before the court, declined to answer. Similar notice was given to the Attorney General of the State, and served by the marshal of the United States. The Governor declined obeying the summons, or employing counsel; but issued a proclamation for an extra meeting of the legislature.

In his speech to the legislature, the Governor says,-"I cannot conceive that the people of this Commonwealth, when by their representatives in Convention, they adopted the federal compact, expected a State should be held liable to answer on compulsory civil process, to an individual of another State, or of a foreign kingdom. Three judges of the United States having given it as their opinion that the several States are thus liable, the question becomes highly important to the people." After stating the consequences, which he apprehended would result from this doctrine, he suggested the propriety of preparing a proposition, by the legislature, for an additional article to the federal Constitution, in which the sovereignty of a State should be so far secured, as not to be liable to a civil suit in the Courts of the United States, at the instance of an individual, whether a citizen of the United States, or of a foreign country. He considered this the most proper course, and most for the peace and harmony of the Union; at the same time he expressed an opinion in favor of State rights, and of the sovereignty of the States, in all cases not expressly or plainly prohibited by the federal Constitution.

In this speech, the Governor also observed, "The great object presented to us by our political situation, is the support of the general government, and affording force and efficacy to its functions, without destroying the powers which the people have vested in and reserved to the State governments. A consolidation of all the States into one government would at once endanger the nation as a republic, and eventually divide the States now united, or eradicate the principles for which we have contended. It is much less hazardous to prevent the establishment of a dangerous or erroneous precedent, than to attempt to contravene it, after it has obtained a place in a civil constitution."*

The legislature sustained the views of the Governor, by a large majority, though several members of talents and learning contended that a State was liable to an action in a civil suit; that it ought to do justice according to the decision of an impartial tribunal; that there was none other,

Governor Hancock died the first of October, at the age of 56, and only ten days after this meeting of this legislature; greatly lamented as an ardent patriot and a sincere republican.

for such purpose than the Courts of the United States, and that the opinion of the Judges of that Court was correct. The resolution passed by the legislature of Massachusetts, on the occasion, was as follows-"That a power claimed, or which may be claimed, of compelling a State to become a defendant in a Court of the United States, at the suit of an individual, or individuals, is (in the opinion of this legislature) unnecessary and inexpedient; and, in its exercise, dangerous to the peace, safety, and independence of the several States, and repugnant to the first principles of a federal government." A resolution was also adopted by the legislature, to instruct the Senators and to request the Representatives in Congress from Massachusetts, to use their efforts for obtaining an amendment to the federal Constitution, which should prevent a State from being amenable, in a civil suit, to the Courts of the United States. In 1794, Congress proposed such an article to be added to the Constitution; and in 1798, it was officially announced by the President of the United States, that the requisite majority of State legislatures had approved and adopted it. It is the eleventh article of those added to the Constitution; and it is as follows-"The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States, by citizens of another State, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign State."

CHAPTER IV.

Third Congress, December 1793. Fears of War with England or France. President's Speech. Debts of the Separate States. Comparison of them. Mr. Jefferson resigns his Office as Secretary of State. Judge Jay's Special Envoy to England. Jealousy of that Nation. Portugal. Algerine Depredations. Embargo. Regular Troops of the United States Increased. Difficulty with Spain. Discontents and Opposition in Pennsylvania. Firm and Mild Measures of Federal Executive. Second Session of Third Congress. Power over Militia. Discipline of them. Reduction of Public Debt Urged. Opposition to the Administration.

WHEN the third Congress met, December, 1793, (consisting of about 110 members,) the public mind was highly anxious respecting the destiny of the country; through fear of a war with France or England, against both which there was just causes of complaint, and by the excitement of national pride and honor, at the highly improper interference of the French minister with the measures of the federal government. The speech of the President to the national legislature, on this occasion, "was moderate, firm, dignified and interesting." He first referred to his re-election, to which, he said, he had consented by the pressing request of many of his most judicious friends, contrary to his own inclination; and he expressed the hope, that his services might be useful and acceptable to his fellow-citizens. He then referred to his proclamation of neutrality in the present crisis, as he deemed it an imperious duty to admonish the citizens of the consequences of a contraband trade, as well as of all hostile acts towards either of the belligerent nations in Europe. He recommended that the country be put in a state for efficient defence against any foreign invading foe; and he also referred to the very improper and offensive conduct of the French minister near the United States.

