doors shut, when acting in a legislative capacity, I am unable to inform you, unless it is because they think there is too much speaking to the gallery in the other House, and business thereby retarded.

Nothing would give me more pleasure, than to serve any of the descendants of General Nelson, of whose merits, when living, no man could entertain a higher opinion than I did. At the same time I must confess, there are few persons of whom I have no personal knowledge, or good information, that I would take into

declaration of their opinion the Senate allowed the matter to rest, and it was never afterwards revived.

While the subject was thus solemnly treated by Congress, it caused much excitement throughout the country. It was discussed in the gazettes, but the advocates of titles found few supporters. By these it was affirmed, however, that titles were as harmless as they were necessary, and that the President, as representing the majesty of the people, might even be styled His Majesty without reasonable offence to republican ears. Others said that His Excellency was not a proper title, because it was applied to officers below him, particularly in the diplomatic department. In some of the newspapers the President was called "His Highness the President-General." The Senate was denominated Most Honorable, and the same epithet was applied to the members of that body. For instance, it was published, that the Most Honorable Rufus King, and the Most Honorable Philip Schuyler were appointed Senators. And when Mrs. Washington came to New York, she was accompanied by the “Lady of the Most Honorable Robert Morris." The Representatives, and even the secretaries of the executive departments, were favored with no higher title than Honorable. In the debates on the subject, Mr. Clymer said, that, "as soon as a man is selected for the public service, his fellow citizens with a liberal hand showered down titles upon him, either excellency or honorable; he would venture to affirm there were more Honorable Esquires in the United States than in all the world besides." There appears not to have been a single member of the House of Representatives in favor of titles. The habit of bestowing them gradually subsided. It would be ludicrous at the present day to affix the superlative epithet to a senator's name, and not less so to use the anticlimax Honorable Esquire, which prevailed during the revolution. General Washington was scrupulous to give every man his official appellation, but was opposed to all titles as marks of rank in a republican government. A person sent to him a manuscript treatise on heraldry, the publication of which was suppressed by his advice, as he thought its tendency would be hostile to the sentiments of the people, and unfavorable to liberty.

my family, where many qualifications are necessary to fit them for the duty of it; to wit, a good address, abilities above mediocrity, secrecy and prudence, attention and industry, good temper, and a capacity and disposition to write correctly and to do it obligingly.

Most clerkships, will, I presume, either by law or custom, be left to the appointment of their principals in office. Little expectation therefore could Mr. Nelson, or any other stranger, have from this source. This latter consideration, added to the desire I feel of serving the son of my old friend and acquaintance, has induced me at all hazards to offer Mr. Thomas Nelson, his son, a place in my family.

I shall not trouble you with legislative or any other accounts, which are detailed in the papers. I have sent you the journals of the Senate, as far as they have been published and handed to me. If the successor of Mr. Richards would get the Federal Gazette, published by Fenno, from this city, it would enable him to collect as much information of what is passing on the theatre of New York, as he could extract from all the other papers of the place (and they are very numerous), were he to go to the expense of them. My best wishes attend Mrs. Stuart and all the family; and I am, dear Sir, your affectionate friend and servant.

TO BUSHROD WASHINGTON.

DEAR BUSHROD,

New York, 27 July, 1789.

Among the first acts of my recommencing business, after lying six weeks on my right side, is that of writing to you this letter in acknowledgment of yours of the 1st instant. Not being fairly on my seat yet, or,

in other words, not being able to sit up without feeling some uneasiness, it must be short.

