KDA V S By JOHH FEN NO, No. 34, NOP CH FIFTH-STREET, ~ " [No. 5> of Vol. IV.] Saturday, December 22, 175,2. Fe, tkeG.ilf.rtc. oj the UW'IXLD STatcS. I" F perseverance can fnpply the want of JL judgment, Mr. Jeflfcrfon has an excellent advocate in the writer ofhis " Vindicatioh."' But I if bis last attempt 11 not fouud ■to involve lliil more deeply the character he wishes to extricate. To repel the- imputation on Mr. Jtft'.-iTon, arifuig from the advirt* which he gave toCon jrrefs refp4ftingthe debt to France; he not only lajors to (hew, that taken in all its circqm ftances it is not of the exceptionable com plexion ar:rlc•- which it has been represented, but endeavors to infufe a belief, that the finfe of the extract originally communicated, has been altered by the interpolation of cer tain words as well as by the fuppreUion of a, part of the paragraph, from which the extraTt is derived. Tt will flrike the moll careless observer, as not a little extraordinary that a person (who bn un lertakins to state the contents of a let ith precise accuracy, and even to detest jte verbal deviation, mult be under o have access to the original)—Tiould, ntnJujf tn-t-lu public eye a itct mfcript of that original, content liim ith giving his own paraphrase of it, and I expect that this would be accepted, up ftrength of his afTurance, that it ex hibits the genuine contents of the letter, on the point in dispute contained in one para graph only—" That the arrangement of the idea is the fame, and that in fubjiance, nothing has been added to, or taken from it," thus mo ■deftly offering his own con/lruflion of fubjiance, the very thing in question, for the thing it •feif. That the extract, as given by me, is tor reft in every materia/ expression, is proved by the statement in the vindication. That it is literally correct, I must continue to believe, until something more to lie depended upon than coujlruQhc fubjiance,is offered in lien of it. The information I pollefs, is drawn from two sources; one a memorandum in the band writing of a friend, which was given to me as an exact tranfeript of the words of the letter, and which was copied verbatim, in the second of these papers;—the other, a document of mqucftio .able authenticity.notj o.ng since con sulted, wh.ch ffates the contents of Mr. Jei» ferfon's letter in the'following form :— Mr. Jefierfon suggests that " if there is a dan ger of the public payments not being punctual, whether it might not be better that the discon tents which would then arise, should be trans ferred from a court, of whose good will we have so Diacb need to the breasts of a private ' company." - " That the credit of the United States is found in Holland, and that it would probably not- be difficult to borrow iw that country the whole sum of money due to the court of France ; and to discharge that debt without any deduction, thereby doing what would be grateful to the court, and eftablifiling with them a confidence in our honor." This statement in the document alluded to, serves to confirm the memorandum, in form as well as substance. Speaking in the third person, it represents Mr. Jefferfon as fuggejt ing, " whether it might rot be better, )kc." whence it is natural to infer, that speaking in the firft person in the letter, the terms are, < 4 1 submit whether it may not be better, &C.'* The form of conveying the idea by way of question, is common to both vouchers; and the word u whether", which is also common to both, p efuppofes the words u I fugged," or " I submit," the last being the most accu rate, and in that view the most likely to have been used. It is observable, also, that the fame state ment difconne&s the two proportions, and gives them a diftin<sl ar>d independent afpe<st. The conjunction " But," which is alledged to be in the original, does not appear in that statement. It is poflible, never thelefs, that some imma terial departures from literal preciflon, may have found their way into the transcripts, which are relied upon. But while this con cefllon, as a hare poflibility is made, it is not intended as an escape from a rigorous refpon /ibility for the eflential accuracv of the diJ clofure. If there be in what has been com municated as a literal extradl, any expreflion the leajl matei-a/ i tending to the crimination of Mr. JefJerlou, which is not to be found in the original, it is admitted to be inexcufabtp.