Title: To George Washington from James McHenry, 8 March 1796
From: McHenry, James
To: Washington, George

            Sir.
            War Office 8 March 1796.

          As the cases of illegal captures under the British treaty ought to be determined by the laws of nations it has occurred to me that you might think mercantile less necessary than law knowlege in the persons to be appointed commissioners.
          If one of the judges of the supreme court of the U.S. could be spared and no objection interferes against such an appointment I suppose there would be no difficulty in selecting one willing to undertake the business. There appears however to be objections.
          Jeremiah T. Chase of Annapolis one of the judges of the general Court in Maryland is very well qualified, but altho I understand that he intends to leave the bench I question whether he would accept an appointment that would oblige him to go to England.
          Mr R. Potts of the Senate is also a fit person.
          Mr Robt Smith attorney at law Baltimore.
          Mr Seney one of the District Judges in Maryland.
          Mr Craik Do—
          Mercantile characters having fitness for the appointment.
          Mr Winder of the Senate of Maryland—a clear distinguishing head—very conversant in accounts and a certain degree of Law knowlege.
          James Calhoon of Baltimore.
          I have the honour to be with the greatest respect Sir Your most obdt

            James McHenry


Title: From George Washington to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, 8 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Senate,House of Representatives

            United States March 8. 1796

          Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Representatives
          I send herewith, for the information of Congress, the treaty concluded between the United States and the Dey and Regency of Algiers.

            Go: Washington


Title: From George Washington to Bushrod Washington, 9 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Washington, Bushrod

            Dear Sir,
            Philadelphia 9th Mar: 1796

          Owing to some irregularity of the Post, your letter of the 29th Ulto did not reach my hands until 8 oclock last Night.
          I shall leave the management of the chancery business respecting Colvils estate entirely to you; not only for the purpose of closing it speedily, but effectually also; as I want to be quieted in this business, & to be finally done with it.
          Mr Keith has, to the present stage of the business, had the sole management of it; and can give you more correct information than it is in my power to do, of every thing relative to it. The vouchers, I presume were satisfactory, but where they are I know not; unless they were deposited with the accts; remain in the hands of Mr Keith, or (as I believe is the case with respect to some of them) are in the bundle I sent you. If I have any of them, they must be at Mount Vernon (packed up with other papers) and not to be got at unless I was there. But as I mean to put your letter to me, and this answer, with a flying seal, under cover to Mr Keith, he will I hope, give you all the information you may need, for the purpose of closing the business, before the closing of the present Chancery term.
          The personal Estate, as I presume you will be informed by Mr Keith, has been all accounted for; Nor is there any thing now owing to the Estate within my knowledge. Sydney George’s acct (which kept the matter open sometime) was the last, and the settlement of that, if I mistake not, was among the Papers I sent you. the whole of that matter being settled, or negociated by Mr William Tilghman. If it was not among the Papers sent you,

it was left with Mr Keith. With Affectionate regard I am always Yours

            Go: Washington


Title: From George Washington to Robert Lewis, 10 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Lewis, Robert

            Dear Sir,
            Philadelphia 10th Mar. 1796.

          Your letter of the 17th of last month did not reach my hands until the evening before last. Why so long delayed, I know not; because the passage from you to me, is certain; after the letter is once in the line of the Posts; tho uncertain from me to you: and for that reason it has become expedient for you to let me know to whose care (since your mother has left Fredericksburgh) letters for you ought to be directed. Whether through the Post Office of that place, to be lodged at Fauquier Court House, or otherwise. Your Brother is so much absent from Fredericksburgh, as to render it ineligable to put letters under cover to him—of course some channel more certain must be devised.
          No good reason occurs to me, for the delay in paying the money that was in your hands to Mr Pearce, or into the Bank of Alexandria, agreeably to the letter I wrote you from Mount Vernon in October last; especially as you had been advised of my wanting it. There is no propriety, and less safety (from Robbery fire & a variety of accidents) to retain the money until every Rent is received; for upon this principle I shall be unable to form any estimate of my dependence. Paying the money, & settling the Rental, are distinct things; The first may be paid at any time, and will always stand as a credit in the Rental; the latter, may be delayed with less inconvenience; but here also, there ought to be a periodical Settlement; that regularity may pervade the system.
          The demands upon me for money, for one purpose or another, are frequent and great; for which reason, it is, at all times, convenient for me to know what my resourses are. for this reason also,

I wish you had mentioned the amount of your collection—If a good & safe opportunity presents, to lodge it in the hands of Mr Pearce, or at the Bank of Alexandria I wish it to be done so: if not, it may remain until I come home; and the whole be accomplished at once. But, at this time, to say when that will be, is beyond my Ken; as I can form no better judgment now, of the close of the present Session of Congress, than I was able to do at the hour of its commencement. And till that happens, & perhaps for some short time after, I may not have it in my power to leave the seat of Government. If you, however, will point out the mode by which my letters to you will find a safe conveyance, it will be in my power to give you timely information of my departure from hence.
          I would have you place no further dependence on what Muse has said, of Colo. Simms’s opinion, respecting the invalidity of my Leases, than to obtain other, and the best advice thereon; for which purpose send to your Cousin Bushrod Washington, one of each kind (for I think there are different forms) of the printed Leases, and request him, and General Marshall both, to consider, & give you there opinions in writing with respect to the general correctness; & more particularly with respect to my right of enforcing the Covenants, (with damages for past failures) or annuling the leases, and pay them for their opinions. I am very much mistaken, if the draught from which one, if not both, Leases were printed, was not made by a person of as much legal knowledge as Colo. Simms. If the gentlemen before named, shall be of opinion that there is no defect in the leases; and think it safe for you to proceed to enforce, or to annul them; I wish you to be governed by, and follow their advice. Hard indeed would it be upon me, to receive only five or Six pounds a hundred acres, for Lands of a quality equal to that which is renting for five times the sum; and when I thought I had insured valuable improvements on the premises, so as to render the Tenements valuable hereafter, to be cut off from these also; and to have no redress.
          Persuaded as I am, that you have rented the repossed lots for as much as you could get, I am perfectly satisfied with what you have done with mine, in Frederick & Berkley; altho’ the Rent is lower than what your cousin George Washington (who is now in this city) says he rents Land at.

          The waste, which has been committed on my reserved Land, is a very serious evil to the tract to which it appertained; as the quantity, originally reserved was scanty; and, under the ci[r]cumstances of the case, there appears to be no remedy. If letting out the part cleared, does not occasion a greater diminution of the Wood & Timber, I shall have no objection to your doing it—but not, if it is to involve that consequence. I perceive by the enclosed, which Mr Airess sent me by Mr George Washington, that another attack is commenced on the said tract. It is his business to prevent incroachment on land in which he has a Leasehold estate; especially as he has it on such advantageous terms; but it may be well for you to have an eye to the matter.
          With respect to the Land on Deep run, let it remain as it is until I see you. My love to Mrs Lewis in wch your Aunt joins I am Your sincere friend & affe. Uncle

            Go: Washington


Title: To George Washington from Oliver Wolcott, Jr., 10 March 1796
From: Wolcott, Oliver Jr.
To: Washington, George

            Treasury Department March 10th 1796.

