requested an examination of his official conduct, while Secretary; which was accordingly made by a committee of the Representatives, and found to have been entirely correct and faithful. Samuel Dexter, of Massachusetts, was appointed to that responsible office, which he held about a year, when he voluntarily retired from its onerous duties. In 1800, John Marshall, of Virginia, was appointed Secretary of State, by Mr. Adams; and in February, 1801, the office of Chief Justice of the United States being vacant, he was selected for that high and important station. The feeble health of Mr. Ellsworth had induced him to resign some months before; when John Jay, who was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, was again appointed, but declined the office. The selection of Mr. Marshall was very judicious and fortunate; for the purity and stability of that department of the federal government was considered as the chief support for the maintenance of justice, and a due interpretation and administration of the laws of the Union.

The presidential election occupied the public mind, during the whole year 1800. It was a subject of deep interest to all, and with many the occasion of great excitement. The candidates for that high office were President Adams, and Mr. Jefferson, then Vice President. Mr. Adams received the support of those who had approved of his leading measures for the four preceding years; and very generally of those who were the political friends of Washington's administration. For though he adopted the pacific but magnanimous policy of that illustrious man, and received his approbation, while he lived, the conduct of Mr. Adams in instituting a new embassy to France in 1799, was severely and bitterly censured by a few individuals of high standing in the federal party. They were respectable for their talents and patriotism; but they were too assuming, and aimed to exercise more influence than a few men ought to do, in a republican government. The majority of the citizens approved of the conduct of President Adams, on this difficult occasion; and probably, his rejection of the overture of the French rulers would have produced a fatal division in the United States; and thrown the government into the hands of men entirely devoted to the views of revolutionary France. It is true, that notwithstanding this conciliating measure of the President, the federal administration was changed; but his conduct, approved as it was by a great portion of the people, served as a check on the policy of his successor, in restraining him

from the adoption of measures still more subservient to the will of the French government, than any which he publicly pursued. Whatever were the secret views of Mr. Jefferson, he was too wise not to regard the wishes and opinions of the majority of his fellow citizens; and whatever were his partialities for the French nation, would not designedly compromit the interests and honor of the United States. The election of Mr. Jefferson was proof of a great change of sentiment in the people, within two years. At the close of 1798, or beginning of 1799, Mr. Adams would have had a large majority of the suffrages of the electors. But such is the instability and uncertainty of public opinion, especially when gross misrepresentations are made, and the prejudices and passions of the people are addressed, rather than their understanding.

By the prudent and pacific, yet firm and decided measures of the federal government, for twelve years, the character of the United States had become highly respectable among the greatest statesmen of Europe. Its policy exhibited a happy union of energy and magnanimity; and it was respected alike for its wisdom and power. The nation was placed in a commanding attitude of defence, while liberty and peace and improvement were every where witnessed within its jurisdiction. Public credit had been fully established; and able and faithful men had been selected for the public agents; men, whose patriotism had been proved by eight years service devoted to their country's welfare.

* Mr. Jefferson and Aaron Burr had an equal number of votes for President and Vice President; and the election of President devolved on the Representatives, as provided by the Constitution, in such case. More than thirty trials were had before a choice was made. The friends of the late adminis tration generally supported Mr. Burr, believing him to be more in favor of the policy before pursued, especially on the subject of commerce.

CHAPTER VI.

Mr. Jefferson elected President. His Professions and Opinions. Treaty with France Confirmed. Removals from Office for Political Sentiments. Naval Force. President unfriendly to it. Laws of 1801-1802. Repeal of Laws establishing Circuit Courts, and laying Excise and Internal Taxes. State of Public Finances. Purchase of Louisiana. Objections to the Measure. Disputes with England and Spain. Danger of Spanish War.

