while in fact we are increasing it. What I doubt is, that if the olive branch be presented to us by one hand, a cup of humiliation and disgrace will be held out in the other; and although I should rejoice to carry the former to the United States, yet I never shall consent to be the bearer of the latter." In a subsequent letter he writes: "No people are more easily elated or depressed by events than the English. We have nothing to hope but from vigorous and successful measures, so far as the war depends upon ourselves alone. The British force in America must be overcome and repelled, or the war must end in national disgrace."

The day after the arrival of the British commissioners, the negotiations commenced, and on the twenty-fourth of December following, a treaty of peace was signed.

Mr. Bayard now visited Paris, where he remained until the ratification of the treaty. Soon after he was appointed minister to the Court of Russia. This office he declined, stating that "he had no wish to serve the administration, except when his services were necessary for the public good. In the late transactions he believed that to be the case, and therefore he had cheerfully borne his part. Peace being obtained, he was perfectly satisfied to resign the honors of diplomaey for the sweets of domestic life. Nothing could induce him to accept an appointment that would threaten to identify him with the administration party, without contributing essentially to his country's good. That was his primary and exclusive object. In all his reflections, he was principally affected by an anxious jealousy for the welfare, and an ardent affection for the people of his native land. It is difficult to conceive how an idea should have arisen, that he ever deviated in thought or action from the genuine principles of federalism. In every public display, in every private discussion, he was their warmest advocate. The whole course of his political pilgrimage, long and laborious as it was, may safely challenge a comparison with that of any statesman for undeviating consistency of conduct, and pure and enlightened patriotism."

From Paris he intended to repair to England to assist in the formation of a commercial treaty, but he was prevented by a severe illness, which soon reduced him to a state of extreme debility and suffering. Anxious to reach his home, he sailed from England, and on the first of August, 1815, arrived in the Delaware. Five days after, he died, in the forty-ninth year of his age.*

SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY.

Mr. Bayard delivered this speech, on the Judiciary Bill, in the House of Representatives of the United States, on the nineteenth of February, 1802:

MR. CHAIRMAN: I must be allowed to express my surprise at the course pursued by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Giles, in the remarks which he has made on the subject before us. I had expected that he would have adopted a different line of conduct. I had expected it as well from that sentiment of magna

*See Biographical Sketch of Mr. Bayard, in the Analectic, vol. 7, p. 833: Raleigh Star, 1815: Biographie Universelle: and Mr. N. Correlissen's Oration at Ghent, on the 13th of October, 1816.

nimity which ought to have been inspired by a sense of the high ground he holds on the floor sire to conciliate, which he has so repeatedly of this House, as from the professions of a demade during the session. We have been invited to bury the hatchet, and brighten the chain of peace. We were disposed to meet on middle-ground. We had assurances from the gentleman that he would abstain from reflections on the past, and that his only wish was that we might unite in future in promoting the welfare of our common country. We confided in the gentleman's sincerity, and cherished the

It also provided, that all the acts in force before the passage of the aforesaid acts, and which, by the same, were either amended, explained, altered or repealed, should be revised. The bill contained further provision for the disposition of the actions, writs, &c., then pending in any of the Courts of the United States, which were established by the aforesaid act of Congress of 1801.

+ The bill proposed, that "the act of Congress, passed on the 13th of February, 1801, entitled an act to provide for the more convenient organization of the Courts of the United States," and also, "an act passed on the 3d March, 1801, for altering the times and places of holding certain courts therein mentioned, and for other purposes," should be repealed. | 442, vol. 1, of this work.

See Mr. Giles's Speech on this bill in the subsequent pages of this volume: also, the speech of Mr. Tracy at page

I know that this is the distinction of party which some gentlemen have been anxious to establish; but it is not the ground on which we divide. I am satisfied with the constitutional powers of the executive, and never wished nor attempted to increase them; and I do not believe, that gentlemen on the other side of the House ever had a serious apprehension of danger from an increase of executive authority. No, sir, our views, as to the powers which do and ought to belong to the General and State Governments, are the true sources of our divisions. I co-operate with the party to which I am attached, because I believe their true object and end is an honest and efficient support of the general government, in the exercise of the legitimate powers of the constitution.

