TO ELBRIDGE GERRY.

Philadelphia, 15 December, 1798. DEAR SIR, I have received your favor of 24th of November. I sent your letter to me, of the 20th of October, from Quincy to the Secretary of State, and requested him to publish it. He has returned it to me, and declines publishing it. I return it to you inclosed, as I think it will be attended with no good effect, if I should publish it. You will judge for yourself whether it is necessary for you to publish it. My opinion and advice and request are that you would not, because things stand at this time well enough. But the publication of that letter may involve controversies that had better remain at rest.

Although I am well satisfied that your conduct was upright and well intended, yet I find that General Marshall has left with Colonel Pickering his journal from day to day, and your conduct, as there represented, will be very unpopular, in several points. Your separate and secret conferences with Talleyrand, your advocating a stipulation for a loan to be paid after the war, will do no good to you or to the public. Pinckney and Marshall will attest to the correctness of the journal, and will be believed. Indeed, I do not know that there is any thing in it that you would deny.

At least, I wish you to wait until you see the communications I shall make to Congress. I hope all will be still and calm; I should hate to have any dispute excited about what is past.

My compliments to Mrs. Gerry and the little family, and believe me as ever your friend and servant.

JOHN ADAMS.

то WILLIAM S. SMITH.

Philadelphia, 19 December, 1798.

DEAR SIR, Before you receive this, you will probably receive a letter from the Secretary of War, informing you that the general officers have proposed either you or Mr. Hammond to be a Lieutenant-Colonel commandant. This event has embarrassed I know not what to do. I know not whether the Senate

me.

will not negative the nomination, if I make it, nor whether you will accept the appointment, if they should advise and consent to it.

Upon this occasion I must be plain with you. Your pride and ostentation, which I myself have seen with inexpressible grief for many years, have excited among your neighbors so much envy and resentment, that, if they have to allege against you any instance of dishonorable and dishonest conduct, as it is pretended they have, you may depend upon it, it will never be forgiven or forgotten. He whose vanity has been indulged and displayed to the humiliation and mortification of others, may depend on meeting their revenge whenever they shall find an opportunity for it. They are now taking vengeance on you with a witness.

If I were to nominate you to any thing more than a regiment, according to reports and spirit that prevail, I have no doubt you would be again negatived by the Senate. If I nominate you to a regiment, I still fear it will not pass. It is a great misfortune to the public that the office I hold should be disgraced by a nomination of my son-in-law, which the Senate of the United States think themselves obliged to negative. If the disgrace should be repeated, it will be a serious thing to the public, as well as to me, and you, and our children.

I pray you, then, to write me, without loss of time, whether you wish me to make the nomination, and whether you will accept it, if made and consented to.1

My love to my daughter and Miss Caroline.

1 The publication of this letter is made necessary, in order to explain the course of Mr. Pickering in the case of Colonel Smith. The facts will now be briefly given, with the authorities to sustain every particular.

1. Colonel Smith's military standing throughout the revolutionary war is fully vouched for by General Washington, then Commander-in-chief, and General Lincoln, acting as Secretary of War, in certificates given by them in 1782. See the Diplomatic Correspondence, from 1783 to 1789, vol. v. pp. 372-373. It is also sustained by General Hamilton. Hamilton's Works, vol. v. p. 431. In the organization of the new army, General Washington placed his name on his own list of officers, as the third of four Brigadiers, and one out of three from whom to select an Adjutant-General. Sparks's Washington, vol. xi. p. 264.

2. At the moment when General Washington's list was placed before the President, that is, on the 17th of July, 1798, Mr. Pickering, then acting as Secretary of War, was with him. He heard him decide upon altering it so far as to give Dayton the precedence over Smith as a Brigadier, and to make Smith Adjutant-General. Colonel Smith had served in a similar capacity to the corps of General Lafayette, in 1779. Pickering's Review, &c., p. 145.

JOHN JAY TO JOHN ADAMS.

Albany, 3 January, 1799.

DEAR SIR, I this morning laid before the legislature of this State your answer to their address. For the kind and honorable mention made of me in it, be pleased to accept my warmest acknowledgments. To be thus laudari a viro laudato, and to receive such spontaneous and decided manifestations of sincere

3. Knowing the President's will, through his confidential relation to him, Mr. Pickering went up immediately to the Senate, announced to some of the Senators that such a nomination was about to be sent in, and urged a rejection of it upon grounds stated by himself, and without giving Colonel Smith a chance of a hearing in his defence. Pickering's Review, p. 145.

4. On the 18th of July, being the morning of the day the nominations were sent in, Mr. Pickering wrote a confidential letter to General Hamilton, giving all the particulars of the President's action, and, besides expressing his opposition to Colonel Smith, intimated a wish that all the nominations of Brigadiers might be postponed until the autumn, when "a better arrangement might be made." Hamilton's Works, vol. vi. p. 327.

5. Colonel Pickering, in another letter, ten days later, admitted that the President knew nothing of the charges against Colonel Smith, and affirmed that he was acting upon a totally mistaken estimate of his military talents. Hamilton's Works, vol. vi. p. 330.

