DEAR SIR:

Same date, to a foreigner applying for office.

It does not accord with the policy of this government to

bestow offices, civil or military, upon foreigners, to the exclusion of our own citizens.

Yours, etc.,

G. WASHINGTON.

And he seems to have been equally opposed to immigration. In a letter to Sir John St. Clair, of England, he declared his opposition thereto in the very positive following terms :

"I have no intention to invite immigrants, even if there are no restrictive acts against it. I am opposed to it altogether."

So in a letter published in Washington's Maxims, p. 89, written in 1794, he expresses himself as follows:

“My opinion with respect to immigration is, that, except of useful mechanics, and some particular descriptions of men or professions, there is no need of encouragement; whilst the policy or advantage of its taking place in a body (I mean the settling of them in a body) may be much questioned, for by so doing, they retain the language, habits and principles, good or bad, which they bring with them. Whereas, by an intermixture with our people, they or their descendants get assimilated to our customs, measures and laws; in a word, soon become our people."

John Adams entertained similar views, and we find that during his administration the following order was issued from the War department: War Department, Feb. 4th, 1799.

Instructions of the Secretary of War to the Inspector General.

For the cavalry, for the regulations restrict the recruiting officers to engage none except natives for this corps, and these only as from their known character and fidelity may be trusted.

And in a letter to Christopher Gadsden, (see his life of his grandson, page 584,) gives expression to the following sentiments :

"What is the reason that so many of our old stand-bys' are infected with Jacobinism? The principles of this infernal tribe were surely no part of their ancient political creed. Foreign meddlers, as you properly denominate them, have a strange, a mysterious influence in this country. Is there no pride in American bosoms? Can their hearts endure that C., D., and L., should be the most influential men in the country-all foreigners and all degraded characters? It is astonishing to me that the tribes of law followers' should adopt principles subversive of all law, should unite with the ignorant and illiberal against men of understanding and property. The plan of our worthy friend, John Rutledge, relative to the admission of strangers to the privileges of citizens, as you explain it, was certainly prudent. Americans will find that their own experience will coincide with the experience of all other nations, and foreigners must be received with caution, or they will destroy all confidence in government."

Thomas Jefferson, though the author of the liberal naturalization law of Virginia, enacted in 1779, seems to have been, several years afterwards, strongly imbued in favor of discriminating, in certain cases, between native

and naturalized citizens; for we find by his writings that he was the author of a petition to the Virginia Legislature, presented in 1797, and signed by citizens of Albemarle, Amherst, Fluvanna, and Goochland counties, praying that none but native born citizens should be eligible as jurors in grand or petty, civil or criminal cases. The petition was as follows:

"And your petitioners further submit to the wisdom of the two houses of Assembly, whether the safety of the citizens of this commonwealth, in their persons, their property, their laws and government, does not require that the capacity to act in the important office of a juror, grand or petty, civil or criminal, should be restrained in future to native citizens of the United States, or such as were citizens at the date of the treaty of peace which closed our revolutionary war, and whether the ignorance of our laws and natural partiality to the countries of their birth, are not reasonable causes for declaring this to be one of the rights incommunicable in future to adopted citizens." Jeffer son's Writings, vol. ix., p. 453.

Nor is this an isolated instance of his expression of opinion on the subject. On another occasion he wrote thus :

"I hope we may find some means in future of shielding ourselves from foreign influence-political, commercial, or in whatever form attempted. I can scarcely withhold myself from joining in the wish of Silas Dean, that there were an ocean of fire between this and the old world !"

While minister to France, in 1788, he wrote a letter to Mr. Jay, from which the following extract is taken :

"Native citizens, on several valuable accounts, are preferable to aliens, or citizens alien born. Native citizens possess our language, know our laws, customs and commerce; have general acquaintance in the United States, give better satisfaction, and are more to be relied on in point of fidelity. To avail ourselves of native citizens, it appears to me advisable to declare by standing law that no person, but a native citizen, shall be capable of the office of consul."

