%f,^- r^''^\...: ^o. ^o. ^■ ,.z-"-*' * \VJ|\ <«■ \' % rA c^"^^^. Wj i Public Opinion in Philadelphia 1789-1801 A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF BRYN MAWR COLLEGE IN PART FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY MARGARET WOODBURY REPRINTED FROM THE SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN HISTORY. VOLUME V. Durham, N. C. The Seeman Printery 1919 f47 Public Opinion in Philadelphia 1789-1801 A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF BRYN MAWR COLLEGE IN PART FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY MARGARET WOODBURY REPRINTED FROM THE SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN HISTORY, VOLUME V. Durham, N. C. The Seeman Printery 1919 CONTENTS PAGE Preface 5 CHAPTER I Newspapers and Editors 7 1. The Existence of a Party Press 7 2. The FederaHst Press 11 3. The Republican Press 20 4. Miscellaneous - 31 CHAPTER H The Financial System 36 1. Nature of the Criticisms 36 2. The Funding of the Public Debt 38 3. The Assumption of State Debts 54 4. The Excise - 57 5. The Bank 60 CHAPTER HI Foreign Relations 64 1. Neutrality - 64 2. The Jay Treaty 82 3. Troubles With France 90 CHAPTER IV Political Parties 97 1. The Origin of Parties 97 2. Constitutional Interpretation 100 3. Political Issues 105 (a) The Seat of Government 106 (b) Democratic Societies and the Whiskey Rebel- lion Ill (c) Titles 120 (d) Election Methods and Political Campaigns 123 Conclusion 130 Biblioraphy 133 PREFACE Since the publication of the first volume of Professor Mc- Master's epoch-making History of the American People, in 1883, the newspaper and the pamphlet have come into their own. They have been made the basis of many books, monographs and articles, the most important perhaps being Mr. Rhodes's clever analysis of public opinion in the United States from 1850 to 1877. In spite of this activity a large part of the field still remains unworked. A thorough analysis of the newspaper and pamphlet literature of the Federalist Period (1789-1801) should throw light upon our political and constitutional development during those important formative years and should also make available some very useful social and economic material. The newspapers and pamphlets of those days were un- doubtedly important factors in shaping public opinion. Their tone was always vigorous and they were either decidedly for or against the measures of the government. Examples of letters which appeared first in newspapers and later as pamphlets, and which exerted a great influence, were the articles of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay in the Federalist, and Hamilton's Camillits letters written in support of the Jay Treaty. Some good ex- amples taken from an earlier period are to be found in Dick- inson's Farmer's Letters and Paine's Common Sense. A series of local studies of this type of literature ought to be useful as a basis for a general history of public opinion which is yet to be written. In such a series, Pennsylvania de- serves special consideration because Philadelphia was the seat of the federal government and the chief center of political in- trigue. The names of four or five Philadelphia editors stand out as particularly important during the period. Philip Fre- neau of the National Gazette, Benjamin Franklin Bache and William Duane of the Aurora were the greatest of the Anti- Federalist editors, while John Fenno of the Gazette of the United States and William Cobbett of Porcupine's Gazette al- ways upheld the policy of the government. These were the newspapers which exerted the most influence and which the leading men of the time used as vehicles for communicating their views to the public. Margaret Woodbury. May 10, 1919. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 CHAPTER I Newspapers and Editors /. The Existence of a Party Press At the close of the eighteenth century, Philadelphia had more newspapers than any other city in the United States. They were, as a rule, well edited, according to the standards which then prevailed, and they compared favorably with the best of their contemporaries in New York, Boston, Baltimore and London. As purveyors of news they were far behind the press of a later date, but they were probably more influential in the field of politics. Even when the editors were known to be political hacks and bound by ties of gratitude to support their party programme, they were important factors in shaping pub- lic opinion. The newspapers of this early period were much smaller than those of the present day, the average size being about four pages of seventeen by twenty-one inches. There was little or no system in the arrangement of the news. Usually the first and last pages were given up to advertisements, such as notices of the sale of real estate and merchandise ; departure and ar- rival of vessels ; notices of runaway slaves ; schedules of stage coaches ; announcements of various educational institutions and of the publication of books and pamphlets. The second and third pages were usually devoted to communications from for- eign sources and to the activities of Congress, together with comments of the editor upon questions of the hour and con- tributions from the subscribers. There was nothing correspond- ing to our present day editorial page. So far as national issues were concerned, there was no dis- tinctly partisan press in Philadelphia until 1791. In the issue of the Aurora for October 23, 1790, the editor comments as fol- lows on the scarcity of news : "As to domestic politics, no party disputes to raise the printer's drooping spirits ; not a legisla- 8 Smith College Studies in History ture sitting to furnish a few columns of debates, not even so much as a piece of private abuse to grace a paper — Zounds, people now have no spirit in them. . . . Now not even an ac- cident, not a duel, not a suicide, not a fire, not a murder, not so much as a single theft worthy of notice. O ! tempora, O ! mores." It is interesting to contrast this article with one which ap- peared in the Gazette of the United States less than two years later. 1 A correspondent relates a conversation which he had with a friend who had traveled extensively in Europe and who made the following observations on the bitter factions now existing in this country, lamenting the way in which the news- papers took part in the quarrels : "Factions are almost harm- less in England — and as our language is the same and our form of government nearly similar, we are apt to conclude that fac- tions will be harmless also in this country. A great many per- sons seem to like the bustle of wrangling parties, and the Prin- ters think their Gazettes insipid and in danger of losing cus- tom, if they refuse to mix a portion of gall with their ink. Accordingly, we see the government bespattered and the heads of departments and members of Congress blackened ; and all the arts of insinuation and deception put in practice to make the people as angry as the writers seem to be. "We are told that the measures of government have done but little good, and that little was not intended — that, however, they have done infinite mischief which zvas intended and is a part of a plan of iniquity contrived by those who administer the ofifices of the government. This evil, they tell us, is still spreading and will be fatal to the property rights and liberty of the many, in order by their plunder to aggrandize the few. That all these consequences are the more to be dreaded and are the more certain, as the country is too extensive to be subject to one free government, and the constitution has not made a proper definition and a due separation of its powers Inflammatory addresses to the passions of men have a tendency 'June 6, 1792. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 9 to create disturbances and convulsions in all countries — but they are pecviliarly alarming in our country from the nature of our government and the temper of our citizens. . . Our gov- ernment is too new and too feeble, and its powers too much divided with the state governments to bear the convulsion of vindictive factions." The following quotation from a pamphlet of 1794 leaves no doubt of the existence of a party press at that time : "I will examine a little further the uses that are made by the faction in promoting their plan through the instrumentality of news- papers and pamphlets. This art is not original ; it has been successfully employed by all the corrupt courts of Europe. I have already mentioned that a new courtly Gazette started up at the commencement of the government. This and others in several principal towns have been industriously employed in proclaiming the praises of the fiscal administration and ascrib- ing all the prosperity the country has experienced from the en- joyment of peace, increased population, industry, and a good government to the revenue system and through that system to the Secretary who originated and the speculating members who support it. . . . "The courtly Gazette and others of the same stamp, sup- ported by the speculators and anonymous pamphlets, were not only employed in publishing eulogies on the secretary and the fiscal measures but also in endeavoring to divert public confi- dence from all those who opposed or censured them. Hence members who disliked the measures were induced to support them from an apprehension that the opposition did not arise from true patriotism but from an anti-federal enmity to the government itself. This impression though its efifect will be but temporary, has been sufficiently lasting to support the min- isterial influence in the House in the second Congress and to render it formidable in the present. "The artful cry of the danger of anti-federalism is gradu- ally ceasing to have its effect. The more the people examine, the more they are convinced that no body of anti-federalists 10 Smith College Studies in History exists in the United States and that no design for overturning the government has been entertained since the commencement of its operation, . . . The monarchical party are the only anti-federaHsts in the United States and by them only the Fed- eral-Republican principles of government are in danger of be- ing overturned." 1 The following extracts from the letters of Washington and Adams constitute a reluctant tribute to the influence of the Re- publican press. "The publications in Freneau's and Bache's pa- pers are outrages on common decency and they progress in that style, in proportion as their pieces are treated with contempt and are passed by in silence, by those at whom they are aimed. The tendency of them, however, is too obvious to be mistaken by men of cool and dispassionate minds and in my opinion, ought to alarm them ; because it is difficult to prescribe bounds to the effect. "2 "Our anti-federal scribblers are so fond of rotation, that they seem disposed to remove their abuse from me to the Presi- dent. Bache's paper, which is nearly as bad as Freneau's, begins to join in concert with it to maul the President for his drawing- rooms, levees, declining to accept of invitations to dinners and tea parties, his birthday odes, visits, compliments, etc. I may be expected to be an advocate for a rotation of objects of abuse and for equality in this particular. I have held the office of libellee- general long enough. The burden of it ought to be participated and equalized according to modern republican principles." ^ "The causes of my retirement are to be found in the writings of Fre- neau, Markoe, Ned Church, Andrew Brown, Paine, Callender, Hamilton, Cobbett and John Ward Fenno and many others, but more especially in the circular letters of members of Congress from the southern and middle states. Without a complete collec- tion of all these libels, no faithful history of the last twenty years ^ "A citizen," A Review of the Revenue System, Letter XIII. Phila- delphia, 1794. ^ Washington to Henry Lee, July 21, 1793, Washington's Writings, vol. XII, pp. 310-311. ^ Adams to Mrs. Adams, January 2, 1794, Adams's Works, vol. I, pp. 460-461. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 11 can ever be written nor any adequate account given of the causes of my retirement from public life."'* Adams had a theory that the hostility of the Aurora to him was largely due to the posthumous influence of Franklin. The follow- ing letter refers to the controversy between Adams and Franklin at the time of the peace negotiation in 1782. "Dr. Franklin's be- havior had been so excessively complaisant to the French ministry and in my opinion had so endangered the essential interests of our country, that I had been frequently obliged to differ from him and sometimes to withstand him to his face ; so that I knew he had conceived an irreconcilable hatred of me and that he had propagated and would continue to propagate prejudices, if noth- ing worse, against me in America from one end of it to the other. Look into Benjamin Franklin Bache's Aurora and Duane's Aurora for twenty years and see whether my expectations have not been verified."^ 2. The Federalist Press Until the establishment of Porcupine's Gazette by Cobbett in 1797, the Gazette of the United States was the leading Federalist organ. Very little is known about the life of John Fenno, the founder of the Gazette. He was born in Boston, Massachusetts, August 12, 1751. He was well educated and for several years was a teacher in the Old South Writing School. The Gazette was started in New York in 1789, and was transferred to Phil- adelphia in October, 1790, when the seat of the government was removed to that city. It was published on Wednesdays and Sat- urdays at 69 Market Street, and the subscription price was three dollars a year. Fenno died in Philadelphia of yellow fever, Sep- tember 14, 1798; and the paper was then published by his nine- teen-year old son, John Ward Fenno, until May, 1800, when it was taken over by the owner, Caleb P. Wayne. ^ ■* Adams to Skelton Jones, March 11, 1809, Adams's Works, vol. IX, p. 612. ^ Adams to Dr. Benjamin Rush, April 12, 1809, Adams's Works, vol. IX, p. 619. °J. T. Scharff and Thompson Westcott, History of Philadelphia, 1884, vol. Ill, pp. 1968-1969. 12 Smith College Studies in History The Fennos were zealous admirers of Hamilton, and always supported his political views as well as his financial and foreign policies. In fact, their paper came to be regarded as Hamilton's official organ, and the charge was freely made that it received a subsidy from the treasury department. The aristocratic tone of the Gazette was especially obnoxious to Jefferson and Madison ; and, as we shall see later, it was largely through their efforts that Philip Freneau was induced to establish the National Gazette as a counterbalancing influence. In Jefferson's correspondence we find frequent references to Fenno and his paper. A few copies of Paine's Rights of Man, the famous answer to Burke's Reflections on the French Revolu- tion, arrived in Philadelphia about the beginning of May, 1791. On the 8th of May, Jefferson wrote to Washington as follows: "Paine's answer to Burke's pamphlet begins to produce some squibs in our public papers. In Fenno's paper they are Burkites, in the others Painites."'^ In a letter to William Short, written July 28, 1791, Jefferson also says: "Paine's pamphlet has been published and read with general applause here. It was attacked by a writer under the name of Publicola, and defended by a host of republican volunteers. None of the defenders are known. I have desired Mr. Remsen to make up a complete collection of these pieces from Bache's papers, the tory-paper of Fenno rarely admitting anything which defends the present form of govern- ment in opposition to his desire of subverting it to make way for a king, lords and commons."^ Jefferson's disapproval of Fenno was likewise expressed in a letter to Thomas Mann Ran- dolph : "I inclose you Bache's as well as Fenno's papers. You will have perceived that the latter is a paper of pure Toryism, disseminating the doctrines of monarchy, aristocracy and the exclusion of the influence of the people."^ Fenno's Gazette and Porcupine's Gazette both supported 'Jefiferson to Washington, May 8, 1791, Jefferson's Writings, vol. V, p. 328. 'Itjid., p. 361. " May 15, 1791, Ibid., p. ZZ6. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 13 Hamilton in his feud with Adams during the settlement of the troubles with France. Writing in defence of his peace policy, Adams says : "A great clamor was raised among the members of the House of Representatives, and out of doors, and an abund- ance of squibs, scoffs and sarcasm, in what were then called the federal newspapers, particularly Cobbett's Porcupine and John Ward Fenno's United States Gazette.^^ Porcupine's Gazette first appeared March 4, 1797. Its editor was William Cobbett who always signed himself "Peter Porcu- pine." On September 6, 1799, the paper was changed from a daily to a weekly and continued at Bustleton, Pennsylvania, be- cause of the yellow fever in Philadelphia. The Country Porcu- pine was a tri-weekly mailing edition of Porcupine's Gazette, which contained all the news matter but omitted the advertise- ments in order to save postage. In a communication to the public, soon after its establishment, the editor says : "I wish my paper to be the rallying point for the friends of government." He went on to say that the subscribers already numbered 1,000 and that some hundreds of names had not yet reached the publisher, and that the paper had more subscribers at Baltimore, New York, and other towns of note, than any other two papers published in Philadelphia. Cobbett's chief object in conducting the paper apparently was to carry on a propaganda in favor of Great Britain. Incidentally he supported the domestic programme of the federal government, or at least that part of it with which Hamilton was most closely associated. As the influence of the Gazette of the United States declined, after the death of John Fenno, September 14, 1798, Porcupine's Gazette became for a time the leading Federalist paper in Philadelphia. The pacific attitude of President Adams toward France, however, aroused the hostility of Cobbett ; and accordingly Noah Webster's Nezv York Minerva became the official organ of the administration. Cobbett's life has already been fully treated by Lewis T. ' Adams's Works, vol. IX, p. 248. See also p. 612. 14 Smith College Studies in History Melville ;ii consequently the chief events of his career may be passed over hastily in order that more space may be devoted to his controversy with Dr. Benjamin Rush, all the material avail- able for that episode not having been used by Mr. Melville. William Cobbett was born March 9, 1763, at Farnham, Sur- rey, England. His father was a small farmer who taught his son the rudimentary education that he himself possessed. Cob- bett worked upon his father's farm until he was twenty years old, when he went to London and secured a position as clerk in an attorney's office. He found the confinement very irksome, however, and left this position, going to Chatham and enlisting in the 54th Regiment of Infantry, which was then serving in Nova Scotia. He devoted much of his time while in the army to self -improvement, and took up the study of English grammar for the first time. In December, 1791, he received an honorable discharge from the army, the purpose of his retirement being to bring certain of his officers to court-martial because of their mis- conduct in office. The War Office put every obstacle in the way of the court-martial and the decision rendered was that his charges were unfounded. After his marriage with Anne Reid, February 5, 1792, Cob- bett went to France. The gathering war clouds making it neces- sary for him to leave, he came to America in the autumn of 1792, and settled in Philadelphia. He soon became the most in- fluential political pamphleteer in America. Between 1794 and 1800 he published twenty pamphlets, in most of which he sup- ported the Federalist party, denounced France, and advocated an alliance with Great Britain. On March 5, 1797, he issued the first number of P or cu pine's Gazette, founded as he said, "with the intention of annihilating, if possible, the intriguing, wicked and indefatigable faction which- the French had formed in this country." In the autumn of 1797 he was sued for libel by Dr. Rush and the decision was rendered in December of 1799 in favor of the plaintiff. The judgment of $5,000, together with " L. T. Melville, The Life and Letters of William Cobbett in England and America. Two vols., London, 1913. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 15 $3,000 damages, ruined Cobbett financially, and he returned to England in June, 1800. In London he became a book-seller and journalist. His Weekly Political Register, established in Janu- ary, 1802, he continued to publish until his death. He prospered, and purchased for himself a country estate where he spent much of his time. Cobbett was always the foe of corruption and the advocate of a more liberal constitution. Such views were obnoxious to the British government and he was frequently prosecuted for libel. In 1816, he established his Twopenny Trash, a newspaper which advocated reform and had a wide circulation among the working classes. The powerful influence which this paper had among the poor increased the hostility of the government towards Cob- bett. Fearing imprisonment, he decided to come back to America. He spent two years in this country, 1817-1819, but took no active part in politics. On returning to England he continued his agitation for reform. His great desire to sit in the House of Commons was at last realized in 1832, but he was seventy years old at the time and did not exercise much influence. He died July 18, 1835, at his country home at Farnham.i^ The origin of the quarrel between Dr. Benjamin Rush and William Cobbett is thus told by Dr. Rush himself i^^ "For many years after I settled in Philadelphia, I was regulated in my prac- tice by the system of medicine which I had learned from the lectures and publications of Dr. Cullen. But time, observations and reflections convinced me that it was imperfect and erroneous in many of its parts ... I read, I thought, and I observed upon the phenomena of diseases . . . and at length a few rays of light broke in upon my mind upon several diseases. . . . The system I adopted was not merely a speculative one. It led to important changes in the practice. "The propagation of my new opinions had an immediate influence upon my business. It lessened it by precluding me " Ibid., passim. "Benjamin Rush, A Memorial Containing Travels Through Life or Sundry Incidents in the Life of, pp. 61-74. 16 Smith College Studies in History from consultations, for most of my brethren in Philadelphia were devoted to Dr. CuUen's system of medicine and opposed to the least deviation from it. It would be improper to ascribe my exclusion from consultations wholly to the influence of my new opinions. The part I took in favor of my country in the American Revolution had left prejudices in the minds of the most wealthy citizens of Philadelphia against me, for a great majority of them had been loyalists in principle and conduct. . . "Other things contributed to offend my medical brethren besides the novelty of my opinions and practice. I had declared medicine to be a science so simple that two years' study, in- stead of four or more, were sufficient to understand all that was true and practical in it. I had rejected a great number of medicines as useless and had limited the materia medica to fif- teen or twenty articles and in order to strip medicine still fur- ther of its imposture, I had borne a testimony against envelop- ing it in mystery or secrecy by Latin prescriptions and by pub- lishing inaugural dissertations in the Latin language in the medical school of Philadelphia. . . . The success which at- tended the remedies which it pleased God to make me the in- strument of introducing into general practice in the treatment of the fever in 1793, produced a sudden combination of all who had been either publicly or privately my enemies and the most violent and undisguised exertions to oppose and discredit those remedies. "To prevent the recurrence of the fever, I early pointed out its domestic origin. In this opinion I was opposed by nearly the whole College of Physicians, who derived it from a foreign country and who believed it to be a specific disease. They were followed by nearly all the physicians of Philadelphia. ... A number of cases of yellow fever occurred in the summer and autumn of 1794 and a few in the same season in 1795 and 1796. . . . In the year 1797, the yellow fever became again epidemic. "Soon after the fever appeared, Dr. Griffiths published, with- out his name, some plain and sensible directions to the citizens Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 17 for the treatment of the fever. This pubHcation was ascribed to me in Fenno's paper and a most virulent invective against me connected with it. It was soon afterwards followed by torrents of abuse in a paper conducted by one Cobbett, an English alien who then resided in Philadelphia. The publications in these two daily papers were continued for nearly six weeks against my practice and character, particularly against my political prin- ciples which were those of the federal republic of our country. . All these different attacks upon my character and prac- tice were well received by many of my fellow citizens. Some of them considered them as a just punishment for my political principles, while many more acquiesced in them as the probable means of destroying the influence of a man who had aimed to destroy the credit of their city, by ascribing to it a power of generating yellow fever. "Their design proved successful. They lessened my busi- ness and they abstracted so much of the confidence of my pa- tients as to render my practice extremely difficult and disagree- able among them. To put a stop to their injurious effects upon my business and the lives of my patients, I commenced civil action against both the printers." The specific accusations made by Dr. Rush against Cobbett are set forth in the charge which Judge Shippen delivered to the jury when he dismissed it to deliberate upon the case. They are as follows :^^ "That he (the defendant) repeatedly calls the plaintiff a quack, an empyric, charges him with intemperate bleeding, injudiciously administering Mercury in large doses in the yellow-fever; puffing himself off, writing letters and an- swering them himself, stiling him the Samson in Medicine; charging him with murdering his patients and slaying his thou- sands and tens of thousands." In his remarks to the jury it is very evident that the sympa- thies of the Judge were with the plaintiff : "The counts laid in ^* A Report of an action for a Libel brought by Dr. Benjamin Rush against William Cobbett, in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Decem- ber term, 1799, for certain defamatory publications in a newspaper en- titled Porcupine's Gazette, Philadelphia, 1800. 18 Smith College Studies in History the declaration," he says, "are full proved by the publications which are certainly libellous. In what manner do the defend- ant's counsel repel these proofs? Not by justifying the truth of the matters charged against Dr. Rush, which on the contrary they have repeatedly acknowledged to be false, but by analyzing the several allegations in the newspapers and from thence draw- ing a conclusion that no intentional personal malice appears, which they say is the essence of the offence. If the defendant has done that to your satisfaction you will acquit him; but as this is chiefly founded on the allegation that the attack was meant to be made on Dr. Rush's System and not upon the man, it unfortunately appears that not the least attempt is made to combat the Doctor's arguments with regard to the System itself, but the attack is made merely by gross scurrilous abuse of the Doctor himself : added to this, one of the witnesses proves a declaration made by the defendant, that if Dr. Rush had not been the Man he should never have meddled with the System. "Another ground of defence is of a more serious nature, as it leads to an important question on our constitution — it is said that the subject of dispute between the plaintiff and defendant was a matter of public concern, as it related to the health and lives of our fellow-citizens and that by the words of our con- stitution, every man has a right to discuss such subjects in print. The liberty of the press, gentlemen, is a valuable right in every free country, and ought never to be unduly restrained, but when it is perverted to the purposes of private slander, it then becomes a most destructive engine in the hands of un- principled men. . . "Every one must know that offences of this kind have for some time past too much abounded in our city ; it seems high time to restrain them — that task is with you, gentlemen. To suppress so great an evil, it will not only be proper to give com- pensatory, but exemplary damages ; thus stopping the growing progress of this daring crime — at the same time, the damages should not be so enormous as absolutely to ruin the offender." The declaration of the plaintiff contained certain extracts Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 19 from Cobbett's paper, Porcupine's Gazette, which were consid- ered hbellous and were the basis of the accusations. One article was entitled "Medical Puffing" i^^ " 'The times are ominous indeed, When quack to quack cries purge and bleed.' "Those who are in the habit of looking over the Gazettes which come in from the different parts of the country, must have observed, and with no small degree of indignation, the arts that our remorseless Bleeder is making use of to puff off his preposter- ous practice. He has, unfortunately, his partisans in almost every quarter of the country. To these he writes letters, and in re- turn gets letters from them ; he extols their practice and they extol his ; and there is scarcely a page of any newspaper that I see which has the good fortune to escape the poison of their prescriptions — Blood, blood ! still they cry more blood ! . . . Dr. Rush in that emphatic style which is peculiar to himself calls Mercury 'the Samson of medicine.' In his hands and in those of his partisans it may indeed be justly compared to Sam- son ; for, I verily believe they have slain more Americans with it than ever Samson slew of the Philistines. The Israelite slew his thousands, but the Rushites their tens of thousands." Another article appeared in the same paper a week later and was entitled "'Another Puff."i® "In Brown's paper ^'^ of last evening appeared another of our potent Quack's barefaced puffs. It was 'a letter from Dr. Rush to a correspondent in Newberry Port,' giving his own account of the yellow fever and concluding with a dragged-in compliment to a Mr. Coates. . . . . All this bustle of letters and address and prescrip- tions, in the name of Dr. Rush, is intended to make the duped world believe that he is the Oracle at Philadelphia and that all the other physicians are mere glister-pipe Dicks under him — It is a cheap mode of acquiring fame, which he learned from the crafty old hypocrite Franklin." "'September 19, 1797. " September 26, 1917. " The Philadelphia Gazette and Universal Daily Advertiser. See be- low p. 32. 20 Smith College Studies in History Still another piece of evidence produced by the plaintiff's counsel was a letter inserted in Cobbett's paper for October 6, 1797. It told of a cure for the yellow fever made by a soldier's accidental immersion in tar. The editor comments as follows : "This seems an odd kind of a remedy, but I would rather Tar, with the addition of Feathers than venture my life against the lancet of Dr. Rush." The jury, after a deliberation of two hours, brought in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. J. The Republican Press During the first session of Congress held in Philadelphia (December 6, 1790, to March 3, 1791), there were bitter dis- putes over the establishment of the national bank and the impo- sition of the excise. Although the opponents of these measures were able to exert some influence through the columns of Bache's General Advertiser, they soon decided that it was desired to es- tablish a party organ to counteract the power which Hamilton was exerting through Fenno's Gazette of the United States. The National Gazette, a semi-weekly, was therefore founded, October 31, 1791, and placed under the editorial control of Philip Fren- eau. His paper was strongly anti-Federal in tone and especially severe in its denunciation of Hamilton's political and financial theories. Its publication was suspended in the summer of 1793 because of the yellow fever epidemic and was never resumed. Philip Freneau^^ was born in New York, January 13, 1752, of Huguenot parentage. Upon the death of his father, his mother and her four children removed to the Freneau estate at Mt. Pleasant, New Jersey. Philip entered the College of New Jersey (Princeton), in 1767. Students and faculty were active in their denunciations of the aggressions of England and this en- vironment largely influenced his future career. It was here that he first exhibited that genius for verse which was to make him ^' S. E. Forman, The Potitical Activities of Philip Freneau. (Johns Hopkins University Studies, vol. XX, Baltimore, 1902), passim. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 21 famous. He graduated in the well-known class of 1771, the class of James Madison and Hugh Breckenridge. Upon leaving college, Freneau came to Philadelphia and read law for several months. After that he tried teaching, but he dis- liked the work and was a failure. In 1775, he was back in New York writing poems in criticism of Great Britain. The year 1775 was an especially important one for arousing the minds of the people and preparing them for the break with the mother country which Freneau thought was the only way out of the difficulty. His work won for him the title of the "Poet of the Revolution." "The British Prison Ship," which he published in 1781 relates his own experiences on a British vessel, the Scorpion, where he was kept a prisoner for two months after having been taken captive from his little privateering vessel, the Aurora. Nothing he wrote had more influence on the American cause, as he de- picted most forcefully the cruelty and inhumanity of the English towards their prisoners. After the Revolution Freneau took to the sea and became captain of a trading vessel sailing between the United States and the West Indies. In April of 1789, he returned to New York and wrote for the Daily Advertiser. He was friendly with all the leading Republicans and was soon recognized in political circles as one of their strongest writers. In 1790, Thomas Jefiferson returned to America from Paris and became Secretary of State. When the government was moved to Philadelphia in 1791, there was a vacancy in Jefferson's office in the position of French translator. It was largely through the instrumentality of James Madison and Henry Lee that this po- sition was oflfered to Freneau.^'' The salary was $250, only one- half the pay of a regular clerk, and it was understood that he was allowed to spend the rest of the time editing a newspaper. Fren- eau had intended to leave New York and start a newspaper in New Jersey. Jefferson, Madison and other Republicans, how- ever, were particularly desirous that he should establish his pa- " Madison says that Lee made the original suggestion. Madison's Writings, vol. VI, p. 117, note. 22 Smith College Studies in History per in Philadelphia as an offset to Hamilton's organ, the Ga- zette of the United States, edited by John Fenno. Madison wrote to Jefferson from New York, May 1, 1791, as follows: "The more I learn of his character, talents and principles, the more I should regret his burying himself in the obscurity he had chosen in New Jersey. It is certain that there is not to be found in the whole catalogue of American printers a single name that can approach towards a rivalship."