leave unfounded and unconnected many of my observations, and on a very important point.

Mr. Gerry, in his letter of October 1st, has expressed an opinion of most mischievous tendency. He says: "Before the arrival of the despatches of the envoys, the minister appeared to me sincere, and anxious to obtain a reconciliation." This strange opinion, so repugnant to the whole tenor of his own communications, will nevertheless be quoted by the enemies of our country, in France as well as America, in proof of the sincerity of the French government; and lead many to propagate the idea that, but for the imprudent act, as they will call it, of publishing the despatches, a reconciliation might have taken place. Mr. Gerry's opinion, as above expressed, is also a reflec tion on the President, on Congress, and on all who had any agency directly or indirectly in causing that publication, as manifesting a want of prudence and foresight, and hazarding a war between the two countries.

Mr. Gerry's opinion is of so pernicious a tendency, I conceived it to be my duty to combat it and demonstrate that it was unfounded; not by an allusion, but by a direct reference to it. I therefore beg leave to submit this matter once more to your consideration, before the new copy is completed. His feelings and consequence in the community are of no moment in competion with the public interest; and but for the latter, I would gladly keep out of sight every thing indicating any error in his proceedings.

The passage in question I have thus expressed in the report: "5. Because Mr. Gerry, after all the demonstrative proofs of which he was possessed to the contrary, says, in his letter of 1st October, 1798: Before the arrival of the despatches of the envoys, the minister appeared to me sincere, and anxious to obtain a reconciliation.' This very extraordinary opinion is opposed not only by the whole detail of facts exhibited in the despatches of the envoys, but by Mr. Gerry's own correspond

ence."

Several pages then follow, contrasting the evidences of Talleyrand's SINCERITY, before and after the publication of the despatches, and having a direct reference to the passage in question.

The language may perhaps be softened; but the substance

seems to me very important to retain. It might have this form: "5. Because Mr. Gerry, in his letter of 1st October, 1798, has expressed his opinion, that 'before the arrival of the despatches of the envoys the minister appeared to him sincere, and anxious to obtain a reconciliation;' an opinion which a candid examination of the despatches of the envoys and of Mr. Gerry's own correspondence will show to be erroneous."

The President will see that three motives urge me to submit these thoughts to his attention. One, To counteract a mischievous opinion that has no foundation. 2dly. To vindicate his honor and that of Congress from the imputation of rashness or indiscretion in the publication of the despatches, and 3dly, a desire that the Secretary's report may appear connected, and the train of reasoning through several pages have some relation to their proper object.1 I am, &c.

TIMOTHY PICKERING.

RUFUS KING TO JOHN

ADAMS.

London, 26 January, 1799.

DEAR SIR, Some weeks past, I had the pleasure of receiving your letter of the 16th of October; 2 the inclosure was immediately forwarded, though, from the obstructions which interupted the passage to Hamburgh, I fear it was a long time on its way to Berlin.

We are still uncertain what is likely to be the situation of Europe during the approaching summer, and on this topic I can only refer to my despatches to Colonel Pickering. It would be

1 The following indorsement is in Mr. Adams's handwriting; Answered orally, 19th, by refusal to comply.

This

In Colonel Pickering's Review, printed in 1824, he gives what he affirms to be all the corrections made by Mr. Adams in his report. That pointed out in this letter is not among them. As no wilful misstatement was probably intended, the inference is that he examined the revised copy, to which he alludes. is the more likely, as he himself admits that the parts he found "struck out were of much less consequence than at first sight he had supposed." They certainly do not correspond to Mr. Adams's recollections of what they had been, any more than to the tone of his own letter of November 5th, or to his later recollection of Mr. Adams's reply to him at the time, which he has made so emphatic by his mode of printing. "I am not going to send to Congress philippic against Mr. Gerry." See page 616. Pickering's Review, p. 140. 2 See page 606. Also compare the conclusion of this letter with the two letters of 17th and 23d September, 1798, addressed by the same hand to Mr. Hamilton. Hamilton's Works, vol. vi. pp. 356 – 359.

a

hardly decent to express what I think of the weakness, corrup tion, and indecision of most of the continental governments. The aristocracies are as unwise and as base as their princes, and if Europe shall be rescued from the barbarism with which philosophy is about to overwhelm it, it will be effected by the moderation and the virtues of the people, who, in Spain, Italy, and throughout Germany, are less guilty, and more meritorious, than their magistrates and rulers. This is a melancholy prospect, and one that may appall, though it ought not to discourage, the boldest minds. The firmness, courage, and the resources of England, joined to the docility of the people, and to the wonderful ease with which the laws are adapted to the new and dangerous condition of surrounding circumstances, are the highest eulogium of its constitution, afford a rational hope of ultimate security, and confirm what has been so well proved in the best work that has been written upon the intricate subject of government. Amidst this mighty storm, it is my greatest pleasure, and the source of the most gratifying pride, to mark the increasing attention with which Europe continues to observe and to applaud the able and dignified administration of the American government, which, in its open and manly proceedings towards France, has not only done much for its own security, but more for that of Europe than many portions of it have had the courage to do themselves. This homage is involuntary; for everywhere throughout Europe, strong, though ill-founded, prejudices existed against us and our institutions.

