Title: To John Adams from William Simmons, 11 December 1797
From: Simmons, William
To: Adams, John

Sir
Department of War Accountants Office December 11 1797—

In obedience to your desire, I have the honor to lay before you a few observations in reply to the letter of the Secretary of War to me of the 11 November Ult. by stateing to you the reasons for my conduct, which he seems to think reprehensible.
The subject of his complaint is, my refusing or suspending to countersign a Warrant in favor of Samuel Lewis a Clerk in his Office for Two thousand five hundred Dollars, permit me Sir to state the circumstances attending it; When Mr. Lewis called upon me with the Warrant in question, he mentioned he was directed by the Secretary of War, to fill it up in his favor chargeable to the Indian Department and that he was to receive the amount in Bank notes, and remit them to the Secretary of War, who was to apply it to secret services in the Indian Department and at my request he produced the letter of the Secretary to him on the subject, my answer was, that previous to my Countersigning the Warrant it would be necessary for the Secretary of War to prefix his Signature, or that he should write me an official letter that I could file as a voucher for my justification, this precaution I thought necessary, as it was an unprecedented case for the monies drawn upon Warrants from the Department to be paid to the Secretary of War, or that they should be disbursed by him or Clerk, in his Office; The warrant accordingly returned with his signature affixed, and was presented to me a second time with the letter from the Secretary of War to his Clerk of the 2nd Novemrr. from the contents of that letter, and the warrant not being immediately wanted, I requested time to consider thereon, and after some little deliberation affixed my signature and returned the Warrant to Mr Lewis.
I must now beg Sir to be permitted to state my reasons generally; on the first instance I refused my signature to the Warrant because I did not consider myself authorized by law to countersign a warrant without the Secretary of War’s signature was first affixed, particularly where the item of expenditure was not specifically pointed out by law and where I could not produce a voucher to shew how the money was to be applied; The letter to his Clerk who was to receive the money I did not consider a sufficient voucher for my signature, to draw so large a sum out of the Treasury of the United States—
In the cases where I countersigned warrants without his signature they were all specifically authorized by law, and when that was not the case where Officers applied for advances the Secretary of War was written to for instructions, besides had I not pursued this measure, the service must have suffered, as there were a number of Officers attending settlement of their accounts, and many Soldier who had been discharged the service, and arrived a great distance for their Pay could not have waited until the warrants were sent to the Secretary of War and returned with his Signature, who was all the time of the calamity of the Yellow Fever upwards of forty miles from the Office; and besides when detachments were ordered to march immediately it would also have been improper to have detained them until they could be paid by Warrants with the Secretary’s signature affixed; the charge therefore of inconsistency of conduct I conceive utterly unfounded—When I suspended my signature in the second instance, it was for time to exercise my judgement; as the subject was a new one, no warrant of the kind had ever issued that was to pursue the same course of disbursement, and I was fearful that difficulties would arise in the settlement of the Accounts. I however after some consideration affixed my name to the warrant under the idea that the Secretary of War was the responsible person in case of any difficulty thereafter; When I requested the Secretary’s letters to his Clerk it was for the purpose of takeing copies of them that I could make a reply as a justification of my conduct which the Secretary therein complains of
The Secretary in his letter of the 11 November proceeds to state his opinion of the duties of the Accountant “that he is to have no deliberative will in countersigning Warrants drawn by the Secretary of War that it does not belong to the Accountant to check the Secretary should he in any case exceed in his demands the sum appropriated by law, that the intention of the Act of countersigning is merely to insure the registry of all the Secretary’s warrants that the Accountant is a mere passive agent having no power whatever to with-hold his signature from such Warrants.” In this he is supported by an opinion given by the Attorney General under date of the 30 May 1796 (copy of which is here inclosed) from which I must beg leave to differ in opinion conceiving that the law entitled an Act makeing alterations in the Treasury and War Departments passed the 8th May 1792 has explicitly pointed out my duties, by which I shall continue to be governed until I can be convinced that their opinions are to prevail and that I am to exercise no judgement of the propriety of the Secretary of Wars demanding my name to warrants on the Treasurer, I would here beg to observe that in such case all check which in my opinion was intended will be destroyed and that I must be relieved from all responsibility, from the inspection and revision of my accounts with the accounting Officers of the Treasury—
The Secretary of War has pleased to observe that I am not to be made acquainted with the secrets of his Office, or that I am to act as a participator in Military arrangements, why he thus intimates, or dwells so lengthy on this subject I am at a loss to know, for I can assert with the utmost certainty, that I never even hinted a wish of the kind, either to know the secrets of his Office in case he had any, or that I at any time wished to participate in the Military arrangements of the Department, the duties of my Office has employed too much of my time to have a desire to pry into or be made acquainted with duties or secrets of his; I can however with propriety assert and can produce a number of instances where the Secretary of War has in my opinion very improperly interfered with the duties of mine, he has not only undertaken to liquidate and judge of accounts against the Department, but has in a variety of instances issued his Warrant for the amount without the account ever haveing been presented or examined in my Office, he has undertaken to authorize the Pay Master General and Agents for the War Department to draw Bills for the pay of the Army, without giving me the least information to what amount he has authorized them to draw, this mode of proceeding has entirely put it out of my power to know what monies the Pay master and Agents are chargeable with until the Bills are presented for payment and I have been lately informed that great part of the Army particularly those at Knoxville are now nine months in arrears, altho’ the law has directed that the Army shall not be more than two months in arrears, I have wrote to the Secretary of War particularly on this business, who has not thought proper to answer my letters or give me the least information, he has undertaken to direct Agents who were exclusively accountable to this Office for the settlement of their accounts and who were entrusted to receive, and disburse monies agreeably to instructions from this Office; to leave their stations without informing me, which has put it out of my power to apply the monies appropriated by Law to their proper objects—I beg leave to state one case in which if I had not undertaken to exercise my judgement the United States would have been subjected to pay a considerable sum which in my opinion was not due either in law or equity, I mention this case in particular because it was the first of any consequence upon which I was so unfortunate as to differ with the Secretary of War. Some time in the Month of May 1796 Captain H De Butts presented to me an account against the United States wherein he had charged his Compensation as Secretary to Major General Wayne a Commissioner appointed to treat with the Indians North West of the Ohio from the 4 April 1794 to the 20 Septemr 1795.—535 days at 2 Dollars per day amounting to Dollars 1070, this account had been with the Secretary, whose Signature was affixed to it, that he had admitted the same and only remained for a Warrant to be made out for the amount, it appeared to me that this mode of conducting the adjustment of accounts was indirect contradiction to the Law organizing my Office, and as I was fully persuaded that he was not intitled to such compensation, and that it would be fixing a principle for the settlement of a like claim of General Wayne’s which was in the Office for a demand of upwards of 8000 Dollars. I refused to allow it, I therefore would not settle it, nor give my certificate for the Warrant, in consequence of which some altercation took place between the Secretary and me, and a question was submitted to the Attorney General upon which Captain DeButts withdrew his account for Dollars 1070, and rendered an other account for the same service amounting to 1500 Dollars with his deposition annexed to it, this caused a full investigation of the subject, and from letters and documents that I obtained from the War Office I was clearly convinced that he could not be intitled to more than 112 days service in that capacity makeing only 224 Dollars, which I reported due to him with my reasons given in full on the account as will appear by copies of the same herewith enclosed where he has receipted for the said sum.
I must beg your pardon for having taken up so much of your time in attending to a detail of this business, it has swelled beyond what I at first intended but justice to myself, and to the public seemed to require that I should be somewhat particular in stating the subject upon which the Secretary and myself have differed in opinion, and I beg leave to assure you that nothing but a sense of duty could induce me to persist in a measure, which must be disagreeable to me not only as it has produced some altercation between the Secretary’s Office and mine but as it tends to make the Officers of the Army reflect upon me for not allowing their accounts to the extent they had been approved of by the Secretary; but Sir I may say without ostentation that no consideration has ever prevailed upon me to swerve from what I believed to be my duty in the several Offices with which my Country has entrusted me and retaining my present disposition I never shall; If I have erred in judgement I am willing to be set right and it is my earnest wish, and desire, that the line may be drawn between the duties which appertain to my Office, and that of the Secretary of War in all cases where there may be any obscurity; and I pledge myself that I shall never knowingly transgress it.
I have the honor to be with the greatest regard / Sir / Your Most Obedt. Humbl. Servt:
Wm: SimmonsAcct. Dept. of War


Title: To John Adams from Timothy Pickering, Jr., 18 December 1797
From: Pickering, Timothy, Jr.
To: Adams, John

