more than this large surplus of eight millions of dollars. Under existing circumstances but little hope could spring from a reliance on commerce. If the thought of war was abandoned, a loan of five millions would scarcely serve the demands upon the Treasury for the ensuing year. The universal cry of the Federalists was, that the country would be crushed beneath the weight of direct taxation, the oft-repeated lamentation of an unmanly sect who neither feel nor know the unfailing willingness and ever-sustaining ability of the people of the United States. At the early meeting of Congress these anticipations were dissipated, like the flying cloud before the morning sun, by the lucid and powerful report of the Secretary of the Treasury. It was impossible that we could be harassed with frequent war; our geographical position, as well as the fixed policy of the nation, forbade it: and he clearly opposed the idea of a resort to loans, under the belief that even a diminished revenue from imports would be sufficient; he was fully persuaded that a resort to direct taxes would never be required; the war could not be so protracted as to place it beyond the power of the Government, upon the return of peace, to meet the existing indebtedness from the duties on imports. This view of Gallatin proved ultimately unsound; and such views ever will be so. No statesman or financier ever approximates the expenses or duration of a war. If the receipts of the Treasury proved insufficient, a loan, he thought, with doubling our duties, would meet the exigency.*

The effects of the embargo were becoming more dreadful every day, whilst its increasing unpopularity was decidedly manifested from the increasing violence of the means resorted to by Congress to enforce it. It was necessary to pass a law, which received the name and is known in history as the Enforcing Act, to sustain the unjust and oppressive cruelty of the embargo. "More effectually to enforce the embargo." Giles, a Congressman from Virginia,-who, with but little learning, yet possessing a native intellectual vigor, united with much practice upon the floor of the House, had become a most skillful debater, was the author of this act, which, after a Jan. 9, sharp debate, was hurried through a midnight session of the House; suitable time, in its deepest darkness,

1809.

*Reports of the Secretary of the Treasury, 1808-9. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.

for such an act, which forfeited every vessel or boat, with every kind of cargo, loading at any of the ports of the United States, to be carried off in violation of the embargo, or to be placed on foreign boats, to be carried off. Collectors were also required to seize all goods "apparently on their way" to any foreign power, and hold them until bonds were given for their delivery in some port of the United States, not adjacent to any foreign territory. Many other harsh and despotic features existed in this law, even to authorizing the President to employ the army and navy, and to hire thirty additional cruisers, to keep in entire and unlimited subjection every species of foreign com

merce.

The effect of the embargo was as injurious in some respects to Great Britain as to the United States; indeed, it had been admitted by Canning to be palpably so; hence his proposition to repeal it, and restore to his country, perhaps, the most important branch of her trade.

It has been supposed that the offer was made because the repeal would be more likely to promote the views of Great Britain than the orders in council, not only in extending her trade, but in bringing the United States in conflict with France. At this time, and even before the passage of the Enforcing Act, a political crisis had arrived which doubtlessly would have severed the Union, had not the Administration and its party taken a course which resulted in the repeal of the embargo. Meetings were held in New England to protest against it, and also in Albany and the City of New York. The Federal papers of Boston, in announcing the passage of the Enforcing Act, proclaimed, with their columns signalized in mourning, that "Liberty is dead." General Lincoln, and many other custom-house officers, resigned their post, rather than be the instruments for enforcing this last feature of the embargo.

The merchants had determined, and thus gave notice, that in every instance of seizure they would institute suit in the State courts.

A Boston town meeting resolved not to assist in carrying the Enforcing Act into execution, and that all who would, ought to be considered "enemies to the Constitution of the United States, enemies to the State of Massachusetts, and hostile to the liberties of the people."

A violent and most decided report passed the Massachu

setts Legislature, pronouncing it "unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional, and not legally binding.'

John Quincy Adams, who had resigned his place in the Senate of the United States, on ascertaining that his course in sustaining the Administration was not in accordance with the views of his constituents; but returning to Washington with the ostensible purpose of attending the Supreme Court, he, however, having sought an interview with the leaders of the Administration party, communicated to Giles, W. C. Nicholas, and Robinson, a Senator from Vermont, "That a continuance of the embargo much longer would certainly be met by forcible resistance, supported by the legislature, and probably by the judiciary of the State. That if force should be resorted to by the Government to quell that resistance, it would produce a civil war; and in that event, he had no doubt the leaders of the party would secure the co-operation of Great Britain. That their object was, and had been for several years, a dissolution of the Union, and the establishment of a separate confederacy, he knew from unequivocal evidence, though not provable in a court of law. That in case of a civil war, the aid of Great Britain to effect that purpose would be as surely resorted to, as it would be indispensably necessary to the design."* In an interview of the same character, and for the same purpose, held with the President, this distinguished statesman informed him "That a secret agent of Great Britain was then in New England, by whose intrigues every aid would be proffered by that Government to carry a project into execution, which would at once render the restrictions on the commerce between the United States and Great Britain nugatory, and all future opposition unavailing." Adams, in all probability, likewise informed Jefferson that a severance from the Union was already concluded, and the plan digested, if the restrictions upon commerce were persisted in.‡ In consideration of the existing danger to the Union, and the determination of the Federalists, a disposition on the part of the President and cabinet was manifested in the early part of the year, to remove the commercial restrictions that were not only occasioning such dissatisfaction, but actually impoverishing the country.

