Livingston’s homecoming was not permanent after resigning from the as Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In the coming years Livingston rose and fell only to rise again in his political fortunes. He continued to be a man who would shape the country. He sought office and recognition. As Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz noted when he visited Clermont; “ambition disturbs his peace.”[i]
Immediately upon returning home Livingston had to deal with a challenge to his office of chancellor. While he was in Philadelphia, opponents at home had begun a push to have him removed from office for not attending to his duties. This effort was orchestrated by James Duane and other members from the Manor branch of the Livingston family who were jealous of the Chancellor’s success and still angry about the loss of their automatic seat in the legislature in the 1777 constitution.[ii] This attempt to take his office quickly dissolved once Livingston returned to New York. As he put it, his return was the “antidote for the slow poison which the selfish politicks of some people would wish to instill.”[iii]In liberated New York City he established himself at 3 Broadway, just down the street from where John Jay, who had taken over as Secretary of Foreign Affairs, resided at 8 Broadway.[iv]
He also dealt with the vengeful spirit that some of the more radical citizens of the state still carried;
“I serious[s]ly lament with you the violent spirit of persecution which prevails here and dread its consequences upon the wealth commerce & future tranquility of the state. I am the more hurt at it because it appears to me almost unmixed with pure or patriotic motives. In some few it is a blind spirit of revenge & resentment but in more it is the most sordid interest. One wishes to possess the house of some wretched Tory another fears him as a rivale in his trade or commerce & a fourth wishes to get rid of his debts by shaking of his creditor or to reduce the price of Living by depopulating the town. It is a sad misfortune that the more we know of our fellow creatures the less reason we have to esteem them.”[v]
In short, he was having the same issues in 1783 as he was in 1779.
Livingston was returned to congress one more time in 1784. His main contributions there were seeking reimbursements for himself and others for work during the war. He sought money for Arthur Lee, who has spent a great deal of the war in Europe as an agent for various colonies and Congress and Samuel Fraunces for aiding American prisoners of war. Livingston also secured $1,500 for himself to cover expenses incurred during his time as Secretary of Foreign Affairs. Most importantly, he represented New York on the commission to settle the border between New York and Massachusetts. This was especially important to him as it would help to establish the eastern border of Livingston Manor.[vi]
In February 1785 he proposed a committee to establish control over the northern and western territory of the United States, including establishing forts for their defense. Livingston was subsequently appointed to this committee when it was adopted. Their report found that due to the fact the British had not yet left the posts they were supposed to according to the peace treaty, the construction of forts as well as the raising and maintenance of a standing force of 1,500 soldiers to man them was necessary to encourage the British to leave, secure relations with the natives and secure navigation of the Great Lakes for America. A few days later he joined James Monroe in recommending a duty be placed on goods brought into the country from Canada.[vii]
During this term in Congress Livingston kept abreast of foreign affairs issues. In January 1785 he made a motion, which was accepted, that America appoint a minister plenipotentiary to England. In February of that year Livingston put forth a resolution that would allow ministers to use up to $80,000 to form treaties with the rulers of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and “Tripoly”. On February 18 Livingston was nominated as U.S. Minister to the Court of London but refused and the nomination was withdrawn. On February 24 he was again nominated for the position but again refused. Later in the year, Livingston crafted a motion that called for the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, John Jay, to gather evidence of the debts owed to the states by Great Britain for the care of prisoners and to have the minister in Great Britain demand payment from the court.[viii]
By this point, Livingston had been dealing with a serious loss of hearing for some time. There is no indication that he used an ear horn or any type of hearing aid, at least in public. Julian Ursyn Niemcewiz said during a visit in the 1790’s “In his youth Chancellor Livingston was one of the best and most eloquent lawyers, later because of severe sickness he lost his hearing…”[ix] The sickness that Niemcewicz referred to was most likely the illness that Livingston had suffered in the early months of 1776, when he was bed ridden, as this seems to be the only time that he was ill for a long enough period for it to be considered severe. His hearing difficulty could also explain why he was thought to be bored by political debates. Niemcewiz seemed to indicate that Livingston’s talent as a speaker had diminished along with his ability to hear, and yet he was still a sought after speaker.