          The Secretary of the Treasury has the honour most respectfully to represent to The President of the United States, that several applications have been made by persons charged with the general superintendance and immediate care of the Lighthouses & other establishments for the security of navigation representing the inadequacy of their compensations. After a full examination of the subject in concert with the Commissioner of the Revenue, the Secretary is of opinion that there are good & sufficient grounds for a moderate augmentation of some of the said compensations consistently with the provisions which have been made by the Legislature for the current year, & with the general powers vested in The President by an act of Congress passed on the 7th of August 1789.
          That the proceedings of the President may appear at one view, the form of an act embracing all the compensations of the

superintendants & Keepers of Lighthouses is herewith submitted to his consideration.
          The augmentations of compensations proposed are as follow.
          1st. That the superintendants of Lighthouses shall be allowed a Commission of five percentum instead of one ⅌ Centum upon the sums disbursed for the Lighthouses under their superintendence respectively.
          The saving made by the reduction of the salary lately allowed to the superintendent in south Carolina, will as is supposed provide fully for this increase.
          2d. It is proposed to allow a commission of two and one half pr centum for the purchase of articles for the Lighthouses generally; this being the rate of Commission allowed commonly in similar private agencies.
          3d. The proposed augmentation of the salaries of the keepers of the Lighthouses will appear from the annexed statement, and is deemed moderate considering the great increase of the prices of provisions & other necessaries of life. All which is humbly submitted

            Olivr Wolcott JrSecy of the Treasury.


Title: To George Washington from James McHenry, 11 March 1796
From: McHenry, James
To: Washington, George

            Sir.
            War office 11 March 1796

          I have the honour to inclose you a letter just received from Gen. Wilkinson with sundry returns and papers shewing the state of the army. With the greatest respect I am Sir your Excellencys Most ob. St

            James McHenry


Title: From George Washington to James McHenry, 11 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: McHenry, James

            Sir,
            Philadelphia 11th March 1796.

          The letters, with their enclosures from Genl Wilkenson, shew in an additional strong point of view, the indispensable necessity of moving the requisite quantity of Provisions & Stores to the upper Posts of the Army, North West of the Ohio. I therefore desire, you will not only make the necessary arrangements with Genl Wayne (to whom the contents of these Papers might be communicated) but direct them to be carried into effect without delay; before the Season for Water transportation is lost.
          By the returns wch you have laid before me a number of Muskets with Bayonets (3000) are required! Enquire of Genl Wayne on what principle, and for what purpose this demand is made—As also what is become of the Arms of those men whose terms of Service have expired.
          A great number of Officers appear to be on furlough. One of whom Captn Sedam, since Novr 1791; and another, Captn Heth, since March 1792; these require explanation.

            Go: Washington


Title: To George Washington from James McHenry, 11 March 1796
From: McHenry, James
To: Washington, George

            Sir.
            War office 11 March 1796.

          A treaty of peace between the United States and the Regency of Algiers being completed gives operation and effect to the 9th section of the “act to provide a naval armament” which section, enacts “that if a peace shall take place between the United States and the Regency of Algiers that no farther proceedings be had under this act.”
          As this event produces a virtual repeal of that act, it becomes from henceforward illegal to create by new orders or measures any new expenditure of money not essential to and required for the fulfilment of contracts made and entered into before this event.
          It appears also to be within the meaning of the proviso that all orders respecting the building of the Frigates, procuring materials for them, or preparing materials already obtained which can be suspended without intrenching upon any actual contract or engagement should be forthwith suspended.
          Under this view of the act it is important to know the intention of Congress on this subject as soon as possible. I would submit therefore whether some communication to Congress may not be proper that would bring it before them and hasten a decision. With the greatest respect I have the honour to be Sir your Excellency most obt

            James McHenry


Title: To George Washington from James McHenry, 12 March 1796
From: McHenry, James
To: Washington, George

            Sir.
            War office 12 March 1796.

          I beg leave to subjoin to the names furnished Nicholas Hammond atty at law East Town & Mr Wm Hemsley. The latter possesses mercantile knowlege, is a man of respectability and long standing. The former a good lawyer of great integrity and well esteemed.
          The inclosed paper respecting the Frigates is that which I mentioned last night.
          If the letter to Chapin herewith submitted meets your approbation or requires alteration I request it may be made and returned as soon as convenient. Mr Chapin leaves town on monday early. I have thought that circumstances authorise that he should be instructed to observe more œconomy in expenditures and attention to vouchers. With the highest respect I have the honour to be Sr your Excellency’s most ob. & h. st

            James McHenry


Title: To George Washington from Timothy Pickering, 12 March 1796
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Washington, George

            March 12. 1796.

          The Secretary of State respectfully lays before the President of the United States, lists of the names of such persons as his enquiries or personal knowledge induce him to think eligible for the respective objects prefixed to the lists.

            British Debts

              Theophilus Parsons

              Massachusetts

              Judge Hobart

              New-York

              Edward Tilghman
              }
              Pennsylvania

              Thomas FitzSimons

              Gunning Bedford (Judge)
              Delaware

            Spoliations

              Christopher Gore

              Massachusetts

              Amasa Learned
              }
              Connecticut

              James Davenport

              Egbert Benson

              New-York

              Richard Stockton

              New-Jersey

              George Gale

              Maryland

            To ascertain the River St Croix

              General Knox
              }
              Massachusetts

              General John Brooks

          With regard to the northwestern boundary, measures are to be taken in concert between his Britannic Majesty’s Government in America and the Government of the United-States, for making a joint survey of the upper part of the Missisipi, preparatory to the settlement of the boundary: Hence the Secretary supposes

it would be premature at this time to name the principal agent or agents on the part of the United States.

            T. Pickering


Title: To George Washington from Tobias Lear, 14 March 1796 [letter not found]
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Washington, George

          Letter not found: from Tobias Lear, 14 March 1796. On 21 March, GW wrote Lear: “Your letter of the 14th Instant did not get to my hands before Saturday.”


Title: To George Washington from William Alexander, 15 March 1796
From: Alexander, William
To: Washington, George

            sir
            Carlisle [Pa.] March 15th 1796

          I find Congress have it in Contemplation to open a land office, for the Sale of the public lands North West of the river ohio, and that a Surveyor General or superintendant will be appointed.
          I take the liberty to offer myself for that office and should you think me worthy of it, I shall endeavour to do the duty faithfully.
          I was by warrant under the hand and seal of Mr Hutchins late Geographer to the United States, appointed surveyor of the lower district set apart for satisfying the Military Bounties but as that district is receded to the Indians by General Wayn⟨e’s⟩ Treaty, that appointment will of Course Cease. And altho, I have been at Considerable Expence and spent some time in attempting to Execute the Warrants then in my hands, yet it is more than probable I shall not receive any recompence. I have

take⟨n⟩ much pains in registering the Military Warrants put into my hands since my first appointment, Which have been upwards of Two thousand, and which the owners are now withdrawing in order (as I suppose) to have registered agreeably to the present Bill before the house—As to my knowledge of the duties of that office, I shall when necessary procure ample Testimony, and if responsibility be required for the faithful performance of the Trust I shall procure to any amount.
          I know it is scarely possible for you to remember personally all your officers. I could procure many reccomendations from the first officers particularly of the line (Pennsylvania) in wh. I Served in the different Grades of Lieutenant, Captain, Briga⟨de⟩ Inspector and last a Major—But am desirous to give as little Trouble as may be, for this reason I have only mentioned my Intention of this application to two Gentlemen Colonel Hamilton and Governor Lee. If you should take the Trouble to Enquire at any other Gentleman, Governor St Claire and General Wayne I have the Honour of being known to both but as I have already perhaps consumed too much of your Time I shall therefore add, but that I am with the most perfect respect and Esteem Sir your most Obedient Humble servant—

