Sold – Constitution Signer Thomas Fitzsimmons Foretells of War With Britain

The maritime war between Britain and France which commenced in 1793 was both a great opportunity for neutral trade and a dangerous enterprise. Exports from the U.S. rose from $20 million in 1790 to $138.6 million by 1807.

On the other hand, the British and French governments enforced policies discouraging neutral trade, particularly by having their men of war seize vessels, confiscate cargoes, and impress the sailors to serve on their own ships (the British would seize some 1,000 American ships, the French 500). So despite its increase in trade, the U.S. was increasingly drawn into the conflict through its maritime losses, and by 1800 American vessels could barely leave port in safety. There were calls for war with both Britain and France.

Although the Treaty of Paris ended the American Revolution in 1783, the decade following saw relations between the U.S. and Britain deteriorate precipitously, as the latter refused to evacuate the frontier forts in the Northwest Territory and encouraged Indian unrest from there. When the ship seizures began in 1793, American shippers were without recourse for their losses, so even ships wrongfully taken under British law were lost, which was a spur to unlawful raiding and a virtual invitation to piracy. Issues with Britain were thus standing in the way of the growth and health of the American economy. The statesman John Jay, pressed into service as special envoy, went to Britain to try and resolve disagreements between the two governments.

On November 19, 1794, Jay’s Treaty was signed, which eliminated British control of western posts within two years, established a mechanism for Americans to claim damages as a result of British ship seizures, and offered the U.S. a limited right to trade in the West Indies. It also provided that commissioners be appointed by both sides to together handle claims by citizens who suffered losses.

During the Adams administration, former Congressman Samuel Sitgreaves was an American commissioner, and in this capacity he received a letter from Fitzsimmons, a signer of the U.S. Constitution, who had had some of his property seized by the British. The letter makes clear that Britain was continuing to commit acts of war and that these were leading Americans to strengthen their military and prepare for a conflict.

Autograph Letter Signed, 6 pages, Philadelphia, April 16, 1800, to Sitgreaves, initially dealing with his attempts to reclaim his property through the British courts, then assessing the likely conflict, and finally turning to a discussion of the upcoming 1800 presidential election which would install Thomas Jefferson in the White House. “…We are here all anxiety to what effect the mission to France will have on the British Court; if they shall take umbrage at it & increase their depredations upon our commerce, the inevitable consequence must be a total loss of all interest or influence in this country. The conduct of their vice-admiralty courts is so repugnant to any principle not only of friendship but of justice that it is difficult to restrain people from breaking out into open resistance to the depredations of their cruisers. The privateers of Tortota, New Providence &Jamaica let no American pass…in some instances they can not condemn but even when they do not, the captors appeal so as to retain the property, & the charges are so immense that appeals are not worth prosecuting…because even in case of success the captors will not be forced to refund the property.”

Fitzsimmons then proceeds to give concrete examples of the fruitlessness of hoping for justice, and continues “If the merchants had not more forbearance than any others we read of…they would before now have put it out of the power of the government to continue on terms of friendship with that nation…The spirit which our naval equipments has called forth would surprise you. The sons of the most wealthy people in the U.S. are entering into the Navy and as far as experience has yet gone there is reason to believe we should make a respectable figure opposed to any nation….in case of naval war commerce would for a time be suspended to enable us to equip a Navy. I sincerely hope we shall not be driven to that necessity, but dreadful as the alternative is, war at any hazard is preferable to insult and pillage…The Democrats are sanguine about carrying Jefferson & Gerry is very likely to obtain the government of Massachusetts…”

Fitzsimmons had every reason to feel antagonistic to the British. Besides serving in the military and the Continental Congress during the Revolution, he was both Irish and the president of the North American Insurance Company (which was suffering losses from the capture of ships and cargo it insured). Nonetheless, his statements reflect perfectly the attitudes of the leaders of American commerce, and were unerringly accurate in predicting that the U.S. would build a capable navy, and would choose war (the War of 1812) over injustice and humiliation.