sented themselves, by which these
impediments might be removed, modified, or counteracted; friendly
arrangement or countervailing legislation. Friendly arrangements were
preferable with all who would come into them, and we should carry into
such arrangements all the liberality and spirit of accommodation which
the nature of the case would admit. But," he adds, "should any nation
continue its system of prohibitive duties and regulations, it behooves
us to protect our citizens, their commerce, and navigation, by counter
prohibitions, duties, and regulations."

With this able and elaborate report, Jefferson closed his labors as
Secretary of State. Washington had been especially sensible of the
talents and integrity displayed by Jefferson during the closing year
of his secretaryship, and particularly throughout this French
perplexity, and had recently made a last attempt, but an unsuccessful
one, to persuade him to remain in the cabinet. The place thus made
vacant was filled by Mr. Edmond Randolph, whose office of
Attorney-General was conferred on Mr. William Bradford, of
Pennsylvania.

The report of Mr. Jefferson on commercial intercourse, was soon taken
up in the House in a committee of the whole. A series of resolutions
based on it, and relating to the privileges and restrictions of the
commerce of the United States, were introduced by Mr. Madison, and
became the subject of a warm and acrimonious debate. The report upheld
the policy of turning the course of trade from England to France, by
discriminations in favor of the latter; and the resolutions were to
the same purport. The idea was to oppose commercial resistance to
commercial injury; to enforce a perfect commercial equality by
retaliating impositions, assuming that the commercial system of Great
Britain was hostile to the United States--a position strongly denied
by some of the debaters.

Though the subject was, or might seem to be, of a purely commercial
nature, it was inevitably mixed up with political considerations,
according as a favorable inclination to England or France was
apprehended. The debate, which had commenced on the 13th of January,
(1794,) was protracted to the 3d of February, when the question being
taken on the first resolution, it was carried by a majority of only
five, so nearly were parties divided. The further consideration of the
remaining resolutions was postponed to March, when it was resumed,
but, in consequence of the new complexion