To the President of the United States
Philadelphia Decr. 18. 1797

Agreeably to your directions, we have read and deliberately considered the correspondence between Mr. Wolcott, the Secretary of the Treasury, and Mr. Coxe, the Commissioner of the Revenue. This correspondence embraces the following complaints of Mr. Wolcott against Mr. Coxe.
I. In the case of Leonard Jarvis’s delinquency as an Inspector of the Revenue in Massachusetts.
Upon the first intelligence of this delinquency, in June last, Mr. Wolcott wrote to Mr. Jarvis; and at the same time to Mr. Davis, the District Attorney of Massachusetts, desiring, if the intelligence were true, that he would take proper measures to secure the public against any loss by that delinquency. Of these letters he verbally communicated the contents to Mr. Coxe: and their objects being simple, no further information about them seemed requisite. Nevertheless, and altho’ they could not at all affect Mr. Coxe’s official duties, he formally, and by letter, requested copies of them, under the pretence “that he might know the exact state of the revenue service.” This request Mr. Wolcott deemed “indelicate”: yet it was four or five times repeated, as if to “harass” Mr. Wolcott into a compliance with an “improper demand.” And as late as September 17th, Mr. Coxe had omitted to answer the Supervisor’s letter on the subject of Mr. Jarvis’s delinquency, and in his letter of that date informed Mr. Wolcott, that he was unable to proceed to the proper measures which this required, for want of copies of his letters to the Supervisor, to Mr. Davis, and to Mr. Jarvis.
II. In respect to the Supervisors of Districts, who also acted as Inspectors of Surveys.
The original act of Congress, passed March 3d 1791, enacts, “That where in the judgement of the President, a Supervisor can discharge the duties of that office and also that of Inspector, he may direct the same.”
It appears that in pursuance of this authority, the President, by his act of March 15. 1791, directed the Supervisors to act as Inspectors; that this act had been officially communicated to them; and that they had performed the duties of Inspectors, pursuant to the President’s direction.
The conformity of the President’s act in this case to the law, and the consequent right of the Supervisors to execute the duties of Inspectors, appear to us clear and incontestible. Nevertheless, as early as 1794, the Executive, led into the error, probably, by Mr. Coxe’s suggestions, issued to the supervisor of Ohio District, a commission of Inspector, in addition to that of Supervisor. And upon the direct application of Mr. Coxe to Mr. Wolcott, in the cases of Maryland and Tenessee, the Supervisors of these two Districts were also separately commissioned as Inspectors, as well as Supervisors. All the other Supervisors continued to perform the office of Inspectors, without separate commissions. And it was not (p. 65.) until the 17th of June 1797, that Mr. Coxe expressed his doubts, (which he says then first occurred) of the legality of the Supervisors acting as Inspectors, unless specially commissioned in the latter capacity. He then wrote to nine Supervisors, exhibiting such doubts; and enquiring whether they had received commissions as Inspectors: and in his correspondence with Mr. Wolcott, he attempts to justify this enquiry addressed to the Supervisors, on the ground (p. 61.) that he “thought it likely to be as little productive of inconvenience as any other mode;” and that “it was perfectly sure and easy to ascertain the thing from (them;) and that it seemed rather best, as there had been a number of changes by resignation and death.”
But if the object was to ascertain the fact, and (p. 75.) to “render his register complete,” there was a shorter & easier course within his knowledge: he had only to apply to his immediate superiour, the Secretary of the Treasury, for the information; or to the Department of State, where the law requires all commissions to be recorded. And this is the course he ought to have taken; and then if any doubts really existed in his mind, he should have stated them to the Secretary of the Treasury, under whose superintendance, & by whose immediate act, he was by law authorized to conduct this branch of Treasury business. But instead of this prudent mode of proceeding, which was so obvious, & which any man sincerely aiming to promote the public service would not have overlooked; and instead of confining his enquiries to the fact;—at the same time that he made the enquiry, he scattered his mischievous doubts. (p. 77.) And in his subsequent letter to one of the Supervisors (Mr. Chester of Connecticut) he says explicitly, that “the doings of a person (meaning a Supervisor) acting as Inspector, without a distinct commission, would be of no legal effect, and might produce consequences injurious to such person, or to the United States”: and, in effect, that frauds & perjuries might be committed with impunity. Yet, notwithstanding these peremptory declarations of the illegality of the acts of such a supervisor, performing the duties of an Inspector, in his justificatory correspondence with Mr. Wolcott, he says (with astonishing inconsistency) that (p. 65.) “no doubt has been raised of the sufficiency of these acts of the President (those which directed Supervisors to perform the duties of Inspector) to all the ends for which the President designed them. It was an evidence only of his acts that was represented as necessary”!
III. The third complaint is grounded on Mr. Coxe’s communications to Mr. Wolcott respecting the act imposing Stamp duties.
This act had to encounter not a little opposition in Congress; and its title alone subjected it to much popular prejudice abroad. Yet when it had only passed the House of Representatives, in the form of a bill; while the ideas of the Senate were unknown; while it was uncertain what changes it might undergo, & what modifications might be introduced, to obviate popular objections;—Mr. Coxe, with an unaccountable zeal, transmitted the bill to the (p. 8.) Supervisors and Inspectors; professing that “he deemed it worth the trouble and expence to possess every Supervisor with sufficient copies for himself and the Inspectors of his district.” He also wrote them “copiously” on the subject; thus prematurely commenting on a bill—or at best giving constructions to a new, an important, & as before observed, an unpopular act, without previously consulting the Head of the Department. It is one (p. 9.) of these commentaries which Mr. Wolcott pronounces to be an ill-timed, and in some respects mischievous production.
He further manifests his zeal on this subject, in calling the attention of Mr. Wolcott to several sections of this law, the objects of which are explicitly & specially committed to the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury. The formal manner of doing this indicates that more was intended than to prevent those objects being overlooked: it would leave on his own records an evidence of his vigilant attention, with an intimation that it was necessary, to prevent the Secretary’s neglecting or forgetting his duty.
IV. The fourth subject of complaint is, that Mr. Coxes conduct has been unsatisfactory in his communications relative to the means of distinguishing different light-houses.
Mr. Coxe proposed to send to England and to France for machinery which would alternately but momentarily, conceal and display the light in some light-houses, to distinguish them from others; and asked for a warrant for 4000 dollars to enable him to import these machines & for “some other connected objects”; or some other provision of the necessary funds.
The project appearing novel to Mr. Wolcott, he asked for a specification of the machinery. Mr. Coxe gave none; altho’ he sent a note designating the object of the machinery and the limits of its dimensions: and he observes, that if he could have furnished such a specification as Mr. Wolcott desired, the importation would have been superseded; as our own mechanics, could thereby have performed the work. Yet Mr. Coxe speaks (p. 86.) of the invention as of “long and extensive notoriety to our ship-owners, mariners, and passengers by sea.” And being thus familiar to our sea-faring citizens, Genl. Lincoln may hence have been enabled to construct the eclipsers which he has lately fixed in the light-house at Cape-Cod. If however, Mr. Coxe really knew more than he communicated to Mr. Wolcott, he has himself accounted for it, where he says (p. 85.), “My impressions really were, that you were about to interpose by purchase, at home or abroad, in a part of the duties formally committed to this office since 1792.”—But altho’ the superintendance of light-houses had been by the Secretary of the Treasury committed to Mr. Coxe, in pursuance of the powers vested in him by law; yet nothing is more clear than that this was a subordinate superintendance; and that what had been so committed might be resumed; and especially the principal was not to be debarred from his superiour superintendance in general, or in any special case in which he desired information, thro’ the unwarrantable jealousy of his subordinate officer.
V. A fifth subject respects the construction of the act of March 3d 1797, altering the former acts imposing duties on stills. A construction on one point by Mr. Coxe had met with objections. Mr. Wolcott asked for information, & to be furnished with a copy of the instructions under the act of 1792, if any were issued, and copies of other papers, by which the construction and practice on the disputed point might be ascertained. Mr. Coxe’s letters and notes indicated that a construction had been settled and practised upon since May 1792. (p. 50. & 51.) Yet upon investigation no such “instructions” were found; nor did it appear that the question had ever occurred & been formally decided in the proper department; altho’ the supervisor of Virginia had expressed his opinion in coincidence with that of Mr. Coxe. But instead of exhibiting the facts which want to invalidate the conclusion that a practice had been established on the point as maintained by Mr. Coxe, he contented himself with saying, in his letter of Septr. 13th to Mr. Wolcott, that (p. 53.) “it appeared to him (referring to what passed in conversation between them) and so continued, that he first section of the act of 1792, required an application for the licence (to distill from domestic materials) to be made at the time of entering the still, and that the license so applied for must contain the times of beginning & ending.” And altho’ the object of Mr. Wolcott’s calls for papers and information was to ascertain the established practice, if there was one, he after all declares (p. 54.) that he “remains, as at first, utterly uncertain what the general usage has hitherto been:” and justly complains, that Mr. Coxe’s communications tended, if they were not calculated, to mislead his judgement, on the point in question.
VI. The sixth subject of complaint arises from Mr. Coxe’s various reports & letters relative to the management of the interior revenues of Pennsylvania. These consisting of numerous details seem not to admit of an abridgement. They have the appearance of much incongruity and uncertainty; and suggest the idea of a defective superintendence on his part.
These are the subjects of the “late correspondence” between the Secretary of the Treasury and the Commissioner of the Revenue; and which the former, in his letter, of the 9th of November, to Mr. Coxe, assured him that he should make “the basis of a representation against him, for deliberate misconduct in office.”
The second, third, fourth & fifth articles, as above enumerated, have been discussed in the correspondence you referred to our consideration: the first & sixth articles have not been noticed on the part of Mr. Coxe; who, however, epxressed his intention to make further observations, in his letter of November 10th to Mr. Wolcott, saying “the remainder of his reply must be postponed until he should have completed the papers in regard to the revenues which were required by the order of the House of Representatives.” These papers we find were completed more than two weeks since.
On the 29th of November, Mr. Wolcott informed Mr. Coxe (by letter) that a copy of his (Mr. Wolcott’s) letter of October 14th, with copies of the several letters which since that time had passed between them, relative to Mr. Coxe’s official conduct, had been laid before the President of the United States; and if he had any further observations to make upon any of them, desired him to communicate the same to him as soon as possible; assuring him, that whatever he should write would be transmitted to the President: but we are not informed that any further observations on the part of Mr. Coxe have been received.
To us it seems unnecessary for the President any longer to suspend his decision on the complaints laid before him by the Secretary of the Treasury against Mr. Coxe as Commissioner of the Revenue.
After a full consideration of the correspondence above mentioned, it appears to us that the Secretary of the Treasury has just causes of complaint against the Commissioner of the Revenue, and that the former has no confidence in the latter; and that their sentiments towards each other (occasioned by the improper conduct of the Commissioner of the Revenue) are utterly incompatible with that harmonious conduct and co-operation in offices so closely connected, which the public interests indispensably require.
Upon the whole therefore we are of opinion that there is sufficient reason for Mr. Coxe’s dismission from office; and we think the public good requires it.
Timothy PickeringJames McHenryCharles Lee


Title: To John Adams from Paul Dudley Sargent, 19 December 1797
From: Sargent, Paul Dudley
To: Adams, John