-*' Freneau was delayed for sometime in New Jersey, and Jeffer- son concluded that he had given up his plan of coming to Phila- delphia. Madison wrote to Jefferson from New York, July 10, 1791, "that Freneau is now here and has abandoned his Phila- delphia project. From what cause I am wholly unable to deter- mine ; unless those who know his talents and hate his political principles should have practised some artifice for the purpose."-^ Finally, late in July, Freneau definitely decided to accept and on August 16, 1791, was given the position in Jefferson's office. The enemies of Freneau and Jefferson made much of his accept- ing this appointment and tried to represent the whole proceeding as dishonorable. The chief aim of the National Gazette was to attack Hamilton and make his measures as unpopular as possible. Freneau was a master of irony and Fenno was no match for him. Hamilton, therefore, undertook to fight his own cause. He at- tacked Freneau in the Gazette of the United States, and made much of the fact that while he was receiving a salary from the government as a translator, he was denouncing the measures of the government in his newspaper.-^ A great controversy resulted from these charges. Hamilton said that Jefferson dictated the policies of Freneau's paper, and it was this episode which caused the outbreak of the quarrel between Hamilton and Jefferson. ^^ Jefferson, however, maintained a dignified silence at this time ** Madison's Writings, vol. VI, pp. 46-47. " Madison's Writings, vol. VI, p. 55, n. "^ Similar charges might have been brought against Hamilton who had employed Fenno as exclusive printer for the government at a salary of $2,500 a year. '" Hamilton's Works, vol. ^, p. 28. Mr Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 23 and left Hamilton and Freneau to fight it out alone. He swore before the President, however, that he had never attempted in any way to influence the policy of the paper. Freneau testified before the mayor of Philadelphia that he had always been in- dependent and influenced by no one. Madison, in a letter to Edmund Randolph, dated September 13, 1792, discusses the charge made by Fenno that the establish- ment of the National Gazette was brought about to sap the con- stitution, and that it was improper for one person to be a trans- lating clerk in a public ofBce and at the same time an editor of a Gazette. "I advised the change [Philadelphia rather than New Jersey]" writes Madison, "because I thought his [Freneau's] interest w^ould be advanced by it and because as a friend, I was desirous that his interest should be advanced. That was my primary and governing motive. That, as a consequential one, I entertained hopes that a free paper meant for general circulation, and edited by a man of genius of republican principles, and a friend to the constitution, would be some antidote to the doctrines and discourses circulated in favor of Monarchy and Aristocracy and would be an acceptable vehicle of public information in many places not sufficiently supplied with it, this also is a certain truth."24 The plague visited Philadelphia in the summer of 1793, and the National Gazette was discontinued. About this time Jeffer- son resigned, and Freneau was obliged to give up his clerkship. After leaving Philadelphia, Freneau published the Jersey Chron- icle at his own home at Mt. Pleasant, New Jersey. This was an Anti-Federal paper which soon perished. The Time-Piece, an- other newspaper venture of Freneau in New York, met with a similar fate. While Freneau spent most of his remaining years at Mt. Pleasant, he continued his literary activity. His poHtical works appeared in Bache's Aurora, the political successor of the National Gazette. Freneau never made a living out of his writ- ings. Finally, to provide for his family, he became captain of a Madison's Writings, vol. VI, p. 117 note. 24 Smith College Studies in History merchantman and thus spent the years from 1799 until 1807, when he abandoned the sea never to return to it again. His literary activity during the war of 1812 won for him the title of the "Poet of the War of 1812." His career as a writer ended at the close of the war, and he spent the last years of his life in retirement in his New Jersey home. His death occurred in De- cember, 1832. The National Gazette overshadowed the other Republican newspapers of the time, but when it ceased publication in 1793, Bache's General Advertiser, known later as the Aurora General Advertiser, became the chief party organ. Benjamin Franklin Bache, grandson of Benjamin Franklin, was born in Philadelphia, August 12, 1769. His father, Richard Bache, a native of Yorkshire, England, came to America while a young man and entered mercantile business. He married Sarah, the only daughter of Benjamin Franklin, in 1767. Benjamin F. Bache accompanied his grandfather to Paris, when the latter rep- resented the Continental Congress at the French court, and re- ceived his education in France and at Geneva. While in Paris he learned the printing trade at the publishing house of Didot. He returned to America with his grandfather in 1785 and com- pleted his education in the College of Philadelphia. Bache founded the General Advertiser, the first number of which ap- peared October 1, 1790. On November 8, 1794, its title was changed to the Aurora General Advertiser. Bache remained the editor until his death, as the result of yellow fever, on September 10, 1798. William Duane then published it for two years as the agent of Mrs. Bache. In 1800 Duane married Mrs. Bache and became the sole editor. The Aurora, as it was popularly called, advocated the cause of the French Republic and tried to arouse American sympathy in its favor. President Washington looked with disapproval upon many of the measures of the French revolutionists, and hence the Aurora was led into hostility to the Federal govern- ment and won over to the Anti-Federal party. It was considered Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 25 as the special organ of the Democratic RepubHcans and was called "The Bible of the Democracy."-^ So strong a stand did the Aurora take against the measures of Washington's administration, that its violence was often directed against the President himself. The following article, published the day after President Adams's inauguration and relating to Washington's departure for Mt. Vernon, illustrates this point : " 'Lord now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace for mine eyes have seen thy salvation' was the pious ejaculation of a man who beheld a flood of happiness rushing in upon mankind. If ever there was a time which would license the reiteration of this exclamation that time is now arrived ; for the man who is the source of all the misfortunes of our country is this day reduced to a level with his fellow citizens and is no longer possessed of power to multiply evils upon the United States. If ever there was a period of rejoicing this is the moment. Every heart in unison with the freedom and happiness of the people ought to beat high with exultation that the name of Washington from this day ceased to give a currency to political iniquity and to legalized corruption. A new era is now opening upon us, an era which promises much to the people ; for public measures must now stand upon their own merits and nefarious projects can no longer be supported by a name. It is a subject of the greatest astonish- ment that a single individual should have carried his designs against the public liberty so far as to have put in jeopardy its very existence. Such, however, are the facts ; and with these staring us in the face, this day ought to be a jubilee in the United States."^" William Duane was born in New York, near Lake Champlain, May 17, 1760. His father and mother, both natives of Ireland, were well educated and of good family connections. From his mother, a very firm and stubborn woman, he inherited the one trait of absolute adherence to principle and loyalty to party A. C. Clark, IVilliaiii Duane. p. 15. March 5, 1747. 26 Smith College Studies in History whether right or wrong, a characteristic which governed him throughout his entire Hfe. His father, a land-surveyor, died in 1765, it is said, in an attack by the Indians. Mrs. Duane with her son, then five years old, came to Phila- delphia, and after remaining there a short time moved to Bal- timore. In 1774 William and his mother crossed to Ireland and settled at Clonmel. Here he was well educated, but as his mother was in very comfortable circumstances no thought was given to providing him with a profession.-^ When not quite nineteen years of age, Duane fell in love with and married Catharine, the seventeenth child of William Corcoran. The marriage displeased his mother, and he was disinherited. Mrs. Duane's objections were entirely religious, as she was a devout Roman Catholic and the Corcorans were of the Established Church. ^^ The question of making a living for himself and his wife presented itself to William. Having no profession or business training, he learned the printing trade. After working at this for three or four years in Clonmel, he took his wife and son to London. In 1787 he went out to Calcutta and established a newspaper called The World. The venture was successful, and Duane was about to send for his family when an article in his paper provoked the wrath of the officials of the East India Company. He was imprisoned, his property was confiscated, and he was ultimately sent back to England. Although he petitioned Parliament for redress, he soon found that the East India Company was too rich and powerful to be successfully attacked. For the next few years he was parliamentary reporter for the General Adver- tiser, a paper that was later merged with the London Timesr^ Duane and his family sailed from London, May 16, 1796, and arrived in New York on the 4th of July. Shortly afterward, he came to Philadelphia and assisted Benjamin F. Bache in the pub- lication of the Aurora. On July 13, 1798 Mrs. Duane died of the yellow fever, and on September 10, Bache succumbed to the same Qark, William Duane, p. 8. 'Ibid., p. 9. ' Ibid., p. 13. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 27 disease. The Aurora was continued for a while under the joint editorship of Duane and Mrs. Bache until, on June 28, 1800, they were married and Duane became sole editor. ^^ Duane was an even more bitter partisan than Bache. His official biographer tells us that he was always ready for a quar- rel and that it was of no consequence to him whether the issue was "national, state, or municipal, whether political, religious, or anything else in the dictionary's descriptives."^^ He was almost constantly involved in libel suits. There can, however, be no doubt about the strength of his political influence. His paper was one of the chief factors in discrediting the administration of Adams and bringing about the election of Jefferson in 1800. Adams's own opinion of Duane is well expressed in the follow- ing extract from a letter written to Timothy Pickering, August 1, 1799: "Is there anything evil in the regions of actuality or possibility that the Aurora has not suggested of me? The match- less effrontery of this Duane merits the execution of the Alien Law. I am very willing to try its strength upon him."^^ Washington of course escaped direct attack as he had retired from public life before Duane's American career began. He was, however, very much disturbed by the violent attacks made upon the men and measures of the Federalist party. In a letter to James McHenry of August 11, 1799, he speaks of Duane in these words : "There can be no medium between the reward and the punishment of such an Editor who shall publish such things as Duane has been doing for sometime past. On what ground then does he pretend to stand in his exhibition of the charges or the insinuations which he has handed to the Public? Can hardi- hood itself be so great as to stigmatize characters in the Public Gazettes for the most heinous offences and when prosecuted pledge itself to support the allegation, unless there was some- thing to build on ? It will have an unhappy efifect on the public mind if it be not so."^^ ""Ibid., 15. ''Ibid., 16. ^ Adams's Works, vol. IX, p. 5. ^Washington's Writings, vol. IV, pp. 194-195. 28 Smith College Studies in History In the diary of John Quincy Adams (1795-1848), the follow- ing entry is written of Duane : "As merely the editor of a news- paper, character is not necessary to support opposition. To prove venal and profligate would only show him fit for the trade which he pursues of disseminating slander. He has talents, long and uninterrupted experience in public affairs, much knowledge crammed without order or method into his head and indefatigible, unremitting industry. His real faculty and power as a slanderer consists in mixing truth with falsehood in such proportions that with the ignorant, the malicious and the interested, the compound is so like the truth 'twill serve the turn as well. As a partisan, he can be useful only to those whose cause depends upon the propagation of falsehood. For support of truth or correct prin- ciple he is impotent." Jefferson, writing from Monticello to Mr. Wirt, speaks of the services rendered his party by the Aurora as follows : "The paper has unquestionably rendered incalculable services to repub- licanism through all its struggles with the federalists and has been the rallying point for the orthodoxy of the whole Union. It was our comfort in the gloomiest days and is still performing the office of a watchful sentinel. We should be ungrateful to desert him and unfaithful to our own interests to lose him."^^ Mr. Madison, writing in 1811, characterizes him as follows: "I have always regarded Duane and still regard him as a sin- cere friend of liberty and as ready to make every sacrifice to its cause but that of his passions. Of these he appears to be com- pletely a slave. "^^ The Aurora gradually lost its leadership as the great organ of Republicanism and declined in political importance. Duane laid down the editorial pen in 1822. He died November 24, 1835, at the age of seventy-six, and was buried in North Laurel Hill Cemetery, Philadelphia. The Pennsylvania Packet and Daily Advertiser was the first daily paper published in the United States. It was first issued March 30, 1811. Jefferson's Writings, vol. IX, p. 316-317. Madison's Writings, vol. VIII, p. 151. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 29 from the press October 28, 1771, and its editor was John Dun- lap. It was printed on Market street on Monday of each week.'^*^ From September 16, 1777, to June 30, 1778, while the British were in possession of Philadelphia, it was pubUshed at Lan- caster, Pennsylvania. Until 1793, Dunlap was the principal edi- tor, after that date David Claypoole was associated with him, and in 1796 the editorship was handed over to Claypoole. On October 1, 1800, Claypoole sold out to Zachariah Poulson, who continued the paper as Poulson s Daily Advertiser until, in De- cember, 1839, it was united with the Philadelphia North Ameri- can. The Packet was strongly Republican in its politics, al- though its influence was not as great as Freneau's Gazette or Bache's Aurora. John Dunlap was born in the north of Ireland in 1747. Early in life he moved to America and settled in Philadelphia, where he became associated in the printing trade with his uncle, William Dunlap. He purchased his uncle's interest in the business in 1768, founded the Packet in 1771, and was official printer of the Journals of Congress from 1778 to 1783. He retired from busi- ness in 1795 and died in Philadelphia, November 27, 1812.-'''' David Chambers Claypoole was born in Philadelphia June 14, 1757. His ancestry may be traced back to an old English family of Claypooles situated in Norborough, Northamptonshire. The history of the Claypoole family in America begins with James Claypoole who immigrated to this country in 1683. David C. Claypoole served during the American Revolution as an in- fantry officer, and he also took part in the expedition sent in 1794 to put down the Whiskey Rebellion. It was in December of 1793 that he first became associated with John Dunlap in the publication of the American Daily Advertiser, successor to the Packet, and in January, 1796, he became the sole editor. Wash- ington's Farewell Address first appeared in Claypoole's paper, and the original manuscript was presented to him by the Presi- ^ It did not become a daily until September 21, 1784. " Isaiah Thomas, History of Printing in America, Albany, 1874, vol. I, pp. 252-253, 258-259. 30 Smith College Studies in History dent. On October 1, 1800, Claypoole sold his paper to Zachariah Poulson for $10,000. He died March 9, 1849, and was buried in St. Stephen's Church, Philadelphia.^^ Zachariah Poulson, Jr., was born in Philadelphia, September 5, 1761. He was the son of Zachariah Poulson, a native of Denmark, who came to Philadelphia in 1749 and went into busi- ness as a book-binder and book-seller. Zachariah, Jr., served an apprenticeship with Joseph Crinkshank, an eminent printer of Philadelphia, and for many years was printer for the State Sen- ate. On October 1, 1800, he purchased Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser. Poulson died July 31, 1844.^^ The Independent Gazetteer or Chronicle of Freedom was founded in April, 1782, as a weekly. It became a daily in Oc- tober, 1786. Its editor was Eleazer Oswald. Upon his death, 1795, the paper was taken over by Joseph Gales, and in Sep- tember, 1796, it became known as Gale's Independent Gazetteer, published semi-weekly. The Gazetteer was pro-French in its sympathies and opposed to the measures of the Federal govern- ment. Eleazer Oswald was born in England in 1755, and moved to America in 1770. He entered the American army at the be- ginning of the Revolution and served with distinction as a col- onel. In 1778, he resigned his commission and came to Phila- delphia, and in April, 1782, began the publication of the Inde- pendent Gazetteer or Chronicle of Freedom. He was a very strong opponent of Hamilton, and on one occasion challenged him to a duel, but mutual friends managed to patch up the affair. In 1792, he went to France and joined the Republican army as a colonel of artillery. He was sent to Ireland by the French gov- ernment on a secret errand to investigate conditions relative to a proposed French invasion. Later he returned to the United States and died soon after of yellow fever, in New York, Sep- tember 30, 1795.^0 ^ Claypoole Genealogy, pp. 82-87. '^ Thomas, History of Printing in America, vol. II, pp. 140-141. ** Appleton, Cyclopaedia of American Biography, vol. IV, p. 603. J. B. McMaster and F. D. Stone, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1888, p. 7. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 31 Joseph Gales was one of the small group of English radicals who were compelled to go into exile because of their sympathies with the French Revolution. He was born near Sheffield in 1760. He became a printer and bookseller in that city and also published the Register. His liberal principles, as expressed in his paper, aroused the hostility of the British government, and fearing ar- rest he sold his paper and came to Philadelphia in the spring of 1793. He obtained employment as a printer on the American Daily Advertiser, published by David C. Claypoole. In 1795, he became owner of the Independent Gazetteer and conducted it until 1799. He then sold out to Samuel Harrison Smith, moved to North Carolina and established the Raleigh Register. When quite old he relinquished this paper to one of his sons and went to Washington, where he became much interested in African colonization. He was an active member of the American Col- onization Society almost to his death. He died in Raleigh, August 24, 1841. 4. Miscellaneous The Pennsylvania Gazette was first issued December 24, 1728, by Samuel Keimer. Benjamin Franklin was employed by Keimer for a short time, but through financial difficulties, Keimer was forced to dispose of the paper, and it was sold to Franklin and Hugh Meredith. This connection was broken in 1732, and Franklin became sole editor. Early in 1748 he took as his part- ner, a Scotchman, David Hall, to whom he sold his interests in 1765. In 1766, William Sellers became associated with Hall and their partnership lasted until 1805. During the occupation of Philadelphia by the British and for some months afterwards the publication was suspended, but was resumed January 5, 1779, and conducted regularly after that. This paper later became the Saturday Evening Post, the first issue of which was published August 4, 1821.-'i The first number of the Pennsylvania Journal and Weekly Ad- " Scharff and Westcott, History of Philadelphia, vol. Ill, pp. 1962- 1963. 32 Smith College Studies in History vertiscr appeared December 2, 1742. The editor was William Bradford, the nephew of Andrew Bradford, who published the American Weekly Mercury, the first newspaper printed in Phila- delphia. In 1766, his son, Thomas, became his partner. During the British occupation of Philadelphia, the publication of the paper was suspended, but it was resumed again in December of 1778. The father and son continued to publish the paper until the former died, September 25, 1791. The title was changed in 1797 to the True American, and the paper continued to be edited by Thomas Bradford. The subscription price was six dollars per annum.^- William Bradford was born in New York in 1719. He was adopted and educated by his uncle, Andrew Bradford, with whom he learned the printing trade and whose partner he be- came in December, 1739. This relationship, however, lasted only a year. In December, 1742, he began to publish the Poinsylvania Journal and Weekly Advertiser, a paper which was devoted to the American cause from the beginning of the difficulties with Great Britain in 1765. He served with distinction in the American Revolution, becoming the colonel of his regiment. Af- ter the British evacuated Philadelphia, he retired from the army, broken in health and fortune. The fact that he had a share in securing the independence of his country afforded him much comfort in his later years, and he frequently remarked to his children, "Though I bequeath you no estate, I leave you in the enjoyment of liberty." He died September 25, 1791, and was buried in Philadelphia."*-^ His son Thomas was born in Philadelphia May 4, 1745. He attended the College of Philadelphia for several years. In 1762, his father gave him a place in his printing office and in 1766 re- ceived him as a partner in the business. He was an ardent pa- triot and served throughout the Revolution. After the war he resumed the printing business with his father. He died in Phila- delphia, May 7, 1838.-'^ Ibid., pp. 1964-1965. ' Bradford Genealogy, pp. 5-7. 'Ibid. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 33 The first number of the Federal Gazette was issued October 1, 1788, by Andrew Brown. In January, 1794, the title was changed to the Philadelphia Gazette and Universal Daily Advertiser. Upon the death of Brown in 1797, his son, Andrew Brown, took charge of the paper and Samuel Relf was associated with him as partner. Samuel Relf bought Brown's interest in September, 1801, and continued to publish the Gazette until his death in 1823. Andrew Brown was a native of Ireland, born in 1744. He received his education at Trinity College, Dublin, and came to America in 1773 as an officer in the British army. He soon left the service, however, and settled in Massachusetts. He fought on the American side during the Revolution. At the conclusion of the war he established a seminary for young ladies at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, but his irritable temper made him unsuitable for this occupation, and he gave it up. In October, 1788, he bought and published the Federal Gazette at Philadelphia. This paper leaned toward the Federalist party, and it was the first journal to publish regular reports of the debates in Congress. Brown continued to publish his paper during the yellow- fever epidemic of 1793, one of the few editors to do this. His death was caused by injuries received while trying to save his wife and children from a fire which destroyed his printing establishment on the night of January 27, 1797. -He died February 4, 1797. His son, Andrew, born in Ireland in 1774, continued to publish the paper until 1802. His partner was Samuel Relf, until, in 1802, Relf bought out his partner's interest and the paper was pub- lished as Rclfs Gazette. In the troubles with England which cul- minated in the War of 1812, his sympathies were so Anglophile that he became very unpopular. He went to England and died there, December 7, 1847.^^ Samuel Relf was born in Virginia, March 22, 1776, and died there February 4, 1823. His mother brought him to Philadel- phia when a child. He became associated with Andrew Brown as editor of the Philadelphia Gazette in 1799. In 1802 he became sole editor, and the paper was changed to Rclfs Gazette.*^' '^Scharff and Westcott, History of Philadelphia, vol. III. p. 1977. ** Frederic Hudson, History of Journalism. New York, 1873, p. 78. 34 Smith College Studies in History The Pennsylvania Mercury and Universal Advertiser was a weekly, established August 20, 1784. Its editor during the greater part of its existence, which lasted until 1791, was Daniel Humphreys. Daniel Humphreys was the son of Joshua Humphreys. He served his time as an apprentice to William Bradford. Begin- ning in 1775, Daniel was the partner of Enoch Story, but this lasted only a few months as the printing house and its materials were destroyed by fire. From June, 1783, to July, 1784, he was a partner of Eleazer Oswald in the publication of his Independent Gazetteer. He had a printing house in Philadelphia until 1811. He died June 12, 1812.^' The New World was a small paper which appeared in Phila- delphia in 1795. Its editor was Samuel Harrison Smith, and it was issued at first twice a day, morning and evening, but was soon changed to a daily.-*^ The price was eight dollars a year, and the place of publication 118 Chestnut Street. This paper claimed to be non-partisan. In his foreword to the public the edi- tor says that "political discussion will be encouraged and not re- pressed so far as it is connected with principles and the general good. But it will always be rejected when its object is personal resentment or party malevolence." The paper was discontinued after a few months. ^^ Carey's Daily Advertiser was published by James Carey and John Markland at 91 South Front Street. The price was six dollars a year. The paper professed political impartiality, and the prospectus announced that "the Daily Advertiser will be open for candid and liberal discussion on both sides of every political question which may interest the public mind. It will likewise contain such extracts from party papers and pamphlets on both sides as may serve to develop the plans and conduct of each. The design of this is to lessen the political zeal. To soften that " Thomas, History of Printing, vol. I, 267-268. « October 25, 1796. ^' Title page of The New World, file in the Ridgeway Branch of the Philadelphia Library Company. Public Opinion in Philajdelphia, 1789-1801 35 asperity which a difference in political opinion produces in the heart, should be the study of every man, whatever his sentiments or whatever his situation. "^"^ Carey came to this country in 1796, having failed in the publication of the Volunteer's Journal of Dublin, a paper he had had charge of after his brother Mat- thew came to the United States. Freeman's Journal or The North American Intelligencer was established April 25, 1781, by Francis Bailey. It appeared twice weekly, its price was four pence, and it was printed in Market Street. About 1780 Philip Freneau became connected with the paper and contributed to its columns for three or four years. ^^ Its motto was "Open to all Parties but influenced by none," but as a matter of fact it was Federalist in its principles. The pub- lication of the paper was suspended in 1792. The only newspaper published in Philadelphia in French dur- ing the Federalist period was The American Star.^'- It was ed- ited by Tanguy at 85 Vine Street. Each page was divided into two columns, one in English, the other in French. The paper was given up largely to French aft'airs and advertisements. Finlay's American Naval and Commercial Register was pub- lished by Samuel Finlay at 49 Chestnut Street. The price was four dollars per annum, later increased to five, and it appeared twice a week, on Tuesday and Friday. It was chiefly a mercan- tile newspaper. Two pages were ahvays allotted to "Prices Cur- rent and Marine Intelligence," and the other two pages given over to advertisements. Here information could be obtained con- cerning the arrival and departure of vessels at Philadelphia and other ports, their cargoes, owners and destinations, announce- ments of vessels, land and merchandise for sale, prices of stock, etc. Some attention was given to the activities of Congress and there were few notices concerningr foreign affairs. ^^ ^^ See first issue of Carey's Daily Advertiser, file in Pennsylvania His- torical Society Library. " Hudson, History of Journalism, p. 185. ^^ February to May, 1794, (stray nos.), Pennsylvania Historical So- ciety Library. "File in Ridgeway Branch of the Philadelphia Library Company. CHAPTER II The Financial System /. Nature of the Criticisms During Washington's first administration the chief event was the reorganization of the financial system. Hamilton's famous reports and the debates in Congress to which they gave rise called forth a mass of criticism in newspapers and pamphlets. Although the tariff and the mint aroused very little opposition, vigorous attacks were made upon the funding of the public debt, the assumption of the state debts, the establishment of the bank, and the imposition of the excise duty on distilled spirits. The arguments were similar to those made in Congress, with perhaps a little more emphasis on the appeal to sectional and class prejudices. The controversy was, however, by no means one-sided. Hamilton's defenders were quite as numerous and quite as active as his critics, and their productivity was equally voluminous. The criticisms were both general and specific. The articles published in The National Gazette under the pseudonyms "Cam- illus" and "Caius" are good examples of the general type of criticism. "It is a fact in our interior economy," says Camillus, "that it is a declared^ opinion, that the present debt (amounting to 70 millions and supported by imposts and excises), is a na- tional blessing.' It is a fact that the principal measures of the government have been planned under the influence of that ma- lign opinion. It is a fact that immense wealth has been accu- mulated into a few hands and that public measures have favored that accumulation. It is a fact that public money appropriated to the sinking of the debt has been laid out, not so as most to sink the debt, but so as to succour gamblers in the funds who have made from 500 to 800 per cent on their capitals. It is a fact that the bank law has given a bounty of four or five millions of dollars to men, in great part, of the same description. It is a fact that a share of this bounty went immediately into the pockets of the very men most active and forward in granting it. These ' The National Gazette, October 20, 1792. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 Z7 facts speak an alarming effort within towards a monied aristoc- racy and a government by artifice and influence." "Caius's" de- nunciation of Hamilton was especially florid and picturesque. ^ "He has devised systems that have already produced consequences most pernicious to the interests, honor and happiness of our country; systems which like seas of corruption will, if pursued, overwhelm and destroy in their poisonous current, every free and valuable principle of our government. "The funding project interweaving the plans of assumption, excise and irredeemability of debt and a mortgage of the best funds of the country beyond the power of legislative control were but a single dash of the pen of this bold adventurer and it speedily became a favorite maxim with the Myrmidons of specu- lation who sprang up like Hydras in every quarter, eager to root on the best blood and treasure of the people 'that the power and efficacy of the new system should be tried at its outset by an ex- periment of measures to the full extent of the authority granted and that opposition, if any, had better be met in its earlier than more advanced stages.' The next project was the Bank scheme which may be regarded as the consummation of the funding project and the union of the government itself with the new cre- ated monied interests which that produced and the last project is that of manufactures so called, or in other words, a new system of monopolies, exclusive privileges and charters of incorporation, grounded on the favorite, new assumed doctrine of discretion and the undefined powers of Congress. "The baneful effects of the funding system will be found in its combination with the Bank, manufactures and monopoly schemes, all of which are to be regarded as links of the same chain. Two principles are also produced by this sys- tem, each of them alike novel and repugnant to the genius and spirit of the federal constitution ; the first, a power in Congress and that exclusively too, of the states, to grant charters of incor- poration and monopolies, the other, the practicability of having 'Ihid., January 16, 1792. 38 Smith College Studies in History in Congress, placement, or in other words, members, who in the character of Bank directors may receive salaries and emoluments from a corporation which they themselves have created, which salaries and emoluments being at all times in the discretion of the stockholders, may be augmented to any amount and produce all the consequences of an actual bribe. "Certain I am that in whatever degree the measures I have scrutinized may be hostile to the first principles of the govern- ment, the great agricultural interests of the community will be thereby rendered subordinate, tributary, and dependent upon the new created, associated and associating interests of speculation, commerce and manufactures and the equal rights and equal in- terests of the yeomanry of our country, who constitute its strength, its wealth, and its firmest pillars, will be shamefully prostrated at the shrine of Mammon and Ambition." 2. The Funding of the Public Debt "Agricola,^' in advocating the funding of the public debt, several months before Hamilton submitted his report, points out the similarity between our situation in 1789 and that of the Brit- ish in the reign of William HI. Specie was scarce, there was a general lack of confidence in the government and public se- curities had fallen 40 to 60 per cent. Mr. Montague, Chancellor of the Exchequer, saved the situation by funding the public debt and putting England's credit on a firm basis. This policy formed the foundation for England's greatness. Immense sums of money flowed into the country, its value was lessened and the ministry was able gradually to reduce the interest on the public debt. Industry was stimulated by the abundance of money, taxes were easily paid and the funded debt increased the circu- lating medium. "From the day that such a system is adopted and pursued, we may date the commencement of the rising splendor of this country. Every palliative or plan that may fall short of this system will only postpone this glorious period." ^Pennsylvania Packet, April 18, 1789. