Ottoman Algeria in Western Diplomatic History with ... - Bibliothèque

Finally, comparing the total cost of a peace treaty with Algiers with what “Jews
and Judaizing Christians” would exact in duties on exports and imports and
interest rates should Mediterranean trade would be abandoned to European
carrying, he remarked that it would be “richer plunder than that of Algerines,”
therefore a peace with Algiers would be most efficient for the United States. 114
Jefferson, however, held an unequivocated hawkish view. Discussing
Adams’ position, he acknowledged that he “very early thought it would be best
to effect a peace through the medium of war.” 115 According to him, war would
procure them justice, honor, and respect in Europe. He also thought it least
expensive and equally effectual. More, he believed that a war would serve the
American system of government better as it would give the federal head
(president) “the safest of all instruments of coercion over its delinquent
members”—meaning the states which refuse to pay their financial
contributions to Congress. As to cost, he comforted Adams by assuring him
that America would not pay for that alone and proposed an armed confederacy
which he believed would be joined by Naples and Portugal, if not by other
powers. 116 Therefore, making war was not a problem for him; the fundamental
issue of cost, however, remained unaltered: “the question is, whether their
peace or war will be cheapest? But it is a question which should be addressed
to our honor as well as our avarice,” as he stated at an earlier date. 117 Similar
114 WJA, 8:401.
115 WTJ2, 5:364, To John Adams, July 11, 1786. See Appendix 5B.
116 Ibid., 5:364-68, To John Adams, July 11, 1786. Many historians consider that this letter is one of the
best Jefferson ever wrote. See WJA, 8:411, fn 1.
117 Jefferson, Memoir, 1:290, To John Page, August 20, 1785.
278