tories &c. They have a right to tolerance, but neither to confidence nor power. It is very important that the pure federalist and republican should see in the opinion of each other but a shade of his own, which by a union of action will be lessened by one-half : that they should see & fear the monarchist as their common enemy, on whom they should keep their eyes, but keep off their hands. But in Delaware it seems we have a preliminary operation to reconcile dissenting republicans. For how can federalists coalesce with those who will not coalesce with each other. I know too well, my friend, your moderation, your justice, your affection to rational liberty, to doubt your best endeavours to heal this two-fold operation. The purity and perspicuity of your views are respected by all parties. I hope much then from their effect, & that operating on the good sense and patriotism of the friends of free government of every shade, they will spare us the painful, the deplorable spectacle of brethren sacrificing to small passions the great, the immortal and immutable rights of men. May heaven prosper you in your endeavours, & long preserve in health & life a consistent patriot, whose principles have stood unchanged by prosperous and adverse times, whom neither the "civium ardor prava jubentium, Nec vultus instante tyranni monte quatit solida."

I tender you the homage of my constant & affectionate friendship & respect.

TO THOMAS MCKEAN.

J. MSS. WASHINGTON, July 24, 1801. DEAR SIR,-Your favor of the 21st is duly received. It is on a subject the most difficult of all we have to act on. My idea is that the mass of our countrymen, even of those who call themselves Federalists, are republicans. They differ from us but in a shade of more or less power to be given to the Executive or Legislative organ. They were decoyed into the net of monarchists by the X. Y. Z. contrivance, but they are come or are coming back. So much moderation in our proceedings as not to revolt them while doubting or newly joined with us and they will coalesce and grow to us as one flesh. But any violence against their quondam leaders before they are thoroughly weaned from them, would carry them back again. Some states require a different regimen from others. What is done in one state very often shocks another, though where it is done it is wholesome. South of the Potomac not a single removal has been asked. On the contrary they are urgent that none shall be made. Accordingly only one has been made, which was for malversation. They censure much the removals north of this. You see, therefore, what various tempers we have to harmonize. Yet to restore that harmony which our predecessors so wickedly made it their object to break up, to render us again one people, acting as one nation, should be the object of every man really a patriot. I am satisfied it can be done, and I own that the day which should convice me of the contrary

It

would be the bitterest of my life. By the time you receive this you will probably see in the public papers my answer to the Newhaven remonstrance. I gladly availed myself of the opportunity it furnished of correcting the misconstructions of what I said on the 4th of July [sic], and of explaining the course I am pursuing. I hope the ardent republicans will acquiesce in it. will furnish new texts for the monarchists. But from them I ask nothing, I wish nothing but their eternal hatred. If that evidence of my conduct were to cease, I should become suspicious to myself. But between the Monarchist and the Federalist I draw a clear line. The latter is a sect of republicanism, the former it's implacable enemy. I am persuaded that you will approve of the course of proceedings explained in my answer to Newhaven, and that our friends in general, seeing what our plan is, will be satisfied with it's expediency. But there is a rock ahead, far more dangerous than that of monarchism. It is the discord showing itself among the republicans. In no place is it so threatening as in Delaware. The republicans there are fallen into open schism, & that at the approach of an all important election wherein their whole force united is not certainly known to be suffi cient. You, my dear sir, can be instrumental to their reconciliation, you will save the republican cause in that state, which otherwise is lost. Some threatening symptoms show themselves in Pennsylvania also. I hope that mutual sacrifice will produce accommodations. I am much gratified by receiving your letter. Anxious as I am to harmonize my fellow citizens (do

not suppose I mean the Hamiltonians, Essex-men, &c. incurable monocrats) I am rejoiced to receive information from every quarter, to know the opinion of every one. Your station enables you to take a broad view, and your communications therefore are always of the first value. Accept assurances of my friendly esteem and high consideration.

P. S. I leave this the 30th instant to be absent during the months of August & Sep. which I am afraid to pass on the tidewaters. I hope the circumstances on which your visit to this place depends will admit of its being postponed till our return, as it would give me the greatest pleasure to receive you here.

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

J. MSS.

(JAMES MADISON.)

MONTICELLO, Aug. 12, 1801.

DEAR SIR,-Doctr. Rose delivered me last night the letter with which you charged him, and I have thought it better to attend to it's contents at once before the arrival of the load of other business which this morning's post will bring. Pinckney's, Orr's, Livermore's, Howell's, Webster's, Murray's, Otis's, Graham's & Thornton's letters, with Wagner's sketch of an answer to the latter are all returned herewith. Reed's papers being voluminous have not been read. I thought a commission as District attorney had been forwarded to Howell: if so, his letter is not intelligible to me, where he says he is ready prepared to quit his office when a more deserving person shall be thought of. That he would have preferred himself to Barnes as judge is evident enough. Tho' I view Webster as a mere pedagogue, of very limited understanding and very strong prejudices and party passions, yet as editor of a paper and as of the Newhaven association, he may be worth

striking. His letter leaves two very fair points whereon to answer him. 1. the justice of making vacancies in order to introduce a participation of office. 2. That admitted, the propriety of preventing men indecently appointed & not yet warm in the seat of office from continuing, rather than to remove those fairly appointed and long in possession. As to Goodrich and Bishop it would be like talking to the deaf to say anything to a man as immovably biassed as he is. Thornton's letter is the same I have seen before I left Washington. When we consider that our minister has to wait months & years for an answer to the most trifling or most urgent application to his government, there would be no indecency to decline answering so crude an application as this respecting the prize, which he does not know if it be prize or not, brought into Boston as the newspapers say. I think it better to avoid determining, with foreign ministers, hypothetical cases. They may by stating possible cases, so employ us as to leave no time for those which are actual. The actual furnish occupation enough for our whole time. Perhaps the case of giving or refusing asylum for prizes may never arise. Yet if we predetermine it, we shall be led into all the altercation & discussion which would be necessary were we obliged to decide it. I think therefore the answer to Thornton might be that his letter being hypothetical presents two questions, calling for very different considerations, both of which it cannot now be necessary to determine. That both are founded on newspaper information only, which is too uncertain ground for the government to act on and that so soon as certain information shall be received that any such case has happened and what the exact nature of the case is, we will do on it what shall be right. I have been reading Schlegel's pamphlet with great attention. It contains a great deal of sound information. He does not however prove that in cases uncontroulled by treaty, the nations of Europe (or a single one of them in a single case) have practised on the principle, as a principle of natural law, that free bottoms make free goods. His own facts shew that the principle practised on in the earliest times was that an enemy's goods in a friend's bottom are lawful prize that on an attempt by the Dutch to introduce the other principle, it was overborne by Lewis XIV & by England,

VOL. VIII.-6