Title: To James Madison from Richard O’Brien, 1 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: O’Brien, Richard
To: Madison, James

1 February 1802, Algiers. Reports that on 10 Nov. he arranged financial affairs with the regency for the period 5 Sept. 1795 to 5 Sept. 1801 as well as debts to Baccri and Busnach in the amount of $15,073.75, which does not include bills he drew on JM in favor of Captain Shaw to the amount of $8,642. George Washington and Peace and Plenty left Algiers on 22 Nov., arriving at Tunis on 1 or 2 Dec. Presumes George Washington has gone to Italy to convoy U.S. and Swedish ships. States that French commissary Thainville arrived on 11 Dec. to negotiate peace with Algiers. He demanded the return of seventy French captives and the establishment of French factories in Algiers, but dey has not agreed to either demand. On 11 Jan. the British frigate Narcissus returned the Algerine ambassador who has been in England for sixteen months negotiating for $230,000 in spoliation claims for the dey. Although the British have not paid the claims, they have sent the dey $15,000 in presents. This has not satisfied him, and in retaliation he is holding thirty-five Neapolitan and Maltese vessels that were sailing with passports from British admirals. Four of the six Algerine corsairs that sailed out on 5 Nov. have returned with five captured Neapolitan ships and sixty-five enslaved men. Reports that a French ship bound for Saint-Domingue ran aground at Algiers during a gale; most of the crew is “in the power of The wild arabs—250 were Marines and 510 soldiers.” Believes that neither the British nor the French will resist the “infamous System of those 3 States of Barbary.” Has heard that Dale was at Toulon repairing damage to his ship and that the Swedish admiral, with four frigates, had left Málaga to meet him there. Hopes their planned joint attack on Tripoli will “End a War which in its present System would drain The U States of Vast Sums and never be finished.” Tripolitan merchant vessel arrived on 19 Jan. with presents, including Christian and black slaves, for dey and ministry. The dey responded with a lecture on the pasha’s failure to abide by the guarantee of the treaty with the U.S., but at the same time he gave him a cargo of wheat, which was in short supply in Tripoli where an attack was expected. Has heard that Tripolitans have three corsairs out searching for Americans and Swedes; fears there are so many American ships in the area that the corsairs will have no difficulty seizing prizes and slaves. On 20 Jan. the Algerine minister proposed that O’Brien negotiate with the Tripolitan ambassador, hinting that “a little Money wld. be required.” O’Brien replied that he had no orders on the subject and that he believed the U.S. would pay nothing, having “had sufficient of the bad faith of Tripoli.” Suspects this proposal was made “in order to feel my pulse to know if I had Orders or Lattitudes.” Reports that the diamonds sent from London with Hargreaves for the Tunisian government arrived on 11 Jan. and on 2 Feb. will be sent to Tunis by way of Bona. Presence of U.S. frigates in the Mediterranean is the “only plan that will give us respect.” Anxiously awaits his successor. Adds in a postscript that the plank, timber, scantlings, and spikes commissioned two years earlier are “anxiously expected.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Algiers, vol. 6). 3 pp.; docketed as received 19 May.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Louis-André Pichon, 1 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Pichon, Louis-André
To: Madison, James

1 February 1802, Georgetown. Hastens to convey information just received from the French authorities for Guadeloupe who recently arrived from France and are now gathered on Dominica. These authorities, excluded from the island as a result of the rebellion that occurred some time ago against General Lacrosse, published declarations and took measures that the U.S. government ought to be informed of, since they affect the trade and the citizens of the U.S. By a proclamation dated 3 Dec. the French authorities declared the colony in revolt, and no vessel, either national or foreign, can enter or depart without prior permission. Commercial vessels seeking entry should first stop at Les Saintes islands. Pichon leaves the U.S. government to decide the measures necessary to avoid the embarrassment and difficulties this act might cause to good relations but expects the administration to abide by the assurances it has given respecting the French colonies. Asks JM to communicate the contents of his note to Jefferson.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, NFL, France, vol. 1); Tr (AAE: Political Correspondence, U.S., 54:62–63). RC 3 pp.; in French; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Pichon; docketed by Wagner, with his notation: “Rebellion of Guadeloupe.”

   On 1 Feb. 1802 the National Intelligencer published a 25 Jan. report from New York stating that a French frigate had stopped an American ship bound for Guadeloupe and ordered it away because the island had been declared in a state of open rebellion and was closed to all shipping. In the same issue was a 14 Dec. 1801 account of rioting and racial violence in Port de la Liberté. See also Edward Jones to JM, 2 Jan. 1802, and n.


Title: From James Madison to Rufus King, 2 February 1802
From: Madison, James
To: King, Rufus

private
Dear Sir
Washington Feby 2. 1802
I have had the pleasure of receiving in addition to your official communications brought by Mr. Dawson, your several private letters beginning on the 8th. Octr. & ending Novr. 5.
The conduct of the British Ministry described in them has an appearance of tergiversation as disreputable as it is difficult to account for. It is possible that the change may have proceeded in part at least from the impressions made on the ear of the Chancellor by the Creditors who are mostly his Countrymen, and who would no doubt prefer the chances of a Board of Commissrs. for obtaining their extravagant claims, to the stricter investigations of our Courts, and the necessary œconomy of their own Government. It is possible also that the return of peace may have led their attention to the Treaty of 94, and that it may be thought politic to keep back the topics now depending, in order to make them bear on the issue of negociations for prolonging or remodifying that compact. As far as the latter may have been a motive, it very much mistakes the Councils of the U. States, which I believe will neither be decoyed nor duressed by stratagems of that sort into the fetters of improper stipulations. Having not obtained any determinate ideas on this subject from the President, I speak only my own, in observing that the adjustment of all depending questions between the two countries would be a proper preliminary to discussions relating to the Treaty, and that in those discussions the utmost care ought to be taken to purge the instrument of some of its present ingredients. The definitions of the law of Nations ought to be more precise, and more favorable to pacific nations; and the regulations of commerce ought to be more reciprocal in their principles and more equal in their operation; or when such can not be obtained, they ought to be very limited both in their objects & their duration, if not declined altogether. It is I am persuaded the sincere desire of the people of this Country, and of every department of its Government, to cultivate the most thorough good will, and the most friendly commerce with G. Britain; but I do not believe that they will purchase either by improper sacrifices.
I have postponed answering your public letters by the present packet, because the arrival of another is hourly expected, and we hope by that to hear further from you on the subjects you have on hand. Notwithstanding the diminution of your confidence necessarily produced by what had passed, I can not despair, that the further reflections of the Ministers, and their proposed consultation with Mr. Pitt & Lord Grenville who instituted the negociation relating to the sixth article will reclaim them from their aberrations, and relieve the Executive from comments which alone would suit the business in its present state.
I think with you that in our respective stipulations with G. B. & France, it is desireable to have them both so shaped as to avoid as much as possible collisions between them, which might involve the U. S. with one or other of those Nations. The President has not yet given any particular instructions on this head to Mr. Livingston, nor required me to prepare any for yourself. I presume that a general review of our relations to these rival powers, is not therefore immediately contemplated by him, and that he either waits for advances on their part, or for a more perfect understanding of the ground on which his own can best be made. In the mean time the ordinary means of rectifying particular inconveniences, may be pursued. In fact that particularly felt from the countervailing regulation of G. B. could not wait the result of a general arrangement between the two countries, without spending nearly its whole force on us. The House of Reps. have made but little progress in discussing the motion of Genl. Smith. A misconception of its tendency has produced dislike to it in some both within & without doors. Others suppose the diplomatic channel the only proper one for seeking a remedy. The subject however begins to be better understood, particularly by the Shipbuilders & Shipowners, and will probably be ere long revived, though I suspect that if the merchants should from any cause not generally come into the measure, it will rather be left to the train in which it now is, than pressed by its patrons through the Legislature. With sentiments of great respect & esteem I have the honor to remain Dr Sr Your Most Obd hbe set.
James Madison

   RC (NjMoHP).

   See JM to Livingston, 19 Dec. 1801, and n. 3.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Bulkeley, 2 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Bulkeley, Thomas
To: Madison, James

2 February 1802, Lisbon. Encloses copies of two notes from Almeida de Mello, each covering a letter for JM. One arrived several days after the other. The first enclosure has already been sent; the second was not sent earlier for want of an opportunity.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Lisbon, vol. 1). RC 1 p.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Bulkeley. Enclosures are two 29 Dec. 1801 notes from Almeida to Bulkeley (4 pp.; in Portuguese with translations), both mentioning enclosed 29 Dec. letters from Almeida to JM. Only one of Almeida’s 29 Dec. letters to JM has been found.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Bulkeley, 2 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Bulkeley, Thomas
To: Madison, James

2 February 1802, Lisbon. Encloses copy of his correspondence with Don Rodrigo on the subject of the schooner Hope detained at Faro by the collector of customs who demanded full duties on cargo of salt fish. Release of vessel has been delayed by customs department attorney’s demand for more papers. Has little doubt of a favorable decision and believes “it will establish a precedent whereby such steps will in future be avoided by the Collectors at the outposts to the prejudice of our trade.” Will send copy of whole transaction if it can be obtained; if not, will send copy of decree issued by Court of Exchequer.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Lisbon, vol. 1). RC 2 pp.; in a clerk’s hand; unsigned. Enclosures are Bulkeley’s letter to Portuguese finance minister Rodrigo de Sousa Coutinho, 24 Dec. 1801 (2 pp.), and the 28 Dec. reply (2 pp.; in Portuguese with translation).

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Benjamin Fry, 2 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Fry, Benjamin
To: Madison, James

2 February 1802, Newport. Encloses documents concerning his brig Favorite, “which was captured by a French Privateer, carried into Guadaloup & condemned in December 1800 after the Treaty was Signed and agreable to the fourth article of said Treaty will be paid for by the French Government.” Would have sent papers sooner but Capt. Benjamin Seabury, master of the Favorite when captured, was away on a sea voyage. Encloses his account for brig and cargo, estimated value of brig from two local merchants and two shipmasters, and customhouse certificate of cargo. Also includes copy of ship’s register, Captain Seabury’s protest, and copy of condemnation, which was taken from one brought from Guadeloupe by Captain Brevoor of Philadelphia who purchased the brig. Wishes to be informed if procedure for obtaining restitution for ships taken into Guadeloupe differs from that for those taken into France. Is “entirely Ignorant how to proceed in this Business” and relies on JM’s goodness for information.