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 39 Other reasons given in the Packet for the funding of the debt were as follows ;■* ( 1 ) Funding a debt creates an artificial capital which in- vigorates industry. (2) Public credit is a mine of wealth; it will supply the exigencies of the country with money attracted from abroad at the usual rate of interest. This money, employed in commerce, agriculture, and manufactures will yield a profit far above the rate of interest paid. The balance will be a clear gain to the country and will contribute to the support of additional taxes. Foreigners who once deposit their wealth here will be interested in the welfare of this country, will be in- clined to immigrate with their families and make a valuable ad- dition to our population and resources. (3) The United States, situated as she is near the valuable possessions of the great mari- time powers of Europe, will be exposed to the need of active in- terference in the quarrels of those nations, if she is not in a con- dition to support her neutrality. It was the deranged state of her finances which compelled France to abandon her Allies, the Dutch, and to submit to the humiliating peace which England dictated. "The United States cannot expect to be exempt from the calamities that other nations have experienced from a loss of public credit and a feeble administration of their affairs." (4) We cannot argue that the United States is unable to establish public credit by funding the debt because of a lack of resources. She has resources far beyond any demands that can be made upon them to satisfy just claims. "The Observer,"^ writing to the American planters and farm- ers, endeavors to impress upon them the fact that it is vital to their interests that the credit of the nation be put on a firm basis. He argues that the farming class in this country is so numerous and holds so great a proportion of the property that it has a right to a decided influence in the measures of the government. Ag- riculture now is, and for a century to come, must remain the prevailing interest. "The war of independence was yours — our *Ibid., August 17, 1789. ^Pennsylvania Packet, "The Observer." X, January 4, 1790. 40 Smith College Studies in History present form of government became a sacred reality by the seal of your suffrages, and the measures of the Treasury Department must be addressed to your good understanding and sense of na- tional honor to render them successful. The evils resulting from a loss of public credit may affect others first — on you they fall heaviest. Merchants, monied men and those who have great property afloat are on the watch — they have leisure to collect ev- ery information, a correspondence by every post and through half the world advertise them of the evil and their property by some change in its situation is secured, while you, without in- formation and unsuspicious, are ensnared. Every possible im- position in public credit will operate thus — either the price of your produce will fall or the articles you purchase rise, or the deceitful medium center in your hands "The first thing you ought to demand is a stable system for the public debt which may be done by placing the whole of every description under one responsible board ; the next is a circulat- ing medium of fixed value. To accomplish this, I am sensible there must be some kind of direct taxation by the United States, for it is not probable that an impost and excise will equitably fund the whole debt." The separate states now exercise direct taxation; if this were all taken over by the general government, there would be such a saving that a part of what is now paid would suffice. The articles taxed, the rates, and the methods of collection are different in the thirteen states. Many more tax collectors are thus employed and there is room for much corrup- tion. The writer suggests that the United States government assume the debts of the states. In addition to the impost and excise, let there be a direct tax on the single article of improved land at three cents an acre. This will suffice to establish our public credit. This will mean a great saving, as not more than one third the amount that is being paid will be needed. Those who contended against paying in full the holders of alienated certificates did so on the ground that most of such holders were speculators who had taken advantage of the exi- gencies of the original creditors of the government to make large Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 41 sums of money. "A customer,"*' writing in their defense, ar- gues as follows : "The holders of such certificates are called speculators, and what then? Is not every member of the com- munity a speculator? Is it not as just and as honorable to specu- late in certificates as in houses, land, articles of merchandise, etc. ? Nay, in many instances much more so. Especially, when the present holders had compassion on the original holders and bought their certificates at the market price and at a considerable risk, while those of toryish principles would not touch them and I am mistaken if it be not these that are now endeavoring to raise an outcry. But the certificates have altered in value. Very true. And what species of property is it that has not undergone the same fate, gold itself not excepted? Did they not change value in the hands of the holders for the time being? Must not every holder of property, be it of what kind it may, abide by the change of its value?" The objection most frequently advanced against restoring the credit was that the original creditors had disposed of their claims at a low price and that if the government were to fulfil its promises it would not benefit the real sufferers. ''Observer,"" however, is of the opinion that the part of the public debt which has been sold at a low price, is only a small part of the aggregate debt. "It is a small proportion of the national paper which hath made the show in circulation. The speculation in paper hath been a kind of gambling, artificially kept up between distant parts, a few sagacious ones have been fortunate and many have been losers. Thus circumstanced, by many times passing and re- passing, a small proportion of the public paper hath made a great appearance. The great weight of debt is still in the hands of the original holders, men who loaned or did service for their country from noble motives men who had rather brave some distress in their private circumstances than sell their just claims for a trifle." Of those who have alienated their certificates, some did so from necessity because of the tardiness ^Pennsylvania Gazette, February 3, 1790. 'Pennsylvania Packet, February 18, 1790. 42 Smith College Studies in History of the government in paying its obligations. To them sympathy is due, but those who disposed of their certificates out of pure speculation justly deserve to sufifer a loss. "Mercator," writing in the National Gazette some two years later, attempted to show that the public debt was not being ex- tinguished by the funding system, but was rather being increased. Hamilton answered these charges in two letters published in the same paper under the name of "Civis."^ In the first letter, September 5, 1792, "Civis" characterized "Mercator" as follows : "He has shown in the true spirit of a certain junto (who, not content with the large share of power they have in the government are incessantly laboring to monop- olize the whole of its power and to banish from it every man who is not subservient to their preposterous and all-grasping views), that he has been far more solicitous to arraign than to manifest the truth — to take away, than to afford consolation to the people of the United States." As proof that the debt of the United States has increased and is continuing to increase "Mercator" cited the "present amount and the increasing weight of the duties of impost and excise." "Let facts," says "Civis," "decide the soundness of this logic. In the last session of Congress, the only excise duty which exists was reduced upon an average 15 per cent. The only addition which was then made to the imposts was for carrying on the Indian war and by avoiding recourse to per- manent loans for that purpose to avoid an increase of the debt. How then can that which was done to avoid an increase of debt, be a proof that it has increased?" Hamilton's second letter was dated September 11, 1792. Af- ter discussing further "Mercator's" arguments, "Civis" makes this statement. "It is sufficient to observe that one good effect of the measures of finance which have been adopted by the pres- ent government is at least unequivocal. The public credit has been ejfectually restored." Another letter written by Hamilton in defense of his measures Hamilton's Works, Federal Edition, vol. Ill, pp. 28-40. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 43 and signed "Fact," appeared in the National Gazette the same day as the second letter to "Mercator."^ The object of this letter is to examine into the foundations of the statement that "certain characters are charged with advocating the pernicious doctrine that 'public debts are public blessings' and with being friends to a perpetuation of the public debt of the country." "Fact" is confident that the particular person aimed at is the secretary, and goes on to say that "that officer, it is very certain, explicitly main- tained that the funding of the existing debt of the United States would render it a national blessing ; and a man has only to travel through the United States with his eyes open, and to observe the invigoration of industry in every branch to be convinced that the position is well founded. But, whether right or wrong, it is quite a different thing from maintaining as a general proposition that a public debt is a public blessing, particular and temporary cir- cumstances might render that advantageous at one time which at another might be hurtful." "Fact" gives extracts from the sec- retary's reports to show that his conduct and language have been uniformly in opposition to the views charged against him. The reports, he says, are so long that most people do not take time to read them and this gives his calumniators an opportunity to mis- inform the public. It is very difficult to satisfy every one. "A certain description of men are for getting out of debt, yet are against all taxes for raising money to pay it off ; they are among the foremost for carrying on war and yet will have neither loans nor taxes. They are alike opposed to what creates debt and to what avoids it."^*^ The opponents of the funding system were as vehement in denunciation as its advocates were in its support. "A citizen of Philadelphia"^^ writes that it is absurd to reason in favor of the redemption of alienated certificates at their nominal value. This demand is made of the people of the United States, and they are composed of the widows, orphans, soldiers, and farmers who were compelled by necessity to sell their certificates to brokers September 11, 1792. "Hamilton's Works, vol. Ill, pp. 40-45. 44 Smith College Studies in History and speculators. They are the persons who pay the 30 per cent upon their own certificates and have to toil and labor to redeem them. "There is not a despotic government in Europe that would dare to perpetrate such a flagitious act of oppression and injustice. In more temperate and virtuous times, the authors of such a proposition will be considered as the scourges and pests of mankind." The following poem appeared in the Pennsylvania Gazette'^- soon after Hamilton presented his report on the public credit : "Tax on Tax," young Belcour cries, "More imposts and a new excise, A public debt's a public blessing, Which 'tis of course a crime to lessen." Each day a fresh report he broaches, That spies and Jews may ride in coaches, Soldiers and farmers don't despair, Untax'd as yet, are Earth and Air. Against those advocates of the funding system who turned to England as the great example of a nation prosperous under a national debt, "A Pennsylvanian"^^ argues that "the wealth of Britain is less owing to her debt than to her wars and extortions in the East and West Indies . . . The present debt of the United States, if funded and entailed upon our posterity as has been proposed, will not only bend our shoulders but sink our whole bodies into the earth." The government will be able to bor- row money at will and engage in wars without the consent of the people. The debt will necessitate the creation of four or five thousand revenue officers "who will devour the fruits of our in- dustry like so many locusts and caterpillars." Oppressive land taxes will be necessary, because the impost and excise duties as they are multiplied will be eluded. The power of the executive department will be so increased as "to destroy the balance of the constitution and thereby to introduce monarchy into our coun- try." "The public debt will promote bloody penal laws, disafifec- Pcnnsylvania Gazette. March 11, 1789. 'March 17, 1790. ■Ibid., April 21, 1790. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 45 tion to the government, bribery, perjury, idleness, gambling, poverty, misery, and slavery." "A Farmer" contributed a series of articles on the funding system in the Pennsylvania Gazette during the early months of 1790. Writing from the point of view of the agricultural class, he could see in the financial measures of the federal government only ruin to the group he represented. "Such injustice and op- pression may be colored over with fine words, but there is a time coming when the pen of history will detect and expose the folly of the arguments in favor of the proposed funding system as well as its iniquity. Instead of disgracing our country, by treating our army with so much ingratitude and injustice, it would be far better to double the public debt by paying the soldier and speculator the same sum. If the balance still due the army is paid them, it would spread money through every county and township of the United states, if paid to the speculator, all the cash of the United States would soon center in our cities and later in England and Holland."^'* In another article, the same writer urges that the original holders be paid 6 per cent according to contract and the pur- chaser 3 per cent. That the original holders sold their certificates for any other reason than necessity, he declares is true only in rare instances. "A hungry creditor, a distressed family, drove most of them to the Broker's Office and compelled them to sur- render up their certificates. The whole report of the Secretary (as he so often styles himself), is so flimsy and so full of ab- surdities, contradictions and impracticabilities, that it is to be hoped it will be voted out of Congress without a dissenting vote."^^ The funding system, he thinks, will have the following results in this country: (1) All the cash will be drawn from the country to our cities and from there exported to England and Holland to pay the annual interest of our greatly oppressive debt. (2) It will be impossible for farmers to borrow money to im- prove their lands, for who will lend money to an individual 'Ibid., January 27, 1790. ■Ibid., February 3, 1790. 46 Smith College Studies in History for 6 per cent when government securities will yield from 8 to 12 per cent? (3) It will check trade and manufactures. (4) It will fill our country with brokers and idle speculators. (5) It will produce a principal of $200,000 for a few nabobs in each of the states who will use the money buying townships and coun- ties to be cultivated by tenants who will administer to the ambi- tion and power of these nabobs "enabling them to establish titles and overthrow the liberties of our country." "The farmers," he continues, "never were in half the danger of being ruined by the British government that they now are by their own. Had any person told them in the beginning of the war that after paying the yearly rent of their farms for seven years to carry on this war, at the close of it their farms should not be worth more than one-fourth of their original cost and value, in consequence of a funding system, is there a farmer that would have embarked in the war ? No there is not ! Great Britain paid the Tories for their loyalty, although they did her cause more harm than good. Certainly the United States should not have less gratitude to her most deserving citizens than Great Britain has shown to her least deserving subjects." In another article "A Farmer"^^ complains that all the benefits of the funding system are to go to New York as that city was ad- mitted early into the secrets of the Treasury. "North and South Carolina and Georgia who all gave pure whig blood for their certificates are to be cajoled out of them by a few rich New York Tories and British agents who perhaps helped to feed the very armies that destroyed the Southern States and all the taxes paid by them are to center in New York." In dis- cussing the means to be employed to raise the money needed to re-establish the credit as Hamilton outlined, "A Farmer"^'^ thinks a land tax would be preferable to the kind of tax pro- posed by the Secretary. We pay a land tax once a year and are then done with it, but if the Secretary's plan is carried out we shall have to pay a shilling or so a day on everything we eat. Ibid., February 10, 1790. Ibid., February 17, 1790. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 47 drink or wear. This daily tax must come out of the produce of our farms and the labour of our hands. The farms must finally pay the immense tax that is to be raised to pay the speculators." At the beginning of the war, it was understood that the crown lands which had been ceded to the government were to pay the expenses of the war. But the lands had not been used for this purpose and were being sold for the trifling sum of a shilling and six pence an acre. "Had these lands been offered for sale for alienated certificates, they would soon have swallowed up the whole of that part of the debt of the United States, and those very foreigners who are now buying up those certificates to draw an interest on them, would at this time have been busy in not only purchasing but in settling our lands with the farmers and mechanics of European countries." "A Farmer" suggests that it would be well to oblige every Congressman speaking in favor of the Secretary's report, first to lay his hands on his heart and swear he was not a speculator. "Caius" writing in the National Gasette'^^ cites the advice of Mirabeau to the American people, "that if they wished to preserve their liberties, they should avoid European systems of finance and above all never to fund their public debt," as proof that they should not accept the Secretary's plan. "If it be 'that the exigencies of a nation are at all times equal to its resources,' the system of funding may be regarded as the true secret of rendering public debt (not public credit) immortal." He also argued that a funded debt is a great source of corruption, as it creates a monied interest distinct from the great body of the people, and that the public faith might have been equally pre- served by the policy of discharging the principal of the debt as far and as fast as the resources of the country would permit and by the prompt payment of the annual interest. "Less is it to be doubted that the great influx of money and with it the rising credit of our country for the last three years has been principally occasioned by those necessities of the European nations which produced a greatly increased demand for our produce and by the "Caius," II, January 26, 1792. 48 Smith College Studies in History operation of the impost, tonnage and excise laws of Congress which brought into the coffers of the general government the whole commercial revenue of the United States." Hamilton expressed the wish "that the creation of debt should always be accompanied with the means of extinguishment." But history and experience, so "Caius" argues, ^^^ have taught us that such a wish is wholly inapplicable to nations that have once adopted funding. The examples of European countries and particularly England, show us plainly, that a funded debt makes it easier to borrow. The legislature finds it more convenient to borrow than to impose new taxes until finally the debt is so huge that to support public credit and the needs of the nation, further burdens must be placed on the property and industry of the com- munity. Neither could the sinking fund be an effective means for extinguishing the debt. Whenever a need should arise be- yond the existing ability to obtain a loan, the sinking fund would be regarded as a subsidiary fund, as a security upon which to raise more money, thus facilitating the contraction of new debts while intended for the discharge of the old. "Brutus, "^^ writing in the National Gazette, sums up his objections to the funding system as follows : It has given added weight to the general government and particularly to the Treasury Department which was never contemplated by the framers of the constitution by throwing the huge sum of fifty million dollars into the hands of the wealthy and has attached them to all its measures by motives of private interest. This great monied interest has been made formidable by means of a bank monopoly. By means of unlim- ited impost and excise laws "the funding system has anticipated the best resources of the country and swallowed them all up in future payments." The wealth of the country has been trans- ferred to the possession of rich speculators, both foreign and domestic, while the industrious mechanics and farmers and the poorer class in general are compelled forever to pay tribute to these highly favored classes. These speculators are either for- ' National Ga::ette, "Caius," IV, February 9, 1792. "Brutus" I, March 15, 1792. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 49 eigners or people closely associated with the Treasury. "Almost the whole of the United States, like Roman provinces, will even- tually become tributary to the seat of government or one or two large maritime towns and the continual drains they will suffer will either be dissipated in luxury and licentiousness at the seat of government or be exported to foreign countries for the use of foreign stock-holders." By being given opportunities to make enormous profits, people are drawn from "their habits of pro- ductive labour" and capital formerly used in commerce is diverted to the purpose of speculation. In another letter, "Brutus"-^ calls the attention of his fellow- citizens to the ever increasing power of the secretary which he thinks is such as to occasion apprehension. "It does not appear to me to be a question of federalism or anti-federalism, but it is the Treasury of the United States against the people. . . . The influence which the Treasury has on our government is truly alarming, it already forms a center around which our poli- tical system is beginning to revolve . . . The state of our country is critical . . . To none is the present a period of more consequence than to the mechanic : already monopolies have been established at his expense. . . . What will be the fate of any private manufacturer who shall see a national manufac- tory rising into existence whose workmen shall have exclusive privileges such as exemption from militia duty and the like?" According to "American Farmer, "-^ the practice of fund- ing has gradually enfeebled every state which has adopted it. The funding system is highly unjust as it mortgages the labour of posterity. "By this means the quantity of property in the country is greatly increased in idea as compared to former times. . . yet not at all increased in reality. We may boast of large quantities of money but this exists only in name, in paper, in public faith." In a later discussion of the same sub- ject, -^ the writer gives further arguments against the funding National Gazette, September 1, 1792. • "American Farmer," IV, National Gazette, March 2, 1793. 'Ibid., V, Alarch 9, 1793. 50 Smith College Studies in History system. It will cause a confluence of people and wealth to the capital by the great sums levied in the provinces to pay the in- terest on the debt. Taxes levied to pay the interest on the debt are apt either to heighten the price of labour or be an oppression to the poorer classes. Foreigners by possessing a large share of our national funds may come to have too much influence in our government. Funding will encourage many to live a useless and inactive life as the greater part of public stock is always in the hands of idle people who live on their revenue. Finally, fund- ing will prevent the farmer from making necessary improve- ments on his property as his revenue will be considerably dimin- ished by the excise and other taxes. Another writer-^ sees no reason why we should put our credit on a firm basis in order to be able to borrow readily. We are so far removed from every foe that we do not need to make the same provision for our na- tional defence as European countries. "We do not need to in- crease our military or naval armament ; we do not have to spend money for court intrigue." Some of the writers of the time seemed to justify Professor Beard's-^ contention that the capitalistic interests were respon- sible both for the establishment of the government and the adop- tion of the financial system. For this evidence, Beard had gone to the treasury records which show the names of many of those creditors who funded their public securities under the law of August 4, 1790. But the Treasury records, though trustworthy so far as they go, are unfortunately not complete. Beard's method of procedure was as follows. The names of all the Sena- tors and Representatives of the first Congress were arranged in alphabetical order. It was then ascertained whether or not their names appeared in the Treasury records as having funded their public securities. "A study of the Treasury records shows that the Senators who held securities and voted for the funding bill were, with one or two exceptions, among the large holders of '*Ibid., "Gracchus," March 9, 1793. ^ C. A. Beard, Economic Origins of Jcffcrsonian Democracy (New York, 1915). Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 51 public paper and that the Senators of the same class who voted against the bill were among the minor holders."-*' A study of the vote in the House upon the Senate amendment to the fund- ing bill, providing for the assumption of state debts, shows that almost one-half of the members were security holders and that thirty-two out of the sixty-four members voted in favor of the measure. "This certainly justifies Jefferson's assertion that had those actually interested in the outcome of the funding process withdrawn from voting on Hamilton's proposals not a single one of them would have been carried. "An examination of the vote with reference to the geographi- cal distribution of the public securities would seem to show be- yond question that nearly all the members, security holders and non-security holders alike, represented the dominant economic interests of their respective constituencies rather than their per- sonal interests. In many instances there was, it is evident, a singular coincidence between public service, as the members con- ceived it, and private advantage ; but the charge of mere corrup- tion must fall to the ground. It was a clear case of a collision of economic interests ; fluid capital versus agrarianism. The rep- resentation of one interest was as legitimate as that of the other, and there is no more ground for denouncing the members of Congress who held securities and voted to sustain public credit than there is for denouncing the slave-owners who voted against the Quaker anti-slavery memorials on March 23, 1790."-''' The following extract from a pamphlet by "An American Farmer"2s illustrates this point : "Whatever were the ostensible reasons for adopting the present government of the United States, there is no doubt but that it owed its existence to the in- fluence and artifices of a few men who had taken advantage of the distresses of the country and who had largely speculated in the certificates given for services rendered by the most merito- ""Ibid., p. 180. "Ibid., pp. 194-195. ^Letters Addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States on Funding and Banking Systems (Philadelphia, 1793), Letter I. 52 Smith College Studies in History rious citizens. The farmers and soldiers knowing how much their country had suffered during a long contest to support the natural rights of men, accepted certificates in lieu of their full pay although public opinion at the very moment of acceptance had reduced them to one-eighth of their nominal value. These original and honorable creditors, when they parted with their certificates, regarded the public opinion respecting their value, as the most certain criterion of the value of the public debt. The American farmers and soldiers should take care that the property sacrificed by them to their country when in distress is not by a most iniquitous funding system now put into the pockets of undeserving speculators." In a later passage the writer char- acterizes Hamilton as a "person who hitherto has been suffered to assume too great a degree of authority in the government ; his decisions will not be regarded as oracles except by those who never think for themselves or are too indolent to examine his opinions, always enveloped in darkness and mystery. "-^ Na- tional credit^*^ he considers as a general expedient used by modern statesmen to mortgage the property and labor of posterity in order to satisfy debts entered into by the present generation. "What claim has the present generation to the property and la- bour of posterity? Such a practice is highly unjust and criminal. I would go farther and say that the present generation even to preserve its own existence, has no right to infringe upon the property of posterity." Similar arguments were also advanced by "A Citizen. "^^ "In the election for the first Congress, care was taken to choose none that were supposed to be inimical to the government. Those who had been the largest speculators and those who looked for ofihces under the government were loudest in proclaiming its per- fection and most industrious in artfully raising the hue and cry of anti-federalism against such candidates as they suspected would not favor their designs ; excited by their avarice, they used ""Ibid., Letter II. ""Ibid., Letter III. ^^ A Review of the Revenue System, Letter II. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 53 every art to secure their own or the election of their friends. The census not being taken, the representation was unequal and the states where the speculators had their principal interest, had too great a proportion of numbers." One of Hamilton's arguments for funding, he says, was that by a rapid rise of the market price of public securities they would be prevented from going into the hands of foreigners at a low value. The funding system did raise the price of the se- curities, he admits, but it did not prevent them from going abroad. Nominally it recjuired more money to purchase them, but as the payments were generally made in goods, a large pro- portion of which were luxuries, it did not add to the riches of the country except through a temporary increase in the revenues. If it had been desired to prevent them from falling into the pos- session of foreigners it should have been made a condition that they should remain the property of citizens at least for a limited time. Evidently the funding system was designed for the Euro- pean market. To foreign purchasers, alone, the irredeemable quality of the funded debt was suited. The Secretary had said that funding the debt would be a national blessing, that the trans- fer of stock would in most cases answer the purpose of money, that it would promote agriculture and manufacturing and lower the rate of interest. "Nay its efifects have been the very re- verse, for those who might otherwise have purchased and im- proved lands, built houses, established manufactures, or lent their money at interest to such as would have applied it to such purposes, have vested their money in the funds and deposited their public securities in the Bank of the United States or in the banks of the individual states. . . It will not be pretended that it has lowered the rate of interest, for in proportion as pub- lic securities rose in the market, the rate of interest also rose. . . . Far from cementing the union of the states, it has given the most deep and incurable wound to their union and confi- dence in each other. The citizens of one state have been en- abled to procure the public securities of the citizens of the other states at a small part of their value. . . As to adding to the 54 Smith College Studies in History security of the states against foreign attack, the funding system, by absorbing the revenues and impairing the confidence of the people in the fiscal measures of Congress, has in great degree tied our hands while we are buffeted by almost all the nations with whom we have any correspondence. "-^^ J. The Assumption of State Debts Another feature of Hamilton's great financial program which gave rise to a sharp division of public opinion was the assump- tion of state debts by the federal government. "A Citizen"^^ charges corruption in the passage of the Assumption Act in the pamphlet already quoted, "Nor could it be finally carried, if the disgraceful and venal bargaining about the seat of government had not been brought into its aid." The writer goes on to say that most of the states had already discharged their debts or made provision for it and that they should not be made respon- sible for the debts of the few negligent ones. In another letter'^^ he points out that if it had not been for assumption there would not have been any need for the excise, for notwithstanding the fact that the funding system had greatly increased the domestic debt, the revenue coming from the im- posts would still have been adequate. "Consequently, so far from preventing an interference with state revenues, the as- sumption of state debts created the only existing necessity of that interference." Another objection put forth was that if the federal government were able to pay the debts of the states, the states would thereby be encouraged in an extravagant and use- less expenditure of money. 'Ts paying back to the states their own debts and the requisitions of interest which they had dis- charged and thus enabling them to make expensive improvements or squander away money in unnecessary purposes or in extrava- gant salaries without taxing their citizens, while at the same time, the same persons as citizens of the Union have their estates '■ Ibid., Letter V. 'Ibid., Letter IIL 'Ibid., Letter IV. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 55 mortgaged for the repayment of the same debt and a growing in- terest in an irredeemable form — I say is this a national bless- ing ?"35 Another writer puts his objection to assumption on the ground that direct taxation by Congress would destroy the independence of the states. "For this [assumption] there was no general pe- tition from the people. No urgency pressed it. But it favored the object of administration. State debts sold at a low rate and therefore might easily be monopolized. To dissolve all money relationships between individuals and the separate states, would, on the one hand, diminish the state power and tend to consolida- tion and, on the other, create an undue influence by which the consolidated power might be managed. . . Congress pos- sessed the power of indirect taxation and the states the power of direct taxation. Hence, the public debt could have been diffused upon the resources of the nation so as to have been less burthen- some upon an exclusive branch of those resources by leaving the states respectively to provide for state debts. "A recurrence to direct taxation by Congress will swallow up the little sovereignty now left to the once sovereign, individual states and every accumulation of the debts of the Union is an impulse towards that end. . . . Without pulsation, without elasticity, they [the states] will dwindle gradually into a tale that has been told and their parts will crumble and dissipate like a corporation of beavers whose waters have been drained away."