & Co. who receive ſix cents per pound drawback on an article not half ſo valuable.

The memorialiſts, in their publication already referred to, ſtated the poſſibility that the drawbacks for a ſingle manufacturer might amount to ſixty thouſand dollars per annum, and if a dozen ſuch manufacturers were to be found in the United States, that they would drain the public treaſury of ſeven hundred and twenty thouſand dollars a year, a ſum which all the exciſes in the country could not cover. To the great aſtoniſhment of the memorialiſts, this prediction received a partial fulfilment almoſt at the inſtant when it was made. The revenue derived from the mills, entered in the ſtate of Pennſylvania, comes only to eight thouſand three hundred and eighty dollars. On the 26th January laſt, the drawbacks, at the port of Philadelphia, ſince the new act began to operate, amounted to eight thouſand five hundred and twenty-three dollars and thirty-nine cents, which is already one hundred and forty-three dollars, and thirty-nine cents, more than the total revenue for this ſtate. Almoſt the whole of this drawback has been paid to Meſſrs. Richard Gernon & Co. who have been only about four months in buſineſs, and within that period, have got back above five thouſand dollars additional, beſides the two thouſand two hundred and forty dollars, which they paid, according to law, for entering their mill. It is not the deſign of your memorialiſts to caſt the ſlighteſt reflection on the conduct of this manufacturing company. On the contrary, if government has laid itſelf open by a law which defeats its own purpoſes, and ſinks a revenue where it expected to raiſe one, the manufacturers are in common juſtice, entitled, to take every legal advantage of ſuch an overſight. Nay, they beg leave to ſtate it as a matter of abſolute certainty, that if this law is not repeated, a number of ſnuff-makers will immediately enter into the buſineſs of exportation. They only forbear altering their mi •• s, and adapting them for the buſineſs, till they ſee whether Congreſs will adhere to the law or not; for the example of Richard Gernon & Co. proves how eaſily a ſnuff-maker, with the requiſite degree of capital and enterpriſe, may take from the public treaſury in the ſhape of drawbacks ten times as much as he pays into it. Your memorialiſts cannot believe that Congreſs, or indeed any legiſlative aſſembly on earth, would ſuffer the longer exiſtence of a law ſo pregnant with the moſt prepoſterous and ruinous conſequences. A few weeks ago, Meſſrs. Gernon & Co. preſented to Congreſs a memorial, repreſenting the immenſe expence which they have been at in preparing their mill to grind ſnuff for exportation. Among other details, they ſtate their having, in the firſt four months of their copartnery, purchaſed four hundred and thirty hogſheads of tobacco, and that they are continuing to make large purchaſes of this kind. At that rate, they will, in the courſe of twelve months, purchaſe, altogether, twelve hundred and ninety hogſheads. Your memorialiſts eſtimate, that, when grinded into ſnuff, the drawback on this quantity will amount to about ninety thouſand dollars. The company will thus gain, by the public revenue, eighty-eight thouſand dollars, the drawback exceeding the revenue in the proportion of forty-five to one. This is a circumſtance perfectly novel in the hiſtory of taxation.

But further, if this affair is ſuffered to go on in its preſent way, Congreſs may ſoon expect to ſee twenty other ſnuff-mills working on the ſame plan, and to an equal extent, with that of Gernon & Co.

If the government of this country intend, ſeriouſly, and ſteadily, to give a drawback of ſix cents per pound on the exportation of American ſnuff, it is the moſt acceptable and joyful intelligence that your memorialiſts could ever hear of. They will immediately repair their mills, extend their purchaſes, and they have not a doubt of clearing, from the drawback, before the end of a year, twenty or thirty times the ſum which they are to pay into the treaſury. Twenty manufacturers, like Gernon & Co. would each of them thus coſt government ninety thouſand dollars, or, collectively, one million eight hundred thouſand dollars per annum. The original object of the law was ſaid to be a revenue of forty thouſand dollars; there is an equal chance, that, in ſearch of it, forty-five times that ſum will be ſunk. It has been abovementioned, that the drawbacks, within this ſtate, already exceed the revenue. The firſt year of this law expires on the laſt day of March next, and, before that time, there will moſt likely be a balance of ſeveral thouſand dollars againſt the revenue, at the port of Philadelphia. But if the law ſ •• nd • unrepealed, it is probable that two hundred thouſand 〈◊〉 will not make up the deficiencies in this ſtate alone, for the next ſucceeding year.

〈◊〉 their hiſtory of exciſe, the manufacturers ſtated the principle, that all taxes ought to be levied in proportion to the ••••• um of perſonal property. Since their publication took place, they have ſeen this doctrine juſtified by an authority of the higheſt nature▪ The new conſtitution of France, in the ſixteenth article of the firſt ſection, lays it down as a fundamental maxim, that, "as all taxes are eſtabliſhed for the general good, they ought to be apportioned among the taxed in the ratio of their means." Under the head of finances, alſo, in the ſame work, it is declared, "that taxes of all kinds are aſſeſſed among all thoſe liable to contribution according to their means."—Your memorialiſts cannot deny that the word exciſe is to be found in the letter of the federal conſtitution; but they ſtrongly contend, that it is entirely hoſtile to the ſpirit of that inſtrument. One of the principle fabricators of that production, was the preſent judge Wilſon. When the ſubject was debated in the convention of Pennſylvania, he argued that it was neceſſary to give all power to government, but he was certain that an exciſe never would be impoſed, unleſs in the laſt extremity. From the opinion which the convention of Pennſylvania expreſſed of exciſe, at that time, and which the aſſembly of this ſtate have expreſſed ſince, it is evident that they never would have conſented to ratify ſuch a ſtipulation, if they had conceived that it was to become one of the firſt, and favourite reſources of government.

That your memorialiſts, cannot help conſidering this exciſe on ſnuff as coming, exactly, under the deſcription of an ex poſt facto law. They had no contemplation of ſuch a burden, when they built their mills, and gave credit, to ſo great an extent, to their cuſtomers. Their mills would not, at preſent, ſell for one half of the money which they originally coſt, and one half of them are, at this hour, ſtanding idle. This, of itſelf, would be ſufficient to deſtroy any ſet of manufacturers. Your memorialiſts likewiſe beg leave to ſtate, as their opinion, that if the merchants and manufacturers of Britain had a liberty of petitioning Congreſs, they could not ſolicit a more favourable mode of conduct for their own intereſt, than perſuading you to trammel, and diſtreſs, the manufacturers of America with exciſes, which do not pay the expence of their collection, which in one ſtate produce bankruptcy, and in a ſecond, rebellion. They humbly regard it as chimerical to term America independent of Britain, while we are forced to ſend to England for a coat, and to Ireland for a ſhirt. It is this commercial chain of dependence in which Britain has entangled ſo many nations, that conſtitutes the eſſence and ſoul of her ſtrength, and that enables her to bully, to combat, and to rob her neighbours. It is her ſuperiority in manufactures, which has enabled this kingdom to ſubſidize and embattle pirates and cut-throats, in every corner of the world, while ſhe herſelf may be termed a bucanneer of Atlantean magnitude, whoſe graſp embraces the terraqueous globe, and whoſe ſtature reaches from earth to heaven.

To conclude, your memorialiſts ardently flatter themſelves with a hope, that Congreſs will ſee the expediency, and even the poſitive and inevitable neceſſity, for an immediate and complete abolition of the exciſe upon ſnuff made in America. Though ſome ill-adviſed manufacturers to the eaſtward have called for the reſtoration of the act of 1794, the principal ſnuff-makers, in that part of the union, regard it with as much abhorrence, as the memorialiſts themſelves do. To continue the preſent exciſe, and withhold the drawback, would be to prohibit, in a great meaſure, the manufacture of tobacco, the ſecond ſtaple of the continent; and it has already been demonſtrated, that, to continue the law, and the drawback, in their preſent ſhape, is only to ſquander forty-five dollars in a fruitleſs ſearch after one.

Your memorialiſts, therefore, earneſtly ſolicit an entire repeal of the exciſe upon ſnuff, and they, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c.

THOMAS LEIPER, & Co. HAMILTON & SON, ISAAC JONES, JACOB BENNINGHOVE, JACOB BENNINGHOVE, jun. PHILIP STIMBLE, Philadelphia, February 8th, 1796.

The ſtatute hath been ſince repeatedly ſuſpended, and, it is ſuppoſed, will never more be put into execution.

Some people may wonder what the Houſe of Repreſentatives were thinking of, when they ſucceſſively enacted ſuch ſelf-condemned laws. It is likely that, during the diſcuſſion, ten or fifteen were employed in reading newſpapers, or in writing letters. About as many more might be in private converſation, at the back of the Speaker's chair, or at the windows. General Samuel Smith, who hath ſaved the houſe from many woeful miſtakes, is the gentleman alluded to, in the ſecond paragraph of the memorial.

We now come to a part of the work, more delicate, perhaps, than any other. The freedoms which the federal party have taken with thoſe who differ from their opinions, are univerſally known. The moſt impartial ſcrutiny would determine, that, in the arts of calumny and detraction, their publications exceed, beyond all proportion, thoſe of their adverſaries. In the firſt ſeſſion of the fifth Congreſs, Mr. Harper has publicly declared to the Repreſentatives, that Mr. James Munroe, our late envoy to France, was guilty of corruption by foreign influence. On being queſtioned by Mr. Giles, he has promiſed, in due time and place, to bring evidence of his accuſation. This example is only one out of hundreds which might be adduced to ſhew that the friends of order, for ſuch they call themſelves, are reſolved to ſet no limits to their rage and their vengeance. Of courſe, they cannot expect to meet with that tenderneſs which they refuſe to grant.

Attacks on Mr. Munroe have been frequently repeated from the ſtock-holding preſſes. They are cowardly, becauſe he is abſent. They are unjuſt, becauſe his conduct will bear the ſtricteſt enquiry. They are ungrateful, becauſe he diſplayed, on an occaſion that will be mentioned immediately, the greateſt lenity to Mr. Alexander Hamilton, the prime mover of the federal party. When ſome of the papers which are now to be laid before the world, were ſubmitted to the ſecretary; when he was informed that they were to be communicated to Preſident Waſhington, he entreated, in the moſt anxious tone of deprecation, that this meaſure might be ſuſpended. Mr. Munroe was one of the three gentlemen who agreed to a delay. They gave their conſent to it, on his expreſs promiſe of a guarded behaviour in future, and becauſe he attached to the ſuppreſſion of theſe papers, a myſterious degree of ſolicitude, which they, feeling no perſonal reſentment againſt the individual, were unwilling to augment.

The unfounded reproaches heaped on Mr. Munroe, form the immediate motive to the publication of theſe papers. They are here printed from an atteſted copy, exactly conformable to that, which, at his own deſire, was delivered to Mr. Hamilton himſelf. Not a word has been added or altered, and the period of four years may, ſurely, have been enough to furniſh the ex-ſecretary with materials for his defence. In the letters of Camillus, the moſt ſublime principles of action are every where inculcated. But we ſhall preſently ſee this great maſter of morality, though himſelf the father of a family, confeſſing that he had an illicit correſpondence with another man's wife. If any thing can be yet leſs reputable, it is, that the gentlemen to whom he made that acknowledgement held it as an impoſition, and found various reaſons for believing that Mrs. Reynolds was, in reality, guiltleſs. An attentive critic will be led to enquire what has become of her huſband, and why the indignant innocence of Mr. Hamilton, did not promote the completion of public juſtice againſt a perſon, who had treated his name with ſuch groſs diſreſpect? What a ſcandalous imputation was it for this culprit to caſt upon our ſecretary, that he had gained thirty thouſand dollars by the purchaſe of army certificates, that this fellow could bring him to capital puniſhment, &c. &c.? It is to be wiſhed that Reynolds may ſtill be found, and that, to borrow the words of his friend, Dr. William Smith, the Secretary may come out of this matter, "as fair as the pureſt angel in heaven!"

Before committing the following papers to the world, their editor muſt again beg leave to remark, that they are nothing more nor leſs than exact copies, from atteſted originals, of which Mr. Hamilton, as hereafter ſpecified, has been, at his own deſire, ſupplied with an accurate tranſcript. Some expreſſions uſed by the culprit, Reynolds, are harſh, and convey diſguſt, without adding to conviction. The editor, from averſion to invective, had, on this account, reſolved to leave them out, as well as ſeveral other paſſages, which are of little importance to the main point. But on due reflection, it has been found ſafer, and more adviſeable, to publiſh the whole, even at the hazard of being tedious. This precludes all pretence of mutilation for unfair purpoſes.

As to the aſperity of ſtyle in ſome parts of the precious confeſſions of Reynolds, the painful reluctance of the editor, to the printing of them, has been ſomewhat leſſened, from the volunteer acknowledgment of ſeduction, emitted by the ex-ſecretary himſelf. This appears to be about as bad, as any thing which his wretched underſtrapper either ſaid againſt him, or could imaginably have to ſay. A procurer has always been regarded as in the loweſt ſcale of human character. Mutatis mutandis, the patron of ſuch an agent can have no ſcruple to become one.

Again, the intemperate ſtile of the convivial and confidential communications of our ex-ſecretary, prohibits him from being regarded as any peculiar object of indulgence. For inſtance, he has often boaſted of rceieving letters from Preſident Waſhington, with the word private wrote on the back of them, and a croſs drawn over the ſeal. After opening ſuch a parcel, ſaid Mr. Hamilton, what do you think were the contents? DEAR HAMILTON, put this into ſtyle for me. Some ſpeech or letter has been incloſed, which I wrote over again, ſent it back, and then the OLD DAMNED FOOL gave it away as his own. Mr. Hamilton is not ſingular in uſing this ſtyle to general Waſhington. After the ſquabble between citizen Genet, John Jay, and Rufus King, the two latter ſent a moſt inſulting letter to the Preſident. Randolph adviſed him to reſent it. He had once reſolved to do ſo; but altered his intention, from a jealouſy that the writers were in concert with Hamilton, from whom he could not determine to disjoin himſelf. Jay and King wanted to obtain a certificate which Mr. Jefferſon had drawn up, relating to the behaviour of citizen Genet. The Preſident actually gave them the certificate, but it is thought that they found it not to their purpoſe; for it was ſuppreſſed, Jay and King alſo got back from the Preſident their impertinent letter; of which, after cooling, they began to be aſhamed. But a copy of it is in exiſtence, and ſome hopes remain of its being obtained for publication. Theſe particulars are derived from undoubted authority. They prove what was ſo fully ſtated in the American Annual Regiſter, that the federal party deſpiſed the late Preſident; that they took frequent opportunities of inſulting him; and that they aſſumed the popularity of his name with no view but to ſerve their own ends.

To be the prompter and primum mobile of the greateſt man in the world, might have flattered the vanity of a more diſcreet favourite than Mr. Hamilton. To hear the Repreſentatives, as in November, 1794, diſpute for three weeks upon the wording of an anſwer to a ſpecch of his own compoſition, muſt have been highly ſoothing to the ſelf-importance of the ex-ſecretary. But, as general Waſhington had been, in the higheſt ſenſe of the word, his benefactor, he ought to have concealed the imperfections of his friend. He has often compared his influence over the Preſident to that of the wind upon a weather cock, or of that over an automaton, moved only by the hand which directs it. This ſtyle was both imprudent and ungrateful. His power was very great, but not entirely unbounded. He wanted to be ſent to England as envoy to negociate the treaty. The arguments of Randolph hindered the Preſident from giving his conſent. That the pen of Mr. Hamilton has long aſſiſted the Preſident is a ſtory current in Europe as well as in America; and that the ſpeeches and letters of geneneral Waſhington are extremely different from his more early productions is very well known.

We ſhall conclude theſe prefatory obſervations with an anecdote. During the late canvaſs for the election of a Preſident, Webſter, in his Minerva, gave a hint, that Mr. Hamilton would be an adviſable candidate. A perſon in this city, who chanced to ſee this newſpaper, wrote immediately to a correſpondent in New-York. The letter deſired him to put himſelf in Mr. Hamilton's way, and inform him that if Webſter ſhould, in future, print a ſingle paragraph on that head, the following papers were inſtantly to be laid before the world. It is believed the meſſage was delivered to Mr. Hamilton, for the Minerva became ſilent.

(No. I.)

JACOB CLINGMAN, being a clerk in my employment, (F. A. Muhlenberg) and becoming involved in a proſecution commenced againſt JAMES REYNOLDS, by the Comptroller of the Treaſury, on a charge or information exhibited before Hilary Baker, eſq one of the aldermen of this city, for ſubornation of perjury, whereby they had obtained money from the treaſury of the United States, he (Clingman) applied to me, for my aid and friendſhip, on behalf of himſelf and Reynolds, to get them releaſed or diſcharged from the p •• ſecution. I promiſed, ſo far as reſpected Clingman; but, not being particularly acquainted with Reynolds, in a great meaſure, declined ſo far as reſpected him. In company with colonel Burr, I waited on colonel Hamilton for the purpoſe, and particularly recommended Clingman, who had hitherto ſuſtained a good character. Colonel Hamilton ſignified a wiſh to do all that was conſiſtent. Shortly after, I waited on the Comptroller for the ſame purpoſe, who ſeemed to have difficulties on the ſubject; and, from ſome information I had, in the mean time, received, I could not undertake to recommend Reynolds, as I verily believed him to be a raſcal, which words I made uſe of to the Comptroller. On a ſecond interview with the Comptroller, on the ſame ſubject, the latter urged the propriety of Clingman's delivering up a certain liſt of money due to individuals, which Reynolds and Clingman were ſaid to have in their poſſeſſion, and of his informing him, of whom, and through whom, the ſame was obtained from the public offices; on doing which, Clingman's requeſt might, perhaps, be granted with greater propriety. This, Clingman, I am informed, complied with, and alſo refunded the money or certificates, which they had improperly obtained from the treaſury. After which, I underſtand the action againſt both was withdrawn, and Reynolds diſcharged from impriſonment, without any farther interference of mine whatever.

During the time this buſineſs was thus depending, and which laſted upwards of three weeks, Clingman, unaſked, frequently dropped hints to me, that Reynolds had it in his power, very materially to injure the Secretary of the Treaſury; and that Reynolds knew ſeveral very improper tranſactions of his. I paid little or no attention to thoſe hints; but, when they were frequently repeated, and it was even added, that Reynolds ſaid, he had it in his power to hang the Secretary of the Treaſury; that he was deeply concerned in ſpeculation that he had frequently advanced money to him, (Reynolds); and other inſinuations of an improper nature, it created conſiderable uneaſineſs in my mind, and I conceived it my duty to conſult with ſome friends on the ſubject.—Mr. Monroe and Mr. Venable were informed of it yeſterday morning.

(Signed,) F. A. MUHLENBERG.

(No. II.)

BEING informed yeſterday, in the morning, that a perſon of the name of Reynolds, from Virginia, Richmond, was confined in the jail, upon ſome criminal proſecution relative to certificates, and that he had intimated, he would give ſome intelligence of ſpeculations by Mr. Hamilton, which ſhould be known, WE immediately called on him, as well to be informed of the ſituation of the man, as of thoſe other matters, in which the public might be intereſted. We found it was not the perſon, we had been taught to believe, but a man of that name from New-York, and who had, for ſome time paſt, reſided in this city. Being there, however, we queſtioned him reſpecting the other particular; he informed us, that he could give information of the miſconduct, in that reſpect, of a perſon high in office, but muſt decline it, for the preſent, and until relieved, which was promiſed him that evening: that at ten to-day, he would give us a detail of whatever he knew on the ſubject. He affirmed, he had a perſon, high in office, in his power, and had had, a long time paſt. That he had written to him, in terms ſo abuſive, that no perſon ſhould have ſubmitted to it, but that he dared not to reſent it. That Mr. Wolcot was in the ſame department, and, he ſuppoſed, under his influence or controul; and, in fact, expreſſed himſelf in ſuch a manner, as to leave no doubt, he meant Mr. Hamilton. That he expected to be releaſed by Mr. Wolcot, at the inſtance of that perſon, although he believed, that Mr. Wolcot, in inſtituting the proſecution, had no improper deſign; that he was ſatisfied, the proſecution was ſet on foot, only to keep him low, and oppreſs him, and ultimately drive him away; that he had had, ſince his reſidence here, for eighteen months, many private meetings with that perſon, who had often promiſed to put him into employment, but had diſappointed him; that on hearing the proſecution was commenced againſt him, he applied to this perſon for counſel, who adviſed him to keep out of the way, for a few days; that a merchant came to him, and offered, as a volunteer, to be his bail, who, he ſuſpected, had been inſtigated by this perſon; and, after being decoyed to the place, the merchant wiſhed to carry him [to], he refuſed being his bail, unleſs he would depoſit a ſum of money, to ſome conſiderable amount, which he could not do, and was, in conſequence, committed to priſon. As well as we remember, he gave, as a reaſon, why he could not communicate to us, what he knew of the facts alluded to, that he was apprehenſive, it might prevent his diſcharge; but that he would certainly communicate the whole to us, at ten this morning: at which time, we were informed, he had abſconded, or concealed himſelf.

(Signed,) JAMES MONROE, ABRAHAM VENABLE.

(No. III.)

BEING deſirous, on account of their equivocal complexion, to examine into the ſuggeſtions which had been made us, reſpecting the motive for the confinement and propoſed enlargement of James Reynolds, from the jail of this city, and inclined to ſuſpect, for the ſame reaſon, that, unleſs it were immediately done, the opportunity would be loſt, as we were taught to ſuſpect he would leave the place, immediately after his diſcharge, we called at his houſe, laſt night, for that purpoſe; we found Mrs. Reynolds alone. It was, with difficulty, we obtained from her, any information on the ſubject; but at length ſhe communicated to us the following particulars.

That ſince colonel Hamilton was Secretary of the Treaſury, and at his requeſt, ſhe had burned a conſiderable number of letters from him to her huſband, and in the abſence of the latter, touching buſineſs between them, to prevent their being made public. She alſo mentioned, that Mr. Clingman had ſeveral anonymous notes addreſſed to her huſband, which, ſhe believed, were from Mr. Hamilton (which we have) with an endorſement "from ſecretary Hamilton, eſq" in Mr. Reynolds's hand writing; that Mr. Hamilton offered her his aſſiſtance to go to her friends, which he adviſed; that he alſo adviſed, that her huſband ſhould leave the parts, not to be ſeen here again; and in which caſe, he would give ſomething clever. That ſhe was ſatisfied, this wiſh for his departure did not proceed from friendſhip to him, but on account of his threat, that he could tell ſomething that would make ſome of the heads of departments tremble. That Mr. Wadſworth had been active in her behalf; firſt at her requeſt, but, in her opinion, with the knowledge and communication of Mr. Hamilton, whoſe friend he profeſſed to be; that he had been at her houſe yeſterday, and mentioned to her, that two gentlemen of Congreſs had been at the jail, to confer with her huſband; enquired, if ſhe knew what they went for; obſerved, he knew Mr. Hamilton had enemies, who would try to prove ſome ſpeculations on him, but when enquired into, he would be found immaculate; to which ſhe replied, ſhe rather doubted it.

We ſaw, in her poſſeſſion, two notes; one in the name of Alexander Hamilton, of the 6th of December, and the other, ſigned "J. W." purporting to have been written yeſterday; both expreſſing a deſire to relieve her.

She denied any recent communication with Mr. Hamilton, or that ſhe had received any money from him to-day.

(Signed,) F. A. MUHLENBERG. JAMES MONROE. ABRAHAM VENABLE.

(No. IV.) Philadelphia, 13th December, 1792.

JACOB CLINGMAN has been engaged in ſome negociations with Mr. James Reynolds, the perſon, who has lately been diſcharged from a proſecution inſtituted againſt him, by the Comptroller of the Treaſury.

