Memoir, Correspondence, And Miscellanies, From The Papers Of Thomas Jefferson
Chapter 160 : We shall endeavor to get your newspapers under the care of Major Read, the bearer of t

We shall endeavor to get your newspapers under the care of Major Read, the bearer of this letter.

I have the honor to be, with great respect and esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER CLVI.--TO MR. PINCKNEY, June 14, 1793

TO MR. PINCKNEY.

Philadelphia, June 14, 1793.

My last letters to you have been of the 7th of May and 4th instant.

Since the last date, yours of April the 15th has come to hand.

I enclose you several memorials and letters which have pa.s.sed between the executive and the ministers of France and England. These will develope to you the principles on which we are proceeding between the belligerent powers. The decisions being founded in what is conceived to be rigorous justice, give dissatisfaction to both parties, and produce complaints from both. It is our duty, however, to persevere in them, and to meet the consequences. You will observe that Mr. Hammond proposes to refer to his court the determination of the President, that the prizes taken by the Citoyen Genet, could not be given up. The reasons for this are explained in the papers. Mr. Genet had stated that she was manned by French citizens. Mr. Hammond had not stated the contrary before the decision. Neither produced any proofs. It was therefore supposed that she was manned, princ.i.p.ally, with French citizens. After the decision, Mr. Hammond denies the fact, but without producing any proof. I am really unable to say how it was; but I believe it to be certain there were very few Americans. He says, the issuing the commission, Sic. by Mr. Genet within our territory, was an infringement of our sovereignty; therefore, the proceeds of it should be given up to Great Britain. The infringement was a matter between France and us. Had we insisted on any penalty or forfeiture by way of satisfaction to our insulted rights, it would have belonged to us, not to a third party. As between Great Britain and us, considering all the circ.u.mstances explained in the papers, we deemed we did enough to satisfy her. We are moreover a.s.sured, that it is the standing usage of France, perhaps too of other nations in all wars, to lodge blank commissions with all their foreign consuls, to be given to every vessel of their nation, merchant or armed; without which a merchant vessel would be punished as a pirate, were she to take the smallest thing of the enemy that should fall in her way. Indeed, the place of the delivery of a commission is immaterial. As it may be sent by letter to any one, so it may be delivered by hand to him any where.

The place of signature by the Sovereign is the material thing. Were that to be done in any other jurisdiction than his own, it might draw the validity of the act into question. I mention these things, because I think it would be proper, that after considering them and such other circ.u.mstances as appear in the papers, or may occur to yourself, you should make it the subject of a conversation with the Minister. Perhaps it may give you an opportunity of touching on another subject. Whenever Mr. Hammond applies to our government on any matter whatever, be it ever so new or difficult, if he does not receive his answer in two or three days or a week, we are goaded with new letters on the subject. Sometimes it is the sailing of the packet, which is made the pretext for forcing us into premature and undigested determinations. You know best how far your applications meet such early attentions, and whether you may with propriety claim a return of them: you can best judge too of the expediency of an intimation, that where despatch is not reciprocal, it may be expedient and justifiable that delay should be so.

I have the honor to be, with great and sincere esteem, Dear Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER CLVII.--TO MR. GENET, June 17, X

TO MR. GENET.

Philadelphia, June 17, 1793.

Sir,

I shall now have the honor of answering your letter of the 1st instant, and so much of that of the 14th (both of which have been laid before the President) as relates to a vessel armed in the port of New York and about to depart from thence, but stopped by order of the government. And here I beg leave to premise, that the case supposed in your letter, of a vessel arming for her own defence, and to repel unjust aggressions, is not that in question, nor that on which I mean to answer, because not having yet happened, as far as is known to the government, I have no instructions on the subject. The case in question is that of a vessel armed, equipped, and manned in a port of the United States, for the purpose of committing hostilities on nations at peace with the United States.

As soon as it was perceived that such enterprises would be attempted, orders to prevent them were despatched to all the States and ports of the Union. In consequence of these, the Governor of New York, receiving information that a sloop heretofore called the Polly, now the Republican, was fitting out, arming, and manning in the port of New York, for the express and sole purpose of cruising against certain nations with whom we are at peace, that she had taken her guns and ammunition aboard and was on the point of departure, seized the vessel.

That the Governor was not mistaken in the previous indications of her object, appears by the subsequent avowal of the citizen Hauterive, Consul of France at that port, who, in a letter to the Governor, reclaims her as '_Un vaisseau arme, en guerre, et pret a mettre a la voile_;' and describes her object in these expressions; '_Cet usage etrange de la force publique contre les citoyens d'une nation amie qui se reunissent ici pour aller defendre leur freres_,' &c. and again; '_Je requiers, monsieur, l'autorite dont vous etes revetu, pour faire rendre a des Francois, a des allies, &c. la liberte de voler au secours de leur patrie_.' This transaction being reported to the President, orders were immediately sent to deliver over the vessel, and the persons concerned in the enterprise, to the tribunals of the country; that if the act was of those forbidden by the law, it might be punished; if it was not forbidden, it might be so declared, and all persons apprized of what they might or might not do.