But, though these seem at one time to have been the views of Mr. Jefferson, it is a well-known historical fact, that he was uncompromisingly hostile to the Congressional legislation in relation to foreigners, which took place under the administration of the elder Adams, and that he recommended, after his election to the Presidency, in his first annual message to Congress, to reduce the term of probation necessary to be naturalized, which recommendation was adopted by Congress, and the act of 1802 passed, reducing the time from fourteen to five years. The following extract from a letter of Grant Thorburn, who is himself a naturalized citizen, published within the last year past in the Home Journal, may not be out of place here, though, if true, and Mr. Thorburn's character forbids us to doubt, for a moment, his statement as to what Mr. Burr told him, it presents a singular contrast with the views which Mr. Jefferson seems before to have entertained on the subject:

"In 1801, Thomas Jefferson became President of the United States. Aaron Burr, Joel Barlow, Thomas Paine, and others, were his privy counsellors. Now commenced the age of experiments. Mr. Jefferson, in his inaugural speech, recommended rotation in office, and to sell our frigates and build gun-boats. The frigates were sold for less than the price of the rigging. In seven years thereafter, I saw the gun-boats transformed into dung-boats, transporting manure from the old Fly Market, foot of Maiden Lane, to raise pumpkins among the Dutch farmers on Long Island.

But the rotation in office was a more serious concern. The Irish rebellion of 1798 had just been suppressed; hundreds were ordered to leave the country; America was their goal. These patriots must be provided for. A secret conclave was held in the star-chamber, Burr and Jefferson being the master-spirits. It was resolved to secure these patriots, and this would secure the votes of all their countrymen, who were daily arriving by thousands on these peaceful shores. (After Col. Burr returned from Europe, whither he had fled, after the death of Hamilton, he gave me this piece of political intrigue.) In accordance with this cold-blooded plan, I saw revolutionary men and officers who had fought with Washington, pine in the prison-ship and groan in the sugar-house. Yes, I saw them marched out of the Custom-house, Post, and every other office, some on crutches, some having one leg, some one arm, and others leaning on their staffs from wounds received in defence of their country. I saw their places filled by foreign patriots, many of them never having learned a letter of their own language, and not even able to speak a word of ours; but such is the gratitude of model republics.

Then commenced the flood of foreign influence, which threatens to place us on the same list with the republics that were.

I was naturalized, and voted when Washington was President; I therefore think that I have as good a right to think as any freethinker in America. I saw the rise and the fall of the French and Mexican republics; both were strangled in their birth by the hands of freethinkers and priests. The same tools are at work among us; and a few Judas Americans are selling their liberties to a foreign potentate for a mess of pottage; and, except God work a miracle, I think, before January, 1901, our dear sister republics, France and Mexico, may look up and exclaim, Lo, America also, may become like one of us.'

The signs of the times are portentous; with few exceptions, the pulpit and the press are silent on the subject. Having watched the republic since the day of its birth, for my brethren and companions' sake, I wish it prosperity; for myself, there is but a step between me and death."

Be the representations of Mr. Thorburn, however, correct, or not, and there can be little doubt that they were made to him by Mr. Burr, the conduct of Mr. Jefferson subsequent to his election to the Presidency, though in favor of a modification of the naturalization law of 1798, does not seem to indicate any change in his previous opinion as to the employment of foreigners in the administration of the government; for we find him writing thus, just ten weeks after he became President, in a letter to Nathaniel Macon, Speaker of Congress:

"A very early recommendation had been given to the Postmaster General to employ no foreigner, or revolutionary tory, in any of his offices."

And in his Notes on Virginia, we have further evidence of his views and feelings on the subject. He therein expresses himself as follows:

66

reason.

Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution, with orders derived from natural right and natural To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchies. Yet from such we are to expect the greatest number of immigrants. They will bring with them the principles of the goverments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass. I may appeal to experience, during the present contest, for a verification of these conjectures. But, if they be not certain in event, are they not probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience twenty-seven years and three months longer, for the attainment of any degree of population desired or expected? May not our government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable? Suppose twenty millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here. If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship; but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements."