That his acquaintance commenced in September, 1791; that a mutual confidence and intimacy exiſted between them; that in January or February laſt, he ſaw colonel Hamilton at the houſe of Reynolds. Immediately on his going into the houſe, colonel Hamilton retired. That in a few days after, he (Clingman) was at Mr. Reynolds's houſe, with Mrs. Reynolds, her huſband being then out; ſome perſon knocked at the door; he aroſe and opened it, and ſaw that it was colonel Hamilton. Mrs. Reynolds went to the door; he delivered a paper to her, and ſaid, he was ordered to give Mr. Reynolds that. He aſked Mrs. Reynolds who could order the Secretary of the Treaſury of the United States to give that? She replied, that ſhe ſuppoſed, he did not want to be known. This happened in the night. He aſked her, how long Mr. Reynolds had been acquainted with colonel Hamilton? She replied, ſome months; that colonel Hamilton had aſſiſted her huſband; that ſometime before that, he had received upwards of eleven hundred dollars, of colonel Hamilton. Sometime after this, Clingman was at the houſe of Reynolds, and ſaw colonel Hamilton; he retired and left him there.

A little after Duer's failure, Reynolds told Clingman, in confidence, that if Duer had held up, three days longer, he ſhould have made fifteen hundred pounds, by the aſſiſtance of colonel Hamilton; that colonel Hamilton had informed him, that he was connected with Duer. Mr. Reynolds alſo ſaid, that colonel Hamilton had made thirty thouſand dollars by ſpeculation; that colonel Hamilton had ſupplied him with money to ſpeculate. That, about June laſt, Reynolds told Clingman, that he had applied to colonel Hamilton for money to ſubſcribe to the turnpike-road at Lancaſter, and had received a note from him, in theſe words, It is utterly out of my power, I aſſure you, upon my honour, to comply with your requeſt. Your note is returned; which original note, accompanying this, has been in Clingman's poſſeſſion ever ſince. Mr. Reynolds has once or twice mentioned to Clingman, that he had it in his power to hang colonel Hamilton; that if he wanted money, he was obliged to let him have it. That he (Clingman) has occaſionally lent money to Reynolds who always told him, that he could always get it from colonel Hamilton, to repay it; that, on one occaſion, Clingman lent him two hundred dollars; that Reynolds promiſed to pay him, through the means of colonel Hamilton; that he went with him, ſaw him go into colonel Hamilton's; that, after he came out, he paid him one hundred dollars, which, he ſaid, was part of the ſum, he had got; and paid the balance, in a few days; the latter ſum paid was ſaid to have been received from colonel Hamilton, after his return from Jerſey, having made a viſit to the manufacturing ſociety there.

After a warrant was iſſued againſt Reynolds, upon a late proſecution, which was inſtituted againſt him, Clingman, ſeeing Reynolds, aſked him, why he did not apply to his friend colonel Hamilton? He ſaid, he would go immediately, and went accordingly. He ſaid afterwards, that colonel Hamilton adviſed him to keep out of the way, a few days, and the matter would be ſettled. That after this time, Henry Seckel, went to Reynolds, and offered to be his bail, if he would go with him to Mr. Baker's office, where he had left the officer, who had the warrant in writing; that he prevailed on Reynolds to go with him. That after Reynolds was taken into cuſtody; Seckel refuſed to become his bail, unleſs he would depoſit, in his poſſeſſion, property to the value of four hundred pounds; upon which, Reynolds wrote to colonel Hamilton, and Mr. Seckel carried the note. After two or three times going, he ſaw colonel Hamilton. Colonel Hamilton ſaid, he knew Reynolds and his father; that his father was a good whig in the late war; that was all he could ſay; that it was not in his power to aſſiſt him; in conſequence of which, Seckel refuſed to be his bail, and Reynolds was impriſoned. Mr. Reynolds alſo applied to Mr. Francis, who is one of the clerks in the treaſury department; he ſaid, he could not do any thing, without the conſent of colonel Hamilton; that he would apply to him. He applied to Mr. Hamilton, who told him, that it would not be prudent; if he did, he muſt leave the department.

After Reynolds was confined, Clingman aſked Mrs. Reynolds, why ſhe did not apply to colonel Hamilton to diſmiſs him, as the money was ready to be refunded, that was received. She replied, that ſhe had applied to him, and he had ſent her to Mr. Wolcot; but directed her not to let Mr. Wolcot know, that he had ſent her there. Notwithſtanding this injunction, ſhe did let Mr. Wolcot know, by whom ſhe had been ſent, who appeared to be ſurpriſed at the information, but ſaid, he would do what he could for her, and would Conſult colonel Hamilton on the occaſion. Colonel Hamilton adviſed her, to get ſome perſons of reſpectability, to intercede for her huſband, and mentioned Mr. Muhlenberg.

Reynolds continued to be kept in cuſtody, for ſome time, during which time, Clingman had converſation with Mr. Wolcot, who ſaid, if he would give up a liſt of ſoldier's claims, which he had, he ſhould be releaſed. After this, Mrs. Reynolds informed Clingman, that colonel Hamilton had told her, that Clingman ſhould write a letter to Mr. Wolcot, and a duplicate of the ſame to himſelf, promiſing to give up the liſt, and refund the money which had been obtained on a certificate, which had been ſaid to have been improperly obtained. Clingman aſked Mrs. Reynolds, for the letters that her huſband had received from colonel Hamilton, from time to time, as he might probably uſe them to obtain her huſband's liberty. She replied, that colonel Hamilton had requeſted her to burn all the letters, that were in his hand-writing, or that had his name to them; which ſhe had done. He preſſed her to examine again, as ſhe might not have deſtroyed the whole, and they would be uſeful. She examined, and found two or three notes, without any name, which are herewith ſubmitted, and which, ſhe ſaid, were notes from colonel Hamilton.

Mrs. Reynolds told Clingman, that having heard, that her huſband's father was, in the late war, a commiſſary under the direction of colonel Wadſworth, ſhe waited on him, to get him to intercede for her huſband's diſcharge. He told her, he would give her his aſſiſtance, and ſaid, now you have made me your friend, you muſt apply to no perſon elſe. That on Sunday evening, Clingman went to the houſe of Reynolds, and found colonel Wadſworth there. He was introduced to colonel Wadſworth, by Mrs. Reynolds. Colonel Wadſworth told him, he had ſeen Mr. Wolcot; that Mr. Wolcot would do any thing for him, (Clingman), and Reynolds's family, that he could; that he had called on colonel Hamilton, but had not ſeen him; that he might tell him, Mr. Muhlenberg, that a friend of his (Clingman's) had told him, that colonel Wadſworth was a countryman and ſchoolmate of Mr. Ingerſoll, and that colonel Wadſworth was alſo intimate with the governor, and that the governor would do almoſt any thing, to oblige him; that his name muſt not be mentioned to Mr. Muhlenberg, as telling him this; but that, if Mr. Muhlenberg could be brought to ſpeak to him firſt, on the ſubject, he would then do any thing in his power, for them; and told him not to ſpeak to him, if he ſhould meet him in the ſtreet; and ſaid, if his name was mentioned, that he would do nothing. That on Wedneſday, Clingman ſaw colonel Wadſworth, at Reynolds's houſe; he did not find her at home, but left a note; but, on going out, • e met her, and ſaid, he had ſeen every body, and done every thing.

Mrs. Reynolds told Clingman, that ſhe had received money from colonel Hamilton, ſince her huſband's confinement, encloſed in a note, which note ſhe had burned.

After Reynolds was diſcharged, (which was eight or nine o'clock on Wedneſday evening); about twelve o'clock at night, Mr. Reynolds ſent a letter to colonel Hamilton by a girl; which letter, Clingman ſaw delivered to the girl. Reynolds followed the girl, and Clingman followed him. He ſaw the girl go into colonel Hamilton's houſe. Clingman then joined Reynolds, and they walked back and forward in the ſtreet, until the girl returned, and informed Reynolds, that he need not go out of town that night, but call on him early in the morning. In the morning, between ſeven and eight o'clock, he ſaw Reynolds go to colonel Hamilton's houſe, and go in. He has not ſeen him ſince, and ſuppoſes, he is gone out of town.

Mr. Clingman further adds, that ſometime ago he was informed by Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds, that he had books containing the amount of the caſh due to the Virginia line at his own houſe at New-York, with liberty to copy, and were obtained through Mr. Duer.

The above contains the truth, to the beſt of my knowledge and recollect on, and to which I am ready to make oath.

Given under my hand this 13th December, 1792. (Signed,) JACOB CLINGMAN.

(No. V.)

Philadelphia, 15th December, 1792.

Mr. Clingman informs us, that Mr. Reynolds returned to town, on Thurſday night, and told him, he had written him a letter which he then had; not having had an opportunity to ſend it to him, and which he then tore; part of which was thrown into the fire. Other parts he preſented to us, and which we now have.

That Reynolds, at the ſame time, told him, he had been received by Mr. Hamilton, the morning of that day, when they parted, about ſunriſe. That he was extremely agitated, walking backward and forward the room, and ſtriking, alternately, his forehead and his thigh; obſerving to him, that he had enemies at work, but was willing to meet them, on fair ground, and requeſted him not to ſtay long, leſt it might be noticed.

Mr. Clingman alſo informs us, that he received a note from Mr. Wolcot, to meet him, on Friday morning, at half paſt nine (which note we have). That he attended, and had an interview with him, in preſence of Mr. Hamilton; when he was ſtrictly examined by both, reſpecting the perſons, who were enquiring into the matter, and their object; that he told Mr. Hamilton, he had been poſſeſſed of his notes to Reynolds, and had given them up to theſe gentlemen: and to which, he replied, he had done very wrong. That he alſo told Mr. Hamilton of the letter he had received from Reynolds, ſince his enlargement, mentioning that he (Mr. Hamilton) would make Francis ſwear back what he had ſaid; and to which Mr. Hamilton replied, he would make him unſay any falſity he had declared.

Mr. Hamilton ſaid, Reynolds was a villain, a raſcal, and he ſuppoſed, would ſwear to any thing.

Mr. Wolcot ſaid, that unleſs Clingman uſed the ſame candour to him, that he had done to Clingman, he ſhould not conſider himſelf bound.

Mr. Hamilton wanted to know, what members of Congreſs were concerned in the enquiry, and deſired him to go into the gallery, where he would ſee them, and enquire their names of the byſtanders.

Mr. Hamilton obſerved, he had had ſome tranſaction with Reynolds, which he had before mentioned, as well as Clingman remembers, to Mr. Wolcot, and need not go into detail.

Clingman alſo informs us, that Reynolds told him, ſince his enlargement, that when he was about to ſet out to Virginia, on his laſt trip to buy up caſh-claims of the Virginia line, he told Mr. Hamilton, that Hopkins would not pay upon thoſe powers of attorney; and to which he, (Mr. Hamilton) replied, he would write to Hopkins, on the ſubject.

16th. Laſt night we waited on colonel Hamilton, when he informed us of a particular connection with Mrs. Reynolds: the period of its commencement, and circumſtances attending it; his viſiting her at Inſkeep's; the frequent ſupplies of money to her and her huſband, on that account; his dureſs by them from the fear of a diſcloſure, and his anxiety to be relieved from it and them. To ſupport this, he ſhewed a great number of letters from Reynolds and herſelf, commencing early in 1791. He acknowledged all the letters in a diſguiſed hand, in our poſſeſſion, to be his. We left him under an impreſſion, our ſuſpicions were removed. He acknowledged our conduct toward him had been fair and liberal: he could not complain of it. We brought back all the papers, even his own notes, nor did he aſk their deſtruction.

He ſaid, the diſmiſſion of the proſecution againſt the parties, Reynolds and Clingman, had been in conſideration of a ſurrender of a liſt of pay improperly obtained from his office, and by means of a perſon, who had it not in his power now to injure the department, intimating he meant Duer: that he obtained this information from Reynolds; owned that he had received a note from Reynolds in the night, at the time ſtated in Mr. Clingman's paper, and that he had likewiſe ſeen him in the morning following: ſaid, he never had ſeen Reynolds before he came to this place; and that the ſtatement in Mr. Clingman's paper, in that reſpect, was correct.

(Signed,) JAMES MONROE. ABRAHAM VENABLE. F. A. MUHLENBERG.

January 2d, 1793. Mr. Clingman called on me, this evening, and mentioned, that he had been appriſed of Mr. Hamilton's vindication, by Mr. Wolcott, a day or two after our interview with him. He farther obſerved to me, that he communicated the ſame to Mrs. Reynolds, who appeared much ſhocked at it, and wept immoderately. That ſhe denied the imputation, and declared, that it had been a fabrication of colonel Hamilton, and that her huſband had joined in it, who had told her ſo, and that he had given him receipts for money and written letters, ſo as to give countenance to the pretence. That he was with colonel Hamilton, the day after he left the jail, when we ſuppoſed he was in Jerſey. He was of opinion ſhe was innocent, and that the defence was an impoſition.

(Signed,) JAMES MONROE.

(No. VI.) LETTERS FROM COLONEL HAMILTON TO JAMES REYNOLDS, REFERRED TO IN No. III.

Endorſement on the parcel, in the hand-writing of Reynolds. "From Secortary Hamilton, eſq The looſe paper on which theſe words are written, is itſelf part of ſome deſtroyed letter from Mr. Hamilton, for it has on the oppoſite ſide, in his undiſguiſed hand-writing, this addreſs, as the ba •• of a letter: "Mr. James Reynolds.""

To-morrow what is requeſted will be done. Twill hardly be poſſible to day.

[This card has neither date nor addreſs. It is in a kind of character, half print, half manuſcript. It was admitted as his own by the ſecretary.]

It is utterly out of my power I aſſure you, PON my honour, to comply with your requeſt. Your note is returned.

[This is the card referred to in No. IV. being the anſwer to a requeſt from Reynolds, of money to ſubſcribe for the Lancaſter turnpike. It has neither date nor addreſs; but muſt have been written about the month of June, 1792. On what ground could Reynolds pretend to make ſuch applications to a perſon ſo far above his rank? The gentle tone of the refuſal, alſo, deſerves notice. It expreſsly implies a high degree of previous intimacy. The ſimple aſſurance of inability was not enough. Mr. Hamilton declares PON HIS HONOUR, that it is not merely out of his power, but UTTERLY, &c. How generous! How magnanimous this language of the ex-ſecretary! eſpecially when he wrote to a being who was in the habit of threatening to bring him to diſgrace. If the ſtatement of Mr. Hamilton, as to Mrs. Reynolds, had been true, ſhe muſt have coſt him, in whole, a ſmart ſum. In No. IV. ſhe ſays, that her huſband had, ſometime before, received upwards of eleven hundred dollars of colonel Hamilton. A ſhare in the Lancaſter turnpike coſt three hundred dollars; and though, in this requeſt, Reynolds did not ſucceed, yet ſo extenſive a ſcale of application ſhews, that he had been in the habit of receiving, or at leaſt of expecting, to a conſiderable amount. In the ſame number it appears, that Clingman was almoſt an eye witneſs to the receipt, by Reynolds, of a large ſum from Mr. Hamilton. No. IV. alſo, ſhews, that Mrs. Reynolds, during the confinement of her huſband, received money from our ſecretary; and in No. III. when Mr. Hamilton wanted to get rid of theſe people, he offered, if they would leave theſe parts, not to be ſeen here again, to give SOMETHING CLEVER. By the way, this was not the language of a lover. If the colonel was tired he might have quitted the lady with leſs ceremony. We proceed to the third card.]

Incloſed are FIFTY DOLLARS. They could not be ſent ſooner.

Addreſſed on the back, Mr. James Reynolds.

[This letter has neither date, nor ſubſcription; and is in the feigned hand of the two former. The addreſs is in a counterfeit hand, of a different kind; but reſembling that of the ſecretary.]

My Dear Sir,

I expected to have heared the day after I had the pleaſure of ſeeing you.

[This is in Mr. Hamilton's common hand. It has no date or ſignature. The addreſs, if it had any, has been torn away.]

The perſon Mr. Reynolds enquired for on Friday, WAITED FOR HIM ALL THE EVENING, at his houſe, from a little after ſeven—Mr. R. may ſee him at any time to-day, or to-morrow, between the hours of two and three.

Mr. Reynolds. Monday.

[The above, and its addreſs, are in the feigned hand. So much correſpondence could not refer excluſively to wenching. No man of common ſenſe will believe that it did. Hence it muſt have implicated ſome connection ſtill more diſhonourable, in Mr. Hamilton's eyes, than that of incontinency. Reynolds and his wife affirm that it reſpected certificate ſpeculations. The ſolicitude of Mr. Hamilton to get theſe people out of the way, is quite contradictory to an amorous attachment for Mrs. Reynolds, and beſpeaks her innocence in the cleareſt ſtile. The following is the torn letter referred to, in the beginning of No. V. It is in the ſame hand writing with the indorſement above quoted on the parcel of letters, and merits particular attention.]

Thurſday, one o'clock, 13th December, 1792 Reynolds got out of priſon, on Wedneſday evening, the 12th of December. See No. iv.. MY DEAR M. CLINGMAN,

I hope I have not forfeited your friendſhip, the laſt night's converſation, dont think any thing of it, for I was not myſelf. I know I have treated ******** friend ill, and too well I am convinſed [Here about three lines are torn out.] to have ſatisfaction from HIM at all events, and you onely I truſt too. I will SEE YOU THIS EVENING. HE HAS OFFERED TO FURNISH ME AND MRS. REYNOLDS WITH MONEY TO CARRY US OFF. If I will go, he will ſee that Mrs. Reynolds has money to follow me, and as for Mr. Francis, he ſas he will make him ſwear back what he has ſaid, and will turn him out of officeThe Secretary kept his word. The perſon here meant was diſcharged from the treaſury office.. This is all I can ſay till I ſee you.

I am, dear Clingman, believe me, forever your ſincere friend,

JAMES REYNOLDS. Mr. Jacob Clingman.

Here the ſtory comes to a criſis. Reynolds, a man of a bad character, and dependent circumſtances, had been caſt into jail for an offence of a very deep dye, and which, as it appears, could have been fixed upon him. Inſtead of comporting himſelf with that humility ſuitable to a ſituation apparently ſo deſperate, he ſpeaks of nothing elſe but ruining and hanging Mr. Hamilton, who, the Preſident excepted, was the moſt powerful and dangerous enemy that he could have met with on the whole continent. This was not, certainly, an obvious way to get out of priſon. He had been proſecuted by the Comptroller, Mr. Wolcot, with whom he found no blame; but he affirmed, that it was a ſcheme of the ſecretary to keep him low, and drive him away. Even admitting that his wife was the favourite of Mr. Hamilton, for which there appears no evidence but the word of the ſecretary, this conduct would have been eminently fooliſh. Mr. Hamilton had only to ſay, that he was ſick of his amour, and the influence and hopes of Reynolds at once vaniſhed. Our ſecretary was far above the reach of his revenge. The accuſation of an illicit amour, though ſounded in notes louder than the laſt trumpet, could not have defamed the conjugal fidelity of Mr. Hamilton. It would only have been holding a farthing candle to the ſun. On that point, the world had previouſly fixed its opinion. In the ſecretary's bucket of chaſtity, a drop more or leſs was not to be perceived, If Reynolds had no claim to regard but in one of the capacities of Mercury, his accuſations and his threats were more than folly. They were ſynonimous to lunacy.

Grounding merely on the procuring ſyſtem, the forbearance of Mr. Hamilton is equally inexplicable. The natural temper of our ſecretary, where he ventures to exert it, is vindictive and furiousSee Findley and Brackenridge, paſſim. , combining that unuſual mixture of quick ferocity and unrelenting vengeance, which Mr. Hume has marked out as a peculiarity in the character of Charles the ninth

The feelings of Mr. Hamilton may be eſtimated by the tone of the hireling writers of his party; and ſhew how little quarter he or they are entitled to. William Cobbett, in his Cenſor for March 1797, deſcribes Mr. Monroe as a traitor, who has bartered the honour and intereſt of his country, to a perfidious and ſavage enemy. Meſſrs. Muhlenberg, Jefferſon, Swanwick, Giles, Madiſon, Gallatin, Mr. Tench Coxe, and others, are all ſpoken of in the ſame ſcurrilous way, without the leaſt regard to truth or decency. What could ail this writer at Dr. Ruſh? That gentleman has long ſince quitted politics, and his philoſophical works are better known and more highly reſpected in Europe, than thoſe of any writer whom the new world has produced, Franklin or Jefferſon's notes excepted.

This man does not write at random. His enemies laughed at him for boaſting of intimacy with ſome of the firſt characters in this country. He ſpoke only truth. Not long ſince, Mr. Liſton, the Britiſh ambaſſador, came down North Second-ſtreet, paſt by the door of his ſtore, looked carefully around him, as if to ſee whether he was obſerved, then turned back and went in. Two days after he was in the ſame ſtore: and, no doubt his excellency derives much improvement from this elegant and dignified connection.

. That ſuch a man, or indeed that any man ſhould tamely endure this treatment is in itſelf highly incredible. No tranſient attachment, ſuch as that which the ſecretary alledged that he had, could have been put in the balance againſt his official character; and from the time that Mr. Monroe and the other gentlemen ſaw Reynolds, his reputation was evidently at ſtake.

In No. V. Clingman ſays, that he received a note from Mr. Wolcot to call on him. It is in theſe words.

Mr. Wolcott will be glad to ſee Mr. Clingman to-morrow, at half after nine o'clock. Thurſday.

At this meeting, Clingman ſays that he was ſtrictly examined by Meſſrs. Wolcot and Hamilton, reſpecting the perſons who were enquiring into the matter, and their object. If everything was ſound at bottom Mr. Hamilton, might have held ſuch perſons and ſuch enquiries in defiance. The following letter, the laſt in the order of theſe pieces, is from Mr. Hamilton himſelf.

Philadelphia, December, 1792. Gentlemen,

ON reflection, I deem it adviſeable for me to have copies of the ſeveral papers which you communicated to me in our interview on Saturday evening, including the notes, and the fragment of Mr. Reynold's letter to Mr. Clingman. I therefore requeſt that you will either cauſe copies of theſe papers to be furniſhed to me, taken by the perſon in whoſe hand writing the declarations which you ſhewed to me were, or will let me have the papers themſelves to be copied. It is alſo my wiſh, that all ſuch papers as are original, may be detained from the parties of whom they were had, to put it out of their power to repeat the abuſe of them in ſituations which may deprive me of the advantage of explanation. Conſidering of how abominable an attempt they have been the inſtruments, I truſt you will feel no ſcruples about this detention.

With conſideration, I have the honour to be, gentlemen, Your obedient ſervant, ALEXANDER HAMILTON. F. Auguſtus Mughlenbergh, James Monroe, and Abraham Venable, Eſquires.

Addreſſed on the back thus. "Frederick A. Mughlenbergh, eſquire."

The above letter, cloſes the collection of papers regarding this affair of Reynolds. It only remains to make ſome obſervations; and theſe demand a retroſpect.

If we conſider the magnitude of the object before them, it was highly commendable in the gentlemen concerned in theſe enquiries to trace the matter as cloſely as they did. The funding of certificates to the extent of perhaps thirty, or thirty-five millions of dollars, at eight times the price which the holders had actually paid for them, preſents, in itſelf, one of the moſt egregious, the moſt impudent, the moſt oppreſſive, and the moſt provoking bubbles that ever burleſqued the legiſlative proceedings of any nation. The debt that could have been diſcharged for ten or fifteen millions of dollars, was funded at forty millions.

