JAMES RENWICK, LL.D.

----------------------------------------

CHAPTER IV.

----------------------------------------

State of Parties under the Administration of Adams. – Clinton is elected a Member of Assembly. – He is chosen Senator of the State. – He becomes a Member of the Council of Appointment. – Contest in respect to the Powers of that Council. – State Convention. – His Victory over Jay. – He is elected a Senator of the United States, where he is opposed to Gouverneur Morris. – Debate on the Mississippi Question. – Clinton’s Speech on that occasion. – He acquires a high Reputation as a Statesman.

----------------------------------------

The federal party, which acquired the superiority in the State of New-York in 1795, seemed destined to an ascendency of unlimited duration. Looking proudly to Washington himself as their leader, their principles seemed indissolubly united with the honour and prosperity of their country. The sympathy with which the cause of the French revolution had for a time been regarded by many American citizens, had been replaced, to a great degree, by disgust at the insolent pretensions of the rulers of that country, and resentment for their aggressions. It thus happened, that, when John Adams succeeded Washington in the presidential chair, the nation was urged by a feeling almost universal into hostilities with France; and, although no absolute declaration of war was made on either side, the commerce of the United States was attacked wherever it was accessible by French cruisers and privateers; while measures were adopted for the defence of the seacoast by fortifications and the creation of a navy. A more questionable step was taken by the administration in the enlistment of an army, which, in the opinion of many, was uncalled for, because our shores were, in fact, inaccessible to any French force more powerful than a single vessel.

Experience has shown us, that the measures of providing a naval armament and an army on a peace establishment, which might have served as the nucleus of an efficient force in war, were both wise. It was also a sagacious step to take advantage of the excitement produced by French aggressions, to obtain the public consent to these important means of national security. They were, however, seized by the opponents of the administration as objects of attack. So long as the popular excitement against France remained, the attacks of the opposition were fruitless; but when Adams, in an evil hour for his party, humbled himself and his country before the French Directory, all enthusiasm was at an end.

It would appear that not only Clinton himself, but his uncle, had partaken of the popular feeling. When the citizens of New-York turned out to labour on the fortifications for the defence of their harbour, old George Clinton was seen among them, encouraging their toils by his example; and Dewitt Clinton was daily engaged in drilling his company to the use of the heavy guns mounted on the battery.

The attempt of the administration to maintain a regular army after the danger of war was at an end, the load of obloquy which was poured upon the navy, but still more the necessity of imposing taxes, coupled with laws construed as interfering with the right of personal liberty, speedily rendered it unpopular. The party with which the Clintons were connected acquired the ascendency, and Jefferson was elected president of the United States.

Even while the victory was yet doubtful, partial successes were gained by the party in opposition to Mr. Adams. In 1797 Dewitt Clinton was elected a member of the Legislature, and in 1798 state Senator. In this capacity he was chosen, in 1800, a member of the council of appointment, and was engaged in a contest with Governor Jay. The state constitution had, in addition to two legislative bodies, provided two councils to aid the governor in his executive and legislative capacities. The one was styled that of appointment, with whose concurrence and advice all offices were to be filled; the other that of revision, to which all laws were to be submitted. Governor Jay, who had, in 1798, been elected by a triumphant vote, was now opposed by a majority in both houses of the Legislature; and the council of appointment, which was chosen from the Senate, was of the dominant party. At the meeting of this council, Clinton asserted for himself and colleagues the equal right of naming the candidates, and of proposing the removal of the holders of office. Jay, on the other hand, maintained that the sole right of nomination was vested in the governor, and that the council had no other powers but those of confirmation and rejection. In order to prevent the council from acting in conformity with the views of its majority, Jay resorted to the bold measure of adjourning their meeting, and refusing to call them together. He then submitted the question to the Legislature, asking for an explanatory law; but that body, under the impression that it possessed no powers in the premises, recommended the call of a convention for the purpose of deciding the question. The convention assembled, and the views of Clinton prevailed.

We therefore have no reason to doubt that his opinion was founded on a correct interpretation of the words of the constitution, although, as Jay himself had prepared the original draught, it is certain that such was not the intention of its framers. It may now be concluded, that in this dispute Clinton was actuated by the motive of securing the supremacy of his party, as well as that of obtaining a signal victory in argument over a distinguished and able adversary; and, in the ardour of his struggle for superiority, neglected to examine the probable consequences. It has even been said, that the course he took was not approved by his uncle, who looked upon the subject through the calmer medium of age and experience. The victory he obtained in the construction of the constitution over a man of such eminence and high reputation as a jurist as Jay, is, however, calculated to give us an elevated opinion of his talent and legal learning, however we may be disposed to question his prudence.

It is due to the truth of history to say, that the consequences of this decision were injurious to the public interests, and were the cause of that bitterness of party spirit which has made the citizens of other states stigmatize the politics of New-York as ferocious. From this partisan rage no one suffered more severely than Dewitt Clinton, both in his own person and those of his friends.

It appears by written memoranda in his own hand, that his views of the proper mode of action under the new construction of the constitution was, that the offices of the state should be divided between the two opposing parties in the ratio of their respective numbers. On this principle he acted, when he led the majority of the council of appointment; and, could it have become the habitual custom, it would have prevented all the objectionable consequences of the measure. But that a triumphant party should pause in the progress of removing its opponents after it has obtained the power, is not to be expected, although there have been individuals who, when the appointing honour was vested in them, have had firmness enough to refuse to gratify their supporters at the expense of the removal of persons who were faithfully performing their official duties.

