The Price of Peace

John Jay: My dear Sally, I was this evening favored with yours of the 14th. It is now between 8 and 9 o'clock, and I have just returned from court. I expect, my dear Sally, to see you sooner than we expected. There is a serious determination to send me to England, if possible, to revert a war. This is a letter written by John Jay in 1794 to his wife.[1]

Narrator: In 1793, the Neutrality Crisis and Genet Affair led the United States to the brink of war. The United States passed the Neutrality Act in 1794 in an attempt to avoid the hostilities in Europe. But, despite their efforts, Britain continued to antagonize American ships. What could the United States do? The British operated the largest navy in the world.

Washington knew they held all the cards. His goal was to keep the United States out of the war. But if he didn't stand up to Britain The American economy would collapse.

John Jay: Nothing can be more distant from every wish on my own account. I feel the impulse of duty strongly. If the nomination should take place, it will be in the course of a few days, and then it will appear in the papers. In the meantime, say nothing on the subject.

Narrator: Jay was right about one thing. The news of his appointment would soon hit the papers. And within months, John Jay would become the most hated man in America. Leading the charge was a man named Benjamin Franklin Bache. Bache was one of Washington's most vocal critics.

And he was quick to use the controversy surrounding Jay to accuse Washington of treason, tyranny, even murder. Freedom of speech is a hallowed right in the history of the United States. But how was a president supposed Post to respond to such vicious attacks against his very character, was a president meant to justify his unpopular decisions to the public and how could he protect those that he appointed?

John Jay: My dear, dear Sally, if it should please God to make me instrumental to the continuance of peace, we shall both have reason to rejoice.

Narrator: This is inventing the presidency. Episode 6 The Price of Peace

By 1795, the reign of terror in France was winding down, but the war between Britain and France raged on. Still committed to the mission of neutrality, Washington wished to stay the course to avoid war with either Britain or France. On paper, this seemed easy. Americans would continue to trade with both nations and would avoid provoking either one.

But none of this seemed to matter to Great Britain. In fact, to some Americans, it seemed as though Great Britain was still holding a grudge from the Revolution. For one, they were seizing American ships bound for France. And while Britain flooded American markets with cheap goods from across the British Empire, they refused to allow American merchant ships into British ports without subjecting them to heavy regulations and tariffs.

Great Britain claimed that American ships carried foodstuffs that would feed their enemies. Thus, the cargo could be taken as contraband. More controversially, They claimed that American sailors who had once been British citizens were still subjects of the Crown and thus could be forcibly recruited into the British Navy.

Impressment, as this practice was called, was a persistent threat to American vessels, and it would eventually become one of the grievances that led to the War of 1812. Many of these practices were a direct violation of the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which had ended the Revolution. But what could the United States do?

Washington knew that the United States was not ready to face Great Britain as an enemy again. The British had the largest and most powerful navy in the world. Washington did not want to end trade with France entirely, nor did he want to provoke Great Britain any further, a few years later, when reflecting back upon the neutrality crisis.

George Washington: Every true friend to this country must see and feel that the policy of it is not to embroil ourselves with any nation whatsoever, but to avoid their disputes and their politics. And if they will harass one another, To avail ourselves of the neutral conduct we have adopted. Twenty years peace with such an increase of population and resources as we have right to expect will in all probability enable us in a just cause to bid defiance to any power on earth. Why then should we prematurely embark in hostilities, the issue of which is never certain, always expensive and beneficial to a few only? [2]

Narrator: Washington was not opposed to a just war, but he wanted to avoid an expensive conflict between other powers, especially when he knew that the U. S. military and economy would not be able to survive it.

Neutrality, he remained certain, was the best policy. Washington needed to smooth things over with Britain. Lingering grievances from the revolution on both sides prevented the nations from moving forward peacefully. Washington originally wanted Alexander Hamilton to represent the United States, but Hamilton stepped back, suggesting that Washington instead go with his second choice, John Jay.