But as the univerſal ſuſpicion and hatred which the formation of this maſs had excited, might, at ſome future period, endanger its exiſtence, the aſſumption act, was brought forward. This law incorporated into the former ſtock thoſe debts contracted by individual ſtates during the war. Hence each of them became, for its own ſake, intereſted in the ſupport of public credit which implicated a riddance of the debt eſpecially due by itſelf. Thus the certificate funds were inſeparably embodied with a powerful and popular ally, under the ſhelter of whoſe reputation they might hope for ſome degree of longevity. This artful meaſure was puſhed through Congreſs by the ſame party, who funded the half-crown certificates at twenty ſhillings. But, even in this project, it is entertaining to notice the blindneſs and precipitation of conſcious guilt. The paper-jobbing junto were in ſuch a hurry to ſhelter their ſpeculations under the wings of the above aſſumption law, that they acted the meaſure in the moſt profligate or bungling manner which can be imagined. Take notice! They pledged the public faith for twenty-two millions of dollars, inſtead of eleven millions The accounts of the union with the individual ſtates might have been placed in the ſame relative ſituation in which they now ſtand, by aſſuming eleven millions, inſtead of twenty-two. The additional and unneceſſary debt, created by that fatal meaſure, amounts, therefore, to ten millions eight hundred and eighty-three thouſand, ſix hundred and twenty-eight dollars, and fifty-eight cents. Gallatin, p. 107.; for, the latter ſum would have ſettled the claims, if a reaſonable degree of time, of judgment, or of method had been employed upon it. This work was the very pinnacle of ſtupidity, or knavery, or probably of both. Suppoſe that you ſee a man go into a ſtore, and buy ten ſhillings worth of linen. He receives the cloth, flings down a guinea, and runs away without waiting for his change. You will infer that he is either circulcating falſe money, or has deſerted from bedlam. Yet ſuch is preciſely the profile. view of this aſſumption act. It is natural that Dr. Smith ſhould be fond of calling Americans the moſt intelligent of mankind, when his party have made them ſuch egregious dupes. Thus, the founder of ſome new ſect in religion, while cramming the ears of his diſciples with viſions and miracles, aſſures them that they are the choſen people. In both inſtances the encomiaſt holds in his eye the very ſame object. As for the ſtate of public information, it is likely that not more than one-tenth part of our citizens recollect or have heard any thing of the aſſumption act. Not one out of five thouſand people is acquainted with this blaſting blunder, about the eleven millions being funded at twenty-two.

This is a profile view of the aſſumption act. But when we look ſtraight into its face, fraud, anarchy, and rebellion, are ſeen indelibly engraved on its forehead. Witneſs the debates of laſt winter in Congreſs, about the balance due from New-York to the union! A ſpark a thouſand times ſmaller, has, before now, involved half the world in conflagration. This act is like an ulcer in the midriff of American tranquillity. To paint its poſſible effects would require the eloquence of Milton deſcribing the congreſs of Death and Sin.

The bank of the United States was another buttreſs raiſed to prop the rampart of corruption. This inſtitution, and the irreſiſtible influence which it draws after it, afford a ſtriking evidence of the daring and profound genius of its author. By what clauſe of the conſtitution Congreſs thought themſelves authoriſed to turn bankers, they have not yet informed the public. From any thing which appears on the face of that inſtrument, they had no more warrant for erecting banks than for erecting pyramids. Their plea, that the inſtitution was to be of national benefit, does not form a proper apology. It would have been better to tell the real motive, which was, that the leaders of a majority in Congreſs expected the ſcheme to iſſue in perſonal advantage to themſelves. The report of Mr. Hamilton to Congreſs, on this bank, promiſed mighty matters which have never come to paſs. But the grand point, the bracing of the funding ſyſtem, has been completely ſecured. The city of Waſhington ſhall be juſt mentioned, as a quietus to the honeſt credulity of the Preſident. Millions have been worſe than idly ſunk upon that ſpot, which, if government removes to it, may be ſafely predicted as the tomb of the federal conſtitution.

The reſult of all theſe meaſures hath been a public debt of eighty millions, inſtead of thirty; a republican government harnaſſed in a monarchical faction; a continent overwhelmed with paper money, with jobs, and bankruptcies, of a nature and ſpecies of infamy almoſt unknown in EuropeSee, for example, the polite correſpondence between Mr. James Greenleaf and Mr. John Nicholſon, that hath ſo long blockaded the newſpapers. Sometime ago, bills of a merchant in this city were advertiſed for ſale, by auction, to the amount of about four hundred thouſand dollars. Theſe things make a perſon from the old world to ſtare, but Americans, perhaps, know better.; the price doubled on every article of living; a commerce inſulted and within ſight of ruin; a public treaſury without money, and without credit; and laſt and worſt, a ſquadron of legiſlative conſpirators, in the fifth Congreſs, who, by every inſidious artifice, and every unbluſhing effort, pant and toil to bury their country in a Britiſh alliance and a French war.

CHAPTER VII.

Farther obſervations on the correſpondence between Meſſrs. Hamilton and Reynolds.—Singular mode of ſecrecy in framing the federal conſtitution, and of diſcuſſing Jay's treaty.—Defence of General Maſon.—Report to Preſident Adams, by Mr. Pickering, on French captures.—Singular ſtyle of that paper.—Defamatory charge by Judge Iredell to a grand jury in Virginia.—Their pitiful preſentment. —Defence of Mr. Cabell.—Curious letter to Mr. John Beckley.—Obſervations on the PURITY of the federal governmeat.—Specimens of the mode of travelling in America.—A trip to New-York.

IN his letter laſt copied, Mr. Hamilton ſpeaks of an explanation. He gave nothing meriting that name. The ſhort way to exculpate himſelf was, by confronting Reynolds and his wife, who accuſed him of fraud, with the gentlemen who undertook the enquiry. Inſtead of that, he ſent Reynolds and his wife out of the way, to prevent any ſuch perſonal exculpation. That he packed them off, there can be little doubt, ſince the ſuddeneſs of the diſappearance of Reynolds can be accounted for upon no other ground. The letter from Reynolds to Clingman mentions a promiſe of that kind, and Mrs. Reynolds had previouſly declared, that this was a ſcheme in contemplation. Reynolds could not fly from fear. The proſecution againſt him was cloſed, and his chief reſource for ſubſiſtence had been by applying to Mr. Hamilton. That he was removed, to keep him from a meeting with Mr. Monroe and his friends, bears the ſtrongeſt marks of probability. It may be ſaid, that the infamous character of Reynolds made him unworthy of credit. Taken by itſelf, his teſtimony was, indeed, worth little; but, when ſupported by various circumſtances, it might merit more attention. The profligate manners of the accuſer afforded an additional reaſon why Mr. Hamilton, if innocent, ſhould have brought him forward, ſince it would have been proportionably a more eaſy taſk to convince Mr. Monroe of his falſehood. But the ſecretary ſealed the importance of the accuſer's teſtimony, by forbearing to produce him to the gentlemen enquiring after him. When perſons of ſo much weight and reſpectability had entered upon this buſineſs, every principle of common ſenſe called for the cleareſt explanation. In place of that the chief evidence was concealed, and ſent off, while the maſs of his correſpondence with Mr. Hamilton was, by deſire of the latter, abruptly committed to the flames. You will determine whether theſe fugitive meaſures look moſt like innocence, or like ſomething elſe.

Mr. Hamilton, referring to Reynolds and his wife, calls this an abominable attempt. Granted. But, ſince the meaſures of himſelf and his party, on the affair of certificates, had excited a very general and violent ſuſpicion, and ſince he well knew that the gentlemen who came forward, were ſuppoſed to be in the number of thoſe who entertained it, every motive of ſelf-love, and of zeal for the honour of his partizans, ſhould have prompted Mr. Hamilton to tear up the laſt twig of jealouſy. In place of ſmothering teſtimony, he ſhould have courted it. In place of burning letters, he ſhould have printed them. Publicity was the only baſis by which he could maintain the ground that he was in danger of loſing. Yet this was the very mode of defence which he choſe to avoid. When Randolph was arraigned of miſconduct not more culpable than that imputed by Reynolds to Hamilton, he purſued the accuſer to Rhode-Iſland, and obtained a certificate of his innocence, couched in the ſtrongeſt terms. Yet the federal party, with their uſual fortitude of aſſertion, and infelicity of demonſtration, have loaded him with reproaches, and the bare ſuppoſition of the poſſibility of his innocence, has been ſcouted as the height of effrontery. Put the caſe that Fauchet, when his apocrypha was intercepted, had been in jail, that Randolph, inſtead of bringing him forward had paid his debts, burnt all his remaining papers, and hurried him out of the country. Every friend to order, would have been convinced that Randolph was guilty, and had removed Fauchet, that the pool of corruption might putrify in peaceRobert Hall, on the liberty of the preſs.. The force of moral or preſumptive teſtimony does not augment or diminiſh, becauſe the party accuſed happens to be for or againſt the American funding ſyſtem.

Some years ago, the late Preſident was attacked in the newſpapers for conſtantly uplifting his ſalary, before it became due. Mr. Hamilton immediately printed a reply that filled nine columns of the Philadelphia Gazette. Even the very worſt which could be alledged of Mr. Waſhington amounted only to this practice being irregular, improper, and ſuper-eminently ridiculous from a man who pretended to do the buſineſs of his country for his mere houſhold expences. The charge of Reynolds wears a more ſerious aſpect. If he was one agent for the purchaſe of certificates, it may well be conceived, though it cannot yet be proved, that our ſecretary had twenty others. Phyſician! heal thyſelf. Before Mr. Hamilton prints any farther defences of other people, before he again arraigns one-half of his fellow citizens as cut-throatsSee American Annual Regiſter, chap. x., let him tell us what has become of Reynolds. Let him obſerve that this narrative is explicit; and that, under all the circumſtances of the affair, ſilence will be more fatal to his character, than the moſt feeble vindication.

It is eaſy to ſee why Mr. Hamilton, and his party, have been permitted to reduce America to its preſent diſagreeable condition. When a merchant refuſes not only to balance his books, but vilifies thoſe who adviſe him to do ſo, it requires no ghoſt from the dead, to foretell for what port he is bound. In private life, it is hardly poſſible to find ſuch a fool; but nations are ſometimes actuated by a degree of madneſs to which, in their individual concerns, it would be impracticable to drive them. Of this remark, America, during the ſhort period of her political career, has afforded various examples. The people of other countries are ignorant againſt their will. The citizens of the United States appear often averſe, and even hoſtile to information. Thus, the federal conſtition, highly reſpectable and valuable as truth muſt acknowledge it to be, was yet an inſtrument framed in darkneſs. When the convention who made it met at Philadelphia, they began by ſhutting their doors. This clandeſtine appearance exhibited the worſt auguries imaginable of what they were going to do. Though they had to frame a conſtitution, yet, before it could take effect it was to be ſubmitted, ſeperately, to each of the thirteen ſtates. To aſſiſt the citizens at large in forming their opinions, the ſafeſt and faireſt method was to have debated with open galleries. If the arguments that ſwayed the deciſion of the delegates were well-founded, they might have had the ſame effect on their conſtituents We have not entirely forgot the mode in which the federal conſtitution was crammed down the gullet of Pennſylvania. When it firſt appeared, the aſſembly were in ſeſſion. A minority declined acceptance, becauſe they had no ſpecial powers to that purpoſe from their electors; and, to prevent its paſſing, they ſeceded from the houſe. The remaining members did not form a quorum. Here they would have ſtuck, but the friends of order, alias, a troop of ruffians, with the captain of a very modern frigate at their head, broke into the lodgings of ſome ſeceding members, ſeized them, dragged them through the ſtreets, with one-half of Philadelphia at their heels, and, by main force, projected them into the aſſembly. Thus a quorum was formed, and the conſtitution accepted, in a way which would have diſgraced a gang of g •• es.. But, to immure themſelves in the way in which they did, looked more like a Venetian ſenate, a gang of ſmugglers or coiners, than the Repreſentatives of a free people. The long parliament of England would never have obtained the confidence of their party, they could never have overturned royal deſpotiſm, if they had kept their proceedings and debates a ſecret from the world. In England, a ſtate-trial muſt be carried on in public. The ſpirit of the country would not endure the concealment of ſuch a tranſaction. In the courſe of ordinary affairs, the preſent Houſe of Commons do not ſhut their doors above once in ſeveral years. But the framing of a conſtitution is of infinitely more importance than the uſual routine of buſineſs; the Engliſh people would not, on ſuch an emergency, ſubmit to excluſion. The Scots union was previouſly known to be deteſted by all ranks of people; and brought the country to the brink of a revolution. Yet the Scots parliament debated with open doors. The acquieſcence of our citizens in the Tiberian privacy of their delegates, has marked a peculiarity in the American character.

The arrival of Jay's treaty afforded another inſtance of the ſame kind. In London, public impatience would, by ſuch a circumſtance, have been wounded up to the higheſt degree; and the proudeſt miniſter muſt have found his popularity intereſted in an early communication. But at Philadelphia, there was even a parade of ſecrecy. The treaty reached the Preſident on the 7th of March, 1795. Inſtead of laying it before the public, who were ultimately to bear its conſequences, and who could have made light break in upon every quarter, he ſuppreſſed its contents from mankind, till the meeting of the Senate. Thirty gentlemen then ſhut themſelves up, like the tranſlators of the Septuagint, as if they had been to act by inſpiration. Without raſhneſs it may be ſaid, that this ſuperior branch of government, as Mr. Fenno calls it, did not collectively know as much about commerce, and its foreign relations, as general Smith and John Swanwick. The reſolution of the Senate to ratify, tranſpired on the 24th of June 1795, three months and an half after the Preſident had got the treaty. This long ſuppreſſion did not excite an audible murmur. Nay, after the ratification, the federal party diſplayed ſtill more ſtrongly their manly notions of government. The Senate had juſt one member, general Maſon, of ſufficient civility towards the public, to ſend a copy of the treaty to the newſpapers. This violated an injunction of ſecreſy paſt by the Senate. The federal cat calls began inſtantly to ſqueak; and, if the general had been forging bank notes, they could hardly have made much more noiſe. Thus the Plymouth reſolutions of the 30th of October, 1795, charged him with "a notorious breach of official confidenceCarey's Remembrancer, vol. iii. p. 311.." Inſtead of this language, they ſhould have thanked him for his intelligence. If it had been communicated three months more early, much of the ſubſequent bad conſequences might have been prevented. He ſhould, alſo, have printed Jay's inſtructions, with minutes of the notable harangues about the partition of the United StatesAmerican Annual Regiſter, chap. v.. With open doors, no ſenator durſt have broached a doctrine of ſuch enormous attrocity. The maſter's eye makes a fat horſe, ſays the proverb. In public affairs, the ſame caſe holds good. The more that a nation knows about the mode of conducting its buſineſs, the better chance has that buſineſs of being properly conducted. This maxim appears very plain; and, in his domeſtic concerns, every man approves of it. On a great national ſcale, we are the firſt free people who have rejected it, and that is one of the principal reaſons why ſome parts of our federal adminiſtration have ſucceeded ſo very ill. Secrecy is a favourite doctrine with our financial Mahomet; and its triumph hath enſured his own.

In the cloſe of the laſt chapter, the word conſpirator has been employed. It ſounds harſhly, but it has been inſerted on the cleareſt evidence, and after the ſtricteſt conſideration. To be convinced of an executive plot, for involving America in a French war, we have only to look at a report from ſecretary Pickering to Preſident Adams, and which, on the 22d of June, 1797, was ſent by the latter to Congreſs. The title page profeſſes to ſtate the depredations committed on the commerce of the United States ſince the 1ſt of October, 1796. Conſiſtency with this profeſſion required, that, as much time ſhould have been beſtowed on the recital of Britiſh captures, as on that of French ones. Apparently grounding on this idea, Mr. Adams, in his meſſage accompanying the papers, hath theſe words: I directed a collection to be made of ALL ſuch information as ſhould be found in the poſſeſſion of the government.

The report and documents fill about an hundred and ſixty pages. The liſt of French captures is taken from the Philadelphia and United States gazettes. Of the Britiſh, Mr. Pickering writes thus:

Captures and loſſes by Britiſh cruiſers, the ſecretary preſumes, have not been numerous; for, citizens of the United States having, theſe three years paſt, been accuſtomed to look up to the government for aid in proſecuting their claims, it is not to be doubted, that generally theſe caſes have been reported to the department of ſtate. An abſtract of ſuch as have been communicated, is annexed. Report, p. 5. This liſt amounts only to ten veſſels. They are diſpatched in two pages. That of captures by the republic occupies about an hundred and forty. As an apology for this diſproportion of bulk, Mr. Pickering, on p. 9, gives a moſt curious reaſon. This examination was chiefly made prior to the call of the houſe of Repreſentatives for a report on this ſubject, with a view to aſcertain the number of French captures, and the circumſtances attending them; and the reſult of the whole is annexed. It is regretted, that the time did not permit a re-examination of thoſe papers to aſcertain likewiſe the captures made by the Britiſh cruiſers. The call of the houſe was dated the 10th of June. The papers were laid before the houſe on the 22d, being at an interval of twelve days. As the French liſt had been made out beforehand, the ſecretary had the more time to compile the Britiſh liſt. Six active clerks, like thoſe in his own office, could, with great eaſe, have completed the buſineſs in forty-eight hours at fartheſt. Where was the mighty affair of turning over two files of newſpapers for the laſt eight months? With ſome diligence, the whole might have been finiſhed in a ſingle afternoon. In a city like Philadelphia, full of public offices, and able tranſcribers, the ſecretary, if he had been in earneſt, could have collected forty proper aſſiſtants, on an hour's warning; and even admitting the Britiſh liſt to be as bulky as the French one, each of theſe auxiliaries would hardly have found an hour's employment. But the ſecretary himſelf ſays, that Britiſh captures were not numerous. Be it ſo. Then it would have taken the leſs time to make them out. Yet it ſeems that, with a ſpace of ten or twelve days before him, the ſecretary could not accompliſh this Lilliputian taſk.

Thus does our ſecretary trifle with the orders of the legiſlature; and Mr. Adams, by the acceptance of ſo abſurd an excuſe, exemplifies the proverb, like maſter, like man. But, to be plain with Mr. Pickering, ſuch palpable ſophiſtication will not go down. All people know very well why the Britiſh liſt of captures was not made out. It would have counteract • d his plan of inflaming us againſt the republic. He proceeds thus.

The editors of thoſe two gazettes agree in ſaying, that no great attention was paid to the ſubject, for the purpoſe of inſerting accounts of all the captures which were publiſhed in the various other newſpapers; yet the number collected exceeds three hundred, of which but few eſcape condemnation. The Gazette of the United States is, and long has been, as much an engine of the American executive, as that of London is to an Engliſh premierInſtead of trying to turn the ſpeech of Barras into an inſtrument for a French war, Mr. Adams might have bought a ſet of this executive newſpaper, and ſent it over as a preſent to the Directory at Paris. For every ſyllable in the whole ſpeech of Barras, they would have found themſelves paid beforehand with a column of invective.. Mr. Fenno, beyond all queſtion, inſerted every French capture that he could find. As to the Philadelphia Gazette, the preſent editor has only held it ſince laſt February; and, previous to that time, he knows not how it was conducted. When Congreſs wanted information, it was the duty of Mr. Pickering to have looked at a wide variety of newſpapers. But he was well aware, that Mr. Fenno had collected about every thing of the kind. The object of Mr. Pickering is, to inſinuate that many French captures have eſcaped notice. Yet the number collected exceeds THREE HUNDRED. So long ago as September, 1794, a liſt was publiſhed, by authority, of Britiſh captures. They were about three hundred and ſixty.

The conduct of the public agents, ſays Mr. Pickering, and of the commiſſioned cruiſers there, has ſurpaſſed all former examples Pickering's report, p. 8.. They cannot be worſe than the confiſcation of the Two Friends, and the murder of captain Boſſon. We might add an hundred Britiſh piracies recited in this volume, all as atrocious as any poſſible caſe of French piracy.

The perſons alſo of our citizens have been beaten, inſulted, and cruelly impriſoned; and, in the forms uſed towards priſoners of war, they have been exchanged with the Britiſh for Frenchmen. This is very bad, but the French are only following the example that England, for above two years, had ſet before them, and at this moment continues to give them. When complaints of impreſſment were made againſt England, the federal party did their utmoſt to quell the ſtory. In Congreſs, Mr. Tracy, and others, would gladly have denied that Britiſh impreſſments had taken place, and Webſter wondered why American printers ſhould trouble themſelves about the matterSupra, chapters v. and vi.. This was the uniform language of the whole party.

There have been frequent accounts of attempts to effect condemnations by bribing the officers and ſeamen of our veſſels to ſwear falſely; but it was reſerved to theſe times, when offered bribes were refuſed, and threats deſpiſed, to endeavour to accompliſh the object by torture. Report p. 10. American ſeamen have been flogged by dozens at a Britiſh gangway. This alſo was torture. Captain Reynolds, under the very noſe of admiral Murray, attacked American veſſels. Several men were killed and wounded. This was torture. There is not the ſmalleſt deſign to exten • ate French outrages, but merely to prove the groſs partiality of our executive in ſhewing only the robberies perpetrated upon one ſide.

Paulo majora canamus. If Mr. Pickering has diſplayed groſs partiality, Preſident Adams has not acted, in the ſmalleſt degree, better. On the 23d of June, 1797, general Smith was reciting in Congreſs the ſteps purſued by the friends of order, for bringing about a French war. He ſaid, that the executive had called Congreſs, and had complained of the French; for the ſpeech did not contain a ſingle word of reference to any other nation. He next recommended the fitting out of frigates, with which he propoſed to convoy American commerce. Our merchant ſhips are to be armed, and, on arriving in a French port, the queſtion is put, againſt whom are you armed? The French would ſay, we have read your Preſident's ſpeech. By theſe preparations, he can only mean to fight us. Your envoys, arriving in France at the ſame time, are ſure of being turned back again. General Smith farther obſerved, that Dr. Smith and Mr. Harper had avowed the deſign of employing the frigates to force a trade into ports of the Weſt-Indies which the French have juſtly declared to be in a ſtate of rebellion. Such was port Jeremie. General Smith affirmed, that theſe meaſures led directly to war. He believed that gentlemen wanted to lead us into war. The member was right; there can be no doubt of it. This aſtoniſhing ſeſſion of Congreſs hath afforded a whole dictionary of evidence. Sir John Brute ſays, every thing I ſee, every thing I hear, every thing I feel, and every thing I taſte, methinks, has wife in it. So at preſent with the federal party, every thing has war in it. A combination more culpable, more hateful, hath not occurred ſince the age of Cataline or Fieſco.

Mr. Pickering complains of the French maltreating American ſeamen. His party have encouraged the Britiſh to impreſs them. In proof of this, attend to general Smith, who is no violent democrat, for he profeſſed in Congreſs great concern, when Mr. Hamilton retired from office. On the 27th of May, 1797, this gentleman ſaid, in the houſe, that members had affected to treat the law for the protection of our ſeamen with lightneſs. It conferred the higheſt honour on Mr. Livingſton, who introduced it. It was oppoſed in both houſes by thoſe who are always combating for an increaſe of power and influence in the executive government. The Senate mutilated that law, ſo as to deprive it of its moſt ſalutary proviſions. After all, the Senate refuſed their aſſent to a law for protecting American ſeamen from impreſſment, and from being whipped on the bare back at the gang-way of a Britiſh man of war. They refuſed to adopt it, until it was ſo much mutilated, that the executive, to render it in any ſhape effectual, was obliged to enforce it with a ſupplementary part. Thus far general Smith.

If this majority in the Senate had been ſelected from the Divan of Algiers, they could not have more completely diſgraced their ſtation. At the ſame time, Meſſrs. Tracy and Harper, below ſtairs, were attempting to deny the reality of Britiſh impreſſments; and Webſter and Ruſſel inveighed againſt every one who mentioned their exiſtence. Theſe things are part of a ſyſtem for degrading America into a Britiſh footſtool. What kind of an AMERICAN Senate is that which refuſes its conſent to a law for the protection of AMERICAN ſeamen? The very idea looks ſo monſtrous that one is apt to think himſelf in a dream when he endeavours to revolve it. The circumſtances of their refuſal to concur in the bill, ſtand recorded on the journals of both houſes. The full detail ſhall ſoon be given to the world. The journals of the Britiſh houſe of peers afford no precedent for ſuch horrible depravity. England has hitherto ſtood upon her own legs. Her repreſentatives and legiſlators, though often extremely corrupted, have never been ſuſpected of ſervility to a foreign nation; and, a trivial inſtance exceptedIn the reign of Charles the ſecond. See Sir John Dalrymple's Memoirs, and Hume's Hiſtory of England, in the lateſt editions., they have not put themſelves up to auction for foreign gold. Their opponents, at leaſt, have not alledged that they ever did ſo; and this forms a ſtrong preſumption of their innocence.

