Title: To James Madison from John Gavino, 2 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Gavino, John
To: Madison, James

2 February 1804, Gibraltar. No. 143. Since his last of 26 Jan. has received the duplicate of JM’s 2 Nov. 1803 dispatch with its postscript of 4 Nov. Has not received the original or seen the Citizen. Has written Simpson regarding the gun carriages and enclosed a copy of JM’s dispatch. “I will be guided by his answer thereon should they arrive, and if he does not require them will then follow Consul Lear of Algeirs directions, to whom have wrote forwarding at same time your Dispatches, with Copy of the one to me, by a Spanish Vessel that will proceed in the course of this week. The Victualler arrived from Norfolk but brought no Gunn Carriages.”

“Yesterday” the English frigate Seahorse arrived from Algiers with British consul Falcon on board. Nelson had been ordered to return Falcon to Algiers, “and altho his Lordship went in sight of Algeirs at the time with Six Sail the Line, and sent him in with a frigate, they refused receiving him, saying were ready to admit any other Person as British Consul without Presents or any thing else but could by no means accept a Person whose proceedings had been Contrary to their Religion, he has gone on this day for Lisbon & England in the mean time Lord Nelson has Signified to the British Trade as their Consul had not been receivd at Algeir that they should be Cautiouse in approaching that Coast.” Encloses a dispatch from Baker. Adds in a 4 Feb. postscript that he has just received a letter from Simpson asking that the Citizen be sent to Tangier with the gun carriages on its arrival.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Gibraltar, vol. 2). 3 pp.; docketed by Wagner as received 21 Mar.

   For Falcon’s expulsion from Algiers, see Gavino to JM, 15 Nov. 1803, and n. 3. For the British attempt to make the dey receive him again, see Tobias Lear to JM, 1 Jan. 1804, First Enclosure.


Title: To James Madison from Carlos Martínez de Yrujo, 2 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Yrujo, Carlos Martínez de
To: Madison, James

2 February 1804, Washington. Returns the documents relative to the claim of William Cooke against Luis de Viguri that were enclosed in JM’s 31 Jan. 1804 letter. Cooke complains of having had a schooner loaded with salt and some other items of little value condemned at Havana on smuggling charges. According to Cooke’s own declaration he was not inconvenienced in any way until one or two men from his own schooner reported to the intendant the scandalous way Cooke violated the laws of hospitality by breaking the laws of the country. States that Cooke has no proof of this unjust condemnation beyond his own word and adds that few people would place confidence in the veracity of a man who, having lost a schooner that according to his own testimony was worth at the most $5,000 and a cargo of salt that cost him barely $600, lodged a protest claiming $93,000 in damages. Even so, Yrujo will report JM’s intervention in the case to Havana and does not doubt that Cooke will receive whatever justice he merits in the court of claims.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, NFL, Spain, vol. 2). 2 pp.; in Spanish; in a clerk’s hand, except for Yrujo’s complimentary close and signature. Enclosures not found.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Appleton, 3 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Appleton, Thomas
To: Madison, James

3 February 1804, Leghorn. “Having been inform’d by the person who presented for payment my draft on the department of State for disbursements made by me in the year 1802. that the Vouchers were indispensable, I now forward them to you. Many of these documents comprise a variety of charges as they were not paid Seperately; but the whole together I believe will be found to Contain the total amount, excepting the postage account, which is Utterly impossible to obtain, as you will no doubt Sir at once perceive. This last item I am persuaded you will not find great, when it is considered, that I have not only from time to time, Sent Circulars to all the ports of Europe of the War with Tripoli; but likewise been the medium, thro’ which has passed many letters for the Consuls &c.”

Also encloses vouchers for his disbursements for 1803. Believes the sum charged for expenses he incurred in going to Florence will be admitted without a voucher because the trip was in the interest of U.S. commerce and “produced so happy an issue.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Leghorn, vol. 1). 2 pp. Enclosures not found.

   See Appleton to JM, 29 Aug. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:354).


Title: To James Madison from Tench Coxe, 3 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Madison, James

3 February 1804, Purveyor’s Office. Has just acknowledged receipt of the U.S. treasurer [Thomas Tudor Tucker]’s order for a sum which agrees with that mentioned in JM’s 28 Jan. 1804 letter. “Mr. Stevens’s bill has not yet appeared.” “The Sal ammc., Lac &c were sold on the day advertised. I have sent twice for the vendue account, but have not received it. When I shall obtain it the necessary papers will be transmitted to your department, & shall be obliged by your directions about the … ⟨ne⟩t proceeds.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, ML). 1 p.; torn; docketed by Wagner as received 6 [Feb.].

   See JM to Ebenezer Stevens, 28 Jan. 1804, n. 1.

   In the 3 Jan. 1804 Philadelphia Aurora General Advertiser, Coxe advertised an 18 Jan. 1804 auction of eight barrels of gum benzoin, a tierce and a half-barrel of sal ammoniac, two kegs of shellac, two pieces of flowered muslin, and two gold watch chains through the auction house of Andrew Pettit and Company.


Title: To James Madison from George Joy, 3 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Joy, George
To: Madison, James

3 February 1804, London. “The enclosed was intended to be sent by ⟨the⟩ Ship Magistrate; but after being some Weeks in ⟨the⟩ letter bag, her voyage was changed for the Cape of Good Hope, and her letters returned which I considered a providential Escape on your part from the Tedium of wading through a letter that had carried me much farther than I intended. I therefore determined not to trouble you with it at least during the session; but now that it cannot arrive till the recess I hand it for perusal at your leisure.”

   RC and enclosure (DLC). RC 1 p.; torn; filed at the end of February 1804. Date obscured by tear; date assigned here on the basis of Joy to JM, 16 Apr. 1804 (PP: Jay Treaty Papers, William Elkin Collection). For enclosure, see n. 1.

   The enclosure (20 pp.) contains Joy’s thoughts on war and its causes throughout history, the war in Europe, Napoleon’s character and actions, the effect of the war on relations between Great Britain and Ireland and on internal British politics, the negotiation of a new commercial treaty between the U.S. and Great Britain and the character of the man needed to negotiate the treaty, and the benefits to the U.S. and Great Britain of the expansion of neutral shipping rights. Joy described his ancestry, his personal history, and his service to American prisoners at Halifax and New York; expressed his opinion of U.S. consuls in Europe; and referred to his earlier solicitations of positions in Antwerp (see Levi Lincoln to JM, 1 Nov. 1802 [PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:71 and n. 2]) and in Spain (not found).


Title: From James Madison to William Cooke, 4 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Cooke, William

Sir
Department of State Washington, 4 Feby. 1804.
I enclose a letter recommending your case to the support of the Governor of Cuba.
The Convention between the United States and Spain, for liquidating claims to compensation for excesses committed by individuals of either nation upon those of the other, during the late war, has been lately ratified by the President and Senate. It now awaits only the exchange of ratifications at Madrid to be carried into complete effect. This compact, is a dernier resort to receive applications for redress, should you fail to meet it, in the extent required by justice, in the other pursuits you have adopted. I am, Sir, very respectfully Your most obed. Servt.
James Madison

   RC (DNA: RG 76, Preliminary Inventory 177, entry 316, Spain, Treaty of 1819 [Article XI] [Spoliation], Disallowed Claims, vol. 47); Tr (ibid., envelope 62B). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by JM. For enclosure, see n. 1.

   The enclosure presumably was JM to Someruelos, 19 Jan. 1804.


Title: To James Madison from Thomas Appleton, 4 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Appleton, Thomas
To: Madison, James

4 February 1804, Leghorn. Encloses a copy of a letter received “this morning” from Livingston at Paris in reply to Appleton’s information of the loss of the Philadelphia. Livingston “has availed himself of the friendly dispositions of the first consul, to give instructions to his Commissary at Tripoli relative to the American prisoners.” Presumes that Preble is still at Syracuse; therefore, “considering how various and tempestuous Are the Winds at this season of the year,” has forwarded the dispatch by land at less expense and with greater certainty of its reaching Preble “in a specified time.” “I have employed a Special Courier who departs in the Course of the day.” Observes that in a similar case, when the bey of Tripoli threatened the U.S. with war, “I pr⟨e⟩vailed on the french minister then residing here, and with whom I was united in the strictest intimacy, to write the french Commissary near that regency to use his Utmost influence, that hostilities might be suspended until the intention of the President of the UStates Should be Known.” Talleyrand approved this measure and letters were directed to Cathcart, “but the extreme haste in which that gentleman took his departure, rendered ineffectual a step calculated to have produced the happiest effects; Considering it was the mediation of a power which had impressed with terror every regency of Barbary.”
“Contrary Winds having detained the Ship, you will receive by this conveyance from Me three seperate letters—in the first is contained several for the President, and the second incloses the Vouchers of my Accounts against the government for disbursements in the years 1802 and 1803.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Leghorn, vol. 1). 3 pp. Enclosures not found.

   For Livingston’s letters to Appleton and Preble, see Livingston to JM, 18 Jan. 1804.


Title: To James Madison from William Davies, 4 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Davies, William
To: Madison, James

4 February 1804, Norfolk. “The enclosed papers, exhibit an irregularity of Conduct on the part of two American Captains, which it may be proper to lay before you, I have only to add that the Sailor, Burnes, by the records in this Office appears to be a native American Seaman.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, ML). 1 p. Enclosures not found.


Title: To James Madison from John Montgomery, 4 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Montgomery, John
To: Madison, James

4 February 1804, Alicante. “In consequence of an Arrangement made in proposals of Partnership with Mr. Wm. Willis late Consul for the United States at Barcelona, in case of obtaining his Commission lately resigned, he proposes with the Approbation of yr. Excellency. to transfer it to your Memorialist, as appears by his Letter to him, whose Contents will prove these Facts.” Further refers JM to Pinckney’s recommendation of Montgomery for the Barcelona consulate and to the enclosed letter from Secretary of State Timothy Pickering. “With these Introductions your Memorialist solicits the honour of being appointed Consul for the above Port of Barcelona if yet vacant by the resignation of Mr. Willis.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, LAR, 1801–9, filed under “Montgomery”). 1 p. Filed with this memorial is a second, similar but undated memorial. Enclosure not found, but see n. 2.

