Why did Washington choose to sign the Jay Treaty when it made the United States suffer?

1994 May 12, Jay Chou left new york with blessings. He has two instructions in his hand, one written by Hamilton and the other by Washington. These instructions are the bottom line of American negotiations. Hamilton's instructions are very specific. In fact, he was the chief architect of the whole negotiation, and his plan was approved by the President and Jay himself. Washington's instructions stressed that British troops must withdraw from American territory. As Hamilton told the British ambassador to the United States, the president yearns for peace, but not at the expense of national dignity. However, the definition of "dignity" in everyone's mind is completely different. Washington, Hamilton and Jay will soon know what kind of storm they will face.

The negotiations are protracted and full of difficulties, because the United States has few chips. The only thing Jay can use to blackmail Britain is that if Britain does not converge, the United States will form an "armed neutral" alliance with several other European countries to defend its rights as a neutral country by force. Hearing this, Britain, hum, stop joking! I don't know what you have. What weapons are you carrying? Be honest! From spring to summer, from summer to winter, until February 1795, a treaty signed by Jay arrived in Philadelphia, which is the Anglo-American Treaty of Peace, Trade and Navigation, commonly known as Jay Treaty.

Washington almost fainted when he saw the treaty. He said Jay was drugged. Isn't this a "traitorous treaty"? Don't say that the American people disagree. Washington itself is very sad. Let's take a look at the content of this treaty that makes Washington want to spank Jay.

The first is the bad news:

First, although there is no explicit provision in the treaty, it indirectly agrees with the British interpretation of "neutrality" and accepts the hegemonic position of the British navy and commerce. Initially, the United States believed that neutrality could do business with both warring parties. But Britain believes that neutrality cannot do business with France. The treaty does not oppose Britain's interception of food and other materials destined for France, and France also recognizes Britain's "rules of the game."

Second, the United States gives British goods "most favored nation treatment", but Britain does not give American goods the same treatment. This is called "one-sided MFN treatment" by later generations. In other words, the tariffs on goods exported from Britain to the United States are low, while those exported from the United States to Britain are high, which seems to be a sign of unequal treaties.

Third, the treaty does not prohibit Britain from forcing American sailors to join the British navy, so Britain can go.

Fourth, the American government promised to repay the debts owed by the American people to British businessmen and banks before the war, which could not be recovered through normal legal channels.

Fifth, Jay completely gave up the demands of the southern States for Britain to compensate the "lost" slaves.

Normal Americans will be shocked after reading the above contents, but don't worry, there is good news:

First, Britain agreed to withdraw its military fortress in the Great Lakes region.

Second, Britain agreed to compensate American businessmen for the losses caused by hijacking merchant ships, and the specific amount was decided by the international arbitration court.

Third, Britain agreed to form a bilateral committee with the United States to resolve the border issue between the United States and Canada through consultation.

Fourth, Britain allows American merchant ships under 70 tons to conduct limited trade with the West Indies.

In addition, the treaty also protects the right of western Indians to "freely enter and leave" American territory. The treaty is valid for ten years.

Anyway, literally, the Jay Treaty is indeed a "unilateral" contract, with Britain taking a big advantage and the United States suffering a big loss. This is also the reason why Washington is disappointed. However, Washington is not an angry young man. After patting the table, he must sit down and weigh it carefully. America needs peace and development. With its present strength, can we negotiate a better price? Washington's conclusion is: No, especially Britain's agreement to completely withdraw from American territory has met Washington's minimum requirements. Unlike Jefferson, Madison and other party leaders, Europe has never been Washington's goal of "seeking development", and the United States is his real ambition. He firmly believes that the development of the United States depends on its expansion in the New World, and this unique land is enough to make it stand out in the world. All it needs is time. Westward is the general trend. The withdrawal of British troops from the west cleared the way for immigrants. This is an opportunity that is hard to buy. He is willing to pay the price for ten years of peace, even if it is frustrating.

The question is, Washington can tolerate all humiliation, but can Congress? The constitution stipulates that treaties signed with foreign countries must be approved by the Senate before they can take effect. Moreover, the requirements passed by the Senate are not a simple majority, but a super majority, that is, a two-thirds majority. Such a hateful treaty, a simple majority is enough, let alone a super majority. 1On June 8, 1995, the Senate began to debate the Jay Treaty. Washington knows that this treaty will greatly stimulate people's nerves. Therefore, he asked for confidentiality and should not be disclosed to the public before Congress reached a conclusion. When senators first saw these clauses, they felt creepy and thought they were back in the colonial era. Aren't we going to sell ourselves back to England? At this time, the Federation has 15 states, and * * * has 30 senators. A two-thirds majority means that 20 people must vote for it. How simple is it?

The president did not directly veto the treaty, but submitted it to the Senate for discussion, which in itself shows that he supports it. Fortunately, although the Republican Party has a majority in the House of Representatives, the Federalist Party has a relatively large voice in the Senate. The federalists were not satisfied, but the treaty basically protected the interests of industry and commerce and met the requirements of the federalists. Moreover, don't forget that Hamilton, who is no longer the finance minister, is still the leader of the Federalist Party, and he still has the power to give orders in Congress.