As the war ended, a group of army officers decided to form the Society of Cincinnati to keep the ideals that the country was founded upon and the brotherhood learned during the campaign alive. Initially membership was strictly limited to just officers of the Continental Army but within a few years the members of the Society decided to allow non-officers who had contributed significantly to the cause into the group. Livingston became one of the first non-military members invited to join. His membership certificate was signed by George Washington and Henry Knox.[x] He was soon representing New York at national meetings of the Society.[xi]
Livingston did not attend the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia but he was instrumental in getting the document ratified in New York. Alexander Hamilton actually suggested to the New York State government that the Chancellor be sent to Philadelphia for the convention saying his “abilities and experience in the general affairs of the country cannot but be useful upon such an occasion.”[xii] He was a staunch Federalist, supporting a strong centralized federal government that would govern in the best interest of the thirteen states as a whole as it fit best with the personal philosophy on government he had developed during the course of the war. On July 4, 1787 Livingston spoke to members of the Society of Cincinnati. He argued for a strong central government run by the educated and experienced. He said: “Can it be thought that an enlightened people believe the Science of government level to the meanest capacity? That experience, application, genius and education are unnecessary to those who are to frame laws for the government of the state.”[xiii]
At the start of the New York Ratification Convention Livingston made the first significant motion of the convention, moving that they only vote on the entire document and not individual sections ensuring that in New York the constitution would either pass or fail. While Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay argued the merits of the Constitution in the newspapers with what became known as the Federalist Papers, it was Livingston who took the lead on the debate floor. The Chancellor brought a humorous bent to many of his arguments. Once in trying to find a simile for the anti-federalists he said; “Shall I liken it to children making bubbles with a pipe?” and in trying to understand a particular line of thought by a stringent anti-federalist; “But, let us see if we cannot, from all this rubbish, pick out something which may look like reasoning.”[xiv] When attacked by many opponents for his views during the debates he was reported to say;
“he was very unfortunate in provoking so many able antagonists They had given a turn to his arguments and expressions which he did not expect. He was, however, happy that he could say, with Sir John Falstaff, that if he had no wit himself, he had been the occasion of wit in others…”
When his cousin, Gilbert Livingston, joined the voices against him the Chancellor said;
“that my worthy kinsman across the table, regardless of our common ancestry, and the tender ties of blood, should join his dagger to the rest, and compel me to exclaim in the dying words of Caesar, “And thou, too, Brutus!””[xv]
Throughout all of the debates Livingston fought for a strong central government. On June 24, 1788 during the state debates Livingston laid forth his thoughts on what the federal government should do;
“The Senate are designed indeed to represent the State governments; but they are also the representatives of the United States, and are not to consult the interest of any one state, but that of the Union.” [xvi]
The federal government, despite being made up of a members from all the separate states was to represent the entire union, and try to do good for the country as a whole.
In addition to the formal debates the representatives to the convention argued the merits of their views in the taverns of Fishkill. Livingston was notorious during the convention for taking representatives who were undecided or even who opposed the constitution and wining and dining them with his nearly bottomless purse until he had their votes.[xvii]
Upon hearing that New Hampshire had approved the Constitution, meaning that a majority of the states had now ratified it, Livingston rose and declared “The Confederation was now dissolved.”[xviii] The ground upon which their previous arguments had stood had shifted. The new government was going to happen, they just needed to decide to be a part of it. When some members questioned whether this was the will of the people Livingston retorted;
“It was as clear as any position proved by experience, that the people, in many instances, could not know Their own good; that, as a body, they were not capable of pursuing the true road to happiness; and that they were rarely competent to judge the politics of a great nation or the wisdom of public measures.”[xix]
Livingston was telling the members of the convention, chosen by the people to lead them, to actually lead, to think of the greater good rather than what would make their neighbors happy in the short term. It also harkens back to the Chancellor’s belief that government should be put in the hands of the intelligent and the experienced.