With unfeigned respect and attachment, I am, &c.

RUFUS KING.

TO GEORGE WASHINGTON.

Philadelphia, 19 February, 1799.

DEAR SIR, Although I received the honor of your letter of the 1st of this month,' in its season, I determined to postpone my answer to it till I had deliberated on it, and the letter from Barlow, inclosed in it, as well as a multitude of other letters and documents, official and inofficial, which relate to the same subject, and determined what part to act.

I yesterday determined to nominate Mr. Murray to be minis1 See this letter in Sparks's Washington's Writings, vol. xi. p. 398.

ter plenipotentiary to the French republic. This I ventured to do upon the strength of a letter from Talleyrand himself, giving declarations, in the name of his government, that any minister' plenipotentiary from the United States shall be received according to the condition at the close of my message to Congress, of the 21st of June last. As there may be some reserves for chicane, however, Murray is not to remove from his station at the Hague until he shall have received formal assurances that he shall be received and treated in character.

Barlow's letter had, I assure you, very little weight in determining me to this measure. shall make few observations upon it. But, in my opinion, it is not often that we meet with a composition which betrays so many and so unequivocal symptoms of blackness of heart. The wretch has destroyed his own character to such a degree, that I think it would be derogatory to yours to give any answer at all to his letter. Tom Paine is

not a more worthless fellow. The infamous threat which he has debased himself to transmit to his country to intimidate you and your country, "that certain conduct will be followed by war, and that it will be a war of the most terrible and vindictive kind," ought to be answered by a Mohawk. If I had an Indian chief that I could converse with freely, I would ask him what answer he would give to such a gasconade. I fancy he would answer that he would, if they began their cruelties, cut up every Frenchman joint by joint, roast him by a fire, pinch off his flesh with hot pincers, &c. I blush to think that such ideas should be started in this age.'

Tranquillity upon just and honorable terms, is undoubtedly the ardent desire of the friends of this country, and I wish the

1 There is a good deal of partisan harshness in this condemnation. But Mr. Barlow, however sincere his motives, had been very far from judicious in his mode of attempting to bring round a reconciliation between the two countries. He had written to his brother-in-law, Mr. Baldwin, in March, that "the election of Adams produced the order of the 2d of March, which was meant to be little short of a declaration of war," thus making the President responsible for all the losses which took place under that decree, merely because he had been selected by the people, acting in their own legitimate sphere, for the chief executive office. And in a later letter of the 26th July to James Watson, which had been submitted to the President, even in stating the withdrawal by the French government of their most offensive acts, he had urged peace measures, not on their own merits, but under the menace, that “a refusal would be considered as a declaration of war, and it would be a war of the most terrible and vindictive kind." These were not of the class of arguments likely to conciliate Mr. Adams. Wait's State Papers, vol. iv. p. 269. Gibbs's Federal Administrations, vol. ii. p. 112.

VOL. VIII.

53

N 2

babyish and womanly blubbering for peace may not necessitate the conclusion of a treaty that will not be just nor very honorable. I do not intend, however, that they shall. There is no much sincerity in the cant about peace; those who snivel for it now, were hot for war against Britain a few months ago, and would be now, if they saw a chance. In elective governments. peace or war are alike embraced by parties, when they think they can employ either for electioneering purposes.1

With great respect and regard to you and your good lady, and late Miss Custis, I have the honor to be, Sir, &c.

JOHN ADAMS.

HENRY KNOX TO JOHN ADAMS.

(Secret and confidential.)

Boston, 5 March, 1799.

MY DEAR SIR-Although I have often entertained the intention of writing to you, yet as I had nothing more to communicate than assurances of my sincere attachment, and the warm approbation which appeared to possess the best mind of the great majority of the people, I could not bring myself to intrude upon time so precious to your country.

But when your recent nominations to France seem for a moment to have divided, in a degree, the federal opinions, and when sentiments are uttered by some, subversive of the confidence which ought to be placed in our President, I can no longer be silent.

I have no doubt (uninformed as the public are) that their entire reliance on your superior knowledge of the state of Europe, and wisdom to embrace every proper occasion, will be perfectly satisfactory to ninety-nine persons out of a hundred, who are attached to the happiness, glory, and freedom of their country. But the hundredth part, or rather certain persons who have an influence over the mind of that part, and who affect to suggest to, correspond with, and even to influence the conduct of certain characters in the executive departments, loudly fault the measure of the nomination. They say the most confidential

1 At about this same time, Mr. Pickering was transmitting to General Washington information that "the President was suffering the torments of the damned, at the consequences of his nomination." The writer's name is suppressed, but the context reveals it. Gibbs's Memoirs of the Fed. Adm. vol. ii. p. 208.