Томас Джефферсон
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 5 (of 9)
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY
Monticello, September 16, 1808.
Dear Sir,—You will perceive by the enclosed papers that an aggression has been committed on the Spanish territory by (if I understand the case,) both our land and sea officers. I enclose the papers to you that the necessary orders may be given in your department, and the papers handed on to the War department that the same may be done there. I suppose it will suffice for the present to order the men to be immediately given up, and the officers given to understand that the conduct of those who committed it will become a subject of consideration for the Cabinet on its re-assembling at Washington, and that we will not permit aggressions to be committed on our part, against which we remonstrated to Spain on her part.
I expect to be in Washington on the last day of September, or 1st of October. I salute you with affection and respect.
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
Monticello, September 20, 1808.
Dear Sir,—Yours of September 10th and 14th were received yesterday, and my time being brief, my answer must be so.
Brig Betsey, and the Aurora
The first having put back by stress of weather, and inevitable necessity, ought, I think, to be permitted to sail again; but not to the Aurora, which put back merely because the Captain was a fool. They have lost their chance by their own folly, and have no claim to be excepted out of the general rule. If you concur in these opinions be so good as to act on them; but if you think differently, let them lie till we meet, which will probably be within two or three days after you receive this.
Mr. Soderstrom
His application is peremptorily refused, and his lawyer's opinions are sent to Mr. Madison, that he may be properly reprimanded. For a foreign agent, addressed to the Executive, to embody himself with the lawyers of a faction whose sole object is to embarrass and defeat all the measures of the country, and by their opinions, known to be always in opposition, to endeavor to influence our proceedings is a conduct not to be permitted. The government will certainly decide for itself on whose counsel they will settle the construction of the laws they are to execute. We are to look at the intention of the Legislature, and to carry it into execution while the lawyers are nibbling at the words of the law. It is well known that on every question the lawyers are about equally divided, as is seen in the present case, and were we to act but in cases where no contrary opinion of a lawyer can be had, we should never act. I send White's petition for better information, to be acted on when we meet. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. GALLATIN
October 14, 1808.
As we know that Sullivan's licenses have overstocked the wants of the eastern States with flour, the proposal to carry more there is of itself suspicious, and therefore even regular traders ought not to be allowed. The regular trade was to supply flour for exportation as well as consumption. If the rule of the sixth (or eighth, I believe,) is extended to them, the supply will be kept up sufficiently for consumption. The rule of the sixth is a good one, because if the vessel goes off, the gain will not be more than the loss by forfeiture, which in that case becomes an efficient penalty. If they wish to take more, it furnishes good grounds of suspicion that they mean to pay the forfeitures out of the gains, and to profit by the surplus. I should think it ought to be adhered to, and that the collectors should consider it as a rule to regulate their discretion, and to give equal measure in all our posts to all our citizens.
* * * * * * * *
TO ROBERT L. LIVINGSTON
Washington, October 15, 1808.
Sir,—Your letter of September the 22d waited here for my return, and it is not till now that I have been able to acknowledge it. The explanation of his principles given you by the French Emperor, in conversation, is correct as far as it goes. He does not wish us to go to war with England, knowing we have no ships to carry on that war. To submit to pay to England the tribute on our commerce which she demands by her orders of council, would be to aid her in the war against him, and would give him just ground to declare war with us. He concludes, therefore, as every rational man must, that the embargo, the only remaining alternative, was a wise measure. These are acknowledged principles, and should circumstances arise which may offer advantage to our country in making them public, we shall avail ourselves of them. But as it is not usual nor agreeable to governments to bring their conversations before the public, I think it would be well to consider this on your part as confidential, leaving to the government to retain or make it public, as the general good may require. Had the Emperor gone further, and said that he condemned our vessels going voluntarily into his ports in breach of his municipal laws, we might have admitted it rigorously legal, though not friendly. But his condemnation of vessels taken on the high seas, by his privateers, and carried involuntarily into his ports, is justifiable by no law, is piracy, and this is the wrong we complain of against him.
