ART. II.-Diplomatic Correspondence.

The Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States of America, from the signing of the definitive Treaty of Peace, 10th September, 1783, to the Adoption of the Constitution, March 4th, 1789, being the Letters of the Presidents of Congress, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, American Ministers at Foreign Courts, Foreign Ministers near Congress, and Reports of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs on various Letters and Communications, together with Letters from Individuals on Public Affairs. Published under the direction of the Secretary of State, from the original Manuscripts in the Department of State, conformably to an Act of Congress, approved May 5th, 1832. In seven volumes 8vo.

In our number for October, 1831, we reviewed the Diplomatic Correspondence of the Revolution,' the work of which that now under consideration is the Sequel. In that review we observed that, in obedience to the terms of the resolution of Congress of 1818, ordering the publication of various portions of the contents of the Archives of the old Congress, the Diplomatic Correspondence, selected for the press, terminated abruptly at the close of the war, in 1783. We expressed ourselves strongly in favor of the continuation of the work, down to the time of the adoption of the Constitution in 1789. We observed that a resolution had been reported to the House of Representatives at its preceding session, (that of 18301831,) authorizing the Secretary of State to continue the work down to that period, under the editorship of Mr. Sparks. The committee, that reported this resolution, recommended that the proposed work should be entrusted to the editorship of Mr. Sparks, in consequence of the extraordinary qualifications known to be possessed by that gentleman, for an undertaking of this kind, and the success with which he had performed the duty of an editor toward the Diplomatic Correspondence of the Revolution. He was known to have bestowed more attention upon the general subject, than any other individual living. In his laborious researches in the public offices of Great Britain and France, he had collected ample materials,

which enabled him to fill up numerous and important chasms, in the various parts of the Correspondence of our public agents, preserved in the Department of State; and of the liberality with which he was disposed to make use of these materials, for the advantage of the great national work confided to him, the volumes published under his editorship bore ample testimony. In addition to this, there seemed an obvious propriety in confiding the continuance and completion of a work to the judgment and discretion, which had been exercised in commencing and carrying it on. It was of importance enough to require a unity of plan and execution:

'servetur ad imum

Qualis ab incepto processerit, et sibi constet.'

The resolution alluded to, and which was reported at the first session of the twenty-first Congress, was thrust aside by the multitude of matters of more urgent interest, and failed to pass. In the following year, a clause was introduced into the general appropriation bill, providing a sum of money to 'enable the Secretary of State to cause to be printed a selection from the Diplomatic Correspondence between the peace of 1783 and the 4th of March, 1789, remaining unpublished in the department of State.' The office of Secretary of State was, at that time, filled by Mr. Edward Livingston. This distinguished gentleman was well aware of the reasons, which existed, for confiding to Mr. Sparks the care of the continuation of the work, of which he had edited the commencement, in a manner equally creditable to himself and acceptable to the public. Had it been in his power to do so, uninfluenced by considerations foreign to the merits of the question, as one of a character purely historical and literary, Mr. Livingston would have put the preparation of the proposed work into the same able hands. Unfortunately, the law making the appropriation, forbore to specify the name of the gentleman, who had so many claims to be selected as the editor. Reasons of State, if they may be dignified by that name, transformed the publication into a printer's job, and compelled the Secretary to dispose of it on the principles, which usually govern the dispensation of public patronage. It was necessary that the work should be printed at Washington. Fortunately, the Secretary of State was as well qualified for the general superintendence of such a selection, as any gentleman could possibly be, who

had not made that branch of our documentary history a particular study. He is understood to have directed himself the selection of the materials for a portion of the work, and probably gave to this task as much time, as could be spared from the other duties of his elevated and laborious station. It is, however, no disparagement of him to say, that this could be but inconsiderable. It is notorious to all persons conversant with the subject, that it is beyond the physical ability of the most laborious and industrious Secretary of State, personally to superintend the editing, so to call it, even of some of the voluminous documents, pertaining to matters of current legislation, and frequently required to be prepared at the department, by calls of the two houses of Congress. It is in our power to name documents of the highest present importance, consisting of papers relative to immediate subjects of legislation, and containing not the Diplomatic Correspondence of times long past, and now become matters of literary and historical curiosity, but that of our ministers at the present day, on topics of the most urgent interest, the publication of which has been delayed month after month, from the actual impossibility of finding time to make the requisite selection from the papers. In this state of things, there is plainly nothing invidious in the remark, that it was out of the question for Mr. Livingston, to give any great portion of his time to the editorship of the work before us. By whom the selection and preparation of the papers contained in it were actually made, we are not informed. We presume that some of the gentlemen in the department of State were employed for that purpose; and bestowed upon it the time and attention which could be spared from their other labors. We have not the slightest disposition to reflect unkindly on the manner, in which the duty was performed by them. We have no doubt they did all that could reasonably be expected, under the circumstances of the case. But no one, who has but walked through the rooms of an extensive public office,-who has seen a department of government, beset with the crowd of idlers and visiters, who throng it from curiosity,-harassed with the legion of office hunters, mousing about for holes where they can creep in, wearily trod by the long-suffering band of claimants, languishing with hopes deferred,-bustling to meet the urgency of Congressional calls,-perplexed with party troubles, cares, and intrigues, alternating from the gratified officiousness of