            Wm Alexander


Title: To George Washington from Elias Boudinot, 15 March 1796
From: Boudinot, Elias
To: Washington, George

            Sir
            Mint of the United States. March 15th 1796

          I have carefully examined the Model & Explanation, for milling the Edges of Coin, which I had the honor of receiving by your Order, under Cover from Mr Dandridge.
          I am happy to report as the Result of that Examination, that the Machine at present in Use, is more simple, more efficient, and much less expensive, both as to original Cost, & Labour in its Operation, than the one proposed by Mr Guyer; indeed I believe that it is scarcely possible to invent a more simple Mode of accomplishing this Part of the coining Business, with equal Expedition and Perfection. I have the Honor to be with the most perfect Esteem Sir, Your most obedient, and very humble Servant

            Elias Boudinot


Title: Bartholomew Dandridge, Jr., to James McHenry, 15 March 1796
From: Dandridge, Bartholomew Jr.
To: McHenry, James

            [Philadelphia] March 15. 1796

          By the Presidents order B. Dandridge respectfully transmits the enclosed papers to The Secy of War; & informs him that the ideas on the subject of them both of The Secy of War & Secy of

State, are agreeable to those of the President. The President suggests that by consult[i]ng with Genl Wayne perhaps a better distribution of the troops might be had—this however he submits to the Secretary.


Title: To George Washington from Timothy Pickering, 15 March 1796
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Washington, George

            Department of State March 15. 1796.

          The Secretary of State respectfully lays before the President of the United States the draughts of two letters which the secretary proposes to send to Mr Adet to-morrow morning, if they meet the President’s approbation.

            Timothy Pickering


Title: From George Washington to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, 15 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Senate,House of Representatives

            United States March the 15th 1796.

          Gentlemen of the Senate, and House of Representatives.
          By the ninth section of the act entitled “an Act to provide a naval armament” it is enacted, “that if a peace shall take place

between the United States and the Regency of Algiers that no further proceedings be had under this act.”
          The peace which is here contemplated having taken place, it is incumbent upon the Executive to suspend all orders respecting the building of the Frigates, procuring materials for them, or preparing materials already obtained which may be done without intrenching upon contracts or agreements made and entered into before this event.
          But inasmuch as the loss which the public would incur might be considerable from the dissipation of workmen, from certain works or operations being suddenly dropped or left unfinished, and from the derangement in the whole system, consequent upon an immediate suspension of all proceedings under it; I have therefore thought adviseable before taking such a step, to submit the subject to the Senate and House of Representatives, that such measures may be adopted in the premises as may best comport with the public interest.

            G. Washington


Title: To George Washington from the Commissioners for the District of Columbia, 17 March 1796
From: Commissioners, District of Columbia
To: Washington, George

            Sir,
            Washington 17th March 1796

          We are informed by Mr White in his Letter by last nights mail that you wish to be informed of the operations in the City during the present winter—We now with pleasure communicate a general outline of our proceedings: and if it be your wish will direct a more full detail with Abstracts from the minutes, contracts and other necessary papers to be made out and forwarded as soon as possible. You have already been informed that our fina[n]ces would scarcely permit us to go on to the close of the building Season, since then very partial fresh supplies having been obtained we have been very much crampt in our affairs

during the whole winter. It has been usual to keep the free stone cutters, Carpenters and Sawyers at work during the winter, and without such a regulation it would be impossible to make much progress in setting free stone during the Summer. There have been engaged at the Capitol during the winter in cutting free stone twenty five hands, in the Carpenters hall and Sawing fifteen, Labourers to attend them twenty; At the Presidents house Stone Cutters twelve hands, Carpenters hall thirteen, Labourers to attend them ten; Labourers to attend the Surveyors six constantly. The Labourers not necessarily employed in attending the Stone Cutters, Carpenters, Sawyers and Surveyors have been employed in opening and cleaning such streets and ways as are most necessary for immediate use—The quantity of free stone now cut and lying in the yards are more than sufficient for the operations of the ensuing Season—The estimate of the materials in the Capitol yard prepared and not used as made by Mr Hadfield to be laid before the Committee of Congress amounted to considerably more than fifty thousand Dollars, since which 200,000 Bricks & 500 Tons of free stone have been delivered—The materials in the yard at the Presidents house including the Carpenters work done cannot amount to less than the estimate made by Mr Hadfield—Since the setting in of winter the following contracts have been made; A Contract with John Mitchell for 100 barrells of good sound well fated Pork, packt and weighed in the presence of one of our people in public employment, and delivered in the City at $14 ⅌ barrell. The pork has been delivered and paid for, and at a price at least 25 ⅌ Cent lower than it now sells for, of very inferior quality—One million of Bricks have been Contracted for and good security given for performance at Six Dollars pr thousand about half a million under last years contract have been delivered in since the commencement of winter—a Contract has been entered into with Messrs Magruders for 1500 bushells of good bolted Indian Meal at 4/4½ ⅌ Bushell delivered at the Capitol & presidents house as wanted. This article has since risen to a dollar and that no excuse might be made, the whole of the money advanced tho’ not called for by the Contract. There is every reason to believe that the Gentlemen will fullfil their Agreement: hitherto they have done so.
          General Lee’s total failure to comply with his contract with

the late Board for 100,000 Cubic feet of Timber (out of which something less than 20,000 feet have been delivered in two years) has compelled us to seek a supply else where—A new Contract has been made tho’ not to the extent wished, at an advanced price, the necessary advances have been made, and a partial delivery of the Timber so as to prevent the Sawyers being idle—A Contract has been made to erect a new bridge over the mouth of Rock creek, and the requisite advances for laying in Materials made—In short every material necessary for the ensuing Season (except Lime[)], has been either purchased or Contracted for. Our finances have always been too low to buy this necessary article; and no Contract could be made without a heavy advance—We have a supply for about two months work: the rest of the Season we shall be obliged to buy at the market price, without a certainty of always geting it, tho’ at double the present price.
          The Surveyors when the weather would permit have been engaged in Levelling the City and taking the Soundings of the river: The Levelling business will be complete so far as we think will be at present necessary by Mid Summer, and which will lessen the expense of the Surveying department at least one half—Dermott has been engaged, when not on the river, in dividing squares, and making copies of those already divided to be delivered to the proprietors—The Surveyors and all others who Superintend the receipts of public materials or superintend any particular object are at length brought to make monthly returns of what has been done the preceding month, which returns are noted on the minutes of the day and filed in the Office—This regulation has been found to have its good effects. When the present year commenced the City was bu[r]thened with a Debt of not less than forty thousand dollars of which thirty thousand are due to the Bank and the Commissioners are personally responsible for it since the first day of January. We have not received altogether but about eighteen thousand. Several old balances of long standing have been paid off—New debts have been constantly accumulating on us without a possibility of our preventing it any other way than by stoping our operations. In no winter since the commencement of the City has more been done with so little means. hitherto all have been paid or quieted, and if a speedy supply could be obtained, our poverty tho’ strongly

suspected would not be certainly known—No persons entitled to annual salaries have during the winter asked for more than very partial payment, few have asked for any; All look forward with anxious solicitude for the long hoped for Guarrantee, and if it comes at last it will not be the less joyfully received because so long delayed.
          We have given the outlines of such objects as we supposed you wished information on, Should further or more particular information be wanted we shall with pleasure forward it—The Carpenters are now engaged in framing the Roof of the Presidents house. we have for some time thought the manner of finishing the interior of that building, which has been proposed, will be too expensive, and will do ourselves the Honor of submitting our Ideas to you on the subject, in the course of next week. We have the honor to be with sentiments of perfect respect & regard Sir, Your most Obt Servts

