A letter to George Washington, president of the United States: containing strictures on his address of the seventeenth of September, 1796, notifying his relinquishment of the presidential office. / By Jasper Dwight, of Vermont.

A LETTER TO GEORGE WASHINGTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, &c.

SIR!

THE cause of Civil Liberty owes you much, and your country still more; hitherto you have been considered as the man whom posterity should hold up as an example to every people de∣termined to be free.

Since the days of Columbus no man has appeared in a more conspicuous and dignified character—glory collected round you, and, for a while, like the sun in the centre of the universe, you influenced and attracted the admiration of mankind.

To what causes must I attribute the alteration that has already taken place, in the sentiments of the world concerning you?

Had the French revolution commenced ten years later, or you retired to the shades of Mount Vernon four years ago, the friends of public virtue would still proudly boast of one great man free from the breath of public dispraise, and your fondly partial country, forbearing to enquire whether or not you were chargable with private aberrations, would vaunt in you the possession of the phenix.

But it is to be feared that the temper of your mind has been mistaken by all but those who, uniting evil with ambitious dispositions, prevailed over your judgment to the prejudice of your reputation.

This is the tender opinion of men warmly attached to you: but it is also alleged that the world has hastily estimated your character from imperfect materials, and your address of the 17th of September is pro∣duced as an evidence of the fact, and as a phenome∣non in the political world even at this eventful era.

That production has excited the most opposite emotions: on one side astonishment and affliction—on the other exultation and gladness: those of the latter temper uniformly consist of the avowed ene∣mies of equal Liberty, the decided friends of mo∣narchy, the open advocates of privileged and distinct classes, but what above all should render such joy suspicious to you, is, that none are more loud than that numerous body among us, who, after embrewing their patricidal hands in the blood of our parents, relatives, and friends, were yet admitted in the ge∣nerous moment of our victory to a participation of that freedom which they had laboured to destroy, and upon equal terms with those who achieved it!—When all these, and these only rejoice and extol your address to the skies, I need not say who mourn in silence and shame!

You are not insensible of that estimation in which you have been hitherto held by foreign nations, nor of the celebrity you were likely to obtain in history,

neither have you been indifferent to fame; you know better than any other man the just extent of your claims to the affections of your country, and you cannot be insensible how full the measure of gra∣titude has been with which you have been constantly repaid.

It is among the amiable errors of our nature, and already appears a too prominent feature in the cha∣racter of our countrymen, to carry the generous sense of gratitude for great services, and admiration of splendid actions, into the extremes of confidence and devotion—to prostrate reason at the altar of blind and undiscriminating affections, and to sacrifice or forsake principles at the instigations of zeal; thus it is that men, suffering veneration to mislead their judgment, learn to sanctify frailties and vices.

This temper so innocent in its source, all history proves to have been most dangerous to the happiness of nations; the influence of power in corrupting the human heart, is universally acknowleged; how few of those who possess it are there, that can learn to doubt the wisdom of their own measures, or to com∣pute for themselves upon rules which they proscribe for the adoption of mankind; in vain do we cherish in remembrance the magnaninity that called Cin∣cinnatus from the plough, if we forget the cause and manner of his departure from Rome.

That you have lost some share of your glorious celebrity is not to be denied, but lamented;—and as different passions prevail various causes will be as∣signed for this extrordinary decadence:—it is a sub∣ject in which your country is most seriously interested, since it may ultimately influence her degeneracy or Freedom.

You know that the obligations which bind the citizen to his country perish at the moment he ceases to be free;—you know that as all men are equally interested in that Freedom, so perpetual watchfulness

is equally the duty of every individual, in the hour wherein he conceives there is danger:—the afflicti∣ons of nations are laid in remote causes, it is a mat∣ter of opinion until it begins to operate, he who thinks he perceives the germ of a plague is bound to explore it, that men may be aware of their danger.

Your address in my mind is fraught with incalcu∣lable evils to your country!—

It affords a most serious lesson indeed to the people of America, and to every other nation who may yet have to adopt a model in realizing their Liberties.

Yet I must acknowledge it painful—it is difficult to discuss your sentiments while the affections would fain palliate and commute the failings of age, and the errors of a virtuous man perhaps deceived, for substantial blessings and benefits secured under better auspices.

But Truth and Liberty, which are not the crea∣tures of a day or a generation, will not sanction that weakness akin to vice, which would throw a veil over the errors even of the most perfect of mankind; justice however calls upon me to declare, that by me and every true American, your course of public con∣duct has always been viewed with the tenderest par∣tiality; too young to have personally shared in the hazards and glories of the revolution, I am not yet so young as not to have partaken of its cares and anx∣ieties, and of that dear and durable sympathy which is the concommitant of an interest in great perils and great achievements. In the lisping lessons of infan∣cy and in the ardency of youth, we learned from the amiable praises of our mothers to lean fondly on your name; and the stranger who flies from the bondage and oppression of Europe, hourly hears in the prevailing themes of domestic discourse and the lessons we teach our children, how closely the affec∣tions of America cling around you. Yes! Sir; Truth unconstrained but always just must place you

in an exalted rank among the great men whom histo∣ry celebrates for the imitation of posterity: But Truth disowns a homage to your errors.

In paying a fair and honest tribute of acknowleg∣ment to your private and public virtues, extensive in no common degree, you will perceive that I know the nature of the ground upon which I stand, while I venture from retirement, and without the sanction of a name, to question your measures, and to display with bold but candid freedom what I see or think I see therein—of an alarming and pernicious tendency; to examine and display sentiments of yours, which I deem inconsistent with yourself, incompatible with the professed sincerity of your character, and repug¦nant to the purest maxims of liberality, wisdom, and morals.

Deeply impressed with these feelings, on the first perusal of your address, I determined to await the return of calmer emotions, till surprize and appre∣hension should abate: cool reflection and mature de∣liberation have strengthened the first impressions; I resolved to await the public determination, expect∣ing to hear opinion flowing from ignorant but honest affection, or hastening on the wings of servility or party adulation, from all quarters of the Union;—but the period is arrived when your address has com∣pleted the tour of the States — I stop to mark the awful and emphatic silence! — Excepting the mer∣cenary and inane cant of booksellers, and the solita∣ry voice of those who "venture to approach you!" from Shepherds-town, a dismal sullen silence prevails! even the the public papers conspicuous for their abject and humiliating praise, or on the other side for freedom and licenteousness, have alike maintained the same surprizing and suspicious forbearance!

Certainly there must have been some potent cause to produce from such discordant assimilations one uni∣form and continued silence — has it not forced a

sigh from from your bosom, and told your unwilling apprehensions there is something wrong!

Would to God you had obeyed the internal moni∣tor that prompted your too wavering sense to speak that faithful but ineffectual truth,—"Here perhaps I ought to stop!"* 1.1: the sincere effusions of tenderness, untinged by party colouring and irritation, would be treasured up for ever and transferred without guile to our children, whose morning orisons should be,

unceasing vows to heaven to continue the choicest tokens of beneficence,

which you wished us

in the free constitution the work of your hands—that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue—that in fine the happiness of the people in those states, under the auspices of LIBERTY may be complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Had you stopped there, partiality would have strove to bury, at least in some degree the remem∣brance of certain truths out of respect to you;—but the subsequent pages of your address demand the examination which is the purpose of this letter: I at first proposed to convey my remarks to you in a private manner; but considering the foundation of the evil effects which I apprehend from your address, as already laid, I have judged it more proper to lay them before the people who are alone essenti∣ally concerned.

You are so strongly fixed in the affections of the greater part of my fellow citizens, and not without great right, except in that dangerous extreme which leads to imbibing the effects of your prejudices as the results of wisdom, that I can expect to find but a minority willing to examine dispassionately the

observations which I offer: nevertheless, it would ill become me on such an occasion to shrink from the sense of duty — since my opinions, if erroneous, are open to refutation, and can do you no injury; but in expressing them I shall speak with the frankness of a Freeman, I shall not couch my sentiments under a treacherous garb of words susceptible of a double interpretation —a conduct that would ill become any man in a just cause, but particularly in his own cause or that of the public.

