1. Pickering’s previous communication, which he dated “Tuesday morning” and GW docketed as “8th Sep. 1795,” informed GW that he had “examined the Treaty addresses in his hands. Few will require any answer; and none to the northward of Philadelphia. The whole shall be delivered to the President before nine o’clock” (AL, DLC:GW).

2. George Heriot, chairman of the meeting in Georgetown, S.C., sent their original address in a cover letter dated 31 July to Edmund Randolph, then secretary of state. Heriot requested he lay it “before the President without delay” (DLC:GW). On 10 Aug., Heriot sent Randolph a second letter that said, in part: “The original was forwarded by post, & should it not have arrived at the time you receive this, you will be pleased to have the Duplicate sent on to the President, by the earliest Opportunity” (DLC:GW).

In their 31 July address to GW, Georgetown residents wrote: “We the Inhabitants of Georgetown in the State of South Carolina, and its vicinity, alarmed at the pernicious tendency of an impending Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, between America and Great Britain, beg leave to represent to you the destructive consequences which must attend its ratification.

“When, in the course of the present War between the Powers of Europe, the Shipping of Britain committed numerous aggressions and extensive Spoliations on the infant Commerce of America, we viewed with satisfaction the peaceful exertions which you exhibited to the World, to avert the dreadful calamities of War; but unspeakable is our sorrow and regret, at the publication of the treaty concluded by our Envoy extraordinary, in which the honor and independence of these States, are bartered for inconsiderable commercial advantages.

“We view it Sir, in all its parts, as unwise, unreasonable, and impolitic; and as not having either equity or reciprocity for its basis—nor do we conceive, notwithstanding the suspension of the 12th article as recommended by the Senate, that that principle of reciprocal advantage is thereby established which ought to be the foundation of every compact, and which alone can render it beneficial to our Republic.

“Upon the whole sir, we do not confine our censures of this Treaty to any particular article, or its operation as affecting any particular State; but, as Freemen of America, we entreat you by every principle that can excite you to a love of our Country, for which you have in the course of a perilous War & arduous administration, been so eminently distinguished, to with-hold your assent to a measure which would effectually undermine the commercial interests of America, have a tendency to destroy that harmony which exists between us and the French Republic, and prostrate our dignity as a Nation” (DS, DLC:GW; DS (copy), DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW). The letter was published in the Georgetown Chronicle, 4 August.

The meeting held at Columbia, S.C., consisted of citizens of Camden and Orangeburg districts. They first met on 1 Aug. at the home of a Joshua Benson in Columbia. Following a debate about the treaty, the citizens selected a committee “to prepare an address to be presented to the President, expressive of their disapprobation.” The meeting reconvened on Tuesday, 4 August. Attendees approved an address to be “transmitted to the President with all possible dispatch” and directed that a copy of the proceedings be sent to the committee representing Charleston residents (DS, DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW). On the cover of the proceedings is written “Answer within.”

In their address to GW, dated 4 Aug. and signed by chairman Thomas Taylor, the citizens expressed their “extreme regret” that they found themselves “reduced to the unhappy necessity of remonstrating against a Treaty lately negotiated by Mr Jay with Great Britain, and acceded to by a great majority of the Senate. With minds fill’d with the greatest anxiety, We beg leave to declare, that our expectations have been greatly disappointed—our hopes deceiv’d. We were taught Sir to expect the unqualified restitution of the Western Posts: satisfactory reparation for former and recent insults, an ample reimbursement for losses sustain’d, and a commercial intercourse establish’d upon principles of reciprocity. But alas! the Objects of our fondest hopes have not been accomplish’d, and We are griev’d to observe, that we have deriv’d no advantage whatever from the negotiation; On the contrary concessions have been stipulated, which we humbly conceive to be hostile to our Interests, and derogatory to our national Character.

