Congress under the Constitution was a consideration of the consular treaty with France, which Mr. Jefferson, as minister in Paris, had negotiated. The first consular convention had been signed by Dr. Franklin in 1784, but it had been disapproved by the Continental Congress, and Mr. Jefferson had been instructed to negotiate one free from its objectionable features. This he had done in 1788, and in the first year of the new government it came before the Senate for ratification. Mr. Jay, still acting as Secretary of State, advised its approval, though not yet free from objection, and the Senate gave its advice and consent to its ratification. And thus began the participation of the Senate in the long series of treaty negotiations of the government. One of the earliest effects of the adoption of the Constitution was seen in the rapid improvement of the public credit. In September, 1789, Mr. Jefferson reported from Paris to Secretary Jay that the credit of the United States at Amsterdam, then the money centre of the world, had become the first on that exchange, England at that time not being a borrower; that our bonds had risen to 99, theretofore at 93; that several individuals and companies in France, England, and Holland were then negotiating for large parcels of our debt; and that in the present state of our credit every dollar of the debt would be transferred to Europe in a short time. This was in gratifying contrast to the reports which he and Mr. Adams had been sending from Europe a short time before. Hamilton, in his first statement of the public credit and national debt called 1 2 Dip. Cor. (1783–89) 326. for by Congress, showed that this foreign debt amounted to $11,710,378; that there were arrears of interest to the amount of over a million and a half of dollars; and that several installments of the French loan were already overdue and unpaid. Under his skillful management a sudden change occurred in our financial status; the revenues of the government rapidly increased; and not only were the arrears of interest wiped out, and the future interest promptly met, but the Treasury was enabled to anticipate and pay off the entire indebtedness before it fell due. No more striking confirmation could be had of the wisdom of a strong federal government under the Constitution. But its healthful influence was not confined to the public credit. Foreign commerce assumed a marvelous expansion; the exports were rapidly increased; shipbuilding was greatly enlarged; not only were American vessels seen in every port in Europe, but a profitable trade was opened with India, China, and Russian America. The ship Columbia, Captain Gray, to whose enterprise we are mainly and primarily indebted for our Pacific possessions by the discovery of the Columbia River, in 1791 made the first voyage of an American vessel around the world. The historian of the period writes: "Already on almost every sea the stars and stripes began to wave." 1 Such were some of the indications in our foreign relations of the new career which was opening up to the country under the reformed government. To Hamilton, more than any other single individual, is due this 1 4 Hildreth's History U. S. 277. improvement in the public credit and our commerce. We recall the words of Daniel Webster: "The fabled birth of Minerva from the brain of Jove was hardly more sudden or more perfect than that of the financial system of the United States from the conceptions of Alexander Hamilton." This crowning achievement of his short life fixed his place as first in ability of American statesmen of the Revolutionary period, and none of his successors have eclipsed his fame in finance. The diplomatic service was not fully organized until 1791, when Thomas Pinckney was appointed minister to London, Gouverneur Morris to Paris, and other representatives to the Hague, Lisbon, and Madrid. The arrival of these ministers at their posts found all Europe on the verge of the great war which disturbed the world for the most part of the next generation. The overthrow of the monarchy and the excesses of the French republicans were arraying against them all the powers of the Old World. For a time England held aloof, but in 1793 against her also war was declared by the Directory. These contests led to reprisals, and an almost complete disregard of the rights of neutral commerce. The United States was the great sufferer. France appealed to the States to support her in the war by discharging their obligations under the treaty of alliance of 1778, and Great Britain claimed that if the United States lent material support to France, it would be tantamount to war against her. The sympathies of the American people were strongly in favor of the ally who had so materially aided in their independence. The first impulse of the nation was well expressed by Gouverneur Morris, who argued for the faithful compliance with the treaty with France, however onerous its terms, in its true intent and meaning. The honest nation, he said, is that which, like the honest man, "Hath to his plighted faith and vow forever firmly stood, And tho' it promise to his loss, yet makes that promise good."1 But as events rapidly transpired a change of sentiment was wrought in the United States. The bloody excesses of the revolutionists, the execution of the king, who was held in high esteem as our best friend during the war of independence, and the disregard of our commercial neutrality, led to a feeling that the French government of the day had no claim on us as an ally. It was held that the Revolution had destroyed the France with which the treaty of alliance was made, and that under the circumstances there was no obligation resting on us to take part in her aggressive wars. existing government, on declaring war against Austria, had claimed the right, under the circumstances, of determining for itself what treaties of the old monarchy it would accept and what reject. Excitement ran high in the United States, and the country was divided between the partisans of France and those who believed we should take no part in the conflict. The The Cabinet, sharing the public sentiment, was also divided on the subject. Washington called for the opinion in writing of its members. Hamilton contended that as the war on the part of France was aggressive, and as the government of that country with whom we had made the treaties had been overthrown, we were 13 Sparks's G. Morris, 264. not bound by them.1 Jefferson, an enthusiastic champion of the French revolutionists, took the opposite ground, and held that the treaty was in force and should be observed by us.2 Hamilton, in order to win the country to his view, published a series of articles under an assumed name. Jefferson wrote Madison informing him that Hamilton was the author of these articles, and begged him to reply. He said: "For God's sake, my dear sir, take up your pen and cut him to pieces in the face of the public. There is nobody who can and will enter the lists with him." Madison, to please his friend, undertook the task, and the two men who had stood together as collaborators of " The Federalist" were now violently assailing each other's views in the press under the assumed names of "Pacificus" and "Helvidius." The arrival in the country of a minister from the French Directory, in the person of M. Genet, brought the question to an issue. He landed in Charleston, and at once set to work organizing public opinion, enlisting men, equipping vessels, and commissioning privateers, as if the United States had declared itself the ally of France against England. Every remonstrance of Washington's government brought forth a more unreasonable and extravagant reply from the minister, until finally his language and his conduct forced the President to suspend his diplomatic functions, and ask for his recall. The crisis became so intense that Washington, in the 1 4 Hamilton's Works, 362. * Ib. 338. |