discernment or integrity of our Courts/' ' How vital
to the preservation of peaceful relations this deci-
sion became was seen during the troublous years from
1816 to 1826, when the Court had occasion to pass ui>on
constant violations of our neutrality in connection with
the Spanish-American revolutions.
A rumor at this time that a vacancy was about to occur on the Court, to be filled by the appointment of Judge Nathaniel Pendleton of Georgia, evoked from Washington a letter to Edmund Pendleton which gave an interesting description of the President's methods in making appointments. After denying the vacancy he said: "Whenever one does happen, it is highly probable that a geographical arrangement will have some attention. . . . Although I do at all times make the best inquiries n^y opportunities afford to come at the fittest characters for oflScers, where my ovm knowl- edge does not give a decided preference ... no one knows my ultimate determination, until the moment arrives when the nomination is to be laid before the Senate. My resolution not to create an expection {sic) which hereafter might embarrass my own conduct (by such a commitment to anyone as might subject me to the charge of deception) is co-eval with my in- auguration, and in no instance have I departed from it. The truth is, I never reply to any application for office by letters, nor verbally, except to express the forego- ing sentiments, lest something might be drawn from a civil answer that was not intended."*
This February session of 1794 was the last in which Jay sat as Chief Justice, for in the succeeding spring,
^ See 4th Cong,, 2d Seas., App., 271S. The cases complained of were Olass v. Bet3y, Talbot v. Jansen, Quyer v. Michael, United States v. Vetigeance, The Cae^iius (all of which appear in Dallas Reports), and The Privateer General Laveaux, The Hawk, The Caesar and Favorite (which are not reported in Dallas).
- Washington Papers MSS, letter of March 17, 1799.