Jay was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and a Federalist supporter. He was also a close political ally of Alexander Hamilton and George Washington. But that meant that those on the other side of the aisle, that is, those allied with Jefferson and his Democratic Republicans, were up in arms. When Washington chose Jay as his envoy, the reaction was swift and sharp.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: It appears to be an object with the executive to prop a tottering minority. A minority whose views are at best but questionable, who would from appearances rather submit to a monarch or dissolve the union, than the present majority should dictate the measures of our government. Can any good reason be assigned why Jay was nominated as an envoy? Unless for the purpose of defeating the intention of the majority of the legislature. [3]

Narrator: This is an excerpt from the Aurora General Advertiser, a Philadelphia newspaper run by Benjamin Franklin Bache, sometimes called Lightning Rod, Jr. Bache had earned himself a reputation as a spitfire printer with a grudge to bear.

He began his newspaper, the Philadelphia General Advertiser, in 1791, later renaming it the Aurora. Bache was not just any printer, however. He had a rather famous family connection. Here is Joseph Adelman, professor of history at Framingham State University.

Joseph Adelman: So, Benjamin Franklin Bache has an unusual path into the printing trade.

He was born in 1769. His mother was Sally Franklin Bache, so Benjamin Franklin's daughter. And during the Revolutionary War, Franklin, when he goes to France, takes two of his grandsons, the other one being William Temple Franklin, but takes Temple Franklin and Benny Bache with him to Paris when he's negotiating and representing United States interests at the court of Versailles.

So, Bache actually learns how to print on Franklin's press at the time. Franklin, when he's in France, sets up in a village just outside Paris, has a printing press constructed that he uses for a variety of purposes, one of which is to train his grandson how to print. So, he learns directly from Franklin.

They come back in 1785. Franklin to great acclaim as an elder statesman. Bache then goes to the college that is today the University of Pennsylvania and earns a degree. So, he's college educated, which is very unusual for a newspaper printer and editor in this time period. So, he starts the Aurora in 1790 as an ordinary run of the mill newspaper.

He is set up in business by his grandfather. Franklin dies in 1790, so he's in part of a quest to his grandson to have the materials to print. Those types and the press and the shop are all given to Benny Bache. And he starts with a normal, ordinary Undistinguished newspaper, except that he carries a very famous name in Philadelphia, for a couple of years.

And then it's really the French Revolution that pushes him as a supporter of France and the Republican ideals of France into opposition to the Washington administration, which takes a much more neutral line. He is very strongly pro-French at a time when the administration is declaring neutrality in the wars between Britain and France, and is trying to avoid appearing partisan on either side of what's going on between those two European nations.

Narrator: While there were still no formal political parties at this time, strong partisan divisions were beginning to crystallize around the controversial appointment of John Jay. Bache's main rival was the Gazette of the United States, run by a man named John Fenno. The Gazette was a Federalist paper and often defended Washington's decisions.

How hot did this rivalry run? Well, in 1797, Fenno and Bache reportedly got into a fistfight on the streets of Philadelphia. Bache is even said to have caned Fenno over the head. Bache is a divisive figure historically, even today. Some saw his zealous attacks in the press as a sincere expression of his Republican beliefs.

Others believe he had more personal motivations. That perhaps he was bitter about Washington spurning his father for a valuable federal appointment. Regardless, Bache seemed to believe strongly that the press was a vehicle through which the people could hold their elected officials to task. His methods for doing so, however, could be a little extreme at times.

From 1790 to 1797, Bache would publish some of the most vicious and outlandish attacks on Washington and his administration. He published conspiracies that Washington was embezzling money from the Treasury.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: As it is so easy a thing for the President to put his hand into the public treasury, it is a little extraordinary that a union of the purses of citizens should be called for to prosecute certain printers among us. [4]

Narrator: And he lashed out against Washington's levees and drawing rooms.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: The editor of the Gazette of the United States has announced in his paper that the President's levy of Tuesday last was numerously attended. Well done, thou good and faithful servant. It was certainly necessary to let the public know that the just resentment of an injured and deeply insulted people had not yet reached the purview of St. Washington's. And manifested itself by so cruel an expression of utter contempt for the mock pageantry of monarchy as absence from a president's levy. [5]

Narrator: Nothing was off limits for Bache. He even accused Washington of murdering the French officer Jumonville in 1754. An accusation that is still debated today.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: The accusation in question is no less than of having, while commanding a party of American troops, fired on a flag of truce, killed the officer in the act of reading the summons under the sanction of such a flag, and of having signed a capitulation in which the killing of that officer and his men was acknowledged as an act of assassination. [6]