Yet the debate continued, mainly focusing on anti-federalists not wanting to give the
federal government “the sword and the purse”; control of standing army and navy and the right to raise taxes to support them and other government bodies. Livingston had been a major part of raising the national army during the revolution and a proponent of Congress taxing people directly. He rose again;
“How is Congress to defend us without a sword? You will also keep that. How shall it be handled? Shall we all take hold of it? I never knew, till now, the design of a curious image I have seen at the head of one of our newspapers. I am now convinced that the idea was prophetic in the printer. It was a figure of thirteen hands, in an awkward position, grasping a perpendicular sword. As the arms which supported it were on every side, I could see no way of moving it, but by drawing it through, with the hazard of dangerously cutting the fingers. For my own part I should be for crying, “hands off!” But this sword of the gentlemen’s is a visionary sword-a mere empty pagent; and yet they would never trust it out of the state scabbard, lest it should wound somebody…If it be necessary to trust our defence to the Union, it is necessary that we should trust it with the sword to defend us and the purse to give the sword effect.”[xx]
Finally on July 11, 1788 John Jay made a motion that the committee should ratify the constitution. Melancton Smith argued for four days until on the July 15, he put forth an amendment to the Jay’s motion that would have allowed the Constitution to be ratified but with conditions. Debates on these conditions went back and forth until July 26 when the committee voted on and approved the Constitution, with 30 votes for it and 27 against. Gilbert Livingston, the Chancellor’s Brutus from earlier in the debates, voted for the Constitution.[xxi]
When the Constitution took effect Livingston, in his office of Chancellor of New York, had the distinct honor of swearing George Washington into office as the first president of the new country. From the time of the Constitution’s ratification Livingston had had no doubt that Washington would hold the most important office in the new government, writing to him in October of 1788 he said;
“I have expressed no doubt of your acceptance of the station to which you will shortly be called, because I persuade myself, that no motives of private ease, or personal convenience will weigh with you when the great interests of the community require your service.” [xxii]
Shortly before the inauguration was set to begin it was realized that no one had acquired a bible for Washington to swear his oath upon. Livingston, who was Grand Master Mason of New York, sent to a nearby lodge for their bible. At the conclusion of the ceremony Livingston reportedly turned to the crowd and shouted “Long live George Washington, President of the United States!” In that sentence Livingston announced the birth of the government of the United States of America.[xxiii]
Despite being named by Washington on a list of men approved to receive a federal appointment, Livingston did not receive a serious offer for a job in the new federal government. Washington wrote to Livingston on May 31, 1789;
“however desirous I might be of giving a proof of my friendship- and whatever might be his expectations, grounded upon the amity which had subsisted between us, I was fully determined to keep therefore, uniformly declined giving any decisive answer to the numerous applications which have been made to me; being resolved whenever I am called upon to nominate persons for this offices which may be created, that I will do it with a sole view to the public good- and shall bring forward those who, upon every consideration, and from the best information I can obtain, will in my judgement be most likely to answer to that great end.”[xxiv]
This was another blow to Livingston’s ties to federalism and no doubt a staggering personal blow. For more than ten years he had labored at great personal cost to create this new country and now, even with a man he had considered a personal friend in the presidential office, he was being left out of the new government. Oddly though, in September of 1789, Washington sent a letter to Alexander Hamilton which included a list of “characters who have made a tender of their services for Suitable Offices” toward the bottom of the list appears the name “Chancellor Livingston.”[xxv] Still nothing of quality was offered to the Chancellor. After helping the country and Washington at every turn, Livingston was being left on the sidelines as the country moved forward.
The most likely reason for Livingston’s being left out of the new government was his opposition to Alexander Hamilton’s banking plan. Livingston would never accept the idea of the government assuming state’s debts and had fought hard against the plan the first two times Hamilton had proposed it in 1784 and 1786. When Hamilton proposed it again in 1790 Livingston publicly declared the plan was a “public injustice.” Livingston opposed Hamilton so vehemently that he and his family switched parties in 1791 to help Aaron Burr defeat Philip Schuyler for a seat in the United States Senate. As James Tillary, a New York physician put it in a letter to Hamilton; “The Chancellor hates, & would destroy you.”[xxvi]
In 1794 Livingston was offered appointment as minister to France but could not accept it because he would have had to resign as Chancellor and he was certain that the Council of Appointment would replace him with someone of opposing political views.[xxvii] Within a few years Livingston would sever ties with the Federalist Party all together and bring most Livingston clan over to the anti-federalist party or Democratic Republican party.