In the mean time, Harriſon Otis cants about French impreſſments, and Mr. Harper on the corruption of Mr. Monroe, by French gold. For conceit and ignorance, Otis may be looked upon as the lineal ſucceſſor of Samuel Dexter. As for Harper, he is ſaid to be in embarraſſed circumſtances; and, while he prattles about foreign gold, one might aſk him, who pays for the printing of his eternal pamphlets

During the two laſt ſeſſions, it is computed that this gentleman coſt the country at leaſt ten thouſand dollars worth of time, by making ſuperfluous motions, for the ſake of making uſeleſs ſpeeches about them. In the ſeſſion of December, 1796, he repeated one ſpeech, about augmenting the duties on imports, at four different times, in the courſe of little more than a month.

He has a very pretty delivery, if any obliging friend would ſupply him with a ſuitable ſtock of ideas. If he could be contented with repeating the ſame thoughts not oftener than five times in the courſe of fifteen minutes, he would not ſo barbarouſly drive the members from their ſeats, nor run himſelf into ſo many ſcrapes with the ſpeaker, as to wandering from the queſtion. In an antediluvian Congreſs, when people lived to the age of a thouſand years, one might have found leiſure for hearing him to an end. Our ſpan of threeſcore and ten is too narrow for the torrent of his eloquence.

? By land, our intereſt has been as groſsly betrayed as by ſea. This appears from the diſcouragement conſtantly given to the defence of the Indian frontier. On that head, the following narrative will repay a peruſal.

On the 19th of November, 1794, Preſident Waſhington, in his ſpeech to Congreſs, has theſe words. Towards none of the Indian tribes have overtures of friendſhip been ſpared. The Creeks, in particular, are covered from encroachment by the interpoſition of the general government, and that of Georgia. It would have been fortunate for the people of Tenneſſee, if the general government had covered them from the encroachments of the Creeks. Reſpecting the behaviour of the Creeks, previous to the delivery of that ſpeech, information for the preſent work has been derived from two ſources, the public newſpapers, and a private manuſcript communicated by Mr. Andrew Jackſon, Repreſentative from the ſtate of Tenneſſee in the fourth Congreſs. An examination of theſe details will aſſiſt in aſcertaining what ſort of friendſhip the Creeks deſerved, and to what ſide the balance of protection ought to have leaned.

The account given in the newſpapers amounts in ſubſtance to what follows. Continual ſkirmiſhes had been taking place for a long time. In one of theſe, on the 13th of Auguſt, 1794, lieutenant M'Clellan, with thirty-ſeven men, had been attacked on the Cumberland path, eighteen miles from South-Weſt-Point, by above an hundred Creeks. He had four men killed, and four miſſing. He likewiſe loſt thirty-one horſes, with ſeveral other articles. A multitude of murders by the Indians are mentioned. Of theſe, it would be needleſs here to attempt a catalogue. A letter from Knoxville, dated 22d of September, 1794, ſays, that the general aſſembly of Tenneſſee had then been in ſeſſion for ſeveral weeks. They had prepared another memorial to Congreſs with a liſt of the citizens killed, wounded, or taken priſoners by the Creeks and Cherokees, ſince the 1ſt of March laſt, the date of a former ſtatement to Congreſs. The number of citizens was an hundred and twenty-ſeven, beſides which the Indians had ſtolen four hundred and ſeventy-four horſes. Theſe thefts and murders had been chiefly committed while a party of the Lower Cherokees were at Philadelphia, giving the ſtrongeſt promiſes of peace, and while major Seagrove, an agent for Indian affairs, was making aſſurances of the friendſhip of the Creeks. The letter concludes with an account of ſome freſh murders which had, at that moment, been received. They were ſaid to have been committed on the 16th of September current. Nickajack and Running Water were two of the moſt populous of the Lower Cherokee towns. They were ſituated cloſe on the ſouth bank of the Tenneſſee, below a place called the Suck. They were principal croſſing-places for the Creeks over the Tenneſſee, when they wanted to make war on Cumberland and Kentucky. They had co-operated with the warriors of Look-out Mountain, and Will's towns for ſeveral years paſt. They boaſted of perfect ſecurity from their ſituation. They were ſurrounded on three ſides by mountains, and protected on the north by the ſouth branch of the Tenneſſee. They were alſo formidable by their numbers.

On the 7th of September, major Ore marched from Naſhville to attack the ſavages. He had with him five hundred and fifty militia, of whom an hundred and fifty were from Kentucky. They arrived on the bank of the Tenneſſee, oppoſite to Nickajack, and undiſcovered, in the duſk of the evening. About eleven o'clock at night, a part of them croſſed the river on rafts, and ſurrounded the town, while another party lay in ambuſh on the oppoſite ſide of the river. The attack began about day break. Many of the ſavages plunged, according to their cuſtom, into the water, and having got almoſt to the oppoſite ſhore, the militia in reſerve roſe from their covert, and diſcharged a volley at the fugitives in the river. The victory was compleat. Nine ſquaws and children were taken. About forty or forty-five warriors were killed. Accounts differ about their exact numbers. As no particular detail is offered about Running Water, but barely that it was deſtroyed at the ſame time with Nickajack, it ſeems probable that they ſtood very near to each other. In theſe towns two freſh ſcalps were found; and ſeveral others dry, that had been hung up as trophies. Many articles of property were recovered which the militia knew to have been taken from their owners when killed by the Indians, in the courſe of the preceding twelve months. Among theſe were found a number of letters. They had been carried off when the Kentucky mail was robbed and the poſt murdered. In Nickajack was found a quantity of powder and lead, that had juſt been received from the Spaniſh government, as alſo a commiſſion to Braeth, chief of the town, who was among the ſlain.

The priſoners confeſſed that ſixty Creek and Cherokee warriors had paſſed through Nickajack, only nine days before, on their way to make war againſt the United States. Two nights previous to the deſtruction of Running Water, a ſcalp dance was held in it. Among others, John Watts was preſent; and it was there reſolved to carry on the war with additional vigour. This the white people learned from the priſoners. The towns were burnt, and every thing deſtroyed. Such is the ſubſtance of the newſpaper account. That received from Mr. Jackſon is to the following effect.

Major James Ore was, in the cloſe of Auguſt, 1794, ordered by governor Blount to march to the diſtrict of Mero, to defend its frontier; and, on the 6th of September, was ordered, by general Robertſon to march to the Lower Cherokee towns, and deſtroy them.

It is proper for me here to obſerve, ſays Mr. Jackſon, that the Indians inhabiting thoſe towns were daily killing our citizens, and our officers, tranſmitting a Roſtrum of the captured, killed, and wounded to the ſecretary at warMr. Henry Knox.; and the anſwers returned were, not to purſue on any account acroſs the Indian boundary, or carry on any offenſive meaſures againſt the Indians; conſtruing the word offenſive to be an act of croſſing the Indian boundary in the purſuit of depredating parties.

Major Ore obeyed the orders of general Robertſon. He marched to Nickajack and Running Water, ſwept them with the beſom of deſtruction, and killed about thirty warriors. It is neceſſary here to ſtate ſome facts. The night before major Ore made the attack on Nickajack, the Indians held the ſcalp dance over two freſh ſcalps, which they had taken on the frontier. Ore had purſued the track of this party. On the very day that he made the attack twenty-two Indians fell upon the ſtation of the widow Hays, killed one man, and wounded three; and the evening before, they had burnt captain John Donelſon's ſtation. At the time that general Robertſon iſſued the order to Ore, he had information of an intended general attack, contemplated on that frontier. This was well ſubſtantiated, and the expedition of Ore was the only circumſtance which prevented it, and eſtabliſhed peace on the frontier.

The pay of theſe troops hath been ſuſpended, becauſe they croſſed the Indian boundary, although they preciſely purſued the orders given by general Robertſon. The muſter and pay roll's were, in the latter end of the year 1794, depoſited with colonel David Henly, agent of the war department at Knoxville. Governor Blount, in 1794, tranſmitted to Mr. Knox general Robertſon's order, authorizing and commanding the expedition, and on the 19th of December of that year this communication was laid before Congreſs. Yet though frequent applications have been made at the office of the ſecretary at war for payment, they have conſtantly been refuſed. After a delay of more than two years, Mr. Jackſon, in the laſt ſeſſion of the fourth Congreſs, has applied to Mr Pickering to recover the neceſſary papers, that he might lay the ſubject before the Houſe of Repreſentatives. I am informed by him, ſays Mr. Jackſon, that he knows nothing of the buſineſs. Here the matter ſtood, on the 22d of February, 1797.

Mr. Jackſon further adds that this is not a ſingle inſtance. In 1794, major Thomas Johnſton commanded a party of Tenneſſee militia who were ordered to purſue a gang of Indians. The latter had murdered colonel John Montgomery, and the Titſworth family. In the purſuit, they croſſed into the Kentucky territory. Colonel H • nly gave that reaſon for ſuſpending their pay. Theſe were the only two parties of Tenneſſee militia, whoſe arrears have not been paid up, excepting thoſe comprehended in the appropriation act for 1797.

Many parts of the union lie beyond the reach of public information. The country newſpapers are commonly very barren. To remedy this inconvenience, ſome members of Congreſs ſend printed circular letters to their conſtituents on the exiſting condition of the political world. Mr. Samuel J. Cabell, of Virginia, tranſmitted two of ſuch letters. One of them was dated the 11th, and the other the 23d of January, 1797. They contained nothing uncommon. They mentioned the brilliant and irreſiſtible progreſs of the French arms, the unfortunate chagrin which had taken place between France and the United States, and the deplorable conſequences that would enſue to this country from an actual rupture. Mr. Pickering's letter to Pinckney was referred to as more likely to promote than prevent a French quarrel. Mr. Cabell expreſſed his regret at the election of Mr. Adams as Preſident, and added, as a conſolation, that of Mr. Jefferſon.

On the 22d of May, 1797, judge Iredell, of the federal court, delivered a charge at Richmond to the grand jury, for the diſtrict of Virginia. It conveyed encomiums on the government, and a ſtrong recommendation of confidence in it. The jury immediately gave in the following preſentment.

We, of the grand jury of the United States for the diſtrict of Virginia, preſent, as a real evil, the circular letters of ſeveral members of the late Congreſs, and particularly letters with the ſignature of Samuel J. Cabell, endeavouring, at a time of real public danger, to diſſeminate unfounded calumnies againſt the happy government of the United States, and thereby to ſeparate the people therefrom; and to increaſe or produce a foreign influence, ruinous to the peace, happineſs, and independence of theſe United States.

The jurors themſelves were evidently committing calumny. The phraſe of ſeveral members was caſting their ſtink-pot in the dark. As to Mr. Cabell, they ſhould have ſpecified the calumnies. When the grand jury of Chatham county, Georgia, arraigned judge Wilſon as a land-jobber, they condeſcended on matters notoriouſly trueIt was upon the queſtionable evidence of this judge, that the preſident declared the four weſtern counties of Pennſylvania to be •• a ſtate of inſurrection.. When a citizen of Maryland cenſures judge Chaſe, he begins with a hiſtory of the bankrupt law. If Mr. Cabell declared his diſſatisfaction at the election of Mr. Adams, one half of the American citizens were doing the ſame. This did not produce the ſmalleſt confuſion or embarraſſment on the ſide of government. It is unfortunate for the union, that Mr. Cabell had ſo much foundation for regret. The out-ſet of the new Preſident has been marked by an endeavour to hurry his conſtituents into an unneceſſary war, while ſecretary Pickering has been writing, and ſecretary Wolcot has been encouraging others to write invectives againſt the French nationBritiſh Honour and Humanity, p. 55.. America needs not to hope for a ſincere peace with France, while either Mr. Adams or his preſent miniſters remain in office. She cannot forget nor will ſhe forgive the many volumes of ribbaldry, which, under their countenance, have been printed againſt her. Beſides, upon a Britiſh ſpy, upon an aſſociate with the attorney general of England for the ruin of Thomas PaineMr. Adams has acted in both of theſe HONOURABLE capacities. See American Annual Regiſter, chap. vi., every honeſt Frenchman, every true republican, of every country, muſt look with horror.

"For never can true reconcilement grow, "Where wounds of deadly hate have pierc'd ſo deepThe following anecdote ought to be known, and it is here given on the beſt evidence. A few weeks ago, the firſt perſon in America gave a dinner to a party of the Senate. They were all from the eaſtward excepting two ſouthern members. The whole converſation turned on ridiculing the ſouthern ſtates. ."

On the 31ſt of May, 1797, Mr. Cabell ſent a third letter to his conſtituents. It has, ſays he, been a regular practice of the federal judges, to make political diſcourſes to the grand jurors.— They have become a band of political preachers. This is true, and their ſermons are often very dull. In Britain, judges have generally been foremoſt to undermine the liberties of the people, and encourage the encroachments of the crown. There is a country where ſpeculators occupy, in part, the ſupreme bench of juſtice. There, the aſſertion of a public officer, whoſe want of probity is proverbial, has been taken as complete evidence, that four counties were in a ſtate of rebellion. It would certainly be very wrong in a private citizen to conteſt the purity of ſuch legiſlators. In a ſubſequent letter of June 5th, Mr. Cabell ſays, upon an aſſurance of the fact from general Smith, that the juſt claims of America, for French depredations, do not exceed a million of dollars, and that the accuracy of his ſtatement is confirmed by the preſident of the American Inſurance Company. In the Congreſs debates on Jay's treaty, dr. Ames computed Britiſh depredations at five millions, and the account hath ſince been augmented.

The federal party naturally wiſh to drive out of their way every man who dares to think for himſelf. Thus Monroe was recalled from France becauſe, without orders from Mr. Waſhington, he had obtained the releaſement of Thomas Paine from the Luxembourg; and becauſe he had retained with the directory a degree of that confidence which Mr. Waſhington had loſt. Thus captain Montgomery, of one of the revenue cutters of this port, hath been diſmiſſed from his office becauſe he voted for the Jefferſon ticket. Mr. Beckley hath not only been diſcharged and attacked from the preſs, but even from the poſt-office. An elegant and polite letter came to him a few days after his diſmiſſion. It is printed here for an odd enough reaſon. The character is feigned, but ſtill, on a careful compariſon, it has a ſtrong likeneſs to the hand writing of MR. OLIVER WOLCOT, as the Saracen's head, in ſpite of diſguiſe, reſembled ſir Roger de CoverlySee the Spectator..

DEAR SIR

You will now Experance the frut of your fooly in being ſo great a Demicrate & bitter Enemay to that Goverment whoſe Bread you have Eaten which has now caſt you out of hir ſervice & is certainly nothing leſs than you could have expede conſidering your conduct for a number of years paſt I can feal for your ſituation as I Underſtood all your Land ſpeculation has turned out but little to ſuport a family in that Dignefied Way you have keept up However this I hope will turn for your Good to make you Humble & know a little more of the Deficulties attending thoſe whoſe Cup has not ruin over with that fullneſs & ſweet you have long injoyed [plaſe turn over] Let me give you an adviſe as a friend Not to let your former ſtation Hinder you from Acepteing of a leſs & not ſo hounorable a place as that you have loſt to enable you to ſuport your family You now ſtand Yet a Reſpectable Character for if your Pride & Haughteneſs keeps you out of Employ becauſe you are not in ſo honourable a ſtation as before till your finances get lower & Lower you find that it will be tenfold more dificult then to get into a place then at preſent & Endeavour to lay aſide your politicts leave that to thoſe whoſe Country have called them to the Important afairs of there Country by giveing them all the Aid & not throwing Impedements in there way by ſuch a prudent Conduct youll Only deſerve Well your Country and in time come forward again and get a good place take theſe hints from a friend who Wiſhes the Happeineſs your family Belive me to be with much reſpect

Your Moſt Obt ſervant, JONATHAN WOTHERSPOON.

Nine years ago, the ſuppoſed writer of this piece was copying in the office of the treaſurer of Connecticut, at ſeventy-five cents per day. The grovelling inſolence which marks his elegant epiſtle has been too frequent with men unexpectedly raiſed from mediocrity to ſomething above it. The letter affords a fine ſpecimen of the ſpirit of the party. Your fooly in being ſo great a demicrate; that is to ſay, in being ſo great a friend to the political rights and importance of the people. Frederick of Pruſſia once wrote a letter to this effect: If my ſubjects of Neufchatel chuſe to be eternally damned, I can ſay nothing againſt it. In like manner, if the citizens of America chuſe to be trode down by an ariſtocracy, no third party ſhould interfere.

Your conduct for a number of years paſt. The official conduct of Mr. • eckley was unexceptionable. Indeed no audible complaint has been made about it. Dr. William Smith, at the head of his regiment of forty, declined argument, and obtained a ſilent vote. Where any thing can be ſaid, the doctor is not a niggard of accuſation. That government whoſe bread you have eaten, which has now caſt you off. The bread was not eaten for nothing. The ſalary was moderate, and the duties laborious. As to the caſting off, it was by the odd vote of Dr. Smith, who is, it ſeems, government. As for giving them all the aid, and not throwing impediments in their way, they cannot ſurely have apprehenſions from a diſcarded clerk, who has to provide for his family by the toilſome profeſſion of the law? If government fear impediments from Mr. Beckley, their ſituation muſt be very frail. That ſomething is wrong will appear from what follows.

Alexander Hamilton calls it an abominable attempt in Reynolds to charge him with dealing in the purchaſe of certificates. Thus, by his own admiſſion, the fact, if proved upon him, would be abominable. Colonel Wadſworth ſpoke of it, as above quoted, exactly in the ſame way. But if this practice was indefenſible in a ſecretary of the treaſury, it was juſt as criminal in a member of Congreſs. There is no difference, or, if there be, the caſe of the member differs for the worſe. The ſecretary could only make a report in favour of funding the half-crown certificates at twenty ſhillings. But the member voted for it. The one drew the ſword; the other drove it up to the hilt. Hence, by a very ſhort and plain proceſs of reaſoning, if one of our legiſlators was concerned in theſe ſpeculations, he committed an abominable crime. The heroes of the piece are ſenſible of this fact. Their concealment of transfers at the treaſury, and the bank of the United States of the names and amount of ſtockholders, proves an irreſiſtible and diſgraceful evidence of their internal condemnation. What are you to think of a perſon who calls himſelf your creditor, but refuſes to tell his name, or the amount of his debt? Such was the plan of the renowned leeches of the Nabob of Arcot. Bonds to an immenſe ſum were conſtantly produced, yet the catalogues of creditors conſtantly varied. This rule at the treaſury is like the crape over a highwayman's face, or the dark lanthorn of a houſe-breaker. The public creditors of England wear no ſuch maſk. Mr. Rayment printed their names to the number of an hundred and twenty-ſeven thouſand. When Americans begin to think upon this ſubject, they will refuſe to pay one cent more of intereſt upon the public funds, till they ſhall have torn aſunder the veil that ſhrouds the ſyſtem. To the great maſs of the preſent holders the diſcovery would be indifferent or welcome. It is only the patriarchal, the congreſſional ſharks of ſtockholding, who can wiſh for mountains to cover them, the men whoſe actions Meſſrs. Wadſworth and Hamilton, have, by the cleareſt implication, declared to be abominable. Mr. Adams, by the way, holds the funding ſyſtem in abhorrenceSee particulars in the American Annual Regiſter, chap. 6., and he will put an end to it, if he can get into his French war. While Americans entruſt and admire ſuch leaders, they diſplay a temporal likeneſs to the inhabitants of Neufchatel. Theſe are the paper currency politicians, who rail at jacobin rapacity, and at Jefferſon for want of religionPhocion accuſes him, 1. Of trying to filch a little popularity from a few free negroes. An important acquiſition! The charge is eked through ſeveral pages. 2. With impaling butterflies. 3. With diſbelieving the ſtory of Noah's flood. 4. With the conſtruction of ſideboards and eaſy chairs. 5. Of reſigning his office as governor of Virginia, during a Britiſh invaſion. Smith himſelf was in England through the whole war. He choſe to let his eſtate be double taxed rather than return to defend his country 6. Whoever ſaw him (Jefferſon) in a place of worſhip? The doctor has been fully deſcribed in a line of Plautus: Impurus, impudens, inverecundiſſimus. .

In March, 1793, ſome debate enſued in Congreſs on the motion of Mr. Giles for examining the conduct of Mr. Hamilton. The free latitude of diſcuſſion, practiſed upon other occaſions, was refuſed; the ſmalleſt departure was cenſured; and whenever, in particular, an approach was made toward the bank, the whole party tumultuouſly crying to order, and with the directors at their head, roſe in arms to defend it. The character of the vote itſelf, which conſtituted the majority is eaſily given.—Of the thirty-five, twenty-one were ſtockholders, or dealers in the funds, and three of theſe latter bank directors An Examination of the late Proceedings in Congreſs, &c. p. 25. It was in this ſtruggle that dr. Smith pledged himſelf for the angelic purity of Mr. Hamilton. Supra, chap. 6. Though the number of ſtockholding members is ſpecified in the text, it appears, afterwards, to have been but a conjecture. The writer gives a liſt of thirty-four members of the two houſes, who were believed to be ſtockholders; but their names are carefully blanked, as if he had thought himſelf liable to proſecution. With ſuch unexampled oſtentation of ſecrecy, there muſt be ſome dirty ſyſtem that needs concealment..

The great cry of the party is about the ſacred nature of public faith, which they alledge to have conſummated by funding the domeſtic debt. This conſiſted of arrears of pay due to the army, to contractors for ſupplies, of loans made to government, and of the remnant of old paper money then in circulation. Now, we muſt recollect, that, during the revolution, this country had been covered with emiſſions of paper. When the old Congreſs borrowed money, they took part of this paper back in loan, but not at the value for which they themſelves had iſſued it out. They allowed credit only for what was its current price in the market. The difference was frequently as forty to one. Thus a farmer got four thouſand dollars worth of government paper for his wheat. After the value of paper fell, he came to lend it to them, and they would only give him credit for the fortieth part of its nominal value, being one hundred dollars. This ſhocking fraud could be excuſed only by the omnipotence of neceſſity. But farther, a part of the paper remained unredeemed at the cloſe of the war, and has been funded at the rate of one hundred for one under the preſent governmentGallatin, p. 89..

Thus taking America for a merchant who has three creditors, one of them is paid with a fortieth, and a ſecond with a hundredth part of the ſum that he lent. A third receives full payment. But a debt contracted ten years ago, and ſtill unpaid, is as fairly due as if it had been incurred but yeſterday. The creditor of 1776, who was paid with one-tenth, twentieth, fortieth, or hundredth part of his juſt claim, was quite as meritorious as the other of 1781, whoſe debt has been bought up and funded, in the name of Theodore Sedgwick, at twenty ſhillings in the pound. A brief conſideration will convince you, that this poſition agrees with the eſſence of juſtice.

