be and is transacted by consuls, without the or the requisite influence or weight of charac interference of ministers. This assertion is the ter? Will they abandon their own private loose block on which, for want of a better foun-affairs, to attend at a remote capital, and solicit dation, he has rested the whole edifice of his reasonings; and this block I mean to knock away. A very slight stroke will be sufficient for the purpose.

In what manner, Mr. Chairman, is the observance of a treaty of commerce with any country to be enforced? In what manner are infractions of such a treaty, or of the laws of nations, to be prevented or redressed? Is it not by applications to the government of that country; by representations, by remonstrances, by negotiations? The gentleman from Pennsylvania will not answer in the negative. I know he will not. By whom then and where are these applications to be made, these representations, these remonstrances to be presented, these negotiations to be carried on? Must it be at the seat of government, by agents residing there; or at the sea-ports of the countries where the consuls reside? If the former, these agents will be ministers. You may call them by a different name, but the thing will be the same: for a public agent of one country, charged with the management of its affairs, and residing at the seat of the government of another, is the very definition of a foreign minister, by whatever name you may think fit to call him. As these transactions are, from their very nature, to be with the government itself, let us see whether they could possibly be managed by consuls.

In the first place consuls, by the established law and usage of nations, have no public official character, and cannot be admitted to any intercourse whatever, with the governments of the countries where they reside. We may, if we please, exclaim against this usage, and call it absurd or foolish; but it is the established usage of nations, and while it remains so we must conform to it. Suppose, therefore, that any injury should be done to the commerce of our citizens, by French privateers for instance, or French municipalities, in contravention of our treaty, or against the law of nations, but under color of certain acts of the French government. Could redress be obtained by means of consuls? So far from it that it could not even be applied for; since the consuls could have no access to the government. And yet the gentleman from Pennsylvania tells us, that the interests of our commerce in foreign countries can be managed by consuls!

the restitution of vessels, the revocation of injurious orders, or indemnification for improper seizures? If they were qualified for this business, and willing to undertake it, they certainly would not do so at their own expense. When our consul at Bourdeaux, Nantes, or Marseilles, for instance, should be applied to on any business which would require an application to the French government, would he go to Paris, and remain there to finish the business, at his own expense? Certainly not. We must pay him, not only his expenses, but a compensation for his time and trouble. As these applications would frequently occur, he could not go specially for each one; but must remain always there; and we must give him a salary sufficient to induce him to do so. He would then be a minister in fact, and in expense. He would want nothing of the character but the name, and the capacity of usefulness. This is the establishment which the gentleman from Pennsylvania wishes to substitute, in the place of our present diplomatic appointments. The consuls, in order to perform the duties which he says ought to be assigned to them, must be turned into ministers; equally expensive with the present corps, but far less efficacious.

In the third place we should have a multitude of these new-fashioned consul-ministers; for we have a variety of consuls, in each of the great maritime nations of Europe. There is one in every considerable trading town. In France, for instance, we have six or seven; perhaps a much greater number. Each of these, upon the plan of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, must reside at Paris; for it would be impossible for them to be perpetually running backward and forward, between their respective sea-ports and Paris, as often as any affair might occur requiring an application to the government. If any gentleman should doubt of this, let him look at the list now on the table, of between four and five hundred American vessels, carried into the different ports of France or detained there contrary to the treaty, and redress for the capture and detention of which must be obtained, if obtained at all, from the French government, by means either of a minister or of consuls. The consuls, therefore, if they are to do the business, must all reside at Paris; and instead of one minister we should have nine or ten; perhaps a greater number. These obIn the next place our consuls in foreign coun-servations will apply, with a greater or less detries are, for the most part natives of the countries where they reside; with very few exceptions they are mere private merchants; and except in the single case of the consuls to the Barbary powers, who according to established usage are a species of ministers, they receive no salaries. Are men of this description adequate to the protection of our commercial interests? Can they be expected to possess the requisite knowledge, for conducting affairs of this kind,

gree of force, to every other country with which we have a considerable commerce. And yet the gentleman from Pennsylvania tells us, that our commercial relations ought to be left to consuls!

Having seen, Mr. Chairman, what the duty of consuls is not, let us now inquire for a moment what it is. We shall find them very necessary agents, though wholly inadequate to the business usually committed to ministers.

constitutional functions, and thus effect a breach in the intrenchments of the constitution; and he will pardon me for considering this doctrine, about which he has discoursed so much, and with such ingenuity, as a mere covered way to conceal his attack.