Narrator: When Bache failed to find evidence to support his outlandish claims, He was comfortable with creating his own. He even tried to sell forged letters supposedly written by Washington. These fake letters declared Washington's love and support for the British monarchy.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: Ambition and military arrogance are strong features in the private letters in question. The desire of an unlimited control over the army and of being the Magnus Apollo of his country show themselves, for his devotion to the monarch of a Great Britain is now known to almost every citizen in the United States.[7]

Narrator: Here's one supposed quote from the letters alleged to have been written by Washington himself.

George Washington: I love my king. You know I do. A soldier, a good man, cannot but love him.[8]

Narrator: Few seem to have taken these letters seriously. But the continued attacks on Washington's administration and character did begin to bother Washington. Writing to his dear friend and former secretary, David Humphreys, in 1796, Washington remarked:

George Washington: The Gazettes will give you a pretty good idea of the state of politics and parties in this country, and will show you at the same time (if Bache's Aurora) is among them, in what manner I am attacked for persevering steadily in measures which, to me, appear necessary to preserve us in a state of tranquility.

But these attacks, unjust and as unpleasant as they are, will occasion no change in my conduct, nor will they produce any other effect in my mind than to increase the solicitude. Which, long since, has taken fast hold of my breast, to enjoy in the shades of retirement. Malignity, therefore, may dart its shafts, but no earthly power can deprive me of the consolation of knowing that I have not, in the whole course of my administration, committed an intentional error.[9]

Narrator: Washington chose not to engage directly with the press. In some respects, this, too, earned him censure. After all, Was he so distant from the people as not to respond directly to their complaints? In other ways, it spared him the worst of the criticism. When Bache realized that Washington would not respond directly, he began taking his disagreements directly to Washington.

Here is Lindsay Chervinsky, presidential historian and author of The Cabinet.

Lindsay Chervinsky: There were a series of opposition newspapers in Philadelphia, and Washington loved newspapers. He subscribed to tons of them, and anytime there was a new one, he pretty much subscribed to it. But when they became too critical, then he would cancel his subscription.

And the Aurora was an example of a particularly critical newspaper in Philadelphia. After Washington canceled his subscription, the editors continued to deliver three copies of the Aurora every day to the president's house just to make him mad. And boy, did it work. He complained about this newspaper. He complained about this trick in the cabinet.

He said they were just doing it to be obedient and to get under his skin, and it worked quite effectively.

Narrator: Bache became creative with his mockery. In 1795, he sent Washington an invitation to

Benjamin Franklin Bache: Celebrate the late victories of the French Republic.

Narrator: Washington wrote on the bottom of the letter,

George Washington: Intended as an insult, it is presumed.[10]

Narrator: Here is Joseph Adelman again.

Joseph Adelman: One of the key factors for why newspapers are critical of Washington is that the question of what the job of the press is actually up for debate in the 1790s and Washington, who disdains the idea of parties and so never claims for himself the label of a party, but his side tends to be the Federalists, the Federalists tend to see the press as a party.

Less legitimate or having a smaller and quieter role in a republic than do the Jeffersonian Democratic Republicans. So there develops this imbalance where papers that otherwise support the Federalists tend to have this view that it's uncouth to get into the weeds of political debates. So, the first and really important thing to understand about these political leanings, ideologies in the 1790s is that they're very fluid and not yet well defined, and they, as participants, are beginning to turn into something like political parties, but they're not like anything new that we would recognize today. And it's important to understand that when we're talking about this, we're talking about tendencies and leaning one way or the other. The Jeffersonians, as their name suggests, tend to ally with Thomas Jefferson, who in the Washington administration is the first secretary of state, who begins in the 1790s to develop an opposition to a set of Washington administration policies from inside the administration largely centering around Hamilton's economic plans. And opposition to those ideas about how to run the economy and how to run the United States government.

Narrator: These tensions did not settle as Jay was sent to Britain. Jay carried with him instructions guided by Hamilton and a cohort of Federalist Senators.

