When I said, that I did not disagree with Manlius, in attributing the downfall of the federal cause, to the Mission to France, my meaning was, not, that the loss of the late election, was to be viewed, as the consequence of that Mission, for I believe with you Sir, that independent of that measure, the federal Candidate would have been almost universally deserted. But I meant to assert as my belief, that this was looked upon by the Hamiltonians as a fit occasion to sever from the Administration; a thing contemplated & advised, I have no 535 doubt, a considerable time before it took place. The appointment of Mr: Gerry, and not abandoning him, when he deserted his colleagues, was the first exasperating act to the Essez Junto, who were all his deadly enemies. This is the leading string to all the subsequent discord among the federalists— There is scarcely a man in Pennsylvania, professing Federalism, who does not think Mr: Gerry a thorough-paced, incorrigible Jacobin, and nothing but his retaining your friendship & confidence, ever raised a doubt in favor of his political principles— Here was a violent clamor, therefore, raised against the first Mission, on account of one obnoxious man. This clamor had not subsided, before the second Mission was projected, & as the character first chosen, nor those afterwards appointed, as colleagues, were in any manner exceptionable to the federal party, they vented all their rage against the measure. I say they, by which I mean, only the most violent, who were certainly a minority of the federal party—

The motives to opposition were various in different parts of the Country; but the object in all was the same, to defeat or frustrate the attempt.

Lord Clarendon in his history of the Rebellion,1 has a very long passage which describes, most elaborately, the propensity of men to defeat the successful termination of any scheme or measure— against which they have once soberly & earnestly set their faces— I will try to find it, and have it published, with a few remarks. The Application is, I think, obvious—

Mr: Hamilton, whose influence & popularity in New York, was ruined, by his anxiety to vindicate his character, no less than in every quarter of the Union; by his own mismanagement or by his deliberate intention, (of the two, the most probable) occasioned the loss of New York to the federal scale— I sincerely believe, he would rather see Mr: Jefferson at the head of the Govt:, than yourself—for you were the first to learn the Americans, how to appreciate this little gentleman, from St Croix. For this, you never will be forgiven by him; enmity is never more malignant than when provoked by a conviction that a small opinion is entertained by any individual, of talents, which receive homage from all the world besides—

It ought never to have been the plan of the federal party to support a Gentleman from the South, merely for the sake of securing the interest of the any Southern State in favor of the federal ticket— There was evidence enough on the former trial, what result might 536 be calculated upon, in making another— I believe that some of the federalists, who gave in to this scheme, were honest—but many expected that South Carolina would vote for you Genl: Pinckney, and drop you— This was Hamilton’s plot; but the true friends of the Administration ought to have taken up Mr: Jay or Mr: Ellsworth, and if the same exertions had been made in favor of either of these gentlemen, they would have succeeded. I should have been perfectly willing to give Mr: Jefferson my vote, as an Elector, if I could have had confidence in the Southern people—but our elections have become so much a job, that the patriotism & services of our most distinguished characters, has little to do in their promotion to office—

I do not think that the unconditional ratification of our Convention with France would be inconsistent with our honor or our good faith— I did think it would clash with our engagements to G. Britain, before I understood the true construction of the 6th: article. The 3d: article, which contracts for the giving up of State vessels, wounded my pride, at first, though I could easily discern that the pride of the french governt: would be much concerned in securing the surrender; but the result may yet be in our favor, if the private vessels, captured before the exchange of Ratifications, should be given up, or paid for, with good faith—

After all, as we know & can judge of the purport of the present bargain, and as we do not know what might result from further negotiation, I should give my voice for ratifying the Convention. The adoption or the rejection of all Commercial Conventions, must eventually be regulated by interest—and I know not that the United States can better themselves by refusing to accept what is now offered to them.

