"A detail of the measures that had been pursued and of their consequences, which would be laid before Congress, while it would confirm the want of success thus far, would evince that means, as proper and as efficacious as could have been devised, had been employed. The issue of some of them was still depending, but a favorable one, though not to be despaired of, was not promised by anything that had yet happened."
That a sanction, commonly respected even among savages, had been found insufficient to protect from massacre the emissaries of peace, was particularly noticed, and the families of those valuable citizens who had thus fallen victims to their zeal for the public service were recommended to the attention of the Legislature.
That unprovoked aggression had been made by the southern Indians, and that there was just cause for apprehension that the war would extend to them also, was mentioned as a subject of additional concern.
"Every practicable exertion had been made to be prepared for the alternative of prosecuting the war in the event of a failure of pacific overtures. A large proportion of the troops authorized to be raised had been recruited, though the numbers were yet incomplete, and pains had been taken to discipline them and put them in a condition for the particular kind of service to be performed. But a delay of operations, besides being dictated by the measures that were pursuing toward a pacific termination of the war, had been in itself deemed preferable to immature efforts."
The humane system which has since been pursued with partial success, of gradually civilizing the savages by improving their condition, of diverting them in some degree from hunting to domestic and agricultural occupations, by imparting to them some of the most simple and useful acquisitions of society, and of conciliating them to the United States by a beneficial and well-regulated commerce, had ever been a favorite object with the President, and the detailed view which was not taken of Indian affairs was concluded with a repetition of his recommendations of these measures.
The subject next adverted to in the speech was the impediments which, in some places, continued to embarrass the collection of the duties on spirits distilled within the United States. After observing that these impediments were lessening in local extent, but that symptoms of such increased opposition had lately manifested themselves in certain places as, in his judgment, to render his special interposition advisable, the President added: "Congress may be assured that nothing within constitutional and legal limits, which may depend on me, shall be wanting to assert and maintain the just authority of the laws. In fulfilling this trust I shall count entirely on the full cooperation of the other departments of government and upon the zealous support of all good citizens."
After noticing various objects which would require the attention of the Legislature, the President addressed himself particularly to the House of Representatives, and said: "I entertain a strong hope that the state of the national finances is now sufficiently matured to enable you to enter upon a systematic and effectual arrangement for the regular redemption and discharge of the public debt, according to the right which has been reserved to the government. No measure can be more desirable, whether viewed with an eye to its intrinsic importance, or to the general sentiments and wish of the nation."
The addresses of the two Houses in answer to the speech were, as usual, respectful and affectionate. The several subjects recommended to the attention of Congress, were noticed either in general terms, or in a manner to indicate a coincidence of sentiment between the legislative and executive departments. The turbulent spirit which had manifested itself in certain parts of the Union, was mentioned by both houses with a just degree of censure and the measures adopted by the President, as well as the resolution he expressed to compel obedience to the laws, were approved, and the House of Representatives, in the most unqualified terms, declared opinions in favor of systematic and effectual arrangements for discharging the public debt. But the subsequent proceedings of the Legislature did not fulfill the expectations excited by this auspicious commencement of the session.
At an early day in a committee of the whole House on the President's speech, Mr. Fitzsimmons moved "that measures for the reduction of so much of the public debt as the United States have a right to redeem, ought to be adopted, and that the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to report a plan for that purpose."
This motion was objected to by Mr. Madison as being premature. The state of the finances, he thought, was not sufficiently understood to authorize the adoption of the measure it contemplated. The debate, however, soon took a different direction.
On a motion made, directing the Secretaries of the Treasury and of War to attend the House and to give information, severe denunciations were poured forth against the unconstitutionality of subjecting the representatives to the control of the heads of the executive departments. The motions for requiring a report from Hamilton on a plan for redeeming the public debt, and for paying a debt owing to the bank, which were brought in by Mr. Fitzsimmons, renewed the contest, but, although Madison and others opposed the reference to the Secretary of the Treasury, the resolution was carried.
Hamilton's report proposed a plan for the redemption of the debt. But the expenses of the Indian war rendering it unsafe, in his opinion, to rest absolutely on the existing revenue, he also proposed to extend the internal taxes to pleasure horses, or pleasure carriages, as might be deemed most advisable. For the reimbursement of the bank, he recommended that power be conferred to negotiate a loan for two million dollars—the dividends on the shares held by the government to be pledged for the interest, and, as the government paid six per cent, to the bank, he relied on the saving that would be effected by borrowing at a lower rate of interest. The consideration of this report was deferred on various grounds, and a motion was made to reduce the military establishment. The debate was long and earnestly contested, but the motion was rejected on the 5th of January, 1793.
A few weeks later another subject was introduced into the House which absorbed the attention of the members and put an end, for the present session, to every measure connected with the finances.
Mr. Giles, on the 23d of January (1793), moved several resolutions, requiring information, among other things, on various points growing out of the loans authorized by Congress in August, 1790. The object was to inculpate the Secretary of the Treasury respecting the management and application of these loans, and of the revenue generally. Mr. Giles indulged himself in remarks which clearly showed the animus of his proceedings, and it was his determination to prove to the House that there was a large balance in the funds unaccounted for. The resolutions were agreed to without debate, as was only due to Mr. Hamilton, and soon after, three successive and able reports were sent in, containing the information required.
In these reports a full exposition was given of the views and motives of the secretary, in the conduct of the treasury department. It is also evident that Hamilton felt aggrieved at this attack upon his reputation, and he did not hesitate to use language of great plainness and severity, observing in conclusion: "Thus have I not only furnished a just and affirmative view of the real situation of the public accounts, but have likewise shown, I trust, in a conspicuous manner, fallacies enough in the statements, from which the inference of an unaccounted-for balance is drawn, to evince that it is one tissue of error."
But the matter did not end here. Mr. Giles, on the 28th of February (1793), submitted to the House a series of nine resolutions, containing charges against the secretary. The substance of them was, that he had failed to give Congress information, in due time, of moneys drawn from Europe; that he had violated the law of the 4th of August, 1790, by an unauthorized application of money borrowed under it; that he had drawn part of the money into the United States, without any instructions from the President; that he had exceeded his authority in making loans, under the acts; that, without instructions from the President, he had drawn more of the money borrowed in Holland than he was authorized by those acts, and that he had been guilty of an indecorum to the House, in undertaking to judge its motives in calling for information. The debate was continued until the night of March 1st (1793), and was characterized by unusual bitterness. It terminated in a rejection of the resolutions and consequently in an entire exculpation of Hamilton from all just censure. The highest number voting in favor of any one of the resolutions was sixteen.