Remember that the Constitution gives the President the power to enter treaties with foreign nations so long as he had the advice and consent of the Senate. But in the 1790s There were still debates about what that meant. After all, in 1790, Washington had visited the Senate for their advice and consent regarding instructions for envoys sent to Native American nations, and that had proven disastrous.

Recall what Lindsay Chervinsky told us in Episode 3.

Lindsay Chervinsky: Washington stood up and he yelled, this defeats every purpose of my being here, except louder and bigger and scarier, because this was like the most famous man in the world. And here he was screaming at you in person. And he apparently was extraordinarily intimidating when he was mad.

Narrator: Many senators opposed to Jay's selection were feeding Intel directly to Bache and other critics. To ask the Senate to weigh in on the specific instructions given to Jay would mean more prolonged debates and possibly a delay that could worsen tensions with Britain. So, Hamilton along with Senators King, Cabot, and Ellsworth, decided that Washington did not need to return to the Senate. The Senate had approved the Envoy after much debate, and they would be required to approve any treaty that would eventually result from the mission. What did it matter if they did not consent to the specific instructions given to Jay?

This decision, as small as it might seem, was an important precedent for the presidency. It empowered the president to make decisions regarding foreign envoys and streamline the process by which foreign diplomats could be sent. But, it would prove wildly unpopular. For one Many believe that allowing a member of the Supreme Court to be appointed to an executive post was a conflict of interest.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: That to permit judges of the Supreme Court to hold at the same time other offices emanating from the executive is destructive of their independence, and tending to expose them to the influence of the executive, is mischievous and impolitic. [11]

Narrator: Others accused Washington of using executive appointments to subvert the will of the legislature.

Benjamin Franklin Bache: It has now become a question whether Congress is necessary or of any utility to this country. To take a view of the executive conduct, it would seem as if the president considered a legislative body a dead weight upon the government and was resolved to obstruct its operations by diplomatic appointments.[12]

Narrator: Hamilton's instructions to Jay gave him several goals for the treaty. One, the British would surrender their forts in the Northwest. At this time, the Northwest War that incited Sinclair's defeat was still raging, and the British had been supplying the Native Americans with weapons.

At the same time, the United States wanted concessions at sea. Great Britain was to stop impressing American sailors, and they demanded that Britain reopen its ports in the West Indies to American trade. Other issues included redefining the border with Canada, and compensating Southern enslavers for the enslaved people who had joined the British side during the war.

But Washington and Hamilton likely knew that Jay would not be able to negotiate. Great Britain was a more powerful nation, with a stronger military and colonies across the world. The United States had no leverage to convince them to agree to these terms. The United States could not threaten a military response.

They knew that they might not survive another war with Britain. And trade sanctions would likely hurt the United States more than it would hurt Great Britain. Sure, some of the British actions could be conceived as a violation of the Treaty of 1783, but who would stop them?

For four months, Washington heard almost nothing about the treaty. Letters from Jay in England informed Washington that negotiations were underway. But then in November, Jay wrote Washington.

John Jay: My dear sir, my task is done. This letter goes by the packet and the treaty with it. Some parts of it require elucidation to common readers.

I have not the time for comments. Lord Granville is anxious to dismiss the packet. I therefore write in haste. If this treaty fails, I despair of another.[13]

Narrator: Jay had managed to secure some victories for the United States. The British agreed to give up their ports if Americans promised to settle debts left unresolved after the Revolution.

The British would give the United States most favored nation status when trading. However, Jay had to yield some mighty concessions to the British. For one, the British would allow American merchant ships into the West Indies, but only if they weighed less than 70 tons. For another, the British refused to provide compensation for slavery, a result that caused protests in the American South.

And lastly, Jay could not prevent Great Britain from continuing to impress American sailors. It took months for the treaty to arrive in the United States. At first, the contents of the treaty were kept confidential until the Senate had a chance to debate and approve it. While divisions had begun to emerge during the Genet Affair and Whiskey Rebellion, some historians point to the Jay Treaty as the event that first solidified these partisan lines in the legislature.

The Federalist were for the treaty. The Democratic Republicans against it. After considerable debate, the Senate ratified the treaty on June 24th, 1795. It was a tight battle, passing 20 to 10. The ratification only passed on the condition that the trade restrictions in the West Indies be revoked. At this point, the No one outside the Senate had seen the treaty.

