e no other sensation than that of
a gross injustice removed. The extent and freedom of the port for
facilitating the use of it, is what will excite the attention and
gratification of the public. Colonel Humphreys writes me, that all Mr.
Gardoqui's communications, while here, tended to impress the court of
Madrid with the idea, that the navigation of the Mississippi was only
demanded on our part, to quiet our western settlers, and that it was not
sincerely desired by the maritime States. This is a most fatal error,
and must be completely eradicated and speedily, or Mr. Gardoqui will
prove to have been a bad peace-maker. It is true, there were characters,
whose stations entitled them to credit, and who, from geographical
prejudices, did not themselves wish the navigation of the Mississippi to
be restored to us, and who believe, perhaps, as is common with mankind,
that their opinion was the general opinion. But the sentiments of the
great mass of the union were decidedly otherwise then, and the very
persons to whom Mr. Gardoqui alluded, have now come over to the
opinion heartily, that the navigation of the Mississippi, in full and
unrestrained freedom, is indispensably necessary, and must be obtained
by any means it may call for. It will be most unfortunate, indeed, if we
cannot convince Spain that we make this demand in earnest, but by acts
which will render that conviction too late to prevent evil.

Not knowing how better to convey to you the laws and the gazettes, than
by committing them to the patronage of Colonel Humphreys, I now send
through that channel the laws of the second and third sessions of
Congress, and the newspapers.

I have the honor to be, with great esteem, Sir, your most obedient and
most humble servant,

Th: Jefferson.

LETTER LX.--TO WILLIAM SHORT, April 25, 1791

TO WILLIAM SHORT.

Philadelphia, April 25, 1791.

Dear Sir,

My late letters to you have been of the 8th, 12th, 15th, and

19th of March; yours received and acknowledged, are as follows,

******

I consider the consular convention as securing clearly our right to
appoint Consuls in the French colonies. The words '_Etats du roi_'
unquestionably extend to all his dominions. If they had been merely
synonymous with '_la France_,' why was the alteration made? When I
proposed that alteration, I explained my reasons, and it cannot be
supposed I would offer a change of language, but for some matter of
substance. Again, in the