— But not having been podTefled of the original, as has been several times stated, any acciden tal variation of exprelijon, not affecting at aH the sense of the quotation, or not affecting it diiadvar.ta; poufly to Mr.JefFerfo'?,cannot be admitted to be of moment; in regard either to the merits wftned fcuffion,or to the fairnefs oi- procedure. To press such a variance, as an objedti' n, is to cavil, aud to betray a con icioufnefs ot weakuefs. Now, it happen?, that the variance, which is alledged to exist, it" it has any influence up on tie mean in 5 of the piA'age, has one favor able to Mr. Jetferfon; taking it for granted, that his Apologist has given a true account of it. This will be seen by carefully contrail ins the phraseology in the two cases. The extra ft, as stated by me, is in these words—" 1) there is a danger of the pui/ic pa<t vur.ts not being punctual, I submit whether it may not be better, that the dijcentents winch would then prije.jiould be transferredjrom a Court, of whcfr good mil w have fomuct need, to the breajls or * m ivate company." Theftatement in the vindication represents, that Mr. Jefferfon, Having stated the pro fofition as abave (referring to the propofitiou for the purchase of tiie debt) obfeives further upon it, in its relation to this country, that if /here be a danger our payments may net be puticlua/, it might be belter, that the d'Jcontents ivktch would then arije, fhcald be transferred from a court, of XL'kofegoed will we hnefo much need, to the breafis fff aptivate company." All tiie material and exceptionable phrases are the fame in the two statements—The on fydm, f s ffet in 1.-ff Mr. Jefferlbn is made to fuimit in the mode* formofa "whether it might not be better." the identicalfenti.r.ent or advice, which, in the lalt, he is made to convey in the affirmative tone of an observation, that " it might be bet ter"—The la ft mode of expression is certainlv stronger than the firft, and if the feiitiniant conveyed be, as it undoubtedly is, an impro. per one, the censure due to it is entreated by the greater degree ofdeciiion with which it is exprefied, as being an indication of a more decided state of mind concerning it—This re mark, which might otherwise appear nice and critical, is naturally drawn forth by the at tempt to have it undo/flood, that the words " I fuimit whether," which are said to have been interpolated, have an influence upon the sense of the clause injurious to Mr. jefferlbn.* The result i". that the alteration of terms said to have been mad#, if real, inuft hare been casual, because ic either does not vary the sense, or varies it favorably to Mr. Jfcf ferfon and confequentlv that the charge which has been brought, rests upon him in its primitive force, unmitigated by the alledged change of terms. In like manner admitting the statement of whafc-is said to follow as a part of the fame paragraph, to be truly represented in the vin dication—it either corresponds with the view I have heretofore given of the matter, or it implicates Mr.Jefferfbn in greater reprehenfi bility than lias been yet charged upon him—lt either presents an alternative proportion pre dicated upon the supposition of a Jlate of things differentf rom that which is the basis of the fir ft, namely, the danger of a deficiency of means for pundlual payment, and in that cafe does not derogate from the firft or proceeding upon the supposition of the fame [late of things, it contains advice to Congress to avail them fclves of the yet found state of their credit in Holland, treacherously to induce individuals upon the invitation of the government to lend their money on the ordinary terms, for the pur pose of making full payment to France, in order to guard her from loss, and preserve her confidence, in direst contemplation of not being able to render the stipulated justice to those individuals. If this was the advice of Mr.Jefferfon,it leaves his condufl without e ven chose flight extenuations which have been supposed to afford a semblance of apology. It takes away the feeble pretexts deduced from the offer having originated with the Company, and from their gaining a considera ble boon in the firft purchase. The last, I acknowledge, is the construc tion best warranted by the ftrudhire of the pa ragraph as delineated in the vindication.— This, as it there Hands,would be the most ob vious and natural reading.—lf there be a danger that our payments may not be punc tual, it may be better that the dificontents which would then arise (houJd be transferred from a Court of whose good will we have J"o much need to the breasts of a private compa- ny. But still it has occurred to me that we may do what is preferable to accepting the proposition of" the Dutch Company. VV - J may find occafton to do what wouid be grateful to the Court of France, and establish with them a confidence in our honor. Our credit is good in Holland— .:ay it not be poflible then to borrow there the four and twenty millions due to Franc?, and pay them the n-hole debt at once. This, belides transferring the d.fcon tents, to be fexpefted from the want of punc tual payments, from the Court of France, to the breads of individuals would ha\e the fur- ther advantage of laving that court from any loss on our account. It is in this sense only, that the firft suggestion can be considered as over-ruled bv, or absorbed in the lad, and that Mr. Jefferfon can be said to have dis countenanced the proportion made by the Dutch Company. If tins be the meaning in * The zvords u might not be better," are also said to have been interpolated—though all but the not" are in the quotation made by the Vindi cator ) a ffecjmen of his accuracy. 