In the first place, it is their duty to settle dis- | Executive in the exercise of this part of his putes, which may arise between seafaring people of their own nation, arriving in the foreign ports where they respectively reside. These disputes, we know, are apt to arise between the masters of the ships and their crews, between the crews themselves, and between the masters or crews of different ships; and these consuls are usually empowered to terminate them, in a manner less tedious and expensive than could be done, by the local laws of the country.

In the next place, they are to assist seafaring people of their own country, who may happen to have any disputes with the people of the place; are to make advances to them when in distress; and procure redress for them in all cases, where it can be afforded by the local authorities of their respective ports.

So much, Mr. Chairman, for the utility of ministers in general; who appear to me essentially necessary, not merely for making commercial treaties, but for protecting the rights of our citizens in foreign countries, according to treaties, where there are any, and under the law of nations, where there are none.

But gentlemen point particularly to the mission to Berlin. What have we to do, say gentlemen, with the minister to Berlin? What have we to do, say gentlemen, with the King And lastly, they are to act as agents, between of Prussia, or the politics of Germany? To me, the people of their country and the minister; Mr. Chairman, let me repeat it, it is enough to inform him of cases which require his inter- that the President has judged it proper to send ference with the government, and to facilitate a minister to Berlin; for to him and the Sento the sufferers the means of applying to him. ate, in my belief, and not to this House, has They are to be his agents in all the sea-ports; the constitution confided the right to decide on while he is the general and immediate agent of this subject. But to gentlemen who are not his country, with the government. They are to satisfied with this answer, I will give another, keep him informed of all the cases which occur and one which I promise myself they will find in their respective ports, of violations of treaties, satisfactory. Have gentlemen who object to or of neutral rights; so that he may be enabled this mission, adverted to the peculiar situation to take the proper steps for obtaining redress. of Europe at this moment? Have they adverted The duties of these agents whom we call to our own peculiar situation? We have a consuls, are, therefore, so distinct from those most disagreeable dispute with the French reof a minister, so necessary in themselves, and public. France has made peace with the emso incapable of being performed, except by per-peror; and a congress is now sitting, if not sons residing in the sea-ports, that were all the present consuls, according to the plan of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, to be immediately sent to the capitals, and converted into ministers under a new name, their place must instantly be supplied by other agents, whom perhaps the gentleman would not choose to call consuls, but who must be invested with the same powers, and perform the same duties. Such is the wise and notable scheme of the gentleman from Pennsylvania; and thus it is he is to rid us of the expense of ministers!

already terminated, to settle the affairs of Germany, and adjust the balance of Europe. In this congress, interests of the utmost magnitude in themselves, and in the highest degree important to France, are to be discussed; no less than to determine whether France shall extend her borders to the Rhine, or be restricted to the Meuse; whether more than two millions of souls, formerly subjects of the German empire, shall become citizens of the French republic. In this congress the King of Prussia is mediator; a youthful monarch; enterprising, warlike, and ambitious, at the head of three hundred thousand of the finest troops in Europe, and with a treasury replenished by four years of peace, while the coffers of his neighbors are in a most exhausted condition. With these advantages, joined to his local position, he holds in his hands the balance of France and Germany. Prepared to strike in every direction, he is dreaded and courted by all parties, and especially by France; who feels that after Aus

Let me be permitted, Mr. Chairman, to propose another question to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. If ministers have nothing to do with commercial relations, except making treaties of commerce, how comes it to pass that the gentleman is willing for us to have ministers of the highest grade, with those two nations with whom we have treaties of commerce, and where, according to him, ministers can have nothing to do? I mean France and England; with both of which nations we have commer-tria, now exhausted and desirous of repose, he cial treaties, and where the gentleman consents to our retaining ministers plenipotentiary. To be consistent with himself he ought to attempt the recall of these two ministers, by refusing an appropriation for their salaries, and to leave untouched those of Lisbon and Berlin, who may possibly have something to do. But this is not the gentleman's object. He has another, which is to establish the principle of controlling the

is the power most capable of checking her ambitious designs. Ilence she has the greatest possible interest to soothe and conciliate him. This monarch possesses all the finest ports in the Baltic, and a great extent of maritime territory. His predecessor, the great Frederick, sensible that commerce alone can supply money, the sinews of military strength, always felt the greatest solicitude to render his States commer

|

avoid new ones. For this purpose we must em ploy ministers; and none could be more wisely employed than the one to Berlin.

