From John Jay to Jonathan Trumbull Jr. (private), 4 December 1799
To Jonathan Trumbull Jr. (private)
Albany 4 Decr 1799
Dr. Sir
I feel myself gratified by the frank & friendly Letter of the 4 ult. w[hic]h. accompanied your official Communication of the Resolutions of your Legislature for amiably settling the Gore Controversy. Every Consideration both of a personal and public nature, will always urge me to promote the best understanding between your State and this; and to discourage whatever might give just Cause of Disgust or Irritation to either.1
Altho’ in my opinion this State ought never to submit to treat or negociate with the Speculators, who have caused and inflamed this Controversy, yet it is not only my opinion but also my Desire that these Resolutions should be meet with such a Reception as will be agreable to Connecticut, and tend to cherish mutual Confidence and Friendship. The Legislature of this State will I flatter myself, be actuated by a similar Disposition; and there is Reason to hope that a fair an[d] amicable accommodation will become, as it ought to be, the prevailing wish of all well disposed Citizens. Some Difficulties are to be apprehended; and yet there are few Difficulties, which cannot, by Men of
Justice Candor and Temper, be made to yield to the Dictates of Right Propriety and public Good.
From the Characters of the Comrs. on your part,2 sanguine Expectations of a proper Settlement may be entertained; especially if those to be appointed on our part, should be prudent and conciliating. Such is my Respect for Connecticut, that I much regret her having been inadvertently drawn into such a Business; and nothing on my part shall be wanting to extricate both her and this State from the serious & encreasing mischiefs, naturally and necessarily resulting from it— With great and Sincere Esteem and Regard I am Dr Sir your most obt. Servt
His Ex[cellenc]y. Govr. Trumbull
C, NNC (EJ: 08998). Letter marked “private” in the top left corner.
1. Attorney General Josiah Ogden Hoffman and William Lewis, acting as attorneys for the defendants, unsuccessfully attempted to have the cases concerning the Connecticut Gore dispute (Fowler v. Lindsley and Fowler v. Miller) moved to the Supreme Court. They argued that the “real” defendant in this case was New York State, not the individuals. In his decision, Justice Bushrod Washington, while disagreeing with their position, suggested that New York might be able to file a bill in equity in the Supreme Court against Connecticut. In June 1799, a bill in equity, drafted by AH, was filed against the State of Connecticut, the plaintiffs in the original ejectment actions, and Halsey and Ward (the Gore Company proprietors). In the meantime, Connecticut and New York reopened negotiations. Previous negotiations failed because the New York State Assembly declined to appoint commissioners because “this State has full confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the judiciary of the United States” (N.Y. Assembly Journal, 22nd sess. [August 1798], 133). On 4 Nov. 1799, Trumbull wrote JJ to inform him of the 10 Oct. 1799 resolution made by the Connecticut legislature appointing commissioners to settle with New York (Public Records of the State of Connecticut, from May 1797 through October 1799 [Hartford, 1953], 9: 408). Trumbull commented that the legislators “are at present in the best disposition for making an amicable settlement of an unhappy affair” and that he hoped that “the State of New York will be disposed to meet them with the like good humour.” Trumbull to JJ, marked “private,” 4 Nov. 1799, ALS, CtY-BR (EJ: 13135); DHSC, 8: 185–89 and LPAH, 1: 670–72. See also JJ to Thomas Mifflin, 6 Sept. 1796, and Josiah Ogden Hoffman to JJ, 14 Dec. 1797, , 6: 494–95, 603–5; and JJ’s Address to the New York State Legislature, 28 Jan. 1800, below.
2. Elias Perkins (1767–1845) served in the Connecticut State House of Representatives (1795–1800, 1814, 1815), as a judge on the New London County Court (1799, 1807–25), and in the U.S. House of Representatives (1801–3). Nathaniel Smith (1762–1822) served in the Connecticut State House of Representatives (1789–95), in the U.S. House of Representatives for Connecticut (1795–99), and as a judge on the Supreme Court of Connecticut (1806–19). Jonathan Sturges (1740–1819) served as a delegate from Connecticut to the Continental Congress (1772–84), in the U.S. House of Representatives (1789–93), and as a judge on the Supreme Court of Connecticut (1793–1805). All three were Federalists.