May it please your Excellency
Sullivan Decr: 19 1797

In reading your Speach to the two Houses of Congress I could not but notice the emphatical manner in which you impressed Congress with the necessity of Defending our Commerce; which led me to consider of our present mode of building our Ships on stocks above high water mark. I think we have had a full trial of the inexpediency of that way of building, in the difficulty, risk, and danger in Launching the Ship Constitution—In Europe your Excly and every one that has any knowledge of Navigation knows that their large Ships are built in dry Docks; there is a number of places in this part of the United States where dry Docks could be constructed the tide riseing from seventeen to twenty feet; but there is one in particular that appears intended by nature for that purpose, its at the bottom of one of the best Bays perhaps in the World, it is secured by Nature from all Winds, and from an Enemy by water, and on the Land side are very high hills that by Art may be made defendable, the arm of the Sea runs inland about a mile and from twenty to sixty Rods wide, the Spring tides rise’s at the enterance of the Cove twenty feet, and by a little labour the whole of the Cove could be brought to the same depth of water, the expence of making a dry Dock here would be trifling in comparison to the expence in many of the United States, and no winds or Sea can damage the Dam, the Bay without the Harbour, is very capacious, fifty miles in circumference, a smoth bottom from twelve to eighteen fathom, and Land lock’d in every direction, the enterance, by two Channels more than half a Mile wide, between Islands high and bold, easily defended if necessary by works, the bulky materials for Ship bulding can be transported at as little expence to Frenchmansbay as to Boston, and most of them were transported for the ship built there, the Masts and Spars which are a bulky artical abound in the District of Maine, and may be brought to the spot with little expence compared with that of carrying them to many places. I concive there are many other advantages attending this place not yet perfectly known—
Your Excellency will excuse the freedom of the above observations. I am fully sensible of your candour and that you will receive them as they are ment, you may be ignorant of me tho’ a Client of yours in 1773 and two or three times since have had the Honour of being in your Company. Mr. J. A. Otis, Mr. S. Brick and many of the Members from this Commonwealth are acquainted with me from whome you may know my Character if requisite, if in any way I can be serviceable to my Country I hold myself bound, with every wish and prayer for your Excelys Life health and hapyness /I am /  With the highest Esteem /  and most profound respect /  Your Excellency /  Most Obet Most hble servt

Paul Dudley Sargent


Title: To John Adams from James Wilkinson, 20 December 1797
From: Wilkinson, James
To: Adams, John

Honoured Sir
Head Quarters PittsBurgh Decr. 20 1797

To justify to our Country and to the world your protection of me at a moment when  and powerful enemies were combined to destroy me by implications which dare not meet the light, I profess before God and Man is among the leading motives of all my acting—
The death of General Wayne silenced an investigation which I had much at heart, because it would have unfolded Scenes and circumstances evincive of my Utility, my Integrity and my wrongs, which can now never reach the public Eye—so soon as this Death was announced in Philadelphia, I waited on the Secretary of War and held with him a conversation precisely to the following effect—“prosecution is in the Grave with General Wayne, but the door is still open to investigation, and I most earnestly wish an enquiry into my Conduct, Military and Political—indeed the vindication of my own affaced Reputation more than any desire to injure General Wayne has directed the obstinate perseverance with which I have pursued the subject—I know that whispers and inuendoes are circulated in secret to wound my Character—I know that a sinister connexion with Spain is slanderously imputed to me—I know that Jacobinism, french attachments, and an indisposition to the Government of my Country are basely ascribed to me—but conscious of innocence, I court Inquiry to obtain an opportunity of vindication which I have amply in my power”—to this Mr. McHenry after declaring that he did not know such things were laid or insinuated, but that if they were I must be sensible from the Presidents Conduct to me, that they had made no impression on his Breast, replied in the following words—“I advise you as a friend to give yourself no more trouble about it”—this conversation took place several weeks before the expiration of the Session of Congress, and I followed the advice given to me, in the hopes that the prejudices and animosity of my enemies might subside
But I have been deceived and while all my faculties have been on the stretch to promote the Interests of the Nation and the Honor of the Government, I find my enemies have not slumbered and that calumnies are still circulated to wound my fame and impair the public confidence.—
Under such circumstances I know not where to appeal with so much propriety as to your breast, because I implicitly confide in your Justice, to determine my merits by my work and not by the words of those who seek my destruction, and because to you I owe the preservation of a spotless character, and am particularly responsible for my Conduct.—
The following circumstances have occasioned this trespass on your time and may I humbly hope justify this intrusion.—
A man by name Hamilton from the lower Country, anticipated me at this place several weeks, and it was presently rumoured about the town that he had secret business with me and waited my arrival—so soon as the report reached the ears of the Commanding officer Capt. Turner and the Quarter Master General Mr. Wilkins they called on Mr. Hamilton and taxed him with the plunder—he avowed his inocence and declared he had no knowledge of,or business with me—the report was then traced to a Mr. Postlethwait a Tavern Keeper of the Town and he gave for another source one of his household who had it from a third person, but it could not be fixed that Hamilton had made the declaration.—
That a Man should be at this place with business for me public or private might occur without producing any remarkable effect—but when such Man is known be a professed Spanish agent (the very same whom I had recommended to Colo. Sargent at Cincinnati but May or June as a proper subject for the attention of the civil magistrate, as will fully appear from the Copy of my letter to the Colonel which was transmitted to the War Office) jealousies are excited, speculation produced and conclusions formed highly injurious to me, when in fact I never have held, nor ever shall hold communication with him unless I may be authorized to put him in Confinement, which if consistent I would recommend and that he should be removed to some other place.
I intreat your pardon Sir, while I claim your attention to a circumstance of similar import but more serious aspect.—
In consequence of the Information No. 1 I wrote the letter No. 2 and received for answer No. 3. and this last produced No. 4 & 5—the misrepresentation of Capt. Lewis notwithstanding the affected guise of candor and respect which he gave his communication to my Major of Brigade is apparent from the positive information of Major Freeman & Mr. Lowell;—This officer attached to the family of General Wayne in the relation of extra Aid de Camp mingled in his prejudices and co-operated in his labours against me, and the circumstance has long protected him against the sentence of a General Court Martial for abuse of my Character and Contempt of my Authority. I have considered it my duty to intrude these particulars upon you with the solemn assurances that I shall omit no industry to find out the reputed author of this vile Calumny and if he has been guilty of the fact to bring him to Justice.—
Believe me Honoured Sir it is the invisibility of my enemies only which I fear, for while I dare the open asault I dread the secret stab—defended by the invincible armour of Integrity I shall exultingly meet the combined force of my foes in fair conflict—yet with all my habits of vigilance it may be impossible for me to guard against their wiles and stratagems—to you then Sir, permit me to look up for protection against the Shafts and arrows which may be levelled at the Honor of an absent, injured, innocent Man—Extend to me but the patronage which the retrospect of my recorded services may warrant and my future Conduct justify, and I ask no more, under heaven to justify your confidence and to fulfil every reasonable expectation.—
I beg leave in this place to remark on a circumstance which appears in a Letter of the Spanish Minister to the Secretary of State, it is there stated that I had not recieved orders to oppose the violation of our Neutrality by the British on the quarter of Canada—This as far as relates to my Instructions which I received from the Secretary of War is true, yet it is in fact false, for Sir, you will be pleased to recollect that in a conversation which I had with you on the Subject of the Chevaliers Alarm—I asked you expressly if the British should attempt to pass through our territory whether I should oppose them and you replied to me “undoubtedly”—a circumstance so trivial at the time may have escaped your recollection, but I am ready to bear testimony to the fact, and it may be proper for me to assure you at the same time that I am ready to make Oath no Eye ever beheld the Instructions of the Secretary except the Gentlemen attached to my person, and I doubt whether they ever saw them, and I can aver with equal solemnity that the contents of those Instruction were never communicated by me to any person.
I fear I fatigue you yet I must call your recollection to another circumstance—you may remember I shewed you a lump of virgin copper before I left Philadelphia, and asked your permission to search for the mine which you granted— I have now the pleasure to inform you that I have proceeded in that pursuit, and if I may credit my informants have discovered a Country of Mines— I had ordered two hundred pounds of the copper to be brought away but the Metal was too hard for my Tools and a few small pieces only could be cut from the assay body—a sample will be delivered to you with this Letter inclosed in a Tin can.—
Before I left Philadelphia I requested the Secretary of War to mention to you my Son who bears my name, as a Candidate for a Commission in the Army—suffer me now Sir, to recommend him to your patronage—it is my view to make him a scientific Soldier and to give him if possible every advantage of Education and experience—he is sixteen years of age and is well grown and well educated for his years, if your goodness may incline you to favour me I should prefer the Corps of Artillerists and Engineers for my Son noviciate as the most Scientific branch—
With the highest &c &c.—I am
J Wilkinson


Title: From John Adams to Sarah Wentworth Apthorp Morton, 22 December 1797
From: Adams, John
To: Morton, Sarah Wentworth Apthorp

Madam
Philadelphia December 22d 1797

Last night, while I was thinking it was time for me to retire to rest they Sent me from the Post Office, your elegant Present of Beacon Hill, for which I pray you, Madam to accept of my best Thanks. I had no further thoughts of Slumber to my Eyes, till I had read the whole Preface, Poem and Notes. I shall read it again and again; but the Pleasure I had in the first Perusal of it, has excited an earnest Wish to See the Prosecution of the Plan in the Subsequent Books.
To me, who have Sometimes Seen the Day break, and often the Sun rise, from the Summit of that Mountain, the Title itself is a Sublime and beautiful Poem
The Design is immortalising, in the charming numbers of Philenia, those Events and Characters which have reflected so much honour on her Country within the View of that Scene, well becomes her Genius and does honour to her heart.
With great Esteem and Admiration, I have /  the honour to be, Madam, your /  most obedient and most humble Servant

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from James Wilkinson, 24 December 1797
From: Wilkinson, James
To: Adams, John