Livingston’s decades long friendship with John Jay also fell victim to the politics of the period. Jay harbored hard feelings toward Livingston over the admonition he had received from Livingston after negotiating the Treaty of Paris. When federal appointments were made Jay received the post of chief justice of the Supreme Court that Livingston coveted. In 1792 Livingston, wrongly as it turned out, had written an unflattering report about him that was widely published in New York newspapers. In response the Chancellor wrote his own article about Jay in which he said “Companions of your youth, these you have sacrificed to a mere jealousy of their superior abilities, to an overwhelming ambition which makes you dread them as your rivals.” He went on to say “You travel through life as fretful men do in a stage coach, disgusted with and disgusting those that you are compelled to be near.[xxviii]
In 1794 John Jay was sent to England to negotiate a treaty to handle some of the lingering issues between the two countries. The very idea was so repugnant to some people that the New York City militia refused to parade when Jay departed and he was burned in effigy around the country when word of the treaty arrived in the States. Livingston felt that the Jay Treaty, as it was known, was too conciliatory to England. He pushed for Washington to refuse to sign it and encouraged his brother Edward, now a congressman, to push for an investigation by the House of Representatives.[xxix]
Robert Livingston and John Jay never spoke again after Jay returned from England. The final nail in the coffin of their friendship was a highly contentious gubernatorial election that saw Jay defeat Livingston by more than 2,000 votes out of around 30,000 votes. Livingston was not a popular man with the general public who disliked him for his “haughtiness and ambition.”[xxx]
It came as no surprise that Livingston did not receive a job under the second president John Adams because of their long time dislike for each other. When Thomas Jefferson came to office he first offered Livingston a job as Secretary of the Navy which Livingston turned down. Jefferson then offered Livingston the posting as minister to France which he quickly accepted. This was not an easy post. The memories of the French Revolution and the Terror were still fresh and Napoleon Bonaparte was well on his way to leading Europe into its second decade of war. Ironically what Livingston saw in France was the realization of what he feared would happen in America if the upper class had lost control of the Revolution. The aristocracy had been exterminated, the country had descended into near anarchy and a despot had risen to power. Livingston wrote to Rufus King, in England; “The people of France may be (and I believe are) happy but they never will be free.”[xxxi]
Livingston had been tasked with trying secure American access to the Mississippi River and the port of New Orleans. Word came that Napoleon intended to send an army to the Caribbean to end the slave revolt there before going to Louisiana to reassert French dominion of the area. This would have definitely closed the Mississippi to American interests so Livingston let the French know that they could resolve their differences with “gold or steel”. After some negotiating and being joined by James Monroe to finalize the price, Livingston signed the Louisiana Purchase and doubled the size of the country for pennies an acre.
Livingston remained in France through the end of 1804, but left shortly before Napoleon’s coronation as Emperor of France. His brother-in-law, John Armstrong who had replaced him as minister to France in November represented the United States at the ceremony. Livingston traveled from France to Germany and Italy before returning to France. Before he departed France for the last time, Napoleon presented him with a snuff box bearing a miniature portrait of the Emperor.
Rather than being greeted with adulation and high office on his return to the United States, Livingston found his political career over. He was out of favor with those in power again. On July 6, 1805 James Monroe, who was still in Europe wrote to Secretary of State James Madison about the Chancellor. “I have heretofore thought him entitled to that apology but I am far from thinking so at present; indeed there is much reason to suspect him of the grossest iniquity I give you this hint to put you on your guard be assured that he will poison what he touches…In short he is the man of all others whom you should avoid as deserving the execrations of his Country.”[xxxii] The government had no further use for Livingston and discarded him.
Livingston went back to Clermont where he engaged in many agricultural pursuits. He was an early proponent of using gypsum as a fertilizer. His new house included the orangery, essentially a green house wing that allowed him to grow plants out of season or normally unsuited to the New York climate. He bred his own breed of oxen that weighed more than 1,000 pounds. He is well remembered for his work with Merino Sheep, which he had imported, with special permission from Napoleon, from France. He also published the Essay on Sheep, his widely read treatise on all aspects of sheep husbandry.[xxxiii]
In 1807 Livingston’s pet project, The North River Steamboat, made its way up the river. The steamboat was the brainchild of Livingston and Robert Fulton, an American inventor Livingston had met in France. Livingston is usually credited as the money while Fulton was the brains but Livingston had been working on designs for a steamboat since at least the 1790’s. He had actually had a prototype built at one point but it had not worked. Livingston had secured for himself and Fulton a monopoly on steam transport on the river which they would enjoy for the rest of the Chancellor’s life.
In the winter of 1812 Livingston suffered a series of strokes. He lingered in his home above the Hudson, often bed ridden, until February of 1813 when he slipped away peacefully. Livingston was initially buried on his property at Clermont. His remains were later removed to a vault at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Tivoli, New York just a few miles south of Clermont. Although his actual grave is unmarked a plaque inside the church memorializes the founder buried nearby.
[i] Niemcewicz, Julian Ursyn Under Their Vine and Fig Tree p 195
[ii] Young, The Democratic Republicans p. 71.
[iii] Robert R. Livingston to George Clinton December 22, 1782 Public Papers of George Clinton Volume VIII p 61
[iv] The New York Directory for 1786 H.J. Sachs & Company, New York, 1786 p 80, 85.
[v] Robert R. Livingston to Alexander Hamilton August 30, 1783 Founders Online
[vi] Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume XXVIII p 112 166, 208, Volume XXXIII p 619
[vii] Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume XXVIII p 30,59, 88.