This we have reason to believe is the true state of the case, and it is a repet.i.tion of that which was the subject of my letter of the 5th instant, which animadverted, not merely on the single fact of the granting commissions of war by one nation within the territory of another, but on the aggregate of the facts: for it states the opinion of the President to be, 'that the arming and equipping vessels in the ports of the United States, to cruise against nations with whom they are at peace, was incompatible with the sovereignty of the United States; that it made them instrumental to the annoyance of those nations, and thereby tended to commit their peace.' And this opinion is still conceived to be not contrary to the principles of natural law, the usage of nations, the engagements which unite the two people, nor the proclamation of the President, as you seem to think.

Surely, not a syllable can be found in the last mentioned instrument permitting the preparation of hostilities in the ports of the United States. Its object was to enjoin on our citizens 'a friendly conduct towards all the belligerent powers;' but a preparation of hostilities is the reverse of this.

None of the engagements in our treaties stipulate this permission. The XVIIth article of that of commerce, permits the armed vessels of either party to enter the ports of the other, and to depart with their prizes freely: but the entry of an armed vessel into a port, is one act; the equipping a vessel in that port, arming her, and manning her, is a different one, and not engaged by any article of the treaty.

You think, Sir, that this opinion is also contrary to the law of nature and usage of nations. We are of opinion it is dictated by that law and usage; and this had been very maturely inquired into before it was adopted as a principle of conduct. But we will not a.s.sume the exclusive right of saying what that law and usage is. Let us appeal to enlightened and disinterested judges. None is more so than Vattel. He says, L. 3, 8, 104. '_Tant qu'im peuple neutre veut jouir surement de cet etat, il doit montrer en toutes choses une exacte impartialite entre ceux qui se font la guerre. Car s'il favorise l'un au prejudice de l'autre, il ne pourra pas se plaindre, quand celui-ci le traitera comme adherent et a.s.socie de son ennemi. Sa neutralite seroit une neutralite frauduleuse, dont personne ne veut etre la dupe. Voyons done en quoi consiste cette impartialite qu'un peuple neutre doit garder_.

'_Elle se rapport uniquement a la guerre, et comprend deux choses, 1. Ne point donner de secours quand on n'y est pas oblige; ne fournir librement ni troupes, ni armes, ni munitions, ni rien de ce qui sert directement a la guerre. Je dis ne point donner de secours, et non pas en donner egalement; car il seroit absurde qu'un etat secourut en meme tems deux ennemis. Et puis il seroit impossible de le faire avec egalite; les memes choses, le merae nombre de troupes, la meme quant.i.te d'armes, de munitions, &c. fournies en des circonstances differentes, ne forment plus des secours equivalents_,' &c. If the neutral power may not, consistent with its neutrality, furnish men to either party, for their aid in war, as little can either enrol them in the neutral territory by the law of nations. Wolf, S. 1174, says, '_Puisque Je droit de lever des soldats est un droit de majeste, qui ne peut etre viole par une nation etrangere, il n'est pas permis de lever des soldats sur le territoire d'autrui, sans le consentement du maitre du territoire_.'

And Vattel, before cited, L. 3, 8, 15. '_Le droit de lever des soldats appartenant uniquement a la nation, ou au souverain, personne ne peut en envoler en pays etranger sans la permission du soverain: Ceux qui entreprennant d'engager des soldats en pays etranger sans la permission du souverain, et en general quiconque debauche les sujets d'autrui, viole un des droits les plus sacres du prince et de la nation. C'est le crime qu'on appelle plagiat, ou vol d'homme. Il n'est aucun etat police qui ne le punisse tres severement_.' &c. For I choose to refer you to the pa.s.sage, rather than follow it through all its developements. The testimony of these, and other writers, on the law and usage of nations, with your own just reflections on them, will satisfy you that the United States, in prohibiting all the belligerent powers from equipping, arming, and manning vessels of war in their ports, have exercised a right and a duty, with justice and with great moderation. By our treaties with several of the belligerent powers, which are a part of the laws of our land we have established a state of peace with them. But without appealing to treaties, we are at peace with them all by the law of nature. For by nature's law, man is at peace with man till some aggression is committed, which, by the same law, authorizes one to destroy another as his enemy. For our citizens then to commit murders and depredations on the members of nations at peace with us, or combine to do it, appeared to the executive, and to those whom they consulted, as much against the laws of the land, as to murder or rob, or combine to murder or rob its own citizens; and as much to require punishment, if done within their limits, where they have a territorial jurisdiction, or on the high seas, where they have a personal jurisdiction, that is to say, one which reaches their own citizens only, this being an appropriate part of each nation on an element where all have a common jurisdiction. So say our laws, as we understand them ourselves. To them the appeal is made; and whether we have construed them well or ill, the const.i.tutional judges will decide. Till that decision shall be obtained, the government of the United States must pursue what they think right with firmness, as is their duty. On the first attempt that was made, the President was desirous of involving in the censures of the law as few as might be. Such of the individuals only, therefore, as were citizens of the United States, were singled out for prosecution. But this second attempt being after full knowledge of what had been done on the first, and indicating a disposition to go on in opposition to the laws, they are to take their course against all persons concerned, whether citizens or aliens; the latter, while within our jurisdiction and enjoying the protection of the laws, being bound to obedience to them, and to avoid disturbances of our peace within, or acts which would commit it without, equally as citizens are.