^^ Hamilton's chief argument in advocating the payment of state debts by the general government was the matter of con- venience. So far as the expenditure of money was concerned, the amount needed would be the same in either case, but it would be far more convenient and orderly to have one general plan under one authority than thirteen different schemes administered by as many heads. Many saw his point of view and lent him ""Ibid., Letter V. ^ "An American Farmer," Letters Addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States on the Funding and Banking Systems (Philadelphia, 1793), Letter IL 56 Smith College Studies in History their support. An article in the Pennsylvania Gazette, December 30, 1789, is particularly interesting, coming as it does before the report on Public Credit was issued. Speaking of assumption, it says : "It is hardly possible to conceive how the peace and tran- quility of the Union can be preserved and justice done to every denomination of our domestic creditors upon any other plan. . . The operation of one general plan of taxation in conjunc- tion with twelve or thirteen rival systems, must be attended with inexplicable difficulties. The expense of distinct sets of officers, the temptations to fraud by different rates of duties, the difficulty of securing the collection upon several thousand miles of fron- tier, the incapacity of the states to meddle with goods when im- ported and so to check frauds, that power being now in Con- gress and many other reasons, all combine to shew the absurdity of different and clashing powers being exerted to effect that which ought to be one business." Another article in the same paper early the next year^" argued in favor of assumption on the same ground of order and uni- formity. "If any of the states should now think the measures against their interests, a short time will open their eyes to the confusion which must arise from a continuance in their present situation." The writer then goes on to consider several propo- sitions that have been presented to him, as affording means to provide the necessary funds if the state debts were assumed. He considers first the old method of requisition — leaving to each state its own way of collecting the sum demanded. Those who favor this method assert that now Congress has the power of coercion and can enforce payment from a delinquent state. But what is to be the subject of coercion? If it be the state in its corporate capacity, it can be done only by levying war upon the whole people and destroying their existence as a state ; if it is to be upon the private citizens as subjects of the United States, that would be attended with many difficulties. This ex- ercise of coercion would cause much friction and ill-feeling and February 10, 1790. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 57 "either destroy the Union or annihilate all respect for the state government where it happens. . . The doctrine of requisition on the states, in every point of view, is a dangerous and imprac- tical one." Another proposition which the same writer examines is to apportion to each state its quota of the sum needed and allow Congress directly to tax the inhabitants, following in each state the method of taxation and collection which is used by its own government. This plan proposes as many modes of taxing and collecting as there are states, as no two states have a similar procedure. For the Treasury Board of the United States to control thirteen different systems would present many difficulties and give room for evasion and fraud which could never be de- tected. If neither of these schemes can be made to work satis- factorily, some plan must be devised by the government which shall operate through the whole country with equal expedition and justice. The mode of taxation must be plain enough for the people to understand or else they will not be satisfied and willing to pay. 'Tf there be any kind of property which is the basis of wealth throughout the Union and bears a near proportion to the ability of the people who must pay, if this kind of property cannot be secreted, if its nature is such that every man may prev- iously calculate his own taxes and detect an over-charge, if it is easily and cheaply collected, if its produce is ever in demand, so the person may pay his own taxes, this property on plain prin- :iples, should be the subject of direct taxation." 4. The Excise Hamilton's report recommending an excise was submitted to Congress December 13, 1790. If the public credit were to be established on a firm foundation, according to the plan suggested in his report of January 9, 1790, and if the debts of the states were to be assumed, more revenue would be necessary than the existing duties supplied, and it was to meet this deficiency that he proposed the excise. The proposition to assume state debts met with strenuous opposition in Congress, and it was only by 58 Smith College Studies in History the famous compromise between Jefferson and Hamilton by which southern votes were won for assumption and northern votes for a southern capital that the scheme was finally put through. "Sidney", writing in the National Gazette (April 23, 1792), says : "Is it not a matter, recorded and understood, that the Assumption of the state debts which alone created the necessity of the Excise was carried by a very small majority of that repre- sentation and under such circumstances, too, of management and inducement as were not very honorable?" He goes on to state his objections to the excise. In the first place it is a tax not con- sistent with liberty. The people cannot understand the excise as well as other direct taxes. ^'^ It is paid without the people really feeling how much they are paying and is in a measure taxing them blind-folded. His second objection is the extent to which the excise may be carried. Hamilton had argued that the proposed excise was the least burdensome source of revenue because distilled liquors were luxuries and could stand heavy taxation better than any- thing else. To this "Sidney" replies : "I call upon the contrivers and promoters of the system to mention that nation which has at any time introduced Excises on its domestic produce or manu- factures without extending the fatal grasp to the necessities of life which must ever be the most productive sources of that spe- cies of revenue." He feared that if once the excise were fully established, it would not long be laid on spirits alone, as lux- uries are used by comparatively few and revenue from them would necessarily be inadec[uate for the needs of government. It had been asserted by the College of Physicians that the ob- ject in imposing the excise was to promote health. This "Sid- ney" denies, and in reply to the suggestion of the Secretary that it was to prevent drunkenness, he says : "The Secretary well knew that the habits and circumstances of new settlements in particular rendered the use of spirits in some degree necessary." ^ It will be noted that "Sidney" assumes that an excise is a direct tax, although his argument is really based upon the theory that it is indirect. Public Opinion in Phil.\delphia, 1789-1801 59 The real objection to the tax, however, was poHtical. The people resented an excise levied by the central government. An excise imposed by the state was regarded as any other state tax while an excise by the central government was looked upon as a burden imposed by an external power. Hoping to make the tax less obnoxious, Hamilton suggested in his report that the excise officers be allowed no discretionary jurisdiction, that there be no abridgement to the right of trial by jury and that the offi- cers have no general power indiscriminately to search the houses and buildings of persons engaged in distilling liquor. But "Sid- ney" is of the opinion that the law can never be executed until these very powers are vested in these officers. Some disregard the law altogether, and some keep two stills, entering on record only one of them. "Sidney" concludes his denunciation of the excise in these words : "Any law that increases crimes, punish- ments, fines, seizures, and confiscation is injurious to the liberty and ensnaring to the happiness of the people. In all countries where the excise has prevailed these have been the results." Speaking of the political aspect of the tax, "Sentinel"^^ says : "The fate of the excise law will determine whether the powers of government of the United States are held by an aristocratic junto or by the people." Further, he states that the people have been so hostile to the measure that since its establishment the income from it has not been sufficient to pay the salaries of the officers employed in its collection. There were of course those who saw a favorable side to the excise. A writer in the Gazette of the United States, ^^ asserts that while the excise has necessarily diminished the consumption of spirituous liquors, the number of stills has increased. The reasons for this have been the growth of population, the decrease in the importation and consequent consumption of foreign spir- its, and the fact that the encouragement held out in the excise law has caused much attention to be given to the manufacture of gin and other spirits. As the result of this encouragement, 'National Gazette, May 7, 1792. 'September 22, 1792. 60 Smith College Studies in History the quality will continually improve and in a short time the ex- port of spirits, already considerable, will be a source of great profit to the country. 5. The Bank The principal reason given by those who opposed the estab- lishment of a National Bank was that it was unconstitutional. "A Pennsylvanian"^! asserts that "all the reasoning in the world can never from the constitution of the United States deduce a power in Congress to establish a National Bank. . . . All exclusive privileges or monopolies to private persons, for such the incorporated members of the National Bank must still be con- sidered, are inconsistent with the nature of our government and the sacred rights of the citizens who compose it." "Caius,"'*^ speaking of the unconstitutionality of the members of Congress holding the office of bank-directors under the authority of a law enacted by themselves and receiving emoluments which the stockholders shall vote, asks, "Why under the sanction of this precedent, may not the Secretary of the Treasury himself be eligible to a seat in Congress ?" The Secretary's system, he de- clares, "Is built on the basis of an humble and servile imitation of British Systems of finance and all their baneful concomitants of debt, funded and unfunded, annuities, chances, lotteries, and schemes from British authors and British statute books." He characterizes the designing junto responsible for the bank as "unanimous and diligent in intrigue, variable in principles, con- stant to flattery, talkers for liberty, but slaves to power." Many found it difficult to reconcile the idea of a National Bank with that clause in the constitution which states that "no senator or representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time ; and no per- son holding any office under the United States shall be a member The American Daily Advertiser, February 5, 1791. ' Letter III, in the National Gazette, February 6, 1792. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 61 of either house during his continuance in office." Some of the critics of the Bank argued in the following manner : Congress establishes the Bank. The Bank by the authority of Congress can create offices and affix salaries, payable in part out of the money of the United States. Every member of Congress can make himself a member of the Bank, can vote for directors and ibe himself elected a director. Many have done so. But how can this be constitutional ? The government owns two millions of the bank stock, and the offices and salaries created for the man- agement of it may be considered as belonging to the United States. If the government owned all the stock, the unconstitu- tionality of the case would be perfectly self-evident. Further- more the people of the country are taxed to the amount of one- fifth of the whole bank-stock and still are not represented by a single vote, a clear contravention of that constitutional principle that taxation and representation should always go together. Ev- ery other stock-holder in the Bank has votes in direct ratio to his stock; why then do not the people of the United States enjoy the same privilege? To those who would say in defense that the British government has no vote in the Bank of England, it may be said it has no stock to entitle it to a vote."^^ "An American Farmer"^^ declared that the Bank was simply a scheme by which the wealth of the country was thrown into the hands of a few. It only made the rich richer and the poor poorer. The profits of the Bank are really an indirect tax on the com- munity. All who deal with that institution constitute one class and the stock-holders the other. The dealers deposit their bonds or notes carrying interest and receive in exchange bonds or notes of the stock-holders bearing no interest. The difference between receiving an interest out of paper while it pays none on similar paper constitutes the great source of profit to the Bank. This gain necessarily implies a loss which must be borne by somebody. Either the immediate dealers with the Bank must bear it or be reimbursed by those who deal wnth them. If not reimbursed ' See for example The National Gazette, July 4, 1792. ^Letters Addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States, II. 62 Smith College Studies in History they would be ruined. Therefore the loss must fall upon the com- munity. "The contrivance is calculated to bestow upon the rich, interest upon the amount of their credit, not of their cash. Bank- paper is circulated to an amount far beyond a deposit in money. It rests on an idea called credit and all interest gotten for this surplus of paper, beyond a specie deposit, is paid by labour to the rich because they have what the poor ardently wish for. . . How delusive is a comparison between bank debts and private loans. The latter must consist of money or money's worth and, without one or the other, debts between individuals cannot be cre- ated. The former may be created though the bank possesses neither money nor money's worth and a banker may live upon the labour of others during his whole life, if he can conceal the fraud of his being a bankrupt. The latter are limited within reas- onable bounds because they are founded on real wealth, the for- mer may be infinitely multiplied by a printing press. In the lat- ter case, something is given for something; in the former the community pays something for nothing." In reply to the asser- tion of the Secretary that the Bank would be useful in support- ing the credit of the government and extending it aid in times of stress, the writer argues that "instead of supporting the credit of the government, the government must support the credit of the Bank. For if the credit of the government wavers, public paper cannot support the credit of the Bank. When the government shall need help, the Bank will need it also." The Bank violates the clearest constitutional principles for the following reasons : (1) Members of Congress may vote for the creation of a profi- table enterprize and themselves receive the profit. (2) They may impose a tax on the community, or a part of it, and instead of sharing in the burden, share in the plunder. (3) "A member of Congress, debauched by a profitable banking interest, ceases to be a citizen of the United States or an inhabitant of the state which chooses him as to the purpose of the constitution. He becomes a citizen and inhabitant of Carpenter's Hall. (4) Being a member of a corporation consisting chiefly or in part of foreigners, he is more under the influence of foreigners than of those who elected Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 63 him. "The EngHsh who could not conquer us, may buy us." (5) If members of Congress are stock-holders and directors of the Bank, then an illegitimate interest is operating upon the national legislature, the representatives of the states are enticed away from their "natural and constitutional allegiance" by their inter- est in the Bank. It would be better to allow the Bank to have representatives in Congress than to permit the states to be robbed of their just quota. (6) The constitution provides that charges of impeachment shall originate in the House and be judged in the Senate. But if those who are to impeach and to decide upon the validity of impeachments may, in consequence of the bank- ing and paper systems, be gainers by any misapplication of money, it is obvious that this check provided by the constitution is useless."'*^ ^ Ibid. CHAPTER III Foreign Relations 1. Neutrality Foreign relations during the Federalist period were chiefly concerned with the great war in Europe between France and the Allies. The people of the United States had not yet developed the spirit of diplomatic isolation which later characterized our foreign policy, and, if they had done so our interests as a neutral would in any case have made it impossible for us to hold our- selves entirely aloof. One faction argued that we ought to go to the support of France because she had helped us in our time of trouble, because she stood for the principles of liberalism, and because we were bound to her by the treaties of 1778; the other defended the Neutrality Proclamation, justified the Jay Treaty, and tried to bring about a war with France in 1798. Public opinion on these issues was freely expressed in newspa- pers and pamphlets, in festival parades and mass meetings, and in the resolutions of the Democratic societies and other partisan organizations. France declared war against Austria on April 20, 1792; Prussia entered the conflict in the following June, and Great Britain was drawn in early in 1793. The first coalition was formed shortly afterwards. The French minister, Genet, ar- rived in Charleston, South Carolina, on the 8th of April, and at once began to enlist troops, fit out privateers, and take prize ves- sels into American ports for condemnation. On the 22nd of April President Washington issued his Proclamation of Neu- trality. The first important newspaper attack upon the proclamation was made by "Veritas" in the National Gazette for June 1, 1793. The President was challenged to justify his policy on the ground of "duty and interest." According to "Veritas," the proclama- tion abrogated the treaties already existing between the United States and France "from which we have long enjoyed impor- tant advantages;" but if this be the true construction, "how can Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 65 the proclamation be considered as consistent either with our duty or interest? With our duty it cannot accord, so long as we pre- tend to any faith as a nation or remember with gratitude the circumstances under which our treaties with France were con- cluded and the generous exertions of that nation in the cause of American liberty. If it be the duty of a free nation to forget those friends to whom she is in a great measure indebted for a national existence ; to view with cold indifference the struggles of those very friends to support their own liberties against an host of despots; and in spite of the reciprocal ties of national treaties to treat an inveterate and cruel enemy with the same friendship as our best and most faithful ally — if such be the duty of Americans, as declared in the proclamation, then is that proclamation to be regarded as disgraceful to the American character." As regards the assertion that it was to Anierica's interest to maintain a strict neutrality, he says, "It never can be consistent with the interest of a nation basely to disregard its plighted faith. . . . It is by no means consistent with the interest of the United States to provoke the French nation to hostilities ; a consequence naturally to be expected from the violation of sol- emn treaties." Some of the advocates of neutrality had argued that there was no danger of the United States being drawn into a war with France, no matter how dishonorable our conduct towards her, "For," say they, "it will be for the interest of France that America should not be engaged in the war, but be left to furn- ish those supplies as a neutral nation which are so necessary to the sustenance of her army during the war. . . . These Solo- mons, however, may find themselves mistaken. France, though desirous of peace and friendship with us, is surely not insensible to injury, neither is she so abject as tamely to submit to an open violation of faith by any nation." A few days later, "Veritas" contributed another article on the same subject,^ in which he asked, "If a proclamation was ^National Gazette, June 8, 1793. 66 Smith College Studies in History justifiable and proper in 1793, was it not equally so in 1792 when several European Powers were actually engaged in a war? If so, why was it deferred till Great Britain became a party?" He went on to criticize what he considered the cowardly attitude of the government toward England. "For ten years has that haughty nation held possession of posts in our territory in open violation of treaty, as if we were tributary provinces." Whether the government had demanded these posts and been refused or not, the public had not been informed, but the writer was of the opinion that if the American people are kept in the dark much longer on this subject, they would "take the law into their own hands (as Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain boys did in 1775), and wipe off the disgrace of the nation by driving the in- vaders from our country. . . Does not England's seizure of our vessels bound for France, though they carry no contraband, and the retention of the Western Posts serve to convince America of the hostile views of Great Britain ?"- During the most critical period of the Genet episode. Presi- dent Washington called upon the judges of the Supreme Court for advice in interpreting the French treaties of 1778. "Juba" wished to know why, if he had any doubts on the subject, he did not consult the representatives of the people in Congress. In answer to his own question, "Juba"'" says : "It is suspected that a certain great man who directs the political movements of the executive, though not the ofificer of the people, is a little timid for fear the present Congress should make him pass through a se- verer ordeal than he has hitherto undergone and that this is the true reason why the representatives of the people are not con- sulted upon this momentous occasion."^ This is very probable, he continues, considering the fact that the number of bank-direc- ^ Jefiferson thought that William Irvine, a clerk in the Treasury, was the author of the "Veritas" letters, while Genet thought that Jefferson himself wrote them. Jefferson's Writings, vol. I, pp. 235 and 244. These letters, three in number, were answered in the National Gazette by "A Friend to Peace." ^National Gazette. July 27, 1793. * This is one of many references to Hamilton as Washington's chief adviser. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 67 tors, stockholders and stockjobbers is not so great in proportion to the whole body of Congress as they were at the last session. "The government," says he, "is in an uproar because the French have fitted out a brig in Philadelphia, •'' but appears to slumber over the British armaments that have been made here and the multiplied injuries and insults that our flag has sustained from the pirates under English colours." The strongest organized opposition to the policy of neutrality came from the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania, an organiza- tion formed on the model of the Jacobin Club in Paris and com- posed exclusively of French sympathizers." On January 9, 1794, the Society passed the following resolutions : "3rd. Resolved that we view with inexpressible horror the cruel and unjust war carried on by the combined powers of Europe against the French Republic — that attached to the French nation (our only true and natural ally) by sentiments of the live- liest gratitude for the great and generous services she has ren- dered us, while we were struggling for our liberties and by that strong connection which arises from a similarity of government and of political principles, we cannot sit passive and forbear ex- pressing our anxious concern wdiile she is greatly contending against a World for the same rights which she assisted us to establish and that, exclusive of the sentiments so natural to every true American, the powerful motive of self-interest com- bines to connect us still closer to France, for when we see so many sovereigns having different interests and some of whom are natural enemies to each other, confederate against a single Nation with no other avowed object than that of changing her in- ternal government, we cannot believe that they are making war ^ The Little Sarah, a vessel captured from the British and fitted out by Genet as a privateer in July, 1793. * The history of this Society has been treated briefly by J. B. McMaster, History of the People of the United States (New York, 1883-1914), vol. II, pp. 109-110, 175-178, 196, 206, and by C. D. Hazen, Contemporary Ameri- can Opinion of the French Revolution (Baltimore, 1897), pp. 188-209. For a description of the original manuscript minutes of the Society see below p. 158. For further history of the Society see below, chapter IV. 68 Smith College Studies in History against that Nation solely, but against Liberty itself. . . It therefore behooves us, as we value our dear bought rights to give to a cause so just in itself and which we may so properly call our own, every countenance and support in our power, consis- tently with the laws of our country. "4th. Resolved that we ought to resist to the utmost of our power all attempts to alienate our affections from France, and detach us from her alliance and to connect us more intimately with Great Britain, that all persons who, directly or indirectly, promote this unnatural succession ought to be considered by every free American as enemies to republicanism and their coun- try. "6th. Resolved that the conduct of the maritime powers at war with the French republic in prohibiting the exportation of our produce to France and her colonies, in seizing our vessels laden with provisions for that country is a daring infringement of the established law of nations and ought to be resented with a proper spirit. "7th. Resolved that we conceive we ought in the same manner to resent the outrageous conduct of Great Britain in im- pressing our seamen, in seizing our vessels on the high seas and detaining them in their ports on the most frivolous pretenses, in stirring up against us the savage nations of Africa and America and in short, in carrying on against this country a covert and in- sidious warfare which evinces her fear of our power at the same time that it can leave us no doubt of her hatred and enmity. "9th. Resolved. . . that the proposition she [France] has lately made of entering into a new commercial treaty with us on a broad and liberal basis and placing us upon the same footing with her own citizens at home and in her colonies, is an additional proof of the warm attachment of the people of France for their American brethren, that such a Treaty cannot but prove highly beneficial to this country in securing to it in the French colonies, rich and abundant sources of trade and a constant and profitable market for our staple commodities. "11th. Resolved that it is the opinion of this Society that Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 69 the agents of foreign powers acting in the name and under the responsibiHty of the governments by whom they are delegated, are responsible only to their own sovereigns for their official con- duct in the countries to which they may be sent. Impressed with this political truth, we find ourselves called upon highly to repro- bate all attempts that have been made and may be made by spreading false and calumnious reports, by indecent strictures and newspaper publications and by other as unwarrantable means to traduce and villi fy a foreign Minister, to excite suspicion against him in the minds of the people and a jealousy in their public officers, with a view to render his cause unpopular and his situation amongst us irksome and disagreeable and we cannot but see in such attempts, the efTects of a foreign influence acting in opposition to the Nation whom that Minister represents and endeavoring to make the good people of the United States sub- servient to such hostile designs. "13th. Resolved that the firm tone of our executive in de- manding from the British government a fulfillment of the treaty of peace deserves the approbation of every citizen who is inter- ested in the dignity, independence and welfare of our country."'^ A committee, consisting of Benjamin F. Bache, Peter S. Duponceau, and Michael Leib, was appointed to draft a set of resolutions expressing the views of the Society relative to the "present crisis of our National affairs." These resolutions, after amendment, were finally adopted, April 10, 1794, in the following form : "1. Resolved, as the opinion of this society, that unequiv- ocal evidence is now obtained of the liberticide intention of Great Britain, she having declared it through one of her satellites even to savages ; that the success of Freedom against Tyranny, the triumphs of our magnanimous French brethren over slaves, have been the means of once more guaranteeing the Independence of this country ; that their glorious example ought to animate us to every exertion to raise our prostrate character and every tie of ' Mss. Minutes, Democratic Society, 1793-1794 (Pennsylvania Histori- cal Society Library, Philadelphia), pp. 31-37. 70 Smith College Studies in History gratitude and interest should lead us to cement our connection with that Great Republic. "2. Resolved that the Proclamation of Neutrality by our Ex- ecutive, although we have every reason to believe it the offspring of the best motives, is not only a questionable constitutional act but has eventually proved impolitic and being falsely construed by Great Britain as a manifestation of a pusillanimous disposi- tion on our part, serves to explain the aggressions of that na- tion, and that experience urges us now to abandon a line of con- duct which has only fed the pride and provoked the insults of our unprincipled and implacable enemy. "4. Resolved that Great Britain has been waging war upon us in the most insidious and cowardly manner. . . Insidious, inasmuch as her orders to seize and condemn our property float- ing on the high seas under the sanction of the Law of Nations were transmitted directly and expeditiously to her commissioned pirates and at the same time carefully kept out of those channels of information by which we could have received intelligence of their unwarrantable intentions— insidious, inasmuch as they were so worded as to conceal their intentions by a studied ambiguity which should give their friends among us an opportunity, by disputing their import, to keep the public mind the longer in sus- pense. Cowardly, inasmuch as their wanton depredations have been exercised on property protected only by the Law of Na- tions. . . and at a time when our government was lulled into security by false assurances of friendship. "6. Resolved. . . . that the moment of national embar- rassment and decline is the most opportune to demand a fulfill- ment of national engagements and that this being the present state of Great Britain, it would be a dereliction of the means which Providence has put into our hands, not to avail ourselves of the present crisis to insist on a surrender of the western posts and a full indemnification for all the injuries which the United States have sustained from her. "8. Resolved that the progress of British influence in the United States has endangered our happiness and independence. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 71 that it has operated to make us tributary to Great Britain and to engender systems and corruptions baneful to Liberty. "9. Resolved. . . . that we entertain the most flattering anticipation that the Sister Repubhcs of America and France will have an inseparable relation and attachment — that they will ever be the temple of Liberty, the residence of the Arts, Sciences, Liberality and Humanity, 'an Hercules in the extermination of every monster of unlawful domination.' "^ On February 20, 1794, the German Republican Society,*^ in a communication to the Democratic Society setting forth the need and advisability of a close affiliation between the two bodies whose ideals and objects were so similar, enclosed the following resolution for its concurrence : "Resolved that as republicans and friends to universal liberty, that this society views with concern, the attempts which are making to depress the French character in this country. That when we see men insidiously endeavoring to produce an abhor- rence of a principle because the actors have gone to imagined excess ; that when we see men who, under the guise of patriotism, enter into a defence, nay a panegyric upon the perfidious, insolent and tyrannical conduct of Great Britain, every freeman ought to express his abhorrence of such dark policy and declare that the true and unbiased American has different sympathies."^ ° The Democratic Society replied on March 6, that it heartily concurred in these resolutions and would gladly co-operate in any measures that would promote the public welfare. ^^ A Civic Feast was held May 1, 1794. to celebrate the victories of the democrats of France over the royalists and aristocrats. The German Republican Society was invited to take part in the festivities. About 800 people assembled at the country residence of one of the members of the Democratic Society where the cele- 'Ibid., pp. 68-74. ' This was an organization of liberal Pennsylvania Germans. The writer has sought in vain for further information than that contained in the text concerning the Society. ^"American Daih Advertiser, March 15. 1794. ''Ibid. 72 Smith College Studies in History bration was held. Among those who attended were Governor Mifflin of Pennsylvania,^- the French Minister, Fauchet, various officers and citizens of the French Republic and Federal and State officials. The flags of the two republics decorated the seat of festivity. At the celebration the following toasts were drunk : "1. The Republic of France; one and indivisible. May her triumphs multiply until every day in the year be rendered a fes- tival in the calendar of Liberty and a fast in the calendar of courts. "2. The People of the United States. May each revolving year increase their detestation of every species of tyranny and their vigilance to secure the glorious inheritance acquired by their Revolution. "3. The Alliance between the Sister Republics of the United States and France. May their union be as incorporate as light and heat and their friendship as lasting as time. "4. The Great family of Mankind. May the distinction of nation and of language be lost in the association of freedom and of friendship till the inhabitants of the various sections of the Globe shall be distinguished only by their virtues and talents. "5. The extinction of Monarchy. May the next generation know kings only by the page of history and wonder that such monsters were ever permitted to exist." The following extemporaneous toasts were also offered : "1. May every free nation consider a public debt as a public curse, and may the man who would assert a contrary opinion be considered as an enemy to his country. "2. The dispersed friends of Liberty throughout the world. May France be the rallying point where they may collect their scattered forces and whence they may sally forth to the destruc- tion of all the tyrants of the earth. "^^ The most powerful defence of the neutrality programme " McMaster is of the opinion that "the real object of the Society . . . was to control the politics of Pennsylvania and to re-elect Governor Mifflin." History of the People of the United States, vol. II, p. 109. ^^Pennsylvania Gazette, May 7, 1794. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 73 came from the pen of Hamilton. His eight articles, signed "Pacificus," which appeared in the Gazette of the United States in the summer of 1793 were also published in pamphlet form.^'* It was his opinion that the real purpose of the attacks upon the Neutrality Proclamation in newspapers and pamphlets was not to bring about a free discussion of an important public measure, but to weaken the confidence of the people in their executive and thus prepare the way for a successful opposition to the govern- ment.