   The only letter found from Pinckney to JM recommending John Montgomery is dated 30 Dec. 1804 (ibid.; 1 p.).

   The enclosure was a copy of Pickering to Montgomery, 9 Apr. 1798, stating that Montgomery’s application for the Barcelona consulate would likely have been approved had it arrived sooner but that William Willis had been appointed to the post the previous December (Allis, Timothy Pickering Papers [microfilm ed.], reel 8).


Title: To James Madison from John M. Pintard, 4 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Pintard, John M.
To: Madison, James

4 February 1804, Georgetown, South Carolina. “Observing by the papers that the Convention between the United States and the Court of Spain, has been duly Ratified by the Senate; I beg leave to remind you of my former application for the apointment of one of the Commissioners under that treaty and to request your concurrence with my wishes on this Subject, assuring you that I shall retain a gratefull Sense of the obligation to you and so conduct myself as to merit your aprobation. I shall remain in charleston until I know the fate of my application where a line directed to me will be Punctually attended to.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, LAR, 1801–9, filed under “Pintard”). 2 pp.; docketed by Jefferson.

   See Pintard to JM, 3 and 14 Dec. 1802 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:176 and n. 1).


Title: To James Madison from William Savage, 4 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Savage, William
To: Madison, James

4 February 1804, Kingston, Jamaica. Last wrote on 13 Oct. by the schooner John for Alexandria. Has since received JM’s letter of 7 June with a document regarding Thomas Holland and a letter for him. The frigate Decade, with Holland reportedly on board, has “long since left this Station.” Had Holland been transferred to another ship “I am Confident I should have hear’d ⟨of⟩ him.”
The “Three Schedules that accompanied your letter ⟨h⟩as been carefully perused”: he encloses his remarks on them. “I am convinced Sir, if you would condecend at your leizure to peruse the same you will think as I do, that many of the remarks made by the Clerks in Office are very unreasonable, I ever consider’d that a discretionary power was lodged with me, I did not see then the necessity of a voucher for every small sum. This in future shall be strictly attended to. I can say with truth that I never bestowed Money or Goods on any person that I had not the strongest reason to believe was a native or a Citizen Seamen, & it has been my particular study to endeavour to conduct the business of an agent with as much œconemy as possible in this very expensive Country. I never received any objection to my accounts till those received from you. My Bill were duely Honour’d till you protested them. I then drew for what appear’d due me. Is it reasonable Sir, to expect I can furnish an Office, find paper, Ink, Books, pay postage, wait on Admirals & Governors, expressly on public Business & not be remunerated for my expences—particularly as I receive no Salary. I am not Vain Sir, when I declare that I have ⟨re⟩nder’d essential services to my Country, particularly by my personal interference in resquing American Seamen from Gangs of British Seamen headed by their Officers, many Individuals in large sums in consequence of an Interest with the Governors here, wth whom I have always taken care to be on good terms with—had it ever been intimated in due time the General Statement of my Accoun⟨ts⟩ was  then Sir, there might have been solid grounds to reject my succeeding Accounts & to have rejected my Bills, but as the contrary has been the case, I think I am justly entitled to the full amount of the accounts exhibited.” Asks again that JM personally inspect the clerks’ original remarks and Savage’s observations on them and then reply to Savage.
“For two Years while in Office I was doing Business here in the Mercantile line & then was part owner of the Stores myself & partners occupied, during which period I made no charge for Office hire, since which I have been obliged to hire an Office & now send the receipts for the same.” Has received Brent’s 14 Sept. letter [not found] with documents respecting John Whiting, Josiah Hunt, and Joseph Emmerson. “The Vessels they are represented on board is not on this Station, On the Arrival of the La pique the Admiral will liberate Barnet Mahony.” Encloses his accounts to 31 Dec. 1803. Adds at the foot of the page: “Amt of Account £77.3.3.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Kingston, Jamaica, vol. 1). 2 pp.; docketed by Wagner: “Recd. 23 April. / Sent the enclosed to the Treasury.” Enclosures not found.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:519.

   Ibid., 5:66.

   Blank left in RC.


Title: To James Madison from John Gibaut, 4 February 1804
From: Gibaut, John
To: Madison, James

Letter not found. 4 February 1804, Gloucester. Described in Brent to Gibaut, 16 Feb. 1804 (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14), as enclosing the protest of Henry Bates, master of the schooner Neptune, against the impressment from his ship near Port Antonio, Jamaica, of John Ingersoll, a native of Gloucester, Massachusetts, by the British ship Mignonne.


Title: To James Madison from John Clark, 5 February 1804
From: Clark, John
To: Madison, James

Sir
February The 5 1804
I Receivd yours dated The 22 Jenuary I am in hopes you have Receivd answer Before This time you wanted to know How much wheet was sown by me I have sown 45 Bushels, Ralph 67 Bushels my Corn 350 Barrells Ralphs Corn was not measured wheet Deliverd to Mr Nooe By Ralph 68 Bushels and 35 pounds I have not deliverd any Wheet as yet, Mr smith who is to Receive The Best part never fixd on where it should Be Carried untill a few days past I have Ralphs and Best part of sawneys seed wheet to pay out of my wheet I have Carried down three hogsheads of tobacco that weghs upwards of five Thousand I Expect Between 3 and 4 thousand more, I mentiond in my other Letter to you your Opinion Respecting the Latter tobacco whether I should stem it or no I am in hops to Receive and answer this day, I forgot to Let know Respecting the pines for the pipes Mr Newman told me you was Very Welcome to the trees If he should want a timber tree from you he was Certain that you would ask pay for it.
I have paid Wm silvey for Cuting the ditch Between Eleven and twelve pound, I have paid Miss nelly madison £10/10 she is indebted to your shop 9 or 10 pounds I shoud be glad to know whether that must be setled in the 23 pounds which I was to pay her for you, I have paid some towards Mrs Madison Account, The winter has Been so hard we shall have But Little hay to spare by Ralph not save his fodder, the Ice house Is well filled with Excellent Ice and I shall do as you have directed, the time before this the house held 29 Loads and now it holds 45 or 6 Loads, we have had no Loss stock more than some of our pigs This Cold wether The people is tolarable well at present I am yours with Respect
John Clark
NB Mrs Madison is something Better Than she was when I wrote to you Before, for the time she was sick Is very much Reduced and look Badly Colonl Wm Madison says Their is no tobaco Lost But I Cannot tell without I Could go down myself I can By Looking at the Books tell whether their is Either of mine mising

   RC (DLC). Return address is Orange Court House. Docketed “overseer” in an unidentified hand.

   Letter not found.

   Ralph was a Madison family slave (JM to James Madison, Sr., 9 June 1798 [PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 17:147–48]).

   Clark may have referred to Zepheniah Nooe, an Orange County resident and tavern owner (PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 16:436 n. 3).

   Sawney was a Madison family slave (JM to James Madison, Sr., 25 Nov. 1793 [PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (1st ser., vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77, vols. 11–17, Charlottesville, Va., 1977–91)., 15:143–44 and n. 1]).

   Clark may have omitted the word “you” here.

   Clark probably referred to James Newman (d. 1816), one of Orange County’s largest landowners, or Reuben Newman (d. 1842), his son, who witnessed JM’s will (Miller, Antebellum Orange, pp. 95, 98; JM’s will, 15 Apr. 1835 [Vi: Orange County Courthouse Records]).

   Clark may have omitted the word “not” here.

   Letter not found.


Title: To James Madison from Elbridge Gerry, 5 February 1804
From: Gerry, Elbridge
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Cambridge 5th Feby 1804
Enclosed is a letter for our commercial agent at Bourdeaux, & I shall be obliged to you for transmitting it, when you write to him.
When you have leisure, I shall take it as a favor, if you will peruse a letter of the 7th Novr 1798 from Mr Pickering, & my answer of the 15th of that month, on the subject of the copies, which I had transmitted to him, of Mr Tallyrand’s letters to me, & on the necessity of his having the originals. The latter, I enclosed to him on the 24th of Novr; after correct copies had been taken by a young gentleman, well versed in french & certified by a notary: who endorsed the Packet, & delivered it to the Postmaster. The violent party spirit, which then prevailed, rendered these precautions necessary, to guard against the loss or destruction of those documents. In the last paragraph of my letter of the 15th, I expressed a “wish to receive Mr Humphreys’ copies, to gratify my curiosity, in ascertaining how far they were erroneous.” Indeed I had a right to the copies, after transmitting the originals, to repel the charge of incorrectness, or to be convinced it existed: but I never received them. If the copies are in the office, & you can with propriety enclose them, it will be viewed as a favour, & I will return them, if requisite: but shall prefer the retention of them.
I heartily congratulate you on the happy state of our public concerns, foreign & domestic. The wise, firm, & temperate conduct of our governmt. has raised the national character to a higher degree of respectability, than it ever before attained. The good disposition, manifested by France & Spain, in their ultimate conduct relative to Louisiana, promises a lasting peace & intercourse with those nations, & will undoubtedly be reciprocated on our part. Great Britain complains of the high tone of our Government; but however desirable a peace may be with that & every other European nation, is it not high time for the UStates to hold a language towards her, that shall be firm & independent, at the same time that it is amicable & conciliatory? Ought they not to demand & insist on a commercial reciprocity, & their rights as a neutral nation? & can we ever be on terms of substantial & permanent friendship, ’till these points are established? I think not, & that they ought never to be relinquished.
The opposition of our Legislature to the federal Government still exists; as is manifests [sic] by their negative to the proposed amendment of the constitution. The fact I conceive to be this, the leaders of the opposition are irreconcileable to the federal administration, & if you

“convince a man against his will,
“he is of the same opinion still.”

but there are many honest men, who have been deluded, & are convinced of their error, but continue in it from a false pride, & the puerile fear of being charged with ignorance by one party & inconsistency by the other. Moderation & patience must be therefore exercised towards them, & they will soon change their system.
On the 27th of Octr last, I addressed a letter to the President which did not require an answer. I requested however one of our delegates to ascertain whether the President received it, but when he last wrote to me, he had not made the enquiry.

