Albert Beveridge - The Life of John Marshall (Volume 2 of 4)

Marshall and Carrington arranged for the Richmond gathering. "The disorganizing machinations of a faction [Republicans]," reported the busy United States Marshal, "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… All who are attached to peace and order, … will now come forward and speak for themselves… A meeting of the people of this city will take place on Monday next" to petition the National House of Representatives to support the treaty. So Carrington advised the President; and the same thing, said he, was to be done "extensively" by "public meetings and Petitions throughout Virginia." 426 426 Carrington to the President, April 22, 1796; Writings : Ford, xiii, footnote to 185.

Washington was expecting great results from the Richmond demonstration. "It would give me and … every friend to order and good government throughout the United States very great satisfaction," he wrote to encourage the Virginia Federalists; "more so than similar sentiments from any other State in the Union; for people living at a distance from it [Virginia] know not how to believe it possible" that the Virginia Legislature and her Senators and Representatives in Congress should speak and act as they had done. 427 427 Washington to Carrington, May 1, 1796; ib. , 185. "It is," philosophized Washington, "on great occasions only and after time has been given for cool and deliberate reflection that the real voice of the people can be known. The present … is one of those great occasions, than which none more important has occurred, or probably may occur again to call forth their decision." 428 428 Ib. , 186.

By such inspiration and management the historic Federalist gathering was brought about at Richmond on April 25, 1796, where the "Marshall eloquence" was to do its utmost to convert a riotously hostile sentiment into approval of this famous treaty and of the Administration which was responsible for it. All day the meeting lasted. Marshall put forth his whole strength. At last a "decided majority" adopted a favorable resolution drawn by an "original opponent" of the treaty. Thus were sweetened the bitter resolutions adopted by these same freeholders of Richmond some months before, which had so angered Washington.

The accounts of this all-day public discussion are as opposite as were the prejudices and interests of the narrators. Justice Story tells us that Marshall's speech was "masterly," the majority for the resolution "flattering," and the assemblage itself made up of the "same citizens" who formerly had "denounced" the treaty. 429 429 Story, in Dillon, iii, 352. But there was present at the meeting an onlooker who gives a different version. Randolph, who, in disgrace, was then sweating venom from every pore, thus reports to Madison at the end of the hard-fought day: —

"Between 3 & 400 persons were present; a large proportion of whom were British merchants, some of whom pay for the British purchases of horses – their clerks – officers, who have held posts under the President at his will, – stockholders – expectants of office – and many without the shadow of a freehold. 430 430 Senator Stephen Thompson Mason wrote privately to Tazewell that the Fairfax purchasers and British merchants were the only friends of the treaty in Virginia. (Anderson, 42.) Notwithstanding this, the numbers on the republican side, tho' inferior, were inferior in a small degree only; and it is believed on good grounds that the majority of free-holders were on the side of the house of representatives [against the treaty].

"Campbell 431 431 Alexander Campbell. (See infra , chap. v.) and Marshall the principal combatants [word illegible] as you know without being told. Marshall's argument was inconsistent, and shifting; concluding every third sentence with the horrors of war. Campbell spoke elegantly and forcibly; and threw ridicule and absurdity upon his antagonist with success. Mr. Clofton [Clopton, member of Congress from Richmond] will receive two papers; one signed by the treaty men, many of whom he will know to have neither interest nor feeling in common with the citizens of Virginia, and to have been transplanted hither from England or Caledonia since the war, interspersed pretty considerably with fugitive tories who have returned under the amnesty of peace.

"The notice, which I sent you the other day," he goes on to say, "spoke of instructions and a petition; but Marshall, suspecting that he would be outnumbered by freeholders, and conscious that none should instruct those who elect, quitted the idea of instruction, and betook himself to a petition, in which he said all the inhabitants of Richmond, though not freeholders, might join. Upon which Campbell gave notice, that it would be published that he (Marshall) declined hazarding the question on the true sense of the country. Very few of the people [freeholders] of the county were present; but three-fourths of those who were present voted with Campbell. Dr. Foushee was extremely active and influential." 432 432 Randolph to Madison, Richmond, April 25, 1796; Conway, 362. Only freeholders could vote.

Marshall, on the contrary, painted in rich colors his picture of this town-hall contest. He thus reports to Hamilton: "I had been informed of the temper of the House of Representatives and we [Richmond Federalists] had promptly taken such measures as appeared to us fitted to the occasion. We could not venture an expression of the public mind under the violent prejudices with which it has been impressed, so long as a hope remained, that the House of Representatives might ultimately consult the interest or honor of the nation… But now, when all hope of this has vanished, it was deemed advisable to make the experiment, however hazardous it might be.

"A meeting was called," continues Marshall, "which was more numerous than I have ever seen at this place; and after a very ardent and zealous discussion which consumed the day, a decided majority declared in favor of a resolution that the wellfare and honor of the nation required us to give full effect to the treaty negotiated with Britain. This resolution, with a petition drawn by an original opponent of the treaty, will be forwarded by the next post to Congress." 433 433 Marshall to Hamilton, April 25, 1796; Works : Hamilton, vi, 109.

The resolution which Marshall's speech caused an "original opponent" 434 434 Author unknown. of the treaty to draw was "that the Peace, Happiness, & Wellfare, not less than the National Honor of the United States, depend in a great degree upon giving, with good faith, Full effect to the Treaty lately negotiated with Great Britain." The same newspaper that printed this resolution, in another account of the meeting "which was held at the instance of some friends of the British Treaty," says that "in opposition to that resolution a vast number of the meeting" subscribed to counter-declarations which "are now circulated throughout this City and the county of Henrico for the subscription of all those who" are opposed to the treaty. 435 435 Richmond and Manchester Advertiser , April 27, 1796. Even the exultant Carrington reported "that the enemies of the Treaty or rather of the Government, are putting in practice every part and effort to obtain subscriptions to a counteracting paper."

Carrington denounced the unfavorable newspaper account as "a most absolute falsehood." He tells Washington that the opposition resolution "was not even listened [to] in the meeting." But still he is very apprehensive – he beholds the politician's customary "crisis" and strives to make the people see it: "There never was a crisis at which the activity of the Friends of Government was more urgently called for – some of us here have endeavored to make this impression in different parts of the Country." 436 436 Carrington to the President, April 27, 1796; MS., Lib. Cong. The newspaper reported that the Federalists had induced "school boys & apprentices" to sign the petition in favor of the treaty; Carrington adds a postscript stating that this was, "I believe, a little incorrect."