hope, that if the divisions of party were not of the people. The gentleman did not tell us banished from the House, its spirit would be in plain language, but he wished it to be underrendered less intemperate. Such were our im-stood, that he and his friends were the guardpressions, when the mask was suddenly thrown ians of the people's rights, and that we were aside, and we saw the torch of discord lighted the advocates of executive power. and blazing before our eyes. Every effort has been made to revive the animosities of the House, and inflame the passions of the nation. I am at no loss to perceive why this course has been pursued. The gentleman has been unwilling to rely upon the strength of his subject, and has, therefore, determined to make the measure a party question. He has probably secured success, but would it not have been more honorable and more commendable, to have left the decision of a great constitutional question to the understanding, and not to the prejudices of the House? It was my ardent wish to discuss the subject with calmness and deliberation, and I did intend to avoid every topic which could awaken the sensibility of party. This was my temper and design when I took my seat yesterday. It is a course at present we are no longer at liberty to pursue. The gentleman has wandered far, very far, from the points of the debate, and has extended his animadversions to all the prominent measures of the former administrations. In following him through his preliminary observations, I necessarily lose sight of the bill upon your table.

I pray to God I may be mistaken in the opinion I entertain as to the designs of gentlemen to whom I am opposed. Those designs I believe hostile to the powers of this government. State pride extinguishes a national sentiment. Whatever power is taken from this government is given to the States.

The ruins of this government aggrandize the States. There are States which are too proud to be controlled; whose sense of greatness and resource renders them indifferent to our protection, and induces a belief that if no general government existed, their influence would be more extensive, and their importance more

The gentleman commenced his strictures with the philosophic observation, that it was the fate of mankind to hold different opinions as to the form of government which was preferable. That some were attached to the monarchical, while others thought the republican more eli-conspicuous. There are gentlemen who make gible. This, as an abstract remark, is certainly no secret of an extreme point of depression, to true, and could have furnished no ground of which the government is to be sunk. To that offence, if it had not evidently appeared that point we are rapidly progressing. But I would an allusion was designed to be made to the beg gentlemen to remember, that human affairs parties in this country. Does the gentleman are not to be arrested in their course, at artifisuppose that we have a less lively recollection cial points. The impulse now given may be than himself, of the oath which we have taken accelerated by causes at present out of view. to support the constitution; that we are less And when those, who now design well, wish sensible of the spirit of our government, or less to stop, they may find their powers unable to devoted to the wishes of our constituents? resist the torrent. It is not true, that we ever Whatever impression it might be the intention wished to give a dangerous strength to execuof the gentleman to make, he does not believe tive power. While the government was in our that there exists in the country an anti-repub- hands, it was our duty to maintain its constitulican party. He will not venture to assert such tional balance, by preserving the energies of an opinion on the floor of this House. That each branch. There never was an attempt to there may be a few individuals having a pre-vary the relation of its powers. The struggle ference for monarchy is not improbable; but was to maintain the constitutional powers of will the gentleman from Virginia, or any other gentleman, affirm in his place, that there is a party in the country who wish to establish monarchy? Insinuations of this sort belong not to the Legislature of the Union. Their place is an election-ground, or an alehouse. Within these walls they are lost; abroad, they have had an effect, and I fear are still capable of abusing popular credulity.

the executive. The wild principles of French liberty were scattered through the country. We had our jacobins and disorganizers. They saw no difference between a king and a President, and as the people of France had put down their king, they thought the people of America ought to put down their President. They, who considered the constitution as securing all the principles of rational and practicable libWe were next told of the parties which have erty, who were unwilling to embark upon the existed, divided by the opposite views of pro- tempestuous sea of revolution in pursuit of vismoting executive power and guarding the rights | ionary schemes, were denounced as monarch

ists. A line was drawn between the government and the people, and the friends of the government were marked as the enemies of the people. I hope, however, that the government and the people are now the same; and I pray to God, that what has been frequently remarked, may not, in this case, be discovered to be true, that they, who have the name of the people the most often in their mouths, have their true interests the most seldom at their hearts.

The honorable gentleman from Virginia wandered to the very confines of the federal administration, in search of materials the most inflammable and most capable of kindling the passions of his party.