   Tr (DLC: Causten-Pickett Papers, box 47). 1 p.; unsigned; undated. Identity of sender, date, and location are assigned on the basis of Fry to Christopher Ellery, 2 Feb. 1802 (ibid.), asking him to deliver this letter and its enclosures to JM. Two days later Fry added a postscript to Ellery’s letter stating that he had opened the packet and sent the letter and enclosures to JM under separate cover and asked Ellery to call on JM and obtain the information Fry needed to pursue his case. Enclosures not found.


Title: From James Madison to William Cooke, 3 February 1802
From: Madison, James
To: Cooke, William

Sir,
Department of State: Washington, 3 Feby. 1802.
Within these few days I have received your letter of 27th of Novr. by Mr. Morton and yesterday that of the 2d ult came to hand. They contain statements, which when supported as you propose by authenticated transcripts of the process will entitle you to relief from the Government of Spain. If an appeal can be made from the last sentence pronounced against you in Cuba, you will do well to prefer it, lest the omission of one of the usual steps for obtaining redress in a judicial course may hereafter be alledged against you.
Mr. Pinckney our new Minister to Madrid has been charged to endeavour to obtain the assent of the Spanish Government to the appointment of Commissioners for examining and deciding upon the claims of our Citizens to compensation for unjust seizures of their vessels and property. Until the result of this measure is known it is thought inexpedient to press particular cases upon that Government: for the present therefore it is not advisable for you to incur the expense of a journey to Washington or Madrid. I am very respectfully, Sir, your most Obt. Sert.
James Madison

   RC (DNA: RG 76, Spain, Treaty of 1819, Disallowed Claims, vol. 47); Tr (ibid., 62B). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by JM.


Title: To James Madison from William Eaton, 3 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Eaton, William
To: Madison, James

3 February 1802, Leghorn. Encloses copy, marked A, of his letter of 13 Dec. indicating his intention of going to Leghorn for reasons of health. Sailed on that date in the George Washington, leaving American affairs in the hands of naval doctor William Turner, a Virginian. Arrived at Naples on 21 Dec.; lists nine American ships and their masters that he found there. Sent enclosure marked B to American consul at Naples on 26 Dec. Finding that nothing had been done by 30 Dec., addressed “the same caution” to Charles F. Degen, who advised on 1 Jan. that copies had been handed to shipmasters at Naples. Mentions encounter on 17 Dec. with unarmed and lightly manned vessel, the Fox of Boston, and laments that the Mediterranean is “covered with this kind of adventurers.” Asks, “if individuals will neither have regard to their own safety nor the general interests of the United States, should not the government interdict this loose manner of hazarding both by legal prohibitions to commerce here without convoy? One single merchantman’s crew in chains at Tripoli would be of incalculable prejudice to the affairs of the United States in that Regency.”
Learned, while still in quarantine at Naples on 7 Jan., that the government there had seized an American cargo of oil because of scarcity. Sent enclosed letter of protest, marked C, signed by Captain Shaw, to the minister of state and also requested mitigation of the quarantine. On 9 Jan. discussed with minister of state, Chevalier Acton, a suggestion made earlier by Commodore Dale that “morrish prisoners” be landed in that territory in case of need; also discussed seizure of the oil and possible U.S. commercial treaty with Naples. Had received no decision by 15 Jan., so sent letter D, also signed by Shaw, to minister, resulting the next day in the answer, marked E, and the immediate purchase of the cargo in question.
Dined with Shaw and minister of state on 17 Jan. and after dinner received informal assurances from minister’s brother of Acton’s sympathy for American position against Barbary and support for American naval squadron. Adduces such friendliness as evidence that Naples supports American enterprise against piracy and suggests that the moment is opportune to negotiate a commercial treaty with Naples in order to assist U.S. fisheries and West Indies carrying trade against British and Danish competition.
Advocates replacement of American agent at Naples as he is “wholly indifferent to the business” and “obnoxious to the Government, being in principle a Jacobin & destitute of prudence to conceal it.” The agent “disgraces the Nation he has the honor to represent.” In private audience at Naples with king of Sardinia Eaton received assurances that American forces “may have entry & provisions in his island.” Arrived at Leghorn on 30 Jan. “The Washington sails to morrow—I return for Tunis in ten days.” Reports presence of Captain Jercovich and brig Benvenuto and will try to avoid paying balance of freight for reasons he has previously stated.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Tunis, vol. 2, pt. 1); letterbook copy (CSmH). RC 6 pp.; marked duplicate; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Eaton. Enclosures include copies of (B) Eaton to John Mathieu, 26 Dec. 1801 (2 pp.), stating that the George Washington would provide the last convoy of winter and warning of danger to U.S. ships from Tripolitan corsairs off Calabria and in Adriatic; (C) and (D) John Shaw’s 7 Jan. and 15 Jan. letters to Acton (3 pp.) about the detention of the Traveller and sequestration of its cargo of oil; and (E) translation of Acton’s 16 Jan. reply (1 p.). Enclosures printed in Knox, Naval Documents, Barbary WarsDudley W. Knox, ed., Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers (6 vols.; Washington, 1939–44)., 1:646, 2:14–15, 22, 23.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from James Leander Cathcart, 4 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Cathcart, James Leander
To: Madison, James

4 February 1802, Leghorn. Has drawn on JM for $453.09 in favor of John Shaw, commander of the George Washington. In postscript states that he has no news worth relating and is awaiting instructions from the president “with the same anxiety & impatience that a Mussulman awaits the prostrations of a pusillanimous christian chief, or that an Algerine Jew awaits the arrival of a Barbary Consul congenial to his views.” Hopes they “may be such as future ages may read in the annals of our country without a blush, & that the operations which will take place in consequence of them may cause our childrens children to rejoice.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Leghorn, vol. 1). 1 p.; docketed by Wagner.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Edward Thornton, 4 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Thornton, Edward
To: Madison, James

4 February 1802, Washington. Notifies JM that Thomas Barclay, British consul general for the eastern states, is returning to England on private business. Henry Barclay will perform the consular duties during his father’s absence. Asks JM to inform the president.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, NFL, Great Britain, vol. 2). 1 p.


Title: From James Madison to Charles Pinckney, 5 February 1802
From: Madison, James
To: Pinckney, Charles

Sir,
Department of State: Washington, 5th Feby. 1802
Though you have been referred to the 21st Article of the Spanish Treaty as a model for the provision you are instructed to urge the Government of Spain to accede to for indemnifying our commercial citizens whose claims have originated since, it is found to be incommensurate in some respects with the relief expected by them. The words are “In order to terminate all differences on account of the losses sustained by the citizens of the United States in consequence of their vessels and cargoes having been taken (apresado) by the subjects of his Catholic Majesty during the late War between France and Spain &c.” Thus the 21 Article is limited to captures; but some of our citizens have complained of injuries received from the officers of Spain in attaching their property for supposed breaches of its fiscal regulations: and examples are not wanting of unjust and ruinous prosecutions against our citizens upon criminal allegations. Two examples are at least recollected of the latter description. It might possibly be questioned whether a seizure in port on suspicion of enemy’s property, as in the case of Capn. Eldridge’s brigantine Sally, would be fairly embraced within the terms of that article. Complaints have also been made of the tender laws whereby our citizens have been paid in a depreciated medium for specie contracts. Some of these cases are marked with arbitrary circumstances derived from the direct interposition of the Government or its Agents: others have arisen in the Colonies and tho’ conducted under judicial forms have issued in the ruin of innocent individuals who have been borne down by the weight of Official influence opposed to them.
It is perhaps difficult to define by a general article which shall appear unexceptionable the principle under which relief in some of these cases is expected: and on the other hand to attempt a detail would hazard the attainment of what might not under a general description be combatted. If indeed the latter mode should be preferred, much of the benefit to be derived from the agreement would depend upon the intelligence and character of the referrees. Should a majority of them feel an undue attachment to Spanish interest or to the artificial maxims of law, some of our claims founded in substantial justice might fail.
The following is supposed to be a form of words which would be preferable to the 21st Article of the Treaty.
“In order to terminate all differences on account of losses sustained since the  day of April 1796 (the day on which the ratifications were exchanged) by merchants and others citizens of the United States trading to the Spanish dominions from the unjust seizure or detention of their persons vessels and effects, or otherwise, under colour of authority from his Catholic Majesty it is agreed &c,[”] to which may be annexed any clearly defined exceptions which it may appear reasonable to make at the instance of the Spanish Government.
Another expedient may be resorted to, should that Government oppose a general provision. After securing a referrence to Commissioners mutually chosen of as many of the cardinal subjects of claims as may be found practicable the remainder may be submitted to two or three of the Officers of the Spanish Government to be named in the agreement for their award, which shall not be final unless the claimant signify his assent in a given time, and if he dissents the claim to remain open. In this way was settled a considerable number of our smaller claims on Great Britain for illegal captures; the Kings Advocate General and a Doctor of the Civil law making the awards which were generally satisfactory and it is believed always accepted.
Mr: John Perry has lately presented to this Department a claim upon the Government of Spain for a quantity of flour he shipped from Pittsburg in the year 1785 for New Orleans, and which was seized and confiscated at the Natchez by the Spanish Commandant. The documents respecting the transaction are inclosed. Whatever justice there may be on his side, its having laid dormant so long necessarily weakens the force of the claim; and you will therefore be pleased to consider it transmitted to you with the same directions which accompanied Mr. Beveridge’s papers by Mr. Graham.
I have the pleasure to inclose a new Commission, issued in consequence of the Senate’s confirmation of your appointment. Mr. Grahams’ second Commission is also inclosed. I have the honor to remain &c.
James Madison

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, IM, vol. 6). Enclosures not found.

   The governor at Alicante had seized Thomas Eldred’s ship on information that the cargo was British (see Daniel Murgatroyd to JM, 10 Sept. 1801, and n. 1).