1809.

* Hild. Hist. of the U. S., second series, vol. iii. p. 118. Tucker's Life of Jefferson, vol. ii. p. 286.

Ibid.; National Intelligencer, Oct. 22, 1828; Niles's Register, vol. xxv.

p. 138.

At one time it appears that the President not only held the opposition to the embargo in supreme contempt, but that its opponents themselves had abandoned all hope of resistance. * At a later day, however, he ascribed the repeal of the embargo to the Federalists, who, in his own language, "believed in the alternative of repeal or civil war, and produced the fatal measure of repeal." This was Jefferson's opinion, written from the shades of his classic mountain-home after the embargo had been repealed and he himself having retired from the turmoil, the excitement, and the cares of the Chief Magistracy; and strange it is that he clung with such tenacious fondness to a scheme he was forced to abandon, rather than face the horrid storm of civil war.†

Feb. 1809.

Congress at this time again became the theatre of angry and stormy debates in reference to an increase of the army and navy, for which large appropriations were asked. Joseph Story (who sat but a short time in Congress, and afterwards became the most brilliant, learned, and accomplished jurist that ever graced the American courts,) urgently advocated a large appropriation for the navy; the Democrats of the Middle and Southern States opposed bitterly the proposition of Story, it being insisted that if we build ships they would fall into the hands of the enemy. It was during this debate, with a view to obtain an immediate and decided expression from Congress, either for a continuance of the embargo or war, that Nicholas introduced, as a substitute for the embargo, the issuing of letters of marque and reprisal against all nations violating our maritime rights. Various propositions were offered and discussed as substitutes for the resolutions of Nicholas, among them was one by Bacon, proposing only to have our merchant-vessels well armed. It was during this debate that a division was called for and obtained on the resolution offered by Nicholas. The first vote was on the repeal of the embargo. The Administration, it was known, had retreated from its former position, and preferred the 1st of June upon which the embargo should terminate; this was voted down by 73 to 40. An effort was then made for inde

Feb. 2,

1809.

finite postponement, which was lost by a vote of 26 to 93. When, finally, the 15th day of March was agreed upon

Jefferson's Works, vol. iv. p. 123.

† Ibid., vol. iv. p. 148, Letter to Dearborn, July 16, 1810.

for the expiration of the embargo, to all nations except France and Great Britain, by a vote of 81 to 40.

Feb. 27.

The interdiction of all commercial intercourse with France and Great Britain has been historically known as the Non-intercourse Law, which was, however, limited in its operations to the end of the next Congress. The provisions of this act were such as to render it nearly nugatory, many supposing it to be thus imperfectly adjusted to favor negotiations which were going on with the British Minister.*

March 1.

No other proceedings of importance occurred at this session of Congress, except the act creating the new Territory of Illinois, which then embraced the present States of Illinois and Wisconsin, with a population of about ten thousand.

On the 3d day of March, 1809, ended the labors of the Tenth Congress, and with it terminated the administration of Thomas Jefferson.

As the reader approaches the close of this Administration, he is not only forcibly struck with the total dissimilarity to those that preceded it, with its decided influence upon the tone and character of the Government, but the deep and lasting impression it made upon the public mind. In the days of Washington, party spirit, slowly but gradually developing, had in the declining days of the elder Adams assumed a most violent type; but it was the last raging fever of Federalism, which was finally allayed by the election of Jefferson. The most decided feature of the administration of this man was the permanent establishment of the States-right school of politics; and whilst Jefferson was not entirely consistent in this respect, yet to him and the supporters of his Administration belong the credit of placing the States-right doctrine upon its impregnable foundation. As a natural effect, from the success of the principles of the States-right party resulted the progressive and increasing popularity of the Democratic

school.

The Administration that preceded Jefferson's was not only weak, but shaken by those violent storms of passion which had driven the Ship of State far from the true republican track; the Constitution still hung in the political firmament,

Tucker's Life of Jefferson, vol. ii. p. 287; Stat. Man., vol. i. p. 263; Hild. Hist. of the United States, second series, vol. iii. p. 137; Bradford's History of the Federal Government, chapter vii.