The internal taxes are made one of the crimes of the federal administration. They were imposed, says the gentleman, to create a host of dependants on executive favor. This supposes the past administrations to have been not only very wicked, but very weak. They lay taxes in order to strengthen their influence. Who is so ignorant as not to know, that the imposition of a tax would create an hundred enemies for one friend? The name of excise was odious; the details of collection were unavoidably expensive, and it was to operate upon a part of the community least disposed to support public burdens, and most ready to complain of their weight. A little experience will give the gentleman a new idea of the patronage of this government. He will find it not that dangerous weapon in the hands of the administration, which he has heretofore supposed it; he will probably discover that the poison is accompanied by its antidote, and that an appointment of the government, while it gives to the administration one lazy friend, will raise up against it ten active enemies.

He represents the government as seizing the first moment which presented itself, to create a dependent monied interest, ever devoted to its views. What are we to understand by this remark of the gentleman? Does he mean to say, that Congress did wrong in funding the public debt? Does he mean to say, that the price of our liberty and independence ought not to have been paid? Is he bold enough to No! The motive ascribed for the imposition denounce this measure as one of the federal of the internal taxes, is unfounded as it is unvictims marked for destruction? Is it the de- charitable. The Federal administration, in sign to tell us, that its day has not yet come, creating burdens to support the credit of the but is approaching; and that the funding sys-nation, and to supply the means of its protectem is to add to the pile of federal ruins? Do I hear the gentleman say, we will reduce the army to a shadow, we will give the navy to the worms, the mint, which presented the people with the emblems of their liberty and of their sovereignty, we will abolish—the revenue shall depend upon the wind and waves, the judges shall be made our creatures, and the great work shall be crowned and consecrated by relieving the country from an odious and oppressive public debt? These steps, I presume, are to be taken in progression. The gentleman will pause at each, and feel the public pulse. As the fever increases, he will proceed, and the moment of delirium will be seized to finish the great work of destruc-expenses of a government which has expended tion.

tion, knew that they risked the favor of those upon whom their power depended. They were willing to be the victims, when the public good required.

The duties on imports and tonnage furnished a precarious revenue; a revenue at all times exposed to deficiency, from causes beyond our reach. The internal taxes offered a fund less liable to be impaired by accident; a fund which did not rob the mouth of labor, but was derived from the gratification of luxury. These taxes are an equitable distribution of the public burdens. Through this medium the western country is enabled to contribute something to the

and daily expends such large sums for its deThe assumption of the State debts has been fence. When these taxes were laid, they were made an article of distinct crimination. It has indispensable. With the aid of them it has been been ascribed to the worst motives; to a design difficult to prevent an increase of the public of increasing a dependent monied interest. Is debt. And notwithstanding the fairy prospects it not well known, that those debts were part which now dazzle our eyes, I undertake to say, of the price of our Revolution-that they rose if you abolish them this session, you will be in the exigency of our affairs, from the efforts obliged to restore them, or supply their place of the particular States, at times when the fede-by a direct tax, before the end of two years. ral arm could not be extended to their relief? Will the gentleman say, that the direct tax was Each State was entitled to the protection of the laid in order to enlarge the bounds of patronUnion, the defence was a common burden, and age? Will he deny, that this was a measure every State had a right to expect, that the ex-to which we had been urged for years by our penses attending its individual exertions in the general cause, would be reimbursed from the public purse. I shall be permitted further to add, that the United States, having absorbed the sources of State revenue, except direct tax-sensible of paying. ation, which was required for the support of the State governments, the assumption of these debts was necessary to save some of the States from bankruptcy.

adversaries, because they foresaw in it the ruin of federal power? My word for it, no administration will ever be strengthened by a patronage united with taxes which the people are

We were next told, that to get an army an Indian war was necessary. The remark was extremely bald, as the honorable gentleman did not allege a single reason for the position.

ships, or sailors, or merchants? The people of this country will never consent to give up their navigation, and every administration will find themselves constrained to provide means to protect their commerce.