   RC (DLC). Signature clipped.

   Pickering told Gerry that he and the translator had noticed “numerous” errors in the extracts from the French that Gerry had included in his dispatches and asked to have the originals forwarded to him, since the papers would probably be laid before Congress and then published (Allis, Timothy Pickering Papers [microfilm ed.], reel 9).

   Letter not found.

   Letter not found.

   John Adams had Gerry’s correspondence with Talleyrand published in 1799 (French Originals of All the Documents, Translations of Which Accompanied the Message of the President of the United States, of the 18th January, 1799, relative to the Affairs of the United States with the French Republic [Philadelphia, 1799; EvansCharles Evans, ed., American Bibliography … 1639 … 1820 (12 vols.; Chicago, 1903–34). 36517]).

   On 2 and 3 Feb. 1804 the upper and lower houses of the Massachusetts legislature rejected the Twelfth Amendment (Boston Gazette, 6 Feb. 1804).

   “He that complies against his will, / Is of his own opinion still” (Samuel Butler, Hudibras, 3.3.547–48).

   Gerry referred to his 27 Oct. 1803 letter to Jefferson, praising the president’s 17 Oct. message to Congress (DLC: Jefferson Papers).


Title: From James Madison to William C. C. Claiborne, 6 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Claiborne, William C. C.

Sir.
Department State [sic], February 6th. 1804.
Your several letters of the 17. 20. & 27 Decr. & 2d. Jan. have been successively received. They were not acknowled[g]ed from time to time as they came to hand, because instructions from the President having been fully given on the subject of obtaining possession of Louisiana, it only remains to learn the result of your proceedings and to communicate his sentiments thereon. These are contained in the enclosed letter of this date to yourself & Gen. Wilkinson. Your last letter of January  has been put into the hands of the Secretary of the Treasury, that he may take whatever measures he may think proper on the subjects within his department. Inclosed is a copy of a bill for the Government of Louisiana, now depending before the Senate. Several alterations have been alredy made in it; and it is possible that others may be made, if not in the Senate, in the House of Representatives thro’ which the Bill has yet to pass. No conjecture can be formed of the time at which it will be finally decided. The novilty & the nature of the subject which has given rise to the past delay in one House, may be expected to have considerable, tho’ probably less effect in the other, where the members have had the subject under consideration. As soon as the bill shall have become a law no time will be lost in transmitting it to you. I am &c.
James Madison.

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14); letterbook copy (Ms-Ar: Claiborne Executive Journal, vol. 13; filed at 2 May 1804). For enclosures, see nn. 1 and 3.

   JM to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 6 Feb. 1804.

   Blank left in letterbook. See Claiborne to JM, 10 Jan. 1804, and n.

   JM presumably enclosed a preliminary copy of what became “An Act erecting Louisiana into two territories, and providing for the temporary government thereof” (U.S. Statutes at LargeThe Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America … (17 vols.; Boston, 1848–73)., 2:283–89). For the alterations made in the bill by the Senate up to 6 Feb. 1804, see Annals of CongressDebates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States … (42 vols.; Washington, 1834–56)., 8th Cong., 1st sess., 233, 235, 240, 241–44, 245.


Title: From James Madison to William C. C. Claiborne and James Wilkinson, 6 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Claiborne, William C. C.,Wilkinson, James

Gentlemen,
Department of State February 6th. 1804
Your several letters of December 8th. 20th. 27th. & Jany. 3. 9 have been duly received and laid before the President; and ⟨I have the pleasure to communicate⟩ to you his ap⟨pro⟩bation of your proceedings under the important Commission in which you are associated. The manner in which Louisiana has been put into the possession of the United States, is the more a subject for general congratulation, as some room had been given for apprehending that obstacles might have been thrown in its way. It is regretted however that any delay should have arisen in the delivery of the Archives, which are of a nature at once so important and so perishable; and still more that the orders relating to upper Louisiana should have been delayed. The President relies on your vigilance in compleating these and every other particular included in your trust, and that favorable reports thereon will be received in your ensuing communications. He relies also on your judgement and prudent firmness in deciding the several questions, whether of right or of delicacy which have already occurred or which may occur in the sequel of your transactions. It being presumed that the circumstances and considerations attending the former, can be better weighed on the spot than at this distance, he has not charged me with any instructions with respect to them, and the rather as instructions could not be expected to reach you before the occasions will have been over. With great Respect, I am, Gentlemen, Your Very Obedt Servt.
James Madison

   RC (ICHi); letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by JM; torn. Words and letters in angle brackets are obscured by damage to the RC and are supplied from the letterbook copy.


Title: From James Madison to Charles Pinckney, 6 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Pinckney, Charles

Sir.
Department of State February 6th. 1804
Your last letter not already acknowledged is that of August 2d continued on August 30th.
The Senate having resumed at the present Session the Convention with Spain, postponed at the last, have thought proper to ratify it; and the President has completed the act on the part of the United States. The instrument is now returned to you with these sanctions, in order to be exchanged for the ratification of his Catholic Majesty. You will hasten this formality as much as possible, and forward the result to the Government here, that no time may be lost in procuring to our citizens the benefit stipulated to them. To favor dispatch, as well as to guard against casualties, duplicates and even triplicates will be proper.
In concurring in this partial provision for the indemnities due from Spain, it is to be particularly understood that it proceeds from no other considerations than a wish to shorten the delay of relief to that portion of the claimants who are included in the provision, and a determination to avail the residue of the reserve expressly made in behalf of their claims by the art. of the Convention. When the decision of the Senate was postponed at the last Session, it was justly hoped, that before the succeeding one, the Spanish Government would have yielded to the reasonableness and justice of giving to the provision the extent required by the United States; in which case, the arrangements would have been simplified, and a foundation laid at once for closing all controversies on the subject. The final refusal of Spain to concur in these views has been thought to give a preference to the course now adopted.
None of the pleas urged by the Spanish Government can in the least invalidate the justice of the claims for injuries committed by French Citizens or Agents within her jurisdiction.
If his Catholic Majesty be sovereign in his own dominions, aliens within them are answerable to him for their conduct, and he of course is answerable for it to others. This is a principle founded too evidently in reason and usage, to be controverted. As well might Spain say that a theft or robbery, committed in the streets of Madrid by a Frenchman on an american, is to be redressed by France and not by her, as pretend that redress is to be so sought for spoliations committed by cruizers from or condemnations within Spanish Ports. Nor is there any room for the distinction between the injuries proceeding from the French Cruizers and the French Consuls. With respect to the Consuls their acts were either authorized or not authorized by Spain: if authorized by Spain, Spain is answerable for giving them the authority: if not authorized by Spain, they could not be authorized at all; the law of nations giving them no such authority, and France having no right to give it; and being acts without authority they are not to be regarded as Consular acts, but as much the acts of private individuals as the cruises or any other irregularities committed or instituted by French Citizens within the jurisdiction of Spain. To say that the Consuls derived their authority from the sanction given by Spain to the authority derived from France, without which sanction positive or permissive, it is clear that the authority of France within the jurisdiction of Spain would be a nullity, is still to rest the condemnations by the Consuls on the authority of Spain and to leave her responsible for them.
Under every aspect therefore, Spain is bound to do justice in this case to the Citizens of the U States, unless she not only pleads a duress, suspending her free Agency, and prostrating her national honor, but proves the reality of this duress; and not only proves this duress, but proves moreover, first that she did every thing in her power to prevent the evil, next that she did every thing in her power to obtain reparation for it; and lastly that in tolerating the evil, she did not deliberately and wilfully surrender the neutral rights under her protection, to advantages positive or negative, obtained or expected by herself from France.
The suggestion that France was resorted to for redress is unfounded. It does not appear that any such resort was authorized by the Government of the United States; whilst the claims against Spain have been uniform and pressing. Nor is it believed that any interpositions have proceeded from the American Legation at Paris. Had indeed such interpositions taken place, they would in no respect lessen the obligations of Spain. Individuals may have made their applications to the French Government. But it will not be pretended that the merits of the question can be affected by that circumstance.
The plea on which it seems that the Spanish Government now principally relies, is the erasure of the 2d Art. from our late Convention with France, by which France was released from the indemnities due for spoliations committed under her immediate responsibility to the United States. This plea did not appear in the early objections of Spain to our claims. It was an after thought resulting from the insufficiency of every other plea, and is certainly as little valid as any other. The injuries for which indemnities are claimed from Spain, tho’ committed by Frenchmen, took place under Spanish authority. Spain therefore is answerable for them. To her we have looked and continue to look for redress. If the injuries done to us by her resulted in any manner from injuries done to her by France, she may if she pleases resort to France as we resort to her. But whether her resort to France would be just or unjust is a question between her and France; not between either her and us, or us and Franc⟨e.⟩ We claim against her not against France. In releasing France therefore we have not released her. The claims, again, from which France was released were admitted by France and the release was for a valuable consideration in a correspondent release of the United States from certain claims on them. The claims we make on Spain were never admitted by France nor made on France by the United States; they made therefore no part of the bargain with her, and could not be included in the release. The only supposition on which Spain could turn us over to France, would be that of her being in a state of absolute duress, of her being merely the staff by which the blow was given by France. But even on this supposition, the injuries done by France thro’ Spain, could not by any fair interpretation be confounded with the injuries released to France, by which could be meant such injuries only, as proceeded from her own immediate responsibility, and as were in the ordinary course of things chargeable on her.
The last plea under which refuge has been sought by Spain against the justice of our claims, is the opinion of four or five American Lawyers given on a case stated; without doubt by some one of her own Agents. An argument of this sort does not call for refutation; but for regret that the Spanish Government did not see how little such an appeal from the ordinary and dignified discussions of the two Governments by their regular functionaries, to the authority of private opinions, and of private opinion⟨s⟩ so obtained, was consistent either with the respect it owed to itself or with that which it owed to the Government of the United States: that it did not even reflect on the reply so obvious, that four or five private opinions however respectable as such, could have no weight against the probability that other lawyers had been consulted, whose opinions were not quoted because they were not the same, and that if the Government here could descend to the experiment, little difficulty could be found in selecting more numerous authorities of the same kind not only in the United States, but among the jurists of Spain.
It was probably unknown to the Spanish Government that the lawyers in giving the opinion to which it attaches so much value, violated a positive statute of their own Country forbidding communications of any sort with foreign Governments or Agents on subjects to which their own Government is a party; that one of them being in a public trust under his own Government, violated his official duty, and that another being allied by affinity to the Minister of His Catholic Majesty here, would have consulted his personal delicacy more by withholding, than by adding his name to the rescript.

