Both Jefferson and Madison lived to a great age, and many years after the bitter contests of the first quarter of a century of our country's history, each gave his explanation of the purpose of the famous Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Jefferson wrote in a letter to J. C. Breckenridge, December 11, 1821: At the time when the Republicans of our country were so much alarmed at the proceedings of the Federal ascendency in Congress, in the Executive and the Judiciary departments, it became a matter of serious consideration how head could be made against their enterprises on the Constitution. The leading Republicans in Congress found themselves of no use there, browbeaten as they were by a bold and overwhelming majority. They concluded to retire from that field, take a stand in their state legislatures, and endeavor there to arrest their [Federalists] progress. The Alien and Sedition Laws furnished the particular occasion. The sympathy between Virginia and Kentucky was more cordial and more intimately confidential than between any other two States of republican policy. Mr. Madison came into the Virginia legislature. I was then in the Vice-Presidency, and could not leave my station; but your father, Col. Nicholas, and myself happening to be together, the engaging the coöperation of Kentucky in an energetic protestation against the constitutionality of those laws became a subject of consultation. Those gentlemen pressed me strongly to sketch resolutions for that purpose, your father undertaking to introduce them into that legislature, with a solemn assurance, which I strictly required, that it should not be known from what quarter they came. I drew and delivered them to him, and in keeping their origin secret he fulfilled his pledge of honor. Ten years later (March 27, 1831) the aged Madison wrote to James Robertson: The veil which was originally over the draft of the resolutions offered in 1798 to the Virga Assembly having been long since removed, I may say in answer to your enquiries that it was 52. Washington's appeal to Patrick Henry, January 15, 1799 [205] [they were] penned by me. . . . With respect to the terms following the term "unconstitutional" — viz., "not law, but null, void and of no force or effect," which were stricken out of the 7th resolution, my memory cannot positively decide whether they were or were not in the original draft. ... On the presumption that they were in the draft as it went from me, I am confident they must have been regarded only as giving accumulated emphasis to the declaration that the alien and sedition acts had in the opinion of the Assembly violated the Constitution of the U.S., and not that the addition of them could annul the acts or sanction a resistance of them. The Resolution was expressly declaratory, and proceeding from the Legislature only, which was not even a party to the Constitution, could be declaratory of opinion only. 1 A few weeks after the publication of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, Washington, greatly disturbed over the attacks on the administration of his Federalist successor, John Adams, and alarmed by language of a state legislature which spoke of acts of Congress as "not law but altogether void and of no force," and "palpable infractions of the Constitution," wrote to ex-Governor Patrick Henry of Virginia, urging him to run for a seat in Congress or in his state legislature, where he could help rescue the country from the pending evil. Confidential Dear Sir Mount Vernon, 15 Jan. 1799 At the threshold of this letter, I ought to make an apology for its contents. . . . It would be a waste of time to bring to 1 The astute Madison saw at the time the inconsistency of protest by a State Legislature. He wrote to Jefferson, December 29, 1798: "Have you ever considered thoroughly the distinction between the power of the State and that of the Legislature, on questions relating to the federal pact? On the supposition that the former is clearly the ultimate Judge of infractions, it does not follow that the latter is the the view of a person of your observation & discernment, the endeavors of a certain party among us, to disquiet the Public mind with unfounded alarms; - to arraign every act of the Administration; - to set the People at varience with their Government; and to embarrass all its measures. Equally useless would it be, to predict what must be the inevitable consequences of such policy if it cannot be arrested. Unfortunately, and extremely do I regret it, the State of Virginia has taken the lead in this opposition.... It has been said, that a great mass of the Citizens of this State are well affected, notwithstanding, to the General Government and the Union;and I am willing to believe it—nay do believe it. . . . But at such a crisis as this, when everything dear & valuable to us is assailed; when this Party hang upon the Wheels of Government as a dead weight, opposing every measure that is calculated for defence & self preservation; abetting the nefarious views of another Nation [France], upon our rights; - when measures are systematically and