He did not undertake to state, that it was a wanton war, or provoked by the government. He did not even venture to deny, that it was a war of defence, and entered into in order to protect our brethren on the frontiers from the bloody scalping-knife and murderous tomahawk of the savage. What ought the government to have done? Ought they to have estimated the value of the blood, which probably would be shed, and the amount of the devastation likely to be committed, before they determined on resistance? They raised an army, and after great expense and various fortune, they have secured the peace and safety of the frontiers. But why was the army mentioned on this occasion, un-made the best bargain in their power. They less to forewarn us of the fate which awaits them, and to tell us, that their days are numbered? I cannot suppose that the gentleman mentioned this little army, distributed on a line of three thousand miles, for the purpose of giving alarm to three hundred thousand free and brave yeomanry, ever ready to defend the liberties of the country.

The honorable gentleman proceeded to inform the committee, that the government, availing itself of the depredations of the Algerines, created a navy. Did the gentleman mean to insinuate, that this war was invited by the United States? Has he any documents or proof to render the suspicion colorable? No, sir, he has none. He well knows, that the Algerine aggressions were extremely embarrassing to the government. When they commenced, we had no marine force to oppose to them. We had no harbors or places of shelter in the Mediterranean. A war with these pirates could be attended with neither honor nor profit. It might cost a great deal of blood, and in the end it might be feared, that a contest so far from home, subject to numberless hazards and difficulties, could not be maintained. What would gentlemen have had the government to do? I know there are those who are ready to answer-abandon the Mediterranean trade. But would this have done? The corsairs threatened to pass the Straits, and were expected in the Atlantic. Nay, sir, it was thought that our very coasts would not have been secure?

Will gentlemen go farther and say, that the United States ought to relinquish their commerce? I believe this opinion has high authority to support it. It has been said, that we ought to be only cultivators of the earth, and make the nations of Europe our carriers.

This is not an occasion to examine the solidity of this opinion; but I will only ask, admitting the administration were disposed to turn the pursuits of the people of this country from the ocean to the land, whether there is a power in the government, or whether there would be, if we were as strong as the government of Turkey, or even of France, to accomplish the object? With a sea-coast of seventeen hundred miles, with innumerable harbors and inlets, with a people enterprising beyond example, is it possible to say, you will have no

In respect to the Algerines, the late administrations were singularly unfortunate. They were obliged to fight or pay them. The true policy was to hold a purse in one hand and a sword in the other. This was the policy of the government. Every commercial nation in Europe was tributary to these petty barbarians. It was not esteemed disgraceful. It was an affair of calculation, and the administration have heretofore been scandalized for paying tribute to a pirate, and now they are criminated for preparing a few frigates to protect our citizens from slavery and chains. Sir, I believe on this and many other occasions, if the finger of heaven had pointed out a course, and the government had pursued it, yet that they would not have escaped the censure and reproaches of their enemies.

We were told, that the disturbances in Europe were made a pretext for augmenting the army and navy. I will not, Mr. Chairman, at present go into a detailed view of the events which compelled the government to put on the armor of defence, and to resist by force the French aggressions. All the world know the efforts which were made to accomplish an amicable adjustment of differences with that power. It is enough to state, that ambassadors of peace were twice repelled from the shores of France with ignominy and contempt. It is enough to say, that it was not till after we had drunk the cup of humiliation to the dregs, that the national spirit was roused to a manly resolution to depend only on their God and their own courage for protection. What, sir, did it grieve the gentleman, that we did not crouch under the rod of the Mighty Nation, and like the petty powers of Europe, tamely surrender our independence? Would he have had the people of the United States relinquish without a struggle those liberties which had cost so much blood and treasure? We had not, sir, recourse to arms, till the mouths of our rivers were choked with French corsairs; till our shores, and every harbor, were insulted and violated; till our commercial capital had been seized, and no safety existed for the remainder but the protection of force. At this moment, a noble enthusiasm electrized the country: the national pulse beat high, and we were prepared to submit to every sacrifice, determined only, that our independence should be the last. At that time, an American was a proud name in Europe; but I fear, much I fear, that in the course we are now likely to pursue, the time will soon arrive, when our citizens abroad will be ashamed to acknowledge their country.