The observations here made on the subject of this portion of our claims on Spain, are not meant to revive your efforts for an adjustment of them. As Mr Monroe will be instructed to repair to Madrid, as soon as he shall have made arrangements with the British Government on certain points depending between it and the United States, and as it may perhaps be best to connect this subject with the negotiations in which he will unite with you, the views of the President require that it should await that occasion. In the mean time you may avail yourself of the ideas now communicated as far as they may be made useful, particularly in stifling an inference by the Spanish Government, that in ratifying a provision for some of our claims, the American Government has relaxed either its confidence in the justice of the residue, or its determination to press them on the reconsideration of Spain. I am with the greatest respect &c
James Madison

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, IM, vol. 6).

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:260–69, 358–59.

   For the delayed ratification of the 1802 convention with Spain, see ibid., 4:262 n. 4.

   Article 2 of the Convention of 1800 between the U.S. and France postponed consideration of the indemnities mutually claimed by the two countries and subjected relations between the two countries to conditions described in the succeeding articles (Miller, TreatiesHunter Miller, ed., Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America (8 vols.; Washington, 1930–48)., 2:458–59).

   For the opinions of five American lawyers on Spain’s responsibility for French spoliations, see Pinckney to JM, 2 Aug. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:260–69, 270 n. 9).

   JM referred to Edward Livingston, who was federal district attorney for New York at the time the opinions were given, and Joseph Borden McKean, whose sister Sally was married to Carlos Martínez de Yrujo (Dangerfield, Chancellor Robert R. Livingston, pp. 305, 393; Rowe, Thomas McKean, pp. 300, 422 n. 14).


Title: To James Madison from William C. C. Claiborne, 6 February 1804
From: Claiborne, William C. C.
To: Madison, James

Sir,
New Orleans Feb: 6. 1804
New Orleans is, at this time perfectly tranquil, and I hear of no disturbances in any part of the Province. The inhabitants generally manifest great solicitude for a form of government, and the merchants of this City in particular, await with great anxiety some commercial provisions.
I believe a decided majority of the inhabitants continue well disposed to the Government of the United States; but there is certainly a strong party here fixed in their attachments, and devoted to the interest of France. The emigration from the French West India Islands is considerable; a vessel is now in the river with about one hundred French citizens on board, and a Ship is known to have sailed from Jamaica for New Orleans, with several hundred Frenchmen who were refused an asylum in that Island. I do not think that these are the best description of settlers for Louisiana, but if they seek a residence here, it cannot I suppose be refused to them.
In a former letter I named to you that an impression was received in some circles, that Louisiana would revert to France, at the conclusion of the present European war; this opinion still prevails, and it has acquired additional currency, by a remark which Mr. Laussat is said lately to have made, that “the harvests of Louisiana, were not yet secured to the United States.” I do not know that this remark is properly attributed to Mr. Laussat, but it is so reported upon the authority of a man of some respectability.
I should not regret Mr. Laussat’s departure from Louisiana. He feels some chagrin at the loss of his Prefectorial authority, and manifests a disposition to interfere in the interior police of the Province. While he remains among us, his councils will be solicited and pursued by many of the citizens, and I doubt much, whether on all occasions these councils would be consistent with the interest of the United States. Mr. Laussat possesses handsome talents, and in private life is an agreeable man; but as a public character I am not one of his admirers. He is always intemperate, and often assuming; relying with confidence upon the infallibility of his own sentiments, he pays no respect to the opinions of others, when opposed to his. The Spanish Commissioners and Mr. Laussat were early at variance, and the American Commissioners have of late, found it impossible to preserve a perfect good understanding with him, unless they would yield on all occasions to his wishes, which cannot be done consistent with their own duty. Accept assurances of my high and respectful consideration
William C. C. Claiborne

   RC, two copies (DNA: RG 59, TP, Orleans, vol. 3); letterbook copy (Ms-Ar: Claiborne Executive Journal, vol. 13). First RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by Claiborne; docketed by Wagner. Second RC dated 5 Feb. 1804; marked duplicate.


Title: To James Madison from George W. Erving, 6 February 1804
From: Erving, George W.
To: Madison, James

(No. 30)
Sir
American Consulate London February 6th. 1804.

By the Monsoon Captn. Nickerson I send to the care of the collector of Baltimore and directed to you, one large Chest containing West Florida papers & one deal box contents unknown.
These were left in my care by Mr. King with his request that they shoud be transmitted to you; No opportunity offering for Alexandria ’till we heard of Mr Monroe’s appointment to this Court, I judged it expedient to keep them ’till his arrival lest possibly he might chuse to examine the Chest and some documents might be found useful to our affairs in Europe. Mr. Monroe declined however to open it, & no proper opportunity of shipping it has since offered ’till the present for Baltimore; no opportunity fore Alexandria is likely to occur for a long time. On the 4th. Inst. by Mr. Monroes consent and recommendation I opened the Chest and made a very hasty inventory of its contents. Copy of the inventory, my letter to Mr. Monroe his Answer and the key of the chest I have herewith the honor to inclose. With the most perfect respect and Consideration, Sir Your very Obedt. Servt.
George W Erving

   RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, London, vol. 9). RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by Erving. For enclosures, see n. 2.

   For King’s acquisition of British papers regarding West Florida, see King to JM, 10 May 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:588 and n. 2).

   Erving enclosed copies of Erving to Monroe, 3 Feb. 1804 (1 p.), suggesting that among the Louisiana papers in his possession there might be some that would be “particularly interesting or necessary to any negotiation” with Great Britain and asking whether Monroe wished to look through them, and Monroe to Erving, 3 Feb. 1804 (2 pp.; docketed by Wagner as received in Erving’s 6 Feb. 1804 dispatch), responding that the documents could be helpful only if they showed whether West Florida was part of Louisiana; believing that they did not, he suggested that Erving and a clerk inspect them, compile a list in case the documents should be lost at sea, and show him any papers that looked useful. Erving also enclosed a 4 Feb. 1804 inventory of the contents of the chest (3 pp.; docketed by Wagner as received in Erving’s 6 Feb. 1804 dispatch), which included official papers, record books, and registers for land grants, warrants, and other business.


Title: To James Madison from Samuel Snow, 6 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Snow, Samuel
To: Madison, James

6 February 1804, Canton. Received the duplicate of JM’s 9 Apr. 1803 letter on 24 Jan. 1804. Has never received the original, JM’s circulars of 1 Aug. 1801 and 26 Aug. 1802, or “‘a copy of the laws of the Session of Congress preceeding the last,’ said to have been transmitted with the above letter.” Will strictly comply with JM’s “directions respecting American Seamen, and the legality of Ships papers.” Will make no observations on the congressional resolution respecting light money, “as the Chinese have no laws or regulations that bear any relation to the subject of your enquiry.”
“Mr. Pickering transmitted to me the laws of Congress up to 1799, and since then I have not had the honour to receive any acts that have been passed, except the one annexed to your present letter.” Requests the laws enacted since that time. “Enclosed I … transmit to you two semi-annual Reports included between the months of January and December 1803, and as there were but two entries between January and July, I have comprised both reports under one general head.”

   RC (DNA: RG 59, CD, Canton, vol. 1). 2 pp. Enclosures not found.

   Circular Letter to American Consuls and Commercial Agents, 9 Apr. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:491–93).

   Ibid., 2:1–4.

   See Gallatin to JM, 16 Aug. 1802 (ibid., 3:489–90 and n. 5).


Title: To James Madison from James Wolfe, 6 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Wolfe, James
To: Madison, James

6 February 1804, Baltimore. “By the contents of yours of the 2 Inst. I Am informed that all hopes of restitutation in the case of the Sloope Nancy Priam Pease Mastr is at an End, & this misfortune is intirely Owing to the wrong information given to me from the then president of the U, S, & seccondly by the claus in the Brittish Treaty in which it tis stupilated that all Appeals must be made within Eighteen Months after the Capture takes place.
“On my Recoverey from the Yeollow fever in the month of Appril 1795. I again had an interview with Mr. Washington, who said that thare was no Ocasion to Make Appeal as the Vessell was taken within the districts of the United States, on my Receiving this Answer I imbarked on board a Ship Call’d the Confederecey at New York bound to France I was in persuite of a Man that during my sickness had made off with 10,000 Dollrs. my propperty & in 24 hours after sailing We ware taken by two Brittish frigates & carry’d into Halifax & thare I was again Striped to My last Shirt.
“In the Month of June following I again renewd My applycation after stating this seccond Capture with all the horrows attending the same & received for Answer that the Brittish had provided for the Captor of all American Vessells, & that Everything necessary was done …, it tis now to be Seen that I am the Dupe in placing any faith in my communications with the Executive Officer of Goverment but it remains douptfull to me that Any Goverment can Enter into any Treaty of An Ex pose facto Nature whareby a Citzn is deprived of the means to make an appeal, this fact is Established for pending the negotiation of this said exerable Treaty the time for making Appeal did expire beffore it was ratifiy’d, how then was appeal to be made when it was not known.…I imbarked the seccond time for france at Philadha. for Bourdeaux in July, & Arrived in Septr 1795. & found this Man that had Rubed me of my money.” Shortly after demanding payment, was denounced to the French government as a British spy, jailed for eight months, then released “for whant of proofe.”
“In the Month of Jany. I Was again Arrested as an Austrin Spiy & Swindler. In twelve Months I was Brought to Tryal & Cost my denounceater in the Sum of 2,000 livers damages on this Judgement I Arrest a Vessell belonging to my hired denounceator as this fellow only Acted by bribes from the Man that stole my Money.
“This Ruffing my Deptor finding that I was released & that I had Arrested a Ship belonging to My denounceator, he prevails on a Mescreant by name Cox Barnard [Barnet] the Acting American Agent to give this Ship so Arrested his Clarence after which she made off, all this in oppen Violation of all Laws in France or the whole Universe & then this said Cox Barnard makes his plea in Court that he is not Accountable to the laws of France but to his Goverment.
“Whilst the Courts is debating this infringment of their laws, by the force of Corruption my Deptor prevails on this Cox Barnard to have me Arrested knowing that I had lost all My documts when the Terroit was in office & by this Means they thought to have sent me out of France as a Vagrant.” Barnet, “in oppen Violation of Official dutey,” asked the commissary of police to have Wolfe deported. “I Am sorry to fine that this Barnard is Appointd Agent at Haver—by the present Goverment.” “After Eight Years strugle” obtained his ten thousand dollars. Bought and freighted a ship to Saint-Domingue, where the local government purchased it by force with bills on the French government that remain unpaid.
“Now sir permitt An Unfortunate Man to humbly intreat of you to point out to him how & in what maner he must proceede to recover this Vessell & Cargo it tis one of the Moste bare face Rubereys in Existance to deprive me of my Appeal this Sloope Was by the force of two french Armed Vessells compelld to go into a Blockaded port in St Domingo & then I am striped of this Vessell & Cargo—by the Brittish—& the Brittish Treaty cuts me off from the recoverment of the Same.”