Supposing that you may be still at Clermont, from whence your letter is dated, I avail myself of this circumstance to request your presenting my friendly respects to Chancellor Livingston. I salute you with esteem and respect.
TO MR. GALLATIN
Washington, October 16, 1808.
* * * * * * * *
Massey's Commission.—A half-sighted lawyer might, perhaps, say that a commission signed with a blank for the name,—afterwards filled up, was a nullity, because, in legal instruments, any change in a material part of a bond, deed, &c., after sealing and delivery, nullifies it. But I am not certain whether there are not cases, even in ordinary transactions at law, where it is otherwise,—e. g., a power of attorney sent to a distance, with a blank for the name, a blank commission, a blank subpœna, &c. But in matters of government, there can be no question but that the commission sealed and signed, with a blank for the name, date, place, &c., is good; because government can in no country be carried on without it. The most vital proceedings of our own government would become null were such a construction to prevail, and the argumentum ab inconvenienti, which is one of the great foundations of the law, will undoubtedly sustain the practice, and sanction it by the maxim "qui facit per alterum, facit per se." I would not therefore give the countenance of the government to so impracticable a construction by issuing a new commission. Affectionate salutations.
TO GEORGE BLAKE, ESQ
Washington, October 17, 1808.
Sir,—However favorably the enclosed papers represent the case of Alexander Frost, yet it would be against every rule of prudence for me to undertake to revise the verdict of a jury on ex parte affidavits and recommendations. If the judges and yourself who were present at the trial think the defendant a proper object of pardon, I shall be ready, on such a recommendation, to issue it. I ask the favor of your information on this subject, and salute you with esteem and respect.
TO MR. GALLATIN
October 18, 1808.
I think that none of the circumstances, preceding the passage of the embargo law, stated by Mr. Lorent, make any part of his case. The misfortunes entering into the preceding history of that property, not flowing from any act of this government, authorizes no claims on it. The embargo law excepted from its own operation articles then laden on board a foreign ship, without distinguishing between articles of foreign or national property. It subjected to its operation all articles, whether foreign or national property, not then laden on board any foreign ship. Mr. Lorent's property was not then laden on board of any foreign ship, is therefore within the words of the law, and as certainly within its purview. It is not one of those cases which, though within the words of the law, were notoriously not within its intention, and are therefore relievable by an equitable exercise of discretionary power. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. SMITH
October 19, 1808.
I enclose you a petition of the widow Bennet for the liberation of her son at Boston, a minor, or for a moiety of three months' pay, to enable her to go to another son. I think when her case was formerly before us, she was said to be a woman of ill fame, and that her son did not wish to return to her. Still, however, the mother, if there be no father, is the natural guardian, and is legally entitled to the custody and the earnings of her son. If she were to make her demand legally for both or either, she would prevail. May it not be for the benefit of the son and of the service, to compromise by paying the sixteen dollars, and taking a regular relinquishment or transfer of her rights to the body of her son, and his earnings in future, so that we may have no more to do with her. This is referred to Mr. Smith's consideration. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. GALLATIN
October 19, 1808.
Is the case proposed by Mr. Wolcott left by the law at the discretion of anybody? The law makes it the duty of the Collector to detain if he suspects an intention to export to a foreign market, à fortiori if that intention be avowed. It is true that the first step proposed is only to go to another district, but declared to be preparatory to an exportation to the West Indies. It is true also that they say they do not mean to export until the law is repealed. But ought we under that cover to facilitate those illegal views which our experience has proved to be so general? Still, if there be any sound ground on which the permission can be given, I would rather make it the subject of consultation with you, than to have the present understood to be a final decision. Affectionate salutations.
TO MR. JAMES MAIN
Washington, October 19, 1808.