If the continent had been ſold by an hour glaſs, its utmoſt value would perhaps have fallen ſhort of ſatisfaction to the honeſt demands of public creditors. The greater part of the United States had been ſwindled or plundered to a degree that exceeds the deſcriptive talents of the moſt powerful mind. Funds could not be had to ſatisfy all the creditors, or even a twentieth part of them. It remains, therefore, to be proved what was the ſuperior merit of that claſs of creditors, whoſe claims were ultimately admitted, at their full value, as a debt on the public. The common ſaying is, that they were old ſoldiers. A great number of them were ſo, and poſſeſſed the higheſt merit. A large portion of certificates was alſo held by contractors, and perſons who had furniſhed various kinds of ſupplies, but who were not in the army. The country was full of widows and orphans, whoſe fathers and huſbands had been killed in the war, and who, to this day, have received no compenſation. Multitudes of ſoldiers had been alſo diſcharged from want of health, or from wounds, and who in equity, though not perhaps in name, were creditors to the public. Hence, if it had been poſſible to clear off all the laſt claſs of creditors, they were not more deſerving than a ſtill greater proportion of military ſufferers who got nothing. The whole hiſtory of American public credit, during the war, holds up a picture of inevitable but enormous iniquity. Three-fourths of the citizens of the United States were, in real truth, creditors to government. The loſs by depreciated paper was prodigious and next to univerſal. If it could have been poſſible to pick out all the ſoldiers or their families, and give them a higher proportion of payment than others, it would have been well. But to give one part of them their whole demand, and nothing to the reſt, was not ſtrict juſtice. The widow and orphan of one old ſoldier were actually taxed to pay the wages of another. When the federal party clamour ſo loudly on public faith, let them revolve theſe particulars. Let them look at the annual bundles of petitions referred to the committee of claims, and then they may bluſh at the very mention of American public faith.

Some perhaps think that the friends of order have been treated with too little ceremony in point of of ſtile. Obſerve a few ſpecimens of their own. Mr. Fenno's gazette, of the 26th of April, 1796, contains a piece wherein the members of Congreſs who oppoſed the treaty, are termed the war-whoop party. If they carry their point, it will murder all your liberties, privileges and properties. Again, referring to Mr. Albert Gallatin, Let the mighty Italian, with his ſtilletto and bowl of poiſon come on. This piece concludes with ſaying that the Americans deſpiſe all incendiaries; and it is ſubſcribed ORDER.

An extract of a letter in the ſame newſpaper has the following words. I want to know how Madiſon has accounted for his inconſiſtency and duplicity of conduct. How long will the people of America be duped by this man.

The firſt queſtion to be here aſked is, whether ſuch inconſiſtency and duplicity exiſt? No details are attempted, and no evidences are offered. There never was an active and diſtinguiſhed member in any legiſlative aſſembly, farther above impeachment than Mr. Madiſon. The marked attention which this gentleman obtained in Congreſs, is a tribute of eſteem which all parties pay not more to his abilities than his virtues, to the irreproachable tenor of a life, that, ſince his firſt entrance on the political career, has remained without a ſtain, and which is far above the ordure of Mr. Fenno's correſpondents.

As for the deſtruction of privileges and properties, no party ever diſplayed greater tameneſs on that head than the Hamiltonians. After the Britiſh had, for, many months, been capturing American veſſels without provocation, and almoſt without pretence, the Repreſentatives, on the 21ſt of April, 1795, paſt a reſolution prohibiting, from and after the 1ſt of November then next, all commercial intercourſe between the United States and the ſubjects of Britain, or the citizens or ſubjects of any other nation, ſo far as reſpects articles of the growth or manufacture of Britain or Ireland. This would have been a moſt effectual blow to Britiſh commerce; and, as ſix months were to intervene before the commencement of its operation, full time would have been given for a mutual explanation and compromiſe. The Britiſh majority in the Senate of Congreſs rejected this propoſal, ſo cheap, ſo ſimple, and ſo deciſive. Jay, that executioner of his country, was, at the ſame time, diſpatched to Britain. He there, by a clauſe of the treaty, tied up the hands of America, and deſtroyed all chance of adopting ſuch a reſource in future. The fifteenth article has theſe words. Nor ſhall any prohibition be impoſed on the exportation or importation of any articles to or from the territories of the two nations reſpectively, which ſhall not equally extend to all other nations. Thus we cannot prohibit the importation of Engliſh manufactures, without alſo prohibiting thoſe of all other nations; and that is impracticable.

This article has the appearance of reciprocity, but not the ſubſtance. Suppoſing that England ſhould entirely prohibit all intercourſe with this country, her loſs would be an hundred times greater than ours. The deſolation of her Weſt-Indies would be the firſt conſequence, and a general bankruptcy among her Weſt-Indian merchants, and her manufacturers for the American market, would be the ſecond. On the contrary, the inconvenience and loſs to the United States would be very ſupportable. We ſhould begin to manufacture more among ourſelves. American produce would ſoon find other markets. Other nations would learn to ſupply our wants, while the artiſts of England would croud over to this country in queſt of employment. More commmanding ground could not be deſired. Yet Jay jumped from his eminence to waddle in the ſlough of pretended reciprocity, to betray every principle of official truſt, and to trample on every atom of his inſtructions. The reader will infallibly abhor ſuch ignorance or treachery, unleſs he has been a Britiſh commiſſary during the laſt war, or a certificat correſpondent with James Reynolds ſince it, unleſs he has a ſuit of compenſation depending at London, unleſs he expects to be made an officer in the cuſtoms, a director of the mint, a chaplain to Congreſs, a printer to the Senate, or an ambaſſador to Berlin; or, unleſs he has twenty bills lying proteſted at the bank of the United States, and his credit ſticking together by the nod of Mr. Thomas Willing.

While the reſolution of the 21ſt of April, 1794, was under debate, and frequently before that time, in the ſame ſeſſion, the gentlemen on the oppoſite ſide of the queſtion, ſaid that the Britiſh would not feel the want of our commerce, becauſe the three millions ſterling of exports from Britain to North-America, formed only one-ſixth part of her total exports. This reaſoning reſembled that of ſuppoſing, that a perſon worth ſix thouſand dollars, will not regret the loſs of one thouſand, becauſe he has five times that number behind; or, if you will, that a man would not feel the amputation of one of his fingers, if the other ſeven are ſafe and ſound. Another circumſtance muſt be attended to. One-half of the commerce of Britain had been deſtroyed by the ravages of the French war, ſo that the loſs of American commerce would then have been equal to the annihilation of one third or fourth part of her whole foreign trade.

What effect theſe reſolutions, if adopted, were likely to produce in Britain, may be perfectly aſcertained upon the authority of Dr. Adam Smith, who was, on a point of this kind, a judge above exception. The paſſage now to be quoted, is of conſiderable length, but it ſerves to illuſtrate the preſent ſubject ſo completely, that an apology would be unneceſſary for its inſertion. After deſcribing ſome of the numerous inconveniences which Britain met with, in attempting to monopolize the commerce of her North-American colonies, the doctor proceeds thus:

Her commerce, inſtead of running in a great number of ſmall channels, has been taught to run principally in one great channel. But the whole ſyſtem of her induſtry and commerce has thereby been rendered leſs ſecure; the whole ſtate of her body politic leſs healthful, than it otherwiſe would have been. In her preſent condition, Britain reſembles one of thoſe unwholeſome bodies, in which ſome of the vital parts are overgrown, and which, upon that account, are liable to many dangerous diſorders, ſcarce incident to thoſe in which all the parts are more properly proportioned. A ſmall ſtop in that great blood-veſſel which has been artificially ſwelled beyond its natural dimenſions, and through which an unnatural proportion of the induſtry and commerce of the country has been forced to circulate, is very likely to bring on the moſt dangerous diſorders upon the whole body politic. The expectation of a rupture with the colonies, accordingly, has ſtruck the people of Britain with more terror than they ever felt for a Spaniſh armuda, or a French invaſion. It was this terror, whether well or ill-grounded, which rendered the repeal of the ſtamp act, among the merchants, at leaſt, a popular meaſure. In a total excluſion 〈◊〉 the colony market, was it to laſt only for a few years, 〈◊〉 greater part of our merchants uſed to fancy that they foreſaw an entire ſtop to their trade; the greater part of our maſter manufacturers, the entire ruin of their buſineſs; and the greater part of our workmen, an end of their employment. A rupture with any of our neighbours upon the continent, though likely too to occaſion ſome ſtop or interruption in the employment of ſome of all theſe different orders of people, is foreſeen, however, without any ſuch general emotion. The blood, of which the circulation is ſtopt in ſome of the ſmaller veſſels, eaſily diſgorges itſelf into the greater, without occaſioning any dangerous diſorder; but, when it is ſtopt in any of the greater veſſels, convulſions, apoplexy, or death, are the immediate and unavoidable conſequences. If but one of theſe overgrown manufactures, which by means either of bounties or of the monopoly of the home and colony markets, have been artificially raiſed up to an unnatural height, finds ſome ſmall ſtop or interruption in its employment, it frequently occaſions a mutiny and diſorder alarming to government, and embarraſſing even to the deliberations of the legiſlature. How great, therefore, would be the diſorder and confuſion, it was thought, which muſt neceſſarily be occaſioned by a ſudden and entire ſtop in the employment of ſo great a proportion of our principal manufacturers!

In deſpite of this overwhelming narrative, members of Congreſs could ſtand up and make ſpeeches, by the hour, to prove, that an interruption of her commerce with America would not be ſeriouſly regarded by Britain. If ſhe was ſo deeply afraid of America in 1766, when victorious, and at peace with all the world, her alarm would, of courſe, be vaſtly greater in 1794, when her public debt had doubled ſince the former time; when her armies on the continent were extirpated; when her manufacturing claſſes were already ſtarving by thouſandsA letter from a merchant in Mancheſter to his friend in this city, written about that time, obſerved, that, if it was not for America, they would have wanted BREAD TO THEIR MOUTHS.; and when her trade to the United States was computed to be at twice the amount of what it had been twenty years before. This turn of circumſtances went directly in favour of America. In 1766, England was more deeply alarmed than ſhe ha • • een by the Spaniſh armada. In 1794, her tremor would have been ten times greater, as a man dipt up to the chin, ſtands in more hazard of drowning, than when the ſtream only wets his ancle.

The exports from Britain to America, were, in 1794, about three millions ſterlingOn the 18th of April, 1796, Pitt ſaid, in the Houſe of Commons, that the total exports of Britain, amounted to twenty-four millions ſterling; and in 1795, to twenty-ſeven millions, two hundred and ſeventy thouſand pounds ſterling.; being, as above ſtated, equal to about a ſixth part of her exported manufactures. Let us ſuppoſe that every manufacturer in Britain requires fifteen pounds ſterling per annum to ſupport him; and that one-half of the price of the commodities exported from Britain to America conſiſts in the wages of their labour. Here then we have abſtracted from the fund of ſubſiſtence for the labouring part of the people of Britain, ONE MILLION AND FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS STERLING. Of theſe manufacturers, a conſiderable number muſt be married, and have families of children. It may ſeem ſtrange in America, but it is abſolutely true, that in Britain, or at leaſt in Scotland, a journeyman manufacturer has raiſed his family on ſix ſhillings ſterling a week, which is only fifteen pounds twelve ſhillings per annum. Let us compute then that one-fourth part of the hundred thouſand manufacturers above ſtated, are married, and that each has three children. This eſtimate gives us two hundred thouſand people reduced to beggary at a ſingle ſtroke. We muſt likewiſe take into the account, that many thouſands of Britiſh tradeſmen depend entirely for their ſubſiſtence upon the cuſtom of thoſe two hundred thouſand people; ſo that the whole number deprived of employment may be conjectured at two hundred and fifty thouſand. To this we muſt add the deſtruction of revenue, the confuſion, alarm, and bankruptcy of merchants, and the fall of the ſtocks, which muſt be the neceſſary conſequence, and then let any body ſay, whether the loſs of the commerce of America muſt not be a very ſerious object to Britain.

This act, prohibiting the importation of Britiſh goods, was loſt in the Senate, by the caſting vote of Mr. John Adams. All the advantages that it would have produced, have been thrown away, and all the miſchiefs attending Jay's treaty have been originally cauſed by the fatal rejection of the vice-preſident. The advocates againſt the prohibition diſcovered a great want of information, of integrity, or of judgment. There cannot be a plainer poſition than that now before us. Adam Smith was, perhaps, the beſt informed political writer that Britain ever had. He affirmed, that an excluſion from the United States would affright her more effectually than a Spaniſh armada, or a French invaſion. The Adamites denied all this; and their ignorance, their factious ſpirit, or their treachery, has coſt American trade at leaſt ſeven or eight millions of dollars. The conſtant cry was, that the Britiſh would declare war. Some weeks before that time, when Madiſon's reſolutions were debated, general Smith aſked one of theſe bawlers, what made him apprehenſive that England would attack us? He replied, that he had no apprehenſions of ſuch a thing, but ſome of his neighbours were afraid of it, and he wanted to pleaſe them. General Smith told this in Congreſs, on the 27th of May, 1797. This would be one of thoſe impoſtors who went home and told their conſtituents, that Madiſon wanted to deſtroy the government.

Among the ridiculous arguments advanced in Congreſs for accepting the Britiſh treaty, one was, that it would prevent the renewal of an Indian war. On the 29th of April, 1796, Mr. Dayton ſaid, that, by rejecting Jay's treaty, it might be calculated upon as inevitable, and the conſequent expenditure of fourteen hundred thouſand dollars annually; but in carrying the treaty into effect, and poſſeſſing the (Weſtern) poſts with the troops, they ſhould be free from any danger of a ſerious rupture with the ſavagesBache's Debates, vol. ii. p. 347.. That the Weſtern poſts would firmly bridle the Indians, was, at that time, a received opinion.

Dr. Ames took up the ſubject in a higher ſtrain. The tories were ready to ſpit in any man's face who did not admire his ſpeech on that occaſion. On the Indian war, he ſets out as follows:

On this theme, my emotions are unutterable: if I could find words for them, if my powers bore any proportion to my zeal, I would ſwell my voice to ſuch a note of remonſtrance, it ſhould reach every log-houſe beyond the mountains. I would ſay to the inhabitants, wake you from your falſe ſecurity. Your cruel dangers, your more cruel apprehenſions are ſoon to be renewed: the wounds, yet unhealed, are to be torn open again. In the day time, your path through the woods will be ambuſhed. The darkneſs of midnight will glitter with the blaze of your dwellings. —You are a father—the blood of your ſons ſhall fatten your cornfield.—You are a mother— the war-whoop ſhall wake the ſleep of the cradle. On this ſubject, you need not ſuſpect any deception on your feelings. It is a ſpectacle of horror which cannot be over drawn. If you have nature in your hearts, it will ſpeak a language compared with which all I have ſaid or can ſay, will be poor and frigid.

Will it be whiſpered that the treaty has made me a new champion for the protection of the frontiers? It is known that my voice as well as vote have been uniformly given in conformity with the ideas I have expreſſed. Protection is the right of the frontiers; it is our duty to give it.

All this is very fine. The concluſion implies an internal doubt in the mind of the orator that he was liable to the cha • ge of inconſiſtency. Indeed, on the 6th of June, 1794, Dr. Ames ſpoke thus, in Congreſs: I am not one of thoſe who think that there are too many Indians, any more than too many wild beaſts. The one may, by ſkilful management, be rendered as harmleſs as the other. In 1794, when the doctor uſed this language, he thought only of injuries that Indians have ſuffered from white people. In April, 1796, he thought only of injuries that white people ſuffer from Indians. In the latter inſtance, Dr. Ames proved more than he foreſaw. A refuſal to appropriate would not have juſtified England in breaking the peace of 1783; and hence her ſtimulating the ſavages to murder, would have been an act of the blackeſt perfidy. The doctor looked upon this conſequence as certain. Jacobiniſm can do nothing worſe. This proves the folly of thinking Frenchmen more barbarous than Britons. The doctor ſays, that his voice as well as vote has been uniform. NO. He was an advocate for that ſyſtem, which ended with refuſing payment to the militia of Tenneſſee, for having done their duty. Yet the capture of Nickajack was nearly as important as Wayne's victory on the banks of the Miamis. Of the former, nobody ſpeaks. For the latter, America has rung with exultation.

Again, if the Indians are ready to break a treaty, when a governor of Canada ſhall bid them do ſo, we have certainly too many of ſuch neighbours, and ſyſtematic treachery makes it hardly worth while to negociate with them. This picture of perſidy does not agree with what Dr. Ames had ſaid only a few minutes before. I ſee no exception to the reſpect that is paid among nations to the law of good faith. If there are caſes in this enlightened period when it is violated, there are none where it is decried. It is the philoſophy of politics, the religion of governments. It is obſerved by barbarians. A whiff of tobacco-ſmoke, or a ſtring of beads, gives not merely binding force, but ſanctity to treaties.

By the ſubſequent account of the gentleman himſelf, the beads and tobacco were both to be forgotten at the nod of England. No exception to the reſpect to the law of good faith! Modern hiſtory is as full as it can be of the violation of good faith. The Britiſh orders of the 8th of June, and 6th of November, 1793, and 8th of January, 1794, were all breaches of treaty. The extravagance of the or •• r's ſtyle is too evident for detection. He then puts the ſuppoſition that England refuſes to execute the treaty, after we have done every thing to carry it into effect.—What would you ſay, or rather what would you not ſay? He then, in a ſtrain of lofty declamation, tells what might be ſaid! The only remark worth making would be that a blackamoor cannot eaſily waſh himſelf white; and that no man verſant in hiſtory would feel ſurprize at ſuch national baſeneſs. Dr. Ames makes repeated reference to the ſtates of Barbary, as unſuſpected of breaking treaties. A ſhort hiſtory of Algiers, printed ſome years ago by Mr. Mathew Carey, will give him a precious catalogue of ſuch matters. Jay's treaty itſelf is regarded by the French as a violation of our treaty with them. The remarks on this ſpeech may be ſhortened, for the treaty has de facto died. This can be proved in a few words.

There is no poſition better ſettled, than that the breach of any article of a treaty by one party, gives the other an option to conſider the whole treaty as annulledCamillus, No. viii.. Now, as England is on the verge of a general bankruptcy, our merchants have no chance to recover their five millions of dollars. This was the temptation for accepting the treaty; and, when that viſion has vaniſhed, Congreſs, by the admiſſion of Camillus himſelf, are at liberty to declare it void. They could do nothing better.

His majeſty's moſt faithful ſubjects in Philadelphia toil hard to prove that England will recover her credit. The preſent diſtreſs hath not come of a ſudden. In April, 1796, a committee of merchants waited on Mr. Pitt. At this interview it came out that the bank of England had advanced fourteen millions ſterling for government, Sixteen millions ſterling of caſh and bullion had, within three years, been exported from the kingdom. Gambling in the funds had been excited by Pitt's exorbitant premiums to ſuch a pitch, that twenty, thirty, and forty per cent were given for money to carry it on. Manufacturers or merchants could no longer borrow money at five per cent, ſo that ſober trade was not to be ſupported. All theſe were the ſtrongeſt cauſes and ſymptoms which could be conceived of approaching ruin. France hath only to reſt on her arms, to exclude, as ſhe hath done, Engliſh commerce from almoſt every port in Europe, and then to permit England to proceed with an annual loan of twenty millions ſterling. Hence it is of little concern whether Britain profeſſedly ſtops payment in this year or the next. The event is certain. The delay is but like a fortnight's reſpite from the gibbet. The predictions of Gerald and Palmer have not been long unfulfilled; nor have their wrongs been long unavenged.

Recurring to Dr. Ames, we can now anſwer one of his queries. The articles ſtipulating the redreſs of our injuries by captures, are ſaid to be deluſive. By whom is this ſaid? By every body

Dr. Ames has been ſucceded in the fifth Congreſs by a diligent imitator. Of all that might have been ſpared in the repreſentative of Boſton we find a faithful copy. But from his comprehenſive knowledge, his pathetic vivacity, his acuteneſs of remark, his chaſte, yet luxuriant elegance of expreſſion, the honourable Harriſon Gray Otis of Maſſachuſetts keeps, and forever will keep, at an immeaſurable diſtance.

On the 1ſt of July, 1797, an amendment was propoſed in Congreſs to the ſtamp-duty bill. Twenty dollars were to be charged for a certificate of citizenſhip to an emigrant. On this occaſion, Mr. Otis made, as uſual, a ſpeech of conſiderable length. Mr. Loyd took an extenſive ſketch of it. But as the commodities of this orator are not much in demand, Mr. Loyd has not yet preſumed to incumber his newſpaper with the copy. Mr. Bache gave a ſhort account of it, and as Mr. Otis has complained bitterly of the negligence of reporters, the following extract of the moſt ſhining paſſages has been here inſerted, cum notis variorum.

Mr Otis defended the ſtamp duty. We did not want population now. [The United ſtates contain above a million of ſquare miles, and about five millions of people. Making large allowance for water, and for uſeleſs land, their territory could with much eaſe accommodate twenty times their preſent number of people. An immenſe wilderneſs beyond the Miſſiſſippi remains alſo to be filled up. We need an increaſe of numbers more than any other nation. It is momentous to our political ſafety. In the A. B. C. of American politics, Mr. Otis might have learned this leſſon.] He made ſome obſervations on the relative manners of Europe and this country. He could not agree that there was this ſimilarity Mr. Gallatin had ſaid that we were in fact an European nation, that the manners of the people, on both ſides of the water, were eſſentially the ſame., at leaſt in the preſent diſtracted ſtate of Europe; when morality and religion, and every veſtige of what was great and amiable, was endeavoured to be ſwept from the ſurface of the earth. [In ſome parts of Europe, in Portugal and Ruſſia, for example, the human character is degraded by deſpotiſm. But in every country where any degree of freedom can be found, the people of Europe will bear, in all reſpects, a compariſon with thoſe of America. How ſhould it be otherwiſe? The United States have become inhabited by a ſucceſſion of chips from the old block of European population. They have not been long enough in the New world to attain any important diſtinction of character. During this debate, an Iriſh repreſentative remarked to a ſtranger in the lobby, that nearly one fourth part of the members then preſent were natives of Europe. To the ſouth of New-England, at leaſt one half of the citizens are either emigrants from thence, or the ſons or grandſons of ſuch emigrants. As for the attempt to ſweep morality and religion, every veſtige of all that is great and amiable from the ſurface of the earth, this is only a round-about way of profeſſing that Mr. Otis is an enemy to the French revolution. Had he been born in due time, he would ſurely have reſiſted that of America; for the French had received at leaſt five millions of provocations, where the Americans could produce one. It is to be inferred that Mr. Otis laments the deſtruction of the Baſtile, the abolition of the Gabelle, the rack, the wheel, monarchy, nobility, and that utmoſt of abominations—an epiſcopal eſtabliſhment by law. He thinks that to let every man believe what creed, and employ what prieſt he pleaſes, is the way to ſweep religion from the earth. To deſtroy ariſtocracy is to deſtroy morality. This muſt be his meaning.] He wiſhed to place a bar in the way of the admiſſion of thoſe reſtleſs people who could not be tranquil and happy in their own country; thoſe who had unfurled the ſtandard of rebellion at home. He profeſſed an eſteem for ſome emigrants to this country; but he did not wiſh a horde of wild Iriſhmen to be let looſe upon us; who were now endeavouring to effect a revolution in their own country. He did not wiſh the introduction here of their revolutionary principles. He was willing to fraternize with thoſe emigrants who might be admitted among us now, but he wiſhed a bar placed to further migrations, and he did not think twenty dollars too much.

The term of wild, as here applied excluſively to Iriſhmen, is highly impertinent. In thoſe parts of Ireland where the peace and property of the ſubjects have formerly been protected, the general caſt of manners was fully as good as that in New-England. A great body of the people were however kept in a ſtate of inceſſant irritation by the preſſure of their landed ariſtocracy, and their blood-ſucking church of England hierarchy. Of theſe unfortunate victims it would be unfair to eſtimate the morals, till they ſhall enjoy a political ſyſtem, whereby induſtry is encouraged, and property ſecured. Fortune has never ſported more cruelly, than by ſubjecting that hoſpitable and generous nation to the monopolizing jealouſy, and the ſyſtematic barbarity of an Engliſh parliament. An Iriſh revolution is now expected, and in its triumphant iſſue, Ireland, ſpurning the yoke of hereditary tyrants, will aſſume her proper rank and dignity among the powers of Europe.