Manlius is a young man—inexperienced, warm and ardent, but not inimical to the independence or the best interests of his Country— but he sees a different route to the attainment of them, than I do. As he knows I sent you some of his numbers, and as I extorted from him a confession that he was the writer, I feel some delicacy, upon the subject of giving his name—

It has been said in the papers of the morning that L. H Stockton has been nominated as Secretary at War, and Genl Marshall Chief Justice— The latter is contradicted this evening, and I think Richard Stockton must be the person nominated for the other office—2

I am dear Sir, truly & sincerely / Your affectionate Son

Yours of the 20th. is before me.— The Senate I hear is perfectly Satisfied at length, by a Message and some papers I sent them this Week at their request, that there is no Collision between The Convention with France and our Treaty with England: but other points labour.1 I choose not to say at present what I think. There has been, about two or three hundred Persons in the Union, who from the first nomination of Murray to this moment have been in a furious passion, and determined in their hearts to defeat the whole measure if they could, and to disgrace it as much as possible, in the Eyes of the public, if they could not.— If there are Some of those in the Senate, it would be no miracle.

The families you mention, have been in pursuit of Dominion by the means of popularity. They are the old Tory Connections. They Seemingly that is hypocritically fell in with the french Revolution because they Saw it was popular: but as soon as they thought it was become unpopular, they flew passionately over the Way. But they mistook the sense of the People. The French Revolution was become unpopular, but a War with France was not become popular. on the contrary the sense of the People has been always in favour of a friendly Connection with France, Spain and holland, as the best Security to keep the British in Awe.

For myself I have been, from 1786 to this moment a uniform detester of the French Revolution, as far as I could judge of it. Providence, and the french Nation had the Power. It was my duty to submit. But I had ever the most gloomy & fearful apprehensions of evil consequences, without being able to foresee any good. At the 538 Same time I have been as uniformly convinced, of the Policy of this Country to preserve Peace and a friendly Intercourse with France Spain and Holland, if it could be done, consistently with our honor and good faith. Brissotts Account of his Conversation with me as reported by Mr Gentz is true enough. The Interview was in Grosvenor Square, London. The Conversation was long and interesting. I wish he had detailed it more particularly.— He made me a present of his Works at the same time.

I began my Defence, in 1786, as much, with a View to the French Revolution then in Embrio or rather Springing into birth, as to the County Conventions their Resolutions against the Governor & senate, and the Insurrection in the Massachusetts.2 in 1788 when I first arrived at Boston Mr George Cabbott and Mr Jonathan Jackson asked me questions about a french Revolution. I answered them that there would be a Revolution and forty Years of War and blood in Consequence of it, without obtaining a shadow of Liberty or any other Advantage that I could foresee. That the French Phylosophers who were bringing the Change forward understood nothing of Government, or the system of Liberty. That any Town Meeting in New England would produce a better Constitution than all the Statesmen and Phylosophers in France.

The Adherents of Mr Hamilton, excepting a part of the Officers of the Cincinnati, are chiefly the Old Tories and their Connections. These have trumpetted and puffed his Talents, his Integrity and his disinterestedness these twenty Years. They all ever hated Hancock And Samuel Adams, and although they have affected an Appearance of some complaisance to me, in Consequence of my known principles and projects of Government, they have never loved me in their hearts. Their extravagant Praises of Washington have been merely to divert praises from Hancocks and Adams’s and McKeans &c on one hand and to boost the heavy Christian Hamilton up upon Washingtons fame, on the other

Your young Friend who writes against the Treaty means3 well no doubt. But he is in error. He mistakes the sense of the people, both now and at the time of the institution of the mission.

Your letters delight me very much. I must enjoin confidence and secresy But I shall soon be free & then I will write you with less reserve. In private life I will speak and write when I please.

The league and the fronde cannot be too much studied nor the revolution & commonwealth of England. Lord Clarendon contains 539 much information & much wisdom. Some allowance must be made for him as a party man. But all revolutions are alike in many features

I am my dear son Yours &c.