Perhaps, however, they sweeten the hour of retirement, and secure us from all dangers of regret. On the subject of that disquietude, it is proper for me only to say that, however unfortunate the incident, I found in it no cause of dissatisfaction with yourself, nor of lessening the esteem I entertain for your virtues and talents; and, had it not been disagreeable to yourself, I should have been well pleased that you could have proceeded on your original destination.

While I thank you for the several letters received from you during your absence, I have to regret the miscarriage of some of those I wrote you. Not having my papers here, I cannot cite their dates by memory; but they shall be the subject of another letter on my return to Washington.

You find us on your return in a crisis of great difficulty. An embargo had, by the course of events, become the only peaceable card we had to play. Should neither peace, nor a revocation of the decrees and orders in Europe take place, the day cannot be distant when that will cease to be preferable to open hostility. Nothing just or temperate has been omitted on our part, to retard or to avoid this unprofitable alternative. Our situation will be the more singular, as we may have to choose between two enemies, who have both furnished cause of war. With one of them we could never come into contact; with the other great injuries may be mutually inflicted and received. Let us still hope to avoid, while we prepare to meet them.

Hoping you will find our cloudless skies and benign climate more favorable to your health than those of Europe, I pray you to accept my friendly salutations, and assurances of great esteem and consideration.

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE

(JAMES MADISON).

MONTICELLO, May 31, 1808.

DEAR SIR,-I return you all the papers received from you by yesterday's mail, except Mr. Burnley's, which I shall send by the Secretary of War. Although all the appointments below field-officers are made, it is possible some may decline, and open a way for new competition. I have observed that Turreau's letters have for some time past changed their style unfavorably. I believe this is the first occasion he has had to complain of French deserters being enlisted by us, and if so, the tone of his application is improper. The answer to him, however, is obvious as to our laws and instructions, and the discharge, not delivery, of the men, for which purpose I presume you will write a line to the Secretary of War. Woodward's scruples are perplexing. And they are unfounded because, on his own principle, if a law requires an oath to be administered, and does not say by whom, he admits it may be any judge; if, therefore, it names a person no longer in existence, it is as if it named nobody. On this construction all the territories have practised, and all the authorities of the

national government, even the Legislature. It was wrong on a second ground; no judge ever refusing to administer an oath in any useful case, although he may not consider it as strictly judicial. If it may be valid or useful, he administers "ut valeat quantum valer potest." But what is to be done? Would it not be well for you to send the case to the Attorney General, and get him to enclose his opinion to Governor Hull, who will use it with Judge Witherall, or some territorial judge or justice?

With the quarrel of Judge Vandeberg and his bar we cannot intermeddle. Mercer's querulous letter is an unreasonable one. How could his offer of service be acted on, but by putting it in the hands of those who were to act on all others?

I shall to-day direct the post-rider not to continue his route to this place after to-day, and to take your orders as to the time you would wish him to continue coming to you. I salute you with affectionate. esteem and respect.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

(JACOB CROWNINSHIELD).

WASHINGTON, June 15, 1808.

SIR, I have considered the letter of the director of the mint, stating the ease with which the errors of Commodore Truxton's medal may be corrected on the medal itself, and the unpracticability of doing it on the die. In my former letter to you on this subject,

I observed that to make a new die would be a serious thing, requiring consideration. In fact, the first die having been made by authority of the Legislature, the medal struck, accepted, and acquiesced in for so many years, the powers given by that law are executed and at an end, and a second law would be requisite to make a second die or medal. But I presume it will be quite as agreeable to Commodore Truxton to have his medal corrected in one way as another, if done equally well, and it certainly may be as well or better done by the graver, and with more delicate traits. I remember it was the opinion of Doctor Franklin that where only one or a few medals were to be made, it was better to have them engraved.

The medal being corrected, the die becomes immaterial. That has never been delivered to the party, the medal itself being the only thing voted to him. I say this on certain grounds, because I think this and Preble's are the only medals given by the United States which have not been made under my immediate direction. The dies of all those given by the old Congress, and made at Paris, remain to this day deposited with our bankers at Paris. That of General Lee, made in Philadelphia, was retained in the mint. I mention this not as of consequence whether the die be given or retained, but to show that there can be no claim of the party to it, or consequently to its correction. I think, therefore, the medal itself should be corrected by Mr. Reich; that this is as

far as we can stretch our authority, and I hope it will be satisfactory to the Commodore. I salute you with constant affection and respect.

TO SHELTON GILLIAM, ESQ.

WASHINGTON, June 19, 1808.

SIR,-Your favor of the 4th was received on my return to this place, and the proposition of your correspondent on the subject of fortification was referred to the Secretary of War, where office and qualifications make him the proper judge of it. I enclose you his answer. The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public moneys. It is not enough that an individual and an unknown one says and even thinks he has made a discovery of the magnitude announced on this occasion. Not only explanation, but the actual experiment must be required before we can cease to doubt whether the inventor is not deceived by some false or imperfect view of his subject. Still your patriotic attention to bring such a proposition under our notice, that it might be applied to the public good, if susceptible of it, is praiseworthy, and I return you thanks for it with the assurances of my esteem and respect.