Honored Sir
Pitts Burgh December 24th: 1797

At the particular desire of the Bearer, the Miamis Chief called the little Turtle, I give Him this Letter of Introduction to you; His consequence among the Nations, approximate to one North Western frontier, gave Him pretensions to this distinction, I have deemed it political to indulge Him, and hope the Step may not be displeasing to you.—
To the details which I have given the Secretary of War respecting this Chief, I will beg leave briefly to add,—that he is unquestionably the man of strongest Mind, and most general influence among the nations North West of the Ohio River—His feats of War—His sagacity in Council, & the facility with which he speaks all the Indian languages, gives Him great pre-eminence—
I rely confidently on his presence here, as a guarantee for tranquillity behind me, and I am of opinion his pride, his Ambition, and his avarice, may be so managed as to render Him a steady Friend; and a useful Agent to Government.
With the most perfect respect, & the most dutiful attachment I am sir / Your faithful Soldier and Servant

Ja. Wilkinson


Title: From John Adams to Benjamin Morgan, 26 December 1797
From: Adams, John
To: Morgan, Benjamin

Sir
Philadelphia Decr: 26th 1797—

I yesterday received by Mr. Malcom, your favor of that date, together with a Catalouge of the Books, belonging to the Library Company of Philadelphia, bound and lettered with uncommon beauty and Splendor—
I pray you Sir to present my thanks to the Directors of that Institution, for this elegant present and especially for their obliging offer of the Use of their books, a favour, however, which I fear, I shall have more inclination, than time to Enjoy—
Accept my particular acknowledgments to yourself, Sir, for the Very Civil and obliging manner in which you have communicated that kind attention of the Company—
Sir / your most Obt and most humble Servt:

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to United States Senate, 27 December 1797
From: Adams, John
To: United States Senate

Gentlemen of the Senate
United States December 27. 1797

I nominate Thomas Waring of South Carolina to be Naval Officer for the District of Charleston, in the place of William Hort who has declined his Appointment.

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to United States Senate, 27 December 1797
From: Adams, John
To: United States Senate

Gentlemen of the Senate
United States December 27. 1797

I nominate William Willis our Consul at Venice to be Consul of the United States at Barcelona in Spain

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from John Lathrop, 27 December 1797
From: Lathrop, John
To: Adams, John

Much Hond Sir,
Boston 27 Decemr 1797

Your very obliging favour of the 4th I recieved, together with the late professor Luzac’s very learned and elegant Oration concerning citizen Socrates. As it is read with great pleasure by those members of the Academy who have had an opportunity to see it, we have a desire to know why that great man left the chair of Rector Magnificent, and whether he now sustains any relation to the university.
The elegiack part of the Oration which has respect to the learned Nieulandius is extremely interesting. We wish to know the Circumstances of his exit.—
I have made known to a number of your friends in Boston, your obliging remembrance of them, for which they beg you to accept their thanks. It is with us a time of general health; and I have the pleasure to inform you, that the friends of government and order among us “keep up good spirits.”
The late awful exertion of force, in opposition to every principle of a free government, in the pretended Republik of France, has had a considerable effect on those among us, who have been foulish enough to prefer the interest of that distracted Nation to the welfare of our own Country.
That extraordinary measure affords conviction that while the leading men in France are talking loudly about Liberty, and the equal rights of men, they exercise the most dispatick rule: From a conviction of this truth, Several who had been extremely erronious in principle & practice are hopefully converted.
There is an impatience to hear from our Envoys at Paris; but with the impatience, there is a good degree of Resignation.—Should the french be disposed to treat America as we ought to be treated, and pay a proper regard to our rights, we shall rejoice: there certainly is no wish to enter into War. But should they continue their depredations on our commerce, & hold a Language towards us, inconsistent with the high Sense which we have of our Liberty and Independence, if I may judge from what I hear, the people in this part of the Union, were never better prepared, in their minds, for self defence.
Although much property might have been Saved, had suitable measures been adopted a year ago, the atrocities of the french government, and their continued depredations on the commerce of this Country, have prepared americans for measures, which many could not be persuaded to adopt the last year.—To use Sacred language, I believe we may say, the house of David is growing stronger and stronger, while the house of Saul is growing weaker and weaker.—
That Congress may have a happy session,—that Health and tranquility may attend you and yours, is the Sincere and constant wish of /  Sir /  Your most obedt & most humbl ser.

John Lathrop


Title: To John Adams from Timothy Pickering, 28 December 1797
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Adams, John

To the President of the United States
Department of State December 28. 1797.

In pursuance of your direction founded on the Resolve of Congress passed the second of March 1797 I wrote to the Governors of the. . . . . states of Conversation in New-Jersey Pennsylvania Maryland, Virginia, Kentuckey Tennessee & South-Carolina. requesting to be informed whether those states respectively had “ratified the amendment proposed by Congress to the Constitution concerning the suability of States.” and if the same had been ratified that “they would direct the proper evidence thereof to be transmitted to the department of State.
In consequence of these letters I have received from the Governors of Connecticut, Maryland and Virginia, information that the proposed amendment had been ratified by those states, together with copies of the acts of ratification, of which copies are herewith laid before you:—From the Executives of New-Jersey & Pennsylvania that the proposed amendment has not been ratified by those States.—The Governor of South-Carolina his answer of the 10th of October, and that the legislature had not yet decided on the amendment; but that he intended again to submit it to them for consideration.
From Kentucky & Tennessee no answers have been received.When I first wrote to the Governor of Tennessee it did not occur to me that the Resolves of the two Houses of Congress proposing the amendment in  passed in March 1794, and been immediately transmitted by the President, at the request of the two Houses to the “Executives of the several States” had not been communicated to Tennessee, which was not included to be one of the United States until approval of two years after, viz. on the first of June 1796. Therefore, on the 16th of October last I again wrote to the Governor of Tennessee, & inclosed a copy of the resolve of March 1794 to be laid before the legislature for their consideration.
All which is respectfully submitted
Timothy PickeringSecretary of State


Title: From John Adams to United States Congress, 30 December 1797
From: Adams, John
To: United States Congress

Gentlemen of the Senate and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives
United States Decembr. 30th 1797

In complyance with the desire of the two Houses of Congress, expressed in their resolution of the Second day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety Seven, that some speedy and effectual means might be adopted of obtaining information, from the States of Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Tenessee, and South Carolina, whether they have ratified the amendment proposed by Congress, to the Constitution concerning the Suability of States, and if they have to obtain the proper Evidences—
Measures have been taken and information and Evidences obtained, the particulars of which will appear, in the Report from the Secretary of State, made by my direction, on the twenty Eighth day of this month, and now presented to the two Houses for their consideration—
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from James McHenry, 30 December 1797
From: McHenry, James
To: Adams, John

War Office 30th. December 1797.

The Secretary of War begs leave to submit to the president certain facts and considerations which respect the situation of his department.
1. That the appropriation for the Salary of Clerks in the War Office is Four thousand and forty Dollars.
2. That this Sum was for a certain time thought sufficient for Seven Clerks.
3. That finding it inadequate to their support it became necessary in order to retain those best qualified to reduce their number to five.
4. That the appropriation is distributed as follows viz. To the principal Clerk, Twelve hundred dollars, to Mr. Jones Nine hundred to Mr Lewis Senr. Seven hundred and Seventy; to Mr. Burton Seven hundred and thirty to Mr. Lewis Junr. Four hundred.
With these five Clerks the Secretary has endeavoured since the 31st. December 1796 to conduct the business of the Office. He now thinks it incumbent upon him, as well with reference to the publics interest as his own health to state that the business would unavoidably suffer unless he is enabled by a more enlarged appropriation to add to this number.
To render this fact more apparent it may be proper to notice the general business assigned to each Clerk
The principal Clerk in charge with the examination, in the first instance, of the claims to  bounty lands and  the cession of Territory by the State of Virginia to the United States; to make statements of difficult cases for final decision: to superintend the examination of all other claims to bounty lands due the Officers and Soldiers of the late Continental army, and in like manner to furnish the  with statements when difficulties  for final decision. He is also charged with the general superintendance of the business of the other Clerks, and with the distribution, arrangement and safe keeping of  public letters, papers, work and books. He is occasionally to  visit and inspect the Books, manner of keeping amounts and articles in the public interest  and to report in writing respecting the same. He is  the appropriate Clerk to copy and record letters that cannot immediately pass into the public Books.
Mr. Jones acts as Assistant to the Chief Clerk in the business of copying and recording letters. It is also enjoined to this Clerk to file and Register letters received, to enter in a book the time when received and an abridgement of their contents, to examine applications for Soldiers discharges, to digest army returns, and the returns from  parties, to copy orders on the Superintendant of military Arms, keep a record of applications for military appointments, and make out and register Commissions.
Mr. Lewis senior prepares army Estimates, fills up warrants for monies for the War and Indian factory department, records the same and all letters of requisition addressed to the Secretary of the Treasury for money. He  fills up warrants for land for Officers and Soldier of the late Army, and pays small amounts in the contingencies of the War and Indian departments also transmits monies to Officers when it would be inconvenient to send the same to Supervisor
Mr Burton is charged with the Pension books and all papers and letters respecting the Invalids He has also to copy and record the correspondence respecting Indian , and with the factors of the Indian trading houses, and to  an account of the state of each factory from the copies of the day books and periodical Inventories.
Mr. Lewis Junior is employed in copying and recording Letters.
The Secretary remarks upon the  view of the duties of the Clerks that they cannot accomplish reasonably much of the business assigned to them, that it necessarily accumulates on their hands for want of Assistants, and that the business of the department of War not comprized in their assignment to the Clerks, remains either to be completed or executed by the Secretary alone.
It ought to be mentioned that under such circumstances inconveniences and delays obstructing and affecting the public interest may occur and be unavoidable; notwithstanding the greatest exertions to prevent them. What alternative has a Secretary so situated, from whom a mass of business is crudely and incessantly poured, that might be safely participated with Clerks in addition to business, which from its nature, must be executed through all its forms wholly and exclusively by himself? And what can more comport with a due regard to national economy than to put it in the power of the head of an important department to devote a proportionate share of his time, by affording him adequate assistants to the higher positions of his Office, and to those systems, plans and arrangements, which involve more or less expenditure and waste of the public resources, as they are more or less ill contrived or desertive, judicious or complete?
It may be further proper to mention that the marine department is not included in these remarks. This composes a distinct source of business and requires a distinct set of Clerks to assist in it’s management.
To this brief state of his Office the Secretary will only add, that he considers the present Salaries of the subordinate Clerks inadequate to the  and  to  that I have little expectation of being able to procure other and able assistants at their rates of compensation.
All which with the utmost deference is respectfully submitted.—

James McHenry


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 30 December 1797
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Sir!
Oldenbarneveld. Herkemer Countÿ 30 Dec. 1797.