The public was aware that a treaty was being discussed, but it was treated as a classified document. But that wouldn't stop Benny Bache. On June 29, 1795, Bache published an unauthorized abridgment of the Jay Treaty for all to see.[14]  A concerned citizen, who was quickly revealed to be Senator Stevens Thompson Mason of Virginia, had leaked the document to Bache.

Bache was said to have carried the papers himself all the way to Boston to distribute it as widely as he could among Americans. By July 1st, the Aurora was advertising that copies of the treaty could be bought from their offices and all major booksellers in Philadelphia. The speed by which Bache distributed the news was extraordinary, especially considering the time it typically took for news to spread.

Here is Joseph Adelman again.

Joseph Adelman: What they would do is you would have one sheet of paper folded in half to make a four-page newspaper. And then for each of those pages, you would have to set types, sometimes 10, 000 characters. This is an era when you had to pull each letter out of a drawer and set it individually, upside down and backwards.

Because it gets reversed when you imprint it on the paper into a straight line and then set into the columns and eventually into the whole page. And so that process can take a very long time. There's a time lag in terms of the time it takes to get the news from one place to another, but the latest news, so that might be for a Philadelphia newspaper, just a few days old for New York.

It might be a week and a half, two weeks old for Williamsburg. It might be two weeks for Charleston, South Carolina, right? It depends on the most recent news. The freshest advices, as they say, might have a different time lag based on where it's coming from. The outcry against the treaty was equally swift.

Narrator: Many Americans saw the treaty as giving great Britain too many concessions. Some believed that it was an act of betrayal against the United States, French allies. Washington felt the sting of criticism keenly. Just a few weeks after the treaty was published, he wrote to Alexander Hamilton.

George Washington: At present, the cry against the treaty is like that against a mad dog. And everyone, in a matter, seems engaged in running it down.

Narrator: Washington believed that the controversy was largely due to bad faith interpretations. He believed that the initial fervor would die down. Then people would understand how beneficial it would be for the United States.

George Washington: It has received the most tortured interpretation and the writings against it are pregnant of the most abominable misrepresentations. Yet there are to be found, so far as my information extends, many well-disposed men who conceive that in the settlement of old disputes, a proper regard to reciprocal justice does not appear in the treaty.[15]

Narrator: The point of the treaty, according to Washington, was not to settle old grudges or to punish Great Britain, but to establish a peaceful relationship moving forward.

The only way to find that peace, according to Washington, was through a stringent policy of neutrality. Washington did have his supporters. While Bache was publishing critiques of the Jay Treaty, Fenno was singing its praises.

John Fenno: It is not to be expected that the treaty with England would escape censure. The spirit of party has too long infected our public affairs not to show itself on this occasion. To those who are animated by a pure and exclusive love of our country, truth will be acceptable.[16] 

Narrator: While the Senate's vote ratified the treaty, the House needed to approve the funds to enact it. Some in the House hoped to quash funding in the hopes of killing the treaty altogether.

At one point, the vote was A tie: 49 votes for and 49 votes against. The Speaker of the House at that time was a man named Frederick Muhlenberg. He was known to have Democratic Republican sympathies, so he was expected to vote against the treaty. Yet his tie breaking vote for the treaty sealed the deal.

Protests immediately broke out across the country. Bache and other critics of Washington ramped up their attacks. The opposition to the treaty was so strongly felt that it even boiled into violence. Just a few weeks after the House bill passed, Muhlenberg would be stabbed by his own brother in law, supposedly because of his support for the treaty.

So why did Washington sign the Jay Treaty, knowing it was so unpopular? Here is Washington's justification in his own words.

George Washington: Few, I believe, acquainted with the proceedings in the House of Representatives, conceived that the real question was whether the treaty with Great Britain was a good or a bad one, but whether there should be a treaty at all without the concurrences of that House.

On this ground, therefore, it was resolved to attempt at every hazard to render the treaty making power a nullity without their consent. Such as could not fail to reflect, disgrace upon the understanding and wisdom of those who framed, but on those also who adopted the Constitution, the inconsistency of giving a power to the President and Senate to make treaties.[17]

Narrator: Although Washington had strong feelings about the ways in which he was treated by the press, he did not publicly defend his actions. While Washington would occasionally circulate speeches to the nation in newspapers. He may have thought it out of line to respond to the attacks directly.

