to tack about & support both treaty & government, rather than risk the government. Thus it is, that Hamilton, Jay, &c., in the boldest act they ever ventured on to undermine the government, have the address to screen themselves, & direct the hue & cry against those who wish to drag them into light. A bolder party-stroke was never struck. For it certainly is an attempt of a party, which finds they have lost their majority in one branch of the Legislature, to make a law by the aid of the other branch & of the executive, under color of a treaty, which shall bind up the hands of the adverse branch from ever restraining the commerce of their patron-nation. There appears a pause at present in the public sentiment, which may be followed by a revulsion. This is the effect of the desertion of the merchants, of the President's chiding answer to Boston & Richmond, of the writings of Curtius & Camillus, and of the quietism into which people naturally fall after first sensations are over. For god's sake take up your pen, and give a fundamental reply to Curtius & Camillus.

TO REV. JAMES MADISON.1

FONTAINBLEAU Oct. 28. 1795

DEAR SIR,-Seven o'clock, and retired to my fireside, I have determined to enter into conversation with you. This is a village of about 5000 inhabitants

1 The true date of this letter is ten years previous to this, Jefferson having written 1795 in place of 1785, and owing to this error, it was not included in its correct place in the present work. As the letter is of singular interest, the editor has thought it best to include it, even though out of its proper place.

VOL VII-3

when the court is not here & 20,000 when they are, occupying a valley thro' which runs a brook and on each side of it a ridge of small mountains most of which are naked rock. The King comes here, in the fall always, to hunt. His court attend him, as do also the foreign diplomatic corps. But as this is not indispensably required & my finances do not admit the expense of a continued residence here, I propose to come occasionally to attend the King's levees, returning again to Paris, distant 40 miles. This being the first trip I set out yesterday morning to take a view of the place. For this purpose I shaped my course towards the highest of the mountains in sight, to the top of which was about a league. As soon as I had got clear of the town I fell in with a poor woman walking at the same rate with myself & going the same course. Wishing to know the condition of the laboring poor I entered into conversation with her, which I began by enquiries for the path which would lead me into the mountain : & thence proceeded to enquiries into her vocation, condition & circumstances. She told me she was a day labourer, at 8. sous or 4 sterling the day; that she had two children. to maintain, & to pay a rent of 30 livres for her house, (which would consume the hire of 75 days) that often she could get no emploiment, and of course was without bread. As we had walked together near a mile & she had so far served me as a guide, I gave her, on parting, 24 sous. She burst into tears of a gratitude which I could perceive was unfeigned because she was unable to utter a word. She had

probably never before received so great an aid. This little attendrissement, with the solitude of my walk led me into a train of reflections on that unequal division of property which occasions the numberless instances of wretchedness which I had observed in this country & is to be observed all over Europe. The property of this country is absolutely concentrated in a very few hands, having revenues of from half a million of guineas a year downwards. These employ the flower of the country as servants, some of them having as many as 200 domestics, not labouring. They employ also a great number of manufacturers, & tradesmen, & lastly the class of labouring husbandmen. But after all there comes the most numerous of all the classes, that is, the poor who cannot find work. I asked myself what could be the reason that so many should be permitted to beg who are willing to work, in a country where there is a very considerable proportion of uncultivated lands? These lands are undisturbed only for the sake of game. It should seem then that it must be because of the enormous wealth of the proprietors which places them above attention to the encrease of their revenues by permitting these lands to be laboured. I am conscious that an equal division of property is impracticable. But the consequences of this enormous inequality producing so much misery to the bulk of mankind, legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let their subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of property of every kind there

fore to all the children, or to all the brothers & sisters, or other relations in equal degree is a politic measure, and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, & to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour & live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not the fundamental right to labour the earth returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to say that every man who cannot find employment but who can find uncultivated land shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small land holders are the most precious part of a state.

* * *

TO JAMES MADISON.

J. MSS.

Nov. 26, 95.

Your favor from Fredericksburg came safe to hand. I enclose you the extract of a letter I received from Mr. R. now in Richmond.' Tho' you will have been

"1 Extract of a lre. dated RICHMD. Nov. 22. 1795.

"Mann Page's motion for a resolution approving the conduct of the minority in the national senate was warmly agitated three whole days, Wednes

informed of the fact before this reaches you, yet you will see more of the subject by having different views of it presented to you. Though Marshall will be able to embarras the republican party in the assembly a good deal, yet upon the whole, his having gone into it will be of service. He has been hitherto able to do more mischief acting under the mask of Republicanism than he will be able to do after throwing it plainly off.

day Thursd. & Friday. It was much less ably defended than opposed. John Marshal it was once apprehended would make a great number of converts by an argument which cannot be considered in any other light than an uncandid artifice. To prevent what would be a virtual censure of the President's conduct he maintained that the treaty in all its commercial parts was still under the power of the H. of R. He contended that it was more in the spirit of the constitution for it to be rendered nugatory after it received the sanction of the P. & S. by the H. of R. refusing it their support, than for its existence to be prevented, for it to be stifled in embryo by their declaring upon application from the P. to know their sentiment before he had given it his signature, that they would withhold that support. He compared the relation of the Executive to the Legislative department to that between the states and the Congress under the old confederation. The old Congress might have given up the right of laying discriminating duties in favor of any nation by treaty: it would never have thought of taking beforehand the assent of each state thereto. Yet no one would have pretended to deny the power of the states to lay such. This doctrine, I believe, is all that is original in his argument. The sophisms of Camillus, & the nice distinctions of the Examiner made up the rest. It is clear that it was brought forward for the purpose of gaining over the unwary & wavering. It has never been admitted by the writers in favor of the treaty to the northward. Its author was disappointed however. Upon a division the vote stood 100 to 50. After the question Charles Lee brought forward a motion of compliment to the P. It was of most uncommon length which was undoubtedly intended to puzzle & the word 'wisdom' in expressing the confidence of the House in the P. was so artfully introduced that if the fraudulent design had not been detected in time the vote of the House, as to its effect upon the P. would have been entirely done away. A resolution so worded as to acquit the P. of all evil intention, but at the same time silently censuring his error, was passed by a majority of 33. 89 to 56.

"Some of the warmest of the victorious party talk of bringing forward a motion for a vote of applause to S. T. Mason. But the more moderate say their triumph is sufficient, & it is supposed this will be dropped."