Томас Джефферсон
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 5 (of 9)
TO MR. GALLATIN
March 31, 1808.
If, on considering the doubts I shall suggest, you shall still think your draught of a supplementary embargo law sufficient, in its present form, I shall be satisfied it is so, for I have but one hour in the morning in which I am capable of thinking, and that is too much crowded with business to give me time to think.
1. Is not the first paragraph against the Constitution, which says no preference shall be given to the ports of one State over those of another? You might put down those ports as ports of entry, if that could be made to do.
2. Could not your second paragraph be made to answer by making it say that no clearance shall be furnished to any vessel laden with provisions or lumber, to go from one port to another of the United States, without special permission, &c. In that case we might lay down rules for the necessary removal of provisions and lumber, inland, which should give no trouble to the citizens, but refuse licenses for all coasting transportation of those articles but on such applications from a Governor as may ensure us against any exportation but for the consumption of his State. Portsmouth, Boston, Charleston, and Savannah, are the only ports which cannot be supplied inland. I should like to prohibit collections, also, made evidently for clandestine importation.
3. I would rather strike out the words "in conformity with treaty" in order to avoid any express recognition at this day of that article of the British treaty. It has been so flagrantly abused as to excite the Indians to war against us, that I should have no hesitation in declaring it null, as soon as we see means of supplying the Indians ourselves.
I should have no objections to extend the exception to the Indian furs purchased by our traders and sent into Canada. Affectionate salutes.
TO MR. SMITH
April 1, 1808.
I approve of your letter to Commodore Murray entirely, and in order to settle what shall be our course for the summer (now that we are tolerably clear, that no rupture with England is likely to take place during the summer), I propose, the first day that I can be well enough, for a couple of hours to ask a meeting of our colleagues to determine these questions.
Shall the proclamation be renewed or suffered to expire?
Shall the harbors of ordinary British resort (say New York, Lynhaven, and Charleston) be furnished with their full quota of gun-boats, with their navigating crews?
Shall the residue of the 170 gun-boats be distributed among the other ports, with their navigating crews, or be laid up or left on their stocks?
Shall the frigates and Wasp be unmanned?
Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 2, 1808.
Sir,—On the amendments to the embargo law, I am perfectly satisfied with whatever you have concluded on after consideration of the subject. My view was only to suggest for your consideration, not having at all made myself acquainted with the details of that law. I therefore return you your bill, and wish it to be proposed. I will this day nominate Elmer. The delegates of North Carolina expect daily to receive information on the subject of a Marshal. Is the Register's office at New Orleans vacant? Claiborne says it is, and strongly recommends Robertson the Secretary. He will be found one of the most valuable men we have brought into the public service for integrity, talents and amiability. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 8, 1808.
I suppose that Favre can carry his necessary provisions from New Orleans across the lake in a periagua or some other vessel, which may come under the exception of vessels under the immediate direction of the President, and that being an agent of the United States for the transmission of public intelligence, such a license is perfectly legitimate. If this were a matter of doubt, its solution would be to be sought in the intention of the Legislature, which was to keep our seamen and property from capture, and to starve the offending nations. But Favre is our own agent, and we may as well remit provisions to him as money to our other foreign agents. It appears to me to be so clearly out of the scope of the prohibitions of the embargo law, and within its exceptions, that I should be for allowing him to take out his provisions for his family, under the superintendence of the Collector. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. JOHN JACOB ASTOR
Washington, April 13, 1808.
Sir,—I have regretted the delay of this answer to your letter of February 27th, but it has proceeded from circumstances which did not depend on me. I learn with great satisfaction the disposition of our merchants to form into companies for undertaking the Indian trade within our own territories. I have been taught to believe it an advantageous one for the individual adventurers, and I consider it as highly desirable to have that trade centred in the hands of our own citizens. The field is immense, and would occupy a vast extent of capital by different companies engaging in different districts. All beyond the Mississippi is ours exclusively, and it will be in our power to give our own traders great advantages over their foreign competitors on this side the Mississippi. You may be assured that in order to get the whole of this business passed into the hands of our own citizens, and to oust foreign traders, who so much abuse their privilege by endeavoring to excite the Indians to war on us, every reasonable patronage and facility in the power of the Executive will be afforded. I salute you with respect.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 14, 1808.