            Gusts ScottWilliam Thornton


Title: To George Washington from William J. Alldridge, 19 March 1796
From: Alldridge, William J.
To: Washington, George

            at Mr Baileys printer 116 Market Street[Philadelphia] Saturday March 19th 1796
            Sr

          About a fortnight since I took the liberty of offering myself as a candidate for the office of Assayer at the Mint, in case Mr Richardson should decline it, but, as I am since informed he has determined to retain it, (not having found it so prejudicial to his health as he at first feared,) I have now only to apologize for the trouble I have given You, and to beg I may be permitted to renew the profession I then made of the pleasure it will give me to fulfil the duties of that office, should there happen to be any future occasion for my services.
          In my conversation with many Gentlemen respecting the mint, and the object of my visit to philadelphia, I have had frequent occasion to speak of, and to shew, the enclosed book (Universal

Merchant,) and in consequence of the approbation it has met with, am induced, at their instance to reprint it in philadelphia. bringing it down to the present time, for which purpose I am possessed of many documents; and shall avail myself of the friendship of Gentlemen in philadelphia, to obtain whatever I may be deficient in, respecting the United States.
          I now beg leave Sr, to take the further liberty to leave it with you for perusal previous to my soliciting your patronage and subscription. I shall be happy personally to answer any questions, and to avail myself of any observations you may think proper to make, in all which I shall esteem it an honor conferred on Sr Your most obedt humble Sert

            Wm J. Alldridge

            P.S. I shall call on Monday Morning.


Title: To George Washington from George Lewis, 19 March 1796
From: Lewis, George
To: Washington, George

            Dr Sir
            Fredericksburg [Va.] 19th of March 1796

          I received your letter of the 8th Inst. with the inclosed advertisement, and think your determination, in doing nothing decisive with your lands untill September well judg’d, as you observe it will afford time for your terms to be more generally known. you may also in that time obtain such further information respecting them as to make the sale much more advantageous, than by a premature one. I am convinc’d that every week nay every day adds to there value, of this I am the more convinced from the information of two Gentlemen of respectabillity that were with me last week (residents of Kentucky) and was assured

by them that the emigration last summer and fall was much greater than it has ever been, since the settlement of that Country. a great part of them went to Green River, which will certainly add to the value of lands in that quarter. You may rest assured of my communicateing to you at all times, any and every information that I may receive respecting the present (value) and future advantages of your land. at present Military lands on green river are worth 6/ pr Acre. yours ought to be of equal value. there is no reason why it should not, except the difference in title between Military lands, and land obtain’d by State warrants. the Military lands is supposed to be entirely free from those interfereances, which State warrant lands are subject to—as to quallity and other advantages, it must be equal to most lands in that Country, and from every information that I have been able to collect, the title is indisputable.
          Your Accounts of the rise in value of lands in Kentucky are not without foundation. I have it from good authority in that Country, that lands are worth fifty pr Ct more than they were last spring, and I have not a doubt could you have postponed the sale of your lands still longer it might have been to your interest. however there is no knowing what to do. the land fever is so fluctuating that it may be as well to make sale while good prices can be obtained—I have at length herd from Wodrow the man I supposed to have owned the small tract of land within your survey, and find from his letter that it must belong to some other man of the same name, I shall however make every exertion to find the person that does own it and to purchase it for you if possible.
          I wrote you by post the 24th of October last in answer to yours of the 13th from Spurriers (on your way to Philadelphia[)] respecting Genl Spotswoods horse, also mentioning one of Colo. Willis’s and there prices, but having never receiv’d any answer to that letter concluded that you had furnished yourself with one, or the prices was so high that you declined purchaseing altogether, and probably it never got to hand—the latter I am inclin’d to beleive, by your makeing no mention of it in your last letter, for fear it should be the case, and you may have attributed it to neglect in me, I have enclos’d you an exact copy of it. having alwayes as you now request retain’d a duplicate of my letters to you—if you are not supplied with a horse, and the prices mention’d in my letter not too extravagant—the same

horses may still be had, and I rather suppose somewhat cheaper, as the high price of grain has reduced the price of horses with us considerably.
          Mrs Lewis unites with me in Love to my Aunt, and accept the sincere respects of Yr Affectionate Nephew

            Go: Lewis


Title: To George Washington from Alexander Campbell, 20 March 1796
From: Campbell, Alexander
To: Washington, George

            Sir
            Phila. 20 Mar. 1796

          It is with real regret that I feel myself obliged to resign ⟨the⟩ Office of Attorney for the district of virginia, which I hereby take the liberty to do, and at the same time to make my acknowledgments to you for the honor which you did me by that appointment. I shall prepare myself on my return to virginia, to deliver up the papers in my possession ⟨r⟩elating to the business of the United States, to the gentleman who shall be chosen to succeed me. In resigning this office, sir, I think it right to mention that the emoluments of it are so small, as to make it even injurious to a man in extensive practice to hold it. I should therefore, have resigned it, long ago, but for reasons which it might not be delicate to mention. There is but one thing more, sir, which I have to add, in taking my leave of you, and for that I must beg your excuse; it is to assure you of my sincere respect & attachment, and to offer, with your permission, my earnest wishes to heaven, that you may enjoy many, many years to ⟨c⟩ome, all the happiness which this world can give you. I have the honor to be, sir, truly, your most respectful and obliged humble Servt

            Alex. Campbell


Title: To George Washington from Charles Lee, 20 March 1796
From: Lee, Charles
To: Washington, George

            Dear Sir
            Sunday 20th March 1796

          I have very little doubt, that Mr John Marshall would not act as a commissioner under the treaty with Great Britain for deciding on the claims of creditors. I have been long acquainted with his private affairs and I think it almost impossible for him to undertake that office. If he would, I know not any objection that subsists against him—1st He is not a debtor, 2d He cannot be benefitted or injured by any decission of the commissioners—3d His being employed as counsel in suits of that kind furnishes no reasonable objection; nor do I know of any opinions that he has published or possesses that might with a view to impartiality, make him liable to be objected to.
          Mr Marshall is at the head of his profession in Virginia, enjoying every convenience & comfort in the midst of his friends and the relations of his wife at richmond, in a practice of his profession that annually produces about five thousand dollars an average, with a young and encreasing family; and under a degree of necessity to continue his profession for the purpose of complying with contracts not yet performed.
          I think it probable that Col. Innes would accept of this appointment—of him I cannot speak with as much certainty as I have done of Mr Marshall: But I believe he is neither a debtor nor a creditor—that he will not be benefitted nor injured by any decision of the commissioners, nor do I know of any opinions that he possesses or has published, that would make his impartiality be suspected—He and Mr B. Randolph married sisters—and though Mr B.R. is himself clear of british debts, there are some of his relations much involved—This circumstance affords in my mind no just objection to the appointment of Col. Innes, & the only one which I can think of is his reluctance to business and want of diligence—as the commissioners will have a clerk and sit as judges, I suppose he will if he undertakes this office be sufficiently active for its duties. I am most sincerely and respectfully your friend & humble servant