pertenaciously pursued, which must eventually dissolve the Union or produce coercion — I say, when these things have become so obvious, ought characters who are best able to rescue their Country from the pending evils to remain at home? Rather, ought they not to come forward, and by their talents and influence stand in the breach wh. such conduct has made on the Peace and happiness of this country, and oppose the widening of it?... I come now, my good Sir, to the object of my letterwhich is to express a hope, and an earnest wish, that you wd. come forward at the ensuing Elections (if not for Congress, which you may think would take you too long from home) as a Candidate for representative in the General Assembly of this Commonwealth.1 . . . legitimate organ, especially as a Convention was the organ by which the compact was made."- Works, Vol. VI, p. 328, note. 1 Henry took Washington's advice and was elected in the spring of 1799 to the Virginia Assembly; but he died (June 6, 1799) before taking his seat. He had previously declined the offices of Secretary of State (1795), Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (1795), Governor of Virginia (1796), and Minister to France (1799). 53. The dis- If I have erroneously supposed that your sentiments on these subjects are in unison with mine; or if I have assumed a liberty which the occasion does not warrant, I must conclude as I began, with praying that my motives may be received as an apology; and that my fear, that the tranquillity of the Union, and of this State in particular, is hastening to an awful crisis, have extorted them from me. I am With great, and very sincere regard and respect, Patrick Henry Esq THE JEFFERSONIAN POLICIES The completion of the Constitution of the United States was unexpectedly celebrated by the first voyage of the American flag around the world. On September 23, 1787, Captains Gray and Kendrick sailed from Boston Harbor in the ships Columbia and Washington, and doubling Cape Horn, collected furs on the northwestern coast of America for the Chinese trade. Gray, in the Columbia, sailed to Canton, and continuing his westward journey around the globe, brought his cargo of tea into Boston Harbor to the sound of a rousing welcome on August 10, 1790.1 He started to repeat his profitable voyage in September, 1790, fortified by letters from Governor Hancock of Massachusetts and President Washington; and, while on the northwestern coast, discovered and sailed into the mouth of the broad river which bears his good ship's name. The discovery of the Columbia River established the earliest and best claim of the United States to the great Oregon region. The following account is from the log book of the Columbia: 1 A charming narrative of the voyages of the Columbia, illustrated by valuable drawings, was published by the Reverend E. G. Porter in the New England Magazine for June, 1892, the Oregon centennial year. May 7th 1792 Being within six miles of land, saw an entrance in the same, which had a very good appearance of a harbor.... Made sail on the ship; stood in for the shore. We soon saw from our mast-head a passage in between the sandbars. . . . At five p.m. came to in five fathoms water, sandy bottom with a safe harbor, well sheltered from the sea by long sand-bars and spits. Our latitude observed this day was 46° 58′ north. May 10th Fresh breezes and pleasant weather; many natives alongside. At noon all the canoes left us. May 11th .. At 4 a.m. saw the entrance of our desired port bearing east-south-east, distance six leagues. . . . At eight a.m. run in east-north-east between the breakers, having from five to seven fathoms of water. When we were over the bar, we found this to be a large river of fresh water, up which we steered. Many canoes came alongside. . . . At 1 p.m. the entrance between the bars bore west-south-west, distance ten miles; the north side of the river a half a mile distant from the ship; the south side of the same two and a half miles' distance; a village on the north side of the river, west by north, distance three quarters of a mile. Vast numbers of natives came alongside; people employed in pumping the salt water out of our water casks, in order to fill with fresh, while the ship floated in. . . . ... May 14th Fresh gales and cloudy; many natives alongside; at noon weighed and came to sail, standing up the river north-east by east; we found the channel very narrow. At four p.m. we had sailed upwards of twelve or fifteen miles, when the channel was so very narrow that it was almost impossible to keep in it, having from three to eighteen fathoms of water, sandy bottom. At half-past four the ship took ground, but she did not stay long before she came off, without any assistance. We backed her off stern foremost, into three fathoms. . . . The jolly-boat was sent to sound the channel out, but found it not navigable any farther up; so, of course, we must have taken the wrong channel. So ends, with rainy weather; many natives alongside... May 19th Fresh wind and clear weather. Early a number of canoes came alongside; seamen and tradesmen employed in |