which he had occupied nearly forty years before in the legislative assembly of his own country, and assert principles and adopt a course of reasoning not only diametrically opposite to those which he had advocated as sound and legitimate in his earlier years, but precisely similar to those used by the federalists on Mr. Jay's treaty.

Finding such doubts and delays in the French chamber of deputies in regard to the execution of the treaty, the executive branch of the United States government took fire; and for a considerable time, it was a very serious question whether we should not be involved in a war with that nation on that simple ground. But the history of the case ought to be received by the people of this republic as an important admonitory lesson, to be more upon their guard against the arts and designs of ambitious politicians, who are more anxious to promote their own personal and party interests than to consult the general welfare or preserve a reputation for consistency either in their principles or conduct. Mr. Jefferson's system, if such it may be called, was one of expedients. He always adopted the project that promised to be useful at the moment in extricating him from an unexpected embarrassment, or in the accomplishment of a favorite object, trusting to future events for what might occur. By placing too much confidence in his skill to get through difficulties, or too great a subserviency to his management or dictation in the case under consideration, they suffered him, in his eagerness to carry a favorite measure, to establish an important precedent which not only placed the government in a mortifying situation, but came very near involving the country in a calamitous and vindictive war. And this was owing to his total disregard of one of the plainest provisions of the constitution.

CHAPTER VIII.

Mr. Jefferson a secret enemy of general Washington-Ambitious of being considered as the greatest political character of his country -Willing to concede to Washington pre-eminence as a military officer, but not as a statesman-Formed a French party soon after his return from France-Accused the federalists of British partialities-Aristocratic and monarchical propensities-Procla mation of neutrality-Strongly opposed by the French party— Extracts from newspapers concerning it—Attacks upon the executive as the enemy of France-Philip Freneau and the National Gazette-Conversation between general Washington and Mr. Jefferson respecting that paper-His enmity to Washington more manifest after the Whiskey insurrection broke out -President's speech to congress, November, 1794-Allusion to democratic societies as the sources of it-Mr. Jefferson's opinion of insurrections, November, 1787-Sentiments respecting the Whiskey insurrection-Democratic societies and the Cincinnati-Judge Marshall's account of the insurrection, and its suppression-Letter to Mazzoi-to James Madison-Effects of general Washington's popularity--John Jay's corruption—Letter to Aaron Burr respecting Washington!

THE federalists believed that Mr. Jefferson, although a professed friend of general Washington, was in reality his secret and malignant enemy. General Washington was probably deluded by the frequency and the warmth of Mr. Jefferson's declarations on that subject, and for a considerable time believed that he was what he professed himself to be, his sincere friend and warm admirer. If his protestations were insincere and hypocritical-and about this there seems to be but little room for doubt-it is difficult to assign a satisfactory cause for it, except those feelings

of selfishness by which very few persons were ever more uniformly influenced than himself. Mr. Jefferson's ambition was, unquestionably, to be considered and acknowledged as the greatest political and civil character of his country; and whoever stood in the way of his ambition was of course the object of his jealousy and animosity. Feelings of this kind undoubtedly were the foundation of his unrelenting enmity to general Hamilton, and led him into the long train of calumnies which have been alluded to. General Washington's military services and character, brilliant as they were, gave Mr. Jefferson no uneasiness. He had no disposition "to seek the bubble reputation at the cannon's mouth." That species of fame could not be attained but through hazards which he had no desire to encounter; and he was therefore willing general Washington should enjoy all the fame as a soldier that he had acquired. But to act the part of a statesman, to perform the duties of civil chief of the government, in his opinion, doubtless, required greater acquirements and different talents from those which the latter possessed. Hence it will appear, that notwithstanding many marked expressions of esteem and respect are scattered along in his correspondence, there is at the same time clearly discoverable, in various instances, a spirit of hostility which it is difficult to account for except upon the ground which has just been suggested.

It has been shown, that Mr. Jefferson returned from France in December, 1789, filled with enthusiasm in favor of the revolutionary movements in that kingdom. His partizans imbibed a similar spirit from him, and in a short time a strong French party was formed in this country. In order to conceal their real objects, under his tutelage they soon began to accuse those who did not adopt his senti

ments and feelings and enroll themselves under his banner, of British partialities, and of course, of being aristocrats and monarchists. And so highly were the passions of the country roused, that there was great danger that the government would be forced into a war with one country or the other by the mere effect of party passion and collision. Foreseeing the evils which such a state of things must necessarily produce, and the calamities which a war would inevitably bring upon the country, general Washington, with that degree of firmness and independence which ever marked his conduct, published his proclamation of neutrality, which kept the country firm and steady, and checked the progress of things towards a rupture with either nation. The following account of this measure is from Marshall's Life of Washington.

"A proclamation of neutrality being deemed a measure which was rendered advisable by the situation of the United States, the attorney general was directed to prepare one in conformity with the principles which had been adopted. On the 22d of April, this instrument was laid before the cabinet, and being approved, was signed by the president and ordered to be published.

"This measure derives importance from the consideration, that it was the commencement of that system to which the American government afterwards inflexibly adhered, and to which much of the national prosperity is to be ascribed. It is not less important in another view. Being at variance with the prejudices, the feelings and the passions of a large portion of the society, and being predicated on no previous proceedings of the legislature, it presented the first occasion which was thought a fit one for openly assaulting a character around which the affections of the people had thrown an armor heretofore deem

ed sacred, and for directly criminating the conduct of the president himself. It was only by opposing passions to passions, by bringing the feeling in favor of France into conflict with those in favor with the chief magistrate, that the enemies of the administration could hope to obtain the victory.

"For a short time, the opponents of this measure treated it with some degree of delicacy. The opposition prints occasionally glanced at the executive; considered all governments, including that of the United States, as naturally hostile to the liberties of the people; and ascribed to this disposition the combination of European governments against France, and the unconcern with which this combination was contemplated by the executive. At the same time, the most vehement declamations were published for the purpose of inflaming the public resentments against Britain; of enhancing the obligations of America to France; of confirming the opinion that the coalition of European monarchs was directed, not less against the United States than against that power to which its hostility was avowed; and that those who did not embrace this opinion were the friends of that coalition and equally the enemies of America and France.

"These publications, in the first instance sufficiently bitter, quickly assumed a highly increased degree of acrimony." (Vol. 5, page 408.)

In reference to this same subject, Mr. Pitkin, in his Political and Civil History of the United States, says :

"The prejudices of the people against Great Britain, arising from recent as well as ancient causes of controversy, and their partialities in favor of France, were made subservient to the views of the leaders of the opposition, and brought to bear against the administration of the gen