            Charles Lee


Title: From George Washington to William Pearce, 20 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Pearce, William

            Mr Pearce
            Philadelphia 20th Mar. 1796

          Your letter of the 13th instt and the reports of the preceeding week came duly to hand yesterday—and will, I presume, do so regularly through the course of the Spring & Summer.
          I am sensible that by dividing my farms into small tenements I add very much to the consumption of my Timber, (and perhaps of the fuel) until hedges sufficient against every thing but Hogs could be raised (which of quick growing wood might soon be done) but then, I knew also, that if I could seat my land with professed, and real farmers, that the improvements in Buildings, orchards, Hedges, Meadows &ca which they would attend to, would greatly overbalance the disadvantages arising from an extra consumption of Wood in the course of fifteen or 18 years.
          It was not intended, nor does it appear from either my Advertisement or the terms proposed in the written propositions that I meant to lay the Land off in lots containing precisely a hundred acres. That quantity was only taken as a data to make an estimate upon. By the notifications the whole or any part—by fields—might be let provided enough would engage to take a whole farm as I could not let part, and keep part of one myself.
          The mode suggested by you for dividing them, may be very good; and I shall receive with satisfaction & pleasure any other ideas which may occur to you in this business: as the whole plan is

thrown out more with a view of trying what can be done than from an expectation of accomplishing it agreeably to my wishes. In what manner though would you divide River & Union farm into 4 tenements each—D. Run into 3—and muddy hole into two?
          One great object with me, is to separate the Negros from the Land; without making the condition of the former worse than it now is: whereas, if I was to rent the farm⟨s⟩ as they now stand, with the Negros &ca on the⟨m⟩—or divide them, negros &ca as you have suggested there would be a great deal of attention required—and perhaps risque and abuse to be run and after all perpetual complaints perhaps from the Negros that would be hired of ill usage in a variety of ways which would make one uneasy, and defeat in all probability the main objects which I aim at—viz.—tranquillity with a certain income. Notwithstanding these observations, and this explanation of my wishes, I shall be very glad, as I have observed before, to receive any suggestions you may think proper to make; to know the sentiments of others, if they are communicated to you; and to know the propositions of all who make them to you; whether for the whole farms, or large or small parts of them without the Negros &ca—or in the same manner, the Negros & stock going along with the Farms.
          There seems to be no apprehension in the mind of any one, here, that the price of flour will fall; However as the price is high, & I am unwilling to run any risks I would have you sell mine whenever you can get fifteen dollars pr barrel for it payable in Sixty days—unless you should be advised to the contrary by me or have good cause to believe from something you yourself may see or hear where you are that it will probably be higher in a short time.
          What ground do you put into Oats at Mansion house, and at the farms, this Spring? And when do you begin seeding them? Would the waste part of the Inclosure that was in Corn last year at the Mansion House bring Oats? Upon reflection, if it goes into corn this year, it will require a fence between it and the other part, which is in small grain; or, no use can be made of the latter until all that would be in Corn at that place wd be equally at liberty.
          Is there no work in the shop (drawing shingles & such like) in which Carpenter James could be usefully employed. He is a very

worthless fellow; indeed I have sometimes suspected that he cuts himself on purpose to lay up. for something or another of this sort is constantly happening to him—In Harvest, he is sure to get a cut in the beginning of it, so as to lay him up during the continuanc⟨e⟩ of it. I wish you well & remain Your friend

            Go: Washington


Title: To George Washington from Tobias Lear, 21 March 1796
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Washington, George

            My dear Sir,
            Washington [D.C.] March 21st 1796

          Desireous, on every account, to have the business relative to the Arsenal on this River closed, it was my intention to have set off tomorrow morning for Philadelphia, in order to ensure its completion on the first day of April, as that is the day fixed for the public to take possession of the premises; but last evening my dear Fanny was violently attacked by ⟨a pleuretic⟩ complaint, which appears to have increased today, and this morning Maria was laid up with the same disorder. The Physician assures me that there are no alarming symptoms in Fanny’s case; but I shall be distressed ’till it is removed; Should it happily be so in the course of this week, I shall pursue my plan of going to Philada where I have also some business of my own to transact. I shall therefore defer answering your respected favor of the 13th instant, so particularly as I should otherwise do. At present I shall only express the heartfelt satisfaction which I experienced in your approbation of my proceedings relative to the business up the River, and assure you that I shall never cease to value that as the highest reward I can receive for any thing I may do.
          I beg to be presented to Mrs Washington in terms of the highest respect & that you will beleive me to be ever your respectful, affectionate & devoted friend

            Tobias Lear.


Title: To George Washington from Timothy Pickering, 21 March 1796
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Washington, George

            March 21. 1796.

          The Secretary of State respectfully returns to the President his report on the claims of the Cohnawagas, or Seven Nations

of Canada, with the draught of a letter which he thinks proper to go from the department of war, with the report, to the Governor of New-York. The Secretary also transmits a press copy of the report, to be lodged in the war-Office, which will enable the Secretary of War to dispatch the original this day by post. The Governor may then be prepared to give an answer to the deputation as soon as they reach New-York. And it is of consequence to the deputation not to be detained in that city; because the Commissioners of the State, at the treaty, told the Cohnawagas that they were not to reckon on the State to defray the expences of any more of their deputations.
          The Secretary supposes it will be necessary to make a present of two hundred and fifty or three hundred dollars to Colo. Lewis and the rest of the deputies, to enable them to return to Cohnawaga. And if this be given them to-day, they may certainly leave this city to-morrow-morning. Mr Francis, on notice, will have their passages engaged.

            Timothy Pickering


Title: From George Washington to Bushrod Washington, 21 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Washington, Bushrod

            ⟨Dear Sir
            Philadelphia 21st March 1796

          Presuming that you have received my last, sent thro’ the hands of Mr Keith, with such aids as he was able to afford you respecting my Administration of Colo. Colvils estate, and supposing, as the Chancery term is closed or about to close, that the enclosed letter from that Gentleman would not get to your hands in time to influence your measures I resolv⟩ed, at first, not to send it. ⟨But upon second⟩ thoughts have changed my mind; lea⟨ving it⟩ to chance, and your own Judgment, to give it the best effect of which the information is susceptible. My best wishes attend you

and Mrs Washington. And with sincere regard and friendship I am—Your Affectionate Uncle

            Go: Washington


Title: From George Washington to Alexander Hamilton, 22 March 1796 [letter not found]
From: Washington, George
To: Hamilton, Alexander

          Letter not found: to Alexander Hamilton, 22 March 1796. On 24 March, Hamilton wrote GW: “I had the honor to receive yesterday your letter of the 22.”


Title: To George Washington from Uzal Ogden, 22 March 1796
From: Ogden, Uzal
To: Washington, George

            Dear Sir;
            Newark [N.J.] March 22, 1796

          I beg your Acceptance of a Publication (which I have taken the Liberty to inscribe to you) designed to check the Progress of Infidelity and Vice, and to promote the Interests of Truth and Virtue. I shall be happy if the Work shall be honored with your approbation, and am, with sincere & great Esteem, Dear Sir, Your most obedient and very humble Servant

            Uzal Ogden


Title: To George Washington from Oliver Wolcott, Jr., 22 March 1796
From: Wolcott, Oliver Jr.
To: Washington, George

            Treasury Department March 22d 1796.

          The Secretary of the Treasury respectfully transmits to The President of the United States two letters of the 29th of December 1795 & 22d instant (the latter being explanatory of the first) received from the Commissioner of the Revenue, on the subject

of a claim made against the United States by George Hooper Esqr. of North Carolina, for his services in inspecting the building & procuring supplies for the Lighthouse at Cape Fear.
          From the representation made by the Commissioner of the Revenue relative to this business, it appears, that Mr Hooper had rendered services other than that of inspecting the building of the Lighthouse, and for which he is entitled to an equitable allowance. The Secretary is therefore of opinion that if Mr Hooper receives two hundred and fifty Dollars in full for all services rendered by him, it cannot be deemed an unreasonable compensation. All which is respectfully submitted.

            Oliv: Wolcott JrSecy of the Treasury


Title: From George Washington to John Adams, 23 March 1796
From: Washington, George
To: Adams, John

            Dear Sir,
            Wednesday Morning 23d March 1796

          I thank you for giving me the perusal of the enclosed. The details are interesting. The Picture is well drawn; and, it is to be feared, too well founded in facts. With very sincere esteem and regard I am Your Obedt & Affecte

            Go: Washington


Title: To George Washington from Sarah Green, 23 March 1796
From: Green, Sarah
To: Washington, George

            Sir
            Alexandria [Va.] March 23d 1796

          I am Sorry that I have to trouble you once more in craving your Assistance but my Situation and Distress is such as induces me to intrude on your Generossity Myself and Children have

been for some time sick and still continue so; if you please consider my Distress and helplesness and send me what relief you may please to think proper your past kindness to me gives me a hope that you will still Regard the petition of your Humbe Sert

            Sarah Green


Title: To George Washington from Tobias Lear, 23 March 1796
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Washington, George

            My dear Sir,
            Washington [D.C.] March 23d 1796

          All I can do at this time is to acknowledge the receipt of your respected favor of the 21st instant, with its enclosures. The situation of Mrs Lear is such at present as to occupy my mind & my attention. To the within letter I refer for particulars, and trust to your goodness to excuse the brevity of this; assuring that I shall take the first moment in my power to attend to the matters mentioned in your two last favors, and give you a particular detail respecting them. With sentiments of the purest respect & most sincere attachment, I am, my dear Sir, Your affectionate friend & servant

            Tobias Lear.


Title: To George Washington from James Monroe, 24 March 1796
From: Monroe, James
To: Washington, George

            Dear Sir
            Paris March 24. 1796.

          You will decypher this by the publick cypher in the hands of the Secry of State.
          A letter from you to Gr Morris inclosed to Mr Deas has fallen by some accident into the hands of the Directoire. It contains five or six pages. Is said to be very confidential, authorizing

communications with Lord Grenville, &c. The person who told me of it and who read it, says it has produced an ill effect. He adds, that you say you have kept no copy of the letter. I mention this that you may be aware of the fact, upon the idea it may be useful and cannot be hurtful.
          My publick communications are so full that I have little to add here especially as Dr Brokenborough will present this a sensible young man who has been here thro’ the winter. with great respect & esteem I am dear Sir very sincerely yr very humble Servant

            Jas Monroe


Title: To George Washington from Timothy Pickering, 24 March 1796
From: Pickering, Timothy
To: Washington, George

              [Philadelphia] March 24. 1796.

            The Secretary of State has the honor to lay before the President of the U. States this day received from Mr Adams & Mr Deas.

              T. Pickering

            Mr Bond informs the Secretary, that neither Major Beckwith nor any other person is coming from Canada on the subject of the posts.


Title: To George Washington from Oliver Wolcott, Jr., 24 March 1796
From: Wolcott, Oliver Jr.
To: Washington, George

            Treasury Department March 24th 1796.

          The Secretary of the Treasury respectfully submits to the consideration of The President of the United States a Letter from the Collector of Boston to the Commissioner of the Revenue, with a Letter from the said Commissioner annexed thereto, relative to a quantity of oil necessary for the Lighthouse Establishment.
          From the information contained in those Letters, it appears that the article of oil is very scarce and difficult to be had. It is therefore the opinion of the Secretary, that it will be adviseable to authorise the Collector of Boston to contract with Messrs Jeffry & Russell for the delivery of twenty tons of strained oil at the price of one dollar pr gallon as mentioned in the Collector’s Letter. All which is respectfully submitted.

            Oliv: Wolcott JrSecy of the Treasury


Title: To George Washington from John Jay, 25 March 1796
From: Jay, John
To: Washington, George

            N. York 25 March 1796

          Govr Jay presents his respectful Compliments to the president of the United States, & takes the Liberty of sending the enclosed Copy of a Letter which he this Day recd from Mr S. Bayard.


Title: To George Washington from Elizabeth Parke Custis Law, 25 March 1796 [letter not found]
From: Law, Elizabeth Parke Custis
To: Washington, George

          Letter not found: from Elizabeth Parke Custis Law, 25 March 1796. On 30 March, GW wrote to Law: “Melancholy as the event is, on which you wrote the 25th instant.”


Title: To George Washington from Tobias Lear, 25 March 1796
From: Lear, Tobias
To: Washington, George

            March 25th 1796.

          Afflicted as I am, I have thought it my duty to write the enclosed, which will communicate an event that must be

distressing to you, my dear friend, as well as to myself. The partner of my life is no more! And I am too much distressd at this moment to add more than to assure you that tho my life now is not worth preserving, yet as it is, it is most sincerely & devotedly your’s

            Tobias Lear.


Title: To George Washington from Alexander Hamilton, 26 March 1796
From: Hamilton, Alexander
To: Washington, George

            Sir
            March 26 1796

          I perceived by the News Paper that the resolution has been carried I have not been idle as far a⟨s⟩ my situation would permit but ⟨it⟩ will not be in my power as I had hoped to send you what I am preparing by this day’s Post. The next will carry it It does not however appear necessary that the Executive should be in a hurry.
          The final result in my mind, for reasons I shal⟨l⟩ submit in my next is that th⟨e⟩ Papers ought all to be refused—I am persuade⟨d⟩ the Communication of the ins⟨tructions⟩ in particular would do ha⟨rm⟩ to The President & to the Govern⟨ment⟩. Respecty & Affecty

            ⟨A.H.⟩


Title: To George Washington from Charles Lee, 26 March 1796
From: Lee, Charles
To: Washington, George

            Sir
            Philadelphia 26th march 1796

          It is my opinion that the house of representatives have not a right by the constitution to demand and obtain the papers described in their resolution of the 24th instant without the consent of the President.
          I am not acquainted with those papers, but supposing they contain nothing which may not be disclosed to the public I think it will be expedient under the circumstances of this particular case to comply with the request as to all which preceded the signature of the treaty: & to accompany the compliance with explicit declarations of your opinions upon the propriety of the resolution and upon the right asserted by some of the members to exist in that branch of Congress to complete and ratify a treaty.
          I beg leave to refer to the paper already furnished as a mode in which a compliance may be made.