233 } ~ tended to be contended for, no pains will be taken to dispute it j and the comment will be left to Mr. Jetfcrlon's molt partial admirers. • rT Wl 'lter.of the vindication continues to inlift,that Mr.Jefferfon was only the vehicle of communication, afligning as reasons for this afiei tion that the tranfaftion had taken place between t!ie parties, before any mention was made ot it to him, and that in communicat ing it to Congress he only made known to that f body the desire both of the company and of th e 'rench Court ; That the opimon which he gave rose out ef the proportion, aim in furthering of the views oj tt.t parties, and that in fact no ilea [ton fould be formed on it, either by the Congress or himfeif, without a comparifun of the par ties as creditors of the United States. But these reasons do not prove ihat Mr. Jeflerfon was onlv the vehicle of communication ; they prove th« contrary ; that he was both the ve hicle of communication, and the patron, though iiot the author of the proportion. The precise difference betweeu being the mere vehicle, and heiii" both the vehicle and the patron of a propo rtion coniifts in this ; that in the tirfi cafe th» rtaci.iwthing mo-" c«rJ;->ani pi'wpofition—in the lait he gives an o frnion arijinv out of it; in furtherance of the views of the proposers; which is exactly, what is ac knowledged to have been done byMr.Jeflerfon. The plea that there could be no immorality or indelicacy, in efpoultng a proposition coming from the parties interested, amounts to no thing. Tbe charge is not, that advice was given to accede to the proposition ; but that advice was given to accede to it upon a ground whick was dijhonorable and unjujl. It is the con dition upon which tile acceptance is advised, that constitutes the culpability. In No. 4 of the vindication, the attack up on Mr.Jeflerfon is said to proceed {ram private revenge. In No. sit changes its nature, aid becomes an attack upon printiples ; a monarchi cal plot against the republican character of tbe community. How long, and how often are the people of America to beinfulted with this hypocritical rant ? When will these political phapifees learn, that their countrymen have too much dHcernment to be the dupes of their holtjtw andoftentatious pretentions ? Tliat the citizens of the United States know how to tliftUjgaifli the men wtio fervt theirs, fucntt thofd to ho only flatter them, the men who have substantial claims to their confidence, from those who study to conceal the want of qualities, really solid and uleful, under the malic of extraordinary and exclusive patriot ism and purity ? It is curious to observe the pathetic wail ings which have been produced by the an'u madverfions in these papers. It would seem as if a certain party considered themselves as the sole and rightful censors of* the Republic ; and every attempt to bestow praise or blame not originating with them, as an usurpation of their prerogative, every ftri&ure on any of their immaculate band as a { bieach of their privilege. They appear to think themselves authorized to deal out anathemas, without measure, or mercy, against all who dare to swerve from their standard of political ortho doxy, which are to be borne without retali ation or murmur. And if any symptom of either lliews itfelf, they are sure to raise the dilmal cry of persecution ; themselves the firft to a flail, and the firil to complain. But what is not permitted to men who have so clearly established a title, little less than di vine, to a monopoly of ali the patriotic vir tues ! The onlyanfwer, which is due to the feint of offering to enter into arrangements, for ascertaining whether the writer of thele pa pers has in the instance under coniideratton been guilty of milreprefentation—and the breach of an official duty—is to remind the public that in my firlt paper I declared my felf willing to be known on proper terms to tlie officer concerned. To this I adhere, in the spirit of the original intimation, but I deem a personal disclosure to any subaltern of his, improper ; nor do I perceive that it is in the present cafe necelTary to an investiga tion of fadts. The writer of the vindica tion admits in fubllance what is aliedged, and as to his collateral statements, it has been shewn that they imply more blame on the character meant to be exculpated, than was originally charged. I forbear any comment on the ii decency of naming upon conje&ure the peri on who has been named as the author of the e papers, or upon the palpable artifice of nviking an avowal of them, by that parti cular jjc'i son, the condition of a disclosure of the name of the writer of the vindication.