Your address, exclusive of that excellent intro∣duction composing the first six pages, where you ought to have stopped, principally consists of three branches, generally connected, but requiring for perspicuity's sake a distinct examination.

• 1 What relates to the permanency and indivisibi∣lity of the Union.
• 2 On Party, Civil Liberty, and Religion.
• 3 The best policy with regard to foreign nations.

On the first of these heads you testify to the ar∣dency of the national affection for Freedom, and justly consider the unity of the government as a main pillar of our independence—of our internal tranquillity and external security—of our peace and prosperity—and of that Liberty we so highly prize; but from that point to the conclusion, there prevails a spirit of ambiguity and recrimination, blended with maxims good and evil, that are at variance with each other and that magnanimity and openness which would bespeak conscious virtue and become the true friend of Freedom; — which should never be for∣saken by the moral man and the hero of a free nation when dictating lessens professedly for the advantage of his fellow citizens, and calculated to make a strong and lasting impression"—"to moderate the fury of party rage"—"to warn against the mischief of foreign intrigues"—and "to guard against the impostures of pretended Patriot∣ism!"

It is fit in this place to call to remembrance, that during the early part of your public life, candor has been the avowed rule of your public and private con∣duct, and it is from that engaging quality above all others you have derived the unlimitted confidence of your country and the respect of other nations; not so much from being conspicuous in you, but because duplicity and reserve, self-sufficiency and secrecy, have been heretofore the cloaks which covered the wily mischiefs of politicians in all the governments of the old world.

Within the last four years, at a period which is as∣certainable, but needing now no particular discussion since it will live in history, you departed from that precious rule, and the procedure and language of old politicians and politics have pervaded all your mea∣sures since. I shall barely notice one transaction, since that alone is a sufficient evidence of the conduct to which I allude, and affords an example that should be a constant warning to Freemen how they repose extensive power in the hands of any indivi∣dual, however dignified by his services or patriotism, for any considerable length of time: I mean your refusal to grant to the just wishes of the people's repre∣sentatives, to the joint wishes of hoth houses, a perusal of papers concerning the people's own affairs, and for whom you should not have forgot you were but a responsible agent. I am aware, that under the fatal forms of state secrecy, privilege of office, or powers as∣sumed to belong to the presidential character, which in fact are neither more nor less than the worst en∣graftments from Machiavelian policy, and the actual essence of monarchical prerogative; this conduct is affected to be justified, but by such frail disguises and foul advisers you have been betrayed to withhold the correspondence on the British Treaty, —to treat your country as an enemy, whom you wished to overcome by stratagem, and like a skilful general

in the career of success, dictated conditions which degraded the subjugated by leaving them the shew of deliberation without the means to deliberate, — when the conditions of surrender were already irre∣vocable! But from that fatal moment, when you listened to the seductions of your deadliest enemies, in opposition to the voice of Freedom which hates disguise, the brightness of your countenance is said to have faded, the glory that shone round you dis∣solved in mist, and like our first parents, you have borne about you the visible evidences of internal regret, and the perturbations of virtue struggling between pride and conscious error; from that unhap∣py hour the enemies of Liberty and your Country called you their own, and the name of WASHINGTON sunk from the elevated rank of the SOLONS and LYCURGUSES to the insignificance of a Venetian Doge or a Dutch Stadtholder!

On that baleful day, the boasted candor, the dig∣nified openness, the communicative disinterestedness of patriotism, became more than equivocal, and the clouds of suspicion hovered round you; American politics became discoloured with the jaundiced hue of despotism and cabinet cunning, and the world was brought once more to look upon the constant declaration of your most vociferous panegyrists, that "pure republicanism is a fiction," as a fatal truth, and the American States but as one more of those ma∣chines calculated for management of a capricious or weak individual; the popular representation from that period lost is respectability, and was degraded into the character of an old French Parliament, kept only for the mere ceremony of receiving implicitly and registering without the toleration of enquiry the edicts which the sovereign wills.

But a more fatal effect results from this measure, in the precedent held out to your successors, whose ambition may not be circumscribed by age or the

want of heirs, nor by the yet vigorous hatred which subsists upon experience against the evils of despo∣tism: earnestly as you warn your country against the dangers to be apprehended from despotism through faction, you in this instance left a breach, at which ambition may enter with trifold force and facility, where entrenched behind the authority of your exam∣ple, and aided by pliant instruments in public situati∣ons (which it is feared our country already affords) they may machinate treaties and maintain correspon∣dences, which in their consequences may produce all the calamity in which weak or wicked ambitious men can involve a notion.

Great labor is visible in the construction of your language!—I have not been an inattentive or a light observer of the concerns of my country, yet I find it not easy to fix upon the description of men to whom you allude in that sentence— * 1.2

it is easy to foresee that from different quarters pains will be taken, and artifices employed to weaken in our minds the conviction, that union is the bond of our safety;

and again

frowning upon the first dawn of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest.

There have been instances in which the speculati∣ons of philosophy have glanced at the future divisi∣on of America into a variety of states, M. Linguet and the Abbe Raynal assumed to predict such an event ere yet we became an independent nation.

Great Britain has in her system of colonization and policy, speculated upon those speculations, and trans∣fused the spirit into her colonial arrangments in Canada; Dorchester and Simcoe acted upon it; and the British ministers and senate have argued upon the desirableness and practicability of dividing the Uni∣ted States into distinct governments and interests, to

be regulated by climate, situation, the natural lines of population, productions, manners, and religions, and all the genera of theoretic circumstance; but in these consists the difficulty which prevents my mind from fixing upon the persons or party from whose ef∣forts you apprehend those dangers to the Union; for when I compare the conduct you displayed on the subjects of British politics and connections, with these lively warnings, I cannot bring myself to believe that you could implicate that party in the dangers you deprecate; and what still distracts my judgment in endeavouring to discover to whom you allude, are the strange and striking circumstances, that the persons among ourselves who are loudest in declara∣tions of attachment to our country, are yet the con∣stant and faithful inmates and advocates of British men and measures, are those who attempted openly and argumentively to recommend, and as it were prove, the necessity and utility of dividing the United States into two republics, to consist of the New-En∣gland states North and Eastward, and the other of all the Southern states; but it is not this effort of theirs, nor their incessant clamour in favour of all things British and against all things French, that dis∣tracts and leaves my opinion unsettled, but that per∣sons very closely in your confidence, openly profess and defend these attachments; that this party com∣pose your most ardent eulogists; that they are like∣wise the constant and no less ardent eulogists of privi∣leged orders, the advocates of an established Church, and the eulogists of a British form of government—Bristish maxims in morals as well as politics are with them the standard of human perfection, of which they do not hesitate to declare you to be a living ex∣ample formed upon a superior model.

I cannot therefore consistently conclude that this party with whom you stand so high, and who have partaken it must be confessed very largely of your pri∣vate

regards for three years past, could have been the objects of your warnings, however pointedly and circumstantially the description may be applied to them.

There remains indeed the shadow of a surmise yet to notice; persons in the western countries it has been said, expressed in the moment when they deemed themselves aggrieved, the idea of separation, to es∣cape oppression—a most memorable occasion! should they be indeed the serious objects upon which you affect alarm, the veil of ambiguity is no longer impe∣netrable, and it remains only to be asked how their circumstances and population justify the fear? Who are their foreign neighbors? What advantage could they derive in effecting such a purpose? And what motive could be sufficiently strong to urge them to such a measure?

These questions require no diffusive reasonings no deep research,—that their population is inadequate to support independence—their resources incompe∣tent to their wants in such a situation, the plain under∣standing of the plainest man could determine; but you say

be deaf to such as would sever you from your brethren and connect you with aliens,

—these aliens must be their neighbours, of whom we have reason to be jealous? The British are their only neighbours, beside the Indians and Spaniards, from both of whom freemen have little to apprehend; the British then remain; and that the description ap∣plies to them alone, is fairly inferable from the expe∣rience we have had on numberless occasions, but par∣ticularly in their conduct while they kept possession of the western posts; near which, neither towns nor habitations were suffered to be erected, the fertile earth was interdicted from culture, and even the erection of a solitary hut was rigidly obstructed and forbidden; settlers were not only seduced by gifts of lands and various other temptations, but forced by

open violence to migrate from the American side of the boundary and settle on that of the British.