I have the honor to be, with sentiments of great respect, and esteem, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER CLVIII.--TO MR. HAMMOND, June 19, 1793

TO MR. HAMMOND.

Philadelphia, June 19, 1793.

Sir,

I had the honor to address you a letter on the 29th of May was twelvemonth, on the articles still unexecuted of the treaty of peace between the two nations. The subject was extensive and important, and therefore rendered a certain degree of delay in the reply to be expected. But it has now become such as naturally to generate disquietude. The interest we have in the western posts, the blood and treasure which their detention costs us daily, cannot but produce a corresponding anxiety on our part. Permit me, therefore, to ask when I may expect the honor of a reply to my letter, and to a.s.sure you of the sentiments of respect, with which I have the honor to be, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER CLIX.--TO MESSRS. CARMICHAEL AND SHORT, June 30, 1793

TO MESSRS. CARMICHAEL AND SHORT.

Philadelphia, June 30, 1793.

Gentlemen,

I have received from Messrs. Viar and Jaudenes, the representatives of Spain at this place, a letter, which, whether considered in itself, or as the sequel of several others, conveys to us very disagreeable prospects of the temper and views of their court towards us. If this letter is a faithful expression of that temper, we presume it to be the effect of egregious misrepresentations by their agents in America.

Revising our own dispositions and proceedings towards that power, we can find in them nothing but those of peace and friends.h.i.+p for them; and conscious that this will be apparent from a true statement of facts, I shall proceed to give you such a one, to be communicated to the court of Madrid. If they find it very different from that conveyed to them by others, they may think it prudent to doubt, and to take and to give time for mutual inquiry and explanation. I shall proceed to give you this statement, beginning it from an early period.

At the commencement of the late war, the United States laid down as a rule of their conduct, to engage the Indian tribes within their neighborhood to remain strictly neutral. They accordingly strongly pressed it on them, urging that it was a family quarrel; with which they had nothing to do, and in which we wished them to take no part: and we strengthened these recommendations by doing them every act of friends.h.i.+p and good neighborhood, which circ.u.mstances left in our power. With some, these solicitations prevailed; but the greater part of them suffered themselves to be drawn into the war against us. They waged it in their usual cruel manner, murdering and scalping men, women, and children, indiscriminately, burning their houses, and desolating the country. They put us to vast expense, as well by the constant force we were obliged to keep up in that quarter, as by expeditions of considerable magnitude which we were under the necessity of sending into their country from time to time.

Peace being at length concluded with England, we had it also to conclude with them. They had made war on us without the least provocation or pretence of injury. They had added greatly to the cost of that war. They had insulted our feelings by their savage cruelties. They were by our arms completely subdued and humbled. Under all these circ.u.mstances, we had a right to demand substantial satisfaction and indemnification. We used that right, however, with real moderation. Their limits with us under the former government were generally ill defined, questionable, and the frequent cause of war. Sincerely desirous of living in their peace, of cultivating it by every act of justice and friends.h.i.+p, and of rendering them better neighbors by introducing among them some of the most useful arts, it was necessary to begin by a precise definition of boundary. Accordingly, at the treaties held with them, our mutual boundaries were settled; and notwithstanding our just right to concessions adequate to the circ.u.mstances of the case, we required such only as were inconsiderable; and for even these, in order that we might place them in a state of perfect conciliation, we paid them a valuable consideration, and granted them annuities in money which have been regularly paid, and were equal to the prices for which they have usually sold their lands.

Sensible, as they were, of the wrong they had done, they expected to make some indemnification, and were, for the most part, satisfied with the mode and measure of it. In one or two instances, where a dissatisfaction was observed to remain as to the boundaries agreed on, or doubts entertained of the authority of those with whom they were agreed, the United States invited the parties to new treaties, and rectified what appeared to be susceptible of it. This was particularly the case with the Creeks. They complained of an inconvenient cession of lands on their part, and by persons not duly representing their nation.