The answer of both Houses of Congress were expressive of their entire confidence in the upright views of the President, and of the correctness of the measures which he had adopted. And while strong feelings of indignation were displayed by the majority respecting the extraordinary conduct of the French minister, as disclosed by the Pres

* Marshall.

ident, no one appeared so lost to sentiments of national honor, or a regard to the welfare of the country, as publicly to offer any apology for him. Anonymous writers in some newspapers, however, vainly attempted to justify or to excuse his conduct.

During this session, the Commissioners appointed to examine and adjust the accounts of the several States, for expenses and advances in the war of the Revolution, made a report to Congress; in which was stated the balances due to each. The creditor States were seven; Massachusetts and South Carolina had the greatest claims, amounting to 1,200,000 dollars each; the other creditor States were Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Georgia; all the other were debtor States.

When the act for an excise, or duty, on carriages was discussed, it was objected that it would operate unequally; that it was of the nature of a direct tax; and should, therefore, be imposed on all; and that no tax but of this character could be constitutionally collected. Mr. Sedgwick, of Massachusetts, maintained that the Constitution, not only allowed Congress to lay duties and imposts, but taxes and excises; that direct taxes were to be laid according to the ratio of population; but that an excise was rather of the nature of imposts, as it was raised, not on articles of necessity, but of superfluity and luxury, and was therefore voluntary; and that an excise on pleasure carriages was as proper as a duty on wine or tea, and would fall only on the rich. The real objection, with many, to this mode of raising a revenue, was, that it had been proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Hamilton, in his report, all whose plans were opposed by certain members of Congress. It was also popular to clamor against an excise; the name even being odious to the people in most parts of the country.

Towards the close of the year 1794, Mr. Jefferson, the first Secretary of State, resigned his office, and retired from the administration of the federal government. He had entertained different views from the President and the majority of the Cabinet, on some of the most important measures proposed and adopted by Washington. It was also supposed that he was induced to this act by finding that Mr. Hamilton, the Secretary of the Treasury, had more influence with the President than himself. By the request of General Washington, Mr. Jefferson remained in office several months, after he tendered his resignation. Washington was under an undue influence from no man; but he considered the

plans and views of the Secretary of the Treasury, and of War, more correct for vindicating the honor and welfare of the United States, than those of Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison. General Knox, the Secretary of War, had no unpleasant collisions with, nor personal jealousies of the Secretary of State, but he had perfect confidence in the patriotism and wisdom of the President.

In April, 1794, the President nominated to the Senate, John Jay, then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, as Envoy Extraordinary to the Court of London; and he expressed his opinion to that body, that the crisis demanded such a measure-that he had no want of confidence in the minister from the United States then near the British Courts, (Mr. Pinckney of South Carolina,) but that a special Envoy might have an additional influence with the government of England; and that if he were unsuccessful in his efforts to preserve peace, and to induce that nation to do justice to the United States, the duty of a resort to force, in defence of our rights, would be manifest to the world, and that but one opinion would prevail among the American people on the subject.

In addition to the reasons for such a mission, to which reference has already been made, a peace had taken place, by the advice and influence of the British ministry, between Portugal and the Dey of Algiers-and the vessels of the latter were thus at leisure to depredate on the commerce of the United States. They took several vessels belonging to American citizens, confiscated the cargoes, and imprisoned the crews, or obliged them to work in their gallies. So jealous were many persons in the United States, at that period of the inimical disposition of England towards this country, that they attributed the peace between Algiers and Portugal to a design in the British Cabinet to harass and distress the navigation and trade of America. This, however, was disavowed by the British ministry, and probably was not a premeditated plan. But no one who was impartial in his feelings, could hesitate to acknowledge, that the Court of London was disposed to find a plea for imposing restraints on the commerce of the United States, whether it were in friendship to other nations, or from hatred to France, with which it was at war.

In the dispute with Spain at this period, the interests of the United States, especially of the western parts, on the Mississippi, were deeply involved; and the citizens of the newly formed State of Kentucky, complained that their rights were not duly regarded by the government. They