But is there no latent motive in this warning? has the system of excise, that hot-bed of patronage, in∣fluence, corruption, and oppression, yet met any jus∣tification other than the western expedition?—or has that expedition met any justification, but in the fortu∣nate but unexpected consequence of its overturning the sanguine expectations of those whose ambition built prospects most fruitful to their fell purposes upon the establishment of an army of mercenaries, an establishment which you in the genuine language of truth declare to be

always inauspicious to Li∣berty, but particularly to Republican Liberty?

The second head is irksome to discuss, because not to do it without reserve would be to desert the most sacred principles of truth and justice, which should never give way to the warmest personal attachments. The foundation of Civil Liberty and the obligations of allegiance to governments founded on the repre∣sentative basis, require no new elucidation at this pe∣riod of time, notwithstanding the efforts of your vio∣lent adulators, to disparage the cause of Liberty by attempting under the cloak of literary dictatorship to persuade unlettered men, that our constitution is not a democracy; fortunately for mankind the topic is be∣come a vulgar one, within the compass of every man that can read his bible and understand common sense, your solicitude to promulge new lights, however, would be commendable, considering that the occasion was an interesting one, and likely to carry with it an effect commensurate with the magnitude of your influence on the public mind at the moment, had you adhered to the earnest enforcement of principles upon their own merits, or even pointed out the con∣sequences of indifference or neglect, of a slavish or sielent disregard for their use or abuse; if a rigid ad∣herence to such conduct were on any occasion pru∣dent

and necessary, on this more than any occasion was it called for; and in proportion to your depar∣ture from that candid and magnanimous line of con∣duct, so must your true friends have cause to regret, the friends of Liberty to deplore; and feeling that you have done so to a most alarming extent, the sacred sentiment of duty obliges me to point out wherein you have violated your own principles, by making your address the vehicle of personal resent∣ment, the indirect defence of weak and unjustifiable measures; where you have urged dogmas repugnant to free government, subversive of the right of private judgment, and calculated to injure and impede the progress of morals and the happiness of mankind.

Serious and afflicting are these truths, verified by numerous passages in your address, upon which I shall remark as I proceed.

"The base of our political systems is" you say,

the right of the people to make and alter their constitutions of government;

it is not because this important principle displays the absurdity or treachery of those professed friends of yours who never cease railing at democracy, that I quote it; but because the declaration of principles is too often the cloak for their violation; in every country from the decline of Roman Freedom to that of Poland, Sweden, and England,—from Augustus to George III. the profession of love has been accompanied by the sacrifice of Liberty! and there can be little doubt that some of those tyrants blinded by selfish passions imagined that their most fatal measures were founded in wisdom and consistent with freedom: but neither the principles of free governments nor the allegiance due to them is the less sacred for their abuse, the dan∣ger proceeds from obscuring the bounds, or leaving them exposed to the inroads of treachery.

In this point of view the foregoing truth standing alone is unassailable, but connected with the fol∣lowing

unqualified illustration, is fraught with all that mischief to which bad men can convert the maxims of great authority; you say

But the constitution which at any time exists, till exchanged by an ex∣plicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sa∣credly obligatory upon all.

You indeed justly add,

the very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government, presuppposes the duty of every individual to obey the establish∣ed government.

From the general truth of these principles no friend of the federal constitution can dissent; but if applied to a particular case, and cer∣tain doctrines daily broached threaten to realize it, would render them unsafe and destructive, unless connected with other principles, marking the limits of official power, and shewing where aggression on the part of the constituted authorities would render disobedience the first of patriotic duties; I will sup∣pose that the administration becomes insensibly com∣posed of men devoted to monarchical government, ("and though the period may never arrive it should not yet be kept out of sight!") that by artful con∣structions, bold assumptions, or open and powerful hostility, they either alter the form by specious in∣novations, or a direct perversion of the principles of the constitution; what then would be the duty of the patriot citizen? How would the loose doctrine you lay down apply—of obedience to any constitution that might hereafter exist! Strange but affecting truth, that power long possessed perverts the judgment, else we should not have received so many admoni∣tions against the people, and so little on the dangers to be apprehended from that source whence tyranny has crept in all ages!

But it is evident that in this part of your address you were governed by feelings very separate from those of dipassionate and benevolent patriotism; this regard for the constitution, altho I doubt not of your

attachment to it, appears awkward when engaged in stimulating one side and depressing the other, and still condemning party; the cause of truth should never be debased into the instrument of resentment, and your judgment must have been under the domi∣nion of a most domineering prejudice when you pro∣nounced an anathema against all combination and as∣sociation, because a few popular societies of your countrymen dared to assert their own opinions in oppo∣sition to yours—because they differed from you on a question which every day's experience since, and which every sober consideration now, and every probability in the future course of human affairs, tend to display your error and their propriety.

In this mixture of jealousy resentment and mista∣ken pride, you forgot that it is to association, to se∣cret meetings, to the secrecy of great and just opini∣ons, the United States owe this day the blessings of Independence; you forgot that whatever may have been the pernicious consequences of some associations in all parts of the world, that still the sum of good has been greater than the evil; you forgot that it is the indifference of a people towards their governors, and the measures they pursue, enables tyranny always to obtain an establishment on the ruins of freedom, you overlooked that part of the natural character of mankind, which requires the indispensible activity of his mind to the preservation of his freedom; but strangely, in the present progression of science and opinion, while you acknowledge the inherent dispo∣sition you flie in the face of God and nature and con∣demn both the author and the work. You never considered, that in commercial cities the deliterious poison of avarice has always been found destructive of Liberty, that connected with this fatal poison there is the great and weighty power of the British mer∣cantile interest, circulating like foul blood through all parts of the states, infecting our habits, dictating

to our manners, insinuating itself into our Senate, and pervading every branch of our public offices; in denouncing the few but masculine efforts of a little club, scarcely of sufficient consequence at any other time to excite ordinary notice, you have attempted to overwhelm every motive and disposition to free and enlightened association, and labored with a most affecting perplexity to polish the sting of your ven∣geance so as strike a very humble object home but sure.

It is the boast of Englishmen, Sir, that you enter∣tain a decided partiality for their nation; until the perpetration of the British Treaty, no man would believe you capable of such truly Christian forgive∣ness; they observe, with the peculiar sneer of mali∣cious exultation, that the sentiments as well as the phraseology of your official productions, have sud∣denly swelled from their former simplicity into servile imitations of the pompous verbiage of the British administration; this was indeed disputed, but in the EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES of hatred of Clubs, it is impossible not to discern the course of your studies; and although you have not had equal reason to hate, nor as just motives as the British minister to fear the petty vengeance of petty clubs, yet your principles go as far, and your sympathy of sentiment falls no∣thing short of Mr. Pitt, on that subject.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, ALL combinations and associations under whatever plausible character, with REAL DESIGN to di∣rect, control, counteract, or overawe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted autho∣rities, are destructive to this fundamental principle

that is of the allegiance of the people to the consti∣tution at any time established; But who, sir, are to be the judges of this REAL DESIGN? Is the construc∣tion of men's intentions to be committed to agents of the powers that be, and designs presumed without

regard to the forms of crimination prescribed by the constitution? These doctrines bear a most ob∣stinate resemblance of the meausures and language of the British ministry a year ago! You continue, they serve to organize faction, to give it an ar∣tificial force, to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, of a small but enterprizing minority; and according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of illconcerted and in congruous projects of faction, rather than the consistent and wholesome plans, digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests."