They were therefore desired to appoint a proper deputation to revise their treaty; and that there might be no danger of any unfair practices, they were invited to come to the seat of the General Government, and to treat with that directly. They accordingly came. A considerable proportion of what had been ceded, was on the revision yielded back to them, and nothing required in lieu of it: and though they would have been better satisfied to have had the whole restored, yet they had obtained enough to satisfy them well. Their nation, too, would have been satisfied, for they were conscious of their aggression, and of the moderation of the indemnity with which we had been contented. But at that time came among them an adventurer of the name of Bowles, who, acting from an impulse with which we are unacquainted, flattered them with the hope of some foreign interference, which should undo what had been done, and force us to consider the naked grant of their peace as a sufficient satisfaction for their having made war on us. Of this adventurer the Spanish government rid us: but not of his principles, his practices, and his excitements against us. These were more than continued by the officers commanding at New Orleans and Pensacola, and by agents employed by them and bearing their commission. Their proceedings have been the subject of former letters to you, and proofs of these proceedings have been sent to you. Those, with others now sent, establish the facts, that they called a.s.semblies of the southern Indians, openly persuaded them to disavow their treaties, and the limits therein established, promised to support them with all the powers which depended on them, a.s.sured them of the protection of their sovereign, gave them arms in great quant.i.ties for the avowed purpose of committing hostilities on us, and promised them future supplies to their utmost need. The Chickasaws, the most steady and faithful friends of these States, have remained unshaken by these practices. So also have the Chocktaws, for the most part. The Cherokees have been teazed into some expressions of discontent, delivered only to the Spanish Governors, or their agents; while to us, they have continued to speak the language of peace and friends.h.i.+p. One part of the nation only, settled at Cuckamogga and mixed with banditti and outcasts from the Shawanese and other tribes, acknowledging control from none, and never in a state of peace, have readily engaged in the hostilities against us to which they were encouraged. But what was much more important, great numbers of the Creeks, chiefly their young men, have yielded to these incitements, and have now, for more than a twelvemonth, been committing murders and desolations on our frontiers. Really desirous of living in peace with them, we have redoubled our efforts to produce the same disposition in them. We have borne with their aggressions, forbidden all returns of hostility against them, tied up the hands of our people, insomuch that few instances of retaliation have occurred even from our suffering citizens; we have multiplied our gratifications to them, fed them when starving from the produce of our own fields and labor. No longer ago than the last winter, when they had no other resource against famine and must have perished in great numbers, we carried into their country and distributed among them, gratuitously, ten thousand bushels of corn; and that too, at the same time, when their young men were daily committing murders on helpless women and children, on our frontiers. And though these depredations now involve more considerable parts of the nation, we are still demanding punishment of the guilty individuals, and shall be contented with it. These acts of neighborly kindness and support on our part, have not been confined to the Creeks, though extended to them in much the greatest degree. Like wants among the Chickasaws had induced us to send them also, at first, five hundred bushels of corn, and afterwards, fifteen hundred more. Our language to all the tribes of Indians has constantly been, to live in peace with one another, and in a most especial manner, we have used our endeavors with those in the neighborhood of the Spanish colonies, to be peaceable towards those colonies. I sent you on a former occasion the copy of a letter from the Secretary at War to Mr. Seagrove, one of our agents with the Indians, in that quarter, merely to convey to you the general tenor of the conduct marked out for those agents: and I desired you, in placing before the eyes of the Spanish ministry the very contrary conduct observed by their agents here, to invite them to a reciprocity of good offices with our Indian neighbors, each for the other, and to make our common peace the common object of both nations. I can protest that such have hitherto been the candid and zealous endeavors of this government, and that if its agents have in any instance acted in another way, it has been equally unknown and unauthorized by us, and that, were even probable proofs of it produced, there would be no hesitation to mark them with the disapprobation of the government. We expected the same friendly condescension from the court of Spain, in furnis.h.i.+ng you with proofs of the practices of the Governor De Carondelet in particular practices avowed by him, and attempted to be justified in his letter.

In this state of things, in such dispositions towards Spain and towards the Indians, in such a course of proceedings with respect to them, and while negotiations were inst.i.tuted at Madrid for arranging these and all other matters which might affect our friends.h.i.+p and good understanding, we received from Messrs. de Viar and Jaudenes their letter of May the 25th, which was the subject of mine of May the 31st, to you; and now again we have received that of the 18th instant, a copy of which is enclosed. This letter charges us, and in the most disrespectful style, with:

1. Exciting the Chickasaws to war on the Creeks.