Sir,—Your favor of the 10th has been duly received. Certainly I would with great pleasure contribute anything in my power to render the history you propose to write a faithful account of the period it will comprehend. Nothing is so desirable to me, as that after mankind shall have been abused by such gross falsehoods as to events while passing, their minds should at length be set to rights by genuine truth. And I can conscientiously declare that as to myself, I wish that not only no act but no thought of mine should be unknown. But, Sir, my other and more imperious duties put it out of my power. So totally is my time engrossed by the public concerns, that for mere want of time, many of them which I ought to attend to myself, if my time sufficed, I am obliged, for want of it, to refer to others. To withdraw myself from still more of them for any voluntary object would be a failure in duty. If you shall think proper, as you say, to commit to me the perusal of the manuscript before it goes to the press, I shall then probably be in a private station, and master of my own time, and I will carefully examine, and faithfully offer any corrections or supplements which I may think will render it a true representation of events. I salute you with esteem and respect.
TO CAPTAIN GROVE
Washington, October 19, 1808.
Sir,—Your two letters of the 11th inst. have been received, and I am obliged to observe that so wholly do the indispensable duties of my office engross my whole time, that I could not give a deliberate reading to two letters so voluminous as these, and not relating to my particular functions, without withdrawing time from objects having stricter claims on me. I have run over them hastily, and perceive that you are still engaged in the pursuit of the method of finding the longitude at sea by an observation of Jupiter and his satellites, brought to the horizon by a double reflection, as in Hadley's quadrant. That you have written a play to raise funds for prosecuting this, and wish me to circulate a subscription for it and print your letters. I will willingly subscribe myself for a number of copies to help you, but I have never permitted myself to be the circulator of any subscription, or to have agency in printing anything, conceiving it improper in my present office. And however wishful of your success in raising funds, I confess I should think them better applied to the comfort of your family. After so many better opinions it may be superfluous to offer mine. Yet justified by my friendly motives in doing so, I will observe, that to get the longitude at sea by observation of the eclipses of Jupiter's satellites, two desiderata are wanting: 1st, a practicable way of keeping the planet and satellite in the field of a glass magnifying sufficiently to show the satellites; 2d, a time-piece which will give the instant of time with sufficient accuracy to be useful. The bringing the planet and satellite to the horizon does not sensibly facilitate the observation, because the planet in his ascending and descending course is at such heights as admit the direct observation with entire convenience. On the other hand, so much light is lost by the double reflection as to dim the objects and lessen the precision with which the moment of ingress and egress may be marked. This double reflection also introduces a new source of error from the inaccuracy of the instrument; 2d, the desideratum of a time-piece which, notwithstanding the motion of the ship, shall keep time during a whole voyage with sufficient accuracy for these observations, has not yet been supplied. Fine time-keepers have been invented, but not equal to what is requisite, all of them deriving their motion from a spring, and not from a pendulum. Indeed these pursuits have lost much of their consequence since the improvement of the lunar tables has given the motion of the moon so accurately, as to make that a foundation for estimating the longitude by her relative position at a given moment with the sun or fixed stars. Every captain of a ship now understands the method of taking these lunar observations, and of calculating his longitude by them.
I have gone into these details with the most friendly view of dissuading you from wasting time, which you represent as so much needed for your family, in a pursuit which has baffled every human endeavor as yet, and has lost so much of its importance. I return you your letters, because you wish to have them published, and conclude with my best wishes for the success of your endeavors to raise the funds you desire, and for the application of them which shall be best for yourself and your family.
TO MR. GALLATIN
October 21, 1808.
The case of the Martinique Petitioners
I think it wrong to detain foreigners caught here by the embargo; but in permitting them to take our vessels to return in, we do what is a matter of favor, not of right. Of course we can restrict them to a tonnage proportioned to their numbers. In the transport service I believe the allowance is two tons to every person. We may allow a little more room; but there ought to be an end to this, and I think it high time to put an end to it. What would you think of advertising that after a certain day, no American vessel will be permitted to go out for the purpose of carrying persons. Perhaps this should be communicated by the Secretary of State to the foreign ministers.