This diplomatic intercourse, therefore, about which gentlemen raise so great an outery, is perfectly consistent with a wish to get rid, as fast as we can, of foreign connections; and if gentlemen were sincere in that wish, it appears to me, that instead of opposing these appointments, they would applaud and support them. Gentlemen must excuse me, if I say that I do

cial; and one of the means by which he hoped to effect this purpose, was to form connections with commercial nations. This was the spirit of his government, and became a standing maxim in his system of policy. Accordingly, having discovered that the United States must speedily become a great commercial nation, he was among the first to form a treaty of commerce with us. Is there not reason to expect that the same views may be entertained by his successor, now on the throne? And was it not wise to do every thing in our power, for keep-not think them sincere; that in my opinion ing up a good understanding with a monarch, foreign relations are merely a stalking horse, who has it in his power to serve us so essen- behind which they advance to attack the adtially? How is this to be done? By sending ministration, and the system of policy which it a minister to his court, renewing our treaty has adopted. To foreign relations and foreign with him, which is about to expire, and holding intercourse, in my opinion, gentlemen have no out to him the prospect of commercial arrange-objection, provided those relations can be such ments, not injurious to us, but perhaps highly desirable to him, and sufficient to procure his good offices and interference, in the adjustment of our differences with France. Would this interference be unavailing? I apprehend not; for France has too much interest in keeping well with this monarch, to refuse attention to his mediation. His interference, if he should choose to interfere seriously, would on the contrary be more efficacious, in all probability, than fifty ships-of-the-line.

I do not know, Mr. Chairman, that this terference will be obtained, or ought much to be expected; but I am fully persuaded that it was wise to use the means, to send the minister, and make the attempt; from which I have no idea that we ought to have been deterred by the paltry consideration of saving nine or ten thousand dollars.

as they wish, and conducted in the manner which they desire. It is against the nature of these connections, and not to foreign connections in themselves, that the hostility of gentlemen is directed. For the proof of this position I appeal to the history of the measures pursued by those gentlemen since the commencement of this government.

I ack gentlemen, Mr. Chairman, who think with me that the present attempt ought to be resisted, whether they can separate it from that in-system of measures, which its supporters have so zealously and perseveringly pursued, since the commencement of the war between France and England? I cannot. I am compelled to view it in connection with that system, and it is this connection which makes me dread it. Viewing it in this connection, the time which is chosen for making the attempt, is to me its most alarming feature. This extension of foreign intercourse, which is made the pretext for the present attempt, is not a measure of this day. It was adopted in May, 1796, and that was the time for opposing it, if the reasons for the opposition were really such as gentlemen allege. But no opposition, or at least none of any consequence, was made at that time. I have looked over the debate which took place on that occasion; and I find that although some objections were made, they rested on a ground wholly different from that now taken. They were confined to the expediency of the measure; but not one word was said of the danger of executive influence, of the necessity of checking executive patronage. Among others I was most struck by the observations of a gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Findley, which agree precisely with our present doctrines, and appear to me so solid and important, that I cannot forbear presenting them to the committee. They are found in the debate of May 30th, 1796, on the extension of foreign intercourse, and in these words:

But gentlemen constantly repeat, that we ought to have no political connections with the nations of Europe. This is about as wise as to say that a man ought never to have a fever. A fever, no doubt, is a very bad thing, and political connections may also be bad things; but we already have them, and the question is not whether they are good or bad, but how we shall get rid of them. We not only have political connections, but disputes of a most disagreeable nature, growing out of those connections. This is attested by all the papers on the table, by various acts of the House, and more strongly still by the universal capture and condemnation of our property. It is vain and foolish, therefore, to repeat continually, that we ought not to have foreign connections; but our business is to inquire how they may be best got rid. How is this to be done? I answer by settling our present differences, and avoiding new ones. Unless gentlemen mean to submit, and if they do, I have nothing to say to them, having already had opportunities on former occasions, to say all that seemed necessary on that subject. Unless they now mean to submit, I repeat that the only method of getting rid of those foreign connections, about which they so loudly exclaim, is to settle our present differences in the best manner we can, and

"Mr. Findley said that he had voted against this measure in the Committee of the Whole, and he thought he was right in doing so; but he was now of opinion, that except the House had information sufficient to convince

them that the appropriation was unnecessary, | know was resolved on, long before it was dethey ought to grant it. He wished as much as any one to save the money of the public; but he believed our government was, in some degree, obliged to conform to European practices. If we had ministers plenipotentiary at one court, he did not know where to draw the line. He believed they should do best in leaving the executive to settle this matter."

