To Thomas Jefferson from James Madison, 13 August 1803
From James Madison
Aug. 13. 1803
Dear Sir
My arrival here was delayed till monday evening last; first by the completion of the business depending at Washington, and then by the breaking down of my carriage just after I had set out which detained me three days. I found at the post office your letter covering the pardon for miller, which was forwarded by the ensuing mail, with the intimation to Wagner which you wished. Yesterday I had your favor of the 8th. with the proceedings of the Indiana Territory under another cover. On the subject of the former I am ready to say that if application were to be made for a frigate in behalf of the brother of Jerome Bonaparte, it ought to be at once rejected, tho’ in a manner as little disagreeable as possible. There is however no danger of such an application. Just before I left Washington I had a conversation with Pichon which the excerpt of the letter from Dawson led me into, in which I explained to him the inadmissibility of furnishing a passage in a public ship to a military Citizen of the French Republic. He acquiesced fully in the objection, and told me that he had, by a proper explanation to young Bonaparte stifled such an expectation. I hope therefore that we shall hear nothing more of the matter. Among the papers sent for your perusal are a letter from T. Paine, and another from Duane. I shall communicate to the former what he wishes. To the latter I shall also communicate the fact that no remonstrance such as has been reported, has been made by G.B. but on the contrary that she is satisfied with the acquisition of Louisiana by the U-States. I shall at the same time withold the copy of Lord Hawksburys answer to Mr. King, with a glance at the reasons which make it proper to do so. I am sensible of the advantage on the side of the Adversary prints which mortifies him, but general rules must be observed, and it would be moreover improper to make more than one paper the vehicle of informal or formal communications from the government. In Smith’s paper, it was intimated that G. Britain was satisfied with our arrangement with France. On the whole the zeal of Duane is laudable, and the manner of his application strengthens the title to tenderness in the refusal.
The day before I left the City I was obliged to write to Thornton a strong complaint agst. Capt. Douglas of the Boston Frigate, founded on an impressment of 4 seamen two of whom had protections & were known to be native Citizens. The trespass was committed on board the Charles Carter abt. 18 leagues at Sea. She had sailed from Norfolk, the resort of the Boston, which had no doubt made her use of that port subservient to her cruises on our own coast agst. our own trade. Pichon is ripening for a formal protest agst a like use of our ports for seizing French vessels the moment they get beyond our jurisdiction.
Be pleased to return the inclosed papers, as I shall await it, before I give answers to such as require them. With most respectful attachment I am Dr. Sir Yrs.
James Madison
RC (DLC); endorsed by TJ as received from the State Department on 15 Aug. and “Miller’s pardon—Jerome Bonaparte—T. Paine—Duane impressmt seamen” and so recorded in SJL, but with notation “Douglass” instead of “impressmt seamen.” Enclosures: (1) Thomas Paine to Madison, 6 Aug., stating that after he sent his letter to John Breckinridge under cover to TJ (see Paine to TJ, 2 Aug.), he learned that the president has gone to Monticello; a report has since circulated that the British government warned the United States not to make any payments for Louisiana, for Britain intends to take possession of the province; that Great Britain “is insolent and desperate enough to do this I have no doubt,” Paine writes, “but as this does not prove the fact I will be obliged to you to tell me, so far as you find yourself at liberty to do it, whether it be true or not. I can without making use of the fact, make some use of the knowlege” (, Sec. of State Ser., 5:284). (2) William Duane to Madison, 3 Aug., asking, “if you judge it proper,” for a copy of Lord Hawkesbury’s reply to Rufus King about Louisiana; “I feel very often the extreme want of some leading information, upon which I could rely in rebutting the incessant attacks of the papers adverse to the government,” Duane notes; if a way could be found to provide Republican newspaper editors with useful information, “the effect on the public mind I am persuaded would be beneficial, and the mortification and uncertainty in which Editors who are attached to the principles of the Government and its administration would be rendered less painful” (same, 271-2). (3) Tobias Lear to Madison, 3 Aug., acknowledging receipt of his instructions and other papers, including letters from the president to the rulers of Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli (see TJ to Mustafa Baba, Dey of Algiers, 16 July, and to Hammuda Pasha, Bey of Tunis, 19 July; no letter to Yusuf Qaramanli of Tripoli from around that time has been found or was recorded in SJL, but perhaps Lear received a letter of credence in case he needed to negotiate with Tripoli—see TJ to Lear, 14 July); Lear has also received copies of ciphers for his use and an advance of funds (same, 277-8). (4) Perhaps James Simpson to Madison, 3 June from Tangier, reporting the requisitioning of an American merchant brig by the sultan of Morocco (same, 55). (5) Harry Toulmin to Madison, 25 July, offering his services if Madison and the president need someone to travel into Louisiana to collect information about its inhabitants, laws, land titles, Indian tribes, and other subjects (same, 220-2). (6) William Clark of Massachusetts to Madison, undated, enclosing a copy of a 5 Sep. 1801 memorial by 24 people in Boston, Providence, and Philadelphia recommending Clark for the consulship at Amsterdam; he now suggests that he be appointed consul at Emden, which will become an important port for American shipping if Dutch and Hanseatic ports are blockaded (RC in DNA: RG 59, LAR, enclosure endorsed by TJ; , Sec. of State Ser., 2:87; 5:270-1; 7:393). For additional enclosures, see TJ to Madison, 16 Aug.