Clinton’s talent lay in the power of open and bold attacks against his adversaries, and in the capacity of maintaining his cause by strong and well-arranged argument, not in the management of the intrigues which are necessary to unite into one expression various conflicting opinions. In the cabinet and in the council, he possessed a commanding and prevailing eloquence; in the management of individual temper and in popular arts, he was deficient. It thus happened that men of less talent, but of more address, secured to themselves the power of directing the movement of the party even while he was its admitted chief; and when its measures became such as his conscience would not permit him to support, he became the victim of party usage.

As we have been compelled to refer to the contest between Clinton and Jay in relation to the council of appointment, it is proper to state, that, before the death of that distinguished statesman, a perfect reconciliation took place between them. Their estrangement had been that of party alone; and personal feeling, if perhaps inseparable from opposition of so violent a character, was speedily allayed. Jay appeared no more in the field of political warfare, but his children were subsequently ranked among the political and personal friends of Clinton.

While a member of the Assembly, Clinton was in the minority of that body, and in opposition not only to the executive of his own state, but to the administration of the general government. His course, however, was not marked by the character of faction. On the question of a request to the governor to write to the senators and representatives of the state to endeavour to obtain a repeal of the Stamp Act, he voted in the negative; this setting at naught the cry of his party, which had adroitly connected this mode of collecting revenue with the obnoxious measure of the British Parliament bearing the same name.

So, also, when he took his seat in the Senate of the state, he cordially concurred in the address of President Adams, pledging the support of the state to the maintenance of the national honour against French aggression.

Of the acts whose passage he was instrumental in obtaining, the most important in its consequences was that for the gradual abolition of slavery; a measure which has been productive of incalculable benefit to the state, and which, although favoured by Governor Jay, he had not ventured to recommend in his speeches to the legislature. He also moved a resolution proposing the amendment which was soon after made in the Constitution of the United States, by which the President and Vice-President are designated in the electoral vote.

When his authority over the dominant party of the state was in its acme, he was elected Senator of the United States. This high rank he attained in 1801, when but 32 years old, being one of the youngest men who have ever taken their seat in that august body. His colleague from New-York was Gouverneur Morris, who still retained all the vigour of his faculties, and had, in addition, the advantage of long experience as a statesman and political debater. A member of the old Congress, he had filled with distinguished ability offices of the highest trust under the federal constitution, and was, in the Senate of the United States, the most eloquent, if not the most powerful supporter of the principles of the federal party. Clinton was thus placed in immediate opposition, and brought into direct contrast with this veteran debater. In this severe trial, it is sufficient for the honour of Clinton to way that he was not worsted.

The public opposition of these distinguished men did, on more than one occasion, take the form of almost personal attack; but in their cooler moments, each felt the ability and acknowledged the sincerity of his antagonist. It thus happened that the very circumstances of party opposition, which brought into direct contact men who might otherwise have been estranged, led to an intimate and sincere friendship, the result of mutual esteem and admiration. Of these two remarkable statesmen, Clinton, although the youngest, was the most sound and practical; Morris, although of maturer years, exhibited more of an almost youthful ardour.

The most important debate which occurred in the Senate while Clinton remained a member, was that on the question of the navigation of the Mississippi. By a treaty with Spain, made in 1795, the right of the United States to navigate that river had been admitted, "from its source to the sea;" and, in addition, the privilege of depositing merchandise in the port of New-Orleans had been granted for the period of three years. The same treaty had contained a promise that this permission should be continued, or an equivalent establishment assigned to the citizens of the United States on another part of the banks of the Mississippi.

Without any notice or the assignment of the promised equivalent, this right was withdrawn by the local Spanish authorities; and all trade with American vessels navigating the Mississippi was interdicted.

The sensation produced by this act among the growing population of the West was prodigious, and the leaders of the opposition in Congress saw in it an opportunity for regaining the popularity which their party had lost under the administration of Mr. Adams. A series of resolutions was moved in the Senate by Mr. Ross, of Pennsylvania, which amounted to a declaration of war against Spain. These resolutions were opposed by Mr. Breckenridge, who moved a substitute, authorizing the calling out of 80,000 militia, and the establishment of arsenals on the Western waters.

In the debate which ensued, Clinton took a decided lead on the side of the administration. His speech delivered on this occasion is remarkable for its sound and luminous exposition of the state of the question, and of the principles of international law which were applicable to it. It furnished the basis of the speeches of the other friends of the administration, and its arguments met with no satisfactory reply from the opposition. The latter party, however, directed against Clinton the weapons of invective and irony, for which his comparative youth furnished the material. One of the senators from New-Jersey descended to taunting language, while Clinton’s colleague veiled his attack under the guise of compliment to his impressive eloquence, and the ingenuous glow on his youthful cheek.

Clinton continued for two years in the Senate of the United States, and his reputation for ability as a statesman, formerly confined to the limits of his native state, became national. He was on all sides looked up to as the most rising man in the Union, and may reasonably have seen in perspective the highest honours in the gift of the people. The close of his senatorial duties was attended by a controversy of a very disagreeable character with one of the senators from New-Jersey; and of all the mere political contests in which Clinton was engaged, this alone seems to have left any impression of resentment on his mind. We find him referring to the name of his opponent many years afterward, although not with anger, yet in a manner which shows that the circumstance was not forgotten. Whatever opinion may now be formed of the merits of this controversy, no doubt can be entertained that it was provoked by the senator from New-Jersey, and that at the time when a generous antagonist would have cautiously abstained from attack, as it was made after it had become known that Clinton had accepted the mayoralty of New-York, and was therefore about to leave the Senate of the United States.

----------------------------------------

Transcribed from the original text and html prepared by Bill Carr, last updated 12/10/99.