Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO JAMES McHENRY. [CONFIDENTIAL.] - The Writings of George Washington, vol. XI (1785-1790)

Return to Title Page for The Writings of George Washington, vol. XI (1785-1790)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

TO JAMES McHENRY. [CONFIDENTIAL.] - George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, vol. XI (1785-1790) [1891]

Edition used:

The Writings of George Washington, collected and edited by Worthington Chauncey Ford (New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890). Vol. XI (1785-1790).

Part of: The Writings of George Washington, 14 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


TO JAMES McHENRY.

[CONFIDENTIAL.]

New York, 30 November, 1789.

Dear Sir,

I have received your letter of the 14th instant, and in consequence of the suggestions contained therein, added to other considerations which occurred to me, I have thought it best to return Judge [Robert Hanson] Harrison his commission, and I sincerely hope, that upon a further consideration of the subject he may be induced to revoke his former determination, and accept the appointment.1

Mr. [Thomas] Johnson has likewise declined his appointment of district judge, and I have no information of Mr. [Richard] Potts the attorney, or Mr. [Nathaniel] Ramsay the marshal, having accepted their commissions. Thus circumstanced with respect to Maryland, I am unwilling to make a new appointment of judge for that district, until I can have an assurance, or at least a strong presumption, that the person appointed will accept; for it is to me an unpleasant thing to have commissions of such high importance returned; and it will, in fact, have a tendency to bring the government into discredit.

Mr. [Alexander Contee] Hanson is the person, whom I now have it in contemplation to bring forward as district judge of Maryland, and shall do so, provided I can obtain an assurance, that such an appointment would be acceptable to him. But as I cannot take any direct measures to draw from him a sentiment on this head, I must request, my dear Sir, that you will be so good as to get for me, if you can, such information upon the subject as will enable me to act with confidence in it, and convey the same to me as soon as possible. I shall leave to your prudence and discretion the mode of gaining this knowledge. It is a delicate matter, and will not bear any thing like a direct application, if there is the least cause to apprehend a refusal. I have observed in the papers, that Mr. Hanson has been appointed chancellor of the State since the death of Mr. [John] Rogers. What the emoluments of this office are, or its tenure, I know not, therefore can form no opinion how far it may operate in this matter.

Mr. Johnson’s resignation came to hand too late to admit of a new appointment, and information to be given of it before the time fixed by the act for holding the first District Court in Maryland. However, if this had not been the case, I should hardly have hazarded a new appointment for the reasons before mentioned, until I had good grounds to believe it would be accepted.

Should it be found, that the office of district judge would not be acceptable to Mr. Hanson, Mr. Paca has been mentioned for that appointment; and, although his sentiments have not been altogether in favor of the general government, and a little adverse on the score of paper emissions, I do not know but his appointment on some other accounts might be a proper thing. However, this will come more fully under consideration if Mr. Hanson should not wish to be brought forward; and, in that case, I will thank you to give me information relative to Mr. Paca.1 Mr. Gustavus Scott and Mr. Robert Smith of Baltimore have also been mentioned for the office; but the age and inexperience of the latter is in my opinion an insuperable objection; for, however good the qualifications or promising the talents of Mr. Smith may be, it will be expected that the important offices of the general government, and more especially those of the judges, should be filled by men who have been tried and proved. I thank you, my good Sir, for your kind wishes for my health and happiness, and reciprocate them with sincerity. With very great regard, I am, &c.

[1 ]Washington’s letter to Harrison is printed by Sparks, x., 52.

[1 ]On this point Mr. McHenry answered: “I have had a long conversation with Mr. Paca. I have every reason to say, that he will make every exertion in his power to execute the trust in the most unexceptionable manner. I believe, also, that the appointment will be highly gratifying to him, and I think it may have political good consequences.”—Annapolis, December 10th.

“Mr. Johnson has, as you supposed, declined the appointment of judge to the district of Maryland, and I have lately appointed Mr. Paca to fill that office. Mr. Thomas, whom you recommend for that place, undoubtedly possesses all those qualifications, which you have ascribed to him; and, so far as my own knowledge of that gentleman extends, he is justly entitled to the reputation which he sustains. But in appointing persons to office, and more especially in the judicial department, my views have been much guided to those characters, who have been conspicuous in their country; not only from an impression of their services, but upon a consideration, that they had been tried, and that a readier confidence would be placed in them by the public than in others perhaps of equal merit, who had never been proved. Upon this principle Mr. Paca certainly stands prior to Mr. Thomas, although the latter may possess in as high a degree every qualification requisite in a judge.”—Washington to William Fitzhugh, 24 December, 1789.