Thoſe, ſays Mr. Otis, who have unfurled the ſtandard of rebellion AT HOME. A gang of banditti from the town of Boſton began the American revolution, by unfurling the ſtandard of villainy. They wantonly deſtroyed three hundred and forty-two cheſts of tea, in preſence, and with the approbation of an immenſe crowd of ſpectators. The act of parliament for ſhutting up the port of Boſton, was the natural and ſuitable conſequence of that ſhameful tranſaction. The burning of the Gaſpee ſchooner, at Providence, in Rhode-Iſland, becauſe it obſtructed ſmuggling, was another wanton outrage, that muſt be reprobated by every man who is fit for living under a civilized government. The whole continent was dragged prematurely into war, to ſave the factious townſmen of Boſton from a chaſtiſement that ſome of them very highly deſerved. The friends of America in England, could no longer defend their proceedings. The cauſe of liberty was diſgraced and injured by the unbecoming inſolence of its advocates. The townſmen of Belfaſt have invaded no man's property. The burden of actual oppreſſion cruſhes them to the earth. The wrongs of America were chiefly in imagination. She was more lightly taxed than any other country in the world. If the people of New-England had behaved with equal moderation and dignity as thoſe of Virginia, it is likely enough that we might ſtill have been Britiſh colonies, and in a happy ſituation, without any revolution at all. When once the conteſt had begun, there could be no medium between independence and ſlavery, but that does not leſſen the extreme want of ſenſe and honeſty in burning the tea. It very ill becomes ſuch people to rail at reformers in Europe. The whole ſpeech proves that Mr. Otis is unworthy even to reſide in a free country, and infinitely more ſo to repreſent it. Nature intended him for a keeper of the Conciergerie, or a led captain to ſome prince of Wales. After all, Otis only betrayed the real ſentiments of his whoſe party; and under ſuch leaders, we cannot wonder at the contemptible and pitiable figure which the United States do at preſent make.

The unexpected length to which ſome articles in this volume are found to extend, has of neceſſity prevented the publication of others. This deviation from the firſt deſign is more fully explained in the preface. The following miſcellaneous remarks have, however, been inſerted, as a relief to the reader from the ſameneſs of political details. They refer to ſubjects of univerſal intereſt, and which, in the moſt expreſſive manner, demand reformation.

On Saturday, the 12th of March, 1796, two ſtage coaches, ſet out at ſix o'clock in the morning, from Frenchtown for Newcaſtle. The diſtance is only ſeventeen miles, and yet the drivers did not reach the latter place till twelve o'clock. They took ſix hours to travel a ſpace, which a healthy, active man would have walked over with eaſe, in four and an half. The road through which the coaches had to go, was very tolerable. One of the drivers, when near Newcaſtle, attempted a kind of quicker pace than uſual. The wretched harneſſing inſtantly gave way; the two foremoſt horſes broke looſe, and ſet off at full gallop: one of them was near breaking his neck.

When the paſſengers arrived at Newcaſtle, the wind was fair, the tide was making, and the boat for Philadelphia was ready and waiting; yet they were detained an hour and an half. The only conceivable reaſon for this delay was, that the innkeeper might ſcrub the paſſengers out of the price of a dinner.

At laſt the boat got off, and with a fair wind came up within leſs than two miles of Glouceſter point; but the wind and tide failing, the veſſel was obliged to come to anchor. If ſhe had left Newcaſtle but an hour more early, ſhe might have come with eaſe to the wharf at Cheſnut-ſtreet, by ſix o'clock in the evening.

Seven or eight of the paſſengers, who were anxious to get forward, were obliged to pay half- • -dollar each to the ſailors to row them aſhore. If the owners of theſe boats are capable of ſhame, which is extremely doubtful, they muſt bluſh at ſuch multiplied inſtances of negligence, inſolence and extortion.

Another tide was expected to begin about one o'clock in the morning. The maſter, whoſe name is Mitchell, ſate up, drinking grog, playing at cards with ſome paſſengers, and making an intolerable noiſe, till the hour above-mentioned; he then went to bed. About four in the morning, ſome of his men came down to tell him that the tide was ebbing, and that the boat was run aground. It was a long time before they could make him underſtand them.

Finally, the boat came up to Arch-ſtreet wharf on Sunday evening, with the tide, having performed a paſſage in twenty-eight hours, which, with the utmoſt eaſe, might have been executed in ſix.

The above appeared in a Baltimore newſpaper. Some of the parties felt themſelves angry, and ſaid ſo; but they did not attempt to contradict the ſtatement, for it was only a ſpecimen of their daily practice.

Extract of a letter from a gentleman in Philadelphia, to his friend in Baltimore, dated 25th of April, 1796.

In the Maryland Journal of the 28th of March laſt, I obſerve an account of an expedition from Frenchtown to Newcaſtle in the ſtage coach, and from the latter place to Philadelphia by the ſtage boat. The writer complains that the coach took ſix hours to drive ſeventeen miles over a tolerable road; that the boat ſpent twenty-eight hours on a voyage up the Delaware, which might have been ended in ſix hours; that Mitchell, the maſter of the boat, got drunk; that his ſailors fleeced ſome of the paſſengers, &c. &c.

This malcontent muſt undoubtedly be a foreigner, otherwiſe he never would have attempted to grumble, for two ſolid reaſons. Firſt, becauſe, with a few exceptions, brutality, negligence and filching, are as naturally expected by people accuſtomed to travelling in America, as a mouth, a noſe, and two eyes, are looked for in a man's face. Secondly, becauſe legal redreſs, and individual reformation, are equally hopeleſs. The former would require ſuch a waſte of time and money, with ſo extreme an uncertainty of the iſſue, that no perſon of common prudence ever thinks of it. As for the ſecond, there are exceptions, both as to landlords and drivers, between this place and Baltimore; and others may be found in different parts of the country. But the blanks in this lottery are more numerous than the prizes; and to hope reformation or amendment of character, among the worthleſs, would be the moſt viſionary of all viſions.

Thus ſtanding the caſe, this gentleman, inſtead of grumbling, ſhould rather be very thankful to have rode from Frenchtown to Newcaſtle, without getting his limbs broke, and his trunk, if he had one with him, ſhattered to pieces, or pitched a yard deep into the mire. Mitchell, the boatman from Newcaſtle to Philadelphia, did not endanger the lives of his paſſengers. He only kept them about five times longer than was neceſſary on the water. If his ſailors took half-a-dollar a piece for rowing ſome of the paſſengers on ſhore, they ſhould have been very grateful that the boat was not overſet. Permit me to relate ſome of my own trials and troubles of this nature.

In June 1794, I had occaſion to go to New-York. Two rival coaches came near the town of Brunſwick, at the ſame time. The one in which I was, got the ſtart of the other by a few yards; and entered the town at full gallop. I expected every moment when the coach would break down, or ſome of the horſes fall dead under the fatigue. Moſt of our paſſengers were as fond of this triumph as the driver himſelf, and did every thing in their power to encourage him to break their necks. At Elizabeth-town, a young lady, well mounted, came up behind us, and attempted to ride by. Six or eight of us inſtantly raiſed a halloo, frightened her horſe, and almoſt unſeated her. On attempting to expoſtulate, I ſoon found that I might preſently be treated ſtill worſe than ſhe was. The whole cargo roared out, What? Suffer any body to take the road of us? They reviled the lady in the moſt ſhameful ſtile. One of them I learned to be a merchant in New-York, and a man not of an obſcure ſituation. A ſecond was a quaker. I tried to argue with him on the principles of his ſociety, on the vileneſs and cowardice of hazarding the life or limbs of a fellow creature for ſuch a jockey piece of ettiquette. I had a ſurly anſwer, and was at the ſame time, taken up ſhort by a clergyman from the north of Ireland, who conſtantly kept himſelf in a ſtate of elevation during the laſt ſixty miles of our journey.

At New-York, I was lodged with two others, in a back room, on the ground floor. This was a dirty hole about three yards and an half ſquare.—What can be the reaſon for that vulgar hoggiſh cuſtom, common in America, of ſqueezing three, ſix, or eight beds into one room? No ſuch thing is ſeen in the Britiſh iſlands. Among genteel or decent people, every perſon has not only a bed, but even a room to himſelf, and very frequently locks the door.

The back yard, into which the window of our cell opened, was about ſix yards wide every way. Within this ſpace, and juſt oppoſite to our window ſtood a little brick kitchen, and cheek by jowl, an edifice of the moſt neceſſary nature. They were ſeparated by a brick partition about ſix or nine inches thick. The delicacy of this arrangement muſt ſtrike every perſon of ſuperior taſte. Having occaſion to viſit the temple, I found that the roof had tumbled in. It was about noon, and a very ſultry day, and before I could get out again, I had well nigh fainted with the moſt horrible ſtench that ever aſſailed my noſtrils.

If the continent of America were only ten miles broad, there might be ſome excuſe for jamming buildings together in ſuch a diſguſting, aukward and dangerous way. I call it diſguſting, as the ſcene juſt deſcribed might turn the ſtomach of a Hottentot. It is aukward, for when theſe receptacles of filth come to be emptied, matters are often ſo badly laid out, that the only paſſage to get the naſtineſs away, is through the very middle of the houſe itſelf. Such is not univerſally the mode of purgation, but it occurs, in too many inſtances. Now it is ſurely aukward to be thus, almoſt in a literal ſenſe, entrenched up to the teeth in human excrement; and it is the more extraordinary, as the Americans are highly and juſtly commended for the general cleanlineſs of their domeſtic economy. Can any body wonder that a city, under the fortieth degree of latitude, ſhould be viſited by the yellow fever, when a part of its inhabitants are permitted to render it a centre of putrefaction? The danger of ſqueezing houſes together like herrings in a barrel, is readily ſeen in caſes of fire. A houſe burnt down laſt winter in Philadelphia near the corner of Arch-ſtreet; and ſuch was its ſituation that it was either almoſt, or entirely inacceſſible to fire-engines. I know a city in Europe larger than Philadelphia, that did not ſuffer ſo much by fire in fifteen years, as I have repeatedly ſeen the latter do in a ſingle evening. Excuſe this diſgreſſion. I now return to my travels.

In coming back from New-York to this city, I preferred going by water.—The maſter of a ſtage-boat, which took us over an arm of the ſea to New-Jerſey, gave an eminent proof of attention to his duty. He ſuffered our boat to be very nearly run down on a ſmooth calm ſea, in broad day light, by a veſſel of much larger bulk than ours, that was coming up in full ſail. At laſt, when within perhaps twenty yards of her, the ſhouting of her crew awaked him from his torpor; but after all, we miſſed only by a few feet, a ſtroke that inevitably would have ſent us to the bottom. Thus were the lives of twenty or thirty people brought into the moſt imminent riſk, becauſe the boat was entruſted with a blockhead, who had not common ſenſe enough to drive a dung cart.

At Amboy, part of our baggage was forgot, notwithſtanding the injunctions which we gave, and the aſſurances which we received, that the whole would be carefully packed. So great was the politeneſs of the houſe, that though we had paid for ſeats over-night, the coach was on the point of ſetting off without giving notice to five or ſix of us, who were in conſiderable danger of being left behind.

In our paſſage acroſs Jerſey, the drivers did every thing in their power to kill the horſes, by making them go at a hand gallop, for ſix or ſeven miles together, without ſtopping, over a deep ſandy road, and in a very hot day. If the owners of theſe coaches had the leaſt ſenſe even of their own intereſt, they would flog ſuch barbarous villains, in place of paying them wages.

At Bordenton, we went into a ſecond boat, where we met with very ſorry accommodation. This was about four o'clock in the afternoon. We had about twenty miles down the Delaware to reach Philadelphia. The captain, who had a moſt provoking tongue, was a boy about eighteen years of age. He, and a few companions, diſpatched a dozen or eighteen bottles of porter. We ran three different times againſt other veſſels that were coming up the ſtream. The women and children lay all night on the bare boards of the cabin floor. A little boy, one of the paſſengers from New-York, lingered at the brink of the grave, during ſeveral months, in conſequence of this mode of travelling. We reached Arch-ſtreet wharf, about eight o'clock on the Wedneſday morning, having been about ſixteen hours on a voyage of twenty miles. Compared to ſuch navigators as thoſe two, whom I have juſt given you an account of, even poor Mitchell was an Anſon or a Columbus.

Print the above. The preſs cannot do better than to deſcribe ſcenes of inhoſpitality and ſwindling that ſeem to have been reduced to a national ſyſtem, and that could hardly be expected in a Turkiſh caravanſera.

The buildings of Baltimore, New-York, and Philadelphia, contain in their conſtruction ſo great a proportion of wood, that if a flame has once fairly caught, nothing but the moſt vigorous efforts can ſtop its progreſs.

If the ground ſtory of one of our houſes catches fire, a family reſiding in the ſecond floor, may run the utmoſt hazard of being either ſuffocated by the ſmoke, or burnt alive in the flames. Their only ſnift is to jump out of the windows, at the expence of breaking half their bones, unleſs, which does not always happen, ladders are brought to their aſſiſtance. Even in that caſe, from hurry and confuſion, the riſk is conſiderable. In many places, houſes are heaped together in ſuch a manner, that in caſe of a fire, either exit or acceſs would be almoſt impracticable.

Every man who ſees a conflagration in an American town, muſt remark the facility with which it ſpreads from one roof to another. This is one of the great and leading cauſes, which make our fires ſo generally deſtructive. The firſt reaſon is, that our houſes are roofed with wood; and ſecondly, a moſt abſurd and ſtupid practice among houſe-carpenters, has multiplied the hazard in a ten-fold proportion.

When two houſes of equal height are built cloſe together, it is very common for the planks of each roof to croſs over and join with thoſe of the other. By this means, whenever one roof kindles, the flame, if it gets not oppoſition, from a water engine, ſpreads immediately to the next. In Dublin, the houſes are roofed with ſ • ate or tile, and each roof is ſeparated from others by a little parapet of ſtone, which is raiſed about nine or twelve inches above the roof, being in fact, the top of the partition wall between the two buildings. This incombuſtible boundary, makes the conflagration ſpread far more tardily than it otherwiſe would do.

When a traveller from Europe firſt lands in the United States, he is amazed at the blindneſs and infatuation of perſiſting in this practice of running the wooden roofs acroſs each other, a practice ſo pregnant with danger and ruin. A few years of habit reconcile him to it, and if he builds a houſe for himſelf, he is not ambitious of looking wiſer than other people.

We often hear of fires in London, and they are ſometimes very terrible. But London is about ſeven or eight times more populous than the five largeſt ſea-port towns in America put together, ſo that if we compare the number of buildings with the number of fires, in theſe different places, it will be found that thoſe of London are of much inferior frequency.

In Edinburgh, the houſes are far more durably built than either in London or Dublin. In the two latter, the walls are almoſt univerſally formed of brick, and the ſtairs of wood. In Edinburgh the walls and ſtairs are of ſtone, and every ſtair is arched quite round with ſtone, ſo firmly compacted, that the wooden parts of the houſe might be conſumed twenty times over, and the ſtair-caſe itſelf remain without damage. No wooden roof is to be ſeen; and the ſ • ate roofs are invariably ſeparated by a parapet wall. The reſult from this ſtyle of architecture is, that a well built houſe can hardly burn to the ground, on any account. A dirty chimney may kindle, cauſe occaſional alarm, and produce petty damage; but the burning out of a family is a very uncommon accident.

CHAPTER VIII.

Proceedings of Congreſs.—Affair of Randall and Whitney.—Plan of appointing a ſhort-hand writer.— Debates on the federal city.—Act of Appropriation.— Debates on the call for Jay's inſtructions.— Strange anſwer of the Preſident.—Appropriations for the Britiſh treaty.—Explanation of the conduct of Mr. Muhlenberg.—Singular multiplicity of petitions in favour of appropriating for the Britiſh treaty.—Riſe of the ſeſſion.

THE preliminary and miſcellaneous materials of this volume have ſwelled to a much greater bulk than had been foreſeen or deſigned. After all, many articles are left out, which were originally propoſed for inſertion. Though not always in a regular ſeries, yet a conſiderable part of the moſt important events of the preſent year, have been related. Our maritime hiſtory, that is to ſay, an account of the French and Britiſh depredations, for the firſt five months of 1796, have been compiled with tolerable completeneſs. The preſent chapter is to give a ſketch of the principal proceedings in Congreſs, during that part of their ſeſſion, which began with the 1ſt of January, 1796. Of many of the moſt intereſting ſpeeches, there have already been inſerted large ſpecimens.

The affair of Randall and Whitney belongs, moſt properly, to the year 1795. A full account of it has been recently given in the American Annual Regiſter. It is ſufficient here to ſay, that Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, did, in 1795, conceive a project, in conjunction with ſome Britiſh ſettlers in Canada, for purchaſing from Congreſs that ſpacious peninſula, which lies between lakes E • ie, Michigan, and Huron. It contains about twenty millions of acres. With this view they came to Philadelphia. Randall made ſome improper advances to certain members of the Houſe of Repreſentatives, in order to gain their intereſt. Having, no doubt, heard of the pilot-boat hiſtory, he waited among others, upon Dr. William Smith. He was apprehended, brought to the bar of the houſe, and for a ſhort time confined in priſon. Whitney had done nothing wrong. He was ſent to jail, and then diſmiſſed without examination. In this buſineſs, the houſe acted without regularity, without judgment, and without juſtice.

On the 19th of January, they took up the bill of appropriations for the current year. Mr. Williams moved to ſtrike out of it all the ſums allotted for the mint. After a very hard ſtruggle, the mint protracted its exiſtence, under the ſevereſt repobation of its management from every ſide of the houſe. The plan of this eſtabliſhment came from Mr. Hamilton. Large ſums had been expended to very little purpoſe. One deſign of it ſeems to have been the erection of a board of ſinecures for the ſake of increaſing the executive influence.

On the 29th of January, the houſe went into a committee of the whole, on a report from a committee that had been appointed to find out a ſhort hand writer who was to take down their debates at full length, and print them. A perſon had, for almoſt two preceding ſeſſions, attended the houſe to take minutes of its proceedings for the Philadelphia Gazette. In this wilderneſs of ſcribbling, many particulars tranſpired, which members were aſhamed to confeſs and afraid to deny. Four gentlemen were eſpecially irritated, viz. Theodore Sedgwick, Dr. William Smith, Samuel Dexter, and Robert Goodloe Harper. Meſſrs. Dexter and Sedgwick were not able to forgive the figure that they had made in the nobility debates, as well as on ſome other occaſions. Harper had diſputed with col. James White, delegate from Tenneſſee, on the defence of the South-Weſtern frontier; and the particulars, which were not to his advantage, had been related with unfeeling accuracy. But Dr. Smith, was by far more rancorous than the other gentlemen collectively. During the debate on Madiſon's reſolutions, Mr. Abraham Clarke of New-Jerſey ſaid, turning round to his right hand, and looking at Mr. William Smith, that a ſtranger in the gallery might ſuppoſe there was a Britiſh agent in the houſe. The nickname of Britiſh agent became general. Mr. Smith was burnt in effigy at Charleſton. On the riſing of the ſeſſion, he found it convenient to ſhun a meeting with his conſtituents by a tour for the enſuing ſummer, into the eaſtern ſtates. The blame of this whole ſcandal was imputed to the pen of the guilty taker of minutes for the Philadelphia Gazette. Influence was employed, but in vain, to procure his diſmiſſion. This occurred in January, 1794.

But on the 2d and 3d of March, 1795, the Repreſentatives met in the evening, and ſome of them being in a ſtate of unuſual vivacity, Smith and Dexter aroſe and complained bitterly of the minutes in the Philadelphia Gazette. Neither of them ſaid, becauſe neither of them durſt ſay, that any thing of their own had been miſrepreſented. The late Mr. Andrew Brown, knowing that miſtakes were unavoidable, had uniformly advertiſed that he was ready to receive and print corrections. The two members cloſed by propoſing a reſolution for appointing a committee to examine a ſtenographer. It paſt by twenty-eight votes againſt twenty-ſix.

All this was in March, 1795. On the 29th of January, 1796, Mr. Giles and Dr. Smith, who had been appointed a committee, reported in favour of Mr. Robertſon, a Scotſman, from Peterſburg, in Virginia. He demanded four thouſand dollars. Congreſs were to give him two thouſand nine hundred, and Mr. Brown undertook for the reſt of the ſum. The debates were to be printed firſt in his newſpaper. This would likewiſe anſwer the object of Mr. Smith in ſeparating Mr. Brown and his preſent reporter.

The plan was attacked from every part of the houſe, as impracticable, if uſeful; and as uſeleſs if it could be practicable. Mr. Baldwin ſaid that he had ſeen many printed ſketches of ſpeeches made in that houſe, and which he would not wiſh to ſee better done. Mr. Swanwick had often heard of miſcellaneous compoſitions, but the ſtrangeſt of all miſcellanies that he ever heard of, was for the legiſlature of a country to run ſhares with a printer in the publication of their proceedings. Even Mr. Sedgwick, alſo, oppoſed the plan. He honeſtly ſaid, that gentlemen were apt to get into a paſſion, and then they were angry at ſeeing their expreſſions in print. Mr. Nicholas was for the appointment. He complained that a perſon who came often to that houſe, and who had a very good ſtyle of writing, once publiſhed a ſpeech as his. The language was much better than I could have made, ſaid Mr. Nicholas, and here the member was miſtaken. The ſpeech did not contain a ſingle ſentiment that I would have diſowned, but ſtill the ſpeech was not mine. Mr. Harper attacked the debates in the Philadelphia Gazette, as diſgraceful to the country, and full of falſehoods. He prattled away at this rate, for a conſiderable time. He had never complained of inaccuracy but once; and his correction was immediately adopted. Mr. Harper poſſeſſes a readineſs of invention, and a confidence of affirmation, which the public eſtimate at their proper value.

Mr. Giles ſpoke in favour of the report; but he ſeemed to loſe courage on finding that a large majority in the houſe entirely diſapproved of the plan. He expreſſed regret at having been concerned in it. As an excuſe, he complained, for the firſt time, of the inaccuracy of the debates. He had never before dropt a hint of that nature. The preſumption is, that it was now brought forward to help him out with a lame argument. He felt evident chagrin at finding himſelf entangled in this prodigal and abſurd project. The committee roſe without a diviſion. On the 2d of February, 1796, the ſubject was diſcharged by a reſolution of the houſe. Mr. Robertſon had come ſome hundreds of miles, from a lucrative employment, at the particular deſire of the ſpecial committee, and had ſtaid in Philadelphia waiting on this buſineſs, at a conſiderable expence. He was diſmiſſed without compenſation. The houſe ought at leaſt to have paid the charges of his journey.

On the 8th of January, the Preſident had ſent a meſſage to Congreſs. It incloſed a memorial from the commiſſioners appointed for inſpecting the buildings at the federal city. The object was, to obtain a loan of money, under the ſanction of government, in order to complete the public buildings at that place. The loan was to be ſecured on the public property in the city. The United States were to pledge themſelves that, in caſe of the property proving inadequate for diſcharging the loan, government was to make good the deficiency.

A committee was appointed to report on this meſſage. After ſeveral diſcuſſions, a bill reſpecting it paſſed the Houſe of Repreſentatives, on the 31ſt of March, 1796. The Preſident was thereby authoriſed to borrow three hundred thouſand dollars on the plan above ſtated. The bill went through, by ſeventy-two votes againſt twenty-one. Thus a freſh bliſter is applied to the back of our national debt.

Mr. Coit, Mr. Sitgreaves, Mr. Havens, and Mr. Swanwick, did themſelves the honour of oppoſing this annihilation of the public money; for, that theſe three hundred thouſand dollars will finally come out of the federal treaſury, and never more return to it, is tolerably certain.