This picture professedly theoretical and prospect∣tive, presents the real and melancholy retrospect of those fatal combinations under which that asto∣nishing measure, the British Treaty, was laboured into existence: to no other event can it be com∣pared, to no other transaction in our history does it so pointedly apply!—But, (observing, en passant, that the "delegated will of the nation," was con∣temned and deemed either unfit, incapable, or un∣worthy of previous counsel or subsequent delibera∣tion on the subject of the treaty!) in what degree does the force of this vindictive declaration attach as a pretext for restraining or fettering the opinions of the citizens of the United States? or for curbing the natural disposition to association, and the free declaration of private judgment, on measures in which they are every one individually as much as you concerned? Are men to remain silent until called upon by their governmental agents? Who are they that the constitution appoints to restrain private deliberation, and mark the line beyond which freedom becomes sedition? Where is the law that forbids the exercise of opinion, and re∣strains the conscience from its honesty? Or are we

henceforward to consider, in defiance of all expe∣rience, — disinterestedness, wisdom, and virtue, as inherent in the possessors of national power and trust? Are the peaceable republican citizens of free America, the men who achieved the blessings we enjoy, to relinquish social communion, and remain quiescent spectators of the open activity of a party the most odious and insolent that ever disgraced a free society—to see their cities thronged with Bri∣tish emissaries—the deadly enemies of their inde∣pendence—the oppressors of their trade, the pirates and executioners of their fellow-citizens—courted, cherished, and still insulting us in our very streets, mocking our tameness, and revileing us for our imbecility?— Must Americans, I say, become so base as to bend the neck in silence to the creatures of their will, while those deadly enemies openly triumph over our persons, trade, and politics, and daringly declare our retrogression to those evils we shook off when we became free? Shall this organ∣ized faction, with the secret gold of Britain at their command, subsist, and the plain American whose only hope and glory is Freedom in perpetuity, must be silent! Good God! and are such the doctrines offered by George Washington to his country!

You are lost, Sir, in the treacherous mazes of passion; you have given way to the jealousy of ir∣ritated feelings, before reflection could soften the violence of your choler; what avails it that you admit that such combinations and associations may now and then answer popular ends, when you add

they are likely in the course of time and things to become potent engines, by which unprincipled and ambitious men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and usurp the govern∣ment:

mystery and equivocation are unworthy of you, as the resentments and precepts which they are employed upon; for until men are filled with

that perfection which you say is not in their nature, the period or occasion when association may be salu∣tary must be left to the opinion of every free citi∣zen; would you leave association to the discretion of men in power? then is your great name and our freedom disgraced! There may be a crisis in our government, as we see in others, when corruption on one side, and ministerial perfidy on the other, will render it the duty of every virtuous citizen to associate—and who then shall mark the line which seperates grievance from justice! In a social view, we have too little of community in the industrious branches of society, we borrow too largely of the boorish inhospitability produced by enormous taxa∣tion in England, and of the selfishness produced by misery and tyranny in Germany; among the idle and opulent, and in the official branches of society we assume all the empty vanity, and more of the inso∣lence than becomes us of the former nation; in our legal abuses and state policy it is the same; I have already noticed that parts of their politics have been adopted by yourself-particularly the secrecy con∣stantly and tenaciously asserted to be an essential part of administration, and which indirectly asserts the government to possess the only wisdom of the nation, that the people are not fit to know their own affairs, or judge how they are administered, or that the nation is a dependant creature on the govern∣ment.

Your professions it is true are in many respects the same as those of the most ardent lover of equal Liberty; your admonition against changes, and the diversitude of hypothesis, and injunctions to adhere by the present government until experience has proved or disapproved its wisdom, are equally ratio∣nal; but how far experience has already discovered blemishes in it, the principle of secrecy and sanctity in public transactions, the conduct and quantum of

duty performed by our Senate and Vice-President, the adequacy of the Senate now, and at a future time, when the population shall have been greatly encreased; and in relation to the comparative po∣pulation of each state severally; the abuses in the remote branches of the Post-office, all under our present constitution, I pretend not now to deter∣mine; the power already vested in the office of Pre∣sident, particularly what has been construed con∣cerning treaties, and considering the use to which you applied them, and the construction which has been assumed from analogy with monarchial go∣vernments, in my mind demand public regard; my fellow-citizens at large no doubt will consider them in proper time and place.

But without dwelling upon these, I cannot but remark one feature of your morality, and which in its full extent governs your politics, it is founded on a maxim which perhaps more than any other has tended to perpetuate the miseries of society and degrade and enslave mankind; the basis of tyranny temporal and spiritual, is the alleged innate depra∣vity of man; if there is that innate depravity, (which, however the long unhappy construction of society and the prejudices of ages may appear to sanctify it, a close observation of man, and the sentiments of the greatest moralists disprove,) then indeed may your position, that the spirit of party is unfortunate and fraught with more than the dan∣gers you describe, be maintained; but it still re∣mains to be proved that God created man naturally wicked, or that the inherent predominant dipositi∣on to evil is really implanted in us, since if the pre∣dominant passions of man should be found to be no other than the love of our kind, of participation, and the desire of sharing the blessings which he pos∣sesses in society; contradistinguished from corrupt despotism which maintains exclusive power in one

or a few at the expence of the rest, then the spirit of party must be the same as the spirit of resistance to oppression, the spirit of philanthropy, the spirit of benevolence, of humanity; then indeed the name and odium of party does not belong so appro∣priately to any class of men as those who possess and with to engross all the power and advantages of society, to the exclusion of the governed:—shal∣low and inert must be those faculties which can dis∣cern in the spirit of party that has been displayed in the French Revolution, nothing but the evil, rejecting in the estimate all the oppression overcome and the good that has been obtained and is to sol∣low; or that would rather place to the opprobrium of party all the destruction, persecution, and crimes sent forth, and let loose among that already afflict∣ed and oppressed people; which see in the clubs of France all the distortions of guilt, but close up the judgment upon the diabolical spirit of the party of despots—the party of the British King and Ca∣binet—the party that partitioned Poland, and had lotted out France, and who would have effected its dismemberment, had not the immortal party of Freedom, rose above their oppression, and stung by the groans of ages, united its omnipotent force, and released that nation from their rapacious talons, and in that great effort, rescued America from the cer∣tainty of another struggle for her Liberty,—and considering how formidable in point of number the avowed monarchists and British partisans are, from the possibility of being subjugated and once more redu∣ced to the low condition of a province to that insa∣tiable maw of political rapacity the kingdom of Britain.

The alternate domination of faction is, you say, itself a frightful despotism," and you add,

that the disorders of faction gradually incline men to seek PROSPERITY and repose in the absolute power of an individual!!!

Lamentable must be the condition of human in∣tellect in the United States, if such is the mode of argument necessarily employed to deter men from reflection—Good God! SECURITY and REPOSE and in the absolute power of an individual! From what history is this example drawn, or from what age? have we sunk back into the iron barbarity of antient times, or are the citizens of America in danger of being as much besotted as the English, when they recalled the most abandoned and profli∣gate of men, Charles II. to perpetuate that mon∣strous breed of oppression, an unprincipled heredit∣ary nobility, an intolerant timeserving hierarchy, passive obedience, non-resistance, licentious guards, wars, funding systems, excise, standing armies, and senatorial corruptions—have we trod back the steps of ages into feudal times, and lost all sense of the rights of individual freedom and private property, are we plunging again to the condition of Lords, Vassals, and Villains?— Is the human character capable of approximating the persection of Liberty, and stupidly relinquishing its blessings; while the rest of mankind are rousing from their torpor, ex∣panding their arms and striding to that point of improvement where freedom will be the acknow∣leged right and possession of all! In what indivi∣dual has an oppressed people ever found more than a momentary refuge?—Is it to a Frederic or a George III. a people not mad would fly for pro∣tection or commisseration? Ye citizens of the once free Dantzic—ye gallant but betrayed Poles—ye hardy Scots, degraded by an iron union—generous but contaminated Irish—ye innoce Hindoos—ye hapless Africans—deluded French Emigrants—and ye supremely afflicted objects of royal individual commisseration LA FAYETTE and your faithful wife and offspring, bear witness to the safety and security that nations and men find in great and am∣bitious individuals!

But what is the powerful incentive to warnings so significant, why

without looking forward to such an extremity, ought it not yet be kept out of sight!

—and for what end?

to discourage and restrain party;

—where and what are the mischiefs that call for these restrictions?

It serves always to distract public counsels, and enfeeble public administration; to agitate ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles animosity and foments riot and insurrection; opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself thro the channel of party passions, and subjects the policy of one country to the policy and will of another.

