To George Washington from Timothy Pickering, 30 January 1796
From Timothy Pickering
Department of State Jany 30. 1796.
The Secretary of State respectfully lays before the President of the United States three letters from Mr Campbell, District Attorney of Virginia, two of which relate to the complaint of the French Consul at Norfolk, concerning the purchase of horses for the British; in which the President will observe a concurrence of legal opinions (with the exception of Mr Randolph’s) in the justness of the principles stated in the late answer to Mr Adet on this subject.1
The Secretary also lays before the President the letter from Governor Brooke on the same subject with the Secretary’s answer, which he had the honour verbally to state to the President last Friday morning.2
Timothy Pickering
ALS, DNA: RG 59, Miscellaneous Letters; LB, DNA: RG 59, GW’s Correspondence with his Secretaries of State.
1. Pickering enclosed Alexander Campbell’s letters to him of 16, 17, and 24 Jan. (DNA: RG 59, Miscellaneous Letters). In the first letter, Campbell described his efforts to prosecute the ship Unicorn (for the seizure of that ship in 1794, see Oliver Wolcott, Jr., to GW, 26 May 1795, and n.1). In the second, Campbell described his receipt of “official information from Norfolk that a number of Horses have been purchased & brought thither from different parts of the State, by persons who it is said are employed by the British government to procure horses in this Country to subserve a military expedition against St Domingo.” It being “supposed that these proceedings were in opposition to a law of Congress which forbids the setting on foot any expedition from these States against foreign powers” (“An Act in addition to the act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States,” 5 June 1794, 381–84), Campbell had examined the act and could “discern nothing in it which in my opinion, calls for the interposition of Government, or which would justify the detention of the horses even for a moment.” He had also consulted other lawyers, “all of whom except one (Mr E. Randolph) were of the opinion that the law did not embrace the Case,” so he had “determined to do nothing more in the business than to give you this account of it.” The third letter enclosed a copy of Campbell’s letter of 24 Jan. to Norfolk collector William Lindsay “on the subject of a representation from the French consul” about the horses. “It being necessary that the Collector should act on the case before I could obtain the opinion of the Executive,” Campbell had advised Lindsay in accordance with the opinion stated in the letter of 17 January.
For Pickering’s letter to Pierre-Auguste Adet of 20 Jan., see Pickering to Bartholomew Dandridge, Jr., 22 Jan., n.1.
2. The previous Friday was 29 January. For the enclosures, see below.