Mr. Coit ſaid, that, between three and four hundred thouſand dollars have already been expended; and, as he conceived, to what was worſe than no purpoſe. Ninety-ſeven thouſand dollars had been laid out on the Preſident's houſe, and it was eſtimated that nearly as much more would be wanted to complete it. When finiſhed, he conceived that a houſe, which would coſt only fifty thouſand dollars, would better anſwer the purpoſe. About eighty thouſand dollars had been expended on the capitol, and yet, progreſs was ſcarcely made beyond the foundation. He expected many future and heavy applications to the public treaſury for thoſe buildings, which he feared would be a laſting monument of the pride and folly of this country.—Ninety-ſeven thouſand dollars for a preſidential palace, that is not yet more than half completed! Thus the whole building will coſt at leaſt two hundred thouſand dollars. If this is not deplorable waſte of money, we ſhould be happy to learn what name it deſerves? Indeed, unleſs among the parties immediately intereſted in forwarding this houſe, there can hardly be two opinions about it. The abſurdity is too enormous to be endured with tranquility by any man, unleſs his ideas are adulterated by ſelf-intereſt, by prejudice, by the horror of being left in a minority, or by ſome other petty motive unconnected with the common exerciſe of his underſtanding. The capitol is another ſuperfluous edifice, that, as came out in the debates, has already ſunk eighty thouſand dollars, and is ſcarcely raiſed beyond its foundation. Such things are encouraged to go on, while our moſt excellent of all governments can hardly raiſe money to pay the very intereſt of the debts which it is annually contracting. It is not a ſeaſon to varniſh the poop, when the wind is rending the ſhrouds, when the ſea is burſting the ſeams, and driving in the cabin windows.

Mr. Sedgwick, in the debate on the 25th of February declared, with a convenient rotundity of aſſertion, that accommodations are to be made for government without any expence to the public treaſury. It is certain that they will be erected at a very enormous expence, which muſt come in ſome ſhape from the purſes of the people. Every newſpaper is occaſionally filled with advertiſements about the Waſhington lottery. This is a tax on the public. In Europe it is univerſally agreed, that a lottery is the moſt ruinous of all methods for raiſing money, and, at the ſame time, the moſt injurious to the morals of the people. When we hear Mr. Sedgwick ſay, that theſe public buildings are to be raiſed without expence to the public, one might gueſs that, like the palace in an Arabian tale, they were to riſe by enchantment.

It is amazing that any gentleman can ſtand up in Congreſs, and talk in ſuch a way. Nay, Mr. Sedgwick went further. He ſaid that the more magnificent theſe buildings were, ſo much the better. If they exceeded the ſplendour of the palaces of Europe, Americans ought to be grateful. It is highly wrong for any legiſlature to encourage, among its citizens, a taſte for gambling. The lottery for the federal city does this in a conſiderable degree; it explains, what Mr. Coit juſtly ſaid, that between three and four hundred thouſand dollars have been expended to what is worſe than no purpoſe.

Mr. Sedgwick may rant as much as he pleaſes, about the gratification that Americans muſt feel in contemplating the completion, and magnificence of theſe buildings in the federal city. A man with chaſte ideas of political economy, and of national freedom, will conſider them as an equal outrage on the one and the other. The pyramids of Egypt, the amphitheatre of Titus, the pillar of Trajan, and a thouſand other edifices of a ſimilar deſcription, were durable and inſulting teſtimonials of the ſlavery of mankind, with an impreſſion more forcible than the pen or the pencil can convey. They atteſted, that the property and induſtry of millions of people had been ſacrificed to glut the caprice and vanity of a ſingle man. And who or what was this man? Some jockey king, or cut throat emperor, who, if ſtript of a little brief authority, would, uſually, have been one of the moſt inſignificant of his ſpecies. But it is needleſs to enter into general declarations, or appeal to the mournful evidence of Rome and Egypt. The facts admitted in Congreſs ſpeak with ſufficient diſtinctneſs.

If the money had been laid out on a canal between Newcaſtle and Frenchtown, or on a high road between Philadelphia and Baltimore, or in penſions, to ſome of the poor old ſoldiers, who ſold their certificates for half a crown in the pound, there might be ſome conſolation. The caſh had, to be ſure, been raiſed in a bad way, but its expenditure had anſwered ſome uſeful end; and, though no man of ſenſe would ever have been highly pleaſed by ſeeing the rapid ſale of lottery tickets, yet the laudable application of the money, muſt have ſerved as an emolient to the ulcer.

It is hard to ſay what was the original object of founding this federal city, or what benefit it could be ſuppoſed to anſwer to the country in general. The human faculties are as clear on the banks of the Delaware as on thoſe of the Potomac. The Preſident had already a good houſe in Philadelphia, for which his very large ſalary, of twenty-five thouſand dollars, well enables him to pay a ſuitable rent. The apartments wherein Congreſs at preſent aſſemble, in the ſame city, are as roomy and elegant as can be deſired. Philadelphia has a centrical ſituation, and an atmoſphere at leaſt as healthy as the intended new metropolis. We aſk then, what could be the uſe or object of theſe buildings? Or why did a government, encumbered with a debt of ſeventy millions of dollars, plunge its citizens into this unfathomable pit of architecture and of lotteries? An old London bookſeller uſed to ſay, that the title page was half of the battle. In like manner, the name of this city has produced more than half the patience with which its expenditures have been endured.

Endured is the proper word, for this plan has never excited popular enthuſiaſm. It hardly could. Is there not already in the union a city good enough to accommodate Congreſs? No other city on the continent can expect the ſmalleſt advantage from this removal, and every one of them feels a certain loſs. On the ſame principle, ſaid Mr, Swanwick, the houſe might guarantee loans for all the cities in the union? Why a loan for the city of Waſhington in particular? Was there any reaſon why the different cities in the union ſhould be taxed for that city? He might have ſubjoined, is there any juſtice in ſuch a tax? If Waſhington becomes an eminent commercial place, Alexandria, or Norfolk, or Baltimore, will not be one farthing the better for it, but they may chance to be the worſe.

It is highly expedient that the legiſlature of a nation ſhould aſſemble to do buſineſs in one of the largeſt of its cities. The reaſon is obvious. The eyes of the people are thus more effectually opened to its proceedings; and a legiſlature is much more ſafely to be entruſted when under ſuch inſpection.

The ſpirit of liberty, the penetration to diſcern and fortitude to reſiſt deſpotiſm, have often been found to beat higher in the metropolis of a limited government than in any other place. Thus Charles the firſt was blamed for calling the long parliament at London, where his tyranny was deteſted, and conſequently where parliament were ſure of firm and effectual ſupport. His friends regretted that it had not met at Oxford; the miſtake coſt his majeſty the loſs of his head.

The French revolution began at Paris. The true character of government was much better underſtood there, by the common people, than by the ſame claſs in moſt other quarters of the kingdom. At Amſterdam, alſo, oppoſition to the corrupting influence of the ſtadtholder was always ſtronger than any where elſe. A very large city is, in almoſt every reſpect, a great nuiſance. Yet, as it is a bad wind which blows good to nobody, a ſubordinate advantage may often be traced in the midſt of a political evil.

Such immenſe capitals as London, Paris, or even Amſterdam, cannot ſubſiſt in America, for centuries to come, but if they did ſo, many reaſons would recommend that the ſeat of government ſhould alſo reſide in ſuch a ſituation. With ſo many obſervers to watch its motions, and whoſe very numbers inſpire them with peculiar confidence, the inſolence or corruption of office is more likely to be detected and expoſed than on a more limited field of enquiry. The preſent trifling oppoſition that the abandoned miniſter of England finds in the Houſe of Commons, would, by this time, have moſt likely dwindled altogether away, if the ſpirit of Sheridan and others had not been ſupported by their ſituation in the boſom of a numerous party of the citizens of London.

Theſe hints tend to point out the propriety of retaining the reſidence of the federal legiſlature in one of the larger cities of the union. On the ſtreets of New-York or Philadelphia, every member of Congreſs meets with fellow citizens as independent and well-informed as himſelf, and who, without ceremony, will tell him what they think of his conduct. In ſuch a place he has a thouſand opportunities of learning public feelings, which he never could acquire in a ſequeſtered deſart, like the paper-built city of Waſhington, even ſuppoſing that he were to read all the newſpapers in the United States. We have at this time about an hundred and twenty newſpapers, if not more; and hence, that taſk is, in itſelf, impoſſible. It is by mixing with mankind that you learn how to legiſlate for them. In the multitude of counſellors there is ſafety, ſaid the wiſe man; and in a limited ſenſe, the maxim holds good. It is only by a colliſion of various ſentiments, opinions, habits of thinking and views of life, the light of truth is finally to be ſtruck out.

There is a large houſe in Philadelphia which the Aſſembly of Pennſylvania had deſigned for the Preſident. Mr. Swanwick, in a debate about this federal city bill, noticed that twenty thouſand dollars were granted to build it; but nearly twice the ſum had been aſked for it ſince, and the houſe is not yet finiſhed.

Veterans who fought battles for America, were glad to accept, as all the world knows, of half-a-crown in the pound for the arrears of their dear-bought wages. Hundreds of petitions are, in the courſe of every ſeſſion, preſented to Congreſs from miſerable objects of all ſorts, who were reduced to decrepitude and beggary in the continental ſervice. Government cannot relieve all theſe people, but ſtill if they promoted lotteries for that end, the money would be more honourably beſtowed than on a capitol, which has already coſt eighty thouſand dollars, though it is hardly viſible above ground!

As for the palace of the Preſident, the plan muſt have originated with ſomebody, who wanted to ſet up a political idol. A Preſident is the very laſt man in the community for whom the public ought to build a houſe, becauſe he has a ſalary five times larger than that of any other public officer in the union; and hence can afford better than other public officer to pay the rent of his houſe.

The money expended on palaces at the federal city, is abſolutely caſt away. The Preſident and Congreſs are already as well accommodated with lodgings as they need wiſh to be, or deſerve to be. There is no uſe for ſuch extravagant buildings. The raiſing of money by lotteries is the moſt pernicious reſource within the range of political inſanity. The erection of ſuch fabrics tends to excite a tone of ariſtocracy and of royalty, to which mankind are already but too much addicted.

Dr. Samuel Johnſon ſays, that to build is to be robbed. We cannot expect that houſes raiſed for a government will be carried on with more economy than thoſe of private perſons. Mr. CoitSee debate of the 31ſt of March, 1796. ſays, that the buildings at Waſhington have been commenced on an extravagant plan, and that he hopes the commiſſioners will be obliged to contract them. Mr. Sitgreaves, in the ſame debate, alſo declares that the eventual expence of the buildings is not within the reach of calculation, or even of conjecture. What a miſerable proſpect is yawning before us!

Mr. Havens aſked, what was meant when it was ſaid that there exiſted an obligation of going to this new city at the year 1800? If room was not to be had in it, Congreſs might go to Georgetown. They may juſt as well ſtay where they are. What would they be at? Poor Richard ſays, I never ſaw an oft removed tree, Or yet an oft removed family, Which throve ſo well, as thoſe that ſettled be.

Let us make a ſuppoſition that, before the end of the year 1800, only two millions of dollars are expended on the federal city. The buildings, as has been already explained, are on an extravagant ſcale. The United States could do as well without them.

Put two millions of dollars into any rational ſcheme of domeſtic improvement in the country, ſuch as a well contrived canal. The money will yield a clear profit of ten, twenty or thirty per cent. Take it at the loweſt rate, and with ten per cent. of compound intereſt, a ſum doubles itſelf in ſeven years, fifty-two days and an half. In fifty years, theſe two millions of dollars will double themſelves ſeven times. They will amount to two hundred and fifty-ſix millions. In an hundred years, they will amount to thirty-two thouſand ſeven hundred and ſixty-eight millions of dollars, which, at that aera, will be the real expence of the city, even if reſtricted only to the original two millions. This computation ſhews the folly of ſinking a capital on an object which is both unproductive and ſuperfluous.

At the end of the nineteenth century, the federal quarries above ground will not be worth ſo great a ſum; nor indeed worth what they originally coſt. They cannot, like a high road, or an improved farm, pay a large intereſt. They are mere unproductive maſſes of brick and lime, and wood and ſtone, the ſpawn of lotteries and land jobbing, for all which fine articles Mr. Theodore Sedgwick imagines it our duty to be grateful.

This project of the federal city has been examined at ſome length, becauſe the ſubject is very imperfectly underſtood, and becauſe the plan, if completed, muſt end in deſtroying the American conſtitution. The monarchical party in the convention of 1787, had the following clauſe thruſt into that paper. The Congreſs ſhall have power to exerciſe EXCLUSIVE legiſlation, in all caſes whatſoever, over ſuch diſtrict, not exceeding ten miles ſquare, as may, by ceſſion of particular ſtates, and the acceptance of Congreſs, become the ſeat of government of the United States. A like clauſe was never heard of before in the conſtitution, or practical adminiſtration of any government in the world.

Suppoſe that, at the Engliſh revolution of 1688, the new parliament had declared themſelves excluſive legiſlators over a ſquare of ten miles, and of which St. Stephen's chapel was to be the centre. Excluſive legiſlation is but another term for arbitrary power, becauſe it confounds the characters of judge and legiſlator. In ſo ſmall a ſpace, where parliament were ſure to ſee every thing, magiſtrates would have been nothing but their tools; and jobs, deſpotiſm, anarchy, and revolt muſt have enſued. The citizens of London and Weſtminſter would, in two or three years at the utmoſt, have laid the new government on its back. But it would be wronging the character of the Engliſh nation to put the ſuppoſition that a clauſe ſo abſurd, ſo fantaſtical, ſo big with miſchief, and confuſion could ever have paſt in that country. Such an originality was reſerved for the fertile brain of Alexander Hamilton. In the convention of bolted doors, this bauble was part of the compromiſe and ſacrifice granted by Madiſon and his friends to the royal faction. Being combined with better materials, it was without reflection accepted by the citizens of America. As a parting appeal to their common ſenſe, let us only figure this caſe, that the ſtate of Pennſylvania had ceded to Congreſs a diſtrict of ten miles, including this city. There is not a man in Philadelphia who wi • hes to ſee Congreſs erected into its excluſive legiſlators.

Their ignorance, their caprice, the natural inſolence of unlimited authority, would, in a few years, have thinned the ſtreets of the city. If on the 4th of July, 1795, Congreſs had held excluſive legiſlation in Philadelphia the evening would not have cloſed with a ſhower of brick-bats. The diſmounting and diſarming of captain John Morrell, of the china ware-houſe, in North Front-ſtreet, and his being ſo baſely pitched into Frog-pond at Kenſington, might have produced a general maſſacre of the citizens. The ſale of his ſword for ſixpence, on his declining to reclaim it, might have eaſily been turned into a high crime and miſdemeanour. This inference becomes very probable, when we contemplate th • bloody maxims of our American DUKE OF ALVA

Alexander Hamilton wiſhed, that the people, aſſembled at Braddock's field, had burnt Pittſburgh. Randolph's Vindication, p. 83. One motive aſſigned in argument, for calling forth the militia, has been, that a government can never be ſaid to be eſtabliſhed, until ſome SIGNAL DISPLAY has manifeſted its power of military coer • ion. "This maxim," adds Randolph, "if indulged, would heap curſes upon the government. The ſtr •• gth of a government is the affection of the people. Ibid p. 102. The maxims and wiſhes of Mr. Hamilton exceed any ſentiment recorded from the hemp-crack-governor of the Netherlands. They rather approach to the comprehenſive ſublimity of Caligula.

It is extremely worthy of notice, that although the Gazette of the United States has been conſtantly ra • ling at Randolph, yet no denial has ever appeared as to the accuracy of the paſſages above quoted. It is no wonder that, after ſuch diſcoveries, the party hate him. They ſometimes harp upon his ſtile. It is at leaſt far ſuperior to that of Mr. • e • no's auxillaries. If Randolph is not ſo acute, ſo • erſe, ſo critical, and ſo brilliant, a • Thomas Jefferſon, yet, in his printed correſpondence with Hammond, he writes like a man who meant well, and who felt for the wrongs of his country.

. Thus much for the federal city.

On the 5th of February, 1796, the bill of appropriation for the current year, having gone through both houſes, was approved by the preſident. This approbation is an inſignificant form. The worſt laws, as well as the beſt ones, have, for ſeveral years paſt, conſtantly received the preſident's; affirmative. In all caſes of importance, however, his will is previouſly underſtood and ſtrictly obeyed by a majority of the Senate. There may have been one or two exceptions to this rule, but 〈◊〉 for a conſiderable time. In the caſe of Madiſon's firſt reſolution, and of Mr. Clarke's • ill for prohibiting commercial intercourſe with England, the Senate were, indeed, equally divided, and the caſting vote of Mr. Adams negatived both. But here it muſt be ſuppoſed, that Mr. Waſhington had kept himſelf in ſuſpence. He had only juſt parted with Jefferſon, and Hamilton was not yet completely fixed in the ſaddle. When the latter fact came to be known, every federal meaſure was bolted through by a large majority. After all, when two legiſlative bodies have agreed to a law▪ it is below their dignity to enquire for the opinion of any ſingle man. By the conſtitution, a preſident who wiſhes to be troubleſome, can raiſe conſiderable confuſion. If he refuſes approbation, the law is ſent back to Congreſs; and, unleſs two-thirds of each houſe ſhall afterwards agree to it, the law becomes void. It is very ſeldom that ſo great a majority unites upon an important meaſure. The Senate conſiſts, at preſent, of thirty-two members; and, by this clauſe of the conſtitution, Mr. Adams, ſupported by eleven ſenators, being more than one-third of the whole number, could prevent the paſſing of any bill which he did not like. Thus the veto of twelve perſons, who are not wiſer or better than their neighbours, might in every inſtance overweigh the whole Houſe of Repreſentatives, though ſupported by twenty-one ſenators. This is one of the miſtakes in our conſtitution. If the citizens of America could, like the bees, create an animal of faculties ſuperior to their own, this veto might be uſeful. But in the late and preſent mediocrity of preſidential talents, it is at beſt an expenſive exc • eſence. This ſubſcription of the laws, and a trifling or inflammatory ſpeeeh at the opening of each ſeſſion of Congreſs, • s almoſt the only real duty that a preſident has to perform. The buſineſs of ſtate is divided among three ſecretaries, and we underſtand from Randolph that Mr. Waſhington uſed to hold a meeting with them on intereſting points, and decide by the opinion of the majority. All this is no great matter. Jared Ingerſol, or the ſecretary of the ſtate of Pennſylvania, or any counſellor of equal talents, would do the buſineſs fully as well, and think himſelf handſomely paid with an annual fee of a thouſand dollars

The account might ſtand thus: The UNITED STATES. DR. To my trouble in writing and reading to the two houſes of congreſs a ſpeech againſt democratic ſocieties, or againſt the citizens of the ſouth weſtern frontier, or againſt another ſpeech made by a member of the French directory, or concerning my friendſhip with John Watts and Doublehead, or in praiſe of the gallant army who carried off one half of the pots and pans of the four weſtern counties of Pennſylvania, and who burnt every rail fence within their reach, 25 To my ſecretary for a clean copy of ditto ſpeech, 5 To my trouble in approving of ſixty acts of congreſs, during laſt ſeſſion, at five dollars each, 300 To my ſecretary, for announcing the ſame to the two houſes, at twenty-five cents each, 15 For my attendance to count the votes of the triumvirate miniſtry, once a week, during fifty-two weeks, at eight dollars per time, 416 To a complete ſet of Cobbet's Gazette, of the Minerva, of the Columbian Centinel, of the Gazette of the United States, and of the works of Meſſrs. Harper and Cobbet, to be reſorted to for occaſional information, 100 Carried over, 761 Brought over, 761 To my trouble in ſigning recalls, and appointments of foreign ambaſſadors, e. g. the recall of my ſon from Holland, for which he had received an outfit of nine thouſand dollars, to my trouble, at the ſame time, in appointing him ambaſſador to Portugal, with a ſecond outfit of nine thouſand dollars, of recalling him within ſix weeks, and ſending him to Berlin, with a third outfit of nine thouſand dollars, over and above his ſalaries, 120 To my loſs of time in bowing on the ſtreet to the additional acquaintances whom I have acquired ſince my appointment, 19 Total dolls. 1000

.

On the 9th of February, was preſented the memorial above inſerted from the ſnuff-makers of Philadelphia. The act of which they complained exemplifies the remark of Montaigne, that there is nothing ſo commonly or ſo groſsly faulty as the laws. The firſt of the two ſtatutes in queſtion required the performance of impoſſibilities. For inſtance, the ſnuff maker was to ſwear to a daily journal of the ſnuff grinded. To be able to do ſo he muſt have taken down his mill at the end of every day's work, and another entire day was requiſite for putting it again in order. Thus between taking down and ſetting up, the ſnuff-maker would have ſpent four or five days in the week in hard work, without grinding one ounce of ſnuff. Mr. Thomas Leiper, and his fellow ſufferers, had not logic enough to convince Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Sedgwick, and Dr. Smith, of this rule producing a hardſhip. Other clauſes were equally ſtupid, oppreſſive, and impracticable. A ruinous exciſe on refined ſugar manufactured in America had been blended in the ſame law with ſnuff, and it ſtill remains in force. In a proof ſheet of the ſhort hiſtory of exciſe, it was ſtated that, after paying the duty, there would not remain to the refiners of ſugar more than a clear profit of five per cent. upon the capital embarked in their buſineſs. This circumſtance was related on the authority of ſome of the principal manufacturers in Philadelphia. But, on a reviſal, they choſe to ſtrike it out of the publication, leſt a diſcloſure might alarm their correſpondents, and injure the general intereſt of the trade. This was in the fall of 1795. Matters have certainly been improved, or elſe the manufacture muſt have ſtopt, as that of ſnuff actually did. The ſugar boilers could have got ſix per cent. for their money in the common rate of intereſt, and ten times that ſum from an exporting flour merchant.

One would be apt to believe that the federal members of Congreſs wanted to deſtroy altogether American manufactures. The paper money ſyſtem is chiefly theirs. Twenty millions of dollars, fabricated out of old rags, are now circulating about the continent. Of theſe, ten millions belong to the bank of the United States. The total dividend of all theſe banks, as ſtated in Congreſs by Dr. Smith and Mr. Gallatin, comes to two millions of dollars per annum. The expences of management can hardly be leſs than five hundred thouſand dollars more. This enormous tax, for juſt nothing at all, and the ſcropholous abundance of money produced by the bank capitals, have tended extremely to impede the progreſs of American manufactures. Though not the ſole cauſe, they have yet been among the chief cauſes that raiſe the wages of labour in America ſo extravagantly beyond its price in Europe. Some leaders of the federal party poſſeſs extenſive concerns in the bank of the United States. But the maturity of American manufactures never can arrive, till wages fall, and that muſt be preceded by a reduction of the maſs of paper. Hence theſe leaders wiſh to encourage the importation of Britiſh goods. The merchants who import them, alſo, and who, in general, deteſt American rivalſhip, are in conſtant habits of diſcounting at the banks, and it is of conſequence to favour ſuch valuable cuſtomers. Theſe obvious motives tend to make the federal commanders anxious for the cloſeſt connection with England. The ſame ſcale of argument leads them to abhor the French, among whom paper currency has always been deſpiſed. Hence, among other reaſons, we find their conſtant inclination to revile France

Camden, in his hiſtory of Elizabeth, book iv. p. 443, has theſe words. The French lawyers ſay, that whatſoever is once annexed to the crown of France, doth inſeparably adhere to it forever. This vindicates the republicans from a ſuſpicion of innovation, when they refuſe to reſtore the Low Countries to the emperor.

During the time of the French league, Elizabeth was adviſed to attempt the conqueſt of Picardy and Normandy. She heard it, ſays Camden, with regret and diſlike, and rejected it with much indignation, ſaying, whenſoever the laſt day of the kingdom of France cometh, it will, undoubtedly, be the eve of the deſtruction of England. Ibid. p. 444.

. Hence their enthuſiaſtic zeal, for the completion of Jay's treaty to which the journal of Congreſs hath now brought us.