“Strongly impressd with these sentiments We conceive it to be a duty We owe to ourselves, to our Country, and to posterity to express in manly, but respectful Language, our warmest and most decided disapprobation. It is not, Sir, the disapprobation of a few discont[ent]ed individuals, that We take the liberty to transmit to You. No Sir, We express the Sentiments of every virtuous Citizen, as far as our observations extend, who have had an opportunity of investigating the Treaty. To You who have been call’d by the united voice of a free People to preside over their Interests and honor, We appeal for redress. The appeal, We confidently trust, will not be made in vain. You are constitutionally invested with ample powers. Having once rescued Your Country from ruin and oppression, it is not to be suppos’d, that a Treaty so hostile to its Interests and incompatible with its dignity would receive Your concurrence. Our minds recoil with abhorrence from the idea.

“We love our Country and reverence its honor. As a Nation we are indubitably entitled to certain rights in our political connection with foreign powers, from which We ought not willingly to recede. We ought not—it would be derogatory to our National Character—We ought not to be the hewers of Wood or drawers of Water to any Nation on Earth.

“We profess ourselves, Sir, to be strongly attach’d to our excellent Constitution, and to be zealous friends to Law and social order. We have not forgot the very important Services You have renderd our Country on a variety of trying occasions, and We feel, in common with our fellow Citizens, the principle of gratitude, still glowing Warm in our bosoms. We rely, Sir, with the firmest confidence on the wisdom and integrity, which has hitherto regulated all Your conduct; and We are very well assured, that, the same wisdom and integrity will still continue to be exerted on every occasion, in which the honor, the happiness, and well fare of our common Country are immediately involved” (DS, DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW).

3. William Falkener, chairman of the meeting in Warrenton, N.C., sent the proceedings to GW under a cover letter dated 22 Aug., conveyed by Charles Alexander. Falkener informed GW that “whatever may be the Issue of the momentous Question which affords me the Honour of addressing you, the Remembrance of your past Services, and a Belief that your future Conduct will be guided by the purest Intentions of promoting the general Weal, will induce my fervent Supplications, that you may long and uninterruptedly enjoy those Blessings you have so eminently contributed to obtain for your Fellow-Citizens” (ALS, DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW).

In their address to GW of 22 Aug., the citizens of Warren County wrote: “being desirous of evidencing our hearty Concurrence with the almost unanimous Sense of our Fellow Citizens who deem many Parts of it inimical to the Constitution, and most of it disadvantageous to the Interests, and derogatory to the Honour, & Dignity of the United States, most respectfully (for Reasons we forbear to state, as it would only be reiterating what you have been generally address’d with) intimate, That it is our earnest Wish you will refuse ratifying the Same: By which, we humbly conceive, you will evince that your Attachment to the Constitution is unalterable, and your Zeal to promote the Happiness, and Welfare of your Constituents unabating and undiminished” (ADS, DLC:GW; LB, DLC:GW).

4. The drafts of GW’s replies to these addresses have not been found. Letter-book copies coincide with Pickering’s comments. The answers are all dated 14 Sept. and contain similar but distinctive statements that correspond to each letter’s contents. In GW’s reply to Heriot, he wrote: “It is now well known that my assent to the treaty has been given; and the principles which governed my determination have also been made public.

“On a subject so complex and having such extensive relations, some diversity of opinion might be expected. But those of my fellow citizens who believe that ‘in the course of a perilous war and ard[u]ous administration’ I have given proofs that ‘I loved my country’ will not easily be persuaded that, at this late period, and in one of the most important acts, of a life which has been devoted to its service, I have ceased to love it.

“While I acknowledge the pleasure derived from the confidence of my fellow citizens I may assure them of my unalterable attachment to their true interests” (LB, DLC:GW).

GW informed Taylor: “My sense of the treaty has been manifested by its ratification. The principles on which my sanction was given have been made public. I regret the diversity of opinion: But whatever qualities, manifested in a long and arduous public life, have acquired for me the confidence of my fellow Citizens, let them be assured that they remain unchanged; and that they ‘will continue to be exerted on every occasion in which the honor, the happiness and welfare of our common country are immediately involved’” (LB, DLC:GW).

GW’s letter to Falkener stated: “Previous to that meeting the treaty had received my assent. The principles which governed my determination have been made public. While I regret a difference of opinion on this subject, with perfect sincerity I assure my fellow Citizens ‘that my attachment to the Constitution is unalterable, and my zeal to promote the happiness and welfare of my Constituents undiminished’” (LB, DLC:GW).