   Perry had pressed this claim for two cargoes of flour at New Orleans in 1798 and was still doing so at Madrid as late as 1804. He also entered it again as a claim under the 1802 Spanish-American indemnification convention (Roscoe Hill, Descriptive Catalogue of the Documents Relating to the History of the United States in the Papeles Procedentes de Cuba Deposited in the Archivo General de Indias at Seville [Washington, 1916], p. 248; Pilar León Tello, Documentos Relativos a la Independencia de Norteamérica Existentes en Archivos Españoles [10 vols.; Madrid, 1976—], 4:101; ASPAmerican State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States … (38 vols.; Washington, 1832–61)., Foreign Relations, 5:48).

   For Beveridge’s case, see Wagner to JM, 17 Aug. 1801, and n. 2.

   The Senate confirmed the appointments of Pinckney and John Graham on 26 Jan. 1802 (Senate Exec. ProceedingsJournal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America (3 vols.; Washington, 1828)., 1:401, 404, 405).


Title: To James Madison from George W. Erving, 5 February 1802
From: Erving, George W.
To: Madison, James

Private—No 7.
Dear Sir—
London Feby 5. 1802.
Your sources of intelligence are now so numerous that I hardly Expect an opportunity of making the first communication of important Events; my reflections upon the passing scene, or the political suggestions which it may give rise to, I fear at the best can be of little consideration; & according to the Eccentric course of political Events for these last few years, may more than probably be found in the result to have been illy calculated, or visionary. Yet the present moment is so interesting, & so critical, that Each great political occurrence may awaken apprehensions as to the whole course of future Events, & we are so necessarily concerned in the state & progress of European affairs, that scarcely any communications upon these subjects can be entirely without Value. The result of the Consulta at Lyons which has placed Buonoparte at the head of the “Italian Republic,” must excite an extraordinary degree of Interest as well from its most obvious consequences, as from the manner & time in which it has been effected; the negotiation at Amiens was in a manner suspended whilst the Consul made his tour to the South; the Spanish Envoy was tardy in getting to Amiens, & it was reported that his government were dissatisfied with the cession of Trinidad; when at last he did arrive (for it is said that he has arrived) Buonoparte had the credit of having peremptorily insisted on his being there, & it was added that the negotiation was completed, & the treaty waited only for his signature; yet he is arrived & it is not signed; it now appears that he went to Genoa in his way to France! & there was unwell; can there be a doubt but that he was detained by Buonoparte? The conclusion must be, that the Cheif Consul intends to gain Every point not mentioned in the Preliminaries; or to break off the treaty; this may be effected upon very plausible grounds, neither the Spanish or Batavians were parties to the preliminaries, yet it is they who are to make the sacrifices; France is bound by her treaties with those powers not to make peace without them, when therefore they are consulted at Amiens respecting the cessions, suppose they shoud prove refractory; It is true that Spain made a peace with Portugal without the consent or rather against the advice of France; this may authorize Buonoparte in saying, “if you had gone on in the conquest of Portugal as we advised, Trinidad might have been saved,” this however he will of course say or not as may suit his views. Upon the whole considering Every circumstance attending this late assumption of Buonoparte, does it not place the definitive treaty in some jeopardy? The vast acquisition of power to France, the certain road which he has obtained to the acquisition of the popes & the Neapolitan dominions, will induce the “President of the Italian Republic” to carry on what remains of the negotiation in a very high tone; will the English submit? Yet it is not Easy to discover any policy which can justify France in again Entering on the War; if she does not succeed in Every point of the Negotiation, she nevertheless will have a treaty infinitely advantageous: all the probabilities seem in favor of peace, & yet if there had been no great obstacle, so much was settled by the preliminaries that it might long since have been completed; but now whilst here they begin to applaud the sincerity & good faith of Buonoparte, he has made a most violent attack on the manifest spirit of the preliminaries by annexing the Cisalpine thro the medium of his own person to the already immense power of France.
Here is so fair an occasion for this government to break off the Negotiation, that were a war minister at the head of their affairs, were Pitt, Grenville, or Windham in place, there can scarcely be a doubt but that they woud venture a new trial; perhaps it is fortunate for the world at large, it is certainly so for this Country, that its ministers have not confidence Enough in themselves, again to launch this shattered Vessel on the Ocean; their prudence, or perhaps their virtue & patriotism, added to the state of the kings health, which prevents that active interference in his affairs, to which his country is indebted for some failures, perhaps gives them at this crisis a chance of tasting the blessings of peace; but the Most mortifying submission to the dictum of the “Corsican Usurper” is the price. There has lately been some rumour of an intention on the part of the King of England, (finding his health unequal to the fatigues of government) to Establish a regency; whether in a single regent, or council, is not said; this is not improbable; for tho perhaps not actually crazy he is so near it, that any considerable irritation may subject him to relapse; he is to name the Regency himself, & when we consider his gratitude to those who on a former occasion refused the guardianship of his royal person to his Eldest son, it is hardly probable that he will vest that son with the sole power: the queen therefore will have at least her share.
Of what is more important to us, respecting the Barbary powers; you are of course informed through the regular channels; & of the measures taken by the French, (or as is said Even by the English) to compel a manumission of all their prisoners. The late vigorous policy of our government has doubtless called forth these Exertions, & shamed them out of that pitiful apathy which has so long suffered the existence of these pirates. Mr King I presume has informed you that the present of Jewels &c has been duly sent to the Bey of Tunis; the guns & pistols are preparing, the stocks studded with diamonds according to his direction: knowing that this is the last tribute he will receive I may venture to say that I never was more mortified than when by Mr Kings desire I went to see these presents put up & dispatched; or felt greater contempt for that miserable acquiescence in European policy which first induced us to pay these robbers; upon the whole it is well these things are not Manufactured in the United States.
The commissioners have not yet held a meeting, we wait for notice to be given by this government to its own members, which may be done in three lines, but this progresses as slow as the convention; & like Every thing else relating to our affairs awaits their good pleasure. I have not understood from Mr King that there is any obstacle. Dear Sir with great respect very faithfully yours—
George W Erving

   RC (MHi: Erving Papers).

   See Appleton to JM, 12 Dec. 1801, and n. 1.

   During George III’s attack of dementia from November 1788 to February 1789, the opposition party under Charles James Fox and Edmund Burke had pressed for the passage of a regency bill that would give power to the profligate Prince of Wales who served as a rallying point for the opposition. Pitt had attached restrictions to the bill that kept the person and estate of the king under the control of the queen and a council. The bill was never passed, as the king had recovered before it worked its way through Parliament (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (2 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986—)., 1:48 n. 1; Robin Reilly, Pitt the Younger, 1759–1806 [London, 1978], pp. 157, 162–63, 165, 167).


Title: To James Madison from James Monroe, 5 February 1802
From: Monroe, James
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Richmond Feby 5. 1802
I enclosed you today from the council chamber a copy of my correspondence with the bankers relative to the 120,000 dolrs. remitted by the late Secry of the Treasury to me at Paris for them, intending to write you fully this afternoon on that & some other subjects, but am prevented by compy. I have the original letters of the bankers, and other papers referr’d to in that correspondence, which I will send forward if necessary. I communicated all the material parts of these heretofore to the secry. of the Treasury, with the evidence furnished by Mr. Skipwith to suppt. his claim on acct. of the money which he lost by robbery. Mr. Walcott refused to allow his claim on acct. of some private engagmt., as he stated, between him and Mr. Swan relative to the bill of the latter. A copy of his letters, and my communications, including the documents relative to the loss of the money may be had of the Treasury department. I cod. never impose on you the burden of perusing that correspondence on acct. of its length, tho’ it was one of those incidents to wh. yr. attention was drawn by some benevolent remarks respecting me which escaped the Secry. before the rect. of the documents. You will now see how much trouble that affr. gave me, at a time when my mind was sufficiently harrassed with other cares. The money was I think abt. 7. weeks in the hands of Mr. Skipwith, detained by causes sufficiently shewn by the papers. The acct. of the loss does not appear in the correspondence with the bankers because I prevailed on Mr. Sk: to send the whole sum rather than go into any discussion with them on that subject, relying on the justice of the govt. to reimburse him. I do not know in what form or on what principle the reference is to you. I understand it is to report. If so I hope it will suit you to make a detailed report of the transaction, calling on Mr. Walcott to state any objections & to explain his own conduct in it. It is impossible for a transaction to rest on a more perfect basis of integrity, nor are there many incidents connected with my mission which unfold more fully the spirit of those under whom I acted. I do not wish yr. report to go to any thing of that kind, but simply to state the facts which belong to the subject, giving Mr. Walcott an opportunity to object if he thinks fit. Yr. friend & servt
Jas Monroe

   RC (NN: Monroe Papers). Cover marked private by Monroe. Addressee not indicated.

   Letters not found. Monroe had already sent JM at least two copies of this correspondence (see Monroe to JM, 5 July and 1 Aug. 1796, PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 16:379–80 n. 13, 383).

   On 19 Jan. a memorial from Fulwar Skipwith seeking a settlement of his accounts was presented to the House and referred to JM with instructions to examine it and report his opinion, which he did on 6 Apr. Skipwith’s claim was complicated by his inclusion of a request for reimbursement for funds he advanced to cover the value of silver ingots belonging to the U.S. that had been stolen from the American consulate in Paris on 22 Nov. 1795. Federalists accused Monroe of complicity in the incident (Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States … (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56)., 7th Cong., 1st sess., 425–26; National Intelligencer, 22 Jan. 1802; ASPAmerican State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States … (38 vols.; Washington, 1832–61)., Claims, pp. 268–72; PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 16:302, 304 n. 4, 382, 383–84).


