CHAPTER XVI.

CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES.

1795.

6

WE have seen that during Jay's absence in England he was chosen Governor of New York.' Anticipating his resignation of the Chief Justiceship, Washington inquired of Rutledge whether, in that event, he would accept the vacant post. He replied in the affirmative. 'Your private letter of the 18th ultimo,' thus wrote Washington, July 1st, 1795, and Mr. Jay's resignation of the office of Chief Justice of the United States, both came to my hands yesterday. The former gave me much pleasure; and without hesitating a moment, after knowing you would accept the latter, I directed the Secretary of State to make you an official offer of this honorable appointment; to express to you my wish that it may be convenient and agreeable to you to accept it; to intimate, in that case, my desire and the advantages that would attend your being in this city the first Monday in August, at which time the next session of the Supreme Court will commence; and to inform you that your commission as Chief Justice will take date on this day, July 1st, when Mr. Jay's will cease; but that it would be detained here, to be presented to you on your arrival.' 2 This letter of the President's, and the British treaty,

2

Washington to Rutledge. Writings of Washington, vol. xi., p. 34.

must have reached Rutledge about the same time.' If the former gave him satisfaction, the latter excited his deepest indignation. With John Langdon, he considered the treaty a damned thing made to plague the French.' The excitement and ferment in Charleston were tremendous. Nowhere were the popular proceedings more violent and indecorous. Jay and his treaty were burnt in effigy; the British flag was dragged through the streets, and finally burnt before the doors of the British Consul.2

A public meeting was called by notifications published in the Gazettes, and on the 16th of July a large concourse of citizens convened in the Exchange. General Gadsden presided, so far as to adjourn the meeting to St. Michael's church, which promised better accommodation, but declined the chair on account of his age. It was then taken by Judge Matthews. Chief Justice Rutledge addressed the excited assemblage. He commenced by saying that the title was a perversion of terms that it was styled a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation; but in fact

412.

The latter was printed in a Philadelphia paper, July 2. Ante, p.

2 The following are copies of handbills printed on this occasion, and posted up at the public corners. 'This evening, at 8 o'clock, will be burnt by the public executioner, near the old market in Broad street, the treaty proposed to be established between Great Britain and America, to show the disapprobation of the citizens of Charleston.

'REPUBLICANS BE VIGILANT !

'As it is in contemplation to burn the effigy of John Jay, and the treaty which he signed, derogatory to the National character of America; and rumor tells us, that persons inimical to liberty, who wish to subvert the ties existing between America and France, mean to try to repel the execution of this just action; it is hoped that the spirit which ever characterized true friends to a democratical government will be prevalent on the occasion, and show these satellites of anarchy that tar and feathers will be the recompense of their good intentions.' Signed Ca. Ira. Ca. Ira See Reminiscences of Charleston, p. 45, for a further account of the popular proceedings on this occasion.

it was an humble acknowledgment of our dependence upon his Majesty; a surrender of our rights and privileges, for so much of his gracious favor as he should be pleased to grant. That the first article securing friendship and peace to people of every degree, was extending favor to all those who were under banishment or amercement, which was improper. He adverted to the frequent inattention to the proper use of words throughout this puerile production. Diplomatic characters were generally particular in this respect; and it was inconceivable how such perversion of terms should take place. His Majesty will withdraw his troops, &c., within the boundaries assigned by the treaty of peace,' &c. Will, he contended, implied it as a favor. It should have been shall withdraw his troops. It is not impossible to conceive it a matter of will, even in his most gracious Majesty. But the whole of this clause, he contended, was improperly introduced. Mr. Jay should have demanded an unconditional relinquishment of those posts as a right; till which was granted, and until Lord Grenville had given orders to Lord Dorchester to that effect, open, to be sent to our President, to be by him forwarded, he should not have opened his lips upon the treaty. It was prostituting the dearest rights of freemen, and laying them prostrate at the feet of Royalty. Assigned by the treaty of peace,' was an expression that ought not to have been admitted by one who knew the territory to have been fought for, to have been attained with our freedom, and who should have insisted upon the possession of it.

He adverted to the tricks, easy to be discovered in every article and clause of the treaty, that were put upon our envoy. But his admitting that it is uncertain whether the river Mississippi extends so far northward as the Lake of the Woods, as to be intersected by a line drawn due west from the Lake of the Woods in the manner mentioned in the treaty of peace,' and whereas doubts

had arisen what river was truly intended under the name of the river St. Croix,' are the grossest absurdities; particularly when assented to by a man who absolutely signed that treaty, and had before him maps that excluded both uncertainty and doubt. To be diplomatically chaste, it should have been as we are uncertain,' and whereas doubts have arisen with us,' &c.

The appointment of the Commissioners was a measure that could operate to the advantage of but one partythe British-in case it should be properly conducted; but he asserted that the chance was greatly against fairness, and he doubted not that it would be little better than a direct relinquishment of all it was intended they should decide upon. After observing that he hoped a full discussion would take place this day, he insisted that there was but one article or clause in the whole that had the appearance of reciprocity- an idea requisite in the inception of a treaty- or conferring advantage on the United States; and that was the one allowing us the West India trade-a deception; a trick that added insult to the injury.

In pointing out the improprieties of negotiations of any kind with England, the Chief Justice was led to the state of the French successes. He lavished the highest encomiums on that brave and heroic nation. The Alexanders, the Cæsars, and the Charles of antiquity, gave place to a whole nation of heroes. Their deeds of heroism were great; but nobler ones were daily enacted in all parts of France. As a nation, she had conquered all her opposers. Holland owned her conquest, Prussia felt her energy, Germany retired from her arms, Spain was suing for peace, and the perfidious, boasting, assuming nation, Great Britain, that had arrogated for ages power never possessed, that assumed the sovereignty of the sea, and monopolized the commerce of the whole world, was hoping for peace upon whatever terms France might grant it.

To negotiate she could not hope. She was reduced to the last gasp; and were America to seize her by the throat, she would expire in agonies at her feet.

One thing appeared to him right—it was justice, and he hoped his country would always maintain it — he alluded to the intent of the articles that secure to British creditors their debts in the United States. He would allow them their just demands, but we ought not to be bound to do it by treaty. To take the power of deciding upon those claims from our State Courts; to manifest a want of confidence in the Supreme Court of the United States, and submit them to a few Commissioners, was ridiculous and inadmissible.

Such is the abstract of Rutledge's speech on this occasion, as published in the Philadelphia papers. To attempt to do justice to the energy and eloquence, the decided and manly firmness of this sage republican,' says the reporter, is a rashness that we disclaim. We only seek to sketch the outlines; not without some hopes, however, of extending the rays of his patriotism by even our humble efforts.' Whatever the merits of Rutledge's oratory on this occasion - and we do not doubt they were great it must be confessed that his objections to the treaty were the suggestions of feeling rather than reason -the offspring of verbal criticism rather than of comprehensive views. The recollection of the misery inflicted on his country during the revolutionary struggle still rankled in his heart; and his hatred of Great Britain, as we have already observed, was intense and unconquerable. He spoke to an audience that shared and sympathized with his feelings.

In addition to the causes that elsewhere inflamed opposition to the treaty, there was one peculiar to Charleston alone. Here, many persons were displeased with Mr. Jay's appointment because it superseded Mr. Pinckney, and they were resolved beforehand to reprobate this