^^ The objections to the Neutrality Proclamation, according to Hamilton, could be classified under four headings: (1) That the President had not the authority to issue the proclamation. (2) That it was contrary to our treaties with France. (3) That it was contrary to the feeling of gratitude we should have towards the French for the aid rendered us by that nation at the time of the American Revolution. (4) That it was untimely and unnecessary. And these objections he proceeds to answer. In order to judge the first of these objections intelligently, we must consider just what is the nature and purpose of a proclama- tion of neutrality. The true nature and design of such an act is to make it known to the powers at war and to the citizens of the country issuing the proclamation, that that country is at peace with the belligerent powers and not obligated by any treaties to become a party to the war as the ally of either side, and that conduct must be observed conformable to the above situation and strict neutrality maintained towards both sides. This and this only is the meaning of a Neutrality Proclamation. "It does not imply that the nation which makes the declaration will forbear to perform to any of the warring powers, any stipulations in treaties which can be performed without rendering it an associate or party in the war. It therefore does not imply in our case, that the United States will not make those distinctions between the present belligerent powers which are stipulated in the 7th and 22nd articles of our treaty with France, because those distinctions See Hamilton's Works, vol. IV, pp. 432-489. Gazette of the United States, June 29, 1793. 74 Smith College Studies in History are not incompatible with a state of neutrality; they will in no shape render the United States an associate or party in the war. This must be evident, .when it is considered that even to furn- ish determinate succours of a certain number of ships or troops to a powder at war, in consequence of antecedent treaties having no particular reference to the existing war, is not inconsistent with neutrality ; a position well established by the doctrines of writers and the practice of nations. But no special aids, suc- cours or favors having relation to war, not positively and pre- cisely stipulated by some treaty of the above description, can be afiforded to either party, without a breach of neutrality." This being the meaning of a proclamation of neutrality, did the President overstep the bounds of his constitutional authority in issuing it? It is an undisputed fact that the management of the foreign affairs of this country is vested in the government of the United States and that a proclamation of neutrality in the case of a nation which is at liberty to keep out of war and wishes to do so, is a very usual and proper measure. "Its main object and effect are to prevent the nation being immediately respon- sible for acts done by its citizens without the privity or con- nivance of the government, in contravention of the principles of neutrality." The next question is, what department of the government is the suitable one to act in case the "engagements of the nation permit and its interests require such a declaration." Obviously it must belong to the executive. "The legislative department is not the organ of intercourse between the United States and for- eign nations. It is charged neither with making nor interpreting treaties. . . . still less is it charged with enforcing the exe- cution and observance of those obligations and those duties." It is equally apparent that the act does not lie within the juris- diction of the judiciary department. "The province of that de- partment is to decide litigations in particular cases. It is indeed charged with the interpretation of treaties but it exercises this function only in the litigated cases." It must therefore rest with the executive to exercise this function if the occasion arises. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 75 "It appears to be connected with that department in its various capacities — as the organ of intercourse between this nation and foreign nations, as the interpreter of the national treaties in those cases in which the judiciary is not competent, that is in the cases between government and government, as the power which is charged with the execution of the laws, of which treaties form a part, as that power which is charged with the command and application of the public force." The constitution provides that "the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States" wnth three exceptions. The Senate shall participate in the appointment of ofBcers and the making of treaties, and the right to "declare war and grant let- ters of marque, and reprisal" shall be vested in the legislature. Considering that, for reasons already given, the issuing of a proclamation of neutrality is an executive act and since the gen- eral executive power of the Union is vested in the President, the conclusion is that he has acted within his constitutional authority in the step he has taken. "The President is censured for having declared the United States to be in a state of peace and neu- trality with regard to the powers at war ; because the right of changing that state and declaring a state of war belongs to the legislature." But as the participation of the Senate in the mak- ing of treaties and the power of the legislature to declare war are exceptions to the general principle that the executive authority is vested in the President, they should be strictly interpreted and not be extended any further than necessary for their execution. "While, therefore, the legislature can alone declare war, can alone actually transfer the nation from a state of peace to a state of war, it belongs to the executive power to do whatever else the laws of nations, co-operating with the treaties of the country, enjoin in the intercourse of the United States with foreign powers. In this distribution of powers, the wisdom of our con- stitution is manifest. It is the province and duty of the executive to preserve to the nation the blessings of peace. The legislature alone can interrupt those blessings by placing the nation in a state of war." 76 Smith College Studies in History That clause in the constitution which instructs the President to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed" gives him competent authority to issue a proclamation of neutrality. The President is the constitutional executor of the laws. Treaties and the laws of nations form a part of the law of the land. He who is to execute the laws must first judge for himself of their meaning. It rested with the President to judge whether there was anything in the laws of nations or our treaties incompatible with neutrality. "Having judged that there was not, he had a right and, if in his opinion the interests of the nation required it, it was his duty as executor of the laws to proclaim the neutrality of the nation, to exhort all persons to observe it and to warn them of the penalties which would attend its non-observance." The proclamation has been represented by some as a newly enacted law. This is incorrect. It only makes known a fact re- garding the existing state of the nation, instructs the citizens what laws previously established demand of them and warns them of the penalties for violation. In another article^" Hamilton discusses the assertion so fre- quently made by the friends of France that a sense of gratitude if nothing else should urge us to help her. This he denies. As a result of the war between England and France which ended in 1763, France suffered very severe losses and humiliating defeats. Her only desire from that time on was to destroy the ascendancy which England had won in the affairs of Europe and repair the wounds inflicted upon her pride. The American Revolution of- fered the opportunity to fulfill that desire. The possibilities of that situation early attracted the cautious notice of France. "As far as countenance and aid may be presumed to have been given prior to the epoch of the acknowledgement of our independence, it will be no unkind derogation to assert that they were marked neither with liberality nor with vigour, that they wore the ap- pearance rather of a desire to keep alive disturbances, which would embarrass a rival power, than of a serious design to as- 'Ibid., July 13, 1793. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 17 sist a revolution or a serious expectation that it would be ef- fected." The victory at Saratoga, which was the turning point of the war and which demonstrated our abihty to carry to a suc- cessful issue our struggle for independence, produced the treaties of alliance and commerce. "It is impossible to see in all this anything more than the conduct of a rival nation embracing a most promising opportunity to repress the pride and diminish the dangerous power of its rival; by seconding a successful resis- tance to its authority and by lopping ofif a valuable portion of its dominions. The dismemberment of this country from Great Britain was an obvious and a very important interest of France. It cannot be doubted that it was the determining motive and an adequate compensation for the assistance afforded us. . Aid and co-operation, founded upon a great interest, pursued and obtained by the party affording them, is not a proper stock upon which to engraft that enthusiastic gratitude, which is claimed from us by those who love France more than the United States." While neither the motives which prompted France to give us aid nor the amount of this aid can be considered sufficient grounds for the great gratitude which so many declare we should feel for that country, yet we must admit that in the manner in which the assistance was given there is ample cause for our esteem and friendship. France did not try to take advantage of our difffcult situation to force from us any humiliating con- cessions or impose any hard terms as the price for her aid. While this course of procedure was dictated by policy alone, still it was an honorable and generous one and is worthy of our deepest gratitude. The question has arisen, to whom do we owe our gratitude, to the unfortunate French King by whom the assistance was given or to the nation whose agent he was ? The arguments sup- porting the latter are as follows : Louis XVI was only the con- stitutional agent of the French people. He acted in their behalf and it was with "their money and their blood he supported our 78 Smith College Studies in History cause. 'Tis to them, therefore, not to him, that our obhgations are due." This reasoning, Hamilton characterizes as "ingenious but not founded in nature or fact." To be sure the King was merely the constitutional agent of the nation but at the time he had the sole power of managing its affairs. It rested with him to assist us or not, without consulting the nation, and he did help us without such consultation. "His will alone was active, that of the nation passive. If there was any kindness in the decision demanding a return of kindness from us, it was the kindness of Louis XVI." The individual good wishes of the citizens of France cannot be the basis for national gratitude on our part as the French people were not responsible for the services rendered us as a nation. "They can only call for a reciprocation of good wishes. They cannot form the basis of public obligations."^''' It must be admitted that the French people took a keen inter- est in the American cause, but who can say how much of it was due to antipathy towards England and how much to their sym- pathy for our aspirations ? "It is certain that the love of liberty was not a national sentiment in France, when a zeal for our cause first appeared among that people. There is reason to believe, too, that the attachment to our cause, which ultimately became very extensive, if not general, did not originate with the mass of the French people. It began with the circle more immediately connected with the Government and was thence diffused through the nation." Furthermore, when urging the friendly disposition of the French people towards our cause as a reason for our gratitude towards them, we must not forget that this friendly feeling was not confined to the French. It was shared by the people of the United Provinces who gave us valuable pecuniary aid and finally were drawn into the war upon our side. Here it is worthy of note that the movement began with the community and not with the government, as in France, the government finally being im- " Ibid., July 17, 1793. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 79 plicated through the pressure of pubHc opinion. Our cause had its friends in other countries, even in those with which we were at war. "It may be said to have been a popular cause among mankind, conciliating the countenances of Princes and the af- fection of nations." "The disposition of the individual citizens of France can therefore in no sense be urged as constituting a peculiar claim to our gratitude. As far as there is foundation for it, it must be referred to the services rendered to us and in the first instance to the unfortunate monarch that rendered them. This is the con- clusion of nature and reason. "^^ Jefferson became so alarmed at the great influence which the letters of "Pacificus" were exerting that he wrote to Madison on July 7, 1793, as follows : "Nobody answers him and his doc- trines wall therefore be taken for confessed. For God's sake, my dear Sir, take up your pen, select the most striking heresies and cut him to pieces in the face of the public. There is nobody else, who can and will enter the lists against him."i'' Acting upon Jefferson's suggestion, Madison wrote five letters under the name of "Helvidius," which appeared first in the Gazette of the United States (August 24 to September 18), but were later published as a pamphlet.-*^ These letters attracted much attention as everyone knew who the real author was. Madison's arguments were largely directed against Hamilton's first letter which stated his idea of the powers of the executive. The merchants and traders of Philadelphia were very de- sirous that the neutrality of the country should be strictly ob- served. In July, 1793, they held a large meeting at the Coffee House to consider certain actions tending toward a breach of the President's proclamation. In the course of the discussion, proof was presented that the Little Sarah had been armed in Philadelphia and sent out against the powers at war with France. ''Ibid. " Jefferson's Writings, vol. VI, p. 338. *" "Helvidius", Letters writttcn in reply to "Pacificus" on the Presi- dent's Proclamation of Neutrality. Philadelphia, 1793. 80 Smith College Studies in History A committee was appointed to call upon the Governor of the state and the heads of the departments in the federal govern- ment, to ascertain what steps had been taken to check "a proce- dure so alarming to the interests and honor of the United States." Governor Mifflin assured the committee that everything was be- ing done and would continue to be done to secure a strict ad- herence to the President's proclamation.-^ The policy of neutrality was supported in various short ar- ticles, letters, and editorials. For example, an anonymous writer in the American Daily Advertiser, for January 6, 1794, says : "There can be little doubt in the mind of any unprejudiced cit- izen taking into consideration recent communications, but that the United States would at this moment have been experiencing all the horrors of war, had not the Proclamation of Neutrality been issued at the crisis at which it was promulgated." "Henry," writing in the same journal,-- argues that while credit must be given to the wise and cautious conduct of the government by which we were "extricated from the snares that French emis- saries reinforced by anti-federal faction had spread for our peace, nevertheless something is due to good fortune. The en- thusiasm for the French in Philadelphia and in some other sea-ports was blind and violent enough to have hurried our coun- try into the war, if those who undertook to make a hack of our folly had not overdriven it. They hurried even those who seemed to be willing to run head foremost into the war quite out of breath. Had the business of privateering been conducted with more skill and address, our people would have been engaged in very great numbers in making a piratical war upon England and our country would have been involved in it beyond the power of retreating. Luckily, however, the French emissaries made a mistake in supposing our people more crazy than they really were and in consequence, they came to their senses. The whole coun- try cried out against privateering — the President found a solid support and the hopes of the war-party seemed to be destroyed." Gazette of the United States, July 10, 1793. January 17, 1794. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 81 But, because Congress has approved of the Proclamation and other measures to preserve neutrahty, we need not feel perfectly- easy about the peace of America. "The danger is not over. Our citizens are not to be led into the pit with their eyes open; nevertheless they may be led into it. New schemes are to be tried ; the project is now to trick the country into the war." "Hen- ry" believed that the people of the country ought to be neutral in thought as well as in action. "Is it prudent, manly or even hon- est," he asks, "after the declaration of an impartial neutrality on our part, to fill every newspaper and every circle of company with enthusiastic professions of attachment and even devoted- ness to the French cause, accompanied with the most provoking expressions of scorn and hatred of the English? There is as much true dignity for a neutral nation to forbear taking a side as to intermeddle with the quarrel of others Such has been the complexion of several of our newspapers, which are not only a disgrace to our country but contribute all they can to involve it in the war." An interesting article entitled "Wholesome Refreshment for the Memory" appeared in Porciip'uie's Gazette on April 7, 1797, four years after Washington issued his Proclamation of Neu- trality. The writer recalls to mind the violent opposition which the proclamation aroused among the heated advocates of war and the reprobation cast upon the President by "many a tedious essayist, whose projects of personal aggrandizement were blasted by a measure as just as it was reasonable." The propriety of the proclamation has been so securely established and its con- stitutionality so ably defended that no one now has any doubt of it. "That it was our duty as well as interest to be neutral has been clearly evinced by the result, we have enjoyed the fruits of it during the course of a war which has half ruined the fairest portion of Europe, and the sacrifices we have sustained, sacri- fices inseparable from a state of neutrality, have been much more than countervailed by the advantages drawn from our situa- tion." 82 Smith College Studies in History 2. The Jay Treaty The Jay Treaty, designed to settle the long-standing difficul- ties between England and the United States, was signed No- vember 19, 1794, and was submitted by President Washington to the Senate for ratification on June 8, 1795. An appropriation of money being involved, the House of Representatives, also had to be consulted. The opposition in both houses was very bitter, but the treaty was finally ratified, June 24, 1795; and the legis- lation necessary to put it into operation was passed on May 6, 1796. Of the many attacks upon the treaty, a series of letters by an anonymous writer who signed himself "Franklin," and which appeared in the Independent Gazcttecr,^^ were perhaps the most outspoken and extravagant in their criticisms. They called forth an extended and vigorous reply from William Cobbett in a pamphlet entitled A Little Plain English.-^ The "Letters of Franklin," Cobbett declared, were "a string of philippics against Great Britain and the Executive of the United States." They did not form a regular series in which the subject was treated in continuation ; the first one seemed rather to be "the overflowings of passion bordering on insanity, and each succeeding one the fruit of a relapse." And of the author, he said : "Far be it from me to pretend to a rivalship with this fawning mob orator, and I would not for the world make one convert from his tat- tered flock; unenvied I leave him to the plaudits of his cajoled 'fellow-citizens and the fraternal hugs of your insidious friends and allies.' " "Franklin" had opposed three main objections to the Treaty : (1) to conclude any commercial treaty with Great Brit- ain was "a step at once unnecessary, impolitic, dangerous and dis- honorable ;" (2) the terms were "disadvantageous, humiliating. ^^ These letters, 14 in number, appeared between the dates March 11 and June 10, 1795. Several letters signed "Philo Franklin" were pub- lished at this time in the same paper, in support of the position taken by "Franklin." '* Philadelphia, 1795. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 83 and disgraceful to the United States;" and (3) even if the terms had been satisfactory, the President had conducted himself in a high-handed manner in negotiating the treaty ; and for this he should be impeached. "Franklin" had even gone on to set forth five offences which in his belief demanded the impeachment of the President : ( 1 ) he had appointed Jay as envoy extraordinary, contrary to the Constitution; (2) he had appointed an envoy extraordinary on this occasion contrary to the judgment of the House of Representatives and of the Democratic Society; (3) he had failed to take the Senate into his confidence previous to Jay's departure for Europe ; (4) he had not taken the public into his confidence; and (5) he had avoided a nev^ treaty with France while advocating one with England. These objections Cobbett proceeded to demolish with char- acteristic vigor. To "Franklin's" assertion that commercial treaties were "an artificial means to gain a natural end," he re- plied that he would allow commercial treaties to be unneces- sary "when the scheme of opening all the ports in the world to all the vessels in the world" had been put in execution with success. And to "Franklin's" objection to a treaty with England because she was "famed for perfidy and double dealing," he did not scruple to reply that this was all the more reason for binding her with written articles. "Franklin" had advocated a treaty with France. But, said Cobbett, "Your commerce with France, even in the fairest days of her prosperity, never amounted to more than one-fifth of your commerce with Great Britain ;" and, moreover, if, as "Franklin" had said, France was "the most magnanimous, generous, just, honorable, rich, and powerful na- tion on earth," what was the use of a treaty to bind her? "Frank- lin" had declared treaties to be "impolitic" because they lead to war. But Cobbett thought it "rather surprising to hear 'Franklin' object to them on that account," when one-third of his argument was taken up with invectives against the President for not con- cluding a treaty with France, and the direct object of which was to draw the United States into the European war on the side of France. "Franklin" had argued that to conclude a treaty of 84 Smith College Studies in History commerce with Great Britain was "dangerous," because it would be forming "a connection with a monarch," and the introduction of "the fashions, forms and precedents of monarchical govern- ment" had ever accelerated the destruction of republics. But, said Cobbett, "can the people who have been so careful in pre- venting their future rulers from depriving them of the benefit of the laws of England, who look upon the being governed by those laws as the most inestimable of their rights, be afraid of intro- ducing among them the fashions, forms and precedents of Eng- land?-^ And if, as "Franklin" had said, the United States should make no treaties with any nation whose customs and forms were different from its own, that was all the more reason why an alliance should be made with England rather than with France. "Franklin" had opined that England planned to conquer the United States, and desired a treaty to secure thereby a footing in this country, in order to carry through her ambitious schemes ; but the surest of all guarantees that Great Britain would never at- tempt anything against American independence was in fact her own interest. And as to "Franklin's" forebodings that a treaty made with England, the inveterate enemy of France, would in- evitably arouse the latter's just and dangerous resentment, Cob- bett could only say that if the United States entertained such fears they were "no more than mere colonies of France," and their boasted revolution was "no more than a change of mas- ters." "Franklin" had asserted that it was "dishonorable" even to treat with England ; her king was "a tyrant that had invaded our territory and carried on war against us." But here Cobbett thought he had made a "small mistake" : "at the time the King of England invaded 'your' territory, it was his territory and you his 'loving subjects,' at least you all declared so." But much more pertinently he inquired how long it had been "a principle in politics that a nation who has done an injury to another is ^ Cobbett here refers to the Declaration of Rights incorporated in the Constitution of Pennsylvania. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 85 never after to be treated on a friendly footing." Was this a maxim, he inquired, of any other state in the world? Cobbett then turned to "FrankHn's" specific objection to the terms of the treaty, viz. : that the western posts had been made the price of a commercial treaty, that no provision had been made for indemnity to merchants, that the French had been sac- rificed to the British, and that all the essential interests of the United States had been abandoned. These charges Cobbett flatly declared to be untrue. "Franklin" had published his let- ters before the contents of the Jay Treaty had been made public; and such premature objections directed at what were only sup- posed to be the terms of the treaty could of necessity not be very serious. Cobbett got on rather firmer ground when he came to deal with "Frankhn's" argument in support of the extraordinary de- mand for the impeachment of the President. The latter had contended that the appointment of Chief Justice Jay as an en- voy extraordinary was a violation of the constitution, making the will of the executive superior to the will of the people ; that the appointee would combine in a single person, both legislative and judicial functions; and that it was the duty of a chief jus- tice to expound and apply treaties, not to negotiate them. To these specious arguments Cobbett replied by pointing out that there was no article in the constitution forbidding a chief justice from being sent as an envoy extraordinary, that the drawing up of a treaty was not a legislative act, and that it obviously did not make a person less capable of expounding a law to have taken part in framing it. And as for "Franklin's" claim that the appointment of Jay had been made in opposition to the wishes of a respectable minority of the House of Representatives, under the constitution that was purely a matter which concerned the President and the Senate. "Franklin's" amazing statement that the President should be impeached because the appointment of Jay was contrary to the wishes of the Democratic Society aroused Cobbett to a sar- castic outburst to which it is impossible to do justice except by 86 Smith College Studies in History quoting in extenso : "How it came into the head of 'FrankHn,' " he declared, "to introduce his club on this occasion, it is not easy to imagine. He does not pretend, I hope, that there is some- thing unconstitutional here also? The constitution says that the President shall take the advice of the Senate but it is totally silent with respect to the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania. Mighty 'alarming' indeed that the President should not consult this club of butchers, tinkers, broken huksters and transatlantic traitors ! Had he wanted a fellow to fell an ox or mend a kettle, to bilk his creditors or blow up an insurrection, he would have done well to address himself to the Democratic Society of Penn- sylvania for advice ; but to ask their advice in the appointment of an Envoy Extraordinary would have been as preposterous as consulting the devil in the choice of a minister of the Gospel." As for the President's failure to take the Senate into his con- fidence, that body did not know of the errand and the person to be sent. To be sure, it was not told of the particular objects to be accomplished ; but this was not necessary, either from a "con- stitutional or prudential point of view." The power of the Sen- ate extended only to the accepting or rejecting the treaties ne- gotiated by the President. The Senate should be consulted in the making of treaties, but not in opening negotiations ; and Franklin's interpretation of the constitution as meaning that no negotiations for a treaty could be entered into without the ad- vice and consent of the Senate was a strained and impossible one. And as for "Franklin's" conviction that "republics should have no secrets," and his complaint that the President had failed to take the public into his confidence, Cobbett replied that if the people had no right to prevent a treaty going into effect, they could gain no possible advantage from having it communicated to them previous to its ratification. "What satisfaction could they derive," he asked, "from being tantalized with a view of dangers that they could not avoid?" And finally, "Franklin's" demand that the President be impeached because he had refused a French treaty while eagerly pursuing one with England was almost too trivial to merit consideration ; for the constitution Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 87 clearly left the treaty-making power in the hands of the Presi- dent. He might make or avoid treaties according to his own judgment. And moreover, the object of France was to plunge the United States into war. There was no likeness whatever between the English treaty and the one proposed by Genet. Not only did the Jay Treaty encounter bitter criticism in the public press ; it also aroused such hostility as to lead to a public demonstration. On July 25, 1795, a large mass-meeting of the citizens of Philadelphia was held in the State-house yard and a memorial was drawn up to send to the President protesting against the Jay Treaty. The objections set forth in the me- morial were as follows : 1. It does not provide for a fair and effectual settlement of the differences existing between the United States and Great Britain, since it postpones the surrender and gives no compensa- tion for the detention of the Western Posts ; since it cedes, with- out any equivalent, an indefinite extent of territory to settlers under British titles within the precincts and jurisdiction of those posts ; since it waives a just claim for the value of the negroes carried off at the close of the war in violation of a contract ; since it renders the securing of an indemnity for the recent spoliations committed on the commerce of the United States an "equivocal, expensive, tedious and uncertain process." 2. By the Treaty, the federal government agrees to re- straints on xA.merican trade and navigation, internal as well as external, which include no principle of real reciprocity and are "inconsistent with the rights and destructive to the interests of an independent nation ;" because they obstruct intercourse with the West Indies, India, and the American Lakes by means of navigable rivers belonging to the English ; because in many cases they "circumscribe the navigation of the United States to a par- ticular voyage;" and because some of our staple goods (exempted by treaties with France, Holland, Prussia and Sweden) are made liable to confiscation as contraband and others (exempted by the law of nations) are made liable to seizure upon payment of an arbitrary price, on the charge that the articles are useful to the enemies of Great Britain. 88 Smith College Studies in History 3. The Treaty is ruinous to the domestic independence and prosperity of the United States, since it admits aliens "to per- manent and transmissible rights of property peculiarly belonging to a citizen," and since "it enables England to draw a dangerous line around the territory of the Union by her fleet on the At- lantic and by her settlements from Nova Scotia to the mouth of the Mississippi." 4. The Treaty violates the "rights of friendship, gratitude and alliance which the republic of France may justly claim from the United States ;" it is not consistent with certain articles of the American Treaty with France ; and it gives England, "cer- tain, high, dangerous and exclusive privileges. "^"^ Washington, replying to this memorial on July 28, 1795, gave to the citizens of Philadelphia the same answer which he had given to a meeting of the Select-men of Boston. He said that his one and only object was the welfare of the country which in his opinion would be best promoted by such a Treaty. ^^ Somewhat later, the merchants and traders of Philadelphia presented an address to the President in which they expressed their approbation of the treaty.-''' The address stated that the subscribers had had such confidence in the wisdom, integrity and patriotism of the federal government that they had refrained from giving their views on the treaty pending between England and the United States, although as merchants and traders they were more vitally concerned than any other class, both because of the indemnity stipulated in it for past losses and because of the security it would give to the property used by the merchants of the United States in their foreign commerce. But as other citizens had expressed views on the matter, ^^ and since they ^^ Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation bettvccn his Britannic Majesty and the United States of America. Appendix, Philadelphia, 1795. ^'Ibid. '* Address of a Number of Citizens of Philadelphia to the President of United States, in The American Remembrance, Philadelphia, 1795. ^° The reference is the to the above mentioned memorial submitted by the citizens of Philadelphia. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 89 feared lest their silence be construed into an acquiescence in those opinions, they deemed it their duty pubHcly to avow their approbation of the conduct of the Senate of the United States, believing that a different conduct respecting the treaty would have subjected them to the eminent hazard of war with all its concomitant evils. And more especially were they gratified be- cause provision was made for the establishment of public and private credit, which would promote a continuance of peace and the further improvement of the country. These were advantages which, in their opinion, greatly outweighed all objections to the treaty. The address was signed by a large number of Philadel- phia's merchants and tradesmen. The President, in reply, ex- pressed his great appreciation of their support. ^*^ Cobbett, in an article in Porcupine's Gazette, February 28, 1798, speaks with scorn of the opposition of the French faction to the Jay Treaty. ''All the evils arising from whatever cause and even the chastisements from the hand of the Almighty have been all attributed to the British Treaty." And he sums up its benefits as follows, "this is the instrument that has saved Amer- ica, that has procured a surrender of the Western Posts, that has retained British capital in the country, that has guarded its commerce in many instances against the ravages of the horde of French pirates, and that has restored and will restore to the merchants some millions of dollars while the only thing that Britain has obtained in return is the payment of debts justly due to her subjects and which ought to have been discharged fifteen years ago." The Treaty has fulfilled our most sanguine hopes. The French faction maintained that its terms would never be carried out, but time has proved their predictions false. The writer submits a report showing that eighty-three vessels have been restored and 55,000 pounds sterling ($250,000.) have been recovered by merchants and traders of America in accord- ance with a stipulation in this treaty. ** President's Reply, Ibid. 90 Smith College Studies in History J. Troubles With France The Jay Treaty disturbed the friendly relations which had previously existed between the United States and France and ultimately led to a breach of diplomatic intercourse. In 1797, President Adams appointed John Marshall, Elbridge Gerry, and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney special commissioners to proceed to France and make overtures for a peaceful settlement. The French government refused to receive the commissioners and apparently sanctioned a scheme of blackmail, carried on by cer- tain individuals who were referred to in the diplomatic records as X, Y and Z. The publication of the X Y Z correspondence strengthened the anti-French party in the United States, and ac- tive preparations were made for war. Adams sent a new min- ister to France, however, and a treaty was finally concluded with Napoleon, September 30, ISOO.