"The whole of the session was spent," says Mr. Gibbs, "in sifting the conduct of the secretary. {8} The investigation served one purpose of the opposition—it prevented any question being taken on the report. It seems somewhat anomalous, that a party which had charged the administration with a wish to perpetuate the debt, should thus have thwarted its measures to discharge it; and an explanation of the fact can only be found in a fixed determination to break down the secretary."
The other business of the session may be briefly stated. The claim for compensation for loss on the certificates in which they had been paid, advanced by the officers of the old Continental army, was rejected. An act respecting "fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from the service of their masters," was passed, early in February, by a vote of forty-eight to seven. The trade with the Indians was regulated, and an attempt was made to initiate an amendment to the constitution, because the State of Georgia, sued in the Federal courts for a debt due to a citizen of another State, had suffered judgment by default. And nearly two millions of dollars were appropriated to the public service, in addition to the almost three millions more for interest on the debt. On Saturday, the 3d of March (1793), a constitutional period was put to the existence of the present Congress. The members separated with obvious symptoms of extreme irritation. "Various causes," says Marshall, "the most prominent of which have already been noticed, had combined to organize two distinct parties in the United States, which were rapidly taking the form of a ministerial and an opposition party. By that in opposition, the President was not yet openly denounced. His personal influence was too great to be encountered by a direct avowal that he was at the head of their adversaries, and his public conduct did not admit of a suspicion that he could allow himself to rank as the chief of a party. Nor could public opinion he seduced to implicate him in the ambitious plans and dark schemes for the subversion of liberty, which were ascribed to a part of the administration, and to the leading members who had supported the measures of finance adopted by the Legislature."
Yet it was becoming apparent that things were taking a course which must inevitably involve him in the political conflicts which were about to take place. It was apparent that the charges against the Secretary of the Treasury would not be relinquished, and that they were of a nature to affect the chief magistrate materially, should his countenance not be withdrawn from that officer. It was equally apparent that the fervor of democracy, which was perpetually manifesting itself in the papers, in invectives against levees, against the trappings of royalty, and against the marks of peculiar respect which were paid to the President, must soon include him more pointedly in its strictures.
These divisions, which are inherent in the nature of popular governments, by which the chief magistrate, however unexceptionable his conduct, and however exalted his character, must, sooner or later, be more or less affected, were beginning to be essentially influenced by the great events of Europe.
That revolution which has been the admiration, the wonder, and the terror of the civilized world, had, from its commencement, been viewed in America with the deepest interest. In its first stage, but one sentiment respecting it prevailed, and that was a belief, accompanied with an ardent wish, that it would improve the condition of France, extend the blessings of liberty, and promote the happiness of the human race. When the labors of the convention had terminated in a written constitution, this unanimity of opinion was in some degree impaired. By a few who had thought deeply on the science of government, and who, if not more intelligent, certainly judge more dispassionately than their fellow-citizens, that instrument was believed to contain the principles of self-destruction. It was feared that a system so ill balanced could not be permanent. A deep impression was made on the same persons by the influence of the galleries over the Legislature, and of mobs over the executive; by the tumultuous assemblages of the people, and their licentious excesses during the short and sickly existence of the regal authority. These did not appear to be the symptoms of a healthy constitution or of genuine freedom. Persuaded that the present state of things could not last, they doubted and they feared for the future.
In total opposition to this sentiment was that of the public generally. There seems to be something infectious in the example of a powerful and enlightened nation verging toward democracy, which impose on the human mind, and leads human reason in fetters. Novelties, introduced by such a nation, are stripped of the objections which had been preconceived against them, and long-settled opinions yield to the overwhelming weight of such dazzling authority. It wears the semblance of being the sense of mankind, breaking loose from the shackles which had been imposed by artifice, and asserting the freedom and the dignity of his nature.
The constitution of France, therefore, was generally received with unqualified plaudits. The establishment of a legislature consisting of a single body was defended not only as being adapted to the particular situation of that country, but as being right in itself. Certain anonymous writers, who supported the theory of a balanced government, were branded as the advocates of royalty and of aristocracy. To question the duration of the present order of things was thought to evidence an attachment to unlimited monarchy, or a blind prejudice in favor of the institutions of Great Britain, and the partiality of America in favor of a senate was visibly declining.
In this stage of the revolution, however, the division of sentiment was not marked with sufficient distinctness, nor the passions of the people agitated with sufficient violence, for any powerful effect to be produced on the two parties in America. But when the monarchy was completely overthrown and a republic decreed, {9} the people of the United States seemed electrified by the measure, and its influence was felt by the whole society. The war in which the several potentates of Europe were engaged against France, although in almost every instance declared by that power, was pronounced to be a war for the extirpation of human liberty and for the banishment of free government from the face of the earth. The preservation of the constitution of the United States was supposed to depend on its issue, and the coalition against France was treated as a coalition against America also.
A cordial wish for the success of the French arms, or rather that the war might terminate without any diminution of French power, and in such a manner as to leave the people of that country free to choose their own form of government, was perhaps universal, but, respecting the probable issue of their internal conflicts, perfect unanimity of opinion did not prevail. By some few individuals, the practicability of governing by a system formed on the republican model, an immense, populous, and military nation, whose institutions, habits, and morals were adapted to monarchy, and which was surrounded by armed neighbors, was deemed a problem which time alone could solve. The circumstances under which the abolition of royalty was declared, the massacres which preceded it, the scenes of turbulence and violence which were acted in every part of the nation, appeared to them to present an awful and doubtful state of things, respecting which no certain calculations could be made, and the idea that a republic was to be introduced and supported by force, was, to them, a paradox in politics. Under the influence of these appearances the apprehension was entertained that, if the ancient monarchy should not be restored a military despotism would be established. By the many, these unpopular doubts were deemed unpardonable heresies, and the few to whom they were imputed, were pronounced hostile to liberty. A suspicion that the unsettled state of things in France had contributed to suspend the payment of the debt to that nation had added to the asperity with which the resolutions on that subject were supported, and the French revolution will be found to have had great influence on the strength of parties and on the subsequent political transactions of the United States.
1. Footnote: Griswold, "Republican Court."
2. Footnote: "Republican Court."
3. Footnote: For designating the site of the new seat of government. Washington remained with the commissioners several days engaged in this business.