In an oration delivered at the request of Congress, by General Henry Lee, December 20, 1799, on the death of Washington, Mr. Lee used the following language:

"Methinks I see his august image, and hear falling from his venerable lips these deep sinking words: Cease, sons of America, lamenting our separation! Go on, and confirm by your wisdom, the fruits of our joint councils, joint efforts, and common dangers! Reverence religion, diffuse knowledge throughout your land, patronize the arts and sciences. Let liberty and order be inseparable companions. Control party spirit, the bane of free governments. Observe good faith to, and cultivate peace with, all nations. Shut up every avenue to foreign influence; contract rather than extend national connection; rely on yourselves only. Be Americans in thought, word and deed. Thus will you give immortality to that Union, which was the constant object of my terrestrial labors; thus will you preserve undisturbed to the latest posterity the felicity of a people to me most dear; and thus will you supply (if my happiness is now sought to you) the only vacancy in the round of pure bliss high Heaven bestows."'"

In 1815, on the 4th of July, the Hon. James Buchanan delivered an Oration in the city of Lancaster. From that oration we make the following extract. It is upon the subject of foreign influence and upon the policy that the United States ought to pursue towards foreign nations. Mr. Buchanan said:

"Again we stand neutral towards all the European powers. What then shall be the political conduct of our country in future? Precisely to pursue the political maxims adopted by Washington. We ought to cultivate peace with all nations by adopting a strict neutrality not only of conduct but of sentiment. We ought to make our neutra

lity respected by placing ourselves in an attitude of defence. We ought forever to abandon the wild project of a philosophic visionary of letting commerce protect itself. For its protection we ought to increase our navy. We ought never to think of embargoes and non-intercourse laws without abhorrence. We ought to use every honest exertion to turn out of power those weak and wicked men, who have abandoned the political path marked out for this country by Washington, and whose wild and visionary theories have been at length tested by experience and found wanting. Above all, we ought to drive from our shores foreign influence, and cherish exclusively American feelings. Foreign influence has been in every age, the curse of republics. Her jaundiced eyes see all things in false colors. The thick atmosphere of prejudice, by which she is forever surrounded, excludes from her sight the light of Heaven. Whilst she worships the nation which she favors for this very crime, she curses the enemy of that nation even for their virtues. In every age she has marched before the enemies of her country, proclaiming peace when there was no peace, and lulling its defenders into fatal security, while the iron hand of despotism was aiming a death-blow at their liberties. Already our infant republic has felt her withering influence. Already has she involved us in a war, which had nearly cost us our existence. Let us then learn wisdom from experience, and forever banish this fiend from our society."

William H. Crawford, while Secretary of War under the administration of James Madison, made a Report on Indian Affairs, in March, 1816, in which he expressed himself as follows, which caused him to be made the object of bitter assault from foreigners, and those who sided with them, and which, it was believed at the time, mainly defeated his nomination for the Presidency when Mr. Monroe was nominated and elected :

If the system already devised has not produced all the effects which were expected from it, new experiments ought to be made; when every effort to introduce among them (the Indian savages) ideas of exclusive property in things as well as persons shall fail, let intermarriages between them and the whites be encouraged by the government. This cannot fail to preserve the race, with the modification necessary to the enjoyment of civil liberty and social happiness. It is believed, that the principles of humanity in this instance, are in harmonious concert with the true interests of the nation. It will redound more to the national honor to incorporate, by a humane and benevolent policy, the natives of our forests in the great American family of freedom, than to receive, with open arms, the fugitives of the old world, whether their flight has been the effect of their crimes or their virtues.

The expression of these sentiments, as already stated, gave rise to much hostility to Mr. Crawford, especially among those of foreign birth, and among the most prominent and talented assailants was Thomas Cooper, then of Pennsylvania, but subsequently a resident of South Carolina. He addressed, through the columns of the Democratic Press, over the signature of Americus, several letters to President Madison on the subject, in which he assailed Mr. Crawford with great acrimony, denouncing him as a bigot, and his report to be a "wanton insult of his colleagues in office, Mr. Dallas and Mr. Gallatin," and to the President "who appointed these well-informed and able men.'