Page images
PDF
EPUB

VIII.

CHAPTER in violent resistance to the laws and armed insurrection. Nor is it very surprising, all things considered, that 1796. many of the Federalists were inclined to look on Gallatin as a foreign emissary, a tool of France, employed and paid to make mischief.

Several of the chief points of Gallatin's speech were answered by Tracy. As to the discovery out of Vattel that slaves could not be carried off as booty, in the first place, Vattel said no such thing; and, in the second place, the British did not refuse to restore them as booty, but as men; men made free as a reward for having joined the British standard, and whom no law, human or divine, could or ought to compel to return to their former slavery. Nor was the so much condemned doctrine of the seizure of enemy's goods in neutral bottoms liable, in his opinion, to all the objections urged against it. It was the right of all nations to carry their own property to such places as they pleased, not thereby infringing the rights of others. But when two nations are at war, what right had a third nation to assist either by transporting its goods across the ocean free from the danger of being captured?

If the appropriation to carry the treaty into effect was refused, he considered the peace of the country in imminent danger. "We are not disposed to go to war with Great Britain, say gentlemen. She will have no reason to go to war with us; and they ask, with an air of triumphant complacency, how, then, is there to be a war? But look at the probable state of things. Great Britain is to retain the Western posts, and with them the confidence of the Indians. She makes no compensation for the millions spoliated from our commerce, but adds new millions to our already heavy losses. Would Americans quietly see their government strut, look big, call hard

VIII

names, repudiate treaties, and then tamely put up with CHAPTER new and aggravated injuries? Whatever might be the case in other parts of the Union, his constituents were 1796. not of a temper to dance round a whisky pole one day cursing the government, and to sneak the next day into a swamp on hearing that a military force was marching against them. They knew their rights, and, if the government were unable or unwilling to give them protection, would find other means to secure it. He could not feel thankful to any gentleman for coming all the way from Geneva to accuse Americans of pusillanimity.” Half a dozen of the opposition, greatly excited, called Tracy to order, and some confusion ensued. But Muhlenburg, who was in the chair, pronounced him in order, and directed him to go on. He took occasion, however, to disclaim any intention to be personal, and to beg pardon for any impropriety into which the heat of debate might have carried him, excusing himself on the ground of the feeling naturally excited by such charges coming from such a source against the American government and people.

But the great speech in favor of the treaty was made April 28. by Ames, whom a large audience had collected to hear. He had been detained from the House during the early part of the session by an access of that disorder which made all the latter part of his life one long disease. Rising from his seat, pale, feeble, hardly able to stand or to speak, but warming with the subject, he delivered a speech which, for comprehensive knowledge of human nature and of the springs of political action, for caustic ridicule, keen argument, and pathetic eloquence, even in the imperfect shape in which we possess it, has very seldom been equaled on that or any other floor. The extracts which follow possess a high historical value from

VIII.

CHAPTER the light which they throw on the state of parties, and the lively picture which they give of the excited political 1796. feelings of those times. "I shall be asked," said Ames, "why a treaty so good in some articles and so harmless in others has met with such unrelenting opposition? The apprehensions so extensively diffused on its first publication will be vouched as proof that the treaty is bad, and that the people hold it in abhorrence.

"I am not embarrassed to find the answer to this insinuation. Certainly, a foresight of its pernicious operation could not have created all the fears that were felt

ers.

or affected. The alarm spread faster than the publication of the treaty. There were more critics than readBesides, as the subject was examined, those fears have subsided. The movements of passion are quicker than those of the understanding. We are to search for the causes of first impressions, not in the treaty itself, but in the state of public feeling.

"The fervor of the war of the Revolution had not entirely cooled, nor its controversies ceased, before the sensibility of our citizens was quickened into a tenfold vivacity by a new and extraordinary subject of irritation. One of the two great nations of Europe underwent a change which has attracted all our wonder and interested all our sympathy. Whatever that nation did, the zeal of many went with it, and often to excess. These impressions met with much to inflame, and nothing to restrain them. In our newspapers, in our feasts, and in some of our elections, enthusiasm was admitted a merit, a test of patriotism, and that made it contagious. In the opinion of party, we could not love nor hate enough In spite of all the obloquy it may provoke, I dare to say it, we were extravagant in both. It is my right to avow that passions so impetuous, enthusiasm so wild, could

VIII.

not subsist without disturbing the sober exercise of reason, CHAPTER without putting at risk the peace and precious interests of our country. They were hazarded: I will not exhaust 1796. the little breath I have left to say how much or by whom, or how they were rescued from the sacrifice. No one has forgotten the proceedings of 1794; no one has forgotten the capture of our vessels, and the imminent danger of war. The nation thirsted not merely for reparation, but for vengeance. Suffering such wrongs, and agitated by such resentments, was it in the power of any words of compact, or could any parchment with its seals prevail, at once to tranquilize the people? Even the best treaty, though nothing be refused, will choke resentment, but not satisfy it. Every treaty is as sure to disappoint extravagant expectations as to disarm extravagant passions. Hatred is a passion that takes no bribes; they who are animated by the spirit of revenge will not be quieted by the possibility of profit.

"Why complain that the West Indies are not laid open? Why lament at restrictions on the commerce of the East Indies? Why pretend that, if this be rejected and more be insisted on, more would be obtained? Let us be explicit. More would not satisfy. Let all be granted, and a treaty of amity with Great Britain would still be obnoxious. Have we not heard it urged against our envoy that he was not ardent enough in his hatred. of Great Britain? A treaty of amity is condemned because it was not made by a foe, and in the spirit of one! The same gentleman repeated a very prevalent objection, that no treaty should be made with the enemy of France. No treaty, exclaim others, with a monarch or a despot; there will be no naval security while those sea-robbers domineer on the ocean; their den must be destroyed; the nation must be extirpated!

CHAPTER
VIII.

With feel

"Sir, I like this, because it is sincerity. ings such as these, we do not pant for treaties. Such pas1796. sions seek nothing, and will be content with nothing but the destruction of their object. If a If a treaty left King George his island, it would not answer, not if he stipulated to pay rent for it. It has been said the world ought to rejoice if Britain were sunk in the sea; if, where there are now men and wealth, and laws and liberty, there were no more than a sand-bank for sea-monsters to fatten on, a space for the storms of the ocean to mingle in conflict. I object nothing to the good sense and humanity of all this; I yield the point that this is a proof that the age of reason is in progress. Let it be philanthropy, let it be patriotism if you will; but it is no indication that any treaty would be approved. difficulty is, not to overcome the objections to the terms, but to restrain the repugnance to any stipulations of amity with the party.

The

"Having alluded to the rival of Great Britain, I am not unwilling to explain myself. I affect no concealment, and I have practiced none. While those two great nations agitate all Europe with their quarrels, they will both equally endeavor to create an influence in America. Each will exert all its arts to range our strength on its own side. But how is this to be effected? As our gov ernment is a democratical republic, it will not be disposed to pursue a system of politics in subservience either to England or France in opposition to the general wishes of the citizens. Even should Congress adopt such measures, they would not be pursued long, nor with much success. From the nature of our government, popularity is the instrument of foreign influence. Without it, all is labor and disappointment; with that mighty auxiliary, foreign intrigue finds agents, not only volunteers,

« PreviousContinue »