It is Long ago, that I was honoured with your favour of Dec. 6 and April 18—in which your Excellency communicated with me the unhappy situation of the worthy Luzac, worthy indeed the high encomiums, which you have bestowed on him, and more so to have merited in such high a degree your Excellency esteem and adprobation. I should have sooner accused this favour, had I not feared to interrupt your Excellency’s more interesting occupations or could I have persuaded me self, that the dignity of the Subject of this letter would have secured me an excuse. Permit me, that I take hold of the opportunity, which the New year offers. Accept mÿ warmest wishes for the uninterrupted—As far as consistent with the course of human affairs—health—and prosperity of your Excellencÿ, your Ladÿ—and Children! May your political career be blessed till its last moment; and modern European Republicans organise their governments according to your model. I know, that you will allow me the Liberty, of which I made use of before, in communicating always with you the sentiments of mÿ heart, without permitting my judgment be biassed bÿ your Exalted station.Your Excell. last speech had been approved in the Western parts bÿ far the greater part—and wel the parspotiors some disliked it as too drÿ—Theÿ who approved it, consider’d, that the President ought not to take a part, or notice of the Political dissentions in the house, and they were of opinion that this impartial conduct must have gained you the hearts of manÿ.
I have admired it in another point of view believing—that your Excellency—in this critical situation—intended to obtain his aim, without mentioning it—and that your so concise proposal of the subjects of their future deliberating, induced both hereby to express themselves with so much warmth—for the persuasion that they were rather the advisers, than the adviced, in the plan, which you wished to see executed. Thy wishes will be accomplished, and the best part of our citisens will learn, by the extravagancies of the European Republicans, that we should have been lost—long ago—if our government was dissolved.
The temporary administration of Holland had reinstated J. Luzac in his Professorship the 20 March 97. But the day before he should make again a beginning with his Lectures, he received a new interdict from the Curators of the Academÿ—
Europe’s situation is as critical as before—in France the one Revolution succeeds the other, a monarchical government with the semotions of some abuses—or a crumbling in parts of this vast bodÿ—may become some of the scenes of the last act. Venice rather died bÿ a lethargy than bÿ convulsions. Any common evelment  may have changed her aristocracy in any other form—So it seems at least by the symptoms in the last moments of their Political existence.
Holland alas! will never recover its antient splendour. It seems the not adopting of the proposed constitution is a rashness of which they will severely repent—In their actual cercumstances anÿ constitution seemeth to be desirable, and I should have supported it, however I might disapprove the whole, when I had struggled in vain to get a better, and secured to the people the right and the efficacious means of amending it in time—So disorganisation would have been at an end—Industry and commerce would have recover’d bÿ degrees—finances vivified, and the influence of Foreing Power insensibly decreased. At present they will be dictated by France—if its power continues increasing.
It is inconceivable, how ignorant several of their principal leaders are—Hallucinating about the first rudiments of Republican states entirely unacquainted with ancient heft. with our constitution and historÿ—and those who hazard a more liberal idea are immediately Federalists—Aristocrats. your Excell. shall have seen from Luzacs gazette—and may be informed by their Envoÿ whose friends belong to the moderate aristocratical party—what abuse they make of these terms.
In the convention one says—“the Executive ought always to be dependent from and responsible to the Legislative. “In a Republican Representative government the Legislature is the only concentred body, in which the supremacy of the People is vested—The Executive—the judiciarÿ are only (emanentes) subdelegate”—Another says “Washington Harrison, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton, Wilson, who formed the American Constitution, where antifederalists! but there is an amazing difference between American foederalisme and French Unisme.
One however—Dumbar of Deventer—but his nigerest! says “the American constitution is founded on that body, on which the Liberty prosperity, tranquillity and the independency of a Nation can and may be established: that this world never yet had seen a system of government, what may better sustain, the sifting examination of the Philosopher, and by historÿ and experience enlighten’d Politician.
Excuse this Long letter, and permit me to recommend me with my family to your Excellency’s remembrance.
I am with sentiments of the highest respect and consideration / Sir! / Your Excellency’s most ob. st.
Fr. Adr. vanderkemp


Title: From John Adams to Anonymous, 1797
From: Adams, John
To: Anonymous

1797

I have filled the Blanks as you desired and see no Objections to the rest.

John Adams


Title: Discussion of British and French Spoliation of US Commerce, 1797
From: Adams, John
To:

ca. 1797

A brief investigation of the Question “Was France or England the first beginner of the measures pursued since 1792, to spoliate the commerce of the United States.
It has been asserted, and, by many, believed, “that the Government of France has an indisputable title to the culpable pre-eminence of having taken the lead in the violation of neutral rights, the first instance on the part of the British Government(refering to the order of the 8th. June 1793) “being nearly a month posterior to the Commencement of the evil by France” (refering to the Decree of the Convention of the 9th May 1793) These are the words, in which that charge has been brought against the French Government by the writer of a series of papers in the Gazette of the United States, entituled “The Warning” signed “Americus”. These papers are manifestly written by a person very minutely informed concerning the transactions of our Government, and have been considered as the productions of the late Secretary of the Treasury. If that be the fact, it is of great importance, because of the large share he is known to have taken in the executive Business, out of the line of the Department and in the publications upon the conduct of the two foreign powers with whom we have had the greatest relations.
It is an important matter of observation, that a similar way of thinking seems to have existed in the mind of the present Secretary of State, immediately before the publication of “The Warning” refered to above; for in his report of the 27 February 1797; page 7; he observes: “It may be proper to remark here that this decree of the Convention” (that of the 9th May 1793 mentioned in his next preceding sentence) “directing the Capture of neutral vessels laden with provisions and destined for enemy ports, preceded by one Month the order of the British Government &ca.” refering to that of June 8th. 1793. It is true, that there is no assertion, that either that British act, or that French act is the leading act of violation committed by England and France upon the neutral commerce, but the passage unavoidably carries the idea to the reader and has  occasioned some, who have not examined the subject to believe, that the Secretary of State has exhibited a proof that “France” (in the language of Americus,) “has really taken the lead in the violation of neutral rights.”
It is always highly important to take a just view of the conduct of nations, which are competitors for our friendship & particularly when we are promulgating an official Notice of the deportment of one of them, which is in a state of disagreement with us.
There is among the records of the department of State clear and positive Evidence, that England had deliberately adopted the System of violating the neutral commerce above a month before the French Decree of the 9th of May. This evidence seems to have escaped the Notice or recollection of the Secretary of state and of the writer of the Investigation in the United States Gazette. Our late Minister in London communicated to our Secretary of State, in his letter of the 5th. July 1793, that Lord Grenville had explicitly and unreservedly avowed, that the Captures of neutral vessels, as directed by the British order of the 8th. of June 1793 to that End, were fully understood by both Russia and Great Britain to be within the intention of the convention between them, which was signed by those two parties at London on the 25th. day of March 1793.  From the extraordinary Nature of that Convention between Russia and Great Britain, from the distance between Petersburg and London, and from the Season of the year, it cannot be doubted, that this important contract, which was  completely matured and signed on the 25th of March, must have been originated in 1792 by the Empress & the British King. In all the correspondence between our Secretary of State and Mr. Pinckney and in all the conferences and Notes between the British Secretary of State and our Minister in London, we do not perceive the least suggestion of the the influence of the example of the french Decree of the 9th. of May. Such a plea could not be made by Lord Grenville, who knew and avowed, that Great Britain had bound herself by a solemn compact, to obseve the very conduct of which the neutral powers complained. He and their Minister here (Mr. Hammond) have perseveringly maintained, that it was regular and right under the law of Nations. The British Government no doubt gave their first orders to the Commanders of their Ships as soon as the Convention with Russia was signed: and it is to be presumed that the known detentions of neutral vessels in their ports, and the Captures of such Vessels, which the French Government assigns as justifying reasons, were made in consequence of that convention and of those first orders. Neutral vessels, with provisions, for Fr. ports were so illegally detained in the fall of 1792 as to occasion a remonstrance from the French Minister to Lord Grenville in Jany 1793, and an Application to Parliament for an indemnity for the unauthorized proceeding. State papers p. 231. The British orders of the 8th. of June are expressly called by themselves, “additional Instructions”. The English Secretary adhered to their right to adopt such measures in his negociations with our Envoy (Mr. Jay) and in the formation of the existing Treaty with the United States. It is not perceived therefore in which what Manner the French Decree of May 1793 can have produced this conduct of Great Britain.
France acted a very unwarrantable and imprudent part in her decree of May 1793. But having an immense population to support, and with a prodigious band of sailors and soldiers to feed, almost completely shut in on the land side by the hostile Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Spain, expecting no Grain from the swarming hive of Switzerland and closely watched by the inimical Fleets of Russia, Sweden, Holland, England, Spain Portugal and the Italian states, her just apprehensions of a ruinous and distracting famine (This is made a particular consideration in the remonstrance of Mr. Chauvelin. Jany 7. 1793) appear to have been quicken’d by the instances of Capture, some of which are particularized, and others of which are expressly, tho generally noticed, in the Decree of the Convention. Altho these circumstances are absolutely insufficient to justify France, they afford a degree and kind of extennuation for her following Russia and England, which they can not plead for their prior and leading act, and the captures and detentions during the pre-existence of their Convention. The views of Russia and England from Feby to July 1793 are fully explained by the latter in her Notes delivered to the Swedish Minister in those two Months. She avows the Consort between England & herself to compel all neutral vessels, bound to France to return or to go to some neutral port. England made in 1793 treaties in the very terms of the Russian Convention,  Spain, Prussia, Holland &ca. The plan of starving France at the expence of domestic law and neutral rights was begun in 1792 & prior to May 1793. That we considered the conduct of Great Britain at the Time, as, under all circumstances, the most exceptionable, must appear absolutely certain from our sending a special Envoy to London and not to Paris. This observation appears the more reasonable, because we had resident Ministers, in 1793 & 1794, at both places: Mr. G. Morris in France and Mr. Pinckney in London. The Object of this paper is not at all to justify the spoliations committed by France, nor is it wished, in the smallest Degree, to extenuate them. That any such Ideas have been admitted into this investigation, is merely because they unavoidably arise in a free discussion of the subject. To ascertain that any particular measure is not of a certain alleged Nature, it may be useful and necessary to ascertain of what Nature it really is. If fears, which now appear to have been well grounded, and the influence of a few English examples have led France to adopt a culpable and unjust measure towards us, still it appears true, and is important in this investigation that there really is a most serious and premediated instance of the evil on the part of Great Britain above six weeks prior to the French Decree of May 1793. The Contracting parties bound themselves to use all possible means with the neutral states to prevent their accustomed and lawful Commercial intercourse with France, from which among other things that Republic drew many of the comforts and necessaries of life. We have the explicit declaration of Lord Grenville who signed the Russian Convention, that it was in execution and fulfillment of this Convention, of March 1793, that the British Additional orders of the 8th. of June 1793 were issued. That English Secretary of State did not allege or even intimate, that the French order of the 9th. of May was the cause. He knew Great Britain had previously commenced those depredations, in the manner set forth in that Decree of the Convention, and he therefore plainly assigns the Concert with Russia and a pretended authority from the law of Nations, as the true and only causes: and it is upon this British Doctrine, that the provision Article of our Treaty proceeded upon their part. It seems particularly worthy of remembrance, that Lord Grenville also alleged, that Spain would act as England had done, in regard to the neutrals and we know, that Spain did act accordingly in the Course of the year 1793. We therefore really appear to owe our Spoliations by Spain to the support, influence and persuasions of England and Russia, in pursuance of the extraordinary Convention entered into by them in March 1793: a convention, which was not only calculated by its dreadful example and plain Tendencies to bring down upon France and all future belligerent nations unprecedented and aweful miseries, but to inflict upon all Neutrals, however peaceful and equitable, the suspension of their ordinary and rightful Navigation, the sales of their most valueable commodities, their supplies of foreign comforts, and necessaries, and the dependent revenues from exports and imports. If Portugal should become involved in the present War, England and her Allies, acting upon this principle, would suspend the accustomed and lawful Commerce of the United States with one half of the civilized world, and France, too ready to follow the example and prompted by Notions of interest and necessity, would suspend our rightful Commerce with the other half. In these views, the Convention of 1793 between Russia & Great Britain, as unreservedly and clearly explained by Lord Grenville to Mr. Pinckney, is a matter of the most transcendant Importance to the United States. To acquiesce in the doctrines and principles, which are its avowed Basis must go far to destroy the Merchant, the Fisherman and the Mariner, and must deeply wound the manufacturer, the planter and the farmer. Not to perceive and be aware of the real devisers and originators of this grand scheme of neutral sacrifices would appear to be a fatal oversight.