Title: To James Madison from William C. C. Claiborne, 5 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Claiborne, William C. C.
To: Madison, James

5 February 1802, Natchez. Encloses copies of his 29 Jan. letter to General Wilkinson and Wilkinson’s reply. Hopes the request he made of the general was not improper but fears the peace of the territory is precarious, “surrounded as it is, by numerous Indian Tribes, and with a Population of Negroes, nearly equal to the number of Whites, … and it seemed to me advisable, to have the Spare Arms at Fort Adams, placed in some Situation, where, in the hour of danger, the Militia could be furnished with the means of defence.” The arsenal can be erected cheaply by the militia. The territorial legislature ended its session on 2 Feb. The lack of a good printer at Natchez will delay publication of its acts, and “the People already complain, that they are not informed of their laws.” Expresses surprise that northern printers “do not turn their attention to this Territory.” Sargent has returned and retired to his farm, “and I have not yet been informed of any exertions on his part, to embarrass my administration.” Mentions a “violent dispute” between Chief Justice Lewis and the assembly, which seems to be working toward the judge’s impeachment. Washington papers to which he has subscribed frequently are lost or destroyed; therefore, he requests that JM enclose newspapers that contain “any interesting information.”

   Letterbook copy and copies of enclosures (Ms-Ar: Claiborne Executive Journal). Letterbook copy 3 pp. Enclosures are Claiborne to James Wilkinson, 29 Jan. 1801, and Wilkinson to Claiborne, 29 Jan. 1801, the latter giving Wilkinson’s assent to the construction of a blockhouse. Letter and enclosures printed in Rowland, Claiborne Letter BooksDunbar Rowland, ed., Official Letter Books of W. C. C. Claiborne, 1801–1816 (6 vols.; Jackson, Miss., 1917)., 1:40–44.


Title: To James Madison from Rufus King, 5 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: King, Rufus
To: Madison, James

5 February 1802, London. No. 51. Reports receipt of JM’s 10 Dec. instructions and the resulting conversations with Lord Hawkesbury on the state of American trade with British dominions in peacetime. Encloses copy of a paper he sent to Hawkesbury on the subject. Acknowledges receipt on 4 Feb. of duplicate of JM’s 22 Dec. letter, “which has enabled me to be more explicit than I otherwise should have been in my Conference of this morning with Lord Hawkesbury.” King began the conference by reminding Hawkesbury of the commercial inequalities between Great Britain and the U.S. with the return of peace, and he urged that Great Britain agree either to discontinue countervailing duties when Americans discontinue unequal rates or to repeal them and impose export duties corresponding to American import duties. Hawkesbury admitted that “the only legitimate purpose” of Great Britain’s countervailing duties was to equalize trade between the two countries and stated his preference for the former of King’s suggestions. He promised to submit the matter to the cabinet and is detaining the mail packet so King may inform JM of the decision. Refers JM to the enclosure for his remarks on tonnage duties and advocates the establishment of lighthouse duties.
Declares that the return of peace will not reestablish harmony between Great Britain and European maritime powers who believe that England’s prosperity is achieved at their expense. Anticipates restrictions on British trade with Europe, which will make trade with America “of still greater value and importance than it is already known and confessed to be.” Concludes that the present is the best time to press for a fair system of trade.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, DD, Great Britain, vol. 10); letterbook copy (NHi: Rufus King Papers, vol. 55). RC 5 pp.; marked triplicate; in a clerk’s hand. Printed in King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, 4:60–63. Enclosures are a copy of King to Hawkesbury, 3 Feb. 1802 (1 p.), covering a memorandum entitled “Observations respecting the Navigation and Trade of the United States of America with the Dominions of Great Britain,” which suggested “the grounds of our Claim to an equal participation in the Navigation employed between the United States and the British West Indies, as well as the objections which we have against the act of Parliament for carrying into execution the Treaty of 1794” (13 pp.). Enclosures printed in ASPAmerican State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States … (38 vols.; Washington, 1832–61)., Foreign Relations, 2:498–500.


Title: From James Madison to James Leander Cathcart, [6 February] 1802
From: Madison, James
To: Cathcart, James Leander

Sir
Department of State Washington [6 February 1802]
The United States Schooner Enterprize Captain Sterret, being on the point of Departure for Gibraltar, I avail myself of the opportunity to acknowledge the receipt of a series of your dispatches of last year, including, No. 12, with the exception however of No. 8. I also enclose you a copy of the communications made to congress respecting our Barbary affaires, and of a law which has just been passed, placing at the disposal of the President an additional Naval force for the protection of our trade in the Mediterranean and adjoining seas, and authorizing a maratime Warfare with Tripoli.
Another squ[a]dron of frigates is now preparing and they will proceed to the Mediterranean as soon as they can be got ready which will probably be in the course of a Month, Captain Truxton takes the command. The instructions with which he may be charged not being yet arranged, nor their principles settled I canot at present acquaint you with the part which you may be assigned by the President to act, in relation to this expedition. But it would be adviseable for you to be prepared to embark at a short notice, in case your services should be needed. I am &ca.
James Madison.

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, IC, vol. 1); partial Tr (CSmH). Letterbook copy undated, with a clerk’s notation: “dated Previously to 18th April 1802.” Date here assigned on the basis of William Eaton’s docket on Cathcart to Eaton, 18 May 1802 (CSmH), which enclosed the partial Tr; Eaton docketed the letter as including an “Extract from Mr. Madisons letter to him of Feb. 6. 1802.” Enclosures not found, but see nn. 2 and 3.

   Cathcart’s dispatch no. 12 is dated 27 Sept. 1801; his no. 8 is dated 2 July 1801 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (2 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986—)., 1:370–72).

   JM presumably enclosed copies of Jefferson’s 8 Dec. and 22 Dec. 1801 messages to Congress and their enclosures (ASPAmerican State Papers: Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States … (38 vols.; Washington, 1832–61)., Foreign Relations, 2:347–61).

   The 6 Feb. 1802 “Act for the protection of the Commerce and Seamen of the United States, against the Tripolitan Cruisers” also enabled Jefferson to authorize naval commanders and privateers to make prizes of the vessels, goods, and effects of the pasha of Tripoli and his subjects and authorized the engagement of seamen for two-year terms if necessary (U.S. Statutes at LargeThe Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America … (17 vols.; Boston, 1848–73)., 2:129–30).

   On 18 Jan. 1802 the cabinet had “agreed to offer peace to Tripoli on est. terms” and also to reinforce the naval squadron in the Mediterranean by two frigates and a schooner. After the passage of the act of 6 Feb. 1802, the administration reorganized the naval squadron, the command of which eventually went to Capt. Richard V. Morris after Truxtun declined (Jefferson’s cabinet notes, 18 Jan. 1802, Ford, Writings of JeffersonPaul Leicester Ford, ed., The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (10 vols.; New York, 1892–99)., 1:370; Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs, p. 104).


Title: To James Madison from Woodbury Langdon, 6 February 1802
From: Langdon, Woodbury
To: Madison, James

Sr.
Portsmouth February 6th: 1802
I am honored with yours of the 15th: January and shall duly attend to its contents.
I understand that the printers of the Republican Ledger in this town who are republicans have received directions from you to print the Laws of the United States and that John Melcher the printer of the New Hampshire Gazette in this town a very high federalist has also received the same directions. As I think the appointment of Mr. Melcher may have arisen from mistake either in the character you may have had of Mr. Melcher who always has been a very high federalist and very troublesome in our elections or which I think is more likely, you might have intended the appointment for E. Russell who is a high republican and publishes the Republican Gazette in the town of Concord in this State which is nearly in the centre of the State where the Legislature generally sits and where the Laws of the United States were published during the late Administration by one Hough a very high federalist—I have taken the liberty to mention this circumstance that if a mistake and thought of sufficient importance it may now be easily rectified. I have the honor to be—Your most Hble: Servt
Woodbury Langdon

   RC (DLC).

   Letter not found.

   Samuel Nutting and John Whitelock published the Portsmouth Republican Ledger, which appeared through 1803. John Melcher published the Portsmouth N.H. Gazette from 1786 until he sold it in 1802. George Hough published the Federalist Concord Herald (later named the Courier of N.H.) from 1700 to 1805. A former printer in his shop, Elijah Russell, published the Republican Gazette in Concord from 1801 to 1803 (Brigham, History and Bibliography of American Newspapers, 1:442, 446, 473, 483–84; James O. Lyford, ed., History of Concord, New Hampshire [2 vols.; Concord, N.H., 1896], 1:294–95, 2:1019; Stewart, Opposition Press of the Federalist Period, pp. 877–78).

   Elijah Russell had written to JM in June 1801 asking him to designate the Republican Gazette to publish the U.S. laws (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (2 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986—)., 1:353–54). John Langdon later informed Russell that JM had intended to do so and that the order was sent to the N.H. Gazette by mistake (Russell to JM, 29 Nov. 1802 [DNA: RG 59, LAR, 1801–9]).

   Woodbury Langdon, a Portsmouth, New Hampshire, merchant, was the brother of Republican politician and former senator John Langdon. He had been appointed naval agent at Portsmouth, 1 May 1801 (Robert Smith to Langdon, 1 May 1801 [DNA: RG 45, Misc. Letters Sent]).


Title: To James Madison from Edward Jones, 8 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Jones, Edward
To: Madison, James

8 February 1802. Refers to annexed copy of his last letter reporting inadequacy of provisions made for sick seamen. Has frequent applications from invalid seamen arriving from small ports where their captains have left them with the fever; it is difficult to place them on other vessels “as it endangers the Crew.” Asks how they shall be provided for. States that unwholesome island conditions have “carried off a number of Americans, indeed the situation of this place is extremely unhealthy.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Guadeloupe, vol. 1). 1 p. Written at the bottom of a copy of Jones’s 13 Jan. dispatch.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from John Mathieu, 8 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Mathieu, John
To: Madison, James

8 February 1802, Naples. Refers JM to his letters of “last Month [not found] in answer to your orders via England of the 31st. May and 4th. August.” Encloses statement of U.S. vessels in port from 1 July to 31 Dec. 1801.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Naples, vol. 1). 1 p. Enclosure not found.

   Mathieu was probably referring to JM’s circular letters of 21 May (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (2 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986—)., 1:209) and 1 Aug. 1801.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from John Moody, 8 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Moody, John
To: Madison, James

8 February 1802, Richmond. Having heard that General Guerrant has declined appointment as Richmond postmaster, asks JM to secure “this little Place” for him. Has written to other friends in Washington on this subject.

   RC (DLC). 1 p.