In this short paragraph you have discharged the loathings of a sick mind; you have collected the aggravating recollections of wounded pride, and warmed to the inveteracy of hatred, discharged the whole burthen of your blazing spirit at the ob∣ject of your personal dislike, under the form of advice to your beloved country!

O God! that you had stopped to weigh the re∣sults of prudence in cool reflection—that you had shunned the ungracious track of indirect aspersion —that you had conquered the remembrance of Mr. Randolph's Vindication—or balanced the secrets which he had manfully kept undisclosed, against that part of your conduct which you compelled him to discover!

But let me examine the principles of this illfated charge against party, independent of their personal guile.

Does party always distract public counsels—en∣feeble the administrations—agitate ill-founded jea∣lousies and false alarms?

This charge, however it might have applied to the particular fact of the struggle between those

who wished respectively to see the French and En∣glish interests favored by unequivocal demonstrati∣ons of our regard and attachment; will not certain∣ly bear out the declaration that such will always be its effects; neither is it true that illfounded jealou∣sies and alarms are the invariable consequences of popular associations, although it is too frequently the effect of combinations among external enemies and a governmental party; in the ever memora∣ble and let me add deplorable occasion above men∣tioned, what was the conduct of the members of your own administration, and what was that of the popular party?

The latter, influenced in no ordinary degree by your repeatedly avowed affection and regard for the French nation, by your attachment to her generals and remembrance of the services which they had rendered us in securing our Independence at a critical and more early period and with a less expence of our own blood; influenced still more by the virtuous cause for which she was then fighting, and in a degree still more strong and energetic by the sense of the wrongs which the combined pow∣ers were inflicting on that nation, and not a little by the sentiment that France was strunggling against the very power that had sought to enslave us, and whose bloody progress is still pictured in the minds of our citizens, in the ruins that still call to painful remembrance the deep inflictions ot British feroci∣ty; the popular associations were decidedly in favor of that oppressed people, the sympathy of suffering virtue and magnanimity called for their warmest affections—our cause was the same—we must be worse than monsters of brutality not to pray for their success, not to glory in their triumphs!—how did the popular societies act on this occasion? they openly and like honest and free men, declared

their opinions in the face of their country and all the world—perfidy itself cannot charge them with more?

It is true indeed, they have been charged with stirring up the passions of the citizens to an equally explicit expression of their sentiments—what! was the love of Liberty the hatred of Tyranny, confi∣ned to the bosoms of a few popular societies only, among all the citizens of the United States; and were the citizens at large so devoid of philanthropy and of every sympathetic sentiment, as not to be able to judge in so plain a case? Away with such detestable delusion, such mockery of virtue, such perversion of truth and free opinion.

But what was the conduct of the only party, which in truth existed, and drew forth that fermentation and alarm that really distracted the national counsels and disgraced its character?

It is not necessary to insist on the precision of dates where facts are notorious; a short time prior to the agitation of the British Treaty, it should not be forgotten, that the British Cabinet had issued a secret order to their cruisers to seize all American vessels which they should meet bound for France, that some hundreds of them were actually seized before the existence of such an order was known to our government, that the same period produced the denunciation against the republican form of govern∣ment; it should likewise be well remembered that, at that period the French were reduced to a predi∣cament wherein an accumulation of internal cala∣mities and an unexampled combination of external force appeared, in the opinion of weak men, ready to overwhelm that people and sink them in the scale of nations for ever; the mode of her partition had already been formally agreed upon and guaranteed, and England eternally babbling on the balance of pow∣er and her faith in treaties—surrendered these max∣ims

of state and her faith plighted to Poland, as a solemn testimonial in the face of the world, of the sincerity of her hatred against any government of the republican form!

At this hour of fatal influence, and reproachful to our character as a free nation, when destruction seemed to let fall her hand on France—when Po∣land was already sacrificed—and Britain bloated with the rank insolence of riches, the fruit of her Eastern spoils, as she is wont to be at the com∣mencement of all her wars, and blindly confident of the speedy annihilation of the only nation that curbed her lust of universal domination, that ene∣my already staggering at her feet; at this period in contempt of the experience of an hundred wars against the several powers of Europe, the British government formed the design of profiting by the naked and defenceless state of America, from the involvement of France, and rendering our strength which she had lost by tyranny, subversive to her am∣bition by the double means of threats and craft—a remembrance of the conduct of British ships on our coast, and British agents in our ports and streets, and the clamourous threats of was or con∣cession which reverberated in our ears on every side, will be sufficient to mark the measures and cha∣racter of the party that prevailed at that time;—those who think the subject worth a scrutiny, will be able to determine what share British emissaries took in it, how faithful the Tories and Refugees proved to their old principles and old friends, and whether or not that party was

a small but enter∣prizing minority,

or the great body of friends to order, civilized government, and religion!

The seizure of our shipping, the sale of our car∣goes, the detention of our seamen, the ruin of our trade, after some time attracted the attention of our executive—(and here it is but equitable to ask

What would have been the conduct of Britain on experiencing such aggressions?)—a private remon∣strance was made, and the answer returned was to this effect, you may have a Treaty! And for this gracious condescension the embargo was taken off!

How far the vain cry of war influenced you, sir, is not necessary to enquire, since the effect com∣pletely answered all the calculations of the British party; since that party boasted then of possessing the car of the greater number of those who enjoyed your confidence, but as has subsequently appeared, who wholly engrossed your counsels and led your judgment in silken bondage.

The British Treaty has been already discussed, but a great part of its improvidence and disregard of our national trade and honor remains yet unex∣posed; it requires a separate exposure; at no re∣mote period it is plain to see, that public exigencies will drag it forth under public odium and exe∣cration.

That treaty was the price of your fears and of the Western posts—and the sacrifice of our relations with France was the return for the repeal of the British order of council, but without the effect of releasing us from the obloquy of British violence and barbarity at sea.

I shall not break open the seal of cabinet secrecy, to unravel the mystery of the proclamation of the 22nd. April 1793—time will commit that tale to history, when you shall be no more and my name forgotten—then history will develope the intrigues which dictated and directed the declaration and de∣reliction of the modern law of nations.

Such were the effects of party, but of what party? They fully illustrate your doctrine, but they de∣mand aloud of the people to reflect much, to com∣municate with each other often, and forbear slum∣bering away in faithless confidence, those liberties

which can only be endangered by weak or wicked men employed in the administration of their public affairs.

I have but a few remarks farther to make on par∣ty, and shall then proceed to examine those parts of your address which relate to foreign policy.

Your examples of party influence are uniformly drawn from occasions wherein your personal opini∣ons, your pride and passions, have been involved; in no particular more strikingly is this discoverable than in your advice concerning the powers of the constitution.

"The spirit of encroachment" you say

tends to consolidate the powers of all departments in one, and thus create, whatever the form of go∣vernment, a real despotism.

This sentence is a palpable allusion to the proceedings in the house of Representatives on the subject of the treaty, and thus again, Sir, under the garb of advice to the people you disguise an attack on the Representatives and an attempt to defend your own secrecy and ob∣stinacy; when I consider this conduct and the in∣stances to which I have already alluded, and as you direct me, form an

estimate of that love of power and pronenses to abuse it, predominant in the human heart;

and I take into that estimate your refusal of the just and proper demand of the Houses for the correspondence on the treaty, then Sir, I cannot but confess the truth of your postula∣tum —and I bless God!—I bless God, Sir, not on your account nor my own, but on that of my coun∣try and my children's freedom, who in leaving you without the blessing of heirs, and making you with such a disposition, the powerful instrument in the hands of providence, for securing our inde∣pendence, has released us from the danger which we might else apprehend, thro that love you have gained in the honest and confiding hearts of our

countrymen, from reverting again to the odious and detestable condition of subjects —and carrying into effect those maxims which appear to be the re∣sult of a close knowledge of your own disposition.

