Candid answers to the following questions are absolutely necessary, to enable the public to form an adequate judgement respecting Citizen Genet’s conduct. Had you been explicit when you dragged the Minister before that awful tribunal, much trouble and uncertainty would have been avoided. I never saw the propriety of your appealing to the people1 in a matter cognizable only by our worthy President, in whose hands America chearfully and with confidence reposes the executive duties of government—He knows how and when to resent an insult offered to him, and when to call on the aid of his fellow citizens, whose ardent affection for him is such, that at a word or hint from that quarter, they would in a moment rally round his standard. But as the people have not the same reason to place such implicit confidence in you, especially when you appear before them in so exceptionable a manner, they mean to suspend their opinion until Mr. Genet’s offence is more accurately defined, and better authenticated. The proceeding interrogatories tend to a disclosure of the whole truth, which the people, no less than Mr. Genet, have a right to exact from you.

Having volunteered your testimony, lame as it is, in support of the libellous publications against the Minister of France, what claim will you have to the character of candid men, if you prove unwilling witnesses upon your cross examination?

First— WHO informed you that Mr. Genet said, He would appeal to the people from certain decisions of the President? And what were the decisions from which he threatened to appeal?

Secondly— When did you first receive this information?

Thirdly— Have you ever conversed with the President on this subject? What information did you receive from him? Relate the whole that passed, without any mental reservation whatever.

Fourthly— did the President desire you to make public the information he gave you, or was his communication confidential?

Fifthly— Upon what occasion, and to whom did Mr. Genet make the threat? Was it to the President—to the Secretary of State—to the Governor of Pennsylvania—to the Governor’s Secretary, or to any other person? How was it made, in writing or by word of mouth? In public or private? as minister or a private gentleman? deliberately and coolly, or in a passion? or in any other way? Reserve nothing, but declare the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Sixthly— When did you first spread the report in this city? Did you say any thing about the matter until we talked of addressing Citizen Genet?

Seventhly— Was it from public or private motives that you circulated the report? Was it to prevent Citizen Genet from being addressed, and to please Mr. Hammond? Or was it really because you thought it your duty to run about and tell the story?

Eighthly— Do you wish well or ill to the French revolution? Do you wish to see America at war with France? Do you believe abusing her Minister, and treating him with disrespect, will have a tendency to alienate the affections of the French, and break the alliance between us?

Ninthly— Have either of you visited Citizen Genet since his arrival in this city? Have you dissuaded others from visiting him? Does your hatred and incivility towards him proceed from your hatred and detestation of Liberty and the French? or from any other and what cause? Declare firmly your motives for abusing this Minister, and your attempts to make other people do the same.

Tenthly— Are you authors of any of the libels which your publication is intended to support? Relate which you have written, and particularly whether the pieces, signed W. Wilcocks, on this subject, are of your composition.2