^^ These long and irregular negotiations between the United States and France gave rise to extended comment and debate in the press of Philadelphia. An anonymous writer in the Aitrora^^ was very favorable to France, and ascribed the failure of the American Commissioners to the hostile attitude which the ad- ministration had shown towards the French Republic during the course of the war. This hostility had inspired distrust and Mr. Pickering's "insulting manifesto"^^ had turned that distrust into open enmity. The obloquy which the President had cast upon the French in his speech at the opening of Congress had only aggravated the situation. "A weak and wicked" administration had sacrificed the people of this country to the views and ambi- tions of England. "The French have been injured," he con- tinued, "by the arbitrary and forced construction given to our treaties with them, by which their prizes have been excluded from our ports and the ships of war of their enemies admitted ; they ^^ For further discussion of the X Y Z affair, and the special litera- ture of the subject, see C. R. Fish, History of American Diplomacv (New York, 1915), pp. 126-139. =" January 12, 1798. ^January 27, 1798. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 91 have been injured by our abandonment of the law of neutrahty after we had proclaimed it; they have been injured by various provisions in the British Treaty." "Fiat Justitia,"^'* writing in the same paper, characterized the conduct of the administration towards France as a "system of hy- pocrisy and treachery." Mr. Jefferson, when Secretary of State, in a letter to Pinckney, the American Minister to England, had laid down this principle: "If we permit corn to be sent to Great Britain and her friends, we are equally bound to permit it to France. To restrain it would be a partiality which might lead to war with France." But by our treaty with Great Britain we excluded provisions from France by granting to England the right to seize our provision vessels and carry them into her ports on paying a certain sum to the owners. This, therefore, was a ground for war. Another correspondent of the Aurora^° was of the opinion that peace had never been so necessary or valuable to the United States as it then was. If we were to enter the European war, we would be subject to great expense and much confusion. The Spaniards and Indians, led by the French in Louisiana, would cause us incalculable expenditures and loss of property in the southwest, aided, as they doubtless would be, by the Indians of the west and northwest who were eager for revenge. "All our frontiers from Lake Erie to the 31st degree of latitude would again require to be defended by much blood and treasure ; and the conciliation, instruction, and civilization of the Indians so happily begun, would be stopped at once." The efifect of war upon our commerce would also be disastrous as we should lose the markets for most of our exports. The expense of arming our vessels in order to protect their cargoes would be greatly increased ; and the loss of freight, necessary to make room for guns, ammunition, and defenders, the great advance in seamen's " The reference is to a public letter addressed by the Secretary of War to Mr. Pinckney on January 16, 1797, while the latter was acting as the President's special commissioner to France. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, vol. II, p. 313. ^ March 14, 1798. 92 Smith College Studies in History wages and insurance rates, all would be considerable. The large revenues of 1795, 1796, and 1797 would be greatly cur- tailed at once ; and more excises, stamp duties, and land taxes would have to be levied at a time when goods offered for sale would fall in price and imports would rise in price. Our pubHc funds, bank stock, and insurance shares would fall in value. Our specie would either go abroad or be hoarded by the timid, and paper would greatly increase in circulation. Immigration of people of business and property from Europe would cease, rents and houses would diminish in value, and property in this country would suffer a very great depression. Foreigners already en- gaged in business here would withdraw, taking their wealth with them. But if we remained at peace, and the destructive war between England and France continued another year, new investments would be made in this country, as shown by the steady price of our stocks and bonds at this critical time. "The true and great c^uestion of the present day," he concluded, "is whether we shall engage in the most wild and expensive war ever known, nay in a ruinous war, for temporary, limited, and questionable commercial advantages. . . Let us rely upon our distance from Europe as a promising security against actual invasion, and let us believe that if such a measure were to be attempted, the justice of a war to defend our homes would render the people of the United States one irresistible phalanx to defend the best of countries and existing constitutions." The following article appeared in Carey's United States Re- corder for July 3, 1798: "To real Americans of every political creed, we apprehend the following important state-paper [Dec- laration of Independence] cannot be uninteresting on the coming great national festival. And to both [Federalists and Republi- cans] it ought to serve as a beacon to warn America from draw- ing closer the bonds of connection with that tyrant whose mani- fold aggressions laid the foundations of such a series of war, misery, and ruin as we ardently pray that these states may never more experience." Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 93 The most vigorous of the anti-French articles and letters were those published in Porcupine's Gazette, many of them com- ing from the pen of Cobbett himself. In an article entitled "War and an Alliance with Great Britain or a Polite Welcome to Gen- eral Embargo, "3*^ Cobbett attacked the statement made by the editor of the New York Gazette that an embargo was "the only resource of the country." Cobbett called this "the most stupid and degrading notion that ever entered a sans-culotte brain. No nation is worthy of the epithet independent, which cannot, either by its own forces or by means of auxiliaries or alliances, enforce its rights or avenge the infringement of them. Without this the name of independence is far worse than nothing, it is a delusion and a curse." Every merchant has the right to expect and demand of the Government protection in his lawful trade. But what protection does a government afiford which fights with an embargo? In peace times he pays a heavy duty on all goods that pass through his hands. When war comes, justice demands that he be given the protection he has so long been paying for, but all he receives is the suspension of his trade: "Under its paternal shelter, he has the comfort to see his vessels rotting at his wharves, while his purse, or his person is harassed with militia laws for the defence of whatever is lucky enough to belong to the proprietors of the soil." As to the destructive effects of an embargo, "A single year of this gallant species of warfare would see the United States without a sailor and almost without a ship. The tars would not stay here to starve for 'liberty's sake' ; the mer- chants would sell their vessels to foreigners whose governments are able and willing to protect them in the use of them; and the farmers might prowl about in rags over their uncultivated fields." Of the two alternatives, war or embargo, Cobbett believes that war with France is absolutely necessary, and that an offen- sive and defensive alliance with Great Britain will inevitably fol- ^ Porcupine's Gazette, Januarj' 25, 1798. 94 Smith College Studies in History low. In the first place what could America, backed by the in- vincible fleets of Great Britain, possibly lose in a contest with France? The navy would be able to defend our seaports and afford a convoy to American ships engaged in trade. The trade with France would be cut off, but this trade is of no value to America. The French have no manufactures and, if they had, the people of this country would not use them. Of late years, France has been, to be sure, a considerable market for American produce, but for the millions worth of goods which have gone to her ports, she has not, upon an average, paid more than the freight. "Almost every merchant that has failed (and the num- ber is awful) was a trader to France, or her colonies and all the distress that now weighs down the country is to be ascribed to this destructive cause." Of foreign capital invested in banks or employed in trade, the part that belongs to Frenchmen is con- temptible indeed. But it is said that "the friendship of the sister republic" would be lost by war. "This is the mighty loss ; the friendship of a nation who has trampled you under her feet and now aims at the destruction of your government." Now, on the other hand, what is to be gained by a war? The immediate effect would be an unobstructed passage over the ocean without fear of seizure or even of examination. Commerce would revive, the confidence of commercial men would be re-established, and the spirit of enterprise renewed. American seamen would no longer be seized, shot at, and flogged within sight of their own shores. Louisiana might be secured, and "thus would the States be completely rid of the most alarming danger that ever menaced them; and which, if it be not soon removed, must and will in a few years, effect their disunion and destruction." But, most im- portant of all, an alliance with Great Britain would destroy the French faction in this country. "It is my sincere opinion that they have formed the diabolical plan of revolutionizing (to use one of their execrable terms), the whole continent of America. They have their agents and partizans without number and, very often, where we do not imagine. . . . They have explored Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 95 the country to its utmost boundaries and its inmost recesses and have left a partisan on every spot, ready to preach up the holy right of insurrection. . . This dreadful scourge nothing can prevent but a war." That some of his enemies would revive their old charge that he was a "hireling of Pitt," Cobbett was well aware ; but he asserted that England could gain nothing from such an alliance except an advantage shared in common with all other civilized nations, that of "staying the destructive tor- rent of Jacobinism." A writer in Porcupine's Gasette,^'^ who signed himself "Y," thought it absurd to attribute all the hostility between France and the United States to the "deceptions and encouragement of an American faction." "The evil did not originate with them, but in the deep-laid, inveterate policy of France, her ambition, in- trigue, and corruption are more to be dreaded and execrated than all the democrats of America. We must either agree to be gov- erned by a French Minister and conform at all times to her am- bitious and turbulent politics or incur her displeasure ; an honest neutrality she will not suffer, any more than she will bear a rival." If France should promise compensation for the damage she has done and agree never to offend again, "let us not for- get that she still is France, artful, perfidious France, and only waits another opportunity to aim a surer blow." Porcupine's Gazette for January 1, 1799, contains an account of an English victory over the French off the north of Ireland, and also of the Battle of the Nile. "This is a charming com- mencement of the New Year. This day twelve months will be the first of the nineteenth century and before it arrives, I think we shall see the republic of France humbled to the dust and her despots destroyed." And next day the Gazette continued in a similar vein : "Before it [the New Year] be terminated, I think we shall see the rapacious, the base, the bloody Republic of France totally annihilated and her pillaged territory wrested from her, if not "April 4, 1797. 96 Smith College Studies in History her ancient dominions frittered away. The century began with a glorious war on the part of the Britons against the intrigues and ambitious projects of this vain and perfidious race." "Americanus"^^ was of the opinion that France had already declared war upon us the day on which she so contemptuously dismissed our minister. Speaking of the Jacobins, he says : "one of their common tricks has been to represent that many-headed monster the Republic as waging war against the tyrants of Eur- ope to establish universal liberty and peace, when nothing can be more foreign from the truth. . . . The case is just the re- verse ; this common enemy has invaded the rights of all other nations and, abroad as well as at home, she has shown the most daring contempt for every law and principle that is reverenced among men. After fighting like devils for seven years, to con- quer liberty as they phrase it, the people of France are at this instant, the most contemptible slaves existing. . . . But whatever may be the future fate of this degraded people, whether they are destined to groan long under the scourge of vulgar tyrants or to submit to the milder sway of their ancient line of princes, it is happy for us that the alliance between France and America is at an end. God forbid it should ever be revived !" Gazette of the United States, February 23, 1798. CHAPTER IV Political Parties /. The Origin of Parties Three different theories as to the origin of national poHtical parties in the United States have recently been advocated. Pro- fessor John Spencer Bassett thinks that there were fairly well defined parties in 1791, but he does not think that they had any very direct connection with the parties of 1787-1788. In other words, he holds that the political divisions of the country which resulted from the ratification of the constitution were not car- ried over into Washington's administration, but disappeared when the constitution was adopted. The Federalist party of 1787-1788 was composed of those who wished a more effective government than that which existed under the Articles of Con- federation, and the Federalist party of 1791 consisted of those who supported Hamilton and his policies. The problems of 1791 were new and not concerned with union or confusion but with two distinct and different lines of internal policy. ^ Professor O. G. Libby agrees with Professor Bassett that the division of the country into Federalists and Anti-Federalists over the ratification of the constitution was not the beginning of the later Federalist-Republican alignment, but he goes further and denies the existence of any real party cleavage during the administration of Washington and the early part of the admin- istration of Adams. He regards this as a transitional period so far as party development was concerned. There were fac- tional and sectional animosities but no genuine party divisions. It was only with the enactment of the Alien and Sedition Laws during Adams's administration that a real political party came into existence. Jefferson saw in these laws and the indignation towhich they gave rise, because of their severity towards aliens and the menace to freedom of speech and of the press, the op- ^J. S. Bassett, The Federalist System (New York and London. 1906), p. 42. 98 Smith College Studies in History portunity to found a genuine political party. Libby character- izes the presidential election of 1800 as a turning point in our history fully as important as the adoption of the constitution. It was a victory of the first political party that really represented the people of the United States. - Professor C. A. Beard disagrees with these two scholars. He is inclined to think that there was "a fundamental relation be- tween the division over the adoption of the Constitution and the later party antagonism between Federalists and Anti-Federal- ists." His theory is based upon evidence gained from a study of pamphlets and periodicals of the decade from 1790 to 1800, which leaves no doubt in his mind that definite party alignments did exist and that they were generally recognized. Furthermore, the writings of such representative men as Washington, Hamil- ton, Jefferson, and Madison give proof that their authors thought there were political parties. The names Federalist and Anti- Federalist were frequently used in the literature of the period.^ There are many letters and articles in the Philadelphia news- papers of the time which throw light upon the problem of the origin of political parties, and so far as their evidence goes it supports the theory of Professor Beard. For example, a cor- respondent of the National Gazette,^ in an article entitled "A Candid State of Parties," is positive that parties existed in 1792 and also that there was a direct connection between the party lines existing in 1789, when the constitution was adopted, and those of the period immediately following, when the measures of the Federal Government were being put into operation. The writer states that there have been three periods of party de- velopment. In the first period, the distinction was between Whigs and Tories, those who advocated the cause of indepen- dence and those who adhered to the British. This state of things ' O. G. Libby, articles in The Quarterly Journal of the University of North Dakota, vols. II and III. Quoted in C. A. Beard, Economic Ori- gins of Jeffersonian Democracy, pp. 12-33. ' Beard, Economic Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy, pp. 22-22). * September 26, 1792. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 99 was ended by the treaty of peace in 1783. The second period be- gan in 1783 with the adoption of the Articles of Confederation, and was terminated in 1789 with the ratification of the Consti- tution. The party divisions of the third period turned upon the diflferences of opinion regarding the measures to be employed in carrying the principles of the constitution into efifect, and were in fact a continuation of the previous alignment. One of the divisions, which he calls the Anti-Republican party, consists of "those who, from particular interest, from natural temper or from the habits of life, are more partial to the opulent than to the other classes of society and having debauched themselves into a persuasion that mankind are incapable of gov- erning themselves, it follows with them, of course, that govern- ment can be carried on only by the pageantry of rank, the influ- ence of money and emoluments and the terror of military force. Men of these sentiments must naturally wish to point the meas- ures of government less to the interest of the many than of a few and less to the reason of the many than to their weaknesses, hoping the government itself may by degrees be narrowed in a fewer hands and approximated to a hereditary form." The other, which he calls the Republican party, consists of "those who, believing in the doctrine that mankind are capable of governing themselves and hating hereditary power as an insult to the reason and an outrage to the rights of man, are naturally offended at every public measure that does not appeal to the un- derstanding and to the general interest of the community or that is not strictly conformable to the principles of republican govern- ment." The writer of an anonymous pamphlet, A Definition of Parties, published in Philadelphia in 1794, had no doubt that there was a distinct party cleavage. The dedication to his work contains these words : "The existence of two parties in Congress is apparent. The fact is disclosed almost upon every important question. Whether the subject be foreign or domes- tic — relative to war or peace — navigation or commerce — the mag- netism of opposite views draws them wide as the poles asunder. 100 Smith College Studies in History The situation of the pubHc good in the hands of two parties nearly poised as to numbers must be extremely perilous. Truth is a thing, not of divisibility into conflicting parts, but of unity. Hence both sides cannot be right." The formation of parties was due to the operation of many cross currents, social, economic and sectional. There were struggles between rich and poor, between creditors and debtors, between industrialists and agrarians, between slave-holders and non-slave holders, between the North and the South, and between the people of the tide-water section and the people of the fron- tier. These diverse elements tended to consolidate into the Fed- eralist and Republican parties. Although the division was mainly the result of differences of opinion on political issues, it had as its philosophical basis two conflicting theories of constitutional interpretation, the nationalist or loose-construction theory of Hamilton and the states-rights or strict-construction theory of Jefferson. All these questions were discussed at length in the newspapers and pamphlets of the Federalist period. The plan of the following exposition will be to deal first with the question of constitutional interpretation and then to consider the political issues. 2. Constitutional Interpretation In his celebrated opinion on the constitutionality of a na- tional bank,^ February 23, 1791, Hamilton had argued in favor of a liberal interpretation of that clause of the constitution which empowered Congress *'to make all laws which may be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" its vested functions. These views were further elaborated in his Report on Manufac- tures,^ December 5, 1791, and the argument was strengthened by an appeal to the "General Welfare" clause of the constitution. The principle was laid down that the powers of Congress are not susceptible of specification or definition, that every object which operates through the whole nation concerns the general welfare, ' Hamilton's Writings, vol. Ill, pp. 445-493. 'Ibid., vol. IV, pp. 70-198. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 101 that it is left to the discretion of Congress just what those ob- jects which concern the general welfare shall be, and that what- ever concerns education, agriculture, manufactures and commerce comes within the sphere of the national legislature. But, asked a correspondent of the National Gazette,'^ "Is there any object of consequence for which money is not necessary or any object at all which money may not be applied to and so be brought under the power of Congress? Is there any object which in its operation may not by possibility extend through the Union? Cannot such a discretion of the national legislature pronounce all objects whatever to concern the general welfare? Can any usurpation of power be judged unconstitutional by the judicial authority, if the legislature can constitutionally do what- ever in their discretion concerns the general welfare? Does not what concerns the general interest of learning, agriculture, manufactures and commerce embrace by far the greatest part of the sphere of legislation?" If the legislature can declare such matters to concern the general welfare, cannot they apply the same discretion to provision for the poor, maintenance of an es- tablished church and anything else it pleases? There is danger that such a doctrine would destroy every boundary between the general and state governments and give indefinite powers to the former. Also there is the same danger of breaking down the bar- riers between the several departments of the general government and making either the executive or the legislative supreme. "Was not the general government adopted and has it not been by all the world understood as limited to the particular powers specifying and defining the general terms, common defence and general welfare ; and not as clothed by these terms with power susceptible neither of specification nor definition? If the ex- position in the Report should prevail, will not the people of America be under a Government which is not the choice of the people but the choice of those who administer the government? Is there not a degree of misconstruction and assumption of January 12, 1792. 102 Smith College Studies in History power that may raise the awful question, whether it does not touch the fundamental compact of government, and is it not wise to keep at a distance from that danger?" The possibility of the division of the Union into a Northern and Southern Confederacy was apparently suggested as early as 1791. In answer to these suggestions there appeared an article in the National Gazette, November 10, 1791, entitled "The Interest of the Northern and Southern States Forever In- separable," in which the writer predicts that there will always be the closest relations between the North and the South. It was the design of nature in her formation of that part of North America occupied by the United States, that the two sections should ever be mutually dependent on each other. Because of New England's not very fertile or productive soil, a great part of her population will be engaged in fisheries, many others will be employed in manufacturing; while many would be out of employment, if it were not for the carrying trade of the Southern states from Maryland to Georgia. "An intimate union, founded upon the broad basis of the carrying trade may continue durable as time and the present constitution of things." It will probably never be to the interest of the Southern States to become their own carriers. Nothing now seems to be wanting to strengthen the close connection between the northern and southern parts of this country except a capital situated in the center of the country and easily accessible to all parts. There was, however, no general discussion of nullification and of the dangers of a dissolution of the Union until Congress began to consider the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. The constitutionality of those measures was challenged in the news- papers, and threats of revolution and nullification were made several months before the appearance of the Kentucky and Vir- ginia Resolutions.^ The issue of Carey's United States Re- ' The Alien Act was passed June 25th ; the Alien Enemies Act, July 6th; and the Sedition Act, July 14, 1798. The Kentucky Resolutions were adopted November 16, 1798, and November 22, 1799, and the Virginia Resolutions December 24, 1798. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 103 corder for July 3, 1798, contains several sarcastic paragraphs on the Sedition Law, including the following attack upon Cobbett : "Some of our first architects are now busily employed in mak- ing out a plan and elevation of a Bastile upon a large scale for reception of seditious republicans, Jacobins and United Irishmen . . . . If the important office of keeper of that bulwark of national and presidential security, the Bastile, be not already given away or promised to some of the great war chiefs in either house of Congress, we would recommend Peter Porcu- pine as a proper Cerberus for that department. . . . From the number of plots and conspiracies which have lately been discovered by Porcupine and certain members of a great house, it would not be a matter of astonishment if they should bring to light a French or Jacobin plot for 'blowing up the Delaware' in order to drown Philadelphia and destroy our incipient naval power and greatness." Carey also brought forward arguments in favor of the right of a state to pass upon the constitutionality of an act of Con- gress : "When a law shall have been passed, in violation of the constitution, making it criminal to expose the crimes, the official vices or abuses or the attempts of men in power to usurp a des- potic authority, is there any alternative between an abandonment of the constitution and resistance? . . . ." "What is a fac- tion?" he continues. "It is any number of men in or out of office eager to obtain or maintain themselves in power, in direct violation of the laws or constitution or in opposition to the inter- ests of a nation. For an illustration first read the third sup- plementary article to the federal constitution and then read all the sedition bills. "^ "Is not every officer of a state govern- ment sworn to support the constitution of the United States? If the federal government passes laws contravening the consti- tution, is it not a breach of oath in a state officer to carry such laws into effect ? Are not the state as well as the federal govern- ment to judge of the constitution? Is not the constitution a con- Carey's United States Recorder, July 3, 1798. 104 Smith College Studies in History tract between different states? Are not they to judge whether this contract be broken or violated ?"^*^ Numerous articles and letters in defense of the Alien and Sedition Acts appeared in Porcupine's Gazette. Cobbett's own views were stated in the issue for January 5, 1799 : "The follow- ing article," he says, "is taken from a Dublin paper of October 12. Read it, I pray you, whoever you are, and then tell me if the Alien and Sedition Bills are not necessary : 'Yesterday eve- ning the State prisoners were all served with notice to prepare for their departure to America. None of them will be allowed at large through the city previous to their embarkation. And those who do not comply with the terms of going direct to America in vessels appointed by the government will be confined here during the war.' I absolutely would ship them off if I were the President, the moment they landed in the country. I do not know where I would send them to, but here they should not remain. This is making a Botany Bay of this country with a vengeance." "Plain Truth" contributed a series of articles to Porcupine's Gazette on the question of the separation of the states, his pur- pose being to show that there was just cause to fear for the safety of the Union, to fear that plans had been formed which would be fatal to the peace and destructive of the United States of America and that it was time for sleeping federalism to take alarm and arouse itself. It was very essential for our welfare, the writer argued, that the Union be preserved : "To every cool, reflecting mind, it must be obvious that our national independence and consequently our individual liberty, that our peace and our happiness depend entirely on maintaining our Union. There has already been much discussion of a distinct Northern and Southern interest ; and in case there should be a division, a Southern Confederacy with Virginia at the head would be likely. The Potomac would doubtless form the Northern boundary, as Maryland has given proof that she would go with the North. 'Ibid., July 14, 1798. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 105 Furthermore, the two Carolinas and Georgia have shown the same disposition. Virginia then, with Kentucky and possibly Tennessee, would form the new Empire. It could not be more extensive." Cobbett comments favorably on the motives of "Plain Truth" and hopes that he will succeed in his efforts to arouse the de- fenders of the Union : "That the states will separate one day or another, every man must believe, but whether the separation is to take place in a few years or not, will greatly depend on these two powerful states [Pennsylvania and Virginia]. If they coal- esce in the project, I am afraid no power on earth can prevent its succeeding." There may, however, he continues, be another cause of sepa- ration which "Plain Truth" does not mention : "The New Eng- landers know well that they are the rock of the Union. They know their own value, they feel their strength, and they will have their full share of influence in the federal government or they will not be governed by it. It is clear that their influence must decrease, because every man has a vote and the middle and south- ern states are increasing in inhabitants five times as fast as New England is. If Pennsylvania joins her influence to that of New England, the balance will be kept up, but the moment she de- cidedly throws it into the scale of Virginia, the balance is gone. New England loses all her influence in the National Government and she establishes a Government of her own."^^ J. Political Issues The formation of political parties was largely the result of disputes over problems of finance and foreign policy which have already been discussed. i- Many of the other political is- sues of the time were also more or less associated with these two subjects. The selection of the federal capital, for example, be- came involved in the controversy over the assumption of state debts. The Whiskey Rebellion was caused by Hamilton's excise Porcupine's Gazette, April 1, 1799. ' See chapters II and III. 106 Smith College Studies in History tax. The Democratic Societies were formed to express sym- pathy with France and distrust of Great Britain. The AHen and Sedition Laws and the Kentucky and Virginia Resohitions were direct outgrowths of troubles with France during President Adams's administration. (a) The Seat of the Government During 1789 and the early part of 1790, considerable parti- san feeling was aroused over the question of the location of the permanent seat of government. The final result is well known, and need not detain us. Hamilton secured the necessary votes in favor of the site on the Potomac in return for Jefferson's aid in securing the assumption of the state debts. But an examina- tion of the newspaper debate over this issue will throw not a little light on the development of opinion. "A True Federalist," writing in the Pennsylvania Packet, summed up his arguments against the claims of New York as follows :^^ (1) The states, in parting with the various powers which they vested in the federal government, thought that in so strengthening the Union they were furthering their own in- terests. But the Union is endangered, if the mutual interests of all are not impartially considered. (2) To assemble the govern- ment in a place so far from the geographical center of popula- tion (there being forty-two representatives and sixteen senators from the south of New York and seventeen representatives and eight senators to the north of New York) is a very partial act. New York may become so powerful as to endanger the Union. (3) That part of the constitution which gives a majority of the legislature the right to regulate commerce, a fact which may tend to monopolize the carrying trade, as well as the power to estab- lish duties on foreign imports, may, by incautious or interested exercise of these powers, be made the instrument of oppression to the southern states. (4) In case of any great question in which the northern states are particularly interested the repre- sentatives from those states, from ''local advantages of situa- ' January 5, 1789. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 107 tion," might assemble quickly and put through their schemes be- fore the southern representatives were able to assemble. (5) The government should be located near the geographical center of population where all might most conveniently enjoy its bene- fits, where the collective resources of the Union might be as- sembled and administered with greatest ease, where any news of an enemy or of a domestic insurrection might be obtained most speedily, where the more southern states in continual dangers from their proximity to the settlements of foreign nations as well as to hostile tribes of Indians might have confidence in the aid of the government. (6) The southern states consume more imported articles than the north, and consequently the most of the revenue from the impost will come from the southern states ; therefore they should have a chance of being benefited by the expenditure of this money, and this will be possible only if they are as near the seat of government as the other states. (7) The situation of the capital should be central, so that those who have business with the fiscal and judicial departments, together with their counsel and witnesses, may easily get to it. (8) The rapid growth of the West must be considered ; and the site se- lected must be more advantageous from their point of view. (9) The reins of control will necessarily have to be relaxed in normal times at a great distance from the seat of government ; and that will make it necessary for districts farther away to submit to extraordinary assertions of governmental power in cases of pressing emergency. "How far the exercise of a high-handed authority will accord with the feelings of the citizens of the southern states requires little reflection to determine." (10) The only plea that is alleged for summoning Congress to meet at New York is the fact that the archives are there ; but these could be moved to a more central location, cheaply and without injury. (11) New York is open to the sea and without defence. Congress should meet in a place that is more free from danger. (12) Where public revenues are concentrated, there is the center of the great monied operations. Many will be induced to settle there, as business can be transacted more speedily. Those who 108 Smith College Studies in History live in the vicinity will have a better chance of obtaining public offices since they can make application personally. For this reason Congress should be centrally located. Speaking of the punctuality with which the representatives and senators from New Etngland assembled at New York, be- cause of the facility of traveling during the inclement season of the year, and of the danger that southern trade might be sac- rificed to the local interests of the New England states, another correspondent of the Packet says : "Nothing can prevent this but a central residence of Congress which shall favor equally the early and punctual attendance of every member of Congress. Philadelphia or Baltimore should be preferred to New York. If they are not, in the first session of Congress it will lay a foun- dation of animosities that no government can prevent or heal."^* Another correspondent fears that British influence will pre- vail if our government meets in any place where English inter- ests are as strong as they are in New York. "Great Britain can never be indifferent to our prosperity. The same spirit which actuated her councils during the war governs them in peace. That situation, therefore, which connects the United States most with Great Britain will always be improper for the resi- dence of Congress. If there is a city in the Union in which an attachment to British manners and customs predominates — if in that city half the principal people have sons or brothers now supported by royal pensions in Great Britain, certainly Congress should avoid that place if they wish to establish Republican manners in the United States. "^^ In reply to the objections made against the high salaries paid to members of Congress and the officers of the new government, "A Traveller," writing in the Pennsylvania Gazette, says that something is to be said in favor of our rulers. "They sit in a town filled chiefly with the friends and adherents of Great Brit- ain who constantly buzz in their ears British ideas of salaries, rank, dress, and equipage, and which, from the want of better 'Ibid., March 17, 1789. 'Pennsylvania Gazette, May 7, 1789. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 109 information, our delegates mistake for the sense of the United States. The newspapers, which in other states are the vehicles of the opinions and complaints of the people, will never con- tain original strictures upon any of the Acts of Congress while the citizens of New York make the residence of Congress among them their first object. These considerations show the necessity of Congress immediately fixing upon a place of permanent resi- dence, otherwise our liberties may be sacrificed to the hospitable cards and tea-parties of the citizens of New York."^'^ "A Late Traveller" calls attention to the fact that the price of boarding in New York is nearly twice as high as it is in Philadelphia, in part due to the fact that New York is only half as large as Philadelphia. This is a substantial reason why Congress should reside in Philadelphia. It ought to be remem- bered that the board of the members of Congress is to be paid out of a common treasury and, of course, that every citizen the United States must pay his proportion of it.^" The question of the location of the national capital also called forth an extensive pamphlet by "A Citizen of Philadelphia"^^ who argued at length in favor of postponing the ultimate de- cision and urged the choice of Philadelphia as a temporary seat of the government. He held that an immediate decision upon the permanent residence of Congress would be very "improper" for the following reasons : ( 1 ) Adequate buildings for the ac- commodation of Congress are already to be had in Philadelphia, and there is at present no money to spare for the erection of new ones. In the present state of the finances and with the nu- merous demands being made on the treasury, the country is in no condition to expend such sums of money as would be required to buy the ground and erect the buildings necessary for a new capitol. The claims of the nation's creditors, both foreign and domestic, should be satisfied with the first money that can be raised. Whatever may be the feeling about the purchasers of ^Ubid., August 19, 1789. "Ibid., May 13, 1789. ^ An Essay on the Seat of the Federal Government, Philadelphia, 1789. 110 Smith College Studies in History alienated certificates, there is no doubt about the claims of the original holders, and they should come first. (2) Debates on the subject in Congress have brought out great differences of opinion as to geographical questions, and it is evident that the internal geography of the country is not definitely enough known to make it possible to decide upon a central location for the gov- ernment. (3) Four or five new states are soon to be added to the Union, and questions affecting the whole nation should not be decided until their admission. (4) In the late discussions in Congress, two parties have appeared which are nearly equal in number, and which have contradictory views as to the proper location of the capital. Such a division, if allowed to continue, may "destroy mutual confidence and lessen our unanimity in matters having no connection with the seat of government." But time may modify these conflicting opinions. (5) In locating the capital, the geographical center of population, not of terri- tory, should be sought for, and this will be a shifting point for some time to come. (6) Congress should be situated where ac- commodations are best and where foreign and domestic news can be most easily obtained. "I think," says the writer, "we might as well immure them [the members of Congress] in the bottom of a well or shut them up in a cave, where they would be effectually cut off from all intelligence of the world, as to place them within the desert dreary fogs and disheartening agues of either the Potomac or Susquehannah, where there is nothing grand and majestic to be seen but the ice and floods and noth- ing lively to be heard or felt but musketoes." The author then urges the following considerations in favor of the choice of Philadelphia, at least as a temporary site, in preference to any other location for the capitol : (1) Phila- delphia is as near the geographical center as any place which is capable of accommodating Congress, and it will continue so for a long time. (2) It is the greatest center of wealth, trade, and navigation in the United States. News, both foreign and do- mestic, may easily be obtained there. (3) It is easily fortified, affords splendid anchorage, and is protected from all winds, Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 111 tides, and storms. (4) Plenty of timber, iron and other stores for building, rigging and repairing ships, together with the food necessary for provisioning them, and the seamen to man them, are always available in the vicinity of Philadelphia. (5) "The climate is temperate, the air good, the spring and fall are delight- ful, the winters mostly moderate, with no more snow or frost than is necessary for the convenience of the inhabitants and the growth of vegetables ; the heat of summer is rarely intense, and if at any time it becomes violent it seldom lasts long; it is very uncommon to have the mercury at 90 degrees." With pardonable exaggeration the author continues to sing the praises of his city, and all objections to it seem to him in- significant. "When compared with any of them," he says, "it has more houses, more inhabitants, more riches, more churches, and more play-houses, and quite as much, though perhaps some- what less sociability, more punctuality in payments, which is some indication of honesty." And if any object that the presence of ice hinders navigation in the river for two months in the year, it may be replied that in winter ships are rarely at sea and that in any case they soon find a harbor in Chesapeake Bay or in New York. And if any feel that the population is too large, he must bear in mind that wherever the seat of the government is, there will a large population congregate, and the difficulty could only be avoided by frequent removals. And finally, if any- one fear that "the various allurements and pleasures of the place are apt to divert some of their numbers from their attention to the public business and their duty in the house," it may be an- swered that this cannot be remedied by running away from the mischief, but by imposing severe laws on their own members, and by rigidly punishing and even expelling such as are guilty of any scandalous practices which corrupt their morals or councils or such who, on any account neglect their attendance and duty in the House." (b) The Democratic Societies and the Whiskey Rebellion Although proof has never been adduced that the Democratic 112 Smith College Studies in History Societies of Pennsylvania had any direct connection with the Whiskey Rebelhon, many respectable citizens agreed with Presi- dent Washington in his belief that they were really responsible for it, and during the excitement caused by that insurrection, the Societies themselves became a political issue of great importance, and many bitter attacks were directed against them. The Democratic Society of Pennsylvania,^^ the first organiza- tion of its kind in the United States, was established at Philadel- phia in 1793 in imitation of the Jacobin Club in Paris. The fol- lowing quotation from the Principles and Regulations of the Society-*^' sets forth the reasons for its formation : "With a view to cultivate a just knowledge of rational liberty, to facilitate the enjoyment and exercise of our civil rights and to transmit unimpaired to posterity the glorious inheritance of a free Repub- lican government, the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania is constituted and established. Unfettered by religious or national distinctions, unbiased by party and unmoved by ambition, this institution embraces the interest and invites the support of every virtuous citizen. The public good is indeed its sole object." The fundamental principles of the association were declared to be as follows: (1) "That the People have the inherent and exclusive right and power of making and altering forms of government and that, for regulating and protecting our social interests, a Republican government is the most natural and beneficial form which the wisdom of Man has devised." (2) "That the Republi- can Constitutions of the United States and the state of Penn- sylvania, being framed and established by the people, it is our duty as good citizens to support them. And in order to do so, it is likewise the duty of every Freeman to regard with attention and to discuss without fear, the conduct of the public Servants in every department of the government." The Rules and Regulations provided that there should be one society in Philadelphia and one in each county of the state. " See above, chapter III. '^Principles, Articles and Regulations agreed upon by the members of the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania, May 30, 1793, Philadelphia, 1793. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 113 Stated meetings were to be held the first Thursday in every month, but as a matter of fact the Society met almost every week. New members were to be admitted and officers elected by ballot, a majority of the votes of the members present being in all cases decisive. No new member could be balloted upon at the same meeting at which he was proposed. Every new member was re- quired to subscribe to the constitution and to pay an entrance fee of fifty cents to the treasurer. The officers were a president, two vice-presidents, two sec- retaries, a treasurer, and a corresponding committee of five mem- bers whose duty it was to keep in touch with the other Societies in the country and to lay the results before the Society. David Rittenhouse was the first president of the Society, and Benjamin Franklin Bache, editor of the Aurora, was a member of the Cor- responding Committee. Among the other members were Stephen Girard, Eleazer Oswald, editor of the Independent Gazetteer, and Clement Biddle. In the summer of 1794, the Society was given a room at the University of Pennsylvania, where its subsequent meetings were held. In true French Jacobin style the use of all titles was re- nounced in the following resolution of March 27, 1794: "Re- solved that the appellation 'Citizen' shall, exclusively of all titles, be used in the correspondence of this Society, that the usual for- mulae at the bottom of a letter shall be suppressed, and that all letters shall be dated from the Era of American Independence. ^i Intimate relations were early established between the Demo- cratic Society and the German Republican Society, another Phila- delphia organization which had been formed to support the rights of man and espouse the French cause. On February 20, 1794, a communication was received from the president of the German Republican Society to the effect that as long as the two organiza- tions were founded on the same principles and had the same ob- jects in view their intentions could "be better promoted and a greater energy given to their exertions by the establishment of a Manuscript Alinutes of the Democratic Society, pp. 62-63. 114 Smith College Studies in History mutual correspondence and a concurrent operation." The Demo- cratic Society cordially accepted this invitation and, on March 6, resolved unanimously to unite with the German Society in any measures deemed proper to promote the public welfare.^^ An amusing parody on the resolutions of the Democratic So- cieties was contributed by "Ironicus" to the Gazette of the United States on January 30, 1794: "Whereas the government of the United States from which the people were led to expect great and manifold blessings hath now been nearly five years in operation and whereas the public expectation hath been entirely disappointed and defeated in re- spect to said government — by the continuance of anarchy, con- fusion and discord among the people — by the prostration of the public credit and the decline and contraction of commerce — the discouragement of agriculture, the depression of mechanic arts — the reduction of the value of ships, houses, lands, cattle, lumber, grain and other produce of the farming interest — ^by the stagna- tion of domestic intercourse, particularly the embarrassments on the coasting trade — by the destruction of mutual confidence be- tween man and man — by the apathy and indifference which hath seized on all the interprizing faculties of our citizens, mani- fested in a total dereliction of all plans for the improvement of our roads, and facilitating by bridges and canals, internal com- munications — by the total defection of all the tried patriots of the United States from those principles which actuated them 'in the times, that tried men's souls' by placing the administration of public affairs in the hands of men who, though they have braved death in every form to secure the liberties and independence of the United States, are now lost to every sense of the blessings they fought and conquered to obtain and from being patriots are transferred to parricides. "Therefore for the remedy of all these and many other evils seen, felt and groaned under from Georgia to New Hampshire — be it known, that one general and universal change ought to ^American Daily Advertiser, March 15, 1794. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 115 take place — revolution is the word — Revolve, revolve, revolve, till all the pleasing, comforting, heart-consoling and exhilarating delights of capsizing, topsy-turvy ing, undermining, disjointing and overthrowing all the systems, principles and practices of this wretched country are fully realized and enjoyed until "Those who are in, No longer shall grin ; And those who are out, No longer shall pout." Apart from the foregoing satire, the Democratic Society ap- pears to have received the compliment of but slight attention from the Philadelphia newspapers before the outbreak of the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania. The situation be- came very difTerent, however, when on November 19, 1794, Washington sent the message to Congress in which he charged that the insurrection had "been fomented by combinations of men, who, careless of consequences, and disregarding the un- erring truth that those who rouse cannot always appease a civil convulsion, have disseminated from an ignorance or perversion of facts, suspicions, jealousies, and accusations, of the whole government."-^ This was generally understood to be an attack upon the Democratic Societies of the country and particularly upon the two organizations in Philadelphia. As a matter of fact, although both the Democratic and the German Republican So- cieties regarded the excise as an unconstitutional and dangerous measure, they both denied any connection with the insurrection itself. On July 31, 1794, the Democratic Society passed a resolution to the effect that "although we conceive Excise systems to be op- pressively hostile to the liberties of this country and a nursery of vice and sycophancy, we, notwithstanding, highly disapprove of every opposition to them, not warranted by that frame of government which has received the sanction of the people of the United States." It was further resolved "that we will use our ut- ^^ Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Ed. J. D. Richardson (Wash- ington, 1897), vol. I, p. 166. 116 Smith College Studies in History most efforts to effect a repeal of the Excise laws by constitutional means ; that we will at all times make legal opposition to every measure which shall endanger the freedom of our country — but that we will bear testimony against every unconstitutional at- tempt to prevent the execution of any law sanctioned by the ma- jority of the people. "2^ It is noteworthy that, moderate as these resolutions seem, some members of the Society, not present when they were adopted, disapproved of them and feared disastrous conse- quences ; and a motion was later passed that a committee be ap- pointed to write to the Democratic Societies west of the moun- tains concerning the resolutions, assuring them of the parent Society's disapproval of any unlawful measures.-^ The letter drafted by this committee to the Democratic Society of Wash- ington County was reported to and approved by the Philadelphia Society on August 14, 1794, and has been preserved in the min- utes. It reads in part as follows : "Friends and Fellow Citizens : We beg you to accept our condolence for the lives that have al- ready been lost on the present unhappy occasion, and we sin- cerely hope that matters may be accommodated without the further effusion of human blood or the destruction of property. With regard to the law which has given birth to so much general uneasiness . . . fancy wants a figure and language words to convey our detestation of Excise-systems in this country. [In every instance where an excise law has been adopted] poverty, wretchedness, slavery and corruption among the people have been the invariable consequences. . . [But, neverthe- less] let us endeavor to apply a constitutional remedy to the evil by obtaining a repeal of the law. In the meantime, Fellow- Citizens, we earnestly recommend prudence and moderation."-^ On September 11, the Philadelphia Society passed a resolu- tion approving of the "moderate, prudent and republican conduct of the President of the United States and the Governor of 'Manuscript Minutes, p. 131. •Ibid., pp. 133-134. 'Ibid., pp. 136-137. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 117 Pennsylvania in pursuing the plan of pacification with the wes- tern people, an appeal to the reason of freeman being more consonant with the principles of liberty than the argument of immediate coercion." And it was further resolved "that we fully concur in the sentiment that the strength of the state ought to be exerted should the power of reason prove inadequate with the Western citizens." These resolutions in support of the government were adopted without opposition. It was a very different thing, however, to condemn the rebels, when a third resolution was proposed, "That the intemperance of the Western Citizens in not accepting the equitable and pacific proposals made to them by the government augurs an enmity to the genuine principles of freedom and that such an outrage upon order and democracy. . . will merit the proscription of every friend to equal liberty;" it gave rise to more than a warm debate. The president of the Society left his chair and with a number of members withdrew from the room. Some thirty members remained with Benjamin F. Bache in the chair, and after extended discussion decided to withdraw the resolution.2''' Although evidence was lacking to prove that the Democratic Societies were responsible for the Whiskey Rebellion, the Fed- eralists tried to use the Rebellion as a pretext for breaking them up. This is shown in the following address issued by the So- ciety of Philadelphia to the other Societies of the United States :2* "Sensations of the most unpleasant kind must have been ex- perienced by every reflecting person who is not leagued against the liberties of this country, on hearing and reading the various charges and invectives fabricated for the destruction of the Pa- triotic Societies in America. So indefatigable are the aristo- cratic faction among us in disseminating principles unfriendly to the rights of man — at the same time so artful as to envelop their machinations with the garb of patriotism, that it is much "Ibid., pp. 143-146. "November 27, 1794. Ibid., pp. 163-170. 118 Smith College Studies in History to be feared unless vigilance, union and firmness mark the con- duct of all real friends to equal liberty, their combinations and schemes will have their desired effect. "The enemies of Liberty and Equality have never ceased to traduce us — even certain influential and public characters have ventured to publicly condemn all political societies. When de- nunciations of this kind are presented to the world, supported by the influence of character and great names, they too frequently obtain a currency which they are by no means entitled to either on the score of justice, property or even common sense. "Unfortunately, a favorable circumstance for the designs of aristocracy lately took place — we "mean an insurrection in the western counties of this state. The executive, however, by marching an army into that country, many of zvhom were mem- bers of this and other political societies soon obliged those people to acknowledge obedience to the laws. . . . There are not wanting some in administration who are attempting to persuade the people into a belief that the insurrection was encouraged and abetted by the wicked designs of certain self-created so- cieties — that no cause of discontent with respect to the laws or administration could reasonably exist. Is it not an indisputable fact that the complaints of the western people against the excise law have sounded in the ears of Congress for sometime before the existence of the present Patriotic Societies?" The Society also issued an address, December 18, 1794, to its "Fellow Citizens of the United States," which refers quite definitely to the attack made upon it in the President's message : "The principles and proceedings of our Association have lately been calumniated. We should think ourselves unworthy to be ranked as freeman, if, awed by the name of any man, how- ever he may command the public gratitude for past services, we could suffer in silence so sacred a right, so important a principle, as the freedom of opinion to be infringed by an attack on So- cieties which stand on that constitutional basis. . . . "If freedom in the communication of sentiments by speech or through the press. ... is the right of every citizen, by what Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 119 mode of reasoning can that right be denied to an assemblage of citizens? . . . and in the conduct of this Society since the first estabHshment, they trust no instance can be adduced in which they have overstepped the just bounds of the right of which they claim the enjoyment." The address then went on to say that the late western insur- rection has been taken advantage of "to cast an odium on po- pular Societies and has been made the plea for their suppres- sion. . . . The fact is that most of the people who in the western counties have been guilty of the outrage on the laws, which every good citizen must lament, are too ignorant to have been incited to those unwarrantable measures by the circulation of the sentiments and opinions which the Democratic Societies have, from time to time, expressed on public men and meas- ures. . . . Indeed, the Great Luminary of the Anti-Demo- cratic party had declared officially that the opposition to the Excise Law dates from its existence ; and it is well to know that Democratic Societies were not thought of 'till sometime after the passing of that law."^'' There is plenty of evidence to show that the excise troubles antedate the rise of the Democratic Societies. An article in the Gazette of the United States for September 26, 1792, com- plained that the people on the frontier had not paid a state tax since the Revolution and that they would not pay the excise except under compulsion. '"Tis not this, that or the other mode of revenue," said the writer, "which they would oppose, but the payment of any and all public dues. Not to execute the laws among such people, would be to abandon the maintenance of civil society and to reduce a free and civilized nation to a state of nature." Various other articles appeared in the newspapers of the next two years which were severely critical of the people of western Pennsylvania. A correspondent of the Pennsylvania Gasette^^ advised them to consider well their conduct, since from Manuscript Minutes, pp. 174-184. August 20, 1794. 120 Smith College Studies in History north to south there was but one opinion regarding their late proceedings, and that opinion was against them. "For how- ever divided [men might be] respecting the utihty of an excise, all unite in reprobating measures which strike at the existence of Society, and lay the ax to the root of all the blessings of peace, liberty and safety." "A Citizen," addressing a communication to "The Enemies of Anarchy," expressed the opinion that anti-federalism was at the basis of the insurrection. "It requires not the spirit of in- spiration," he said, "to foretell that the government of the United States is the object of the insurgents. To be convinced of this, it is only necessary for those who doubt to look into the charac- ters of the leaders, and they will soon discover that the whiskey is only given out for the purpose of intoxicating the multitude and that anti-federalism will be their order of march. . . . If government in any form is considered as a blessing to the governed, the friends of our government ought to act with unanimity and firmness on the present occasion. "^^ (c) Titles The question of titles was another issue which gave rise to much public discussion, and the advocates of democratic sim- plicity were very much exercised over the prospect of their use. The well-known debate on this question in Congress early in January, 1795, was echoed in the newspapers. As early as 1789 a correspondent of the Pennsylvania Ga- zette^'^ compliments Congress on the good sense and indepen- dence of European monarchical customs which it has shown in refusing to give titles to the President and Vice-President. He thinks them "only calculated to please children and fools," and he would be much pleased if "the promiscuous use of the titles Honorable, Worshipful, etc., was banished from our legislatures and courts. They smell of the corruption of European govern- ment." Pennsylvania Gazette, August 27, 1794. 'May 13, 1789. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 121 The celebrations and festivities all over the country on the occasion of the birthday of Washington in 1791 and the atten- tion given to the day in the newspapers was very displeasing to one of the subscribers to the Aurora.'^^ He writes of the dem- onstrations as follows : "Though we admire the character of our Illustrious Personage, the anniversary of whose Birth is thus celebrated, yet we cannot but think that this mode of expressing our gratitude for the services of any individual, however great his deserts, possesses too strong a tincture of Monarchy to be adopted by Republicans. Let us rejoice at the birthday of our Empire; let us keep it as a day of Joy and Thanks, but let the Birthdays of Presidents be blotted from the Calender of Feasts." Benjamin Franklin Bache, the editor of the Aurora, was es- pecially vigorous in expressing his abhorrence of the pomp and pageantry of monarchy. On one occasion he expresses his feel- ings as follows : "It is grateful to a heart anxious for the hap- piness of mankind to observe the rapid progress of the principles of the American and French Revolutions. ... to find that almost wherever the book the the High Priest of Ecclesiastical Establishments and the Right Honorable Solicitor General for the claims of despotism is read, its doctrines and maxims are regarded with superlative contempt. "^'^ And in reply to an article in the Gazette of the United States which had advocated the use of certain official titles, the same editor says : "Does not the name of the office convey an idea of the trust which is reposed in the officer? — and what more dig- nified title could be bestowed on our supreme executive Magis- trate than George Washington? Would the epithet Honor or even Excellency, annexed to his name, express as much as his Name itself? Does Excellency call to mind the services he has rendered to his country? and is not George Washington synonymous with prudent and brave warrior, profound states- man, defender of liberty, good citizen, great man?"^^ =^ March 4, 1791. ^Aurora, June 4, 1791. ''Ibid., June 7, 1791. 122 Smith College Studies in History "X," a contributor of the Aurora, considered the idea of an hereditary nobihty as "incompatible with every law of nature." Wisdom and virtue, he argued, are not qualities which can be be- queathed nor inherited from a parent. "Why then should no- bility which is said to be the reward of merit be inherited, when merit itself is not? Had the creator of mankind intended that nobility should have been necessary in the administration of gov- ernment, he would doubtless have created a distinct species of men, remarkable for ability and virtue, and he would have made his hereditary nobles hereditarily wise and good men. "3*^ That liberty was greatly endangered by the use of titles was the opinion expressed in an article in the Gazette of the United States for April 20, 1793. Those who maintain that "sounds are substances" are warned to be on the watch for all advances which the enemies of Liberty may attempt to make along that line. "It is surprising that the title of Reverend, applied to the clergy, should have remained uncensured till lately. But the high sounding titles of the Grand Lodges of the Free Masons, with their Right Worshipful Grand Masters and their Most Worshipful Grand Secretaries must be abolished or Liberty will not live to see another New- Year's day." The writer of an anonymous pamphlet-^" in 1794 complained of the monarchical ideas of Hamilton and his followers and of the use made by them of their party organ, the Gazette of the United States, in the following words : "To render this monarchical etiquette the more pompous and to familiarize it to the citizens, a courtly gazette was instituted, which industriously proclaimed the ideal grandeur of the court and published the names and rank of all the most honorable personages, both male and fe- male, who graced it with their presence." "When Washington was commander-in-chief of the army," he went on, "it was his habit to set aside a particular hour for receiving visitors, when his officers and any other persons so desiring might consult with him. When he came to the presidential chair, he introduced ■Ibid., June 10, 1791. ' "A Citizen," A Review of the Revenue System. Letter XII. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 123 the same custom and probably never would have offended the most scrupulous republican, if the monarchical order had not metamorphosed it into a courtly levee, and if the courtly gazette, faithful to its trust, had not proclaimed it to the world in the pompous stile of St. James or Versailles." The purpose of these monarchical tendencies, the pamphleteer continued, was to turn the attention of the people away from the activities of the Government. "The monarchical faction vainly thought that by apeing the courts of Europe, they would strike the people with awe and that, by the splendour of the court, the attention of the people would be diverted from the measures of the Administra- tion." The Democratic Society, of course held in abhorrence all titles or other insignia of courts. On January 9, 1794, it passed the following motion : "Resolved, that we differ in opinion from those who imagine that the rulers of a republic may con- ciliate the favor of monarchs and despotic courts by assuming courtly forms, etiquettes and manners ; that republics are held in detestation by despotic governments not on account of their manners but of their principles. "^^ (d) Election Methods and Political Campaigns Partisan feeling, however high it may have run at certain crises, did not save the country in the Federalist period from the besetting dif^culty of almost all democracies, the apathy of the electorate. And the newspapers of Philadelphia freely per- formed the function then as now of reminding Demos of his shortcomings. A correspondent of the Pennsylvania Gazette for January 7, 1789, notes that the severity of the weather had been advanced as the reason for the poor attendance at the recent town-meeting to choose representatives in Congress. But, says he, "the chilling frosts of winter are but trifling compared to the consequences which will result from choosing men to govern us who are unworthy of our trust and confidence." Another correspondent of the same journal laments that, ^' Manuscript Minutes, pp. 37-38. 