I forbear remarking on other points of blen∣ded truth and ambiguity; but I cannot suffer the spirit of party rancour under the mask of religion to overturn and annihilate the gratitude which this nation owes to that great man THOMAS PAINE, it is not for me to defend his writings on the subject of revelation; but however much I may disallow the arguments he has produced against it, I am content that those whose province it is to stu∣dy and search the scriptures, have been alive to their faith, answered his call, and satisfied the conscien∣ces of all who doubted; but then if I do not ap∣prove of his belief, must I necessarily condemn him? alas! what is belief if it is not free!—what must be∣come of the Jew, the savage, the Mahometan, the Idolator, upon all of whom the sun shines equally, whom the same heat warms and the same cold chills, must I allow no virtue, no right of opinion on mat∣ters which divide and have divided all mankind in all periods and times, upon which even we ourselves are split into countless sects, and have in the course of every one of our own lives, who have dared to step beyond the threshold of education and to reflect on our being, been perhaps equally or more scepti∣cal than he; but you say "volumes would not trace "all the connections of religion with private and public happiness"—granted, and this also is my opinion, but then does he speak sincerely or as a hypocrite? or are we to close up the doors of dis∣cussion against him, who desires every man only to think for himself, and to disregard his opinions where he gives no reasons for them; to reject them, if in our own opinions they are not right; who loves God, and has proved his charity towards

all men;—but there is I fear, and the fear is now becoming general, a design to erect a national church among us, if such should be your view in attacking the well earned fame of Thomas Paine, God forgive you! I trust to no spiritual inquisitor; nor expect "the kingdom of Christ upon earth;" how far religion should be national, would require a voluminous and separate discussion, constitutionally it cannot be ours; on the subject of oaths which are so shockingly multiplied every where, there are many of the best moralists divided in opinion, and whatever the bounded wisdom of Judge Rush, Mr. Swift, and yourself may suggest, we see in the conduct of that great body of virtuous men, the Quakers, how unnecessary are oaths in the orderly regulation of society; while in the Custom-house perjuries, and those of men in office and men professing Christianity of all descriptions, most powerful ar∣guments against their efficacy. I have said more on this delicate topic than I proposed, but I can∣not with justice to the cause of Liberty which PAINE has well served, and the cause of truth which I a∣dore above every partial consideration, forbear to remark that an attack on that great assertor of Free∣dom, comes from you with particular ungracious∣ness, and I cannot but openly apply to you the same charge which you unnecessarily and impru∣dently lay against him.

In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labour to subvert the great pillars of human happiness, (religion and morality) the firmest props of the duties of men and citizens:" without attempting a comment on the distinction which you have made in accusing him of attempting to overturtrn both, I think it enough to remark, that you made it; but there is another particular in which the defence of religi∣on, but especially the Christian religion, appears very

awkward in your hands:—Would to God! you had retired to a private station four years ago, while your public conduct threw a veil of sanctity round you, which you have yourself rashly broken down, you fame would have been safe, your country with∣out reproach, and I should not have the mortifiying task of pointing out the blind temerity with which you come forward to defend the religion of Christ, who exist in the violation of its most sacred obligations, of the dearest ties of humanity, and in defiance of the soverign calls of morality and liberty—by dealing in HUMAN SLAVES!—aggravated too by the sad reflections, that neither necessity, self preservation, the want of fortune, nor the desire of transferring riches to your descendants, could be urged even as plausible or worldly motives in extenuation, but on the contrary, when your property, ample for the gratification of the most extravagant desires—would would call loudly upon you to release your species from their unchristian bondage and ignorance, were it but to present an example of disinterestedness—of that virtue—that morality—of the sincerity of your love of liberty—of benevolence—of charity—of the love of God and the most benign religion, to you country, which you declare to be the main springs of every government,

the great pillars of human happiness, and the firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.

Having already exceeded the bounds which I proposed, for this part of my letter, and having yet to offer some observations on the remaining subject of foreign relations, and a few concluding remarks, I shall omit what I purposed saying concerning taxation and finance, upon which there is ample room for pointed animadversion.

In what I have said concerning party, I noticed the origin of the Treaty with Britain, and the de∣fenceless situation in which we then stood, from

the distressed condition of France; it has been as∣serted, I know not with what degree of truth, that Britain gave the United States the alternative of a treaty or a war; upon a surmise it is not neces∣sary to argue, further than the weight that is ex∣pected to be derived from the wisdom which is pre∣sumed to have secured peace in such a dilemma; but if peace was secured upon that occasion upon such conditions, we certainly should not have been left ignorant of a fact so necessary for our future guid∣ance, and for the regulation of the national judg∣ment concerning the conduct of our public agents and allies. Whatever may have stimulated you to the execution of such a treaty, it is evident the ad∣vice you have here offered to your fellow citizens, with regard to foreign connexions, conveys a tacit condemnation of that measure, while it displays an attempt to defend your conduct, though deviating from the policy you recommend; your aim clearly is to bring over the nation to an unsettled and trimming policy, in order to cover your own error: but in this, as in former cases, your mode of de∣fence applies against you, and while you call up every effort of which you are capable to obliterate the gratitude and attachment due to France and the cause she is engaged in, you only persuade us with tenfold effect how conscious you are of the faithless sacrifices which have been made to Britain.

After recommending the total forgetfulness of those just and crying antipathies which the bloody scenes of Esopus, Paoli, and the North River, must ever awake in the breasts of feeling men, but which to attempt smothering while George III. is King of England, Alexander Wedderburne the keeper of his conscience, Cornwallis his privy counsellor, one Arnold his friend, and Sir Charles Grey his favourite, is such a folly as no experience could hope for, nor any thing but desparation suggest, to the present

and the rising generation; could you hope for the exclusion of the most honorable and endeared of the moral virtues from our hearts, or that we could take to our bosoms those who butchered our fathers and brothers in cold blood, who dishonored our daughters and sisters, who marked their paths thro our country by pillage, massacre, fire, and desola∣tion, and in the same moment banish from our minds and affections those who, in the crisis of our fate, by a powerful interposition, rescued us from the continuity of such honors, secured to us our freedom, and to whom many of us now owe the existence we enjoy?—He must be a sturdy moralist whose nature can bend to such regards for justice!

The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave.

This, Sir, is a new mode of reasoning batred of slavery into love of oppressors! Suppose this new political sophism were generalized, and by reducing it to the stan∣dard of common sense, rendered intelligible;—in this way then it will stand thus—Virtue and Vice distinguish nations in various degrees, a ha∣bitual fondess of the vices of a nation renders you in some degree a slave to those vices, but if a nation is conspicuous for virtues, a habitual love for those virtue, is not to be called slavery, because virtue and slavery cannot exist together. I venture to say, Sir, this applicatian of your dogma is strictly in point, and it the moral regard of nations should not go counter to those of individuals, that there can exist no difficulty when we ask, from what nation are we in most danger of infection by their vices? It will be granted, that it is not to the animal we become attached, but the qualities which distinguish nations as much as persons from each other, the wisdom, science, talents, magnanimity, generosity, disinterestedness, and sacred devotion to Liberty,—the question of love or hatred of nations then be∣comes

a question of morals, and our first enquiry will be what is the form and character of their Government?—When any one accuses the British Government, and convicts it of one Virtue, it will be then time enough to urge a comparison.