arrival here: Madison left Washington for Montpelier on 5 Aug. (, Sec. of State Ser., 5:280). monday was the 8th.
letter covering the pardon: TJ to Madison, 31 July. Madison’s communication to Jacob Wagner about the Samuel Miller pardon has not been found (, Sec. of State Ser., 5:320).
For the letter from John dawson, see TJ to Madison, 8 Aug., Enclosure No. 1.
Madison drafted replies to paine and duane on 20 Aug. He advised Paine that the report of a British design to take possession of Louisiana was “utterly destitute of foundation” and the British government “has on the contrary expressed its satisfaction with the cession.” To Duane, Madison wrote that “I have long been sensible of the advantage taken of official silence, in propagating false reports for party purposes,” but circumstances often prevented “a resort to the remedy which would be most effectual, that of publishing the documents relating to the subject.” Madison gave Duane permission to declare, without mentioning “the particular authority for the fact,” that the British approved of the transfer of Louisiana to American control (, Sec. of State Ser., 5:327-8, 329).
Rufus king wrote to Lord Hawkesbury on 15 May, informing him of the treaty between France and the United States for the sale of Louisiana. King noted that the treaty did not infringe on British rights to navigation on the Mississippi. Hawkesbury replied on 19 May to convey “the pleasure with which his Majesty has received this intelligence.” The attention to Britain’s rights testified, Hawkesbury wrote, to a disposition on the part of the Americans “to promote and improve the harmony and good understanding which so happily subsists between the two countries and which are so conducive to their mutual benefit” (Charles R. King, ed., The Life and Correspondence of Rufus King: Comprising His Letters, Private and Official, His Public Documents and His Speeches, 6 vols. [New York, 1894-1900], 4:262-3).
strong complaint: Thomas Newton, Jr., wrote to Madison from Norfolk on 30-31 July, enclosing a newspaper report and other information about the stopping of the merchant ship Charles Carter off Cape Henry by the British frigate Boston. A boarding party removed three seamen and a carpenter, all of whom were reported to be American citizens, from the Charles Carter, which had left Norfolk on 23 July. The British returned two of the men to the merchant ship. The Boston entered Hampton Roads soon after the incident, and the third detainee escaped from the frigate by swimming to shore. Although Madison did not know it yet, the British released the fourth individual by 6 Aug. The incident was not the first attempted impressment ordered by the frigate’s commander, John Erskine douglas. In April, Louis André Pichon informed Madison of an attempt to seize an Irish mariner from a French merchant vessel, the Anne, in Hampton Roads. During that incident, Douglas detained the Anne’s captain and supercargo overnight on the Boston. Verbally in late May and in writing on 1 June, Madison lodged a complaint with Edward Thornton about the affair involving the Anne. In reply, the British chargé d’affaires said that he would collect information about the incident, but he doubted that Douglas acted with anything but “exemplary correctness.” Thornton also suggested that the captain of the Anne—who was likely an American, he believed, “or of the British dominions”—had probably encouraged seamen to desert from British warships. Such enticement, Thornton alleged, was “the real cause” of the troubles over impressment around Norfolk. On 5 Aug., before he left Washington for Montpelier, Madison wrote to Thornton about the boarding of the Charles Carter. He enclosed a copy of a deposition by the man who swam ashore from the Boston. It was unfortunate that any provocation should disrupt the “amity & confidence” between the United States and Great Britain, Madison wrote to Thornton, “and it is the more to be regretted as it awakens apprehensions that effectual steps have not been taken by the British government for suppressing a practice which has heretofore been a source of so much just dissatisfaction.” He also protested the use of American ports, “under pretexts which are specious,” as sources of supplies and intelligence for cruises off the American coast by British warships. Madison enclosed a copy of a State Department circular of April 1795, which declared it to be against the law of nations for a belligerent nation to use American territorial waters for a hostile purpose. “It is sincerely our desire & our interest to live in friendship and free intercourse with G.B.,” Madison confided to Newton, “but it is not less her interest & duty to respect our rights” (, Sec. of State Ser., 4:533-4, 540; 5:48, 64-5, 155, 254-5, 280-3, 290; New York Daily Advertiser, 8 Aug.; Newburyport Herald, 9 Aug.).