You cannot doubt my wishes to see you appointed to any office of honor or emolument in the new government, to the duties of which you are competent; but however deserving you may be of the one you have suggested, your standing at the bar would not justify my nomination of you as attorney to the federal District Court in preference to some of the oldest and most esteemed general court lawyers in your own State, who are desirous of this appointment. My political conduct in nominations, even if I were uninfluenced by principle, must be exceedingly circumspect and proof against just criticism; for the eyes of Argus are upon me, and no slip will pass unnoticed, that can be improved into a supposed partiality for friends or relations. I am, &c.*

* From Bushrod Washington's Letter. -"Having lately heard, that the appointment of the officers of the federal court will be vested in the judges, I take the liberty of asking your opinion, whether it would be worth my while to solicit the office of attorney in the federal court of this State, and for your advice about the most proper mode of making application. If this office has been thought of by others, my chance may be destroyed, not only by prior candidates, but by superior merit; and in that case it would be both prudent and honest in me to decline. My life will be devoted to the law; and if application to the study of a science to which I am wedded by inclination can render me deserving of this appointment, I shall hope that time will enable me to fill it with advantage to my country. If you think my application improper, or that it will be unavailing, I rely on that friendship, which I have so often experienced, to inform me of it, and the same principle will, I hope, plead for me, for having taken some share of your attention from other more important matters. Whatever steps you may advise, I will readily pursue." Alexandria, July 1st.

TO JAMES MADISON.

MY DEAR SIR,

New York, 9 August, 1789.

In consequence of the enclosed resolution, I had a conference with the committee therein named yesterday, when I expressed the sentiments, which you also have enclosed.

I was assured by the committee, that the only object the senate had in view was to be informed of the mode of communication, which would be most agreeable to the President, and that a perfect acquiescence would be yielded thereto. But I could plainly perceive, notwithstanding, that oral communication was the point they aimed at. Indeed, one of the gentlemen candidly declared, that a great object with him, in wishing this, was to effect a viva voce vote in that body. He added, however, that he was not without hopes of accomplishing this without. To this I replied, finding all three were opposed to the balloting system, that nothing would sooner induce me to relinquish my mode of nomination by written messages, than to accomplish this end. Thus the matter stands for my further consideration.

What do you think I had best do? I am willing to pursue that line of conduct, which shall appear to be most conducive to the public good, without regard to the indulgence of my inclination, which, I confess, and for other reasons in addition to those which are enumerated, although they are secondary, would not be gratified by personal nominations.*

* A motion had been made in the senate on the 5th of August, "That it is the opinion of the Senate, that their advice and consent to the appointment of officers should be given in the presence of the President." This motion was postponed till the next day, when it was ordered, C

VOL. X.

4

The period is now arrived, when the seat of the vacant judge in the western district is to be filled. Would Colonel Carrington, do you think, be pleased with this appointment? Or are you acquainted with any professional character of fitness for the office, south of New Jersey, that would accept it?

I have had some conversation with Mr. Jay respecting his views to office, which I will communicate to you at our first interview; and this, if perfectly convenient and agreeable to you, may be this afternoon, as I shall be at home, and expect no company. I am yours affectionately.

TO JAMES MADISON.

MY DEAR SIR,

Date uncertain (10 August ?), 1789.

My solicitude for drawing the first characters of the Union into the judiciary is such, that my cogitations

"That Mr. Izard, Mr. King, and Mr. Carroll be a committee to wait on the President of the United States, and confer with him on the mode of communication proper to be pursued between him and the Senate in the formation of treaties, and making appointments to offices." The committee accordingly waited on the President, and had the conference mentioned in the above letter. It does not appear, however, that the plan of communicating nominations orally was adopted in any instance, or that the President was ever present when they were considered by the Senate. See APPENDIX, No. V.

In regard to treaties, a practice was at first begun, which was not pursued. On the 21st of August, the following message was sent to the Senate. "The President of the United States will meet the Senate in the Senate chamber, at half past eleven o'clock to-morrow, to advise with them on the terms of the treaty to be negotiated with the southern Indians." He accordingly took his seat in the Senate, attended by General Knox, the secretary of war, for two days in succession, when the outlines of a treaty proposed by the secretary were discussed. But this practice, being found inconvenient, and subject to various objections, particularly in regard to treaties with foreign powers, was soon discontinued. - STORY's Commentaries, Vol. III. p. 371.