The measures of '98 grew out of the public feelings. They were loudly demanded by the public voice. It was the people who drove

because their power depends upon it, but I believe they respect no existing establishment of the government, and if public opinion could be brought to support them, I have no doubt they would annihilate the whole. I shall at present only say further on this head, that we thought the reorganization of the judicial system an useful measure, and we considered it as a duty to employ the remnant of our power to the

the government to arms, and not as the gentle- | we had heard the thundering voice of the people man expressed it, the government which push- which dismissed us from their service, we erected the people to the X. Y. Z. of their political ed a judiciary, which we expected would afford designs before they understood the A. B. C. of us the shelter of an inviolable sanctuary. The their political principles. gentleman is deceived. We knew better, sir, But what, sir, did the gentleman mean by the characters who were to succeed us, and we his X. Y. Z. I must look for something very knew that nothing was sacred in the eyes of significant, something more than a quaintness infidels. No, sir, I never had a thought that of expression, or a play upon words, in what any thing belonging to the federal government, falls from a gentleman of his learning and abil- was holy in the eyes of those gentlemen. I ity. Did he mean that the despatches which could never, therefore, imagine that a sanctuary contained those letters were impostures, design-could be built up which would not be violated. ed to deceive and mislead the people of Amer-I believe these gentlemen regard public opinion ica? Intended to rouse a false spirit not justified by events? Though the gentleman had no respect for some of the characters of that embassy; though he felt no respect for the chief justice, or the gentleman appointed from South Carolina, two characters as pure, as honorable, and exalted, as any the country can boast of, yet, I should have expected that he would have felt some tenderness for Mr. Gerry, in whom his party had since given proofs of undiminish-best advantage of the country. ed confidence. Does the gentleman believe that Mr. Gerry would have joined in the deception, and assisted in fabricating a tale which was to blind his countrymen, and to enable the government to destroy their liberties? Sir, I will not avail myself of the equivocations or confessions of Talleyrand himself; I say these gentlemen will not dare publicly to deny what is attested by the hand and seal of Mr. Gerry. The truth of these despatches admitted, what was your government to do? Give us, say the Directory, one million two hundred thousand livres for our own purse, and purchase fifteen millions of dollars of Dutch debt, which was worth nothing, and we will receive your min-ings which it enjoys. isters and negotiate for peace.

The honorable gentleman expressed his joy that the constitution had at last become sacred in our eyes; that we formerly held that it meant every thing or nothing. I believe, sir, that the constitution formerly appeared different in our eyes from what it now appears in the eyes of the dominant party. We formerly saw in it the principles of a fair and goodly creation. We looked upon it as a source of peace, of safety, of honor, and of prosperity to the country. But now the view is changed; it is the instrument of wild and dark destruction. It is a weapon which is to prostrate every establishment, to which the nation owes the unexampled bless

The present state of the country is an unanIt was only left to the government to choose swerable commentary upon our construction between an unconditional surrender of the hon- of the constitution. It is true that we made it or and independence of the country, or a manly mean much, and I hope, sir, we shall not be resistance. Can you blame, sir, the adminis- taught by the present administration that it can tration for a line of conduct, which has reflect-mean even worse than nothing. ed on the nation so much honor, and to which, under God, it owes its present prosperity.

These are the events of the general government, which the gentleman has reviewed in succession, and endeavored to render odious or suspicious. For all this, I could have forgiven him, but there is one thing for which I will not, I cannot forgive him. I mean his attempt to disturb the ashes of the dead; to disturb the ashes of the great and good Washington. Sir, I might degrade by attempting to eulogize this illustrious character. The work is infinitely beyond my powers. I will only say that as long as exalted talents and virtues confer honor among men, the name of Washington will be held in veneration.

After, Mr. Chairman, the honorable member had exhausted one quiver of arrows against the late executive, he opened another, equally poisoned, against the judiciary. He has told as, sir, that when the power of the government vas rapidly passing from federal hands, after

The gentleman has not confined his animadversions to the individual establishment, but has gone so far as to make the judges the subject of personal invective. They have been charged with having transgressed the bounds of judicial duty, and become the apostles of a political sect. We have heard of their travelling about the country for little other purpose than to preach the federal doctrines to the people.

Sir, I think a judge should never be a partisan. No man would be more ready to condemn a judge who carried his political prejudices or antipathies on the bench. But I have still to learn that such a charge can be sustained against the judges of the United States.

The constitution is the supreme law of the land, and they have taken pains, in their charges to grand juries, to unfold and explain its principles. Upon similar occasions, they have enumerated the laws which compose our criminal code, and when some of those laws have been denounced by the enemies of the administration as uncon