   Richmond postmaster Augustine Davis was also the publisher of the Va. Gazette, and General Advertiser, a newspaper with Federalist inclinations. On 13 Dec. 1801 Jefferson had written Monroe, “In cleansing the Post office Davis must be removed,” and he asked Monroe to recommend respectable gentlemen, “perhaps some member of your council.” In his reply of 21 Dec. Monroe suggested council members John Guerrant and Dr. William Foushee, adding, however, that Davis was attentive, accommodating, and inoffensive. The Richmond Examiner announced Guerrant’s appointment on 9 Feb. noting that it was unknown if he would accept. Guerrant declined the position on the grounds that the yearly income of $1,700 would not cover office rental, living quarters, and an assistant’s salary and also support his family. The demands of the post office, moreover, unlike those of the state council, would leave him no time to pursue farming. On 12 Feb. 1802 Monroe added the name of Col. Parke Goodall to “the list of candidates for the post office in this city.” None of those suggested was appointed, and at the end of the year Marks Vandewall filled the position (Richmond Va. Gazette, and General Advertiser, 5 Jan. 1803; Durey, “With the Hammer of Truth”: James Thomson Callender, p. 117; Monroe to Jefferson, 21 Dec. 1801, Hamilton, Writings of MonroeStanislaus Murray Hamilton, ed., The Writings of James Monroe (7 vols.; New York and London, 1898–1903)., 3:323–24; Jefferson to Monroe, 13 Dec. 1801, Guerrant to Jefferson, 7 Feb. 1802, Monroe to Jefferson, 12 Feb. 1802 [DLC: Jefferson Papers]; CVSPWilliam P. Palmer et al., eds., Calendar of Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts (11 vols.; Richmond, 1875–93)., 9:346; Richmond Examiner, 9 Feb. 1802; see also Moody to JM, 7 Jan. 1799, PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 17:198, 199 n. 2).


Title: From James Madison to Carlos Martínez de Yrujo, 8 February 1802
From: Madison, James
To: Yrujo, Carlos Martínez de

Letter not found. 8 February 1802. Mentioned in Yrujo to JM, 18 Feb. 1802. Requests passports for two Americans.


Title: From James Madison to Joseph Howard, 9 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Madison, James
To: Howard, Joseph

9 February 1802, Department of State. Acknowledges Howard’s letter of [27] Jan. concerning the seizure of his property at Trujillo. “As instructions have been given to our Minister at Madrid to endeavour to effect an agreement with the Spanish Government for the establishment of a Board of Commissioners to ascertain the losses which our commercial citizens have sustained during the war, it would be advisable to suspend your measures until the result of this negotiation is known.”

   RC (DNA: RG 76, Spain, Treaty of 1819, Allowed Claims, vol. 92). 1 p.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by JM.


Title: To James Madison from Rufus King, 9 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: King, Rufus
To: Madison, James

9 February 1802, London. No. 52. States that the definitive treaty is not yet signed but preparations are being made to reduce the war establishment. Virtual annexation of Italian Republic by France will not impede peace with England, and neither Austria nor the rest of Italy has a voice at Amiens. The size of Great Britain’s peacetime establishment is unknown, but it will be larger than previously, especially at sea. Twenty to twenty-five sail of the line will be at Jamaica while French forces are in the area. The French fleet sailed from Brest on 15 Dec. but has been delayed and scattered by storms in Bay of Biscay. It was provisioned for only four months and therefore probably will seek food and repairs in the U.S., as may also a detachment of the British fleet.
Repeats earlier news that Denmark has acceded to the St. Petersburg convention. Before ratifying, Sweden attempted to clarify British definitions of convoy and contraband but was told that ratification must precede discussion of these points. It is said that Sweden will now ratify, but Prussia, “having nothing to gain by it, will not be likely to do so.” Mentions newspaper reports that Great Britain and France have agreed to repress Barbary States but declares them to be without the “Smallest foundation.” Rumors of a change of ministry are equally unfounded; the present British administration continues popular, having imposed no new taxes and achieved peace “in compliance with the public wishes.” Peace and prolonged negotiations led to business stagnation; the last quarter’s revenue will fall far short of former amounts, “but these embarrassments may prove to be only temporary, and after a while men may resume and adjust their affairs, according to the new order of things.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, DD, Great Britain, vol. 10); letterbook copy (NHi: Rufus King Papers, vol. 55). RC 4 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by King. Printed in King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, 4:63–65.


Title: To James Madison from William Kirkpatrick, 9 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Kirkpatrick, William
To: Madison, James

9 February 1802, Málaga. Transmits a copy of his letter of 7 Jan. and its enclosures. Is pleased to announce order from Madrid that all U.S. vessels be immediately admitted to pratique on submission of attestation from Spanish consul at port of embarkation that no contagion prevails there. Consequently, it is “absolutely necessary the Captains of Merchant Vessels coming to Spain, should be provided with that Document.” Assumes this order resulted from “our Ministers fresh Remonstrances to the Court of Spain, with the certified Copy of a Bill of Health, legalised by the Spanish Consul in New York, which I forwarded to him.” Has heard nothing more from Commodore Dale. Essex arrived on 3 Feb. for supply of spirits, vinegar, and other articles and left 8 Feb. for Gibraltar “to procure Provisions out of the Store Ship, that I received Information had Just got in there from Baltimore.” Essex will also observe movements of Tripolitan cruiser whose captain has recently arrived at Tetuán with an order from the emperor at Fès for men and provisions.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Málaga, vol. 1). 2 pp. Printed in National Intelligencer, 5 Apr. 1802.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from James Monroe, 10 February 1802
From: Monroe, James
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Richmond Feby 10. 1802.
Two incidents occurr’d in the course of the last session of our Assembly which are worthy some attention. These were, the attack on the Executive respecting the disbursements of the publick money, and the meetings which took place in the Capitol towards the close of the session of some of the members from the western counties for the purpose of promoting a dismemberment of the State. The first was commenc’d before Christmass and lasted to the end of the session, in Feby. A motion was made in the H. of Delegates by B. Harrison of P. George to appoint a joint committee of both houses to examine into and report a statment of those expenditures, wh. passed without opposition. It was amended in the Senate by being converted into a standing rule of the legislature. The committee was appointed by both houses, who were met by three members of the council (a request to that effect being made) and who gave information on all the items on which it was desir’d. Creed Taylor from the Senate was chairman of the committee. He had promoted the enquiry in the commenc’ment, and seemed disposed to push some restrictive resolutions, as to the future conduct of the Executive wh. cod. not otherwise than operate as a censure on what had passed. Before the committee the members of the council, Genl. Guerrant, Dr. Foushee & Mr. Mc.Rae were much mortified by the conduct of some members especially a Mr. Sheffey who had embarked in it with peculiar zeal. The committee reported to the House a series of opinions as to what the Executive had done invol[v]ing a censure without stating a single fact on which their opinions were founded. As the enquiry was unprecedented, and other circumstances occurr’d to excite a suspicion that the object of many was to censure, a report of that kind did not surprise us. It was moved & carried without opposition that the report lie on the table & the Executive be furnished with a copy of it. I then wrote the legislature justifying the enquiry, and expressing a wish that it be pursued with the utmost rigor, but stating that the report which had already been made, did not contain a single fact, on wh. I cod. furnish any explanation or the house form an opinion. I requested that the house wod. cause such a statment of facts to be reported as might remain and become a precedent, under the decision formed on it, which might serve as a guide to both departments for the future, and that the Executive might have a copy of it. The report was then committed to the same committee and with it my letter, with an instruction to make such a report as had been desired. In my letter I observed that I shod. explain in what cases the Executive had acted relative to the salaries of clerks &ca. Finding after the commitment that there was cause to suspect the affr. wod. be protracted to the end of the session, with a view to avoid a report of facts, and leave the case on the ground on which it stood, which was the most favorable the partizans in the business then hoped for, I prepard my letter, the one in the pamphlet enclosed intending to send it in whether a report was made or not. The report was made on the saturday before the adjournment wh. was on tuesday, and my letter being nearly finished was sent in immediately afterwards. The result was what you will perceive in the enclosed paper. The foundation of the enquiry was sundry protests of Genl. Wood entered in the journal of the council, agnst an addition to Major Coleman’s salary of £75., the building of the barracks for the guard, & some other trifling expenditures. Those wh. made most noise were the illumination of the Capitol, and the charge of the powder expended on the 4. of July, for wh. Mr. Wood voted with the other members. Several engaged in the business at first who cod. not be suspected to have any unfriendly views to the Executive, or any connection with the federalists, such as Creed Taylor. It is probable the agency of such men gave the thing a consequence it wod. not have had, had the federalists appeard in it at first. The zeal of these men who had embarked in it, with too little reflection, abated as they got information of the true state of facts. The federalists were forc’d then to shew themselves more distinctly in the business. Till finally on the statment of facts which my letter gave the republicans who had before given any countenance to the enquiry turnd completely round, and many of the federalists left the house, among whom was Mr. Sheffey heretofore deemed a republican but whose conduct was more than equivocal thro’ the session. On monday Sheffy mov’d to take up the rept. of the committee intimating that his absence on saturday had been accidental. The motion was set aside by the previous question.
The caucus’s for promoting a dismemberment of the State went on at the same time. In these Sheffy, & Wilson of the Senate, were most active, the latter I believe from Morgantown. There are 28. counties westwd. of the mountains. Only 29 of their members attended, of whom 14. only were for recommending the subject to the consideration of the people, and it being carried by the vote of their chairman (Breckenridge) that their names shod. be signed to whatever they recommended, the affr. fell to the ground at least for the present. I do not think any thing is to be inferrd as to the views of the chairman from his vote on the above question. I suspect both movments were federal, that they were carried on with the same political views & prompted by the same parties. I fear you will not be able to read this as it is written with a bad pen in great haste. Our best regards to Mrs. Madison & yr. family yr. friend & servant
Jas. Monroe

By whom was Mr. Skipwith’s claim referrd to you, the house of reps. or the President?

   RC (NN: Monroe Papers).