Joseph Adelman: Washington was keenly aware of cultivating a particular kind of public image and was mostly convinced of his own virtue in acting in the public interest. And so, he did not take criticism lightly at all. There are then other Federalist papers, newspapers in the 1790s, but that is not a place where the Federalists are focused, they are in government and so focused on running the government, and the press is really good at being oppositional, at checking power, at serving as a bulwark of liberty, to use the phrase that A lot of people in the 1780s, 1790s used, and that phrase shows up in a lot of the state constitutions, that freedom of the press is important as a bulwark of liberty.

It's a defense against tyranny. Washington and his administration and the Federalists thought they were doing the public work and so critique of them was actually undermining government, not preventing tyranny. So, it really takes a long time for Federalists to get their act together, to be blunt, in terms of engaging in a public policy debate through newspapers.

Narrator: Thus, most of Washington's reactions to the press are found not in the newspapers, but in private letters and papers to family, friends, and advisors. Some are found in even more private places. In 1797, James Monroe published A view of the conduct of the executive in the foreign affairs of the United States, a direct attack on Washington's decisions regarding the Genet Affair, Jay Treaty, and French Republic. Who was Monroe's publisher? None other than Benjamin Franklin Bache himself. Monroe delivered one of the most scathing attacks on Washington's presidency. And Washington was not pleased.

Unlike other men of the era, Washington did not often write in the margins of his books. But he made a special exception for Monroe's book. In the margins, Washington scribbled a defense of his actions. It is one of the most passionate writings that survived from Washington. And, it gives us insight into Washington's thought process during the decisions leading up to the treaty. For example, when Monroe wrote,

James Monroe: In the month of May, 1794, I was invited by the President of the United States, through the Secretary of State, to accept the office of Minister of Plenipotentiary to the French Republic. [18]

Narrator: Washington responded

George Washington: after several attempts had failed to obtain a more eligible character.

Narrator: And when Monroe said that

James Monroe: Mr. John Jay was nominated to great Britain, which nomination to I oppose because I was of the opinion in the then state of European affairs. It would be made by the enemies of the two republics, the means of embroiling us with France, the other party to the European war and because I thought it was unconstitutional to appoint a member of the judiciary into an executive office.

Narrator: Washington wrote:

George Washington: Did the then situation of our affairs admit of any other alternative than negotiation or war? Was there an abler man to be found to conduct the former, or one more esteemed?

Narrator: And when Monroe criticized the decision to keep the treaty secret,

James Monroe: to express sentiments in private, which it was wished should not become public, appeared to me a strange doctrine to be avowed by the administration of a free people, especially as it was known that the sentiments thus expressed were in harmony with those Of the people, and with those publicly and formally expressed by the representatives of the people.

Narrator: Washington defended the decision.

George Washington: The great and primary object of the administration was to preserve the U. S. in peace by pursuing a conduct strictly neutral. It was not essential then, knowing beforehand, with what eclair the reception was to be. To make a parade of sentiments, however strong, might be felt and however pleasing to one nation, which might create unpleasant feelings in other nations with whom we were also at peace and wished to remain so.[19]

Narrator: Despite its overwhelming unpopularity, the Jay Treaty did successfully keep the United States out of the war between Britain and France. Tensions did not abate entirely. The British practice of impressing American sailors into their navy would eventually contribute to the outbreak of the War of 1812.

But the Jay Treaty had some surprisingly long-lasting benefits as well. For example, to this day, members of a native nation in Canada or the United States can pass the border freely thanks to the Jay Treaty. Washington's decision to keep the press at arm's length also likely helped him maintain his reputation.

The Jay Treaty was widely disliked, and Washington was no longer immune to criticism. At the same time, his public composure was important in maintaining his overall popularity.

Lindsay Chervinsky: It didn't really harm Washington's presidency all that much because His stature was still so unparalleled that even with this criticism, he still was super famous and super beloved.

And so many people, including Jefferson and Madison, wanted him to serve a third term. He could have been elected to a third term easily, maybe not unanimously, but darn near close. However, what I did to Washington was incredibly painful. He had a very thin skin. He really did not like criticism, did not take it very well.