4. Footnote: The following is the message which he delivered on this occasion:
I have maturely considered the act passed by the two Houses, entitled "An act for the apportionment of representatives among the several States according to the first enumeration," and I return it to your House, wherein it originated, with the following objections.
First. The constitution has prescribed that representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, and there is no proportion or divisor which, applied to the respective numbers of the States, will yield the number and allotment of representatives proposed by the bill.
Secondly. The constitution has also provided that the number of representatives shall not exceed one for thirty thousand—which restriction is by the context, and by fair and obvious construction, to be applied to the separate and respective numbers of the States—and the bill has allotted to eight of the States more than one for thirty thousand.
5. Footnote: Marshall.
6. Footnote: The salary of the Secretary of State, which was the highest, was $3,500; that of the Secretary of the Treasury was $2,000. Hamilton was finally obliged to resign, to gain a living.
7. Footnote: Mrs. Washington's maiden name was Frances Bassett. She was the daughter of Colonel Bassett, an intimate friend of Washington.
8. Footnote: "Administrations of Washington and Adams."
9. Footnote: This event was announced to the President by the minister plenipotentiary of France, at Philadelphia, in February, 1793. Through the Secretary of State an answer was returned, of which the following is an extract:
"The President receives with great satisfaction this attention of the executive council, and the desire they have manifested of making known to us the resolution entered into by the National Convention, even before a definitive regulation of their new establishment could take place. Be assured, sir, that the government and the citizens of the United States view with the most sincere pleasure every advance of your nation towards its happiness, an object essentially connected with its liberty; and they consider the union of principles and pursuits between our two countries as a link which binds still closer their interests and affections.
"We earnestly wish, on our part, that these our mutual dispositions may be improved to mutual good, by establishing our commercial intercourse on principles as friendly to natural right and freedom as are those of our governments."
As the time approached for the expiration of Washington's first term of office as President of the United States, a great deal of anxiety was felt lest he should determine on a final retirement from public life. It was well known that he had originally accepted the office with extreme reluctance, that his attention to its duties had impaired his health, and that he was very desirous to pass the remainder of his life in retirement and repose. But at the same time it was felt that a crisis in public affairs was impending which imperatively demanded the whole force of his character and the whole influence of his popularity to sustain the government. Even at the period when the Federal government was first inaugurated, the call of his country to give it strength and permanence was not more urgent than that which now summoned him to save it from the rage of party spirit. Troubles and difficulties were also threatening the country from abroad as well as internal factions at home, and the true friends of the country felt that none but Washington was equal to the emergency. He received many letters urging his continuance in office. Three of these were from members of the cabinet—Jefferson, Hamilton, and Randolph.
Jefferson expressed himself as follows:
"When you first mentioned to me your purpose of retiring from the government, though I felt all the magnitude of the event, I was in a considerable degree silent. I knew that to such a mind as yours persuasion was idle and impertinent; that, before forming your decision, you had weighed all the reasons for and against the measure, had made up your mind on full view of them, and that there could be little hope of changing the result. Pursuing my reflections, too, I knew we were some day to try to walk alone, and if the essay should be made while you should be alive and looking on, we should derive confidence from that circumstance and resource if it failed. The public mind, too, was then calm and confident, and therefore in a favorable state for making the experiment. Had no change of circumstances supervened, I should not, with any hope of success, have now ventured to propose to you a change of purpose. But the public mind is no longer so confident and serene, and that from causes in which you are no ways personally mixed.
"The confidence of the whole Union is centered in you. Your being at the helm will be more than an answer to every argument which can be used to alarm and lead the people in any quarter into violence or secession. North and South will hang together, if they have you to hang on; and if the first corrective of a numerous representation should fail in its effect, your presence will give time for trying others not inconsistent with the union and peace of the States.
"I am perfectly aware of the oppression under which your present office lays your mind, and of the ardor with which you pant for retirement to domestic life. But there is sometimes an eminence of character on which society have such peculiar claims, as to control the predilection of the individual for a particular walk of happiness and restrain him to that alone arising from the present and future benedictions of mankind. This seems to be your condition, and the law imposed on you by Providence in forming your character and fashioning the events on which it was to operate, and it is to motives like these and not to personal anxieties of mine or others, who have no right to call on you for sacrifices, that I appeal from your former determination, and urge a revisal of it, on the ground of change in the aspect of things. Should an honest majority result from the new and enlarged representation, should those acquiesce, whose principles or interests they may control, your wishes for retirement would be gratified with less danger, as soon as that shall be manifest, without awaiting the completion of the second period of four years. One or two sessions will determine the crisis, and I cannot but hope that you can resolve to add one or two more to the many years you have already sacrificed to the good of mankind.
"The fear of suspicion that any selfish motive of continuance in office may enter into this solicitation on my part obliges me to declare that no such motive exists. It is a thing of mere indifference to the public whether I retain or relinquish my purpose of closing my tour with the first periodical renovation of the government. I know my own measure too well to suppose that my services contribute anything to the public confidence or the public utility. Multitudes can fill the office in which you have been pleased to place me, as much to their advantage and satisfaction. I, therefore, have no motive to consult but my own inclination, which is bent irresistibly on the tranquil enjoyment of my family, my farm, and my books. I should repose among them, it is true, in far greater security, if I were to know that you remained at the watch, and I hope it will be so. To the inducements urged from a view of our domestic affairs I will add a bare mention of what indeed need only be mentioned, that weighty motives for your continuance are to be found in our foreign affairs. I think it probable that both the Spanish and English negotiations, if not completed before your purpose is known, will be suspended from the moment it is known, and that the latter nation will then use double diligence in fomenting the Indian war.
"With my wishes for the future I shall, at the same time, express my gratitude of the past, at least my portion of it, and beg permission to follow you, whether in public or private life, with those sentiments of sincere attachment and respect with which I am unalterably, dear sir, your affectionate friend and humble servant."
Extract from Hamilton's letter:
"I received the most sincere pleasure at finding, in our last conversation, that there was some relaxation in the disposition you had before discovered to decline a re-election. Since your departure I have lost no opportunity of sounding the opinions of persons whose opinions were worth knowing on these two points: First, the effect of your declining upon the public affairs, and upon your own reputation; secondly, the effect of your continuing in reference to the declarations you have made of your disinclination to public life. And I can truly say that I have not found the least difference of sentiment on either point. The impression is uniform, that your declining would be to be deplored as the greatest evil that could befall the country at the present juncture, and as critically hazardous to your own reputation; that your continuance will be justified in the mind of every friend to his country by the evident necessity for it.