124 Smith College Studies in History "according to the present statement of votes given in, it does not appear that more than half the citizens of this state have paid the proper attention to the darhng privilege of choosing their ov^n rulers." "Lethargy," he says, "is not becoming the spirit of a free and independent people," and he goes on to complain that in some of the counties anti-federal sheriffs have resorted to il- legal means to defeat the purposes of the people in the recent elec- tions. The returns for federal representatives from some of the counties, instead of being made in ten days, had been kept back for four weeks; and those for electors of a President and Vice- President had not yet been made made from all the counties on February 4, 1789. "Shall a few anti-federal sheriffs," he de- mands, "be suffered with impunity thus to trample on the laws and render the federal state of Pennsylvania the scofif of the Union ?"39 Nine years later, we find a writer in Porcupine's Gasette^^ complaining of the same indifference on the part of the electors. "If," says he, "it were ever necessary for the friends of the fed- eral government, of order, security of property and personal safety to exercise their franchise and bring their influence to bear at the elections, it is now." The Quakers have been particularly blameworthy in this respect. Their religious scruples have been given as the reason ; "but what man is there whose conscience can forbid him to do good and to prevent evil, when it is in his power and when he can employ that power in a fair, honest and legal way. . . . William Penn, the venerable founder of this state and the ornament of their society, .... this pattern of Excellence, as he has ever been held, did not think it wrong to vote at elections ; on the contrary, he called on all free- holders to do so and that too, in times, not unlike the present as far as the affairs of a kingdom and a republic can approach to a resemblance. He who will not, to support the government, take the pains to put a word upon a piece of paper and carry Pennsylvania Gazette, February 11, 1789. ' February 20, 1798. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 125 it a mile, will talk to us in vain about his attachment to peace, order, morality and religion, all which depend on the stability of that government and on that alone." The first presidential conflict between the Federalists and the Republicans was the campaign of 1796. The party press was filled with arguments for and against the claims of Jefiferson and Adams. One of the strongest presentations of the case for Jefiferson came from the pen of "Cassius."'*^ Writing in the New World shortly before polling day, he tried to make the peo- ple realize the importance of the approaching election by remind- ing them of the great powers which the Constitution vested in the President and of the enormous influence which his office en- abled him to exert. That "Cassius" did not regard Washing- ton's administration as a success is shown by the following : "The history of the present administration proves that there is no measure, however odious to you or repugnant to your consti- tution, which the authority of a President cannot accomplish. . The history of the present administration proves that there is no man, however contemptible in your sight, whom a President cannot elevate to your highest offices and that there is no na- tion, however detestable to you, with whom a President cannot unite you in the closest alliance. When I call your attention to the alarming events of the present administration, it is not with a malignant desire to excite indignation against your venerable President. May his virtues ever be deeply impressed upon your grateful hearts. Let his errors be consigned to oblivion's darkest cave, never to return to light, except when stern duty requires that the patriot should hold them up as awful examples." Coming to the respective merits of the candidates themselves, "Cassius" was willing to acknowledge the services of Mr. Adams to his country during the Revolution, and to admit "that he had integrity of principle until his residence at the Court of St. James. There he was dazzled with the splendor of royalty ; there he drank at the polluted fountain of political corruption, there he prostrated himself at the shrine of Majesty." The *'New World, October 28, 1796. 126 Smith College Studies in History writer hints that if it were not for the deep mystery enveloping the proceedings of the Senate, many specific charges of mis- conduct in the office of Vice-President might be brought against him. "But it is sufficient for you to know that he has supported every measure which the patriot condemns, that he favoured the introduction of pompous titles, that he strenuously labored to keep you in profound ignorance with respect to the proceedings of your own Senate ; that he negatived the law prohibiting all commercial intercourse with Britain, and that by this fatal nega- tive, he left no alternative but a negotiation which terminated in the most disgraceful Treaty which history records. But let us turn from the contemplation of this odious character to sur- vey Mr. Jefferson." "Cassius" then goes on to eulogize Jefferson, praising his firmness of purpose, his bravery, and his absolute fitness in every respect for the presidency. He says it is a fact admitted by every candid man, that America has only one enemy among the nations, only one country with whom we might engage in war and that is England. But those very people who oppose Jefferson on the ground that he would be incapable of leading this country in war, are the very ones who advocated the British Treaty and who professed absolute confidence in British faith. "This party," he says, "by expressing an apprehension of war, are shameful enough to stigmatize Britain as a perfidious nation, whilst their odious eulogium upon her justice and benevolence still resounds upon the patriot's disgusted ear." But if we were to engage in a war with England, would not Mr. Jefferson con- duct it with more firmness than Mr. Adams? "Consider the close connection that now exists between Mr. Adams and the British party ; consider how that connection is daily strengthened by congeniality of sentiment and exchange of benefits and an- swer the question." A series of articles published in the Nczv World over the sig- nature of "Federalist" were evidently designed to further Ham- ilton's scheme of defeating Adams and electing Pinckney. In a communication addressed to the presidential electors, "Fed- Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 127 eralist" says that he wishes to correct the very erroneous impres- sion which has been spread that Mr. Adams has consistently co- operated with the government in the principal measures which have been enacted since the adoption of the constitution. "It is a well-known fact, however, that Mr. Adams has never been con- sidered or treated by the President as an executive officer. The office of Vice-President has been kept in a perfectly dormant state in an executive sense. Mr. Adams has not at all partici- pated or co-operated in the executive councils or business of the United States in the last seven years." The fact that he is strongly opposed to the financial system of this country, adopted by Congress, is also very important. He greatly disapproves of the funding and banking systems and considers them "matters that have and will produce extreme and extensive ills. . . . There is not a citizen of equal consideration in the United States whose sentiments upon the funds and the bank are more opposed to the opinions of every person who ever has been or now is an officer of the Treasury Department." These senti- ments, the author wishes it to be known, "proceed from no ma- lignity towards Mr. Adams but from a long-reflected and settled opinion that the great financial operations of this government were wise, necessary and inevitable."'*- During the latter part of Adams's administration, he became involved in a quarrel with Hamilton and the "Essex Junto," largely because of his courage in insisting upon a peaceful set- tlement of the troubles with France. Cobbett and the Fennos, rep- resenting the extreme Anglophile element, supported Hamilton. "Porcupine's Gazette and Fenno's Gazette," says Adams, "from the moment of the mission to France, aided, countenanced and encouraged by soi-disant Federalists in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, have done more to shuffle the cards into the hands of the Jacobin leaders than all the acts of administration and all the policy of opposition from the commencement of the govern- ment. "^^ "^New World, November 30, 1796. "Letter, Adams to John Trumbull, September 10, 1800, Adams's Works, vol. IX, p. 83. 128 Smith College Studies in History The outstanding feature of the presidential campaign of 1800 was of course Hamilton's bitter pamphlet attacking Adams. It called forth a vigorous reply from Noah Webster, editor of the New York Minerva, in an open letter to Hamilton in which he pointed out that the salvation of the Federalist party in the coming election depended on the support given to Adams. "You boldly assail the conduct and character of Mr. Adams," he said, "and endeavor to prove his vanity, self-sufBciency, jealousy, rash- ness, and ungovernable temper unfit him for the station of Chief Magistrate. The instances adduced in proof are mostly of a pri- vate and trifling nature ; hardly worthy of being the subject of remark or refutation." Webster then went on to prove that Hamilton's policy and conduct had been the chief source of the present divisions among the Federalists, and that if they should result in the election of an Anti-Federalist to the presidency, the fault would be his. The party feud, which had first manifested itself in 1798, was due chiefly to two causes: (1) The proposal of an offensive and defensive treaty of alliance with England, a plan which was defeated ; and the writer admits that he must do Hamilton the justice to say that he was opposed to this policy. (2) A propo- sal for the raising of an army to be used against France. This measure was passed by Congress, and for it Hamilton was largely responsible. But the plan was never carried into execution, thanks to Adams's pursuit of a pacific policy. And it was this which had aroused the resentment of Hamilton against him. "What extreme indiscretion to undertake an opposition from which, in case of success, would inevitably result an irremediable division of the federal interest and in case of defeat, complete our overthrow and ruin. Will not federal men, as well as anti- federal, believe that your ambition, pride and overbearing tem- per have destined you to be the evil genius of this country?" As a further cause of gratitude to Mr. Adams, Webster urged that he was the father of the navy — a system of defense much cheaper, more eiTectual, and popular than Hamilton's pro- posed army plan. "Be assured. Sir, you mistake the temper of Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 129 the intelligent and hardy freeman of the United States. Your military system, they will not bear — they are almost to a man determined, if possible, to have no treaties of alliance and no permanent military force beyond what the frontiers and gar- risons may require." Finally it was Webster's "opinion, formed on thirty years of public service, that Mr. Adams is a man of pure morals, of firm attachment to a republican government, of sound and inflexible integrity and patriotism, and by far the best statesman that the late revolution called into notice." In Hamilton's pretense of upholding the honor and interests of the United States by blam- ing the President for sending an embassy to France, the citizens of America would see only "the deep chagrin and disappoint- ment of a military character, whose views of preserving a perma- nent military force on foot have been defeated by an embassy which has removed the pretext for such an establishment."'*'* ** "A Federalist," A Letter to General Hamilton Occasioned by his Let- ter to President Adams. Philadelphia, 1800. CONCLUSION From the foregoing study it is abundantly apparent that Hfe could hardly have been uninteresting for the citizen of old Phila- delphia in the Federalist period. Life for him unquestionably was lacking in many of the comforts of the twentieth century. The streets over which he was obliged to travel were many of them unpaved and badly lighted and at times well-nigh impas- sable. The sanitary conditions were such as to render life at best precarious. But then as now he had the satisfaction of de- nouncing the city authorities for their neglect and mismanage- ment. The news of the world did not come each morning fresh to his door with present day dispatch ; but newspapers he did have in abundance, and if their accounts of distant happenings were not quite up to date, they were at any rate well spiced with opinion. The pamphleteer must have been more in evidence than he is today ; and beyond all question our citizen was preached at on Sundays with more than modern violence. And as for the topics of the day which occupied his attention, they were both numerous and important. In 1789 and 1790 the question of the permanent location of the national capital was still undecided ; and in this the citizen of Philadelphia had a deep and personal interest. And if he could not prevail upon Congress to fix its lasting abode with him, he could at least denounce the claims of New York, and by prudent arguments perhaps gain for his city the coveted honor and advantage for at least a dec- ade. Hamilton's great measures for the reorganization of the national finances — the funding system, the assumption of state debts, the excise, and the bank — claimed his attention in 1790 and 1791, that is, if he had any head for tough financial prob- lems; and if he found himself much puzzled over the merits of the issues, at least he found his fellow citizens, who understood them better or worse than he, or whose material interests were involved, very much aroused and divided. In 1792 Hamilton's Opinion on the Bank, which ascribed such far-reaching powers to the federal government under the cloak of the "general wel- Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 131 fare" clause of the constitution, caused grave alarm and dissatis- faction to many of his fellow citizens, though the great debate between the federalists and the exponents of states rights was postponed for some years longer. Far greater was the stir cre- ated by the war between revolutionary France and the mon- archies of old Europe in 1793. Washington's proclamation of neutrality, while it seemed to cut this country loose from the bitter issues which were engrossing and perplexing Europe, by no means did so in reality. Issues which were convulsing the Old World could not but be re-echoed in the New ; and Americans inevitably took sides. Some Philadelphians led by "Peter Por- cupine" hailed the Neutrality Proclamation with satisfaction so far as it went, but would have preferred an alliance with Great Britain. But the sympathizers of France were more numerous, and our citizen heard high debates between the two factions. Indeed, the Jacobin Club which was carrying all before it in France furnished the model which was imitated in this country when the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania was founded in Philadelphia and began to establish affiliated clubs in the counties throughout the state. Our citizen, unless he was a great radical, and a member, probably heard but little of the Democratic So- ciety at the time of its foundation in 1793. But when the pent- up grievances of the agrarian west burst forth in the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794, and the President of the United States in a message to Congress cast the blame for that rising upon the radi- cal societies, the press at once was filled with denunciations of them, and our citizen must have been gravely troubled. The publication of the Jay Treaty and the debate in Congress to which it gave rise in 1794 and the early part of 1795, again brought forward serious issues of foreign policy. Truly these were stirring times. With the presidential election of 1796. Washington was re- tiring from public life; and our citizen found himself obliged to decide between rival candidates and rival policies, and to take sides in a great party contest, the first of its kind with which he had ever been confronted. In the following year the abrupt 132 Smith College Studies in History dismissal of Monroe, the American Ambassador to France, led to a serious crisis in Franco-American relations, a crisis which was heightened in the sequel by the X Y Z Episode, and led to a virtual state of war between the two countries; and if our citi- zen was one who had leanings towards the French cause, he must have been much disturbed. The passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 seemed to the proponents of states rights a most vexatious, dangerous, and unconstitutional exercise of ar- bitrary power by the federal government. Virginia and Ken- tucky promptly countered with resolutions which practically set the national government at defiance; and the whole question of nullification was thrown open. The very existence of the Union seemed to be placed in peril. The Philadelphia press was filled with the discussion. But fortunately the example of Kentucky and Virginia was not followed, and the Union remained secure. With the election of 1800, the hitherto dominant Federalists found themselves split into two factions by the bitter controversy between their leaders, Hamilton and Adams ; and their oppon- ents, the Republicans, were able to come into power. Our citi- zen must have found it even more difficult to cast his vote wisely on this occasion than he did in 1796. Add to all these major issues, the chronic discussion over the use of titles, which occupied the press from 1789 until the question was finally settled by Congress early in 1795, and the frequent carpings of the newspapers because of his failure to be more assiduous in his attendance at the polls on election day, and the fact that his life was frequently placed in jeopardy by reason of repeated outbreaks of epidemic yellow fever; and one must form a picture of the life of our citizen of Philadelphia, which if he was attentive to his private business, must have been lacking neither in interest nor in occupation. BIBLIOGRAPHY MANUSCRIPT Minutes of the Democratic Society, 1793-1794. An original manuscript preserved in the Manuscript Room of the Pennsylvania Historical Society Library. Hand made paper, 8x13 inches. 68 folios, but incomplete; the following are preserved: pp. 17-18, 21-22, 27-76, 85-88, 95-150, 163-184. Written in various hands, and without signatures of secretaries. NEWSPAPERS* Aurora General Advertiser (daily). Continuation of The General Ad- vertiser. From August 30 to October 19, 1799, published at Bristol. Publishers: 1795 to September 9, 1798, Benjamin Franklin Bache ; November 1 to 13, 1798, Margaret H. Bache; November 14, 1798, "published foi the Heirs of Benjamin Franklin Bache"; March 8, 1800, William Duane. P. H. S., November 8, 1794 to 1801; Ridg- way, 1794 to 1800. Suspended publication from September 10 to October 31, 1798. Carey's Daily Advertiser. Publishers : James Carey and John Markland. P. H. S., 1797, February 10 to September 8; Ridgway, 1797. Carey's United States Recorder. Established January, 1798. Publishers: James Carey. P. H. S., 1797 (incomplete) ; Ridgway, 1798. Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser. Continuation of Dunlap and Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser (q. v.) Publishers: 1796, David C. and Septimus Claypoole ; 1799, David C. Claypoole. P. H. S., January 1, 1796, to October 1, 1800; Ridgway, January 1, 1796, to October 1, 1800. Continued as Paulson's American Daily Adver- tiser, October 1, 1800. Dunlap's American Daily Advertiser. Continuation of the Pennsylvania Packet and Daily Advertiser. Publisher : John Dunlap. P. H. S., January 1, 1791, to December 9, 1793; Ridgway, January 1, 1791, to December 9, 1793. Suspended September 15 to December 1, 1793, on account of yellow fever. Continued December 9, as Dunlap and Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser. Dunlap and Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser. Continuation of Dunlap's American Dailv Advertiser. Publishers: John Dunlap and David C. Claypoole. P.H. S., December 9, 1793, to January 1, 1796; Ridgway, December 9, 1793, to January 1, 1796. Continued as Clay- poole's American Daily Advertiser, January 1, 1796. Finlay's American Naval and Commercial Register (semi-weekly). Es- tablished December, 1795. Publisher: Samuel Finlay. Ridgway, December, 1795, to December, 1797. Publication suspended in De- cember, 1797. Federal Gazette and the Philadelphia Evening Post (daily). Established October 1, 1788. Title varies: April 16, 1790, Federal Gazette and the Philadelphia Daily Advertiser. Publisher: Andrew Brown. P. H. S., 1789 (stray nos. March 19, September 8, November 16), Sep- tember 1, 1792, to December 31, 1793; Ridgway, 1790 to 1794. Con- * The best collection of Philadelphia newspapers of this period is to be found in the Pennsylvania Historical Society Library. There is also a valuable collection at the Ridgway Branch of the Philadelphia Library Company. The following ab- breviations are used: P. H. S. — Pennsylvania Historical Society; Ridgway — Ridg- way Branch of the Philadelphia Library Company. 134 Smith College Studies in History tinued as the Philadelphia Gazette and Universal Daily Advertiser, January, 1794. Freeman's Journal, or the North American Intelligencer (weekly). Es- tablished April 25, 1781. Publisher : Francis Bailey. P. H. S., 1789 to 1791 (with gaps) ; Ridgway, 1790 to 1792. Publication suspended in 1792. Gales's Independent Gazetteer (semi-weekly). Continuation of The In- dependent Gazetteer. Publisher: Joseph Gales. P. H. S., September 16, 1796, to December 30, 1796, January 3 to March 7, 1797 (most). Gazette of the United States (semi-weekly). Removed from New York October, 1790. Title varies: 1794, January 7, Gazette of the United States and Daily Evening Advertiser; 1795, Gazette of the United States; 1796, July 1, Gazette of the United States and Philadelphia Daily Advertiser; 1800, October 13, Gazette of the United States and Daily Advertiser. Publishers: 1790 to 1798, John Fenno ; 1798 to 1800, John Ward Fenno; October 13, 1800, to 1802, C. P. Wayne. P. H. S., April 15, 1789, to 1801 (incomplete), April, 1790, to 94, and January to June, 1797, missing; Ridgway, 1790-1795 to 1796, stray number in 1798. Publication temporarily suspended September 18, 1793. Continued as the United States Gazette in 1804. General Advertiser and Political, Commercial, Agricultural, and Literary Journal (daily). Established 1790. Title varies: 1791, The General Advertiser. Publisher: Benjamin Franklin Bache. P. H. S., Oc- tober 1, 1790, to November 8, 1794; Ridgway, 1790 to 1794. Dis- continued from September 26 to November 25, 1793, on account of yellow fever. Continued as the Aurora General Advertiser, No- vember 8, 1794. Independent Gazetteer or the Chronicle of Freedom (weekly). Established April 13, 1782. Issued as a semi-weekly from September 17 to De- cember 17, 1782, October 7, 1786, changed to daily. Title varies: 1782, The Independent Gazetteer and Agricultural Repository; 1794, The Independent Gazetteer. Publishers: 1782, Eleazer Oswald; 1783, E. Oswald and D. Humphreys; June, 1784, E. Oswald. P. H. S., 1789 (complete), February 8, 1794, to September 16, 1796, 1790 to 93 (stray nos.) ; Ridgway, 1790 to 1796. Continued by Joseph Gales as Gales's Independent Gazetteer, September 16, 1796. The Mail; or Claypoole's Daily Advertiser. Established June, 1791. Publisher: David C. Claypoole. P. H. S., June 1, 1791, to December 29, 1792. Merged with Dunlap's American Daily Advertiser in No- vember, 1793. Merchant's Daily Advertiser. P. H. S., January 6, 1797, to June 30, 1798; Ridgway, June 22 and June 29, 1798. National Gazette (semi-weekly). Established October 31, 1791. Pub- lishers : Childs and Swaine for Philip Freneau. Ridgway, Oc- tober 31, 1791, to October 26, 1793. Publication suspended October 26, 1793. Ncue Philadelphische Correspondcnz. Publisher: Melchior Steiner. Continued as Philadelphische Correspondcnz. New World (daily). Established 1795. Title varies: September 19 and 20, 1796, The New World or The Morning and Evening Gazette; October 26, 1796, The Nezv World. Publisher : Samuel Harrison Smith. Ridgway, 1796 to 1797. Publication suspended in 1797. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 135 Pennsylvania Gazette (weekly). Established 1728. January to June, 1778, published at Yorktown, Pennsylvania. Title varies : 1779, The Pennsylvania Gazette and Weekly Advertiser ; April 3, 1782, The Pennsylvania Gazette ;]\Ay 31, \7%2, Pennsylvania Gazette and Weekly Advertiser; September 11, 1782, Pennsvlvania Gazette. Publishers: 1735 to 1748, B. Franklin; January 12, 1748, to 1766, B. Franklin and D. Hall; February 6, 1766, David Hall; May 8, 1766, David Hall and William Sellers. P. H. S., 1789 to 1790, 1794 to 1796 (nearly complete) ; Ridgway, 1790 to 1800. Became Saturday Evening Post, August 4, 1821. Pennsylvania Journal or the Weekly Advertiser. Established December, 1742. Became a semi-weekly June 23, 1781. January 7, 1789, again published weekly. Publishers: 1743 to 1766, William Bradford; September 4, 1766, to 1779, William and Thomas Bradford; 1779 to 1781, Thomas Bradford; May 2, 1781, to 1782, P. Hall and T. Bradford; June 12, 1782, T. Bradford. P. H. S., 1789 to 1793 (some lacunae) ; Ridgway, 1790 to 1793. Continued as the True American, in 1797. Pennsylvania Mercury and Universal Advertiser (weekly). Established August 20, 1784.' 1788 changed to tri-weekly, 1790 to weekly. Pub- lisher : 1784 to 1788, Daniel Humphreys ; 1788 to 1790, David Hum- phreys ; 1790, Daniel Humphreys. P. H. S., 1789 to December 8, 1791 (with lacunae and gaps) ; Ridgway, 1790. Pennsylvania Packet and the General Advertiser (weekly). Established October 28, 1771. For a time between September 16, 1777, and June 30, 1778, published at Lancaster, Pa.; July 2, 1778, tri-weekly; April 8, 1780, semi-weekly; June 12, 1781, tri-weekly; September 21, 1784, daily. Title varies : October 25, 1773, Dunlap's Pennsylvania Packet or the General Advertiser ; November 29, 1777, Pennsylvania Packet or the General Advertiser; September 21, 1784, Pennsylvania Packet and Daily Advertiser. Publishers: 1771 to 1780, John Dunlap; Oc- tober 17, 1780, to 1781, John Dunlap and David C. Claypoole; Jan- uary 2, 1781, to 1784, David C. Claypoole; September 21, 1784, John Dunlap and D. C. Claypoole. P. H. S., 1789 to 1790; Ridgway, 1790 to 1791. Continued as Dunlap's American Daily Advertiser, Jan- uary 1, 1791. Philadelphia Gazette and Universal Daily Advertiser (daily). Contin- uation of the Federal Gazette and Philadelphia Daily Advertiser. Title varies : June 20, 1800, Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Adver- tiser. Publisher: 1794 to 1799, Andrew Brown; July 1, 1799, An- drew Brown and Samuel Relf. P. H. S., 1794 to 1796, 1798 to 1800 (with lacunae) ; Ridgway, 1794 to 1801. After 1801 was known as Relf's Gazette. Philadelphia Minerva (weekly). Established 1795. Publisher: William T. Palmer. P. H. S., February 6, 1796, to January 20, 1798. Pub- cation suspended July, 1798. Philadelphische Correspondcnz. Continuation of Neue Philadelphische Correspondenz. Publishers : Steiner and Kammerer. P. H. S., 1789 to 1800 (many lacunae). Continued as Pennsylvanishe Corres- pondenz, 1798. Porcupine's Gazette (daily). Established March 4, 1797. Title varies: March 4 to April 22, 1797, Porcupine's Gazette and United States 136 Smith College Studies in History Advertiser; April 24, 1797, Porcupine's Gazette. Publisher: Wil- liam Cobbett. P. H. S., March 8, 1797, to August 27, 1799; Ridgway, March 4, 1797, to September 6, 1799. Changed to a weekly and continued at Bustleton, Pa., September 6, 1799, on account of yel- low fever in Philadelphia. Paulson's American Daily Advertiser. Continuation of Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser. Publisher: Zachariah Poulson. P. H. H., October 1, 1800, to 1801; Ridgway, October 1, 1800, to 1801. True American and Commercial Advertiser (daily). Continuation of the Pennsylvania Journal and the Weekly Advertiser. Publisher: 1798, Thomas Bradford. P. H. S., July 2, 1798, to 1801 ; Ridgway, 1798, (stray numbers). Universal Gazette (weekly). Continuation of the Independent Gazetteer by J. Gales. Publisher : Samuel Harrison Smith. P. H. S., March 20, 27, 1801, June 26 to August 21, 1800. Publication suspended from September 11 to November 6, 1800, when the paper was resumed at Washington, D. C, under the same title. PAMPHLETS "A Citizen of Philadelphia," An ^Essay on the Scat of the Federal Govern- ment and the Exclusive Jurisdiction of Congress over a Ten Miles District. Philadelphia, 1789. "A Farmer," Five Letters addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States, containing some Observations on the dangerous scheme of Governor Duer and Mr. Secretary Hamilton to establish National Manufactures. Philadelphia, 1792. "An American Farmer," Letters addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States, containing some Observations on the Funding and Banking Systems. Philadelphia, 1793. "Helvidius," Letters written in reply to "Pacificus" on the President's Proclamation of Neutrality. Philadelphia, 1793. "Pacificus," Letters, zvritten in justification of the President's Proclama- tion of Neutrality. Philadelphia, 1793. Principles, Articles and Regulations agreed upon by the members of the Democratic Society of Pennsylvania, May 30, 1793. Philadelphia, 1793. "'A Citizen," A Review of the Revenue System adopted by the First Con- gress under the Federal Constitution. In Thirteen Letters to a Friend. Philadelphia, 1794. "Germanicus," Letters to the Citizens of the United States. Philadelphia, 1794. A Definition of Parties or the Political Effects of the Paper System con- sidered. Philadelphia, 1794. An Enquiry into the Principles and Tendency of Certain Public Measures. Philadelphia, 1794. "Caius," Address to the President of the United States on Neutrality. Philadelphia, 1795. "Camillus," Letters V, VI, VII. VIII. Philadelphia, 1795. "Cato," Observations on Mr. Jay's Treaty, I and II. Philadelphia, 1795. Examination of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between the United States and Great Britain. Philadelphia, 1795. Public Opinion in Philadelphia, 1789-1801 137 "Curtius," Vindication of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation with Great Britain. XII numbers. Philadelphia, 1795. "Porcupine, Peter," A Little Plain English, addressed to the People of the United States on the Treaty Negotiations with his Britannic Majesty and on the conduct of the President relative thereto, in answer to Letters of Franklin. Philadelphia, 1795. The American Remembrancer, or an Impartial Collection of Essays. Re- solves, Speeches, etc., relative to the Trcatv with Great Britain. Philadelphia, 1795. Aristocracy; An Epic Poem. Philadelphia, 1795. Features of Mr. Jay's Treaty. To zvhich is annexed a View of the Com- merce of the United States as it stands at present and as it is fixed by Mr. Jay's Treaty. Philadelphia, 1795. Political Observations. 1795. A Rub from Snub, or a Cursory Analytical Epistle addressed to Peter Porcupine. Philadelphia, 1795. A Short History of the Nature and Consequences of Excise Laws includ- ing some account of the Recent Interruption to the Manufactories of Snuff and Refined Sugar. Philadelphia, 1795. Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between his Britannic Ma- jesty and the United States of America. To which is annexed a Copious Appendix. Philadelphia, 1795. "Porcupine, Peter," A New Year's Gift to the Democrats, or Observations on a Pamphlet entitled "A Vindication of Mr. Randolph's Resigna- tion." Philadelphia, 1796. Duane, William, Truth Will Out. The Foul Charges of the Tories against the Editor of the Aurora Repelled by Positive Proof and Plain Truth and the Base Calumniators put to Shame. Philadelphia, 1798. A Report of the Extraordinary Transactions zvhich took place at Phila- delphia in February, 1799. In consequence of a Memorial from cer- tain Natives of Jreland to Congress, praying a Repeal of the Alien Bill. Philadelphia, 1799. "A Federalist," A Letter to General Hamilton occasioned by his letter to President Adams. Philadelphia, 1800. A Report of an action for a Libel brought by Dr. Benjamin Rush against William Cobbett, in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, December term, 1799, for certain defamatory publications in a newspaper en- titled Porcupine's Gazette. Philadelphia, 1800. COLLECTED SOURCES Adams, John, Works of. ed. C. F. Adams. 10 vols. Boston, 1856. Hamilton, Alexander, Works of, ed. H. C. Lodge. Federal Edition, 12 vols. New York and London, 1904. Jefferson, Thomas, Writings of. ed. P. L. Ford. 10 vols. New York and London, 1895. Madison, James, Writings of, ed. Gaillard Hunt. 9 vols. New York and London, 1900. Messages and Papers of the Presidents, ed. J. D. Richardson. 10 vols. Washington, 1897. Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, 1789-1845, ed. Richard Peters. Boston, 1861. 138 Smith College Studies in History Rush, Benjamin, A Memorial containing Travels through Life or Sun- dry Incidents in the Life of, ed. L. A. Biddle. Philadelphia, 1905. Washington, George, Writings of, ed. W. C. Ford. 14 vols. New York and London, 1893. SECONDARY WORKS Appleton, Cyclopaedia of American Biography, ed. J. G. Wilson and John Fiske. 7 vols. New York, 1887. Austin, Mary S., Philip Freneau, the Poet of the Revolution ; a History of his Life and Times. New York, 1901. Bassett, J. S., The Federalist System. New York and London, 1906. Beard, C. A., An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. New York, 1913. Economic Origins of Jcfferson- ian Democracy. New York, 1915. Bradford Genealogy, compiled by S. S. Purple, 1873. Clark, A. C, William Duane. "Read before the Columbia Historical So- ciety, February 13, 1905." Claypoole Genealogy, compiled by Rebecca L Graff. Philadelphia, 1893. Fish, C. R., American Diplomacy. New York, 1915. Forman, S. E., The Political Activities of Philip Freneau. Johns Hop- kins University Studies, vol. XX. Baltimore, 1902. Hazen, C. D., Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution. Baltimore, 1897. Hudson, Frederic, J ournalisni in the United States, 1690-1872. New York, 1873. Melville, L. T., Life and Letters of William Cobbett in England and America. 2 vols. London, New York, Toronto, 1913. McMaster, J. B., and Stone, F. D., Pennsylvania and the Federal Con- stitution, 1787-1788. Philadelphia, 1888. McMaster, J. B., Historv of the United States. 8 vols. New York, 1883-1914. Scharf, J. T., and Westcott, Thompson, History of Philadelphia, 1609- 1884. 3 vols. Philadelphia, 1884. Thomas, Isaiah, History of Pri>iting in America. 2 vols. Albany, 1874. VITA I, Margaret Woodbury, was born in Columbus, Ohio, October 2, 1893. My father is Benjamin Woodbury, and my mother Margaret Evans Woodbury. Upon graduation from Central High School, Columbus, in 1911, I entered Ohio State University, from which I received the de gree of Bachelor of Arts in 1915. In October, 1915, I became a graduate student at Bryn Mawr College. In 1915-16 and 1918-19 I was a scholar in History; in 1916-18 I held the Resident Fellowship in History. My work at Bryn Mawr College has been directed by Dr. William Roy Smith, Pro- fessor of History, Dr. Marion Parris Smith, Professor of Economics, and Dr. Howard Levi Gray, Professor of History. My Major work in Bryn Mawr College has been in American History, Mediaeval and Modern European History being my Associated Minor, and Economics my Independent Minor. My preliminary examinations for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy were passed on January 31, 1919, and my final examinations on May 31, 1919. For assistance in the preparation of this dissertation, I am deeply in- debted to Dr. William Roy Smith and Dr. Charles Wendell David, of Bryn Mawr College. I wish to express my gratitude for the unfailing courtesy shown me by the officials of the Library of the Pennsylvania Historical Society and of the Ridgway Branch of the Philadelphia Li- brary Company. .o-' ■^\^ ,$> * o « o "°* A"^' .S^^: ^■5 ''<(\^?f/^- ' « • s < ' li' ^.' v^ •<••% -5^^- /; ^■•^o^^^' -> %^ 4 o QuNO M "-s.^^^ i^%