   RC (DNA: RG 76, Preliminary Inventory 177, entry 179, Great Britain, Treaty of 1794 [Article VII], Unbound Records, box 4, folder N). 4 pp.; docketed by Wagner.

   See James Wolfe to JM, 26 Jan. 1804.


Title: From James Madison to Robert R. Livingston, 7 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Livingston, Robert R.

Sir,
Department of State February 7. 1804
The person to whom I committed my despatches of the 31st ult having been detained here till this time, I avail myself of the opportunity of acknowledging the receipt of your two letters of October 20 & 31 which have just come to hand. I have laid them before the President, but his engagements at the present moment have permitted as yet but a very slight attention to their contents. I can therefore only express the regret excited by the circumstances detailed in that of the 31st and a hope that as the questions before the Board of Commissioners which gave occasion to them, will be superceded by the remodifications of the subject contemplated by the President, every thing connected with those questions will take a more agreeable turn.
None of the letters received from you for a long time have said any thing with respect to the period of your stay in Europe. Having been in constant expectation of hearing whether you persisted, or not, in the intention last expressed, of returning home next Spring, I have thus far delayed sending you a letter of leave, which if not to be used I considered as most proper not to forward. The delay was the rather prefered as you are already in possession of such a letter, which tho’ sent with reference to another occasion, might, and if requisite for your purposes, I presumed would be made subservient to them. I think it probable some Letters written by you have not yet been received, and that in them you may have signified your wishes on this head. Whenever these shall be finally known, another letter of leave will be immediately sent, if required by them. In the mean time, the President however agreeable it might be that your public services should be continued at Paris, calculates on your making use of the letter you possess, if your determination should so require and on your charging a trust-worthy person with our affairs, as usual in such cases, until a successor shall be appointed.
In my letter of the 31st ult. I have said every thing with respect to the trade with St Domingo, which the peculiarity of its situation appeared to call for, excepting the permission of American Consuls, to reside there. Should the French Government view its interests in the light in which they occur to us, it will not hesitate to sanction the trade; and if it gets over the objection to the trade, perhaps it may be induced by like considerations to permit the residence of Consuls whose sole functions will consist in taking care of it. This however may be a tender point with the Chief Consul, and you will press the idea no further than you may judge prudent; or even not propose it at all if the proposition be likely to grate his sensibility.
With respect to the other French Colonies, the residence of Commercial Agents, may be expected to meet with less difficulty. They have heretofore been admitted in time of War, and for reasons which must have equal weight at present. Consuls are in fact an appurtenance of foreign Commerce, and wherever and whenever commerce is permitted, Consuls ought also to be permitted. Every nation, where not bound by Treaties may shut particular parts of its dominions against the Trade of other Nations, and whilst the restriction continues the reason for admitting Consuls in such parts, fails. But as soon as the restriction ceases and the excepted parts are like the rest laid open to foreign commerce, they like the rest ought to be equally open to the Agents who are appurtenant to it. Mr Monroe is charged to present the subject in this point of view to the British Government, in order to obtain such a regulation in her colonies. Your interposition with the French Government cannot be less proper, and as its Colonial policy has been less rigid heretofore in time of War, on this subject, than that of Great Britain, may be more likely to be successful. I am with great respect &c.
James Madison

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, IM, vol. 6); letterbook copy (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 2).

   Here “1st inst” has been emended in another hand to read “31st ult.” Second letterbook copy has “the first Instant.”

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 5:556, 594–96.

   In March 1803 Livingston had expressed to Jefferson his desire to return to the U.S. no later than the spring of 1804 and preferably in early September 1803. In May 1803 he offered to stay through the winter: “I find such an aversion among the American creditors here to part with me till their affairs are finally arranged, & indeed the treaty & the present state of Europe calls for so much attention & so many matters may arise that can not be so well executed by any person who has not been here long enough to make himself acquainted with both persons & things, that … I will continue my residence to the next spring.” He repeated his offer twice in June (Livingston to Jefferson, 12 Mar., 26 May, and 2 and 11 June 1803 [DLC: Jefferson Papers]).

   See JM to Livingston and Monroe, 18 Apr. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:527–32 and n. 8).

   Here “1st inst.” has been emended in another hand to read “31st ult.” Second letterbook copy has “the first Instant” with “see 31st. Jany” noted in the margin.


Title: From James Madison to Robert R. Livingston, 7 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Livingston, Robert R.

private
Dear Sir
Washington Feby. 7. 1804
The public letters which you will receive by this conveyance acknowledge all the letters recd. from you since the date of those last written to you, except your correspondence with Mr. Monroe. This I have thought proper to acknowledge in a private letter because I have not placed it on the files of the Office. You left me free to consider the Letters which passed between you as private, and I have not yet decided that it can be of use to dispose of them as of a public nature. Should it on further consideration be deemed proper to view them in this light, they can at any time be deposited in the Office; whereas if now deposited, and a further consideration should oppose this use of them, the step would be irrevocable. It is much to be desired, on various grounds, that the mutual sensibilities which betray themselves in the correspondence should have no greater publicity than may be inevitable, and that no insuperable obstacle should be thrown in the way of that oblivion of disagreeable incidents, which can not but be favored by your mutual respect and liberality.
Congress have been long in Session, but have passed but few Acts, and appear to move very slowly. They dwell with particular tediousness on the Bill providing a Govt. for Louisiana. The newspaper I herewith send will give you an acct. of their latest proceedings. I beg leave to refer to the same source for other public occurrences. I communicated to Genl. Armstrong yesterday the present opportunity, namely that of a young gentleman who goes in the vessel carrying the French Louisiana Stock, and he said he would have a letter for you at the Office in time for it. If it comes it will be inclosed herewith.
You will find in the public letter the reasons for not heretofore forwarding a letter of leave, and of the intention to forward one only on the rect. of your determination to make use of it. It was not wished to take any step which might be misrepre[se]nted as an intimation for your return, and it was conceivd that the letter you possess could, if your return was resolved on, without impropriety be made use of. The date alone suggests any difficulty, and that admits so easy an explanation, as scarcely to be regarded as one. You will I am persuaded be sensible that the footing on which the matter has been put, was that deemed most consistent with the delicacy & friendship entertained for you, and which seemed best to reconcile a due respect for your personal inclinations, with the respect due to the interest the public has in your diplomatic services. With sentiments of great esteem & regard I remain Dr Sr Yr most Obedt. Servt
James Madison

   RC (N); FC (DLC). RC docketed by Livingston. FC is a letterpress copy.

   JM probably enclosed John Armstrong to Livingston, 7 Feb. 1804 (NHi: Livingston Papers).


Title: To James Madison from William C. C. Claiborne and James Wilkinson, 7 February 1804
From: Claiborne, William C. C.,Wilkinson, James
To: Madison, James