I should think Mr. Woodside's application to send provisions for the family of our consul at Madeira, admissible on the same ground as that lately to Favre, were the necessity as evident, but I suppose it can hardly be doubted that England will procure provisions for that island, and there is danger of one precedent in our relaxations begetting another till we may get out of the limits of the law and its object.
The application for the establishment of a packet on Lake Champlain cannot be admitted. Such an establishment is by no means within the description of those which we have proposed to license; it would give too great a facility to evade the law, and the builder is in no worse situation than the many others who began their vessels before the embargo law, and who will not be permitted to use them till that is repealed. Affectionate salutations.
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
April 19, 1808.
Dear Sir,—Sincerely sympathizing in your distress, which much experience in the same school has taught me to estimate, I could not have been induced to intrude on it by anything short of the urgency of the case stated by Penniman on Lake Champlain. Messrs. Robinson and Witherall tell me the whole of the business will be over early in May, when the fall of the water renders the rapids impassable for rafts. They think vessels of any kind desired, can be had on the Lake at a moment's warning, and guns of 6 lbs. ball, there also, mounted on them by procurement of the collector, and that the governor would order any assistance of militia on being written to. Believing it important to crush every example of forcible opposition to the law, I propose to ask the other gentlemen to a consultation immediately, and for their and my guide have to request any ideas on the subject which you can hastily give me on paper, for which I would not have troubled you, but from a confidence that your knowledge of the character and means possessed by the collector there, and of the local circumstances to be attended to, may enable us to decide on what will be most proper and effectual. I salute you with affection.
P. S. Return me Penniman's letter if you please, to lay before the gentlemen.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 19, 1808.
We have concluded as follows:
1st. That a letter from your department to the collector on Lake Champlain, shall instruct him to equip and arm what vessels he can and may think necessary, and luggage as many persons on board them as may be necessary, and can be engaged voluntarily by force of arms, or otherwise, to enforce the law.
2d. The Secretary of State writes to the Marshall, if the opposition to the law is too powerful for the collector, to raise his posse, (which, as a peace officer, he is fully authorized to do on any forcible breach of the peace,) and to aid in suppressing the insurrection or combination.
3d. The Secretary at War desires the Governor, if the posse is inadequate, to publish a proclamation with which he is furnished, and to call on the militia. He is further, by a private letter, requested to repair to the place, and lend the aid of his counsel and authority according to exigencies.
We have further determined to build two gun-boats at Skanesborough. Affectionate salutations.
P. S. General Dearborne has Penniman's letter to copy for the Governor.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 22, 1808.
Did I lend you the Pennsylvania act permitting our Western road to pass through that State? If I did, or if you have a copy of it, I shall be very glad to see it. Mr. Hodge gave me notice yesterday that there would be legal opposition to that road's passing in any other direction than through Washington, their construction being, that if in fact a good road can be got by Washington, the law obliges me to direct it through that; and they have got a survey made on which they affirm the fact to be that a good road may be had. I know my determination was not to yield to the example of a State's prescribing the direction of the road; and I understood the law as leaving the route ultimately to me. If I have misconstrued the law, I shall be sorry for the money spent on a misconstruction, but that loss will be a lesser evil to the United States than a single example of yielding to a State the direction of a road made at the national expense and for national purposes. If you have not the law, I must write by this day's post to Mr. Moore, to suspend all further proceedings till we can see whether we are really at liberty to pursue the route we have proposed, or must adopt another which shall not enter the State of Pennsylvania.
Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 23, 1808.
My ideas on the questions relative to the active letter of Marque stated in your letter of yesterday, are as follows:
1st. Letters of Marque have been considered, ever since the decisions of 1703, to be of a mixed character, but that the commercial character predominates; and as a commercial vessel of private property we have in some cases since the proclamation of July, considered them as not included in its restrictions.
2d. The law of 1794, June 5th, certainly exempts the enlistment of foreigners in this country on board the vessels of their sovereign, from the penalties of that law, and leaves the subject merely under the law of nations. By that law the right of enlistment in a neutral country, given to both belligerents if they can devise equal advantage from it, is no breach of neutrality, but otherwise becomes questionable. We may, justly, I think, permit a vessel of either nation to supply its desertions by new engagements; but we should be cautious as to permitting them to increase their number, to carry away more than they brought in.
3d. It is difficult to draw a line between the two cases where the collector should consult the government, and where the district attorney. Where a case is political, rather than legal, or where it arises even on a law whose object is rather political than municipal, the government should be consulted; and where the district attorney is the proper resort, still it should be on consultation by the collector, and not by the party interested. Affectionate salutations.
TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE
April 23, 1808.
Notes on the British claims in the Mississippi territory.
1803, March 3d, act of Congress gave to March 31, 1804, to exhibit their claims on grants.
1804, March 27, act of Congress gave to November 30, 1804, and allowed transcripts instead of originals, &c.
1805, March 2d, act of Congress gave to December 1, 1805, to file their grants. And in fact to Jan 1, 1807, time when the sale might begin.
1807, December 15, the British claimants memorialize again.
On no one of the acts did the British claimant take any step towards specifying his claim or its location, but remained inactive till the time was expired, and then remonstrated to his government that we had not given them time sufficient. And on the last of 1805, instead of having come forward with his claims, ready to avail himself of the third term which was then to be asked, and which was granted nominally to December 1, 1805, but in effect to January 1, 1807, he stays at home inactive, and on the 15th of December, 1807, again gives in a memorial that we have not given time enough, but still takes no step to inform us what and where his claim is.
Although these titles may have been confirmed by treaty, yet they could not thereby be intended to be withdrawn from the jurisdiction or conditions on which lands are held even by citizens. It is evident that these claimants are speculators, whose object is to make what profit they can out of the patronage of the government, but to make no sacrifice of themselves either of money or trouble. They are entitled, therefore, to no further notice from either government. However, Mr. Erskine may be informed verbally, that as the day of commencing sales of lands there is now put off to January 1, 1809, if any of these claimants will, before that day, file their claim, with its precise location, the executive is authorized to suspend the sale of any particular parcels, and will as to that, till the proper authority can decide on the title, but that the settlement of that country in general, is too pressing to be delayed one day by claims under the circumstances of these.
TO MR. GALLATIN
April 23, 1808.
The leading object of the enclosed application from the owners of the Topaz, is to send witnesses and documents to save the property of the ship and cargo seized. But as the Topaz would be insufficient to bring home the whole property if cleared, the permission of sending a vessel may be on the ordinary ground of bringing home the property. But do the restrictions of the embargo laws (for I have them not) inhibit the passing from port to port as proposed in the enclosed? And do they admit, (in case the Topaz and her cargo are condemned,) that the vessel sent out should bring home other property to cover the expenses of the ineffectual voyage? On these questions I must ask your opinion, as General Smith will call on me to-morrow. The questions had been brought to me originally by Mr. Taylor, because he happened to come at a moment when you were confined. Affectionate salutes.