But tho I pass over some expressions calculated to warp the judgment and insinuate away the opi∣nions of men, there is one truth which Freemen should never suffer to be absent from their minds—THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM IS THE CAUSE OF MANKIND! Applying it to the single cause of France, and supposing her subjugated and dissect∣ed—"blotted from the map of Europe;"—the re∣publican form of government would then remain to undergo the same operation, the petty oligarchies of Italy and the then feeble remains of Batavian re∣publicanism would scarcely demand the force of a single member of the despotic confederation to an∣nihilate them, and could we then expect to remain exempted from the universal proscription? Let any man turn a moment's earnest reflection on what must be our condition if France had been extinguished! Could we expect a magnanimous forbearance from England? From whom then could we expect suc∣cour? Surely not from the partitioners of Poland! But it will be said, we have already proved ourselves invincible to the power of Britain: Alas! precarious would be that Liberty which were to be placed on the risk of such a contest! When we fought for our Freedom all the world was with us; France fought for us; we had her navy to protect us, her valorous generals to direct us; we had not the experience and consequent terrors of a savage and assassinating war, and of the treachery that put the poignard in the hand of our ext door neighbors, nor the know∣lege which we now possess, that nearly one half of our fellow-citizens are decided partizans of the British and their form of government, a considerable por∣tion of the friends of Liberty become so totally ab∣sorbed

in worldly pursuits and confident of security, that danger at their doors can scarcely rouse them—In such a situation, what could the band of firm re∣publicans do but die nobly, and leave their posterity at the merciless mercy of their conquerors! That we have not tasted of this bitter cup is not the effect of your measures, every step displayed the weakness that would invite domination. But thanks to the better genius of France, that in baffling despotism secured to us peace and Freedom so long as we shall be worthy of it! Looking to the future situation of Europe, how are we to appreciate your maxims? If France should conclude a peace at the close of the present campaign, what would be our situation with regard to that nation? In what manner could we jus∣tify our uniform conduct toward her, our public de∣clarations of admiration and attachment, our secret desertion and treachery? Are we to propose accom∣modation by a renewal or a complete dereliction of the disregarded treaty—are we to throw ourselves into the arms of Britain—are we (as they exclaim who supported the British Treaty to avoid war!) to go to war with France? No other path lies open but that of concession, and that task you leave to your successor in office!

But let us look beyond these unpleasant limits, and considering what France is—what she promises to be, ask wherein consists the prudence or wisdom of your maxims? After ten years of peace, under a republican government, with the finest and best situ∣ated country in the universe, the most numerous and enlightened body of philosophers that any nation ever possessed, the most numerous, intelligent, active, disinterested, and brave people the world has ever known; with these advantages, seeing what Colbert effected under circumstances so much inferior, what will such a country have to covet from us or to fear from all the powers of the earth and sea!

But it has been urged by trimming politicians, that as England now holds the dominion of the sea, we owe it to ourselves to cultivate peace with her, since her trade employs our shipping, and her manufac∣tures engross three-fifths of our internal traffic— by this mode of argument it is, that the recommen∣dation of adherence to the faith of Treaties, and a steady assertion of national independence and neutra∣lity, have been made odious by avarice and faction. and bellowed forth only as the treacherous whoop prelusive of war.

Such were the proceedings and such the mode of argument, that justified and effectuated the British alliance; I will not stop to remark minutely how powerfully all the arguments against the attachment to France might be employed against that with Bri∣tain, it will be enough to state the general circum∣stances of each; the government of Britain is a sub∣ject deserving the decided abhorrence of every moral man; that of France is representative like our own; the perfidious policy of the former will constantly endanger us, if not ultimately involve us with one or other of the European powers whom she hates or fears; in a commercial view she will be necessarily dependant on us, for out staples and the consumption of her fabrics, which we can procure cheaper in other countries; France can have nothing to fear from our enmity nor to court from our warmest love, her population and the genius of her people will enable her to undersed all the manufacturers of Europe, and trade will follow cheapness; England on the contrary deriving all her consequence from abroad, and daily sinking under the burden of her ambitious, oppressive, and corrupt government at home, cannot hope for future prosperity or respectability in Europe, only in a Revolution and Republican government (an event that would render your measures perfectly ridiculous) or by wily machinations drawing in America, as

an old Bawd drags her daughter to prostitution, as the only source of support under the weight of turpi∣tude and age. Our detached and distant situation invited and enabled us to pursue the course of im∣partial justice without fear of war from Great Britain or interference in behalf of France; that faith which is pledged by the nice obligations of gratitude, honor, and Liberty should have directed us to this unerring point.

"Why" I repeat after you

forego the advanta∣ges of so particular a situation? Why by inter∣weaving our destiny (again with England who would enslave us) entangle our peace and prospe∣rity in the toils of (British) ambition, rivalship, interest, humour, or caprice?

In the trembling anxiety of your apprehensions you betray a solicitude for the exculpation of your past conduct, that speaks more than the most minute examination of your sentiments; having mentioned the British treaty with applause, you recollect in the sequel that you have deprecated foreign alliances: you therefore find it necessary to create the distincti∣on between commercial and political alliances, as if the former were not to all intents and purposes of the latter description, when the privileges of a fa∣vored nation are sacrificed on one side, and insult and oppression submitted to on the other; but fearful that even this should be insufficient you further warn us against

permanent alliances, so far I mean as we are now at liberty to do it, for let me not be under∣as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing en∣gagements.

This extrordinary advice is fully ex∣emplified in your departure from the spirit and prin∣ciple of the treaty with France, which was declared to be permanent, and exhibits this very infidelity you reprobate in a most striking and lamentable light.

In forming the treaty with Britain, one of two modes of conduct was pursued, equally regardless of subsisting obligations; there was either a relinquish∣ment

or sacrifice of particular conditions secured by treaty to France, or a neglect or disregard of the justice which was due to that contract; or in other words we have derived the most signal advantages from the assistance of France particularly in the cap∣ture of Cornwallis, that obligation has never been repaid,—our treaty with France from this cause and from the attachment of the philosophical characters of the French nation through whose powerful influ∣ence we acquired the alliance, and by whose advice in conjunction with our own philosophical agents, the treaty was formed,—was it not considered as a great step towards the amelioration of the laws of nations, and which we have adopted in every treaty we have entered into since excepting that with Bri∣tain? national consistency, therefore, as well as the impressive principles of generosity and justice should have bound us on that particular occasion to have regarded principles primarily established by our own example.

There was still another circumstance of particular delicacy in negociating the British treaty, which a Republic jealous of her reputation, as the most vir∣ruous woman, should not have neglected;—that the negociation was commenced and concluded during the existence of a war between the most favored nati∣on in alliance with America, and the former enemy of America, then at war with the most favored nati∣on; under all these circumstances it should appear to be a most indispensible obligation on America not to accede to any conditions proposed by Britain incom∣patible with those already enjoyed by France—or at least if America granted all that France enjoyed, to grant no more.

Whether the question on neutral bottoms was ever discussed or not, is a matter not now to be exa∣mined, but speaking in the spirit of charitable for∣bearance, the ignorance, or indifference, or imbecili∣ty,

of our ambassador on that occasion, surpassed every thing of the kind in the annals of diplomatic affairs, and placed our national faith in the same rank with that of ancient Carthage.

Having freely discussed the leading points of your address, there still remains a considerable share, which might be employed in corroborating with great force the general charge of deviation in the lat∣ter part of your administration from the spirit and te∣nor of your former professions, and the proper and true interests of your country; wherein your advice for the future is but a defence for the past,—where your warnings against party appear but as the result of party spirit—your lessons upon foreign politics but props for past measures—where you have displayed the consciousness of error—attempted to disguise the acrimony of personal resentment under the sem∣blance of public virtue—vainly displaying morals as the spring of Freedom, and betraying the rash∣ness of resentment, and intolerance of superstition, while exhibiting the most fatal example of your disbelief or contempt of the morality and religion you defend, and that Freedom which they uphold; —but in doing all these you are perfectly consistent with the views, practices, and principles,—nay even with the hatreds of the British party!

The principles that lead men to virtue should be well understood by Freemen, if Freedom is a bless∣ing and Slavery a curse, then whatever conduces to the Freedom of Man is Virtue:—Is the love of Liberty implanted in our nature or not? Your opi∣nions seem to sanction that cherished maxim of des∣potism, that man is naturally depraved; the moral and physical consequencs of such a principle are in∣calculable, but confining the consideration to its effect on freedom, we find that in all despotic Go∣vernments it is the great argument for violence, for sanguinary punishments, for grinding laws; nor can

it be denied, that if God could be so unjust as to create man predominantly prone to depravity, then we should no longer condemn despotic governments because they would be only the necessary result and counterpoise of that vicious constitution.

But if the numerous virtues of which men are in the constant exercise, and which are in perfect unison with the attributes of God, disclaim indignantly the accursed stigma; or that at least innate depravity is a question in morals; your support of such an opin∣ion was at least imprudent, and on an occasion favor∣able to the propagation of any doctrine you might chuse, wears an appearance that I do not wish to countenance; but the love of your country and of morals ought to have prevailed with you at such a time, since you cannot be ignorant that vicious men are ever ready to charge their errors to the sup∣posed step-motherly behests of nature, rather than to their own wilful agency: this selfishness is the parent of many errors, thro' it we disguise to others and accommodate to our own starting consciences, acts of vice and oppression that religion loudly forbids and morals cannot tolerate nor endure.