[viii] Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume XXVIII p 25, 65, 85, 242.
[ix] Niemcewicz, Julian Ursyn Under Their Vine and Fig Tree p 195.
[x] Livingston’s Society of Cincinnati membership form is the collection of Clermont State Historic Site, New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation.
[xi] “Appointment as Delegates to the General Meeting of the Society of the Cincinnati, 3 May 1788,” Founders Online, National Archives (http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0233 [last update: 2016-03-28]) Source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, vol 4, January 1787-May 1788 ed. Harold C. Syrett, New York: Columbia University Press, 1962, p 647.
[xii] “New York Assembly. Remarks on a Motion that Five Delegates be Appointed to Constitutional Convention, [16 April 1787],” Founders Onlin, National Archives (http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamiltonn/01-04-02-0075 [last update: 2016-03-28]) Source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, vol 4, January 1787-May 1788, ed Howard C. Syrett. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962, pp148-149.
[xiii] Robert R. Livingston An Oration Delivered Before the Society of Cincinnatti at the State of New York in Commemeration of the Fourth Day of July. p. 10.
[xiv] Bailyn, Bernard The Debate on the Constitution Part Two Penguin Putnam Inc., New York 1993 p 837.
[xv] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Elliot’s Debates Volume 2 p 394-395.
[xvi] Bailyn, Bernard The Debate on the Constitution Part Two Penguin Putnam Inc., New York 1993 p 792.
[xvii] Bemis, The American Secretaries of State and Their Diplomacy Vol 1 p 186.
[xviii] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Elliot’s Debates Volume 2 p 322.
[xix] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Elliot’s Debates Volume 2 p 322.
[xx] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Elliot’s Debates Volume 2 p 386.
[xxi] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Elliot’s Debates Volume 2 p 413.
[xxii] “To George Washington from Robert R. Livingston, 21 October 1788,” Founders Online, National Archives (http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-01-02-0043 [last update: 2016-03-08]) Source: The Papers of George Washington, Presidential Series, vol 1, 24 Spetember 1788-31 March 1789, ed Dorothy Twohig. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1987, pp55-58.
[xxiii] The bible that Livingston used to swear in Washington belonged and still belongs to the St. John’s Masonic Lodge in New York City. It has been used for other presidential oaths of office including that of Warren G. Harding, Dwight Eisenhower, Jimmy Carter, and George Bush. It is usually on display at Federal Hall in New York City.
[xxiv] “From George Washington to Robert R. Livingston, 31 May 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, version of January 18, 2019, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-02-02-0303. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Presidential Series, vol. 2, 1 April 1789 – 15 June 1789, ed. Dorothy Twohig. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1987, pp. 417–418.]
[xxv] “To Alexander Hamilton from George Washington, 25 September 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, version of January 18, 2019, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-05-02-0178. [Original source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, vol. 5, June 1788 – November 1789, ed. Harold C. Syrett. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962, p. 409.]
[xxvi] Young The Democratic Republican p 160. “To Alexander Hamilton from James Tillary, [January 1791],” Founders Online, National Archives (http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilotn /01-07-02-0342 [last update: 2016-03-28]). Source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, vol 7, September 1790-January 1791, ed Harold C. Syrett. New York, Columbia University Press, 1963, pp 614-616.
[xxvii] Young The Democratic Republicans p 164.
[xxviii] Young The Democratic Republican p 293.
[xxix] Young The Democratic Republican p386, 448, 460.
[xxx] Niemcewicz, Julian Ursyn Under Their Vine and Fig Tree p 195, Stahr John Jay p 360.
[xxxi] Robert R. Livingston to Rufus King June 31, 1802 in Parsons, Edward Alexander The Letters of Robert R. Livingston: The Diplomatic Story of the Louisiana Purchase American Antiquarian Society, Massachusetts 1943 p 24.
[xxxii] “To James Madison from James Monroe, 6 July 1805” Founders Online National Archives last modified June 29, 2016 http://founders .archives.gov/documents/Madison/02-10-02-0023 [original source: The Papers of James Madiosn, Secretary of State Series vol 10, 1 July 1805-31 December 1805, ed Mary A. Hackett, J.C.A. Stagg, Mary Parke Johnson, Anne Manderville Colony, and Katheirne E. Harbury. Charlottsleville: University of Virginia Press, 2014, no pagination]
[xxxiii] Strickland, William Journal of a Tour in the United States of America 1794—1795 p111, 113