"It is clear, says everyone with whom I have conversed, that the affairs of the national government are not yet firmly established; that its enemies, generally speaking, are as inveterate as ever; that their enmity has been sharpened by its success, and by all the resentments which flow from disappointed predictions and mortified vanity; that a general and strenuous effort is making in every State to place the administration of it in the hands of its enemies, as if they were its safest guardians; that the period of the next House of Representatives is likely to prove the crisis of its permanent character; that, if you continue in office, nothing materially mischievous is to be apprehended, if you quit much is to be dreaded; that the same motives which induced you to accept originally ought to decide you to continue till matters have assumed a more determinate aspect; that indeed it would have been better, as it regards your own character, that you had never consented to come forward than now to leave the business unfinished and in danger of being undone; that, in the event of storms arising, there would be an imputation either of want of foresight or want of firmness, and, in fine, that on public and personal accounts, on patriotic and prudential considerations, the clear path to be pursued by you will be again to obey the voice of your country, which it is not doubted will be as earnest and as unanimous as ever.
"I trust, sir, and I pray God, that you will determine to make a further sacrifice of your tranquility and happiness to the public good. I trust that it need not continue above a year or two more. And I think that it will be more eligible to retire from office before the expiration of the term of election than to decline a re-election.
"The sentiments I have delivered upon this occasion I can truly say proceed exclusively from an anxious concern for the public welfare and an affectionate personal attachment. These dispositions must continue to govern, in every vicissitude, one who has the honor to be very truly and respectfully, sir, yours, etc."
Randolph wrote as follows:
"I have persuaded myself that this letter, though unconnected with any official relation, and upon a subject to the decision of which you alone are competent, will be received in the spirit with which it is written. The Union, for the sake of which I have encountered various embarrassments, not wholly unknown to you, and sacrificed some opinions, which, but for its jeopardy, I should never have surrendered, seems to me to be, now, at the eve of a crisis. It is feared by those who take a serious interest in the affairs of the United States that you will refuse the chair of government at the approaching election. If such an event must happen indulge me, at least, in the liberty of opening to you a course of thought, which a calm attention to the Federal government has suggested, and no bias of party has influenced.
"It cannot have escaped you that divisions are formed in our politics as systematic as those which prevail in Great Britain. Such as opposed the constitution, from a hatred to the Union, can never be conciliated by any overture or atonement. By others it is meditated to push the construction of Federal powers to every tenable extreme. A third class, republican in principle, and, thus far, in my judgment, happy in their discernment of our welfare, have, notwithstanding, mingled with their doctrines a fatal error—that the State assemblies are to be resorted to as the engines of correction to the Federal administration. The honors belonging to the chief magistracy are objects of no common solicitude to a few, who compose a fourth denomination.
"The fuel which has been already gathered for combustion wants no addition. But how awfully might it be increased were the violence, which is now suspended by a universal submission to your pretensions, let loose by your resignation! Permit me, then, in the fervor of a dutiful and affectionate attachment to you, to beseech you to penetrate the consequences of a dereliction of the reins. The constitution would never have been adopted, but from a knowledge that you had once sanctioned it, and an expectation that you would execute it. It is in a state of probation. The most inauspicious struggles are past, but the public deliberations need stability. You alone can give them stability. You suffered yourself to yield when the voice of your country summoned you to the administration. Should a civil war arise you cannot stay at home. And now much easier will it be to disperse the factions which are rushing to this catastrophe than to subdue them after they shall appear in arms? It is the fixed opinion of the world that you surrender nothing incomplete.
"I am not unapprised of many disagreeable sensations which have labored in your breast. But, let them spring from any cause whatsoever, of one thing I think I am sure (and I speak this from a satisfactory inquiry lately made), that, if a second opportunity shall be given to the people of showing their gratitude, they will not be less unanimous than before."
Washington's own views we learn from the following letter in answer to Randolph:
"The purpose of this letter is merely to acknowledge the receipt of your favors of the 5th and 13th instant, and to thank you for the information contained in both, without entering into the details of either.
"With respect, however, to the interesting subject treated in that of the 5th, I can express but one sentiment at this time, and that is a wish, a devout one, that, whatever my ultimate determination shall be, it may be for the best. The subject never recurs to my mind but with additional poignancy, and, from the declining state of the health of my nephew, to whom my concerns of a domestic and private nature are entrusted, it comes with aggravated force. But as the all-wise Disposer of events has hitherto watched over my steps, I trust that, in the important one I may soon be called upon to take, He will mark the course so plainly as that I cannot mistake the way. In full hope of this I will take no measures for the present that will not leave me at liberty to decide from circumstances and the best lights I can obtain on the subject.
"I shall be happy, in the meantime, to see a cessation of the abuses of public officers and of almost every measure of government with which some of the gazettes are so strongly impregnated, and which cannot fail, if persevered in with the malignancy with which they now teem, of rendering the Union asunder. The seeds of discontent, distrust, and irritation which are so plentifully sown, can scarcely fail to produce this effect, and to mar that prospect of happiness which, perhaps, never beamed with more effulgence upon any people under the sun, and this too at a time when all Europe is gazing with admiration at the brightness of our prospects. And for what is all this? Among other things, to afford nuts for our transatlantic—(what shall I call them?)—foes.
"In a word, if government and the officers of it are to be the constant theme for newspaper abuse, and this too without condescending to investigate the motives or the facts, it will be impossible, I conceive, for any man living to manage the helm or to keep the machine together. But I am running from my text, and therefore will only add assurances of the affectionate esteem and regard with which I am, etc."
To the remonstrances of his immediate advisers in the Cabinet were added many more of the same tenor from other friends and correspondents. He had, in fact, already determined to retire at this time, and had accordingly prepared a farewell address to the people for the occasion. But he had never publicly declared this intention, and, urged thus strongly by leading men of all parties, he finally consented to remain in office.