Title: To John Adams from Tench Coxe, 1797
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Adams, John

Sir
1797

It The Reasons which induced me to the freedom of my  communication concerning our Affairs with France have prompted me to that which I have now the honor respectfully to submit to your consideration in the same guarded and confidential manner, it has It appeared to me in the month of Feby last that some  persons of weight and even in the Government itself  had adopted the Opinion, that France had originated the European plan of neutral spoliation by her decree of May 1793.  This  a  of considerable importance in itself & is rendered the moreso  by great exertions what have been  made within the two  last months to propagate &   confirm the Idea thro the medium  of systematic publications  in some of the Gazettes.
Tho it is a serious &  painful truth, that France has committed  large proportion of unjust  Depredations on our trade, particularly in the West Indies & of late, yet two things among others have appeared to me necessary to an accurate estimate of  the degree of her positive and comparative culpability in so doing—It has appeared,
1st. That in order to determine the positive culpability of France  we must deduct from her captures, those which she has made upon ground adjudged to be solid by the Courts of her rivals & enemies—Such as the trading with places belonging to her Enemies with to which we could not trade  before the war, the covering by collusive American papers  Enemy’s property—the trading with places  taken from her by Enemies but  not confirmed to those Enemies by a treaty of peace, and the possession of which by the right of postliminium will revert to her, if not formally ceded by treaty—the carrying provisions to the places of their enemies according to Lord Grenvilles explanation of the Russian Convention and the law of Nations—The carring to Enemies ports articles indisputably  contraband of war, and other  grounds of Capture of the like Nature. The French Captures under those heads would make a very large deduction from their disputed spoliations. The allowances upon these & similar grounds, Sir, are  respectfully submitted to your particular consideration.
2dly. It has appeared necessary, in order to ascertain the Comparative Culpability of the French, that the conduct of Great Britain as  avowedly grounded by Lord Grenville upon the Russian Convention of March 1793, & that Convention as unreservedly explained to our Minister (T. Pinckney) in British  official Communication should be  perceived to be the great leading acts  in the plans of spoliation of neutral Commerce. Or in other words, that  Great Britain is  rather to be considered as the beginner of those unjust and injurious  France.
I beg you to excuse, Sir, the liberty I have taken in offering  laying before you  the enclosed facts & reflexions in exclusive relation to the question propounded at their head.—
I have the Honor to be with great perfect Respect, Sir, / your most obedt. / & most humble Servant
T. C.
To President Adams 1797—with a paper concerning his Question “whether England or France originated the Business of neutral Spoliation.


Title: To John Adams from James McHenry, 1797
From: McHenry, James
To: Adams, John

1797-1798

William B. Davie
Alfred Moore
Danl. Smith
Landon Carter
Alexander Outlaw
North Carolina{William Davie. Of Halifax North Carolina. Was a member of the Convention which framed the Constitution of the U.S. Is a good federalist, a good lawyer, a member of the legislature of N. Carolina and well acquainted with the people of Tenissee.Alfred Moore. Perhaps a man of more genius than Mr. Davie. Was very iminent at the bar from which he has retired. He is a good federalist and very wealthy. Mr. Davie’s manners more popular.Tenessee{Daniel Smith. Was Secry. to Mr. Blount, and might have been acquainted with some of his improper projects while governor of the South Western territory; of a liberal education, greatly addicted to reading, said to be discreet and a man of veracity.Landon Carter. One of the wealthiest farmers in Tenissee. Has had a tolerable education, is prudent and of a fair character.
Alexander Outlaw. A rich farmer a great talker—Shrewd withal, and father in law to Judge Cambel whose publications in the Knoxville papers have been calculated to mislead the intruders on the Indian lands.


Title: To John Adams from James McHenry, 1797
From: McHenry, James
To: Adams, John

1797-1800

Constitution.
Lieutenants. 1 2 3 & 4.
Benjn. Lee Boston.
Isaac Hull. Do.
Richard O’Beal, Massachusetts.
Wm. H. Wattles Connecticut.
David Phipps Do.—
James Hodge Philad.
John Augustus Spotswood Virginia
 Edward Wyer of Mass. Midshipman
Marines.
John Wm. Livingston. N. York
Lemuel Clerk Boston.
Oram N. Carolina.
Henry Caldwell. Vermont.
Frederick Dalcho. Maryland.
Surgeon.
 Read.
Surgeon’s Mates.
U.S.
Lieutenants.
William Billings. Boston.
John Mullony Philad (appointed)
Charles Stewart Do.
Van Renselaer.
Lt. Marines
Wm. McRea Virginia (appointed)
Frederick Dalcho: Maryland.
Surgeon
George Gillespiee
Surgeon’s Mates.
John Bullus. Pennsylvania: Maryland.
Isaac Henry Ditto.


Title: List of Captains of American Ships, 1797
From: Adams, John
To:

1797-1800

Guadaloupe StationS. Domingo StationPresidentTruxtun}CongressSeverPhiladelphia.DecaturAdams:RobinsonNew YorkMorrisAugustaMc.ElroyJohn Adams. CrossRichmond.Law
Merrimack.BrownSamuel.  JonesBoston.LittleHavannaPatapsco—GeddesDelaware.SpottswoodTrumbullLewettA roving cruise thro’the Windward Islandsschrs{Enterprise.ShawExperimentStewartChesapeakeBarronBrig Pickering—HillarE. Indiesoff the CoastEssexPrebbleInsurgent.FletcherFranceAlgiersPortsmouth.McNiellGo. Washington.Bainbridge

Vessels in Port refitting+United States.Barry—nearly ready for Sea+
Constellation.Murray—Just arrived in Port+Ganges.Mullowny.{Phila— nearly ready for Sea}+
EagleCampbell-ConstitutionTalbot—ready for SeaWarrenBarron—nearly ready for Sea BostonHeraldRussell—Just arrivedGeneral GreenePerryNewport}These three Vessels will not be ready for Sea sooner than 5 or 6 Weeks.ConnecticutTryon?New LondonMarylandRogersBaltimoreBaltimore.Cowper—Norfolk}Ordered to be sold unfit for serviceNorfolk.Calvert—Baltimore


Title: List of the Officers of the Ship Baltimore, 1797
From: Adams, John
To:

1797-1800

officers for the Baltimore to receive their Commissions and Warrants—
Jonas M Speake – Lieutt.
John West – Do.
Thomas Rowland – Surgeon
Henry Wells – Do. Mate
Solomon Hotchkiss – Sails. Master
Solomon Dickinson – Burser
Peter Clopper – Sailmaker
Horace Smyth – Midshipman
Stanton Hazard – Do.
John Gault – Do.—
These Officers were appointed in July last, but not commissioned & no Commissions were ever signed by the President further.