* * * * * * * *
Fronda states that a proprietor of Amelia Island, in Florida, shipped his crop for a foreign port on board an American vessel. The vessel was taken by the Argus, carried into Savannah, and condemned for a breach of the embargo laws; the cargo pronounced clear. Probably the vessel had left our harbors without a clearance, though that is not stated, nor the cause of her condemnation specified. Permission is asked to send away the cargo. If the Spanish proprietor had no agency in drawing the vessel away contrary to the embargo laws, his employment of her was innocent, and he ought to be permitted to send his cargo out; because for us to take his property and bring it in by force, and against his will, and then to detain it under pretext of an embargo, would be equivalent to piracy or war. A vessel driven involuntarily into a port by weather, or an enemy, with prohibited goods, is always allowed to depart, and even to sell as much of the goods as will make the vessel sea-worthy, if disabled. I do not know, however, that in the present case we are bound to do any more than let one of our vessels be engaged to replace the cargo in Amelia Island, and certainly we ought not to let it go to any distant port; but if the proprietor enticed or engaged the vessel to break the embargo law, he was particeps criminis, and must submit to the loss which he has brought on himself. I send you Fronda's note, which should be returned to Mr. Madison, with information of the order you shall give for inquiring into the facts, and permission or refusal as they shall turn out. Affectionate salutations.
TO THOMAS COOPER, ESQ
Washington, October 27, 1808.
Dear Sir,—When I received your letter of the 16th, I thought I had not a copy of my report on measures, weights, and coins, except one bound up in a volume with other reports; but on carefully searching a bundle of duplicates, I found the one I now enclose you, being the only detached one I possess. It is defective in one article. The report was composed under a severe attack of periodical headache, which came on every day at sunrise, and never left me till sunset. What had been ruminated in the day under a paroxysm of the most excruciating pain, was committed to paper by candlelight, and then the calculations were made. After delivering in the report, it was discovered that in calculating the money unit § 5 page 49, there was a small error in the third or fourth column of decimals, the correction of which however brought the proposed unit still nearer to the established one. I reported the correction in a single leaf to Congress. The copy I send you has not that leaf.
The first question to be decided is between those who are for units of measures, weights, and coins, having, a known relation to something in nature of fixed dimension, and those who are for an arbitrary standard. On this "dice vexata quaestio" it is useless to say a word, every one having made up his mind on a view of all that can be said. Mr. Dorsey was so kind as to send me his pamphlet, by which I found he was for the arbitrary standard of one-third of the standard yard of H. G. of England, supposed to be in the Exchequer of that nation, a fac simile of which was to be procured and lodged in Philadelphia. I confess myself to be of the other sect, and to prefer an unit bearing a given relation to some fixed subject of nature, and of preference to the pendulum, because it may be in the possession of every man, so that he may verify his measures for himself. You will observe that I proposed alternative plans to Congress, that they might take the one or the other, according to the degree of courage they felt. The first is from page 18 to 38; the second from page 39 to 44. Were I now to decide, it would be in favor of the first, with this single addition, that each of the denominations there adopted, should be divisible decimally at the will of every individual. The iron-founder deals in tons; let him take the ton for his unit, and divide it into 10ths, 100ths, and 1000ths. The dry-goods merchant deals in pounds and yards; let him divide them decimally. The land-measurer deals in miles and poles; divide them decimally, only noting over his figures what the unit is, thus:
I have lately had a proof how familiar this division into dimes, cents, and mills, is to the people when transferred from their money to anything else. I have an odometer fixed to my carriage, which gives the distances in miles, dimes, and cents. The people on the road inquire with curiosity what exact distance I have found from such a place to such a place; I answer, so many miles, so many cents. I find they universally and at once form a perfect idea of the relation of the cent to the mile as an unit. They would do the same as to yards of cloth, pounds of shot, ounces of silver, or of medicine. I believe, therefore, they are susceptible of this degree of approximation to a standard rigorously philosophical; beyond this I might doubt. However, on this too every one has an opinion, and I am open to compromise, as I am also to other plans of reformation, of which multitudes have been published. I can conclude, therefore, candidly with the "si quid novisti rectius," &c., and sincerely with assurances of my constant esteem and respect.
