284

PARTY VIOLENCE.

[CHAP. V.

the reasons of it. But I have heard such reports of his own language in France at his own table, and the language of those he entertained and countenanced, and of his correspondences with Bache, Beckley, etc., and his communications through the Aurora, that I wonder not at his recall. His speech at his audience of leave is a base, false, and servile thing. Indeed, it was Randolph who appointed him. He was, in Senate, as dull, heavy, and stupid a fellow as he could be consistently with malignity and inveteracy perpetual. A more unfit piece of wood to make a Mercury could not have been culled from the whole forest."

And Mr. Adams then goes on to hint that by some means, not explained, but clearly not honest ones, Monroe's "confidential correspondents and intimate acquaintances" have suddenly become rich, and "roll in wealth!"

It presents a curious specimen of human, and particularly of political "sea change," to snatch a glimpse down the future. and see Mr. Adams, as a member of the Electoral College of Massachusetts, voting for this stupid and malignant if not corrupt "fellow" for President of the United States. Nor shall the Colossus, rampant or couchant, in this instance monopolize the inconsistency. We shall see the whole party which now denounced Monroe so violently, not only for his conduct in France, but for defending himself against the censures of the Cabinet, also supporting him for a second Presidency, with the talismanic words, "The Washington-Monroe Policy," inscribed on their party banners.

But Monroe was not long the most prominent object of attack during the events we have been describing. A mightier form loomed up on the same side, amidst the smoke of the conflict. The press poured its steady volleys on him. Champions sought fame by individually and rancorously assailing him. Reptiles were fostered and caressed because they transcended all the decencies of previous party warfare, to pour out disgusting calumnies on his private character. The hasty and angry words of his contemporaries against each other and against him, have been passed over by those who have picked up and perpetuated every warm phrase of his to prove his bitterness of heart, and his personal hostility towards great and good men from whom he chanced to be separated in those warm political contests! The faults of the CREED are still avenged on the head of its PROPHET!

For this letter entire, see APPENDIX, No. 13.

CHAPTER VI.

1796.

Treaty of London returned ratified-President proclaims it as in full force, without awaiting any Action of the House of Representatives-Dissatisfaction of the Republican Members-Livingston's Resolution calling for the Papers, and its Amendments President refuses to send them-Kitchell's Resolutions-Supported by Madison-They pass by a strong Vote-Jefferson's Views-Resolution for carrying the Treaty into effect-Federal Threats-The Debate-Reaction out of Congress, and the Causes of itDearborn's Preamble-Preamble rejected and Resolution passed by very close votesJefferson's Letter to Mazzei-An Account of Mazzei-Letter to Monroe-Efforts to personally alienate Washington and Jefferson-General Lee's Agency in this-Expedi ency and Effects of Treaty of London considered-Domestic Affairs at MonticelloDuke of Rochefoucauld-Liancourt's Visit to Monticello-His Journal of his Visit-Comments and Explanations-Jefferson's Plow of least resistance-Rittenhouse's Opinion of it on Mathematical Principles-Sir John Sinclair asks a Model and DescriptionPrizes bestowed on it in France-Was Jefferson the First Discoverer of the Mathematical Principle?-His usual Practical Ingenuity-His House-building-Fall Elections -Occupations and Expenses of a Presidential Candidate in 1797-Jefferson professes to be gratified at his Defeat-What right had he to feel thus?-The Method of Voting -The Number of Votes for the various Candidates-Adams President and Jefferson Vice-President Jefferson's Letters to Madison and Adams given from Memory in his Works History of the Recovery of the Originals The Originals given-Explanation of Jefferson's Willingness to have Adams succeed-Adams's Political Attitude at the Moment His own Testimony on the Subject-He made the First Practical Overture to the Republicans-Madison's Testimony-Testimony of the Hamiltonians-The Conclusion-Fortunate that the Union failed-Jefferson discovers his Error-A Prophetic Political Idea.

THE treaty of London was a long time in returning with the ratification of the British Executive. In the meantime the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, though challenged to an exhibition of their strength by the rejection of Rutledge for the chief-justiceship, undeniably on no other ground than his participation in the anti-treaty demonstration at Charleston, remained quiet, committing themselves to no decisive line of action.'

This was distinctly concoded by the leading Federalists. Se Uriah Tracy to Oliver

286

TREATY RETURNED-EXECUTIVE ACTION.

[CHAP. VI.

The ratified treaty came back in February, 1796. The President immediately, by an official proclamation, announced it a supreme law of the land, sending a copy of this proclamation to each House of Congress. This necessarily implied that the Executive had decided the mooted point that the instrument went into full force without any action on the part of the House of Representatives-that the latter body had no option but to concur in the legislation necessary to carry out its provi

sions.

This action of the Executive was not received with satisfaction by the Republican members. They claimed that the exercise of such authority practically gave the President and Senate complete power to regulate commerce, a power which the Constitution had vested in Congress collectively. They insisted that if making any topic of administration the subject of a treaty stipulation, thereby precluded the popular branch of Congress from exercising any further discretion concerning it, the President and Senate might thus legally absolutely control almost any external or even internal measure of Government; that they might thus, in effect, constitute themselves the Government, and make the representatives a mere subsidiary body, vested with high separate functions only by fictions of the Constitution, inserted to gratify popular fancies, but meaning nothing. If these positions were well taken, it might be said, indeed, these fictions had a further purpose-to attain the nominal and legal assent of the people to great public measures where really their direct representatives had no voice, but played a part analogous to that of a French Lit de Justice' or the representatives of the English burgesses in the parliaments of Edward IV.

