why then make one?  This is a mistake.  By the sixth article of the Confederation, the States renounce, individually, all power to make any treaty, of whatever nature, with a foreign nation.  By the ninth article, they give the power of making treaties wholly to Congress with two reservations only. 1.  That no treaty of commerce shall be made, which shall restrain the legislatures from making foreigners pay the same imposts with their own people:  nor 2. from prohibiting the exportation or importation of any species of merchandise, which they might think proper.  Were any treaty to be made which should violate either of these two reservations, it would be so far void.  In the treaties, therefore, made with France, Holland, &c. this has been cautiously avoided.  But are these treaties of no advantage to these nations?  Besides the advantages expressly given by them, there results another, of great value.  The commerce of those nations with the United States is thereby under the protection of Congress, and no particular State, acting by fits and starts, can harass the trade of France, Holland, &c. by such measures as several of them have practised against England, by loading her merchandise with partial imposts, refusing admittance to it altogether, excluding her merchants, &c. &c.  For you will observe, that though, by the second reservation before mentioned, they can prohibit the importation of any species of merchandise, as, for instance, though they may prohibit the importation of wines in general, yet they cannot prohibit that of French wines in particular.  Another advantage is, that the nations having treaties with Congress, can and do provide in such treaties for the admission of their consuls, a kind of officer very necessary for the regulation and protection of commerce.  You know that a consul is the creature of treaty.  No nation, without an agreement, can place an officer in another country, with any powers or jurisdiction whatever.  But as the States have renounced the separate power of making treaties with foreign nations, they cannot separately receive a consul:  and as Congress have, by the Confederation, no immediate jurisdiction over commerce, as they have only a power of bringing that jurisdiction into existence by entering into a treaty, till such treaty be entered into, Congress themselves cannot receive a consul.  Till a treaty then, there exists no power in any part of our government, federal or particular, to admit a consul among us:  and if it be true, as the papers say, that you have lately sent one over, he cannot be admitted by any power in existence to an exercise of any function.  Nothing less than a new article, to be agreed to by all the States, would enable Congress, or the particular States, to receive him.  You must not be surprised then, if he be not received.

I think I have by this time tired you with American politics, and will therefore only add assurances of the sincere regard and esteem, with which I have the honor to be, Dear Sir,