gress, and refer the decision to them. Why? | thusiastic partiality for France, whom they conBecause it was known that a popular body, sidered as contending for liberty, and on this like Congress, was infinitely more susceptible partiality the party founded strong hopes of of enthusiasm, more easily wrought on by success. But the good sense of the people enmanagement and intrigue, more obnoxious to abled them to discern, that whatever might be the influence of popular clamor, mobs, and their wishes for the success of France, the invenal presses, than the cool deliberative coun- terests of their own country lay in preserving cils of the President. It was also known, that peace; and they gave throughout the Union, in case of a reference to Congress, the neutral the most unequivocal proofs of approbation, to system would lose the aid of its author's talents, the proclamation of neutrality. When Conwho was precluded by his official station for a gress met this sentiment had become so strong seat in that body. To this point then the au- and universal, that the war-party did not dare thor of the war system directed his force. He to oppose it. The proclamation was approved labored to convince the President, that it did of by Congress, and the party and their chief not belong to him to decide the question of once more had a hook put into their nose. neutrality; but to Congress, to whom the constitution required to be referred; and in this effort it is well known that he was aided to the atmost, by that description of people, who have since that time omitted no opportunity in their power, of hurrying us into a war against England.

A

Though a second time disappointed they did not, however, lose courage, nor abandon their schemes. But as a system of neutrality had now been adopted, it was too late to talk of war; and the next step, therefore, was to explain this neutrality in such a manner, as would render it in effect an alliance with France, and Fortunately, however, the President saw and a state of hostility against England. This was avoided the snare. His sound judgment and attempted accordingly; but as the author of the penetrating discernment enabled him to per-war-system held an official station in the execuceive all the hazards of such a reference: his tive department he could not openly appear in good sense prevented him from entertaining a the attempt. The French minister came fordoubt, about his constitutional power to decide ward and advanced the pretensions, which it this question, and his firmness enabled him to was the part of the other personage to second make and support the decision. The proclama- and support, in the President's council. tion of neutrality accordingly appeared. right was claimed on the part of France, to arm, fit and commission ships of war in our ports; to exclude British ships of war, under pretences which would have applied to every possible case; to enlist crews among our citizens; to raise armies in our country; and to preclude our courts of justice from all cognizance of prizes, taken and brought in by vessels acting under French commissions. It was contended on the part of France, that we ought to resist by force the right claimed by England, and clearly acknowledged by the law of nations, to take the goods of her enemies, when found on board of our neutral vessels. It requires no discernment, Mr. Chairman, to see that these pretensions, had they been agreed to, would have placed the direction of our affairs in the hands of France, and must instantly have induced a state of war between us and England. This was well understood by the war-party; and therefore, as every body recollects, they aided and supported the French minister, to the utmost of their power. These pretensions, indeed, were repelled by the President, who adopted a system wholly different, a system of national independence and fair neutrality; but it is well known to have been adopted contrary to the opinion, and in spite of the efforts, of the chief of this party. When it was adopted he did indeed defend it, in his official character; but he has taken care to declare* his abhorrence of it, and the French minister did not fail to accuse him of duplicity, for having written

It no sooner made its appearance, than the war-party and their chief raised an outcry against it, from one end of the continent to the other. The French minister, Genet, who arrived soon after, remonstrated; the popular societies formed under his auspices published resolutions, and the venal presses, the principal of which was under the immediate direction of the author of the war system, poured forth abuse against the proclamation of neutrality, the minister who advised it, and the President by whom it was issued. In short, Mr. Chairman, no expedient which disappointed intrigue and an artful, enraged spirit of party could devise, was omitted, for raising an universal popular indignation against this proclamation of neutrality, and for preparing Congress to condemn and reverse it. The changes were rung from town to town, from State to State, and from one end of the Union to the other, on pusillanimity, on national degradation, on ingratitude to France, on servile submission to England; and this proclamation was furiously assailed, with the very same weapons which we have since seen employed against the British treaty, justly considered as a part of the same system of neutrality.

The efforts of the friends of war and their chief were, however, unavailing. The people of America, indeed, felt a warm and almost en

The National Gazette, whose editor, Philip Freneau, was confidential clerk of Mr. Jefferson. This paper was the vehicle of all the most violent attacks against the proclamation of neutrality.-Author of the Speech.

In the letter to Mazzie, where he stigmatizes this very system, as a system of ingratitude and injustice to France.