          I will now proceed to state some observations in support of the opinions which I have formed on this important subject.
          By a clause of the third section of the second article of the constitution the President “shall from time to time give to the congress information of the state of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” I understand by this that he is to exercise his own discretion as to the manner of giving to congress information of the State of the Union & he is responsible if he fails to do it in a proper manner. This however does not preclude Congress from requesting copies of papers to be laid before them touching a subject properly under their cognisance, if there is reason to believe there is a probability of obtaining any that may be useful and which at the same time may with propriety be communicated to them; but the president has a right to decide for himself whether he will comply with such request.
          The house of representatives has generally from the nature of its functions a right to demand from the President such statements of the transactions in any of the executive departments as they shall conceive necessary or useful in forming their laws, and there may be occasions when the books and original papers should be produced: for instance to sustain an impeachment commenced or to discover whether there be any malversation in office which might require impeachment—But it does not therefore follow that this branch of Congress possesses a right to demand and possess without the consent of the President copies of all the instructions and documents in his custody relative to any subject whatsoever, whenever they shall be pleased to require them. On the contrary it is my opinion that he may withhold from them the confidential communications between foreign ministgers and our own on the subject of a treaty either pending or finally concluded when in his judgment he shall think it best; and that he is bound by the consideration of good faith to the foreign minister & perhaps to our own so to do on some occasions.
          When it has been asked for what purpose the papers are to be used, it has been answered to enable the house to determine, first whether the laws contrary to the treaty should be repealed, and secondly whether they ought to make appropriations of

public money for carrying it into effect. Neither of these objects warrant the resolution.
          As to the first I do not concur with those who think that a treaty made between the United States and a foreign nation by the President by and with the advice and consent of two thirds of the Senate, requires the sanction of the house of representatives to give to it validity, though there be stipulations in it contrary to precedent laws and though money be requisite for the performance of it. It seems scarcely denied by any that the people have vested the authority to make treaties on the part of the United States in the President by and with the advice of two thirds of the senate, for this has been done in express Words. But is this authority vested there exclusive of the participation of the house of representatives. I think it is for the following reasons
          1st because a power to participate or co-operate in the making of treaties is not given to that branch of Congress in express terms.
          2d Because if this branch is by construction to be allowed to participate in making one treaty, the same reasoning would extend its power to all, even a treaty of mere peace and in the convention who formed the constitution it was proposed that [“]no treaty should be binding that was not ratified by law,” and the proposition was rejected.
          3d Because under the former confederation the whole treatypower resided in a body composed of representatives of each State, like unto the present senate, and in the formation of treaties each state possessed an equal vote, which equality the smaller states considered as essential to their political preservation—So they considered their equality in the Senate when they agreed to the new constitution; and in putting construction on it, regard should be had to the preceding form of government; and that should be adopted in doubtful cases which innovates the least, and tends most to the safety of the Integral parts of the confederacy.
          4th because it seems to have been generally understood in the state conventions who adopted the constitution that this branch had no participation in the making of treaties; and this understanding has been confirmed by constant and uniform experience to the present day.
          To make a contract and to perform it after it has been duly

made are obviously very different things; If the treaty with great britain in its present state of ratification is a complete contract binding on the United States, it is their own act and possesses every power which a treaty made by the nation can possess. But a treaty made by the constituted authority of a nation for that purpose becomes a law: if a law it must possess all the power of a law; and consequently a power to supercede or repeal all laws anterior & contrary thereto. Hence it is manifest that if a treaty contains any stipulations inconsistent with acts of the Legislature, it supercedes them. If a nation has a law and makes a treaty by which it is agreed that the law shall thereafter cease, it exercises a power which it hath to repeal its own laws. By their own authority they made the law—by the same they repeal it.
          This general proposition is further supported by Vattel who in book 4. section 24 says “that a treaty of peace binds the contracting parties from the moment of its conclusion as soon as it had passed through all its forms” and in section 25 that “on the publication the treaty becomes a law to the subjects and they are obliged to conform to the articles stipulated therein: if for instance the treaty imports that one of the two nations shall abstain from a particular trade every subject of that nation from the time of its being made public is to renounce that trade.”
          In the controversy between the United States and great Britain touching the inexecution of the treaty of peace, the American minister maintains that a legislative repeal of the laws of the states contrary to the treaty was not necessary “for that it was at all times perfectly understood that treaties controuled the laws of the states the confederation having made them obligatory on the whole.” See the recapitulation of Mr Jefferson’s letter section 56.
          If the laws of the states under the old confederation were repealed by a treaty, I infer that a law of the United States ought to be deemed repealed by a treaty of the United States and it is immaterial by whom as the rightful instruments of the nation, the one or the other is made.
          I admit that in England where their usage is their constitution, it is the established usage to repeal by a legislative act any law in opposition to a treaty—But this proves nothing more than this is an exception to the general rule and arises out of their

government—and a treaty as well as a law must be conformable to the constitution of every country that has one.
          Thus independent of that clause of our constitution in the sixth article declaring a treaty made under the authority of the United States to have the efficacy of a law it seems to me upon general principles to have that efficacy, and this persuasion is confirmed in some degree by that clause.
          As to the second object of the resolution, I do agree that the treaty cannot be performed without an appropriation of money which is under the power of that house of congress. But I do not perceive what aid can be derived from the papers to this end, unless it be intended not to perform the treaty. A treaty is to be executed with good faith and “the injury that a nation may sustain from a treaty is not a justifiable reason for such a nation to refuse complying with its conditions.” Martens Law—page 52—If any reasons will excuse a breach of treaty, they must be different from those which may be collected out of the documents which concern the negotiation and therefore on this ground the house of representatives are not conceived to have an undeniable right to the possession of those papers.
          The resolution by the generality of its expressions comprehends papers which properly belong to those only whose assent is requisite to the validity of a treaty and not to those who have a power respecting the performance of it only in which light I consider the house of representatives to stand.
          As to the expediency of the communication, time will not permit me to go into that subject minutely, and especially as I am a stranger to the papers, my opinion is given under much disadvantage as to this point and is founded on general Ideas. I am with the most profund and sincere respect your most obed. servant

            Charles Lee


Title: To George Washington from James McHenry, 26 March 1796
From: McHenry, James
To: Washington, George

            Sir,
            War office 26 March 1796.

          In compliance with your note of the 25 instant I beg leave to submit the following opinions on the queries it proposed.