Sir,
New Orleans February 7. 1804
In our Letter of the 16th ultimo, we informed you that we have just then received Information, of the Arrival in the River, of a Vessel with French Troops from St. Domingo. It Appeared by the first Accounts, that a great Mortality had prevailed on Board, and we were Apprehensive of her being infected by some Contagious distemper; It now Appears, that her Company consists of Officers, Surgeons, Attendants of the Sick &c, Together with many wounded Soldiers, from the Hospitals of St. Nicholas Mole, which has lately been Evacuated.
On first hearing of this Arrival, we determined, that they Ought not to be permitted to Come up to the City, & in which Opinion, we have persisted, for Two reasons, 1st. That those People having made their Escape from a place Blockaded by the British, with whom they are at War, if our Assistance should be extended, further than to relieve their Immediate Distresses and furnish them with Necessaries to Carry them to their Own Country, or Territories, it might perhaps Justly be considered, as a Violation of Our Neutrality: on this Topic we have prin[c]ipally insisted, in Our correspondence with the Commissioner, of France: But 2dly. A more weighty Reason, in Our Minds, existed, in the Consequences to be Apprehended, from admiting, such a number of French Officers, in Addition to those now here, whose Conduct, countenanced as it is, by the Colonial Prefect, is exceedingly hostile to that Spirit & to those feelings, which the Interests of the United States, Require to be cherished; In short, the State of Things here, at the present Moment, is such, that the Arrival of these French Officers and Troops in the City, would probably have been Immediately attended, with, Consequences more or less serious to its Tranquility, & more Remotely might have endangered, our Quiet Possession of the Province; The Commissioner of France, as you will percieve, has Laboured the Point with us, but finding our Decision to be unshaken, has finally taken the Resollution, to make the necessary Arrangements, for Shiping them to France, in the National Brig, Argo, now lying here subject to his Orders; For your information, we inclose you Copies of our Correspondence, with him on this Subject, (marked (A No. 1 to No 24) up to the Close of the last Month, since which, some other Letters have passed, but none of Importance.
A Difference, of rather a serious Nature, has sprung up Apparently from a very trivial Source, between the American and French Citizens (in which, hitherto, the Creoles or Natives of the Province, have taken no Open Part, though we Suppose them to favour decidedly the French Interest) of which this is the Origin. That Species of Country Dance, which is best Known & practised in the United States, passes here by the name of Contra Danse, Anglaise, against which (as great Importance is often Attached to mere Words) the Officers and Citizens of France, Strangers & not permanent Residents here, have manifested a decided Disapprobation, and pretended, that the Taste of the Americans, for this Danse, indicated a partiality, to the English, their Enemies: of Consequence, they undertook, not in a very open way at first, to prevent the Americans from practising this Danse, at the Public Ball Room, which Occasioned a trifling Disturbance there, not long after our taking Possession of the Town; To prevent the like in future, the Municipality decreed, that Managers should be Appointed on these Occasions, with ample Powers to preserve order &c. Notwithstanding which, at a public Ball, which took place on the 22d Ultimo, at which we were both present, a great Riot and Disturbance happened, on the Grounds above Stated. Some French Officers & troublesome young Men from Bordeaux, were the Aggressors: much Confusion ensued, Swords were drawn; and it Required the greatest Exertions, to prevent the Spilling of Blood, finally, two Frenchmen, one a Shop keeper in this Town, and the Other, as it afterwards appeared, a Surgeon in the French service, were Arrested, the latter on giving his parole d honour to appear and Answer in the Morning, was released, and the former Committed to the Guard; they were tried the next Morning before a Tribunal of the City, chiefly french, and Acquitted; notwithstanding it was fully proved, that they had been principally, Concerned in Commencing & Promoting the disturbance, and interrupting the Amusement, of the Company. In the Course of the Day, (23d) we Received a Letter from the French Commissioner, A Copy of which, (marked B No 2) is under Cover, complaining that the Citn. Lebalch a French officer, had been summoned before an American Tribunal without any previous Application to him, the Commissioner of France. We instantly replied (as per Copy B No 3.) As we judged the Interruption of the Quiet of the City, to be principally occasioned by the French officers & Citizens, before alluded to, we had determined to insist, with the French Commissioner, on the Evacuation of the Province by the Troops of France in the Course of the succeeding Day (the 24 (calculating erroneously at the Moment, that the Exchange of Ratifications had taken Place on the 24 October, instead of the 21 as was the Fact; and that the three Months, allowed for the Evacuation would expire on the said 24) This Letter a Copy of which you have under Cover (marked B No 1) had been written previously to the Receipt of the Letter (B No 2) from the French Commissioner. This drew from him an intemperate Letter, dated the 25 (Copy B No 4) to which we have not yet thought proper to return an Answer, though it shall not Escape due animadversion.

It may be proper, by way of repelling the Idea that any Thing unfriendly was intended in our applying for an Evacuation of the Province within the Time limited by the Treaty, to observe that a French national Brig the Argo was then and is now lying here, nearly ready for Sea, on board of which these officers might, without Inconvenience have been embarked, had the French Commissioner felt well-disposed towards the Interests of the United States in Relation to the Government of this Province; or inclined to repress the disorderly Conduct of his Countrymen.
In Vindication of our own Character, and that of our Countrymen, in the Eyes of our Government, we have thought proper to obtain the inclosed Depositions, (marked B No 5 to 10) inclusively) given by Men of respectable characters, who were Spectators of the Scene referred to, from which you can judge, how far our Conduct has merited the indecent Imputations, alledged against us, by the Commissioner of France.
His conduct in this affair & since, has fortified a Suspicion, which had previously been entertained, that he is labouring to impress upon the People of this Province, the Idea, that France has not yet abandoned all ulterior Views towards this Country. Whether this Conduct, be a Consequence of Instructions from his Government, or the Result of personal Disappointment, Time alone can determine.
In Support of our Opinion, we beg Leave to allude to the general Tenor of his Proclamation on taking Possession from Spain, a Copy of which was forwarded to you from, Fort Adams: also to the concluding Paragraph of his Letter of the 25 Jany. (Copy B No 4) and we refer you particularly to the 2d Paragraph of his Letter of the 21. Jany (Copy C No 1.) where it will be observed, he advances a Pretension on the Part of France, to interfere, between the Government of the United States and the Citizens of this Province, to see Justice done to the latter, in Relation to the Grants of Land; for such is the Consequence that we attach to his Expressions.
We have been put in Possession of certain Registers of Grants of Land, formerly kept in the office of the Spanish Intendant, consisting of two folio Volumes, and other single Papers to the Amount of another Volume. Some previous Conditions were attempted on the Part of the Commissioner of France to be annexed to the Surrender of these Documents, which have been repelled by us. Copies of our Correspondence on this Subject, (marked C No 1. to No 6) are under Cover. We beg Leave to renew to you the Assurance of our sincere Respect & high Consideration.
William C. C. Claiborne
Ja Wilkinson

   RC, two copies, and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, TP, Orleans, vol. 3). First RC in a clerk’s hand, signed by Claiborne and Wilkinson; docketed by Wagner with the added notation: “Express / Archives / Riot at Assembly.” Second RC marked duplicate. For enclosures, see nn. 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8.

   Claiborne and Wilkinson to JM, 17 Jan. 1804.

   The enclosures marked “A” and numbered 1–24 (46 pp.) are copies of the correspondence among Claiborne, Wilkinson, Laussat, commandant William Cooper at Fort Plaquemine, Lt. Enoch Humphreys of the U.S. Army, Dr. John Watkins, François Parent, and others regarding the number, condition, and disposition of the passengers and crew of the Exprès. The documents indicate that the Exprès left Saint-Domingue for Havana on its way to France carrying 400 passengers and crew but was forced by contrary winds into Santiago de Cuba, where some 250 individuals, including the ship’s American captain, insisted on staying. The local French prefect made Bourgoin de Sey captain, gave the ship supplies for fifteen days, and ordered the vessel to Charleston with 140 passengers, mostly wounded soldiers. Contrary winds drove the ship to the Balize, where it arrived in urgent need of repairs and provisions with 119 people on board, 27 having died on the voyage of their injuries. At least 17 of those on board were described as “sick or lame”; the passengers were unarmed and seemed to be free of active disease. Claiborne and Wilkinson, citing the law of nations and concern for public health, initially ordered the ship, passengers, and crew to be held at Plaquemine, where Cooper and Humphreys were charged with providing lodging and supplies. Laussat, who strongly and repeatedly protested the order banning the refugees from New Orleans, was asked to make arrangements to send them to French territory. After receiving reports from Humphreys and Watkins, Claiborne and Wilkinson allowed the ship to come to New Orleans for repair but ordered the military passengers to remain at Plaquemine while Laussat completed arrangements he had agreed to make for them to depart on the Argo.

   The enclosure marked “B No 1.” is a copy of Claiborne and Wilkinson to Laussat, 23 Jan. 1804 (1 p.; see Claiborne to JM, 24 Jan. 1804, n. 1). The enclosure marked “B No 2” is a copy of Laussat to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 23 Jan. 1804 (1 p.; in French), complaining that Lebalch, a health officer in the French army resident on the Argo who was under Laussat’s direct authority, said he had been ordered before a U.S. tribunal and asking how this could have occurred. The enclosure marked “B No 3” is a copy of Claiborne and Wilkinson to Laussat, 23 Jan. 1804 (1 p.), stating that Lebalch had been ordered before the court on a charge of breach of the peace. Should he be acquitted, they asked Laussat to arrange his immediate removal from Louisiana because of his indecorous conduct and disposition to disturb the peace. The enclosure marked “B No 4” is a copy of Laussat to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 25 Jan. 1804 (3 pp.; in French), expressing puzzlement at their request for the embarkation of French troops since, although some Spanish troops remained, there were no French troops in Louisiana to be removed and arguing that the time period provided for any evacuation had begun on 26 Nov. 1803, when he received the ratifications. Laussat denied that French citizens had been involved in the 22 Jan. disturbance and stated that the sale of Louisiana had stipulated that the people might retain their own habits, ways, and tastes. He further asked that Claiborne and Wilkinson refrain from blaming the French for things they had not done and from giving him orders he could not execute.

   The enclosure marked “B No 5” is a copy of George W. Morgan’s 28 Jan. 1804 deposition with a 31 Jan. 1804 certification by Justice Beverly Chew (3 pp.; printed in Carter, Territorial Papers, Orleans, 9:180–82), describing the incident at the 22 Jan. 1804 public ball and praising the actions of the U.S. commissioners. The enclosures marked “B” and numbered 6–10 are similar depositions (16 pp.) by James Proffit, William Brown, George Pollock, and William Simpson, each certified by Chew, and a report by Chew certified by Justice Eugene Dorsier (6 pp.), all of which exculpate the Americans present and praise the pacific overtures of the U.S. commissioners. Filed with the enclosures marked “B” is a note in Wagner’s hand: “Recd. with Messrs. Claiborne & Wilkinson’s 7 Feby. 1804. Disturbance at the Assembly.”

   The second RC omits this paragraph.

   For Laussat’s proclamation, see Claiborne and Wilkinson to JM, 8 Dec. 1803, n. 1.

   The enclosure marked “C No 1.” is a copy of Laussat to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 21 Jan. 1804 (2 pp.; in French), in which Laussat asked the U.S. commissioners to name two people to meet with his representatives, Joseph Daugerot and Jean Paul Blanque, to receive the government archives, which he wanted deposited where they would be accessible to the public, since they concerned both Louisiana and the Floridas and contained titles and matter of interest to French, Spanish, and U.S. citizens. The enclosure marked “C No 4.” is a copy of Laussat to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 25 Jan. 1804 (2 pp.; in French), in which Laussat stated that Article 2 of the treaty (see n. 8, below) did not contradict his demand and added that he had not refused to surrender the documents until he had copies but had asked where they would be deposited.

