Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T04:20:36.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jefferson and the Law of Nations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Louis Martin Sears
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The embargo upon commerce which Congress at the suggestion of President Jefferson decreed in 1807 was more than an experiment in practical politics. It was the test on a magnificent scale of a theory of international law long maturing in the President's mind, and the fitting contribution of a new nation to a body of doctrine which owed its revival, if not its inception, to the need of curbing the international anarchy which accompanied the rise of modern states. The law of nations was a new development. Less than two centuries had passed since Grotius put forth the pioneer work De jure belli ac pacis (1625). The interval between the publication of Grotius' book and the issuance of the embargo decree was, in fact, the classical period in international law. The labors of Leibnitz, Wolff, Vattel, and Bynkershoek built up a system popular, not only with doctrinaires and philosophers, but even with enlightened despots in their more subjective moments. By the close of the eighteenth century, the law of nations had acquired as much prestige as it could ever hope to secure without the support of its own guns and navies. It was the highest political expression of an age which believed in the perfectability of human relations through sheer intellect. And if its dicta sometimes failed to govern the actions of courts and cabinets, its infringement was not a matter of indifference. Nations broke treaties, to be sure, but they did not call them “scraps of paper.”

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , August 1919 , pp. 379 - 399
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1919

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For an interesting study of Vattel, see Fenwick, Charles G., “The Authority of Vattel” in The American Political Science Review, Vol. VII (1913), pp. 395–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar An article by Balch, Thomas Willing in the Pennsylvania Law Review for 1916Google Scholar also treats of Jefferson's interest in the law of nations.

2 Among others he cites: The Writings of James Madison (Hunt, ed.), Vol. II, p. 43Google Scholar, Madison to Thomas Jefferson, March 16, 1784, “The tracts of Bynkershoek, which you mention;” The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal, ed., 1904–1905), Vol. IV, p. 29Google Scholar, Puffendorf; Vol. IV, p. 248, Bynkershoek; Vol. VI, p. 63, Adam Smith; also Montesquieu, Locke, Burke, De Lolme, Hume, Molloy, Beccaria, and Vattel.

3 For an epitome of the place of the theory of contract in American thought, see Sears, L. M., “The Puritan and his Anglican Allegiance” in Bibliotheca Sacra for Oct., 1917.Google Scholar

4 M. de Vattel (Carnegie Institution, 1916), Introduction by A. de Lapradelle, p. xviii: “Dans l'école du droit de la nature et des gens, à laquelle appartient Vattel, le contrat joue un grand rôle. De même qu'il est à la base de l'Etat, dans le droit public interne, sous le nom de pacte social, il est encore à la base du droit international public, sous le nom de traité. Par le pacte, l'Etat se forme. Par le traité, il s'assure les droits nécessaires à son développement.”

5 See Reeves, J. S., “The influence of the Law of Nature upon International Law in the United States,” etc., in American Journal of International Law, Vol. III (1909), p. 559.Google Scholar See also The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, p. 400.

6 M. de Vattel (Carnegie Institution, 1916), Introduction by A. de Lapradelle, p. xxiv: “Vattel, le premier, déclare que l'impartialité n'est pas obtenue par l'égalité des secours, mais par l'absence de secours. ‘Ne point donner de secours, quand on n'y est pas obligé; ne fournir librement ni troupes, ni armes, ni munitions, nirien de ce qui sert directement à la guerre … ne point donner de secours et non pas en donner également:’ telle est sa formule,” etc. See also ibid., p. xxxvi.

7 See Burlamaqui, J. J., The Principles of Natural Law (5th ed., Dublin, 1791), p. 164Google Scholar: “… let us observe that the natural state of nations, in respect to each other, is that of society and peace.” M. de Vattel (Carnegie Institution), Introduction by A. de Lapradelle, p. xxiii: “Machiavel donnait aux princes le conseil d'épouser les querelles les uns des autres, en vue de partager, avec le vainqueur, les dépouilles du vaincu. Diplomate de l'école de Jean-Jacques, Vattel, au contraire, les engage à rester spectateurs. Pour la première fois le nom de neutralité pénètre dans un traité de droit des gens.”

8 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, p. 485, Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, August 16, 1793.

9 Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 29.

10 Ibid., p. 248.

11 Ibid., Vol. VI, p. 63, Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, May 30, 1790.

12 Ibid., p. 72, Jefferson to John Garland Jefferson, June 11, 1790. For a comment on Beccaria, see ibid., Vol. I, p. 71.

13 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 252, March 18, 1792. See Vattel, 1. 3, p. 122.

14 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 252, March 18, 1792.

15 Ibid., p. 253.

16 Ibid., p. 254.

17 Ibid., p. 254.

18 Ibid., p. 254.

19 Ibid., p. 254.

20 Ibid., p. 254.

21 Ibid., p. 254, March 22, 1792.

22 For a recommendation of commercial retaliation on this account, see The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 210.

23 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 201, May 29, 1792, citing “Vattel, 1.4. s. 21,” and “Wolf, 1222.”

24 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 201, quoting “Vattel, 1. 4. s. 24” and s.25; “Wolf, s. 1229.”

25 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, pp. 201–202, May 29, 1792, quotes Bynkershoek “Quest. Jur. Pub. l. 1. c. 7.”