"Respecting the person who should fill the office of Vice-President," says Marshall, "the public was divided. The profound statesman who had been called to the duties of that station had drawn upon himself a great degree of obloquy by some political tracts, in which he had labored to maintain the proposition that a balance in government was essential to the preservation of liberty. In these disquisitions he was supposed by his opponents to have discovered sentiments in favor of distinct orders in society, and, although he had spoken highly of the constitution of the United States, it was imagined that his balance could be maintained only by hereditary classes. He was also understood to be friendly to the system of finance which had been adopted, and was believed to be among the few who questioned the durability of the French republic. His great services and acknowledged virtues were therefore disregarded, and a competitor was sought for among those who had distinguished themselves in the opposition. The choice was directed from Mr. Jefferson by a constitutional restriction on the power of the electors, which would necessarily deprive him of the vote to be given by Virginia. It being necessary to designate some other opponent to Mr. Adams, George Clinton, the Governor of New York, was selected for this purpose.
"Throughout the war of the Revolution, this gentleman had filled the office of chief magistrate of his native State, and, under circumstances of real difficulty, had discharged its duties with a courage and an energy which secured the esteem of the Commander-in-Chief and gave him a fair claim to the favor of his country. Embracing afterward with ardor the system of State supremacy, he had contributed greatly to the rejection of the resolutions for investing Congress with the power of collecting an impost on imported goods, and had been conspicuous for his determined hostility to the constitution of the United States. His sentiments respecting the measures of the government were known to concur with those of the minority in Congress."
Both parties seemed confident in their strength, and both made the utmost exertions to insure success. On opening the ballots in the Senate chamber (Feb. 13, 1793), it appeared that the unanimous suffrage of his country had been once more conferred on General Washington, and that Mr. Adams had received a plurality of the votes. {1}
The ceremonial to be observed at the inauguration was the subject of a difference of opinion, and a Cabinet council was called to take the matter into consideration. Jefferson and Hamilton thought that the oath ought to be administered in private, and that one of the judges of the Supreme Court should attend to this duty at the President's own house. Knox and Randolph were of a different opinion and decided that the ceremony should take place in public. Washington coincided with them in their views, and it was finally decided at a subsequent Cabinet meeting, on the 1st of March, that the inauguration should take place in the Senate chamber.
Among the senators who were present on this occasion were John Langdon of New Hampshire, one of the purest and most disinterested of the Revolutionary veterans; Oliver Ellsworth, from Connecticut, afterward chief justice of the United States; Roger Sherman, also from Connecticut, one of the committee for preparing the Declaration of Independence; Rufus King, the eloquent statesman from New York; Robert Morris, the great financier, from Pennsylvania, and James Monroe, afterward President of the United States, from Virginia.
The proceedings, as recorded in Mr. Benton's "Abridgment of the Debates of Congress," were as follows:
"Agreeably to notice given by the President of the United States on the second instant, he came to the Senate chamber and took his seat in the chair usually assigned to the president of the Senate, who, on this occasion was seated at the right, and in advance of the President of the United States; a seat on the left, and also in advance, being provided for Judge Cushing, appointed to administer the oath. The doors of the Senate chamber being open, the heads of the departments, foreign ministers, the late speaker, and such members of the late House of Representatives as were in town, together with as many other spectators as could be accommodated, were present.
"After a short pause the president of the Senate arose and addressed the President of the United States as follows:
"'Sir:—One of the judges of the Supreme Court of the United States is now present and ready to administer to you the oath required by the constitution to be taken by the President of the United States.'
"On which the President of the United States, rising from his seat, was pleased to address the audience as follows:
"'FELLOW-CITIZENS:—I am again called upon, by the voice of my country, to execute the functions of its chief magistrate. When the occasion proper for it shall arrive, I shall endeavor to express the high sense I entertain of this distinguished honor, and of the confidence which has been reposed in me by the people of United America.
"'Previous to the execution of any official act of the President, the constitution requires an oath of office. This oath I am now about to take, and in your presence; that, if it shall be found during my administration of the government, I have, in any instance, violated, willingly, or knowingly, the injunction thereof, I may (besides incurring constitutional punishment) be subject to the upbraidings of all who are now witnesses of the present solemn ceremony.'
"Judge Cushing then administered the oath of office required by the constitution, after which the President of the United States retired, and the spectators dispersed."
The record of the proceedings thus given by Mr. Benton gives but a very imperfect idea of the actual scene. Fortunately, an eye-witness, Arthur J. Stansbury, for twenty-five years a reporter of Congress, has given us a very lively and graphic description of the scene in his "Recollections and Anecdotes of the Presidents of the United States." {2}
We copy his description in full:
"But I once had," says Mr. Stansbury, "an opportunity far more favorable of beholding this greatest of men, under circumstances the best possible for exhibiting him to the fullest advantage. It was a privilege which could happen but once to any man, and I esteem the hour when I enjoyed it as one of the brightest moments I was ever permitted to know. Its remembrance yet glows vividly on my mind; years have not dimmed it; the whole scene is yet before me; and I need not say with what force repeated public occasions of a like kind have since recalled it to remembrance. Yes, it was my favored lot to see and hear President Washington address the Congress of the United States, when elected for the last time. Of men now living, how few can say the same!
"I was but a schoolboy at the time, and had followed one of the many groups of people who, from all quarters, were making their way to the hall in Chestnut street, at the corner of Fifth, where the two Houses of Congress then held their sittings, and where they were that day to be addressed by the President, on the opening of his second term of office. Boys can often manage to work their way through a crowd better than men can; at all events, it so happened that I succeeded in reaching the steps of the hall, from which elevation, looking in every direction, I could see nothing but human heads—a vast fluctuating sea, swaying to and fro, and filling every accessible place which commanded even a distant view of the building. They had congregated, not with the hope of getting into the hall, for that was physically impossible, but that they might see Washington. Many an anxious look was cast in the direction from which he was expected to come, till at length, true to the appointed hour (he was the most punctual of men), an agitation was observable on the outskirts of the crowd, which gradually opened and gave space for the approach of an elegant white coach, drawn by six superb white horses, having on its four sides beautiful designs of the four seasons, painted by Cipriani. It slowly made its way till it drew up immediately in front of the hall. The rush was now tremendous. But as the coach door opened, there issued from it two gentlemen, with long white wands, who, with some difficulty, parted the people, so as to open a passage from the carriage to the steps, on which the fortunate schoolboy had achieved a footing, and whence the whole proceeding could be distinctly seen. As the person of the President emerged from the carriage, a universal shout rent the air, and continued, as he very deliberately mounted the steps. On reaching the platform, he paused, looking back on the carriage, thus affording to the anxiety of the people the indulgence they desired, of feasting their eyes upon his person. Never did a more majestic personage present himself to the public gaze. He was within two feet of me; I could have touched his clothes; but I should as soon have thought of touching an electric battery. Boy as I was, I felt as in the presence of a Divinity. As he turned to enter the hall, the gentlemen with the white wands preceded him, and, with still greater difficulty than before, repressed the people, and cleared a way to the great staircase. As he ascended, I ascended with him, step by step, creeping close to the wall, and almost hidden by the skirts of his coat. Nobody looked at me; everybody was looking at him; and thus I was permitted, unnoticed, to glide along, and, happily, to make my way (where so many were vainly longing and struggling to enter) into the lobby of the chamber of the House of Representatives. Once in, I was safe; for had I even been seen by the officers in attendance, it would have been impossible to get me out again. I saw near me a large pyramidal stove, which, fortunately, had but little fire in it, and on which I forthwith clambered, until I had attained a secure perch, from which every part of the hall could be deliberately and distinctly surveyed. Depend upon it, I made use of my eyes.