Nothing that excited general attention occurred in Congreſs from the trial of Randall till the 1ſt of March. On that day, the Preſident ſent a meſſage to each houſe informing them that ratifications of the Britiſh treaty had been exchanged at London, on the 28th of October, 1795. I have directed the ſame to be promulgated, added the Preſident, and herewith tranſmit a copy thereof for the information of Congreſs. This was clearly the ſtyle of a public officer, who conſidered his authority on this point, as independent and unqueſtionable. He had complied with every formality required by the conſtitution. He had ſelected an ambaſſador for England, and had given him inſtructions as a rule of conduct. The conſtitution ſays he ſhall nominate, and by and with the advice and conſent of the Senate, ſhall appoint ambaſſadors. The preſident had announced his nomination to that body. They were mean or ſtupid enough to acquieſce in the appointment, without once aſking for what purpoſe Jay was to be ſent to England, or demanding a copy of his inſtructions. This ſhewed that the meſſage was but an empty form, and that, in the particular details of his negociation, the Preſident ſcorned to hold any prefatory communications with them. Here, by the way, comes out, as before obſerved,Supra chap. 3. an evidence of hypocriſy towards Genet. Mr. Waſhington could not negociate with the French envoy, becauſe the Senate were not in ſeſſion. Yet, over their heads, he ſent an envoy to England, without letting them underſtand one line of his directions. This was frankly telling the republic that he rejected their advances. He could not have taken a more ungracious, a more ungrateful or infatuated ſtep. After ſuch coldneſs and contempt on our part, we ſhould ſpeak with temper about the republic. Frenchmen have never been celebrated for patience; and it can leaſt of all be expected in the midſt of a blaze of victories, which reduce Beliſarius and Hannibal to the rank and file of conquerors.

From this digreſſion we go back to Jay. Receiving orders from the Preſident, and a ſanction from the Senate, he went to England and framed a treaty. On its arrival here, the Senate, and Preſident, gave in due time, a ratification. They expreſsly took the whole burden upon themſelves; and whether Jay obeyed his inſtructions, or broke them, was a queſtion entirely between himſelf and the Preſident, from whom excluſively he accepted of them. The Senate had, beforehand, reſigned all right of thinking upon the ſubject. They poſſeſſed no future title to call for the inſtructions. The fit time for that demand had paſſed away. If the treaty proved to be a good one, it was quite a frivolous enquiry, whether the inſtructions were right or wrong. If it was bad, the Preſident ſtood in the gap, and they could diſappoint all bad effects by a rejection. They approved of the whole treaty, one article excepted. It was, thereafter, ratified by the Preſident. Here the character of theſe two branches, or rather of theſe two ſprigs from the trunk of repreſentation, was completely embarked.

There does not appear any ſolid reaſon why the Preſident, in the ſequel, ſubmitted Jay's inſtructions to the Senate, after the treaty had been ratified. The only time for ſuch a communication was before Jay ſailed for England. The inſtrument could only ſtand or fall, not by the tenor of the inſtructions, but by its own intrinſic value. The tardy production of Jay's orders reſembled a Chineſe marriage. The lover, it is ſaid, does not ſee his miſtreſs till after the wedding, but has leave to ſend her home again, if he does not like her. The Preſident could only ſend this paper as a matter of civility. The Senate had loſt their right of calling for the inſtructions. They had not even a decent pretence to have challenged Jay. He acted as private agent to Mr. Waſhington, and the Senate had, in plain juſtice, no more to do with him, than the Preſident had with his ſecretary, Mr. Trumbal.

But farther, Jay was, upon a different ground, placed beyond the reach of perſonal conſequences▪ Admitting that he acted with the wildeſt deviation from his orders, yet he neither did nor could do any thing final. If the Preſident diſapproved of the treaty, ſtill he had only to refuſe it. He could have ſent Grenville a copy of his inſtructions to evince that Jay had entirely contradicted them. This muſt have been a full apology for his negativing the treaty.

There ſtill remained one point of view in which Jay might be regarded as reſponſible. Suppoſe that, while he carried on a negociation contrary to the ſpirit of his orders, the relative condition of the two parties had altered, that Britain had become ſtronger, and America weaker, or that ſome change in the condition of a third party had produced a ſimilar effect. In that caſe, the Houſe of Repreſentatives might have addreſſed the envoy in terms like theſe:

It is true that you acted as an immediate agent for the Preſident, that he had legal authority to employ you, and that he, along with the Senate, has taken upon himſelf the total reſponſibility for your conduct. In common matters an employer, by vindicating his agent, completely covers him from enquiry; but, in your affair, there is ſomething particular to be ſaid. We believe that you diſobeyed your orders, that you treacherouſly entangled the Preſident in a bargain for which you had no powers, and that you thus forfeited that impunity annexed to the character of HIS agent. He received your production with every feeling of ſhame, of alarm, and indignation. Agreeable to law he aſſembled the Senate; and they and he ſucceſſively ratified the treaty, under the dread that if they rejected it, their perfidious and formidable enemy would pervert their refuſal into a pretence for declaring war. So ſtanding the caſe, we contend that in ſubſtantial equity, you have not been the agent of Mr. Waſhington, but of lord Grenville; and that the compulſive operation created by your perfidy on the minds of the Senate and Preſident, transferred the conſtitutional reſponſibility from them to you. The charges here made againſt you are matters of ſtrong ſuſpicion, but not of certainty. We are in want of evidence either to ſupport or to refute them. We can only get that evidence by reſorting to your inſtructions, for you can only be impeached on the head of having diſobeyed them, and of your diſodienee having thereafter ſhackled the deliberations of the Preſident and Senate. For the purpoſe of aſcertaining your guilt or innocence, we are going to ſolicit the Preſident. He has ſent theſe papers to the Senate. He cannot, therefore, in common civility, or even decency, deny our requeſt. Yet we have no conſtitutional right of demanding the paper. The power of making treaties has been excluſively and jointly veſted in the Senate and in him. No part of the conſtitution requires that he ſhould explain to our houſe his motives, or divulge, unleſs by his own free will, your inſtructions and ſubſequent correſpondence. If he withholds theſe means of information and impeachment, we can only grumble into ſilence, and bluſh at the contemptible incenſe of adulation that, for ſeven years paſt, we have piled on the altar of Mount Vernon.

The above is apprehended to contain a ſummary of the arguments that might have been employed in favour of impeaching Jay. The ſtreſs lies on aſcertaining that the Preſident diſliked the treaty, and gave it a reluctant ratification. On this point, Randolph affords a copious evidence. My opinion," ſays Mr. Waſhington, "reſpecting the treaty, is the ſame now that it was, that is, not favourable to it, but that it is better to ratify it in the manner the Senate have adviſed, than to ſuffer matters to remain, as they are, unſettled.—I find endeavours are not wanting to place it in all the odious points of view of which it is ſuſceptible, and in ſome which it will not admit. [This is plain enough.] I have never, ſince I have been in the adminiſtration of the government, ſeen a criſis, which in my judgment has been ſo pregnant of intereſting events, nor one from which more is to be apprehended: whether viewed on one ſide or the other.—Scarcely a day paſſed, that he (the Preſident) did not enumerate many objections to it; objections going not only to the commercial part, but alſo to the Canada article,—to the omiſſion of compenſation for the negroes and property plundered, and to ſome other parts of leſs conſequence. It would be uſeleſs to heap up farther teſtimony that the Preſident diſapproved of Jay and his treaty, and that he agreed to it only to prevent ſome worſe conſequences.

Having ſettled this point, we proceed with the journal of the Repreſentatives. On the 7th of March, 1796, the houſe took up a reſolution moved by Mr. Livingſton. It was in theſe words:

Reſolved, that the Preſident of the United States be requeſted to lay before this houſe, a copy of the inſtructions to the miniſter of the United States who negociated the treaty with the king of Great Britain, communicated by his meſſage of the firſt of March, together with the correſpondence and other documents relative to the ſaid treaty, excepting ſuch of ſaid papers as any exiſting negociation may render improper to be diſcloſed. As one Randolph, p. 35, 36, 38. reaſon for this motion, Mr. Livingſton ſaid that the production of the papers would determine the houſe whether an impeachment would be deemed adviſeableBache, vol. i. p. 4.. But his chief reaſon was a firm conviction that the houſe were veſted with a diſcretionary power of carrying the treaty into effect, or refuſing it their ſanction. To guide them in an enlightened determination as to that point, the papers are neceſſary; they would certainly throw light upon the ſubject, and enable the houſe to determine whether the treaty was ſuch as that it ought to be carried into effectBache, vol. i. p. 4.. Mr. Livingſton calls the latter his principal reaſon. He did not ſpeak exactly what he thought. The papers called for could not be needful to guide the determination of the houſe, as to whether they ſhould ſanction the treaty, for nothing but its individual merits could decide for or againſt it. But, ſecond, if the papers were needful, the houſe, before this time, had virtually, though not officially ſeen them. They had been lying for ſome time on the table of the Senate. Many Repreſentatives had gone up ſtairs and read them, and every member was acquainted with the eſſence of their contents. Hence, they could not be wanted for the purpoſe of determining an opinion about the treaty, even had its fate reſted on ſuch a diſcloſure.

Mr. Livingſton well knew that his former reaſon for wanting the papers was almoſt equally hollow. He knew, or he well might have known, that an impeachment was not adviſeable. The ſequel of the debates diſcovered the real ſenſe of his party. The project of impeachment was but rarely and faintly dwelt upon. But the democratical members had other and good reaſons for deſiring an official Ibid. p. 5. communication of the inſtructions. This would have fixed the perfidy of Jay in departing from them. Popular reſentment at his behaviour would have riſen to the higheſt pitch. His alledged preceptor, Mr. Hamilton, would have been involved in the clamour. The treaty muſt on freſh grounds, have become an object of jealouſy and diſguſt; and this addition to the force of its enemies was to have enſured, in the Houſe of Repreſentatives, a refuſal of money for its fulfilment.

By an impeachment of Jay, nothing, in common ſenſe, could be expected, but an enormous waſte of time and of congreſſional wages, a pernicious and endleſs delay in the routine of private buſineſs, and finally, a triumphant acquital of the envoy. In defiance of all imaginable teſtimony, the Britiſh treaty majority in the Senate were ſure to have pronounced him guiltleſs. Look at their extruſion of Albert Gallatin, at their fraternal embrace of Meſſ. Gunn and Marſhal!

Thus it appears that Mr. Livingſton could hope for nothing from an impeachment, and he as little needed the inſtructionsIn the debate of the 21ſt of March, Mr. Williams obſerved that for the ſpace of ten weeks, any member of that houſe might have ſeen them, Bache, vol i. p. 236. But the great loſs was, that no member could, from ſuch inſpection, venture to quote them in the Houſe of Repreſentatives. He would have been called to order, and obliged to ſit down. to complete his opinion of the treaty. That opinion had been long ſince matured. It is difficult to keep from ſmiling when we perceive an intelligent legiſlator ſtanding up, and giveing all reaſons but the real one, in defence of his reſolution. The debate laſted, with ſome intervals, from the 7th of March to the 7th of April, both incluſive; and the report occupies three hundred and eighty-ſix cloſe printed octavo pages. This is the American mode of managing legiſlative debates. In a Britiſh Houſe of Commons, the queſtion could hardly have been protracted beyond ſix o'clock on a ſecond morning.

Mr. William Lyman roſe next after Mr. Livingſton. He defended the reſolution. One of his arguments was, that poſſibly the papers might throw ſuch light as to produce a very great degree of unanimity relative to that inſtrument (viz. the treaty). Such circumſtances might poſſibly be diſcloſed as to reconcile thoſe now oppoſed to it, and who might otherwiſe remain irreconcilable. If the reſolution tended only to this object it was effecting a valuable purpoſe. Mr. Lyman held the treaty in notorious deteſtation, ſo that this argument was mere hypocritical canting. The unanimity which he deſired and expected from a production of the papers was not for the treaty, but againſt it. As to impeachment, Mr. Lyman ſpoke not one word. Mr. Giles on the ſame ſide, followed. He did not contemplate impeachment as the probable iſſue, but the information might tend, perhaps, to reconcile thoſe now averſe to the inſtrument. This gentleman ſpoke with as little ſincerity as the two former. We may obſerve how very ſoon the Madiſonians began to file away from their impeachment.

Mr. Murray ſucceeded Mr. Giles. He oppoſed the reſolution. He denied the right of the houſe to intermeddle in treaties, unleſs theſe were alledged to be unconſtitutional. He objected the general impolicy of expoſing ſecrets of ſtate. Mr. Murray is a moderate and ſenſible ſpeaker; but, with all his fondneſs for ſecrecy, he would certainly have voted 〈◊〉 the reſolution, if its real object had been to promote the ſucceſs of the treaty.

Mr. Buck, another friend to Jay, took the ſame ſide, but not from an apprehenſion that the papers referred to will not bear the public ſcrutiny, or from a belief that there would be the leaſt reluctance on the part of the executive to deliver them. Here the firſt ſentence of Mr. Buck's harangue contained two direct untruths. He knew that the papers would not bear ſcrutiny

Such as the two cards upon impreſſment. Supra chap. 5. Was it unknown, that thouſands of our ſailors have been occaſionally enſlaved by the impreſs tyranny of the Britiſh government? Or, that thouſands have loſt their lives in noxious priſons, while their veſſels were carried into Britiſh ports for legal ajudication? Features of Jay's treaty, ſection 3d.

"In all my vaſt reading," as Dr. Wagtail ſays, this pamphlet, both as to ſtile and matter, is conſiderably the beſt which has appeared either for Jay or againſt him. Candid, elegant, comprehenſive, and conciſe, its accuracy gratifies the moſt informed, while its perſpicuity convinces the plaineſt reader. Yet Mr. Dallas has a material defect. His extreme reſerve and delicacy are entirely caſt away upon ſuch enemies as Wilcocks, Webſter, Curtius, and Camillus, on the ſtupid malignity too frequent in Mr. Fenno's Gazette, and on the illiterate brutality of the Columbian Centinel.

. He knew, and and ſo did every perſon in the houſe, that Mr. Waſhington would be aſhamed and unwilling to give them up. It was for theſe very reaſons, which Mr. Buck ſet out with diſowning, that he oppoſed the reſolution.

Thus the combatants went on. They interperſed much extraneous matter, with pretended arguments on each ſide, which, as in the five caſes already cited, the orator himſelf held in ſovereign contempt, and which every man who heard him knew that he deſpiſed. Some ſpeeches deſerved a better character, but the limits of this volume do not permit farther criticiſm. At a future time it may be convenient and inſtructive to trace the obliquities of congreſſional diſcuſſion. The pompous petulance and Iſcariot-like malignity of BuckA ſhort memoir of this gentleman, tranſmitted from Vermont, has, for the preſent volume, been laid aſide., the plauſible ſtupidity and ſelf-important ignorance of Sedgwick, the pregnant vacuity, and elegant loquacity of Harper, often approaching to good ſenſe, yet almoſt never getting up to it, hold out prominent materials for amuſing illuſtration. But the number of reſpectable ſpeakers was greatly ſuperior to that of ſuch phantoms as theſe. In general, a member of Congreſs hath ſufficient prudence either to hold his tongue, or to tell his ſentiments in a way which does not make him ridiculous.

On Thurſday, the 24th of March, 1796, a diviſion took place in a committee of the whole houſe on this reſolution to call for Jay's inſtructions and correſpondence. It paſſed by ſixty-one votes againſt thirty-eight. This was a majority unuſual on great political queſtions. When ſome victim who has been reduced to beggary by the late war, or ſome French officer who neglected to call, in due time, for his arrears of pay, has the weakneſs to ſolicit Congreſs, a negative paſſes with unanimity, or ſomething like it. But in matters of high political import, the majority runs, for the moſt part, very cloſe. The reſolution paſt in the houſe by ſixty-two votes againſt thirty-ſeven. On the 25th of March, it was preſented to the Preſident. On the 30th, he ſent a refuſal of the papers. His meſſage miſquoted and perverted the requeſt of the houſe into a poſitive demand, and then pretended to refuſe what had not been aſkedSee American Annual Regiſter, chap. xi.. Their behaviour gave Mr. Waſhington reaſon to deſpiſe them. The debates that laſted for eight, ten, or twenty days about an anſwer to his annual ſpeech diſhonoured the whole body. His refuſal of the inſtructions was to conceal the diſobedience of Jay, and his own tameneſs in bearing it.

The majority of ſixty two ought to have received the meſſage with ſilent diſdain, and prohibited their clerk from inſerting it on the journals. Without oſtenſible interference they could have ſent to preſs a copy of the inſtructions. Theſe would have darted through the newſpapers with the velocity of lightning. An abortive attempt to conceal this paper muſt have enſured its univerſal peruſal. A victory to the publiſhers was the natural conſequence. The people would have reſented the diſobedience of Jay, the puſillanimous acquieſcence of the Preſident, and his ill-concerted ſcheme for ſuppreſſing information. While they ſympathized with the affronted repreſentatives, a few well written eſſays might have matured into effective ſervice the germ of indignation; and the treaty and its allies had ſunk into the duſt.

But the majority poſſeſſed not one man with the reſources, firmneſs and activity of colonel Hamilton. The party ſeemed ſtudious to diſplay more than their uſual inferiority of addreſs and boldneſs. Never was a critical moment more miſerably caſt away. Inſtead of a glowing declaration that they contemned the refuſal, inſtead of ſome ſpirited harangues to animate their partiſans without doors, their tremulous and trimming meaſures towards a faction whoſe animoſities are immortal, betrayed their total want of energy, depreſſed their friends, encouraged their enemies, and paved the way for their own approaching downfall. They did not perceive that the public had become tired of theſe debates, that farther haggling and wrangling would only increaſe that diſguſt, and raiſe the meſſage to an unmerited importance, and that ſilent contempt was the plaineſt way to render it deſpicable.

On the 6th of April two reſolutions See them in Bache's Debates, vol. i. p. 374. were brought forward. The meaning of the firſt was, that the majority, if they could hold themſelves together, would refuſe money for fulfilling Jay's treaty. The ſecond implied, that when the houſe deſired the executive to let them have the inſtructions, they were not obliged to tell for what purpoſe the paper was wanted. Madiſon explained and enforced the reſolutions with that ſuperior knowledge, ingenuity, and eloquence, which have ſo often illuſtrated and adorned the tranſactions of Congreſs. Next day, they were paſt, ayes fifty-ſeven, noes thirty-five. They were not worth one half of the trouble which they coſt. To illuminate and brace the minds of the people it would have been better to propoſe the ſtriking twenty thouſand dollars from the preſident's ſalary. Mr. Adams, as a premium for his two Britiſh negatives, might have been reſtricted to twelve dollars per day during the ſitting of Congreſs. This is the allowance to a ſpeaker of the repreſentatives, a character of more real uſe, and who bears more actual drudgery than the Senate and their vice-preſident put together. Such reſolutions could not have been carried, but the bare propoſal would have conveyed an important hint. A contraſt might have been run between an old ſoldier with the palſy and ſeven dollars and an half per annum, or his widow with ſix ragged children, and Mrs. Waſhington goſſipping for a whole evening at the national expence, with fifty or an hundred and fifty women, while ſnuff-mills and ſugar-bakeries were caſt idle by the approbation of her huſband.

Treaties had, within a ſhort time, been entered into by the United States with Britain, with Algiers, with Spain, and with thoſe Indians whom Wayne defeated at fort Miamis. On the 13th of April, 1796, Mr. Sedgwick moved a reſolution that proviſion ſhould be made for carrying theſe treaties into effect. He meant that the houſe ought to vote ſums of money for that end, and his view in bundling the whole four treaties into one reſolution was that they might ſtand or fall together. This reſolution produced warm debates. Several amendments were ſuggeſted and diſcuſſed. Of theſe a particular detail can hardly intereſt an ordinary reader. The whole proceedings have been minutely compiled by Mr. Bache, and deſerve to be ſtudied by every future candidate for a ſeat in Congreſs. For this place, it is enough to ſet in one luminous point of view the actual objects of the oppoſite parties. The news of the Spaniſh treaty had been received in America with univerſal exultation. It was to open the navigation of the weſtern waters, of which the king of Spain had hitherto been the J • ilor. The Indian and Algerine treaties were rather convenient than advantageous, but as their terms gave general ſatisfaction, no doubt was entertained that money would be voted to fulfil them. A refuſal was, of neceſſity, to ſubject the union to immediate piracy and warfare. But it was, in all reſpects, quite otherwiſe with the Britiſh treaty. A general and violent oppoſition had appeared againſt it. A complexity of principles was involved in its diſcuſſion. Hitherto, moſt repreſentatives had profeſſed to diſlike it, and a delay, or even a rejection, could not reaſonably be ſuppoſed to produce war, when, by the conqueſt of Holland, the extirpation of her armies in Europe and the Weſt-Indies, the ſcarcity of money, and the diſcontent of her people, England was evidently ſtaggering on the brink of ruin.

The ſcheme of the federal members was to blend theſe negociations in one maſs. Their arguments and motives, when ſtript of the loquacious maſquerade common to both parties, might be expreſſed thus:

We have on the table before us four treaties. Of theſe, three are equally acceptable to the whole houſe; but you want to fulfil them, and to reject the fourth. We are as deſirous as you can be for friendſhip with Spain, and for peace with Algiers and the Indians. But our Britiſh treaty, that you propoſe to deſtroy, is of infinitely greater importance in our eyes than all the others collectively, and the intereſt and independence of our country into the bargain. Grenville has adverted to you, as American jacobins, and has aſſured the toad-eating Thomas Pinckney that a Britiſh army ſhall, if we requeſt it, be ſent over to cruſh you. But if we reject this treaty, that aid cannot be expected; and that twilight of our political millenium ſhall be forever extinguiſhed, while ſo ſignal a defeat on the floor of Congreſs will give a mortal blow to the power which we at preſent poſſeſs. Mankind will begin to think and act about us with common ſenſe. They will demand a publication of the books of the treaſury. They will no longer pay intereſt for forty millions of dollars of domeſtic debt to creditors, till they ſhall have learned who theſe people are? And whether William Smith, or Izard, or Hillhouſe, or Sedgwick, has waded fartheſt into the funds? This proſpect is terrible. To avert it we ſhall fall or conquer by the ſide of the treaty. If that cannot be carried, we ſhall rejoice in blocking up the Miſſiſſippi, in whetting the tomohawk, in glutting the pirates of Barbary with the plunder of our commerce.

The reſolution was negatived. The three treaties were agreed to. A ſecond ſeries of debates occurred as to the granting of money for fulfilling Jay's treaty. This ended on the firſt of May, 1796. The appropriations paſt, in committee of the whole, by the caſting vote of the chairman, Mr. Muhlenberg, the votes of members being forty-eight on each ſide. In the houſe, this appropriation paſt by fifty-one votes againſt forty-eight. Some even of this narrow majority, declared their entire diſapprobation of the treaty. The general zeal excited in its favour, and the probability that the ſix per cent. citadel of Connecticut would have burſt into actual rebellionSupra, chap. 2d. See alſo, the ſpirit of ſome people in that ſtate, in the American Annual Regiſter, chap. 6th., were forcible reaſons in favour of adoption. The multitude and ſtile of the addreſſes to Congreſs in its behalf were ſufficient to make thoughtful members doubtful as to rejecting it. Mr. Muhlenberg has been highly blamed for his vote on this queſtion. By an uniform tenor of conduct, ſince 1789, he had already offended the oppoſite party beyond all hope of forgiveneſs. But on this emergency, he preferred the ſecurity of internal peace, even to the approbation of his conſtituents. He had candidly ſtated his ideas in ſeveral private meetings of members previous to the final vote.

The ſeſſion roſe on the 1ſt of June, 1796. Britiſh depredations did not, as had been fondly foretold, ceaſe after the appropriations had paſt for the treaty. As one of its conſequences the French began ſoon after to diſturb our trade. The weſtern poſts were, however, delivered up. The general election for Congreſs, and that for a Preſident, the difference between the French miniſter and the American executive, were among the chief events which occurred till the next meeting of Congreſs, which was on the 5th of December 1796.