26 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 202, May 29, 1792.

27 Ibid., pp. 208–209, citing “Vattel, l.4. s. 51” and “Bynkershoek, l.2. c. 10.” See also Bynkershoek, l.1. c. 7.

28 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 211, Section 45.

29 Ibid., p. 213. He quotes here Lord Mansfield, “Dougl. 753,” and 376.

30 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 213. See also The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, pp. 84–85.

31 See in this connection American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 214, citing “Wolf, s. 229” and s. 1224, and “Grotius, l.3. c. 20, s. 22.”

32 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 206, May 29, 1792.

33 Ibid., p. 206, citing “Vattel, l. 4. c. 26.”

34 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 227, Anas Papers, 1792.

35 It had really been looming since 1787, even before the French Revolution began, and Jefferson had then predicted our eventual neutrality (see The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 114) and attempted to demonstrate its advantages to both belligerents.

36 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, p. 314, May 7,1793.

37 Ibid., pp. 314–315, May 7, 1793.

38 Ibid., p. 326, May 15, 1793. See also ibid., pp. 84–85; also American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, pp. 147, and 188, November 30, 1793.

39 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, pp. 386–387, Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, our Minister at Paris, June 13, 1793.

40 Ibid., Vol. VII, p. 416, Jefferson to James Monroe, June 28, 1793.

41 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, pp. 154–155, Jefferson to Genet, June 17, 1793, quoting “Vattel, l.3. s. 104.”

42 See The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, p. 96, for an early mention of this principle.

43 American State Papere, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, pp. 166–167, Jefferson to Genet, July 24, 1793. For the same idea, see ibid., p. 170, Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, August 16, 1793.

44 Ibid., p. 170, on neutrality. See also The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, pp. 302, 309, 387, 415.

45 Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 28, Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney, September 7, 1793. Also American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 239. Also Egerton, H. E., British Foreign Policy in Europe to the End of the 19th Century, pp. 374–375.Google Scholar Lord Grenville on his side relied on Vattel to prove England's right to this corn seizure, American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 241, July 5, 1793.

46 Ibid., p. 176, September 9, 1793. Also The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 271, 273, 289–290.

47 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 183, November 8, 1793.

48 Ibid., p. 176.

49 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 259, 271–273, 326–328, etc.

50 But see also ibid., p. 390.

51 Ibid., 1786, pp. 100–103. See also American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, pp. 104–105, report of Thomas Jefferson on the Mediterranean Trade, January 3, 1791. Also ibid., p. 134, March 7, 1792. Also The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 265, June 11, 1801.

52 The Resolution of Albemarle County should be remembered with the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence as one of a series of economic and political protests developing all along the western frontier from Pennsylvania to the Carolinas. Taken together these indicate a sectional self-consciousness which marked the west as united not only as against the Mother Country, but as against tide-water counties and the older east. Shut off from a European market, the west might contemplate with more serenity than commercial centers on the coast the workings of an embargo.

53 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. II, pp. 43–44.

54 The Writings of George Washington (Ford, ed.), Vol. XII, p. 414Google Scholar, note.

55 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VIII, pp. 147–148, Jefferson to Tenche Coxe, May 1, 1794.

56 Ibid., p. 150, Jefferson to George Washington, May 14, 1794.

57 Ibid., p. 293, Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney, May 29, 1797.

58 Ibid., p. 374, Jefferson to James Madison, February 22, 1798.

59 Ibid., Vol. IX, pp 65–66, Jefferson to Edmund Pendleton, April 22, 1799. For similar pessimism, see ibid., Vol. VIII, pp. 286–287, May 13, 1797; also ibid., Vol. IX, p. 95, January 18, 1800.

60 Ibid., p. 219, Jefferson to Dr. George Logan, March 21, 1801.

61 Ibid., p. 299, Jefferson to Robert R. Livingston, September 9, 1801.

62 Ibid., pp. 300–301.

63 Ibid., p. 300.

64 See Taylor, John, Curtius, A Defence of the Measures of the Administration of Thomas Jefferson, 1804, pp. 111–118.Google Scholar

65 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, p. 27, Jefferson to James Madison, Secretary of State, July 31, 1803.

66 Ibid., p. 67, Jefferson to James Monroe, January 8, 1804, and p. 77, Jefferson to James Madison, April 23, 1804.

67 Ibid., p. 67. He preferred England to France, though, after all, ibid., p. 263–264, May 4, 1806.

68 Ibid., p. 118, Jefferson to James Madison, November 18,1804.

69 Ibid., p. 188, December 3, 1805.

70 Ibid., pp. 247–248, Jefferson to Thomas Paine, March 25, 1806.

71 Ibid., p. 250, Jefferson to Alexander First, April 19, 1806.

72 Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 406–407, February 2, 1807. For an earlier statement on impressments, see American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I, p. 131, February 7, 1792.

73 The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X, p. 375, Jefferson to James Monroe, March 21, 1807.

74 Ibid., p. 381, Jefferson to James Bowdoin, April 2, 1807.

75 Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 410–419.

76 Ibid., Vol. X, pp. 466, 471.

77 Ibid., Vol. I, p. 427; ibid., Vol. X, pp. 433, 456, 458.

78 Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 421–422, states advantages of keeping shipping near home.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.