TO WM. RODNEY
April 24, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson returns the enclosed to Mr. Rodney, with thanks for the communication. It is very evident that our embargo, added to the exclusions from the Continent, will be most heavily felt in England and Ireland. Liverpool is remonstrating, and endeavoring to get the other posts into motion. Yet the bill confirming the orders of council is ordered to a third reading, which shows it will pass. Congress has just passed an additional embargo law, on which if we act as boldly as I am disposed to do, we can make it effectual. I think the material parts of the enclosed should be published. It will show our people that while the embargo gives us double rations, it is starving our enemies. This six months' session has worn me down to a state of almost total incapacity for business. Congress will certainly rise to-morrow night, and I shall leave this for Monticello on the 5th of May, to be here again on the 8th of June. I salute you with constant affection and respect.
TO COLONEL WASHINGTON
Washington, April 24, 1808.
Dear Sir,—So uncertain has been the situation of our affairs with England, and yet so much bearing would they have on those with the Indians, that I have delayed answering your favor of October 5th until I could see a little way before me. At present I think a continuance of our peace till the next meeting of Congress (November) probable. I have now addressed a message to the Indians in the north-west, in which I inform them of our differences with England, and of the uncertainty how they will issue. Assure them of the continuance of our friendship, and advise them in any event to remain quiet at home, taking no part in our quarrel, and declaring unequivocally that if any nation takes up the hatchet against us, we will drive them from the land of their fathers, and never more permit their return. With respect to the prophet, I really believe the opinion you formed of his views is correct. But we have heard so many different stories since, that we are awaiting some information which we expect to receive before we make up a definitive opinion. This much, however, we determine; and he might know that if we become dissatisfied that his views are friendly, we shall extend to him all the patronage and good offices in our power, and shall establish a store in his new settlement; and particularly if we find him endeavoring to reform the morality of the Indians, and encourage them in industry and peace, we shall do what we can to render his influence as extensive as possible. I had been in hopes that a change in the British ministry would have produced a revocation of the orders of council, which called for our embargo, and an European peace, so as to have removed all danger of our being dragged into the war. But our advices to the 14th of March show they still retained a good majority in Parliament. Should they continue in office, our peace will continue uncertain. Accept my salutations, and assurances of great esteem and respect.
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
April 30, 1808.
Case of the Fleusburg
Our laws permit a foreigner to hold any property in our country, except lands. A foreigner may contract for a ship to be built for him, so that she will be his from the time of laying the keel; or he may contract so as that she shall be his only when launched, or when rigged, &c. The act of delivery to him or his agents fixes, in that case, the moment when she becomes his property. If the Fleusburg was delivered to the agent of the Danish merchant, by such an act of delivery as by our laws will transfer personal property, before the 22d of December, she was then Danish property. The statement says that a bill of building and sale, dated December 10th, proved her to be then Danish property. If the collector shall find that she was actually Danish property before December 22d, I should think her entitled as a foreign vessel. I suppose she did not take out an American register. This would be corroborative proof that, though built in America, she was not meant to be, nor ever became, an American bottom; for I presume the register is what completes the American bottom. The matter of fact should be proved to the collector.
Rhode Island Packets
The pretension that the navigation from Newport to New York is entirely a navigation of rivers, bays, and sounds, would take from language all kind of certainty. There is not one point of the coast of Rhode Island, from which a perpendicular line does not lead into the main ocean. A very small proportion of these would lead across Block Island. But to say that Block Island covers the whole coast from Martha's Vineyard to Long Island, so as to make it a Sound, is too gross for any one who casts his eyes on the maps. The difference of regulation, too, between bay-craft and coasting vessels, since the act of April 25th, is very inconsiderable.
TO GENERAL DEARBORNE
April 29, 1808.
Thomas Jefferson will thank General Dearborne to consider the enclosed. The writer appears to have that sincere enthusiasm for his undertaking which will ensure success. The education of the common people around Detroit is a most desirable object, and the proposition of extending their views to the teaching the Indian boys and girls to read and write, agriculture and mechanic trades to the former, spinning and weaving to the latter, may perhaps be acceded to by us advantageously for the Indians, and the bounties paid for them be an aid to the other objects of the institution. Affectionate salutations.
