5.
Vindication of m
(
~r
) Randolph’s resignation.
RANDOLPH,
Edmund.
A Vindication of Mr. Randolph’s Resignation.
Philadelphia: printed by
Samuel H. Smith,
m.dcc.xcv
. [1795.]
First Edition. First Issue. 54 leaves: A-N
4, O
2, +3 leaves, being the cancel N
4, O
2. This copy is misbound. The errata leaf is correctly placed after the title, and is followed by Appendix No. 1 (N
4 O
2) in its original state; this is followed by sig. F, G, E, in the wrong order, then the text (with these leaves omitted from
their proper place) and at the end the cancel N
4 and O
2.
Sabin 67817.
Evans 29384.
Initialled by Jefferson at sig. I. On the blank verso of the cancelled O
2 (which is at the beginning, but should be the last leaf), Jefferson has written a chronology of the events of which the headline,
probably reading
Order of dates, has been partially cut away. Jefferson has also written two clarifying notes in the margins, and made the textual corrections listed in the errata.
Jefferson first mentioned Randolph’s impending resignation in a letter to Madison, November 17, 1793: “
. . . R. has given notice that he means to resign . . .”
On September 6, 1795, he announced the accomplished fact to Monroe: “
. . . the same post which brought your letter, brought also advice of the death of Bradford, Atty Gen
l. the resignation of E. Randolph (retiring perhaps from the storm he saw gathering) . . .
”
This copy seems to have been sent to Jefferson by William
Branch Giles. On December 9, 1795, in a letter to Jefferson, Giles wrote: “Mr Randolph’s vindication is not yet before the public at full length.-- I have by special indulgence been favored with its perusal as far as page 84. the first pages contain all the evidence, and part of his general letter (as he terms it) to the President. The publication will afford an infinite fund of matter for political parties; but its effects upon the public mind, as it respects the President, or the state of parties, I think extremely problematical. It will probably depend upon the management and the activity of the parties themselves.-- As to Mr Randolph, there will be no doubt of its effect.-- He will be exculpated from the charge of corruption; but will be deemed the most indiscreet of ministers. I will transmit you a copy as soon as it shall appear at full length . . .”
Giles wrote to Jefferson again on December 15, and added a postscript to his letter: “Mr Randolph’s vindication is promised to us on friday next, on monday it shall be forwarded.”
Jefferson wrote to Giles from Monticello on December 31, 1795:
“
. . . Randolph seems to have hit upon the true theory of our constitution, that when a treaty is made, involving matters confided
by the constitution to the three branches of the legislature conjointly, the representatives are as free as the President
& Senate were to consider whether the national interests requires or forbids their giving the forms & force of law to the
articles over which they have a power.--I thank you much for the pamphlet. his narrative is so straight & plain, that even
those who did not know him will acquit him of the charge of bribery: those who know him had done it from the first. tho he
mistakes his own political character in the aggregate, yet he gives it to you in the detail. thus he supposes himself a man
of no party (page 57.) that his opinions not containing any systematic adherence to party, fall sometimes on one side and
sometimes on the other. (pa. 58.) yet he gives you these facts, which shew that they fall generally on both sides, & are complete
inconsistencies.
|
1. he never gave an opinion in the Cabinet against the rights of the people (pa. 97.) yet he advised the denunciation of the
popular societies (67)
|
|
2. he would not neglect the overtures of a commercial treaty with France (79) yet he always opposed it while att(
~
y)
general, and never seems to have proposed it while Secretary of state.
|
|
3. he concurs in resorting to the militia to quell the pretended insurrections in the West (81.) and proposes an augmentation
from 12,500 to 15,000 to march against men at their ploughs (pa. 80) yet on the 5
th. of A
[
ug.]
he is against their marching (83. 101.) and on the 25
th. of Aug. he is for it. (
[
84]
.)
|
|
4. he concurs in the measure of a mission extraordinary to London ([
as]
inferred from pa. 58.) but objects to the men, to wit Hamilton & Jay (50.)
|
|
5. he was against granting commercial powers to m(
~
r)
Jay (58.) [
yet]
he besieged the doors of the Senate to procure their advice to ratify.
|
|
6. he advises the President to a ratification on the merits of the tre[
aty]
(97.) but to a suspension till the provision order is repealed. (98.)
|
the fact is that he has generally given his principles to the one party & his practice to the other; the oyster to one, the
shell to the other. unfortunately the shell was generally the lot of his friends the French and republicans, & the oyster
of their antagonists. had he been firm to
[
the]
principles he professes in the year 1793, the President would have be[
en]
kept from a habitual concert with the British & Antirepublican party. but at that time I do not know which R. feared most,
a British fleet, or French disorganisers. whether his conduct is to be ascribed to a superior view of things, an adherence
to right without regard to party, as he pretends, or to an
”