"On either side of the broad aisle that was left vacant in the center were assembled the two houses of Congress. As the President entered, all rose, and remained standing till he had ascended the steps at the upper end of the chamber and taken his seat in the speaker's chair. It was an impressive moment. Notwithstanding that the spacious apartment, floor, lobby, galleries, and all approaches were crowded to their utmost capacity, not a sound was heard; the silence of expectation was unbroken and profound; every breath seemed suspended. He was dressed in a full suit of the richest black velvet; his lower limbs in short clothes with diamond knee buckles and black silk stockings. His shoes, which were brightly japanned, were surmounted with large square silver buckles. His hair, carefully displayed in the manner of the day, was richly powdered, and gathered behind into a black silk bag, on which was a bow of black ribbon. In his hand he carried a plain cocked hat, decorated with the American cockade. He wore by his side a light, slender dress-sword, in a green shagreen scabbard, with a richly ornamented hilt. His gait was deliberate, his manner solemn but self-possessed, and he presented, altogether, the most august human figure I had then or have since beheld.
"At the head of the Senate stood Thomas Jefferson, in a blue coat, single breasted, with large bright basket-buttons, his vest and small-clothes of crimson. I remember being struck with his animated countenance, of a brick-red hue, his bright eye and foxy hair, as well as by his tall, gaunt, ungainly form and square shoulders. A perfect contrast was presented by the pale reflective face and delicate figure of James Madison, and above all, by the short, burly, bustling form of General Knox, with ruddy cheek, prominent eye, and still more prominent proportions of another kind. In the semicircle which was formed behind the chair, and on either hand of the President, my boyish gaze was attracted by the splendid attire of the Chevalier d'Yrujo, the Spanish ambassador, then the only foreign minister near our infant government. His glittering star, his silk chapeau bras, edged with ostrich feathers, his foreign air and courtly bearing, contrasted strongly with those nobility of nature's forming who stood around him. It was a very fair representation of the old world and the new. How often has the same reflection occurred to me since, on witnessing the glittering and now numerous company of foreign dignitaries collected round our President by an inauguration day, or the recurrence of our national anniversary! True, the individuals who form that brilliant coterie are, for the most part, men eminent for general intelligence, as well as the virtues of private life—men who meet, and well deserve, a cordial welcome on our shores and often carry from it the sincerest regret. But how do the personal sentiments and characters of the men themselves put out the blaze of the gold and diamonds with which their governments had covered them! And if, even in the unadorned presence of his successors, these decorations seem puerile in Republican eyes, how would they have faded away and been lost in the chilling grandeur of the public presence of Washington!
"Having retained his seat for a few moments, while the members resumed their seats, the President rose, and, taking from his breast a roll of manuscript, proceeded to read his address. His voice was full and sonorous, deep and rich in its tones, free from that trumpet ring which it could assume amid the tumult of battle (and which is said to have been distinctly heard above all its roar), but sufficiently loud and clear to fill the chamber, and be heard, with perfect ease, in its most remote recesses. The address was of considerable length; its topics, of course, I forget, for I was too young to understand them; I only remember, in its latter part, some reference to the Wabash river (then a new name to my ear), and to claims or disputes on the part of the Indian tribes. He read, as he did everything else, with a singular serenity and composure, with manly ease and dignity, but without the smallest attempt at display.
"Having concluded, he laid the manuscript upon the table before him and resumed his seat, when, after a slight pause, he rose and withdrew, the members rising and remaining on their feet until he left the chamber.
"The paper was then taken up by Mr. Beckley, the clerk of the House, and again read from beginning to end. Beckley's enunciation, by the by, was admirably clear, giving every syllable of every word, and I may say, he was almost the only officer, whose official duty it is to read, whom I ever heard read well.
"This form having been gone through, the members of the Senate retired and I took advantage of the bustle to descend from my unwonted and presumptuous elevation, and mingle with the dissolving crowd."
These recollections of Mr. Stansbury present a much livelier view of the transactions of that memorable day; than that which any reader's imagination can supply by the aid of the official record.
Washington was now once more plunged into the troubled ocean of public affairs. Before following him into new scenes of self-sacrifice and disinterestedness in the service of his country, we pause to notice a pleasing act of private friendship, which, with his usual delicacy, he calls an act of simple justice. In consequence of the active part which he had taken in the French revolution, Washington's bosom friend, Lafayette, had become a prisoner to the King of Prussia, and was detained in captivity. The Marchioness Lafayette, after being a prisoner in Paris, had been suffered to retire to her husband's estate, and reside there under the safeguard of the municipality, without permission to correspond with her friends. Ignorant of her actual residence, but supposing that she might be suffering for want of ready money, Washington sent her a considerable sum, and wrote as follows:
"MADAM:—If I had words that could convey to you an adequate idea of my feelings on the present situation of the Marquis de Lafayette, this letter would appear to you in a different garb. The sole object in writing to you now is, to inform you that I have deposited in the hands of Mr. Nicholas Van Staphorst, of Amsterdam, two thousand three hundred and ten guilders, Holland currency, equal to two hundred guineas, subject to your orders.
"This sum is, I am certain, the least I am indebted for services rendered to me by the Marquis de Lafayette, of which I never yet have received the account. I could add much, but it is best, perhaps, that I should say little on this subject. Your goodness will supply any deficiency.
"The uncertainty of your situation, after all the inquiries I have made, has occasioned a delay in this address and remittance, and even now, the measure adopted is more the effect of a desire to find where you are, than from any knowledge I have obtained of your residence.