   The controversy was provoked by a Federalist-inspired inquiry into Monroe’s executive expenditures, particularly his use of the contingent fund for clerical expenses and the costs of celebrating the Fourth of July and Jefferson’s election. Although the committee reported that some items may have been covered by precedent rather than by law and urged that in future the legislature should provide for the services of clerks and other officeholders then covered by the contingent fund, the House resolved that the expenditures “were made in obedience to the laws” and expressed its “approbation of the conduct of the Executive relative to the same.” It also expressed its “high sense of the distinguished ability, attention and integrity” with which Monroe discharged his duties (Ammon, James Monroe, p. 201; JHDVJournal of the House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Begun and Held at the Capitol, in the City of Richmond. Volumes in this series are designated by the month in which the session began., Dec. 1801 [Shaw and ShoemakerR. R. Shaw and R. H. Shoemaker, comps., American Bibliography: A Preliminary Checklist for 1801–1819 (22 vols. to date; New York, 1958—). 3474], pp. 79, 89).

   Western Virginians were strong supporters of the national government and felt that the current system of state government deprived them of adequate representation. During the debate on JM’s Virginia Resolutions, westerners, assailing those who demanded a democracy from the federal government that they denied to citizens of their own state, voted against the resolutions. James Breckinridge had begun to focus this dissatisfaction the previous year when he described the state constitution as “radically defective,” resulting in representation that was “unequal and unjust” (Charles Henry Ambler, Sectionalism in Virginia from 1776 to 1861 [1910; New York, 1964 reprint], pp. 69–70, 72; Otis K. Rice, The Allegheny Frontier: West Virginia Beginnings, 1730–1830 [Lexington, Ky., 1970], pp. 352–53; JHDVJournal of the House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Begun and Held at the Capitol, in the City of Richmond. Volumes in this series are designated by the month in which the session began., Dec. 1800 [Shaw and ShoemakerR. R. Shaw and R. H. Shoemaker, comps., American Bibliography: A Preliminary Checklist for 1801–1819 (22 vols. to date; New York, 1958—). 1585], p. 58).

   Benjamin Harrison of Brandon (1743–1807) represented Prince George County in the House of Delegates several times between 1777 and 1807 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., p. 384; Judith McGhan, ed., Virginia Vital Records: From the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, the William and Mary College Quarterly, and Tyler’s Quarterly [Baltimore, 1982], p. 424).

   Creed Taylor (ca. 1767–1837) represented Cumberland County in the House of Delegates in 1788 and served in the state Senate from 1798 to 1805 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., p. 435; McGhan, Virginia Vital Records, p. 594).

   Lawyer Alexander McRae, Dinwiddie County representative in the House of Delegates from 1794 to 1796, was elected to the Council of State in 1796 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., p. 403; PJM-PSRobert A. Rutland et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Presidential Series (2 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1984—)., 1:137 n. 2; CVSPWilliam P. Palmer et al., eds., Calendar of Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts (11 vols.; Richmond, 1875–93)., 8:402–3).

   Federalist Daniel Sheffey (1770–1830) represented Wythe County in the House of Delegates from 1800 to 1804 and in the state Senate from 1804 until 1808. After serving another term in the House of Delegates, he represented Virginia in Congress from 1809 to 1817 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., p. 427).

   For Monroe’s 26 and 28 Jan. 1802 letters to the Speaker of the House of Delegates, see Hamilton, Writings of MonroeStanislaus Murray Hamilton, ed., The Writings of James Monroe (7 vols.; New York and London, 1898–1903)., 3:330–34.

   The pamphlet was probably A Report of the Committee Appointed to Examine into the Executive Expenditures … (Richmond, 1802), which also included Monroe’s 28 Jan. letter to the Speaker of the House of Delegates (see Sowerby, Catalogue of Jefferson’s Library, 3:353).

   Monroe apparently enclosed a copy of a joint resolution, passed by both branches of the General Assembly between 30 Jan. and 2 Feb., endorsing Monroe’s conduct (Acts Passed at a General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia [Richmond, 1802; Shaw and ShoemakerR. R. Shaw and R. H. Shoemaker, comps., American Bibliography: A Preliminary Checklist for 1801–1819 (22 vols. to date; New York, 1958—). 3470], p. 53).

   James Wood (1741–1813) of Frederick County had served in the government of Virginia since 1766, including three terms as governor from 1796 to 1799. He sat on the Council of State from the time he left office in 1799 until 1803 and again from 1812 until his death (McIlwaine, Journals of the Council of State of Virginia, 5:409–10).

   Lawyer Thomas Wilson (1765–1826) represented Monongalia, Ohio, Harrison, Wood, Brooke, and Randolph counties in the Virginia Senate from 1792 to 1795 and from 1800 to 1804. A Federalist, he also served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1811 to 1813 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., pp. 57, 447).

   James Breckinridge (1763–1833), a 1785 graduate of the College of William and Mary, represented Botetourt County in various sessions in the Virginia House of Delegates from 1789 through 1802. A Federalist, he was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1809 to 1817 (Swem and Williams, RegisterEarl G. Swem and John W. Williams, eds., A Register of the General Assembly of Virginia, 1776–1918, and of the Constitutional Conventions (Richmond, 1918)., p. 341).


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Bulkeley, 10 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Bulkeley, Thomas
To: Madison, James

10 February 1802, Lisbon. Transmits copies of his dispatches of 2 Feb. and an original letter that should have been sent that day. Has received a letter dated 4 Dec. from Capt. Daniel Savage at Pernambuco reporting the “unjust capture & detention” of the schooner Samuel. Is forwarding the letter to Boston owners so that they can send it to JM with documents in support of their claim, which Bulkeley will prosecute as forcefully as the president sees fit. Mentions that ten American vessels are “detained here under rigorous quarantine.” Has received letters reporting the same problem in Spanish ports.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Lisbon, vol. 1). 2 pp.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Bulkeley. The letter that should have been sent on 2 Feb. has not been identified, but see Bulkeley to JM, 2 Feb. 1802 (first letter), and n.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Bulkeley, 10 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Bulkeley, Thomas
To: Madison, James

10 February 1802, Lisbon. Encloses a copy of a letter from Charles Frederick Knise, U.S. deputy consul at Faro, reporting the “unfortunate circumstance that has happened to one of our vessels, stranded on that coast.” Has written to the customs collector at Boston, enclosing an abstract of the letter to be made public in order to discover the ship’s owners.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Lisbon, vol. 1). RC 1 p.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by Bulkeley. For enclosures, see n. 1.

   Knise’s 3 Feb. 1802 letter to Bulkeley (2 pp.) told of a vessel found wrecked on the coast east of Faro on 31 Jan. “Two men were found dead upon the deck, who had tied themselves by the waist, probably to avoid being washed overboard, both masts were broke, and the vessel very much shattered, upon the beach two american Colours were found.” Knise enclosed a copy of a protection certificate, “found in a tin letter case,” for a seventeen-year-old American seaman, issued by Benjamin Lincoln (1 p.).

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Samuel Chase, 10 February 1802
From: Chase, Samuel
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. 10 February 1802. Acknowledged in JM to Chase, 12 Feb. 1802. Inquires about the status of Rufus King’s negotiations with Great Britain on the Maryland bank stock case.


Title: To James Madison from Horatio Gates, 11 February 1802
From: Gates, Horatio
To: Madison, James

My dear Sir
New York 11th: Feb: 1802:
My [sic] Armstrong has Sacrificed his Seat in the Senate, to his patriotism; he resigned about the 3d. Inst: afflicted with an inveterate Rheumatism, that has Tormented him all the Winter, he found himself unable to attend his Duty in Congress, and forthwith sent his Resignation to the Legislature, then in Session at Albany; this should, & I have no doubt will, have its weight with every Friend to Republican Government; Inclosed is a Letter for Mr: Pichon, Consul General of France; you will Oblige me in having it deliverd to Him. I hope the Summer will bring you this way, the Doors of Rose Hill will Fly open to receive You; present my most respectfull, & Affectionate Compts: to The President, & assure the S: of The Treasury that he has my sincere esteem, with unalterable attachement to You I am Your Obedt: Servt:
Horatio Gates
P. S:
pray present Mrs: Gates’s & My Compts:, to Mrs: Maddison.

   RC (DLC).

   John Armstrong had been elected in November 1800 to fill the unexpired Senate term of John Laurance. He was reelected in 1801 and served until February 1802 when he resigned rather than return to Washington (C. Edward Skeen, John Armstrong, Jr., 1758–1843: A Biography [Syracuse, N.Y., 1981], pp. 45, 48).

   Rose Hill Farm, the Manhattan estate to which Gates had retired in 1790, was located a few miles north of the then New York City limits, near present-day Madison Square (Samuel White Patterson, Horatio Gates: Defender of American Liberties [New York, 1941], p. 369).


Title: To James Madison from William Eustis, 11 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Eustis, William
To: Madison, James

11 February 1802, Washington. “In substituting this for an original letter having for its object the recommendation of Mr William Foster Junr. of Boston as a candidate for a consulate in France, stating that he is a young man of talents, integrity and amiable manners, a Republican in principle and qualified for such an office, I am governed by the consideration of that letter’s containing other information not of a public nature. The facts stated are vouched by respectable names and I believe are unquestionable.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, ML). 1 p.; docketed by Wagner.