Mr. Adams, in writing to his wife on the 31st December, 1798, says; "If Smith has forfeited his honor, I wish some kind friend would have given me the facts and the proof. In such a case I would not nominate him to be a lieutenant. But no such fact or proof has been presented to me."

6. On the 19th of July, the Senate confirmed the entire list of nominations as sent in by the President, excepting that of Colonel Smith, which they rejected on the representations of the President's own cabinet officer, made without his knowledge, and sustained by no evidence. Journal, Executive Proceedings Senate U. S. vol. i. p. 293. Pickering's Review, p. 146.

7. Colonel Pickering, not content with this success, seems to have pursued his hostility to Colonel Smith down to the moment when his name was proposed to the general officers for the commission of Lieutenant-Colonel. He affirms that they declined to recommend him to the President. The fact is, that they reported him as one of two candidates, in case he could clear himself from the charges made against him. Colonel Smith sent his defence. He was thereupon nominated to the Senate by Mr. Adams, very unwillingly, because he thought the place beneath his deserts, and only after having consulted him, through the above letter, with the view of his declining it. The opposition of Colonel Pickering was still carried on, but the Senate this time received Colonel Smith's defence, and they confirmed the nomination without a division. Pickering's Review, p. 148. J. A. to his wife. Ms. 31 Dec. 1798. Journal, Executive Proceedings Senate U. S. vol. i. p. 303.

It is believed that no similar instance of disclosure of and interference with the action of the President, by a cabinet officer in his confidence, has ever occurred under the present form of government. It is due to Mr. Pickering to add that, without appearing to have carefully analyzed the moral objections to his course of proceeding, he expressed serious misgivings at one time about its propriety. See his letter to J. Jay. Hamilton's Works, vol. vi. p. 330.

and cordial esteem and friendship, are events too interesting and pleasing not to excite correspondent emotions.

Our affairs in relation to France are by too many thought to have assumed a less menacing aspect. Such and similar errors are and will be encouraged. When the Directory refused to receive, and ungraciously dismissed General Pinckney, that singular measure, viewed in all its relations, led me to apprehend that the continuance of existing differences, by putting them in capacity to elect war or peace with us, according to future circumstances, was deemed necessary to some of their meditated plans. They must have foreseen that improper conduct towards our minister would impair their interest in the affections of this country; and therefore I conclude that the object for which it was done, must in their opinion have been of more importance than that sacrifice.

I presume that the rejection of our three envoys is imputable to the same motives; and that the unexpected degree of indig nation and irritation which it produced, induced the Directory to endeavor to moderate and restrain our resentments by pacific and delusory professions, in order still to keep things in a state of perplexing uncertainty.

Various circumstances and considerations incline me to think it not improbable that their views of domination comprehend all America, both north and south; and that they wish to place the United States in a situation favorable and auxiliary to those views. Considering the state of Spain and even of Portugal, I ascribe the forbearance of France, in not attempting to conquer and disorganize them, to the obvious difficulty of embracing their American territories, until she shall, by war or by peace, have withdrawn the British fleets from the ocean, and, if possible, have rendered the United States compliant.

From the representations of their agents and partisans in this country, the Directory have doubtless entertained too sanguine expectations; and from the firmness of our government and the general declarations of our people, they may perceive that their calculations have not been accurate. I nevertheless think it probable that they will continue to be in many respects deceived, and that their efforts to deceive and seduce will continue unremitted. While they persist in multiplying difficulties and complaints and aggressions, and in repelling the negotiations

necessary to settle differences amicably, it is impossible that their real designs can be otherwise than hostile.

You are called, my dear Sir, to the government of this nation at a time when our peculiar circumstances and dangers demand the combined efforts of great talents, great fortitude, and great prudence. Your measures have hitherto afforded matter for brilliant pages in our history, and they have inspired a confidence which will greatly facilitate the operation and success of your future ones. With great and sincere respect, esteem, and affectionate regard, &c.

JOHN JAY.

TO T. PICKERING, SECRETARY OF STATE.

15 January, 1799.

The President of the United States requests the Secretary of State to prepare the draught of a project of a treaty and a consular convention, such as in his opinion might at this day be acceded to by the United States, if proposed by France. It is his desire that the Secretary of State would avail himself of the advice and assistance of all the heads of department in the formation of this composition, to be completed as soon as the pressure of other business of more immediate necessity will permit. The necessity of inviolable confidence will be obvious.1

T. PICKERING, SECRETARY OF STATE, TO JOHN ADAMS.

(Private.)

18 January, 1799.

SIR, On examining the alterations you have directed in the report on Mr. Gerry's communications, one appears to me to

1 This is dated more than a month before the nomination of Mr. Murray. It followed the refusal to cut off, in the message to Congress, all further opening for negotiation, as proposed by the cabinet in November preceding; and the letter of the 20th October, before that, suggesting the names of individuals who might in certain contingencies be nominated to negotiate. See page 609. Yet the cabinet officers professed complete surprise when Mr. Murray was nominated! The truth is, that the struggle of the three cabinet officers had been all the while, by every means, to prevent that act, and their disappointment at the failure, through the steadiness of Mr. Adams, was in proportion.