"At all times, and under all circumstances, you and yours will possess the affectionate regards of him who has the honor to be, etc."
Shortly after writing this letter Washington received one from the marchioness, and still later another, both written before the above letter reached her. She requested Washington's interference with the Prussian government on behalf of Lafayette, and was desirous, if he could be released, that he and his family should reside in the United States. Everything was done that could be done, by Washington and the American ministers in Europe, to obtain Lafayette's release, but it was not effected till several years after, and then through other means.
During the recess of Congress, Washington twice visited Mount Vernon, once for a few days in April (1793), and again, for two or three weeks in June and July. On the 4th of July he was present at the celebration of the national anniversary by the citizens of Alexandria. He was prevented from spending more time at Mount Vernon by the pressure of public business, which was now assuming a new and very unpleasant aspect.
During Washington's short visit to Mount Vernon in April, he received a letter from Jefferson, dated April 7th, (1793), informing him that France had declared war against England and Holland. Instantly perceiving the danger of the United States becoming involved in the hostilities of these nations, Washington, on the 12th of April, wrote in reply to Jefferson: "War having actually commenced between France and Great Britain, it behooves the government of this country to use every means in its power to prevent the citizens thereof from embroiling us with either of those powers, by endeavoring to maintain a strict neutrality. I therefore require that you will give the subject mature consideration, that such measures as shall be deemed most likely to effect this desirable purpose may be adopted without delay, for I have understood that vessels are already designated as privateers, and are preparing accordingly. Such other measures as may be necessary for us to pursue against events, which it may not be in our power to avoid or control, you will also think of, and lay them before me on my arrival in Philadelphia; for which place I shall set out tomorrow, but will leave it to the advices which I may receive tonight by the post, to determine whether it is to be by the direct route or by the one I proposed to come, that is, by Reading."
The tenor of this letter shows that Washington was fully aware of the importance of the emergency in our foreign relations which had now arisen, and the result showed that, as usual, he was fully equal to the occasion. The difficulty of the position arose from the fact already adverted to—that of the two great political parties then existing, one was in favor of direct aid to the French revolutionists, while the other, desirous to remain neutral while the European contest was going on, was charged by its opponents with partiality to England. It remained for Washington, by that decision of character and inflexible firmness for which he was so remarkable, to inaugurate that system of neutrality and noninterference in the affairs of Europe, which has ever since constituted the foreign policy of this country.
On his return to Philadelphia, Washington summoned a meeting of the Cabinet, at the same time sending to each member a series of questions to be considered as preparatory to the meeting. These questions, thirteen in number, all referred to the measures to be taken by the President in consequence of the revolution which had overthrown the French monarchy; of the new organization of a republic in that country; of the appointment of a minister from that republic to the United States, and of the war declared by the National Convention of France against Great Britain. The first of these questions, says Mr. Adams, {3} was, whether a proclamation should issue to prevent interferences of our citizens in the war, and whether the proclamation should or should not contain a declaration of neutrality. The second was, whether a minister from the Republic of France should be received. Upon these two questions the opinion of the Cabinet was unanimous in the affirmative—that a proclamation of neutrality should issue, and that the minister from the French Republic should be received. But upon all the other questions, the opinions of the four heads of the departments were equally divided. They were indeed questions of difficulty and delicacy equal to their importance. No less than whether, after a revolution in France annihilating the government with which the treaties of alliance and of commerce had been contracted, the treaties themselves were to be considered binding as between the nations, and particularly whether the stipulation of guarantee to France of her possessions in the West Indies, was binding upon the United States to the extent of imposing upon them the obligation of taking side with France in the war. As the members of the Cabinet disagreed in their opinions upon these questions, and as there was no immediate necessity for deciding them, the further consideration of them was postponed, and they were never afterwards resumed. While these discussions of the Cabinet of Washington were held, the minister plenipotentiary from the French republic arrived in this country. He had been appointed by the National Convention of France, which had dethroned, tried, sentenced to death, and executed Louis the Sixteenth, abolished the monarchy, and proclaimed a republic one and indivisible, under the auspices of liberty, equality, and fraternity, as thenceforth the government of France. By all the rest of Europe they were then considered as revolted subjects in rebellion against their sovereign, and were not recognized as constituting an independent government.
Hamilton and Knox were of opinion that the minister from France should be conditionally received, with the reservation of the question whether the United States were still bound to fulfill the stipulations of the treaties. They inclined to the opinion that treaties themselves were annulled by the revolution of the government in France—an opinion to which the example of the revolutionary government had given plausibility by declaring some of the treaties made by the abolished monarchy no longer binding upon the nation. Mr. Hamilton thought, also, that France had no just claim to the fulfillment of the stipulation of guarantee, because that stipulation, and the whole treaty of alliance in which it was contained, were professedly, and on the face of them, only defensive, while the war which the French convention had declared against Great Britain, was on the part of France offensive, the first declaration having been issued by her—that the United States were at all events absolved from the obligation of the guarantee by their inability to perform it, and that under the constitution of the United States the interpretation of treaties, and the obligations resulting from them, were within the competency of the executive department, at least concurrently with the Legislature. It does not appear that these opinions were debated or contested in the Cabinet. By their unanimous advice the proclamation was issued, and it was decided to receive a minister plenipotentiary of the French republic. Thus the executive administration did assume and exercise the power of recognizing a revolutionary foreign government as a legitimate sovereign, with whom the ordinary diplomatic relations were to be entertained. But the proclamation contained no allusion whatever to the United States and France, nor of course to the article of guarantee or its obligations.
Whatever doubts may have been entertained by a large portion of people of the right of the executive to acknowledge a new and revolutionary government, not recognized by any other sovereign State, or of the sound policy of receiving, without waiting for the sanction of Congress, a minister from a republic which had commenced her career by putting to death the King whom she had dethroned, and which had rushed into war with almost all the rest of Europe, no manifestation of such doubts was publicly made. A current of popular favor sustained the French revolution, at that stage of its progress, which nothing could resist, and far from indulging any question of the right of the President to recognize a new revolutionary government, by receiving from it the credentials which none but sovereigns can grant, the American people would, at that moment, have scarcely endured an instant of hesitation on the part of the President, which should have delayed for an hour the reception of the minister from the republic of France. But the proclamation enjoining neutrality upon the people of the United States, indirectly counteracted the torrent of partiality in favor of France, and was immediately assailed with intemperate violence in many of the public journals. The right of the executive to issue any proclamation of neutrality was fiercely and pertinaciously denied as a usurpation of legislative authority, and in that particular case it was charged with forestalling and prematurely deciding the question whether the United States were bound, by the guarantee to France of her West India possessions in the treaty of alliance, to take side in the war with her against Great Britain—and with deciding it against France.