new incumbents, eager to signalize their ministry, to the overplied assiduity of the departing, anxious to save the credit of their administration,-we say no one, who has glanced at this scene, needs to be told that this is not the place where a literary labor is to be performed. There is no calmness or tranquillity in it. The air is hot and close. Hurry, and anxious expectation, and fear of change prevail. Pains-taking, laborious merit is a contemptible thing; plodding, conscientious research, a quality, to say the least, as far removed from the daily walks of life, as the fossil remains of lost animals, which professor Buckland has detected in rocks of slate and limestone, are from the living race of quadrupeds. With respect to the typographical execution of the work before us, it is greatly deficient in correctness. The punctuation is neglected, so as to produce continual confusion; and all the other imperfections incident to printing done like this, in a newspaper office, disfigure the pages.

Thus much we have said, not censoriously nor unkindly, but with a strict regard to truth and justice; and as all concerned in the labor or expense of the publication have been amply remunerated by the government, the usual considerations of tenderness in alluding to the defects of costly works, of course, fail. But with these qualifications, the Diplomatic Correspondence from 1783 to 1789, possesses its due share of the interest and value of that of the Revolution. It is, in fact, part and parcel of the same work. It records the continuance of the same negotiations, often by the same individuals. It covers a period of time less familiar in our political history, than that of the Revolution, and a larger portion of the seven volumes is new matter than of the twelve that preceded them. Many points in our history are illustrated, and as the former volumes showed, in the most convincing manner, the inadequacy of the Confederation, to carry on the diplomatic intercourse of the country, with the utmost desirable effort, in time of war, the present work establishes the same fact, and still more conclusively, of a time of peace. There is one illustration of this, so signal and instructive, that it has been thought worthy by the writer of the introduction to the work,-apparently Mr. Livingston,—to be quoted at length in that paper. We allude to the letter of the Duke of Dorset to the commissioners appointed by the Congress to negotiate treaties of amity and commerce, with the various powers of Europe. These commissioners, (Messrs. Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin,) had apprized the British

Minister of their being furnished with full powers to negotiate such treaties, and their readiness to remove from Paris to London for the purpose of entering into such a negotiation with Great Britain. In reply to their communication, the Duke informs them, that he is directed to inquire, as to the real nature of the powers with which they are invested; whether they are merely commissioned by Congress, or whether they have received separate powers from the respective States.' From this sentence, and the rest of the letter, it would appear, -what indeed other portions of the work render certain, that it would have been impossible, without an alteration in the character and an enlargement of the powers of the General Government, to conclude a commercial treaty with Great Britain.

The first volume opens with the Correspondence of Mr. Boudinot, then president of the Congress, with the American. minister in France, Dr. Franklin. Mr. Boudinot conducted the Correspondence with the foreign ministers, in the interval between Mr. R. R. Livingston's retiring from the office of Secretary for foreign affairs, and the choice of his successor. Mr. Boudinot's first despatches to Dr. Franklin contain an account of the mutiny of a part of the troops of the Pennsylvania line, stationed at Lancaster, their march to Philadelphia, and their audacious and insulting treatment of Congress. This incident is here related with more particularity than it appears in the general histories of the period, and Mr. Boudinot's despatches are accompanied with original papers, which, we believe, have not been elsewhere preserved, nor previously published. The following interesting summary of the ultimate views of the leaders, is extracted from Mr. Boudinot's despatch to the ministers of the United States at Paris, of the 15th of July, 1783.

'As soon as it was known that Congress was going, (to Princeton) the council were informed, that there was great reason to expect a serious attack on the bank, the night following; on which the President of the State collected one hundred soldiers and kept guard all night. On Wednesday, it was reported that Congress had sent for the Commander-in-chief, with the whole Northern Army and the militia of New Jersey, who were to be joined by the Pennsylvania militia, in order to quell the mutiny, which was no otherwise true, than ordering a detachment of a few hundred men from the North River. The sergeants being alarmed, soon proposed a submission, and the whole