53 
numerous as to require almost his whole time. The little 
leisure he could command was spent in agriculture and in 
promoting the liberal and useful arts. Of these he was ever 
passionately fond. After noticing one more prominent part 
of the Chancellor’s public life, we shall recur again to this 
subject, and shall show, that how much soever this state 
and the United States are indebted to him for his political 
services, much more is due to him for his improvements in 
agriculture and in promoting the arts. 
In 1801, Chancellor Livingston, being appointed minister 
plenipotentiary from the United States to the consular gov¬ 
ernment of France, resigned his office in the court of chan¬ 
cery, which he had held so long, with much credit to him¬ 
self and the welfare of the state. In a foreign court, he 
strictly regarded the rights and interests of his government 
and of his fellow citizens. In his intercourse with the first 
consul and his ministers, he neither forgot the duty of self- 
respect, nor the dignity and honor of his country. The 
most prominent act of Chancellor Livingston’s negociation 
with France, was the purchase of Louisiana, and its anr na¬ 
tion to the former territory of the United States. Concern¬ 
ing the expediency of which, very different opinions have 
been entertained by those best versed in the political affairs 
of their country. Most undoubtedly it will not be an indif¬ 
ferent event or of trivial consequence to the United States. 
It will either greatly benefit or greatly injure. The immedi¬ 
ate consequences of, and perhaps the principal inducements 
to the measure were, that it opened by means of the Missi- 
sippi, an undisputed outlet to the ocean for the whole of our 
western states and territories; and that four and an half 
millions of American property, of which the French had 
despoiled us, were deducted from the price of the purchas¬ 
ed territory and saved to our citizens. The lapse of a few 
years will probably determine the policy or impolicy of the 
measure; but should it eventuate in one or the other, the 
credit or the blame must go to the executive, rather than the 
minister. The responsibility is on him who lawfully direct¬ 
ed, not on hfin who faithfully executed the measure. 
B 
i 