   The enclosure marked “C No 2” is a copy of Claiborne and Wilkinson to Laussat, 23 Jan. 1804 (2 pp.), acknowledging receipt of Laussat’s 21 Jan. 1804 letter and stating that Article 2 of the Louisiana Purchase treaty required that the archives be left in the possession of the U.S. commissioners and that copies be given to the judges and municipal officers. They were ready to receive the archives at any time and had appointed Decius Wadsworth and Daniel Clark to confer with Daugerot and Blanque on the subject. A place of deposit would be designated later. The enclosure marked “C No 3” is a copy of Laussat to Claiborne and Wilkinson, 24 Jan. 1804 (1 p.; in French), stating that he could not surrender the archives until he had met with them to decide on a place of deposit. The enclosure marked “C No 5.” is a copy of Claiborne and Wilkinson to Laussat, 25 Jan. 1804 (1 p.), replying that the archives would be deposited in the office formerly occupied by the Spanish provincial secretary for Louisiana, which had been selected for its proximity to the commissioners’ residence. The enclosure marked “C No 6.” is a copy of Laussat’s 26 Jan. 1804 reply (1 p.; in French), stating that he had ordered Daugerot and Blanque to make arrangements with Wadsworth and Clark for the delivery of the archives.


Title: To James Madison from Levett Harris, 7 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Harris, Levett
To: Madison, James

7 February 1804, St. Petersburg. Last wrote on 17 Nov. via Antwerp. Has instituted “the necessary inquiries” to obtain the information requested in JM’s circular of 9 Apr. 1803 but is unable to furnish it as conclusively as he deems necessary. “I … shall therefore defer transmitting any Statements until I am capable to provide them in a Satisfactory form.” Recently received news of the loss of a U.S. frigate off Tripoli and the imprisonment of its crew. “As soon as this information bore marks of authenticity I delayed not a moment to address an official Note to the grand Chancellor of the Empire, soliciting the influence of his Imperial Majesty with the Ottoman Port in behalf of my unfortunate Countrymen. The power and Consequence of the Russian Government acknowledged throughout Europe, and especially in that quarter wherein its mediation in this disasterous event might be essentially advantageous, and finding myself the first Accredited Agent of America at this Court, I eagerly Seized the Opportunity of employing my best address in order to procure so important an intercession.” Encloses copies of his correspondence with Vorontsov on the subject. “By this days post I shall forward Copies of the Chancellors Letter to our Ministers in Paris, London, and Madrid, to the Commander of the Squadron in the Medeterranean, and to some of the Consuls on that Sea.
“My duty acquits me on this Occasion and I flatter myself my Government will accord me an equal indulgence.”

   RC, four copies, and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, St. Petersburg, vol. 1). First RC 2 pp.; dated “26 Jany/7 February”; docketed by Wagner: “recd. 16 April / Respecting the Philada. Frigate.” Second RC marked duplicate; docketed by Wagner as received 9 May. Third RC marked triplicate; docketed by Wagner: “interposition of the Emperor.” Fourth RC marked quadruplicate. For enclosures, see n. 2.

   PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:491–93.

   Harris enclosed (1) a translation of Harris to Vorontsov, 20 Jan./1 Feb. 1804 (1 p.; printed in Bashkina et al., The United States and Russia, pp. 391–92), reporting the capture of the Philadelphia and crew and requesting the emperor’s intercession with Turkey to ameliorate the condition of the prisoners; (2) a copy of Vorontsov to Harris, 25 Jan./6 Feb. 1804 (1 p.; in French; docketed by Wagner; translation printed ibid., p. 392), stating that the emperor had decided to intercede on behalf of the prisoners and to instruct his minister at Constantinople to ask that an order be sent to the bey of Tripoli for the liberty of the crew and also of the ship; and (3) a translation of Harris to Vorontsov, 26 Jan./7 Feb. 1804 (1 p.), expressing the profound gratitude of the American government and people for the emperor’s kindness, news of which he would convey to his government as soon as possible. For Vorontsov’s correspondence with Andrei Iakovlevich Italinskii at Constantinople, see ibid., pp. 396–98.

   Also filed with this dispatch is a copy of Harris to Monroe, 26 Jan./7 Feb. 1804 (1 p.), transmitting a copy of Vorontsov’s note.


Title: To James Madison from Robert R. Livingston, 8 February 1804
From: Livingston, Robert R.
To: Madison, James

Sir
Paris 8th feby 1804
I have the honor to transmit you my answer to the Minister’s notes enclosed in my last—they amount to little as I have thought it best to dwell in generals, not knowing the President’s instructions to Commodore Preble. I find by a letter of 22 January just received from Mr Pinkney, that the Minister of Exterior Relations has kept his word with me relative to Florida. I wrote you some time since that I had applied to him (a war then between Spain & England being at least doubtful) to afford the Ministers of the United States in obtaining Ea[s]t Florida from Spain which I urged upon grounds of utility to France, & left in his hands a memoire on the Subject; that he then assured me that he would give the most cordial aid to any measures that Mr Pinkney should commence at the court of Madrid of this I sent information both to Mr Pinkney and to Master Monroe. The following extract from Mr Pinkney’s letter Shews his Sincerity. Speaking of the probability of Spain’s remaining at peace he Says “It is however not promoting what you wished me to undertake that she should remain neutral. Not hearing from Master Monro[e] I have commenced so [far] as to say that I am ready to accept and have state[d] a volume of reasons why they should sell while they have in their power so to do the French embassador say[s] he has instruction[s] to [sup]port us in the at[temp]t and think the moment it is certain that Spain cannot avoid war she will accept the offer you will be pleased to urge the French Government to continue & repeat from time to time their instructions on this Subject.”
I mention this that the President may judge how far this business Should be prosecuted now, & that you may give me Such instructions as you may deem proper on the subject. I have had such cor[dial] [sup]port from the minister upon [ever]y occasion that I wish I could [as] the custom is here give him some mark of the gratitude of the United States [as] indeed I have intimated to him that I would if certain matters particularly the business of Tripoli was arranged to your satisfaction I so fully possess his confidence that I can arrange the terms for any [im]portant object on the condition that they are only known to the president as this is the great hinge on which negotiations turn at present you will see how [im]portant it is to name me a successo[r] who will be able to place himself upon the ground of the utmost confidence and to give him the means of availing himself of circumstances nor must these means be small. I think it my duty to let you know exactly the State of things here, for I trust the times are past in which we will publish to the world the weakness that we may benefit ourselves of nor can you possibly be too circumspect in the choice of the man you Send here. If it were possible to Spare you from where you are, you can render your country essential Services here. Should I have designed to Stay myself, I Should have asked the rank of Ambassador, which gives Some advantages & is attended with no inconvenience, & I Should have pressed the Embassy to the Italian Republic, as neither would have cost any thing & would have been very acceptable.
Should you come, I would recommend these objects to you as of more moment than you appear to think them, & your rank & political Standing would render them proper.
A new plot has [lat]ly been discovered for which two officer[s] have been shot they insist here that an assassination plot has been hatched in England and agent[s] sent over for its execution. Do not let this intelligence be mentioned as from me in America.
The Commissioners I am told are going on with the provisional note only & reject the investigation of all other claims as well as a number on that note evidently within the Treaty. But I know nothing from them; neither they, nor Mr Skipwith thinking proper to make me any communications, tho I never have had the Smallest personal difference with any one of them. Unless they are Subjected to the directions of the Minister, I foresee the most Serious evils to the Public. They are at present So excessively odious to the American creditors that a change is absolutely necessary; of one of them at least. It is impossible that they Should ever regain their confidence, either here or in the United States. I have the honor to be With the highest respect & esteem Your most Obt hum: Servt
Robt R Livingston

PS: An embargo now exists & has existed for some time in all the ports of france.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, DD, France, vol. 9); draft (NHi: Livingston Papers). RC in a clerk’s hand, except for Livingston’s signature and postscript; marked “Private & confidential to be decyphered only by the Secretary of State”; docketed by Wagner as received 6 June. Draft marked “No 99.” A marginal note in Livingston’s letterbook (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 1) between dispatches no. 98 and 100 reads: “N. B. the No 99 has not been registered in this book on account of the extreme importance & Secrecy of its contents it will be hereafter inserted when proper.” Italicized words and letters are those encoded by Livingston’s secretary and decoded here by the editors or supplied within square brackets from the draft (for the code, see PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 2:304–5 n.).

   Enclosures not found, but no doubt they included a copy of Livingston to Talleyrand, 4 Feb. 1804 (NHi: Livingston Papers, vol. 3), replying to Talleyrand’s 10 Pluviôse an XII (31 Jan. 1804) complaint about Preble’s blockade of Tripoli. Livingston stated that he had no jurisdiction over Preble and could give him no orders. He added that he had been awaiting instructions from Jefferson before announcing the blockade, that he had no doubt Jefferson would agree with Talleyrand’s statement of general principles, and that Preble might very well be in the right even under those principles. He promised to forward Talleyrand’s note to the U.S. government.

   See Livingston to JM, 15 Nov. 1803.

   Draft inserts “every aid” here.

   Miscoded “fear.”

   The first syllable of this word was miscoded “282,” which has no equivalent.

   Miscoded “attendt.”

   Miscoded “coreal 282 port” (see n. 5, above).

   Miscoded “customy.”

   Miscoded “be.”

   Miscoded “be.”

   Miscoded “ightly.”

   Throughout late 1803 and early 1804, Paris police unraveled the details of a plot to kill Napoleon and place the comte de Provence on the throne as Louis XVIII. The Vendean counterrevolutionary Georges Cadoudal, Generals Jean-Victor-Marie Moreau and Jean-Charles Pichegru, and various members of the royalist nobility were all involved (Alan Schom, Napoleon Bonaparte [New York, 1997], pp. 279–81; Connelly et al., Historical Dictionary of Napoleonic France, pp. 92–93).