Title: To James Madison from Nathaniel Massie, [ca. 12 February] 1802
From: Massie, Nathaniel
To: Madison, James

Sir:
[ca. 12 February 1802]
Believing that Arthur St. Clair, Governor of the Northwestern Territory, has violated that confidence and trust reposed in him by the constituted authority of the United States in presiding over the Territory as their chief magistrate, I have thought proper to exhibit to the President such parts of his conduct which appears inconsistent with the nature of his appointment, trusting that when a high and responsible officer has violated his constitutional duty, that an inquiry will be made into his conduct.
The following charges I wish and request you to lay before the President of the United States:
1st. That Governor St. Clair has degraded his official character in attempting to divide the Territory, by assuming to himself the right of recommending to the Hon. William H. Harrison, the then delegate to Congress from this Territory, in the session of the year 1799, when the legislature of this Territory had been but three weeks out of session, and to Mr. Pickering, the then Secretary of State, a plan of division which was calculated to deprive the inhabitants of the advantage and opportunity of forming a State government agreeably to the provisions of the Ordinance for the government thereof, which has ever been considered as their constitutional guide. That, in his letter to the delegate, he gave as a reason that the division ought to be made as recommended, otherwise a certain part of the Territory would be materially injured, which appears to be that part in which the delegate, as he supposed, was most interested, when to Mr. Pickering he used quite a different reasoning, to-wit: that if the division as recommended did not take place, that the then administration might, with reasonable certainty, expect that the eastern State, as contemplated by the Ordinance, would in a short time become a State government, and the consequence would be that the representatives chosen from said State to represent them in the General Government would oppose the then administration. Indeed, his Excellency did not stop here, but condescended to criminate and represent the individual opinions of the different settlements of the Territory, saying that such a district of people was Republican, and another was in favor of the then administration; and to enforce his reasoning more strongly on the probability of the majority of the said contemplated State being Republican, he referred him to the neighboring States of Kentucky and Tennessee; but, trusting that if the division as recommended was made, that such an influence as the General Government was capable of making might operate a change to their advantage. Viewing such conduct as degrading to the office of a chief magistrate, inasmuch as it appears that he was placed over the independent sentiments of the inhabitants of the Territory rather than their chief magistrate, I can not for a moment believe that the President will ever encourage such conduct. To his letter to the Hon. Mr. Harrison, which was printed for the use of the members of both Houses at that session, and to his letter to Mr. Pickering at the same time, I beg leave to refer you; if the last-mentioned letter was a private one, a copy, or the substance thereof, I can procure and will forward when requested.
2d. That the Governor has demanded and received from the citizens of this Territory oppressive fees in the execution of his official duty unauthorized by law; for the confirmation of this article, I refer you to his letter on that subject.
3d. That the Governor has violated the constitution of this Territory in assuming to himself the legislative powers thereof, by erecting new counties out of counties already laid out, and thereby altering their boundaries, and fixing the permanent seat of justice. I will refer you to his several proclamations on this subject.
4th. That in public companies he has frequently manifested a hostile disposition to a republican form of government in asserting that a monarchical government was the only form that could or ought to be supported, thereby degrading his official character as the chief magistrate of a people attached to a republican form of government.
5th. That the Governor has attempted by his official influence to make justices of the peace of this Territory depart from their duty, and thereby to place the life, liberty and property of the citizens at his control; his conduct in the case of Colonel Samuel Finley, as a justice of the peace, and certain citizens of the town of Chillicothe, as will appear from the Scioto Gazette of the —— date.
Having the fullest confidence in the Chief Executive Magistrate of our General Government, I trust the above charges will have his serious and mature consideration.

   Printed copy (Smith, St. Clair Papers, 2:563–65). Unsigned; undated. Date here assigned on the basis of Massie’s 12 Feb. 1802 letter to Thomas Worthington (OHi: Worthington Papers). The printed text was taken from a copy of the letter to JM that Massie apparently enclosed in his 12 Feb. letter to Worthington in which he informed Worthington: “The enclosed charges I have at length prepared and have sent them to the Secretary of State referring him to you for the several documents which you will be pleased to lay before him.” In 1992 the Ohio Historical Society was unable to locate the enclosure.

   Massie, Thomas Worthington, and other Republicans were dedicated opponents of Federalist territorial governor Arthur St. Clair in the struggle for Ohio statehood. Following adjournment of the territorial legislature on 23 Jan. 1802, the group stepped up its attacks on the governor. A Chillicothe committee sent Worthington and Michael Baldwin, leader of a Christmas night mob attack on St. Clair’s lodgings, to Washington to oppose the redistricting plan favored by St. Clair. Worthington, outlining complaints against the governor in a letter to Jefferson on 30 Jan., went further by calling for St. Clair’s removal. On 8 Feb. Massie promised Worthington that he would write another statement against St. Clair “by the next mail” and “in due form.” Finally, on 20 Feb., Worthington sent the president a detailed list of the charges drawn up by Massie, together with supporting documents (Massie to Worthington, 18 Jan. 1802, Worthington to Jefferson, 30 Jan. 1802, Massie to Worthington, 8 Feb. 1802, Smith, St. Clair Papers, 2:559–61, 565–70, 572–73; Worthington to Jefferson, 20 Feb. 1802 [DLC: Jefferson Papers]; Bond, Foundations of Ohio, pp. 469–73; Jeffrey Paul Brown, “Frontier Politics: The Evolution of a Political Society in Ohio, 1788–1814” [Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois, 1979], pp. 245–46).

   St. Clair had supported a plan to divide the Northwest Territory into three parts, cutting in half the Eastern District established in 1800. The measure would have removed the seat of government from Chillicothe and made Marietta and Cincinnati the new district capitals. The governor’s adherents secured the passage of a bill to this effect in the territorial legislature, which the Worthington-Massie party believed would postpone statehood indefinitely. The House of Representatives, however, refused to assent to the bill (Bond, Foundations of Ohio, p. 467; Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States … (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56)., 7th Cong., 1st sess., 465–66).

   See St. Clair to William Henry Harrison, 17 Feb. 1800 (Smith, St. Clair Papers, 2:489–91).

   Date omitted in printed copy. Following the Christmas night disturbance in front of the governor’s living quarters, St. Clair directed justice of the peace Samuel Finley to bind several individuals over to the next quarter-sessions court, requesting that they should be put under recognizance for their good behavior. After interviewing several witnesses, Finley decided there had been no riot and did not pursue the matter, leading to an exchange of letters between himself and St. Clair on the issue. On 29 Dec., St. Clair asked the legislature to investigate Finley’s behavior in the case. On 2 Jan. the newspaper published St. Clair’s communication to the House of Representatives, the letters between the two men, and the depositions of the witnesses (see Chillicothe Scioto Gazette, 2 Jan. 1802).

   Nathaniel Massie (1763–1813), a founder of Chillicothe, was a native of Goochland County, Virginia, who had moved to Kentucky after the Revolution and then to the Ohio country. There, as a surveyor and land speculator, he played a major role in opening the Virginia Military Tract to settlement. Massie, whom St. Clair described as “a little tinctured by democracy,” also served as a territorial legislator and as a justice of the peace in Adams County (St. Clair to Timothy Pickering, 30 Mar. 1800, Smith, St. Clair Papers, 2:495; Bond, Foundations of Ohio, pp. 306–8, 351–52, 438–39; Brown, “Frontier Politics,” p. 161).


Title: To James Madison from William Savage, 12 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Savage, William
To: Madison, James

12 February 1802, Kingston, Jamaica. Informs JM of his 25 Jan. draft for $1,500, which he trusts will be honored. Has just received under a blank cover two documents relating to Gilbert Giberson and Martin Quin, which will be attended to.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Kingston, Jamaica, vol. 1). 1 p.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Elias Vander Horst, 12 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Vanderhorst, Elias
To: Madison, James

12 February 1802, Bristol. Acknowledges receipt of JM’s 28 Nov. letter; has forwarded the letter JM enclosed for Livingston regarding the four casks of indigo belonging to Smiths, DeSaussure, and Darrell that were seized by a French privateer. Has also forwarded JM’s letter to Saabye at Copenhagen. Encloses copy of letter received “some time since” from Latimer, customs collector at Philadelphia, and his reply. Describes a journey he made to London at short notice to deliver dispatches forwarded by Latimer for King, but King declared that “they were not of much consequence.” Wishes King to pay the expenses of £12 16s. 10d. for the journey, but King says he cannot do so without JM’s permission. Encloses an extract of King’s letter to him in the belief that JM will support his claim for reimbursement. Encloses an account of imports and exports for latter half of 1801, newspapers, and London price current.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Bristol, vol. 2). 2 pp. Enclosures not found. In a note of 13 Feb. 1802 (ibid.), Vander Horst informed JM that he was also forwarding a letter from Rufus King and five more newspapers by the same conveyance.

   A full transcription of this document has been added to the digital edition.


Title: To James Madison from Joseph Jones, 13 February 1802
From: Jones, Joseph
To: Madison, James

Dr. Sr.
Loudoun 13th. Febry. 1802.
I have returned to Loudoun from Richmond only a few days past, where I was during the latter part of the Session, and while the back members held two meetings to consult on the propriety of attempting a division of the State, I understood there were each evening between thirty and forty convened at the Capitol—Brackenridge in the Chair—some of them were averse to, and opposed the measure. The Characters who avowed and supported the proposition were chiefly of the Fœderal party—Wilson, Sheffy and the Chairman were of the leaders—a third meeting was to be holden at the same place the evening afer I left Town, but which I am told like the others terminated withot coming to any resolution. These Men may have their personal views, but I suspect the plan is the project of more designing Men of the party, to lessen the importance and influence of this State in the Union. It was whispered, but wher. with sufficient ground for the conjecture I know not, that while ⟨Judge?⟩ Washington was in Town a small Caucus had been holden at the House of a distinguished Char⟨acter⟩ in the Town—this was mentioned to me the day after I left Town by a Gent. who left it that morning. I heard no such report while I was there. The Bill to repeal the Judiciary Law of the last Session of Congress is I find through the Senate, and will no doubt pass the other branches of the Legislature, it w⟨ill⟩ be seen then whether this prop of the Constitution as it has been called being removed the whole must fall to ruin. I inclose you for Mrs. Paine Ja[…] receipt for the money paid him; to whom, to Mr⟨s.⟩ Madison and the Family be pleased to make my respectfull compliments and believe me Yr. Friend & Servt
Jos: Jones.

   RC (DLC). Parts of words obscured by tape along margin.

   See Monroe to JM, 10 Feb. 1802, and n. 2.


Title: To James Madison from Rufus King, 13 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: King, Rufus
To: Madison, James

13 February 1802, London. No. 53. Informs JM that Great Britain will accede to a proposal to abolish all discriminatory duties between U.S. and British territories and that Vansittart has moved for a bill in the House of Commons authorizing the king “by an order in Council, or by Proclamation, to cause the countervailing Duties … wholly to cease, or to be suspended.” Counts on the bill passing into law and declares that the extent of the repeal will depend on American actions. Has suggested an immediate suspension of the countervailing duty on tobacco but has received no assurances that this will be done. Will pursue the matter and suggests that individuals ask for a remission of the duty according to circumstances of the cases. Encloses copy of a letter from Hawkesbury to the British commissioners acting under article 7 of the Jay treaty; has sent the American commissioners a copy of the recently signed convention.