Title: To John Adams from William Bingham, 1797
From: Bingham, William
To: Adams, John

Sir,
1797-1801

The Committee who were appointed to carry into Effect, the Views of the Legislature, relative to their appropriation of $5000, for the purchase of Books suitable for the executive and legislative departments of the Government, wish to avail themselves of your Superior Judgment, and enlightened Experience in making the proper Selection—& for this purpose, I have the Honor of addressing you.
The following are in their opinions, the most prominent Subjects, under which it appears most expedient to class the Collection, unless a more fit arrangement should be suggested. viz.
Jurisprudence—political, Civil, $ common Law
Law of Nature and Nations–English Law–Law of Parliament–public Law of Europe–Parliamentary Proceedings–Parliamentary Debates–Political Œconomy–Political Treatises–Antient & modern History Voyages and Travels–Œthics–Geography, Belles Lettres—
If your Leisure will permit you to give any attention to Such Reflections, the Committee will thankfully receive any Ideas you may think proper to communicate on the Subject—
I have the Honor to be with respectfull Consideration / Sir / Your obedt hble servt

Wm. Bingham


Title: Declaration Concerning Shipping, 1797
From: Adams, John
To:

John Adams, President of the United States of America. To all who shall see these presents, Greeting:
post 1797

Be it known, That leave and permission, are hereby given tomaster or commander of thecalledof the burthen oftons or thereabouts, lying at present in the port ofbound forand laden with
to depart and proceed with his saidon his said voyage, suchhaving been visited, and the said  having made oath before the proper officer , that the saidbelongs to one or more of the citizens of the United States of America, and to him or them only.
In witness whereof, I have subscribed my name to these Presents, and affixed the Seal of the United States of America thereto, and caused the same to be countersigned byattheday ofin the Year of our Lord Christ, one thousand seven hundred and ninety

            John Adams By the President

            Most Serene, Serene, most Puissant, Puissant, High, Illustrious, Noble, Honourable, Venerable, wise and prudent, Lords, Emperors, Kings, Republics, Princes, Dukes, Earls, Barons, Lords, Burgomasters, Schepens, Counsellors, as also Judges, Officers, Justiciaries and Regents of all the good cities and places, whether Ecclesiastical or Secular, who shall see these patents, or hear them read. Wemake known, that the master ofappearing before us, has declared upon oath, that the vessel, called theof the burthen of abouttons, which he at present navigates, is of the United States of America, and that no subjects of the present belligerent powers have any part or portion therein, directly nor indirectly, so may God Almighty help him. And, as we wish to see the said master prosper in his lawful affairs, our prayer is, to all the before-mentioned, and to each of them separately, where the said master shall arrive, with his vessel and cargo, that they may please to receive the said master, with goodness, and to treat him in a becoming manner, permitting him, upon the usual tolls and expences, in passing and repassing, to pass, navigate, and frequent the ports, passes and territories, to the end to transact his business, where, and in what manner he shall judge proper: Whereof we shall be willingly indebted.
In Witness and for cause whereof, we affix hereto the Seal of


Title: To John Adams from Robert Worrall, 3 January 1798
From: Worrall, Robert
To: Adams, John

Honoured Sir—
No. 24 North ninth Street Philedelphea Jany. 3rd. 1798

I hope your Goodness will not think me Troublesom in giving you this line, and Informing you of my being in the Building Branch of Buseness, and having nearly devoted all my Time, Since the begining of August last, with the Commissioner of Revenew, on the Light, and Beacon, House, Business, and makeing the best Plans, with Honest Estimates, delivered and fulley Approved of, with Bonds Men Appointed, for the Performance of the Work, and the Different Sums of Money fixed for the Payment thereof in the Differant Stages of the Jobb, and bringing forwards the best Recommendation and Attending a greate number of times at the Treasurry, Department, at Grays Ferry, and at Burlington, which has been a greate Disappointment and loss to me in my Business—I hope I Shall not be thought Troublesome in Asking your Honour, to Spare at Some Convenient time Half an Hour, that I may Relate the Differant Circumstances, as the very Meterialley Concern myself and the United States, and in the mean time shall pray and Continue, to be with greatfull Acknowledgment your Very Hamble Sarvant to Command—

Robt. Worrall


Title: To John Adams from Timothy Pickering, 5 January 1798
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Adams, John

To the President of the United States
Department of State Jany. 5. 1798

I have the honor to lay before you a copy of the act of the Legislature of Kentuckey, this day received, ratifying the amendment proposed by Congress to the Constitution of the United States, respecting the suability of States. The amendment having now been ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, has become a part of the Constitution of the United States.
Timothy PickeringSecretary of State


Title: From John Adams to United States Congress, 5 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To: United States Congress

					Gentlemen of the Senate and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives:

					United States, January 5, 1798.

				The Secretary for the Department of War on the 30th day of December last made a representation to me of the situation of affairs in his office, which I now transmit to the Senate and House of Representatives, and recommend to their consideration and decision.

					John Adams.


Title: To John Adams from R. Bourne, 6 January 1798
From: Bourne, R.
To: Adams, John

To the Honble John Adams President of the United States
Philadelphia January 6th: 1798

The employment of Individuals is a matter of Concern—The unfinished House in Chesnut street might probably be made of Much value to the State by being made into a Mint and Treasury
I am with Much respect

R Bourne


Title: To John Adams from Tristram Dalton, 6 January 1798
From: Dalton, Tristram
To: Adams, John

Sir
Washington 6th Jany. 1798

Mrs. Dalton desirous to pay the Compliments of the Season to her much respected Friend Mrs. Adams, I take the Liberty of putting under Cover, with this, a Letter to that Purpose—adding Mrs. D’s request that you will be so good as to pardon the Freedom.
It affords me an Apology for troubling yourself with my best Wishes, on the same Occasion—I should have highly enjoyed the Opportunity of presenting them personally—Not One of the many who had that Honor did it with more Sincerity than I now do.I pray Heaven that you may have the supreme Delight of seeing our dear Country established in Peace & Tranquility: the Consequence of your Administration; and that every domestic Felicity may attend You, the ensuing, and for many, many Years—
Accept, Sir, my hearty Congratulations on the Unanimity with which your Speech to Congress, at the Opening of the present Session, was answered—An Instance not lately known—
Critical indeed is the Situation of the United States—I flatter myself that, in every possible Event, the People will support the Measures of Administration—
In this Quarter Government has many fast active Friends.
It is in train to have a Convention of Delegates called in Virginia, for the purpose of altering the old—or framing a new Constitution of Government—This, if done on a proper Basis, will tend to rectify their wild Politics—
With the most perfect Regard, / And highest Sentiments of Esteem, / I am Sir, Your obliged Friend / And most obedt. hble. Servant
Tristram Dalton


Title: From John Adams to United States Senate, 8 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To: United States Senate

Gentlemen of the Senate
United States January 8 1798

The Situation of Affairs between Some of the Citizens of the United States and the Cherokee Indians, has evinced the Propriety of holding a Treaty with that Nation, for the purpose of extinguishing by Purchase, their Right to certain parcells of Land, and for adjusting and Settling other Points relative to the Safety and Conveniency of our Citizens.
With this View and for these Ends I nominate Fisher Ames of Dedham in the State of Massachusetts
Bushrod Washington of Richmond in the State of Virginia, and
Alfred Moore of North Carolina to be Commissioners of the United States with full Powers to hold Conferences and Conclude a Treaty with the Said Cherokee Nation of Indians for the Purposes before mentioned.

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to United States Senate, 8 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To: United States Senate

Gentlemen of the Senate
United States January 8. 1798.

 The Situation of Affairs, between Some of the Citizens of the United States, and the Cherokee Indians, has evinced the Propriety of holding a Treaty with that Nation, to extinguish by purchase, their Right to certain parcells of Land, and to adjust and Settle other points relative to the Safety and Conveniency of our Citizens. With this view, I nominate
Fisher Ames of Dedham in the State of Massachusetts
Bushrod Washington of Richmond in the State of Virginia and
Alfred Moore of North Carolina to be Commissioners of the United States, with full Powers to hold Conferences and conclude a Treaty with the Cherokee Nation of Indians for the Purposes before mentioned.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to United States Congress, 8 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To: United States Congress

Gentlemen of the Senate, and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives
United States January 8th 1798.

I have now an Opportunity of transmitting to Congress, a Report of the Secretary of State with a Copy of an Act of the Legislature of the State of Kentucky, consenting to the Ratification of the Amendment of the Constitution of the United States proposed by Congress by in their Resolution of the Second day of December 1793, relative to the Suability of States. This Amendment, having been adopted by three fourths of the Several States, may now be declared to be a Part of the Constitution of the United States.