— Indecency and artifice are the proper wea pons of such adversaries. For the GAZETTE oj the UNITED STATES. ON THEATRICAL AMUSEMENTS. SUMPTUARY laws, or Jaws to regulate the expences of t;:e citizens, are justly condemned. They are tyrannical and odious in their nature; and generally fail in the ex ecution., They may k© expe&ed to languiih between life and death for a time-am! then as they are repugnant. to tatioiial Irbeitv, drop into negleft.-»Do&or Franklin l-ai uj?.dc- KMne very jtift remarks, fuewing how ih^de fire of pofieffing certain finery inert* r v . ( | t | ie teniale labor that was to pavi'urit. Kis ideas ave been publiflied in inoft of o»,r (ijzetln and need not be repeated. When a mantakes' tne pains to earn money, he seems to have the best right to fay how. lie will spend it—or if he chnfes to lock it up, and not ijiend it at all lie has the exclusive right to do it. ' What then aie we to fay to laws prohibiting the Tneatre ? It is a law to prevent expence m ainuiements.—Why Ihould not other amule ments be prevented for the fame reafoo. They all cost money. And as to morality, borfe racing, or a militia review, or a feaft to cele brate the 4th of July, do not probably cost less. or aid morality mo re, than a tr»gedy or a co medy. Y e t it would be thought rather an alarming exercise <Jf pov.it to retrain us by ' ;iw ' rnm going to places *lief«,jt is probable bets may be laid, or merry, perhaps ludeoerft songs, may be sung, or labor mav hedrav.-n oif for a whejr {Vy to lfare a: a cro'wl. or ro de. " r "y its vigor hy er» elfivedrinkilig, 'file pi in» ciple that umufements which may produce immorality are to fee prohibited, will carry the government that adopti it to ury Jrcat; lengths. Yet this principle is coatendtd frr bv very sober ami worthy persons, in rigsrd to the theatre, who would be ft*rtled *t i|j beißg carried as far as it will bear. * • Is it not better therefore to leave.people at liberty to fp«nd their money as t JC7 chulfc,— Tiiey *ill lears prudence—or if they (houid not, their imprudence will afford awarning to others. But if that Qiould fail to warn them, prudence is a Quality of the mind, and is not t« be provided by law. If the liberty which as free agents the citizens are entitled to e*'- ercife in the disposal of their meney, ihould produce breaqhej of the peace, w any other , violations of law, there are ast» enough jind magistrates to apprehend, try And puniA the offenders. Either let the lit*« against the Theatre be repealed, or let the system of pro hibition be carried thro', so as to break iiji ail; amusements which are liable to any alu e- Mr. Russeli, IN Mr. Kreneau's National Gazette, there is an indirect, but lufiici ently intelligible infitiuatioß, that the old republican fpiric of Ameri ca, has been rather obfmred for some time palt in the Ncvi-Enpland States. The persons throughout the uni on who liill feel and reverence the old republican spirit are not a few. —It is evidently the delign of the writer of the paragraph alluded to, to create a jealousy against the New- England principles, and, to effect that, it is endeavored to ftigniatife them as anti-republican. Polfibly local prejudices, (which alas ! are not quite dead, though dying,) may alfift the currency of this infinuatiou, and parties without believing may not blufli to afFec't to believe it. Therefore some nntice of the slander seems properfrom cit - cumrtances, though none is due to it from its weight. Such as examine afiertions with care may be easily convinced, and such as do not, ate not worth the convincing. Men of inqniry will search for the anti-republican spirit of the New- England dates in their constitutions and laws, their institutions, or their manners and cuftgms. If this evil spirit should not appear in auy of these, where does it lurk ? This is bed known to the malignant para graph-writer who ltigmatifes a dif trift of country containing more than a million of people, all free. Anti-republican principles mult be supposed to intend such as are oppolite to a jlift equality of rights and of power. The constitutions of the New-En gland states breathe the fpixit--of pure repubiicaii--eqtiairryrE;ie<fti ons are ires—are freqnenc, and th« right of fufFrage is not confined to landholders, as in Virginia, but is extended to almost all the citizen*. of full age, who also may be chosen to office. The laws divide eitafes without even favoringthe eldest son —they protedt no rich or greMnia» CATULLUS. [Whole No. 581.1 FROM TO& LVLVMB.'/Hf IHMIXSZ.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers