From John Jay to George Washington, 27 January 1792
To George Washington
NYork 27 Jany 1792—
Dear Sir
As I shall be absent from the next sup. Court, obvious considerations urge me to mention to You the Reasons of it. Early in next Month I expect an Addition to my Family— Mrs. Jay’s delicate Health (she having for more than three weeks past been confined to her Chamber) renders that Event so interesting, that altho she is now much better, I cannot prevail on myself to be then at a Distance from her; especially as no Business of particular Importance either to the public, or to Individuals, makes it necessary—
Mr Burr’s Motion gave me much concern, and the Issue of it much Satisfaction. I regret that the Senate were not more unanimous—1 similar attempts in future may be encouraged by their having divided so equally on the Question— It is in my opinion a Question very important in its consequences—so much so—that if the Senate should make and retain that Encroachment on the Executive, I should despair of seeing the Government well administred afterward.—2
I flatter myself that you recieved the Letter I had the Honor of writing to You on the 23d. of Septr. last3— With perfect Respect Esteem & Attachment I am Dear Sir Your obliged & obedt. Servant
John Jay
1. On 16 Jan. Aaron Burr, senator from New York, had moved during a debate on the desirability of ministerial appointments that there was then no reason to send a U.S. minister to the Hague. JA, as vice president, broke the 13-13 tie vote in the Senate to set aside that measure, thereby temporarily precluding senatorial interference on what the Washington administration perceived as an executive function. GW, as advised by JJ, TJ, and JM in April 1790, saw the Senate’s role as only to approve or disapprove particular nominations, not to make policy decisions on whether, when, and where to make ministerial appointments. However, the issue of the extent of the Senate’s power to “advise and consent” remained unresolved. See Executive Journal, 1: 96–98; and , 9: 306–7, 372–78; , 6: 68.
2. The following paragraph appears next in the Dft: “I wish such a Report on Indian affairs may be made, as that it might with Propriety be published, at least so far as it may respect the Causes of the War: The Justice of the War is generally questioned; and if that opinion should prevail & encrease, disagreable Consequences must naturally follow.—” In his letter of 23 Sept. 1791, above, on topics for GW to include in his annual address to Congress JJ had suggested hinting “at the Justice and Policy of treating those nations [Indians] with Benevolence and constant Regard to good Faith,” and GW had done so. On the current conflict with Indian nations on the northwest frontier, and Henry Knox’s explanatory report prepared and publicized at GW’s request, see , 9: 503–7.
3. See JJ to GW, 23 Sept. 1791, above. GW replied briefly to that and the present letter on 6 Mar. 1792, below.