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from John Allen, 8 January 1798
From: Allen, John
To: Adams, John

Sir,
Congress–Hall Jany 8. 1798

Judge Miller, of Connecticut, and a Gentleman in whose information entire confidence may be placed, arrived here within a few days from the Natchez which he left about the middle of Novr. In conversation with me and others last evening he mentioned that Lieut. Pope’s detachment of troops in that quarter were extremely destitute of cloathing, & that a year’s pay was due them— That Lieut. Pope told him he had regularly & frequently communicated his situation & the condition of the Troops to the Secretary of War, but had received no reply or Supply or other communication whatever.
Judge Miller has conversed with Mr. McHenry on the subject, and recd. such answer as appears to me to form a very incompetent apology for the neglect.
Judge Miller was in that Country Several months; his discernment and observation are accute and extensive. I know not but he may have in some way communicated with your Excellency on the subjects that fell under his observation; if not, your Excellency will permit me to recomend that enquiries be made of him and particularly on the Subject of the Troops, & the neglects they have endured; his information on many matters I am convinced will be usefull. I thought it might be agreeable to your Excellency to converse with this Gentleman; and have therefore taken the liberty to address this information.
With profound respect, / I am your Excellency’s / Obedient Servant

J. Allen


Title: Proclamation Respecting Foreign Coins, 10 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To:

10 Jan 1798

By John Adams, President of the United States of America
A Proclamation.
Whereas an act of the Congress of the United States, was passed on the ninth day of February 1793 intitled “An Act regulating foreign Coins and for other purposes,”,in which it was enacted “That foreign Gold and silver Coins shall pass current as money within the United States, and be a legal tender for the payment of all debts and demands” at the several and respective rates, therein stated: and that “at the expiration of three years, next ensuing the time when the coinage of Gold and silver, agreeably to the act intituled “An Act establishing a Mint and regulating the Coins of the United States” shall commence at the Mint of the United States (which time shall be announced by the Proclamation of the President of the United States) all foreign Gold coins, and all foreign Silver coins, except Spanish milled dollars, and parts of such dollars shall cease to be a legal tender as aforesaid.” Now therefore I the said John Adams President of the United States hereby proclaim, announce, and give notice to all whom it may concern, that agreeably to the act last abovementioned the Coinage of Silver at the mint of the United States, commenced on the fifteenth day of October, one thousand seven hundred and ninety four, and the coinage of Gold on the thirty first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninety five: and that consequently, in conformity to the Act first above mentioned, all foreign Silver coins, except Spanish milled dollars, and parts of such dollars, shall will cease to pass current as money within the United States and to be a legal tender for the payment of any debts or demands, after the fifteenth day of October next, and all foreign Gold coins will cease to pass current as money within the United States and to be a legal tender as aforesaid for the payment of any debts or demands after the thirty first day of July, which will be in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety eight.
In Testimony whereof I have caused the seal of the United States to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand.
Done at Philadelphia the twenty second day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety seven, and of the Independence of the United States the Twenty second.

John AdamsBy the PresidentTimothy PickeringSecretary of StateTrue copy of the original in the office of the Department of StateGeo. Taylor Jr. Chief Clerk


Title: From John Adams to United States Senate, 10 January 1798
From: Adams, John
To: United States Senate

Gentlemen of the Senate.
United States January 10. 1798

I nominate the following Persons to be Marshals of the United States.
John Hobby for the District of Maine.
Phillip B. Bradley, for the District of Connecticut.
Thomas Lowry for the District of New Jersey
Samuel McDowell Junr for the District of Kentuckey,
each for the term of four years to commence, on the twenty eighth of January current, when their present terms will expire.
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Charles Lee, 10 January 1798
From: Lee, Charles
To: Adams, John

					Sir:
					Philadelphia, January 10, 1798.

				I have attentively considered the letter of the judge of the United States for the district of Pennsylvania, dated the 8th instant, relative to the act of Congress entitled “An act for the relief of persons imprisoned for debt,” which he thinks deficient in many particulars.1st. He states it as doubtful whether the act vested judicial power in the judge relative to the discharge of insolvents, and assigns for the reason of the doubt that the law requires the proceedings to be had in the jail, and certified to the jailer. This reason creates no doubt in my mind, for judicial authority may be exercised in any place appointed by law, and the certificate to the jailer is requisite to inform him whether the prisoner may be discharged as an insolvent, or is to remain in custody.2d. The complaint against the law in requiring the judge to go to the jail, and there to execute the business, is well founded. It is unnecessarily degrading and troublesome, and must be very disagreeable. The act should be amended, by authorizing the judge to issue his warrant commanding the jailer to bring the prisoner before him, at some certain time and place to be named in the warrant, and authorizing any parties interested to obtain subpœnas for witnesses from the clerk of the court, requiring their attendance to give testimony then and there. Also in the great cities of Philadelphia, New York, Boston, Baltimore, and Charleston, the judge of the district should have power to appoint two commissioners to do this kind of business, when it shall be inconvenient to the district judge, by reason of other judicial occupations, absence, sickness, or other inability, to act.3d. It is objected that the act does not require a record of the transactions when the judge himself acts. Certainly the proceedings ought to be recorded in the district court by the clerk of that court, whether done before the judge of the district court or commissioners, and so I understand the law as it now is; for though it does not expressly direct the judge, when he acts, to return his doings to the district court, yet it is implied, from the nature of a court of record, that whatever is judicially done by the court shall be recorded. However, this may be made plainer by an amendment.4th. It is doubted whether witnesses taking false oaths before the commissioners are punishable for perjury; and considering the expressions of the act of Congress respecting perjury, there seems good cause for this doubt.5th. It is represented that no provision is made for supplying necessaries to poor persons confined under execution as debtors, or confined as witnesses, to insure their appearance to testify. This defect should be supplied.6th. A difference of opinion is entertained whether the act before mentioned comprehends debtors to the United States or not. On this question, and on this alone, a committee of Congress applied lately to me for my opinion, which I sent, and of which I take the liberty to transmit the enclosed copy. As I think the fewer the laws the better, if competent to the purpose of society, I deem it advisable to avoid every unnecessary multiplication of legislative acts. If this was the only objection or doubt in the law now under consideration, it might wait for a judicial decision in the Supreme Court; but, as in other respects the law is capable of essential amendments, it will be best that the attention of Congress be called to the whole subject.With perfect respect, I have the honor to remain, sir, your most obedient humble servant,

					Charles Lee.


Title: To John Adams from John Murray Forbes, 12 January 1798
From: Forbes, John Murray
To: Adams, John

Sir,
New York Jany. 12. 1798

It is with extreme pain that I find myself constrained, in justice to my own reputation, to occupy, with an affair of a personal nature, even a moment of that time which is so important to my Country—
The distinguished place which Mr. Munroe has given my name in his late, as I conceive, Criminal Publication, renders it indispensably necessary that I should explain to you, Sir, what were my motives, how the address to which my name appears Subscribed, was brot: about and what construction was given it by many of the Subscribers at the time. I would promise that the address alluded to, cannot be considered as conclusive evidence of what is called Antifæderalism, because you see thereto many names of Gentlemen whose attachment to the Government of this Country was never doubted for a moment, such I may boldly say are all the Members of the Committee—Previous to my ever having visited France or known Mr. Munroe, I was laid under an immense obligation to him, by the following circumstances—My Brother Mr. R. B. Forbes whose life is as dear to me as my own, for want of a better opportunity, took passage from Guernsey to Cherbourg in an English Cartel, he had a considerable remittance in Gold in a belt about his Waist & in this situation was arrested immediately on his arrival under suspicion of being an English Spy—his Papers seized & he conducted under strong guard from Cherbourg to Paris, where he was immediately thrown into Prison with several thousands arrested in the Affair of 1st. Vendemain—He lay in Prison, in the most cruel uncertainty as to his fate for Eight days when Mr. Munroe found him out, claimed him and procured his liberation—This impressive circumstance, strengthened afterwards by his numerous attentions to me at Paris, attached me in some degree, to Mr. Munroe—When it was known that he was recalled, a complimentary address was proposed & a general meeting of the Americans in Paris immediately was convened, at which a variety of Characters assisted, some that honor and others that disgrace our Country—A variety of addresses also were proposed of which, by far the most temperate was adopted—and so far from it’s being supposed to contain any implication of the conduct of the Executive, I have reason to believe that it was my zealous opposition to any such reflection more than any other Circumstance, that brought me into the Committee—The plain fact was, it was reported at Paris that Mr M’s conduct had been maliciously misrepresented by some individuals & this address was merely intended to serve as evidence against any such supposed misrepresentations—It was never intended to contain any opinion upon the Talent or fidelity Mr. M. had proved in his diplomatic intercourse with the French Government, or the strictness with which he had persued the instructions he had received, but merely as a compliment on his external deportment which was all the Subscribers were competent to decide—It was the opinion of Judge Tudor who was one of the Committee, that we had by no means committed ourselves with respect to the conduct of the Executive—It would mortify me extremely, Sir, if you should, after this explanation think differently, as there is, I assure you Sir, no bailable offence in the whole criminal Code, I would not rather be charged with than be suspected for a moment to want attachment to our most excellent system of Government or it’s upright administration—
I have the honor to be, / with great Respect, / Your Excellencys obedt. / Humble Servant

Jno. M. Forbes


Title: To John Adams from Rev. James Wilson, 12 January 1798
From: Wilson, Rev. James
To: Adams, John

Sir,
Alexandria Jany. 12th 1798

The only apology I can offer for troubling you is, that, I know, your highest gratification is to promote the welfare of the United States, over which you preside with so much wisdom and dignity.
The annexed piece was written out for publication; but, as I am of opinion every good citizen ought to beware of unnecessarily agitating the public mind in such a government as ours, I anxiously wished for your judgement of the plan, and of the propriety of publishing it.
If its principle be unsound, or Congress do not adopt it, I am afraid its publication would be attended with some danger; because the few acquaintances to whom I have communicated it, not only declare their warm approbation but their determination to give it their most strenuous support.
I leave you at full liberty, if you judge it proper, to submit it to Congress: and I hope you will have the goodness to excuse my putting on the title “Copy right secured,” and expecting it will be returned if judged improper.
Since ill health obliged me to give up my pastoral charge of the Presbyterian Church of Charleston, So. Carolina, I have had some difficulty to support my family; and, if my piece be published, I think myself entitled to the profits, if any, of its publication.
With every sentiment of esteem and veneration, and the most fervent prayers for the success of your most excellent administration
/ I have the honour to be, Sir, / your most obt. and devoted hble. Servt.

James Wilson


Title: To John Adams from Thomas Adderley, 14 January 1798
From: Adderley, Thomas
To: Adams, John

To His Excellency John Adams Esqre President of the United States &c &c &c
Sir,
No 17 Filbert St. near 9th Street Philidelphia. 14th January 1798—

If in the Course of Your Excellency’s leisure your may be pleased to cast Your eye over the Poem I now have the honor of laying before You, You will be able to judge whether it possesses sufficient merit to be dedicated to You.
I shall make it more perfect, before it meets the public, if Your Excellency conceives that You would not have to blush for Patronizing the sentiments and the humble Talents of a stranger isolated and unknown.
I have the honor to be with the most sincere respect, Sir, / Your Excellencys very obedient / & very humble Servant

Thos. Adderley