          1. Whether the house of representatives hath or hath not a right to call upon the President of the United States for certain papers relative to the negociation of the treaty with Great-Britain.
          2. Whether if it does not possess the right, it would be expedient under the circumstances of this particular case to furnish them?
          3. And in either case what terms would be most proper to comply with or refuse the request?
          As to the first. The right to make treaties appears exclusively vested in the President and Senate by the words used to convey the right. The words are, “he (the President) shall have power by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.” It is not that the President shall, with the advice and consent of the Senate make treaties of a particular kind, but “treaties,” that is treaties of every kind and description For, Had a particular kind been intended, or but a few species only, the generic term which comprehends all the varieties would not have been selected.
          So far this right appears to be exclusively vested in the President and Senate. It follows then that when a treaty is made, and contains a promise to do a thing, or to forbear from doing a thing, it is a promise made for the whole nation, consequently whatever is necessary to be done or forborn by the people or by any department of government to fulfil that promise cannot be refused without a violation of the national faith.
          In this detached view of the subject the house can have no right to demand the papers, because a treaty which becomes binding without their privity and consent can give it no claim to the inspection of such papers. If papers that respect a treaty are ever laid before the house upon such a request it must be because the President shall judge such a communication expedient from the circumstances of the time, to avoid a public evil or to obtain a public good.
          As to the powers vested in Congress which may seem connected with this question and to clash with the exclusive right in the President and Senate to make treaties, it may be observed.
          1. Although the constitution declares “all legislative powers herein granted, shall be vested in a congress of the United States,” the legislative powers of Congress are not therefore

like the legislative powers of a British Parliament illimitable or undefined, becoming thereby capable to be applied and bear upon every object of government; but defined and contracted by express limitations restrictions and prohibitions beyond which Congress cannot proceed without a violation of the constitution or running into usurpation.
          2. Besides, the limitations restrictions and prohibitions to the powers that may be exercised by Congress contained in the 8 & 9 sections of the 1st article of the constitution, these powers are further abridged and restricted by prohibitions and reservations in different parts of the instrument, and by the powers vested in particular departments or officers trenching upon and limiting these powers.
          3 Every restriction upon the powers of Congress is an absolute exclusion of the right to legislate upon the object restricted.
          To give examples. By article the 1st: sect. 8 Congress have power to raise and support armies and to make all laws proper to carry this power into execution. By article the II. this latter power which is coextensive with the full completion of the object is abridged by an express assignment of the power to appoint officers to the President and Senate, a power abolutely necessary to carry the power to raise and support armies into execution, and without which they could neither be raised nor supported.
          By art. 1. sect. 8 Congress have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and power to make all laws proper to carry this power into execution. This power to regulate commerce with foreign nations is in like manner restricted by the power given to the President & Senate to make treaties with foreign nations, a power expressly comprehending regulations of commerce.
          It is deemed unnecessary to carry this illustration further, the examples stated being sufficient to shew the principle they establish, vz. that wherever a specific or generic power is expresly vested in an officer or department by the constitution, just so much power is taken from the powers vested in Congress.
          This is thought to be a sound construction, because it keeps the treaty making power where it is expresly and literally lodged; because from the nature of that power it is more properly lodged with a few than with many, and because were it participated in by the house of representatives in which the States are unequally represented, it would comport less with their safety and

sovereignty than by being vested in that branch where each State is equally protected by having an equal number of Senators, circumstances which severally considered evince that the spirit of the constitution in this respect accords with the letter.
          If the reverse construction is assumed vz. that the powers vested in Congress by art. 1. Sect. 8 limit the treaty making power to objects not comprised or included in these powers it would result from thence that the treaty making power is a nullity, because the powers vested in Congress by art. the 1. comprehend almost every object that can enter into the composition of treaties. This therefore cannot be a good construction because it would defeat one principal end of the instrument.
          If it is said that the house of representatives have a participative right in treaty making from whence is it derived? If from construction, that can never be set up against positive and declared right. If from the power given to Congress to regulate trade with foreign nations, that cannot be construed into a power to make treaties. If from the power to grant money, which implies a discretion to give or withhold, such discretion cannot be rightfully exercised to the violation of a compact entered into by those having a right to make it, by a branch possessing no such right.
          On none of these grounds then have the house of representatives a right to call for the papers, because they have neither a right to make treaties nor a right to violate them when made.
          But as the house of representatives are vested with “the sole power of impeachment” has it not a right as an incident of that power to call for papers respecting a treaty when the object is impeachment? I would presume that it has; but to legitimate such a call the object ought to be explicitly and formally announced. Where it is not, it is not to be presumed.
          I conclude that the house has no right to make the call for papers in the naked form it appears in, and having no right, that there can arise no obligation to comply, which is not imposed by a different cause or by a sense of the public good.
          It may now be remarked that the giving or withholding the papers can neither establish nor nullify the position couched under the resolution that the house have a right to call for them, because the resolution being disconnected with any declared constitutional object that might seem to require the papers,

leaves the President at perfect liberty to exercise his negative should he think proper. Being therefore left at liberty to use his discretion, whichever way it is exercised can make very little either in favour or against the position. Were indeed the treaty in discussion, and had the house sent for these papers, as for a scale wherwith to decide upon its merits, a simple compliance with the request without note or commentary would be susceptible of a more pointed application. As it comes forward however it cannot be construed as having the same force, unless as connected with the probable ulterior intentions of the house.
          In this point of view then to give or to withhold the papers becomes a question of expediency.
          If the papers are withheld, the party in the house opposed to the treaty may shelter their refusal to carry it into effect by assigning this as a reason for their vote, and thus endeavour to get rid of the responsibility attached to refusal. The papers being withheld may also give poignancy to all the fictions which have been so industriously propogated on this subject, and may make even good men to wish that no insurmountable obstacle had opposed their communication.
          It is worthy too of consideration, whether in a government like ours a freer communication in such cases than is usual in a country where the Executive and one branch of government are hereditary, is not a matter of policy if not of propriety.
          On the whole I incline to the opinion that the papers may be communicated without a conceding of the principle that the house has a right to demand them, and that by communicating them more good is likely to result than present or future inconvenience.
          The right of the house being disavowed what terms would be proper to refuse the request?
          It does not strike me that the chain of argument which the case embraces ought to be adopted, because it might involve a series of unprofitable and unpleasant discussions between the house and Executive, and because it is in the nature of every argument to be susceptible of reply. A simple declaration of the opinion that the treaty making power is vested exclusively in the President and Senate with such observations on the nature of negociations between nations as may serve to shew the

impolicy of exposing such papers might possibly obviate altercation, while some impressive reasons might be added to lead the house to make the appropriations necessary to give it effect.
          In the case of communicating the papers without yielding to the call as a right the same course would perhaps be the least subject to objection.
          The answer might assume a turn like the following.
          That the request contained in the resolution of —— has received his deliberate consideration.
          That certain opinions which have been published as having been delivered in debate upon the resolution afford ground for a belief that there is an intention in some of its advocates to contend that the house of Representatives hath a concurrent or negative power with the President & Senate over treaties, and to infer an acknowlegment of the right from a compliance with the request.
          That having sworn to protect the constitution he feels himself called upon to stay as far as in his power the progress of a doctrine which if carried into practice wuld produce a radical change in the constitution of the United States without the intervention of the mode it prescribes to obtain alterations.
          That inasmuch as he believes the right to make treaties to be exclusively vested in the President and Senate by the constitution, as he knows such to have been the sense of the Convention which framed it; and as government have followed this construction in practice, it becomes his duty to protest against any thing tending to establish a different construction of the instrument.
          That being the sole judge of what or whether any papers ought to be laid before the house at this juncture, he has annexed such documents and correspondence relative to the negociation of the treaty lately concluded with Great Britain as in his opinion may be communicated consistently with foreign relations and the interests of the union.
          That as the treaty requires certain appropriations of money to be made which can neither be refused without a violation of national faith, nor yet delayed beyond a certain time without involving the most important consequences he trusts that the house will give the subject the earliest attention.
          That to enable the house to appreciate the value of the

moment he has subjoined an extract of a letter from Mr Adams &c. The above is respectfully submitted

            James McHenrySecy of War