On the 2d of March, Edward Livingston of New York offered a resolution that the President of the United States be requested "to lay before the House a copy of the instructions. given to the Minister of the United States, who negotiated the

Wolcott, senior, February 10, 1796, and Chauncey Goodrich to same, February 21, in Gibbs's Memoirs, etc., vol. i. pp. 298, 304.

If the Parliament declined to enregister a royal edict, the King issued Lettres de jussion, and if they failed to produce obedience, he held a Lit de Justice, or "Bed of Justice." The King, Princes of the blood, Peers, State and Crown officers, proceeded to the Parliament, and sitting upon the throne (anciently called Lit from its cushions), ordered the Parliament to enregister the edict in the royal presence. The Parliament was then compelled to submit, or it might be punished for its contumacy.

CHAP. VI.] PRESIDENT REFUSES PAPERS TO THE HOUSE.

1

287

treaty with Great Britain, communicated by his message on the 1st instant, together with the correspondence and other documents relative to the said treaty." On the 7th, Livingston proposed to amend this by adding the words: "excepting such of the said papers as any existing negotiation may render improper to be disclosed." Mr. Madison moved in the place of this: "except so much of said papers as in his judgment it may not be consistent with the interest of the United States at this time to disclose." This modification was rejected by a majority of ten.❜ On the 24th, the resolution, as amended by its mover, passed by the strong vote of sixty-two to thirty-seven-absent five.'

On the 30th, the President sent a message to the House, refusing to comply with its resolution on the ground that such requests might lead to embarrassments in negotiations and to impolitic disclosures; that it "did not occur [to the Executive] that the inspection of the papers asked for could be relative to any purpose under the cognizance of the House of Representatives, except that of an impeachment, which the resolution had not expressed ;" and then the President proceeded from his knowledge as a member of the Federal Convention, and from various other considerations, to show that "it was perfectly clear to his understanding" that the power of making treaties was exclusively vested in the President and Senate; and "that the assent of the House of Representatives was not necessary to the validity of a treaty." Considering it, he said, "essential to the due administration of the Government that the boundaries fixed by the Constitution between the different departments should be preserved-a just regard to the Constitution, and to the duty of his office, under all the circumstances of this case, forbade a compliance with their request.'

1 Annals of the Congress of the United States, 1795-6, p. 400. As we shall have frequent occasion to cite this publication, we will say that we refer to the work whose more particular designation is " The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, etc. etc., compiled from authentic materials. Washington, printed and published by Gales and Seaton, 1849."

2 Ib. 424.

• Ib. 438.

Ib. 760. All the Virginia members voted for the resolution, namely, Richard Brent, Samuel C. Cabell, Thomas Claiborne, John Clopton, Isaac Coles, William B. Giles, George Hancock, Carter B. Harrison, John Heath, George Jackson, James Madison, Andrew Moore, Anthony New, John Nicholas, John Page, Josiah Parker, Francis Pres ton, Robert Rutherford, and Abraham Venable.

See Annals of Congress, 1795-6, p. 760.

288

RESOLUTIONS OF HOUSE THEREON.

[CHAP. VI.

Judge Marshall thus forcibly and accurately describes the effect of this message:

"The terms in which this decided, and it would seem, unexpected negative to the call for papers was conveyed, appeared to break the last cord of that attachment which had hitherto bound some of the active leaders of the opposition to the person of the President. Amidst all the agitations and irritations of party, a sincere respect and real affection for the Chief Magistrate, the remnant of former friendship, had still lingered in the bosoms of some who had engaged with ardor in the political contests of the day. But, if the last spark of this affection was not now extinguished, it was at least concealed under the more active passions of the moment."

Resolutions were the next day introduced by Kitchell of New Jersey, declaring " as the opinion of this House, the Constitution has vested the power of making treaties exclusively in the President and Senate, and that the House of Representatives do not claim any agency in making or ratifying them when made;" but "when a treaty is made, which requires a law or laws to be passed to carry it into effect, that, in such case, the House of Representatives have a constitutional right to deliberate and determine the propriety or impropriety of passing such laws, and to act thereon as the public good shall require.'

Mr. Madison supported these resolutions in a speech, elaborately reviewing the constitutional questions involved. They passed by a vote of fifty-seven to thirty-five. Seven members were absent on the vote, six of whom, says the Annals of Congress, "it was understood would have voted for the resolutions, had they been present," and one was "probably against the resolutions." This would have made the vote stand sixty-three to thirty-six.

We have seen Mr. Jefferson's views, in advance, on the main point involved; but he appears to have written very little on the subject, during the discussions in Congress. Several letters from him to members of that body do not allude to it.. But that he fully approved of the stand made by the House, and partook deeply in the apprehensions of the hour, in regard to the

Annals of Congress, 1795-6, p. 769.

Life of Washington, vol. ii. p. 382. Ib. p. 783. This does not include four who were absent on leave-of whose preferences nothing is said. One of the four was Kitchell, the mover of the resolutions. All the Virginia members we have before named as voting for Livingston's resolution, voted for these, but Brent, Claiborne and New, who were absent, and who are among those who the Annals of Congress state it was understood would have voted for Kitchell's resolutions, had they been present.