To George Washington from Edward Carrington, 22 April 1796
From Edward Carrington
Richmond April 22. 1796
Dear Sir
The late Votes of the House of Representatives which have just reached us, and from which it appears that appropriations are not entended to be made for giving effect to the Treaty between the U. States and Great Britain, have in my opinion brought our political maladies to a crisis.1 The disorganizing machinations of a faction are no longer left to be nourished and inculcated on the minds of the credulous, by clamorous demagogues, while the great mass of Citizens, viewing these, as evils at a distance, remain inactive. The consequences of a failure of the Treaty are too plain, and too threatening to the unparalleled happiness and prosperity we enjoy, not to excite alarm in the minds of all who are attached to peace & order—this class of Citizens will now come forward & speak for themselves, and will be found to compose the great body of the community—I may possibly be mistaken—I however feel a confidence in an opinion, that the sense of Virginia to the purpose, will shortly be extensively expressed, in public meetings and by Petitions—A meeting of the people of this City, will take place on Monday next, for the purpose of expressing their opinions on the pending measures, and setting on foot a Petition or remonstrace, to the House of Representatives, thereon.2 From what I can learn from various parts of the Country I verily believe that similar measures will be adopted, at least, in many Counties.3 Feeling as I do, a strong conviction that the intelligence contained in this letter is well founded, I have indulged myself in the satisfaction of communicating it to you, and hope that events will realise it.4 with unalterable attachment and confidence I have the Honor to be Dear Sir Your Most Ob. st
Ed. Carrington
ALS, DLC:GW. The cover of this letter is marked “(Private).”
1. Carrington most likely referred to two resolutions that passed the U.S. House of Representatives on 7 April in response to GW’s assertion of executive privilege in withholding documents related to the Jay Treaty. The first claimed that “when a treaty stipulates regulations on any of the subjects submitted by the constitution to the power of Congress, it must depend for its execution, as to such stipulations, on a law or laws to be passed by Congress; and it is the constitutional right and duty of the House of Representatives, in all such cases, to deliberate on the expediency or inexpediency of carrying such treaty into effect, and to determine and act thereon as in their judgment, may be most conducive to the public good.” The second held it as unnecessary “to the propriety of any application from this House to the Executive for information desired by them, and which may relate to any constitutional functions of the House, that the purposes for which such information may be wanted, or to which the same may be applied, should be stated in the application” ( 8:316–20; quotes on 316–17).
2. For the meeting in Richmond on Monday, 25 April, see Carrington to GW, 27 April.
3. In April and May, the U.S. House of Representatives officially received petitions in support of appropriations to implement the Jay Treaty from the towns of Alexandria, Fredericksburg, and Norfolk, as well as Fairfax, Frederick, King William, and Westmoreland counties ( 8:360, 369–70, 375–76, 401). Meetings representing Williamsburg and the counties of Accomack, Augusta, Northampton, Loudoun, and Prince William also sent the House resolutions favoring appropriations (Gazette of the United States [Philadelphia], 17, 18, and 21 May; Columbian Mirror and Alexandria Gazette [Va.], 3 and 10 May).