The proclamation of neutrality was signed on the 22d of April, 1793, and was immediately published. "This measure," says Mr. Sparks, "both in regard to its character and its consequences, was one of the most important of Washington's administration. It was the basis of a system by which the intercourse with foreign nations was regulated, and which was rigidly adhered to. In fact, it was the only step that could have saved the United States from being drawn into the vortex of European wars, which raged with so much violence for a long time afterward. Its wisdom and its good effects are now so obvious, on a calm review of past events, that one is astonished at the opposition it met with, and the strifes it enkindled, even after making due allowance for the passions and prejudices which had hitherto been at work in producing discord and divisions."
The proclamation of neutrality furnished the first occasion which was thought a fit one for openly assaulting a character, around which the affections of the people had thrown an armor theretofore deemed sacred, and for directly criminating the conduct of the President himself. It was only by opposing passions to passions, by bringing the feeling in favor of France into conflict with those in favor of the chief magistrate, that the enemies of his administration could hope to obtain the victory.
For a short time the opponents of this measure treated it with some degree of delicacy. The opposition prints occasionally glanced at the executive, considered all governments, including that of the United States, as naturally hostile to the liberty of the people, and ascribed to this disposition the combination of European governments against France, and the apathy with which this combination was contemplated by the executive. At the same time the most vehement declamations were published for the purpose of inflaming the resentments of the people against Britain; of enhancing the obligations of America to France; of confirming the opinions that the coalition of European monarchs was directed not less against the United States than against Great Britain, and that those who did not avow this sentiment were the friends of that coalition, and equally the enemies of America and France.
These publications, in the first instance sufficiently bitter, quickly assumed a highly increased degree of acrimony.
As soon as the commotions which succeeded the deposition of Louis XVI had, in some degree, subsided, the attention of the French government was directed to the United States, and the resolution was taken to recall the minister who had been appointed by the King, and to replace him with one who might be expected to enter with more enthusiasm into the views of the republic.
Edmund Charles Genet, a man of considerable talents, and of an ardent temper, was selected for this purpose. The letters he brought to the executive of the United States and his instructions, which he occasionally communicated, were in a high degree flattering to the nation, and decently respectful to its government. But Mr. Genet was also furnished with private instructions, which the course of subsequent events tempted him to publish. These indicated that if the American executive should not be found sufficiently compliant with the views of France, the resolution had been taken to appeal to the people of the United States against their own government, and thus to effect an object which legitimate negotiations might fail to accomplish.
Mr. Genet possessed many qualities which were peculiarly adapted to the objects of his mission, but he seems to have been betrayed by the flattering reception which was given him and by the universal fervor expressed for his republic, into a too speedy disclosure of his intentions.
On the 8th of April (1793) he arrived, not at Philadelphia, but at Charleston in South Carolina, a port whose contiguity to the West Indies would give it peculiar convenience as a resort for privateers. He was received by the governor of that State, and by its citizens, with an enthusiasm well calculated to dissipate every doubt he might previously have entertained concerning the dispositions on which he was to operate. At this place he continued for several days, receiving extravagant marks of public attachment, during which time he undertook to authorize the fitting and arming of vessels in that port, enlisting men, and giving commissions to cruise and commit hostilities on nations with whom the United States were at peace.
The captures made by these cruisers were brought into port and the consuls of France were assuming, under the authority of Mr. Genet, to hold courts of admiralty on them, to try, condemn, and authorize their sale.
From Charleston Mr. Genet proceeded by land to Philadelphia, receiving on his journey at the different towns through which he passed such marks of enthusiastic attachment as had never before been lavished on a foreign minister. On the 16th of May (1793) he arrived at Philadelphia, preceded by the intelligence of his transactions in South Carolina. This information did not diminish the extravagant transports of joy with which he was welcomed by the great body of the inhabitants. Means had been taken to render his entry pompous and triumphal, and the opposition papers exultingly stated that he was met at Gray's ferry by "crowds who flocked from every avenue of the city to meet the republican ambassador of an allied nation."
The day succeeding his arrival he received addresses of congratulation from particular societies, and from the citizens of Philadelphia, who waited on him in a body, in which they expressed their fervent gratitude for the "zealous and disinterested aids" which the French people had furnished to America, unbounded exultation at the success with which their arms had been crowned, and a positive conviction that the safety of the United States depended on the establishment of the republic. The answers to these addresses were well calculated to preserve the idea of a complete fraternity between the two nations, and that their interests were identified.
The day after being thus accredited by the citizens of Philadelphia he was presented to the President, by whom he was received with frankness and with expressions of a sincere and cordial regard for his nation. In the conversation which took place on this occasion Mr. Genet gave the most explicit assurances that, in consequence of the distance of the United States from the theater of action, and of other circumstances, France did not wish to engage them in war, but would willingly leave them to pursue their happiness and prosperity in peace. The more ready faith was given to these declarations, because it was believed that France might derive advantages from the neutrality of America, which would be a full equivalent for any services which she could render as a belligerent.
Before Genet had reached Philadelphia, however, a long catalogue of complaints, partly founded on his proceedings in Charleston, had been made by the British minister to the American executive.
This catalogue was composed of the assumptions of sovereignty already mentioned—assumptions calculated to render America an instrument of hostility to be wielded by France against those powers with which she might be at war.
These were still further aggravated by the commission of actual hostilities within the territories of the United States. The ship Grange, a British vessel which had been cleared out from Philadelphia, was captured by the French frigate L'Ambuscade within the capes of the Delaware, while on her way to the ocean.
The prizes thus unwarrantably made, being brought within the power of the American government, Mr. Hammond, among other things, demanded a restitution of them.
On many of the points suggested by the conduct of Mr. Genet, and by the memorials of the British minister, it would seem impossible that any difference of opinion could exist among intelligent men not under the dominion of a blind infatuation. Accordingly it was agreed in the Cabinet, without a dissenting voice, that the jurisdiction of every independent nation, within the limits of its own territory, being of a nature to exclude the exercise of any authority therein by a foreign power, the proceedings complained of, not being warranted by any treaty, were usurpations of national sovereignty and violations of neutral rights, a repetition of which it was the duty of the government to prevent.