The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-05-31

took the affair out OF Madison's hands when
became critical and conducted his own
diplomacy by conversation, and private
letters right and left. Peace is our pas q,
neither Madison. nor Monroe. nor Liyings-
ton, nor any one In Congress knew all.
Possibly not even Jefferson then saw every
intrigue In Europe in behalf Of our cause,
which his diplomacy. like that started
through Du Pont de Nemourss, had set on
foot He counted on renewal Of war be-
tween France and England
Mr. Roosevelt, as historian, insisted
that Jeiierson's diplomacy, was feeble. v
but what Is the primd tdcie presumption
from the great result' What specific fact
is alleged by the deprecators. Of Jefferson
a. ovid ,ncc Of tn. feebleness Of his Louisiana
diplo acy? They affirm that he limited
Instructions of his diplomatic agents in
Europe to acquiring only the city and har-
Dor of New Orleans, but they. nevertheless.
the American case since, for, as Roose-
welt wrote (page 2Sn: ut WIS tirely
Impossible" for any European nation, to hold
upper Louisiana If New Orleans became
a city of the United States" 49,,
They criticise Jefferson because he did
retrocession to France Of Oct. 1. 1870, when
he got news Of it late during the next sum.
mer To whom should he have protested?
Spain was refusing to deliver to France
on account of failure Of consideration and
the Anal order was not signed till October,
1902, the very month in which local Span
ish customs officer forbade our people TO
deposit at New Orleans under the expired
article Of the treaty of 1875.
They also insist that, when the news
finally came Of delivery to be made by
France dt was not made, in fact. till March,
1909 and Of the cessation of the right to
deposit, Jefferson should have beaten the
war drum as the Federalists urged. That
is Roosevelt g chief point OF fault with
Jefferson. What are the facts OF "the
right Of deposit" regading which so much
that Is superficial has been writtenP The
Pinckney- Godoy treaty Of l795 did not cede
territory. 1t identified boundaries 1t
river and so it added that "for the spac.
of three years" we should have right of
deposit, DC. and an extension OF the time,
If Spain would not be prejudiced. or, in any
case, IAN equivalent establishment else
where on the banks. The three years had
eminent, under President John Adams. had
done nothing regarding Il. Nobody, to
this day, knows why the local Intendente,
Morales, formally stopped the deposit,
unless for venal objects OF his own: Inc
Spanish Governor rebuked him. spain ana
France repudiated the act: Spain had then
no authority there. Against whom should
In domestic politics. JeiTerson's diplo-
macy was certainly not feeble BE de-
fed the Federalists demanding war. ne
held absolutely in check his friends IN the
Southwest. whom the Federa'ists hoPen
to ALLEVIATE from him. He kept Congress
Quiet, He was reserved and silent, till he
emerged with treaty Of cession; not
gun was fired. "
analogy may he dangerous for the user II
the analogy should turn out TO Ne partial'
but vet il can be safely said there was rela-
lively az much war fever in 1903, after the
stopping OF deposit at New Orleans: as in
1898 after the destruction OF the Maine.
Jefferson sought the acquisition OF New
Orleans; Mckinley sought the independence
of Cuba. Jefferson defed the federahsts;
and kept in hand his own party both In and
out of Congress II Mckinley had turned
his back on Democratic clamor for war,
had kept wet blankets on his lingo Repub-
lican friends, and then had, In the end,
without firing an angry gun, sent 70 tne
Senate treaty by when S2atn .e Dec
and the Philippines TO the United States,
his resemblance to Jefferson would have
been complete.
Roosevelt, the lively historian. had IN
another way embarr 1a. a. -; i lDun
(page 2s2):
LEI, Jei sbam naS go Of State ana special
Opponent national :oSsr'sntSs n hs sni H. they
s::1 ss
on had been WeSea o Gomez, We9 o.
10, tho author of that sentence had paused
-. moment before dashing it oh, he would
have remembered that the acquisition OF
fnreipn territory and its government by
Congress were not, before 1903 an issue
in national politics. The famous Virginia
Kentucky resolutions a,d n1 o. t tbisd rne
Gle of the treaty ceding Louisiana. A
,nonarchica. Federalist tendency in do
nestle AFFAIRS was what Jefferson had
resisted, but in foreign affairs he advocated
a strong front. Only few weeks before
his Inauguration ne woe i .,, n the
wisest and best the States are in
dependent a. to everything within them
selves, and united as to everything respect
ing foreign nations.
1t may be true. az an historical iact, mat
the Democratic Republican party WAS the
successor of the Anti-Federalist party which
resisted the Constitution because 1t did not
contain a Bill Of Rights, secured the
first ten amendments, and insisted that
after adoption they should be respected.
1t may be true that at the end OF the eigh-
t2antn ana tIS tckLliiih6 oi WV ~
the war between France and England IN
fiuenced the division Of partics In our coun.
try; that Federalists were English and
Democrats were French, and that French
societies affected the Democratic party
and its leaders Mr.. Roosevelt AYERS Vol.
4. page i7o), that those in favor OF the French
Revolution "were already looking to
Jefferson as their leader, and that Jefferson,
although at the time Secretary Of State
under Washington. was secretly encourage
ing them and playing a very discreditable
part toward his chief
The Constitution had, in expressed words.
impaired to the national Government the
power to make war, conclude treaties and
new States into the Union, and
Jefferson never doubted that the treaty
making power could acquire foreign land
So he wrote to Gallatin. He did not ques-
ton the right Of Congress to admit new
States into the Union. but rs matter Of first
impression he questioned the right to exer.
else 1t unless confined to States created
out OF territory belonging to the Union,
and a part Of the United States when the
was adopted. That doubt he
finally yielded to argument, and reason.
His solicitude and hesitation when the in
tegrity of the fundamental law OF the Union
was involved, were right. They deserve
by Presidents and Congress-
men to-day.
The difficulties growing out OF the text
Of the Louisiana treaty, its unexpected
and unwished-for third article, did not
relate to State rights so much IA to the