Title: To James Madison from John Sevier, 8 February 1804
From: Sevier, John
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir
Knoxville 8 February 1804
I have the honor of enclosing such kind of an official Certificate as the nature of the case appeared to admit, and such as I hope will answer the purpose. The troops from this Country are on their return from Natchez, after a long teadious, and disagreable March. We was Much perplexed in raising those troops. Every obsticle Was thrown in the Way that could be thought of or devised, but through the activity of the friends of Government, and the Zeal and ardor of those who Was prevailed on to turn out, it has been effected, and the whole of the Mounted Infantry called for have been sent on to the Natchez, (perhaps one or two Companies were not Quite compleat.)
I flatter myself Government will pay off those Men the Usual and Accustomed Wages the Militia of this Country have heretofore received, which has always been 75 Cents ⅌ day to privates with forage & & allowed them—permit Me sir, to sollicit your interest and attention on the occasion, and that you Will please to suggest the propriety of Such A measure; It has been a Feateaguing disagreable March, the distance Very Great, provisions on their route Scarce, and the season Wet and cold; which has occasioned the Men to Suffer Much hardship and inconveinancy. I have the honor to be With Great respect and Consideration, your Most obedt. Hble Servt.
John: Sevier

   RC (DLC).

   Enclosure not found, but see Sevier to JM, 29 Nov. 1803.


Title: From James Madison to James Sheafe, 8 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Madison, James
To: Sheafe, James

8 February 1804, Department of State. “In answer to your letter of the 13th. ult. I have to inform you, that instructions have been transmitted to Paris calculated to promote a modification, if possible, of the Convention of the 30th. of April last, so as to divide the sum payable under it, more equally among the claims, than may happen from its operation in its present form.”

   RC (owned by Harmers of New York, Inc., New York, 1990); letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14). RC 1 p.; in a clerk’s hand, signed by JM.


Title: To James Madison from Anthony Merry, 9 February 1804
From: Merry, Anthony
To: Madison, James

Washington February 9th. 1804.
Mr Merry has the Honor to present his Respects to Mr Madison.
He has just had that of receiving a Note from the President of the United States of which the following is a Copy—
“Thomas Jefferson asks the Favor of Mr Merry to dinner with a small Party of Friends on Monday the 13th. at Half past Three. Feby. 9. 04.” (superscribed to Mr Merry).
It so happens that Mr Merry has engaged some Company to dine with him on that Day. Under other Circumstances, however, he would have informed himself whether it is the Usage, as is the Case in most Countries, for private Engagements of every Kind to give Way to Invitations from the Chief Magistrate of the United States, and, if such were the Usage, he would not have failed to have alleged it as a just Apology for not receiving the Company he has invited.
But, after the Communication which Mr Merry had the Honor to receive from Mr Madison on the 12th. of last Month respecting the Alteration which the President of the United States had thought proper should take place in regard to the Treatment to be observed by the Executive Government towards Foreign Ministers from those Usages which had been established by his Predecessors, and after the Reply which Mr Merry had the Honor to make to that Notice, stating that, notwithstanding all his Anxiety to cultivate the most intimate and cordial Intercourse with every Member of the Government, he could not take upon himself to acquiesce in that Alteration, on Account of its serious Nature, which he would therefore report to his own Government, and wait for their Instructions upon it; it is necessary that he should have the Honor of observing to Mr Madison that, combining the Terms of the Invitation abovementioned with the Circumstances which have preceded it, Mr Merry can only understand it to be addressed to him in his private Capacity, and not as His Britannic Majesty’s Minister to the United States. Now however anxious he may be, as he certainly is, to give Effect to the Sentiments above expressed of conciliating personally and privately the good Opinion and Esteem of Mr Jefferson, he hopes that the latter will feel how improper it would be on his Part to sacrifice to that Desire the Duty which he owes to his Sovereign, and, consequently, how impossible it is for him to lay aside the Consideration of his public Character.
If Mr Merry should be mistaken as to the Meaning of Mr Jefferson’s Note, and it should prove that the Invitation is designed for him in his public Capacity, he trusts that Mr Jefferson will feel equally that it must be out of his Power to accept it without receiving previously, through the Channel of the Secretary of State, the necessary formal Assurances of the President’s Determination to observe towards him all those Usages of Distinction which have heretofore been shewn by the Executive Government of the United States to the Persons who have been accredited to them as His Majesty’s Ministers.
Mr Merry has the Honor to request of Mr Madison to lay this Explanation before the President, and to accompany it with the strongest Assurances of his highest Respect and Consideration.

   RC (DNA: RG 59, NFL, Great Britain, vol. 3); Tr (DLC). RC unsigned; encoded interlinearly by Wagner. Tr partially in code; decoded interlinearly. Tr and Tr of JM’s reply (see n. 2, below) were enclosed in JM to Monroe, 16 Feb. 1804.

   For JM’s conversations with Merry about this matter, see JM to Monroe, 19 Jan. 1804.

   JM replied on the same day: “Mr. Madison presents his compliments to Mr. Merry. He has communicated to the President Mr. Merry’s note of this morning and has the honor to remark to him that the Presidents invitation being in the stile used by him in like cases, had no reference to the points of form which will deprive him of the pleasure of Mr. Merry’s company at dinner on Monday next.

   “Mr. M. tenders to Mr. Merry his distinguished consideration” (draft [DNA: RG 59, Notes to Foreign Ministers and Consuls, vol. 1]; Tr [DLC]; draft encoded interlinearly by Wagner; Tr docketed by Monroe “private”).


Title: From James Madison to William Blackledge, 9 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Madison, James
To: Blackledge, William

9 February 1804, Department of State. “I return you Mr. Fisher’s letter [not found]. To qualify his case for the relief provided by the Convention with France respecting Louisiana, it is necessary that, according to the 5th. Article, he should have a decree of restitution, by the Council of Prizes, in his favor, and have also verified the insufficiency of the Captors to make restitution. Perhaps it would be advisable for him to transmit all the papers he has or can procure respecting the ownership of the vessel and cargo, the nature of the voyage and the manner and circumstances of the capture and subsequent proceedings to Mr. Skipwith the public agent at Paris; but as the period within which all the decisions under the Convention are to be completed is partly elapsed, and the remaining term is but short, very sanguine expectations of the result of the claim would not be justified.”

   Letterbook copy (DNA: RG 59, DL, vol. 14). 1 p.

   Republican William Blackledge (d. 1828) represented North Carolina in the Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Congresses (1803–9) and again in the Twelfth Congress (1811–13). In 1804 he was one of the managers appointed to conduct the impeachment of John Pickering.


Title: From James Madison to Daniel Clark, 10 February 1804
From: Madison, James
To: Clark, Daniel

private
Dear Sir,
Washington. Feby 10, 1804.
The inclosed letter was sent to me by Mrs Clark, with a request that it might be forwarded to you.
I take this occasion of congratulating you on the successful termination of the measures for placing Louisiana in our hands, and of repeating my acknowledgments for the active and useful services which you have rendered on the occasion. The Bill providing a government for this acquisition has not yet passed thro’ Congress. The novelty of the circumstances, added to the nature of the subject, has given rise to an unusual diversity of opinions and length of discussion.
The papers which you were so good as to transfer into my hands from those of Mr. Morton, of New York, remain subject to your orders. Shall I forward them to you, & how? Or is there any other disposition of them that would be preferred by you. I remain, Sir, with much esteem, Your Obedt. srvt.,
James Madison.

   RC (NjMoHP).

   This was probably Clark’s mother, Mary, who was living in Germantown, Pennsylvania (Nolan B. Harmon, Jr., The Famous Case of Myra Clark Gaines [Baton Rouge, 1946], pp. 147, 200).

   For the papers Daniel Clark left with George Washington Morton, see Clark to JM, 8 Mar. 1803 (PJM-SSRobert J. Brugger et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison: Secretary of State Series (6 vols. to date; Charlottesville, Va., 1986–)., 4:401–4 and n. 3).


Title: To James Madison from Sylvanus Bourne, 10 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Bourne, Sylvanus
To: Madison, James

10 February 1804, Amsterdam. “I have sedulously occupied myself of late in the means for procuring a relaxation of the rigorous quarantine Laws of this Country in favr of our Vessells.” Encloses a copy of a letter “just received” from the secretary of state “which holds forth the pledge of a due attention thereto in future that I hope to see realized.” “It has been lately reported here in the public papers that the yellow fever was brought some time past to Malaga by an Amn. vessell—the Captain of which by entering an intermediate Port had procured a counterfeit Bill of Health that proved a fatal deception to the Inhabitants of that Place—how true the account may be I am unable to say but I think it might be well in order to prevent as far as possible like impositions that Congress should make some regulations on this score annexing the due punishment of any Captains or Others who might be found guilty of such infamous practices, while it would tend to secur⟨e⟩ our Commerce from the ill effects of similar co⟨n⟩duct.” Repeats his earlier comment regarding the reaction in Europe to the recent report of Congress on Louisiana and the Floridas.

   RC and enclosure (DNA: RG 59, CD, Amsterdam, vol. 1). RC 2 pp. For enclosure, see n. 1.

   The enclosure is a copy of Maarten van der Goes to Bourne, 7 Feb. 1804 (2 pp.; in French), acknowledging receipt of Bourne’s 20 Jan. 1804 letter, which had been shown to the government. Van der Goes stated that he had no doubt that Bourne’s representations regarding the quarantine on U.S. vessels would be given all due consideration and dealt with in a manner as compatible as possible with the maintenance of proper caution for public health.

   See Bourne to JM, 2 Feb. 1804.


Title: To James Madison from Benjamin Day, 10 February 1804 (Abstract)
From: Day, Benjamin
To: Madison, James

10 February 1804, Fredericksburg. “Inclosed you will please receive Bill-Loading for your Tobacco in the Atlantic [not found], and at Foot, an account of the shipping. Charges on them, amounting to £19.8.6, which be pleased remit me in a Bank-Post-Note, or as may better suit your Convenience.” Adds at the foot of the page:

“1803

Octr.
14.
To Tax on 21 Hhds Tobacco.—a 6./.—

£ 6. 6.

25.
To Draye. a 1./6. opening 22 Hhds a 4./6 and reprizing one of them 6/.
}
  6.16.6.

Novr:
22.
To Craftage of 21 Hhds to the Atlantic a 6./.

  6. 6.

£19. 8.6”

   RC (DLC). 1 p. A note in JM’s hand at the bottom of the page reads “$64.75.”