In attacking Thomas Paine, you acted rashly; an eminent philosophical English bishop has acknow∣ledged that his writings were dictated in sincerity, you do not question that—yet you not only wished to disgrace him for that sincerity, but to deprive him of the title to patriotism which he had justly obtained joined with you in the great contest for Freedom; his doctrines I do not defend, but ere you became his censor (honesty is the best policy,) you should have considered how morality was affected at home!

Religion should be kept apart from politics;— temporal establishments are never bettered by spirit∣ual influence; they have always corrupted each other, and slavery has been the fate of all who have fallen within their united jurisdiction: strange that while

the whole world is divided into numberless religions, and these each into sects, the body is subjected to punishment for the involuntary honesty of the consci∣ence; it is a maxim in literature that truth is never more secure than when exposed to dicussion; it would appear to be the rule most consonant with reason to leave mind unrestrained by the trammels of laws or the egotism and caprice of authority; there ever will be suspicion where there is mystery, and nothing contributes more to strengthen scepticism than the jealousy of believers; besides it is grossly inconsistent with the meek religion of Christ, which prays for all, to usurp dominion over the intellects of men: were we conspicuous over every other religion, which is not the case, or did our lives exhibit examples of our precepts, we might be in some degree excused; but our faith would rank very low indeed if it were to be judged by our works! No one would dispute the right of a man to bestow a thousand dollars of his own property, nor of another to refuse it; is opinion then which tyranny vainly interdicts, proscribed by you? Men who rail at religion, judge by the wickedness practised in its name, or under the hypocritical profession of it, and thence to think it is a delusion fostered by fear, and causing depravity; that if men were extricated from it, virtue would be loved for its own sake, they would become better, and the laws which are necessary notwithstanding the influ∣ence of religion, would then have to do only what is now required of them; such is their way of thinking, and their acting under such impressions is no more objectionable in a rational view, than the efforts of the missionaries to convert the Indians, or your own plans for introducing the arts of civilization among them—the motive of each is the same, and arises from the innate disposition to promote human bappiness, which we never cease to pursue unless biassed by some private prejudice or error of education.

Equally objectionable are your doctrines when you declare

it is not for one nation to expect disinterested favors from another;

this also strikes at the root of morals, and is founded on the baleful examples of the worst governments, and the supposed depravity of man; but altho our conduct towards France too forcibly maintains the affirmative, I cannot admit the maxim to be any other than Machiavelian, disproved by various exam∣ples from history, and in a very forcible manner by France, which, in bestowing something more than what you strangely term nominal favors, and asking of us no sacrifice in return, as she justly might have done, may very fairly reproach us for having given NO MORE THAN "the equivalents of nominal favors!"— for real benefits bestowed.

But, Sir, "in the duty of holding a neutral po∣sition" your country and France herself and the world at large agreed, that it was a justly

predo∣minant motive with you to gain time to our coun∣try to settle and mature its recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that de∣gree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its fortunes;

and these were truly powerful arguments that called upon you for a rigid adhe∣rence to the neutral principle.

But, however willingly every man must allow these obligations and objects to have been binding and wise, I apprehend I have already shewn that you have not adhered to that rigid and neutral jus∣tice which you profess—every concession to Britain in prejudice of France was a deviation from neutra∣lity, and above all, every neglect of justice to our own rights and character as a nation was a de∣parture from the spirit and basis of the neutral principle—for independent of our own disgrace in exhibiting our imbecility at the moment when we

possessed the certain means of preserving our peace and dignity—we were wounding an ally in the crisis of her distress, by confessing our despair of her cause in a pusilanimous indifference for our own commerce and national character; and this con∣duct was the more ignominous on our part, in that the orders of the British government for the sei∣zure of American ships, were issued at the same time, and formed part of the system that declared hostility against the Republican form of government; a declaration which is well known to have glanced at America, and expressed the intentions of Britain when she should obtain that success with the idea of which she was then blindly intoxicated.

That we might have preserved our honor and avoided war, is within the judgment of every man acquainted with the nature of the British trade,—that a non-importation of their manufactures would have done this, is within the compass of proof; and knowing that it was neither the desire nor would it have been the interest of France that we should take a share in the war, so in these vari∣ous respects must we submit to the just censure which belings to our measures, and as your address is but an indirect defence thereof, it must remain with time to develope motives, that can rescue your name from reproach.

Freedom like this, Sir, you have not been used to; against a man so long and deservedly elevated into the first trust of a nation, it is painful to exer∣cise it; there will, however, be found many per∣sons ready to give your words a colour or qualifica∣tion of which they are in some measure susceptible; others more attached to you than the Liberties of their country, will either not discern that departure from your long professed character which I allege, or considering you as the consummation of politi∣cal wisdom and moral perfection, they will hasten

to heap obloquy on him who questions your infalli∣bility; they will find in my comment on your text a new proof of the ingratitude of Republics, while my obscure voice will not be heard in the clamer, tho' I speak in the plainness of truth, that the great error of Republics has been, too much confidence placed in the virtues and talents of individuals, too much faith in their professions, and power confided so long in their hands, that by its exercise the favorite has been deluded into a belief of that perfection artfully attributed to him, and learned to look upon his equals as the creatures of his will.

Posterity will in vain search for the monuments of wisdom in your administration; they will on en∣quiry find one of the most afflictive of political dis∣eases inoculated on the constitution, in the funding system—they will see the excise, a species of taxa∣tion equally odious and incongruous with freedom, giving birth to the first military effort of Freemen against their fellow citizens; a tax founded in the breach of domestic security, and engrafting on the municipal trunk the seeds of civil hate, division, and corruption;—in vain will they seek for traces of establishments or institutions calculated to secure the perpetuity of freedom on the strong basis of education and moral equality;—examining in order to discover the true features of your character, the declarations of your former enemies and present friends will be minutely examined, who assert that your attachment to the revolution was not the result of a love of republican freedom, but of disappoint∣ed ambition,—that had you obtained promotion, as you expected for the services rendered after Brad∣dock's defeat, your sword would have been drawn against your country: comparing these assertions with sad existing facts, they will discover that the great champion of American Freedom, the rival of Timoleon and Cincinnatus, twenty years after the establishment of the Republic, was possessed of

FIVE HUNDRED of the HUMAN SPECIES IN SLAVERY, enjoying the FRUITS OF THEIR LABOUR WITHOUT REMUNERATION, OR EVEN THE CONSOLATIONS OF RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION—that he retained the barbarous usages of the feudal system, and kept men in LIVERY—and that he still affected to be the friend of the Christian Religion, of civil Liberty, and moral equality—and to be withal a disinteresied, virtuous, liberal and unassuming man.

I hen the foreign political incendiary, that feeds upon your praise, and the insiduous native sycophant, who battens on your shame, will have sunk to their congenial home, and the scrutinizing eye of history will try you, as the ancient Egyptians were wont to do with their kings, and determine upon the merits of your life, by laws that spurn alike the meretricious evidence of incense and tinsel.

I have done, Sir, what I deem a duty; you are un∣happily fond of flattery; indirect praise is to you the language of sincerity; the ingenuity without the vehemence of truth, will offend: in present∣ing my opinions, my earnest wish is to expose the PERSONAL IDOLATRY into which we have been heedlessly running—to awaken my country∣men to a sense of our true situation—and to shew them in the fallibility of the most favored of men, the necessity of thinking for themselves.

Should any one blame me for the plain truths here declared, and make any attempt to controvert or explain them away, I shall be governed in any attention I may bestow thereon, by the degree of candor and temper they may display; if I have mistaken a fact, I shall not be backward to acknow∣ledge it, because I have not stated a sentiment but upon conviction of its rectitude—notice of any other kind shall be beneath mine.

JASPER DWIGHT.

12th November, 1796.

Notes

• * 1.1

  President's Address Ormrod's Edition P. 6.
• * 1.2

  P. 6.