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, DD, Great Britain, vol. 10); letterbook copy (NHi: Rufus King Papers, vol. 55). RC 2 pp.; marked duplicate; in a clerk’s hand. Printed in King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, 4:69–70, as is the enclosed text of Hawkesbury’s 11 Feb. 1802 letter to Maurice Swabey and John Anstey (1 p.), instructing them to propose to the American commissioners that they resume their negotiations and transmitting a copy of the 8 Jan. Hawkesbury-King agreement on articles 6 and 7 of the Jay treaty (6 pp.), which included the text of a notice to be inserted in London and American newspapers announcing that the commission was ready to proceed in its work under article 7.


Title: To James Madison from Rufus King, 13 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: King, Rufus
To: Madison, James

13 February 1802, London. Reports that no one defends the unequal operation of the discriminating duties against U.S. commerce. All prefer abolition to revision; and no one supports the proposal to transfer the countervailing duties from imports from, to exports to, the U.S., as it is against British policy to impose duties on their manufactures except in unusual circumstances and the sum of the duties would not justify the amount of bookkeeping. American policy will determine whether the abolition of discriminating duties on both sides will be total or partial. Suggests the imposition of lighthouse duties according to the usage of other nations and also the retention of tonnage duties until the West Indies trade can be settled. Asks to be informed of the president’s views on the West Indies trade as he does not wish to “cross them, by being ignorant of them.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, DD, Great Britain, vol. 10); letterbook copy (NHi: Rufus King Papers, vol. 55). RC 2 pp.; marked private and duplicate; in a clerk’s hand. Printed in King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, 4:71.


Title: To James Madison from Hubbard Taylor, 13 February 1802
From: Taylor, Hubbard
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. 13 February 1802. Calendared in the lists probably made by Peter Force (DLC, series 7, container 2) as a two-page letter.


Title: To James Madison from Robert R. Livingston, 15 February 1802
From: Livingston, Robert R.
To: Madison, James

No. 5
Dear sir
Paris 15th. Feby. 1802
Nothing extraordinary has occurred since my last. The definitive treaty is not yet signed. It is asserted some difficulties are started on account of reinstating France in her former commercial situation with respect to Turkey, the British claiming similar advantages in consequence of their last treaty.
It is also reported that Russia is not satisfied with the new order of things in the Italian Republic. These however are mere conjectures; the Ministers here of the powers that form the Congress deny that any thing of importance has intervened.

Of our own affairs you will judge by the enclosed notes. The case of the Pigou will I believe be settled as I wish, the Minister of Exterior having promised to give Mr. Waddel tomorrow a strong letter to the Minister of Marine upon whom I shall call and press the thing to a final issue. I am promised a speedy answer to the other notes. How the promise will be performed I know not for their financial embarrassments are as great as ever.
Mr. Sotin having been named commercial agent for Georgia—I have objected to his appointment, the nature and cause of my objections will appear by the note enclosed on that subject. I have not seen the Minister since so as to know his intention, but shall tomorrow—should he go you will judge how far it would be proper to grant him an Exequatur.
As to the affair of the commercial agents appointed from french Citizens I have received the final answer of Government informing me of their resolution not to grant them Exequaturs—so that there will be several vacancies to fill. I am very sorry to see Mr. Vailes place supplied. I have explained to him the mistake that occasioned it, and desired him to continue to act, in hopes that he may be replaced And some other provision made for Mr. Paterson. Nantes & St. Maloes are now vacant either of which would be more advantageous to a young Merchant than L’Orient where the whole commerce centers in the house of Vaile & Co.
I have heard nothing yet from Mr. Pinckny to whom I wrote by Mr. Graham. The conservative Senate have finished their illimination (as they call it) by which the principal opposers of Government are left out. A new question is now before them Viz. whether or not they shall elect out of the lists returned. Every thing is tranquil at present, & tho’ there is some discontent there is no appearance of its breaking out into action. Every body here pursue Literature or pleasure & few interest themselves so much in the politics of the Country, or find themselves so secure as to make them the subject of Conversation.
The Presidents Message and the report on the finances have raised us very high in the estimation of foreigners and I doubt not that we shall feel the effect of them in the migration to America of persons of property who wish to live at peace under a happy and tranquil government. Be pleased to send the Journals of Congress and interesting reports. As for Newspapers—not one reaches me from the public offices until they are 5 or 6 Months old—they are laid in a heap, I suppose, at the Custom houses and when they happen to be thought of or become so bulky as to be troublesome they are sent all together. Some precise order should be given to make up the packets weekly & to send them by every Ship destined for any port of France. I have the honor to be Dear sir, with the Most perfect Esteem & Consideration your. Mt. Obt. Hle. St.
Robt R Livingston.

   RC and one enclosure (DNA: RG 59, DD, France, vol. 8); draft (NHi: Livingston Papers); letterbook copy and copies of three enclosures (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by Livingston. For the enclosures, see nn. 1 and 5.

   Livingston enclosed copies of his notes to Talleyrand of 21 Jan. and 8 Feb. 1802. The first protested violations of article 4 of the Convention of 1800 by the Council of Prizes and sought the immediate release of American ships by means of an executive decree (8 pp.) (DNA: RG 59, DD, France, vol. 8; letterbook copy, NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1). The second requested that the condemnation of the Hope be overturned as it was based on principles “so alarming” that they would allow French armed vessels “to take every vessel of the United States without regard to treaties” (letterbook copy, NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1).

   On the Pégou, see Livingston to JM, 31 Dec. 1801, and n. 4.

   Denis Decrès had become French minister of marine on 2 Oct. 1801 (Connelly et al., Historical Dictionary of Napoleonic France, p. 147).

   Pierre-Jean-Marie Sotin de la Condière (1764–1810) had served as minister of police under the Directory in 1797 and the next year was appointed French ambassador to Genoa. In this last capacity, William Vans Murray informed Timothy Pickering, he was an “active agent” in “embroiling the insurgents against the King of Sardinia.” He was then named consul general at New York but never took up the post because of President John Adams’s decision to revoke the exequaturs of all French consuls in the U.S. in June 1798. Murray described Sotin as “a dangerous man—subtle & contriving—[and] a wicked intriguer,” which had led him to conclude in 1798 that “there can be but one design in sending such an incendiary from the rank of minister to that of consul—at such a time and to such a place!” Seemingly unaware of these facts, however, the administration announced Sotin’s Georgia appointment in the National Intelligencer on 3 Feb. 1802, and on 29 May 1802 Pichon forwarded JM a copy of his commission. Sotin commenced his duties in June 1802, but he was recalled in 1803 after supporting the marriage of Jerome Bonaparte to Elizabeth Patterson, contrary to Napoleon’s wishes (Murray to Pickering, 29 June 1798, quoted in Syrett and Cooke, Papers of HamiltonHarold C. Syrett and Jacob E. Cooke, eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York, 1961–79)., 21:525–26 n. 1; Biographie universelle [1843–65 ed.], 39:652–53; Pichon to JM, 29 May 1802 [DNA: RG 59, NFL, France, vol. 1]).

   Livingston enclosed a copy of his 7 Feb. 1802 note to Talleyrand pointing out that Sotin’s appointment would “be extremely disagreeable both to the Executive & citizens of the United States,” partly because of Sotin’s personality and partly because American citizens in France were subjected to ill-treatment during his tenure as minister of police (letterbook copy, NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1).


Title: To James Madison from John Francis Mercer, 15 February 1802
From: Mercer, John Francis
To: Madison, James

My dear Sir
Annapolis Feb. 15. 1802.
In an Official Letter of this date, you will find allusions which comport more with a private & confindential [sic] communication. The effect which the loss of the Bank Stock will have here, I can have no doubt will be fatal to the popularity of the present administration. Under the last it was offer’d the State with the deduction of 10,000£ Sterlg. as appears by the Letters of both Mr. King & Pinkney. They will now make the exclusion a sine qua non.
I fear you are deceiv’d with respect to this State, be assur’d that its wealth & talents are fearfully agt. us, what has been done is by Coup de main—& any drawback cannot yet be sustain’d. I wish I coud say all I wish to you on this subject, but fear it woud be thought over sollicitude. Be assurd I have no private object, fair & honorable extrication from the part I play is all my ambition soars to.
I enquire constantly after your health, I am truly gratified when each suceeding report is more favorable than the former. Pray present me affy. to the President & receive the assurances of a real freindship—
John Fr: Mercer

   RC (DLC).

   The official letter from Mercer is dated 16 Feb.


Title: From James Madison to Louis-André Pichon, 15 February 1802 (Abstract)
From: Madison, James
To: Pichon, Louis-André

15 February 1802, Department of State. Acknowledges receipt of Pichon’s 1 Feb. note detailing the state of the revolt on the island of Guadeloupe and the dispositions made by the French authorities in regard to commerce with that colony. The note was shown to the president, whose instructions were that no matter what the results in terms of commercial relations, the U.S. would be guided by respect for the authority of the French republic and the regulations it issued as well as by a strict adherence to public law where applicable and by existing friendly relations between the two nations, which it was in the interest of both parties to conserve with cordiality and the best faith.

   Tr (AAE: Political Correspondence, U.S., 54:135). 2 pp.; in French.

   Pichon later reported to Talleyrand a conversation he had with JM about publicizing the trade restrictions with Guadeloupe in which they both agreed that Saint-Domingue was really the issue. The French diplomat quoted JM as saying that the U.S. was not obligated to France beyond respecting its regulations, that it was a policy question whether they should work together on the matter, and that it would probably not be advisable to excite the colonial populations against them in ways that could be prejudicial to the U.S. and its tranquillity. Pichon noted that he reminded JM that the preceding summer the president had led him to hope for more by stating positively that the U.S. could concur in a policy to starve Toussaint. When Pichon raised the matter with the president again, he reported to Talleyrand, Jefferson was cold and reserved and spoke to him in the same sense as JM had done (Pichon to Talleyrand, 4 Ventôse an X [23 Feb. 1802] [ibid., 54:162–63], editors’ translation).