UNDER President Jefferson, the heads of the great departments of the government were changed, nor was there any just reason to complain of this measure; as they formed a part of his political council; and, as the chief executive officer of government, he had a perfect right to select his confidential friends and advisers. But, when afterwards, and within a few months, he removed able and upright men from offices of a subordinate grade, his conduct was considered improper and arbitrary, and as partaking somewhat of the right of prerogative, usually claimed and exercised by royal princes. The new administration professed to be governed by more democratic principles than the former; but it was denied, that its measures were more in accordance with the Constitution, or more strictly republican. A large portion of the people were pleased, because they were flattered; but no evidence appeared that they were benefitted by a change of rulers. Mr. Jefferson was not considered to have cordially approved of the federal Constitution; and in some of his private letters he had expressed the opinion, that the government it provided approached too nearly to monarchy to receive his assent. When he took an oath to support the Constitution, no doubt he was sincere; with the qualification, however, in all such cases understood, of giving it a construction for himself. And he never appeared averse from the exercise of power vested in the chief executive officer of the government. In some instances, his opponents believed he exceeded his legitimate authority; as in the case of withholding commissions from persons appointed by his predecessor, after being approved by the Senate, but which had not been issued from the State department at the time of his inauguration; and still more, in the purchase of a large terri

tory, not within the limits of the United States, without direct authority from the national legislature. In his inaugural address, Mr. Jefferson said, "We have gained little, if we encourage a political intolerance as wicked as impolitic. We are all brethren of the same principles; we are all republicans, and all federalists." Yet in less than fifty days, he removed fourteen federal officers, without any allegation of unfaithfulness or inefficiency: on the plea indeed, that his predecessor had removed two public officers, on account of their political opinions; and had appointed none to office in the government but such as were of the same sentiments and views as the administration. "Few died, and none resigned," he said; and therefore, to equalize public offices between the two great political parties, it was necessary, in his opinion, to remove a part of those then employed, and to appoint others more friendly to the new administration.

For a very few of the removals, there might have been sufficient or justifiable reasons offered; but in most instances, the changes were made merely for political opinions, and these not at all affecting the real republican character of individuals. In some cases, the officers of the revolution were superseded by sons of Tory refugees. The chief recommendation to a candidate was his making court to and flattering the administration. The principle was essentially exclusive and intolerant; and it served as a dangerous precedent to others, who might be in power at a future time, or over smaller portions of the Union. It was imitated, and probably furnished an apology for the governors of several States afterwards, in removing faithful public agents, of undoubted republican sentiments, and rewarding their zealous supporters, with the spoils of successful electioneering warfare.

The treaty made with the French government, by Mr. Ellsworth and his associates, in 1800, and conditionally confirmed by the federal administration early in 1801, was sent to Paris soon after, by President Jefferson. There was some delay and hesitation on the part of the French rulers, in accepting the conditions and modifications proposed by the Senate of the United States. But it was confirmed in the course of the year. The American government was released from the obligations of the treaty of alliance with France of 1778, by which it had guaranteed the French possessions in the West Indies and the nonfulfilment of which had been the only just cause of complaint against the federal government; but indemnification

was not made for the extensive depredations on American commerce by the French vessels, any farther than by the way of a compromise, for giving up alleged claims arising from the guarantee made in the treaty of 1778.

Robert R. Livingston, of New York, who had been chancellor of that State, was appointed Envoy to France, in 1801, with full powers to negotiate on all subjects in dispute between that nation and the United States. He remained some time near the French government; and was the minister who stipulated for the purchase of Louisiana, in 1802-3; an event of great importance to the United States, though at the time of doubtful validity arising from Constitutional principles.

During the years 1800 and 1801, there was a misunderstanding between the commissioners of England and the United States, appointed to adjust the claims of citizens of the latter, under the treaty of 1794; and all proceedings relating to the subject were suspended for some time. But after due explanations, the business was again commenced, through the prudent and able influence of Mr. King; then the American minister at the Court of London, and soon terminated to the satisfaction of the federal government, and of the merchants, who were particularly interested in the fulfilment of the terms of the treaty. The amount they awarded and received of the British government for spoliations on the commerce of the United States, in 1793 and 1794, was very great; and must have convinced every impartial and reasonable man, that the negotiation instituted by the federal administration in 1794, under Washington, was far more wise and beneficial than war; or non-intercourse, for which some strongly contended at that period.

The President was accused not only of undue partiality in his appointments to office, but of arbitrary conduct in interfering with the due process of law. In the case of an. individual, Duane, the publisher of a paper in Philadelphia, who was prosecuted for a libel on the Senate of the United States, which had been brought in the federal Court, under a law of Congress called the sedition law, the President ordered the attorney for government to discontinue the action; and it was accordingly dismissed. This act of the executive was deemed to be an improper interference with the province of the judiciary; though the prosecution was technically in the name of the President of the United States, it would have been more in the spirit of the Constitution, had it been in the name of the United States.

In his message to Congress, at the beginning of the ses