And this was the first time that he had experienced a sustained amount of criticism from a broad swath of the American people. And he hated it. It infuriated him because he knew it was intentional.

Narrator: Bache. would continue his pointed editorials on Washington until Washington left office in 1797. He would then continue to criticize President John Adams.

Bache's commentary was so inflammatory that he would be eventually charged under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. He died. of Yellow Fever before ever making it to trial. That year, his rival, John Fenno, died of the same disease.

The Jay Treaty signaled an important moment for Washington's presidency. He had survived the court of popular opinion. The Jay Treaty was an unpopular decision, but a necessary one. It sustained peace with Great Britain for at least another 15 years. American neutrality. would become one of the defining policies of Washington's administration.

As Washington would write in 1798,

George Washington: Peace with all the world is my sincere wish. I am sure it is our true policy, and I'm persuaded it is the ardent desire of the government.[20]

Narrator: Next time on Inventing the Presidency, one woman dares to defy the president. When the enslaved maid Ona Judge left the presidential mansion, a national manhunt is launched that forces Washington to confront once again the question of slavery in the United States.

Ramin Ganeshram: Washington is very rigorous in pursuing. He hires agents to find her. He has a flurry of letter writing campaigns, he takes out an ad. She very specifically called out the fact that they did not allow her to learn to read. She's very clear about that. That's among, you know, her legitimate complaints against these people is that they withheld education.

Narrator: Inventing the Presidency is a production of the Mount Vernon Ladies Association and CD Squared Productions. This episode was written and directed by Dr. Anne Fertig. Audio production was done by Curt Dahl of CD Squared Productions. Production assistant was Jacob Cameron. Narration by Tom Plott.

Additional voice acting by Dan Shippey, Matt Mattingly, and James Ambuske. Additional fact checking was performed by Dr. Alexandra Montgomery. We would like to thank our contributing scholars, Dr. Lindsay Chervinsky and Dr. Joseph Adelman. To hear more great podcasts from Mount Vernon and the George Washington Presidential Library, visit George Washington podcast.com or go to www.mountvernon.org.

Notes

[1] “Jay to Mrs. Jay, Philadelphia, 15^th April, 1794,” The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 4 (1794-1826). G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1893, p. 4.

[2] “From George Washington to Charles Carroll of Carrollton, 1 May 1796,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-20-02-0073. [

[3] "Philadelphia, Monday, April 28." General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1057, April 28, 1794: [3]. 

[4] "Aurora. Surgo Ut Prosim. for the Aurora." Aurora General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1518, November 2, 1795: [2].

[5] "[Editor; Gazette; United States; President's; Tuesday; Saint Washington's]." Aurora General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1467, August 22, 1795: [3]. 

[6] “For the Aurora.” Aurora General Advertiser, (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 112, March 13, 1797: [2].

[7] "Aurora Surgo Ut Prosim. Letter XVI. to the Editor of the Aurora." Aurora General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1523, November 13, 1795: [2].

[8] Ibid.

[9] “From George Washington to David Humphreys, 12 June 1796,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-20-02-0190. 

[10] “To George Washington from Benjamin Franklin Bache et al., 11 April 1795,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-18-02-0027.

[11] Quoting Aaron Burr, For the General Advertiser." General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1054, April 24, 1794: [3].

[12] "Philadelphia, Wednesday, April 30." General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1059, April 30, 1794: [3].

[13] “Jay to Alexander Hamilton, London, 19^th November, 1794,” The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, pp. 135-136.

[14] "For the Aurora." Aurora General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 1421, June 29, 1795: [3].

[15] “To Alexander Hamilton from George Washington, 29 July 1795,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-18-02-0318.

[16] From the (New-York) Daily Advertiser." Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) VIII, no. 882, July 7, 1795: [2]. 

[17] “From George Washington to Charles Carroll of Carrollton, 1 May 1796,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-20-02-0073. [

[18] “Comments on Monroe’s A View of the Conduct of the Executive of the United States, March 1798,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/06-02-02-0146.

[19] Ibid.

[20] From George Washington to Jonathan Boucher, 15 August 1798,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/06-02-02-0422.