If, on considering the doubts I shall suggest, you shall still think your draught of a supplementary embargo law sufficient, in its present form, I shall be satisfied it is so, for I have but one hour in the morning in which I am capable of thinking, and that is too much crowded with business to give me time to think. 1. Is not the first paragraph against the Constitution, which says no preference shall be given to the ports of one State over those of another? You might put down those ports as ports of entry, if that could be made to do. 2. Could not your second paragraph be made to answer by making it say that no clearance shall be furnished to any vessel laden with _provisions_ or _lumber_, to go from one port to another of the United States, without special permission, &c. In that case we might lay down rules for the necessary removal of provisions and lumber, inland, which should give no trouble to the citizens, but refuse licenses for all coasting transportation of those articles but on such applications from a Governor as may ensure us against any exportation but for the consumption of his State. Portsmouth, Boston, Charleston, and Savannah, are the only ports which cannot be supplied inland. I should like to prohibit _collections_, also, made evidently for clandestine importation. 3. I would rather strike out the words "in conformity with treaty" in order to avoid any express recognition at this day of that article of the British treaty. It has been so flagrantly abused as to excite the Indians to war against us, that I should have no hesitation in declaring it null, as soon as we see means of supplying the Indians ourselves. I should have no objections to extend the exception to the Indian furs purchased by our traders and sent into Canada. Affectionate salutes. TO MR. SMITH. April 1, 1808. I approve of your letter to Commodore Murray entirely, and in order to settle what shall be our course for the summer (now that we are tolerably clear, that no rupture with England is likely to take place during the summer), I propose, the first day that I can be well enough, for a couple of hours to ask a meeting of our colleagues to determine these questions. Shall the proclamation be renewed or suffered to expire? Shall the harbors of ordinary British resort (say New York, Lynhaven, and Charleston) be furnished with their full quota of gun-boats, with their _navigating_ crews? Shall the residue of the 170 gun-boats be distributed among the other ports, with their navigating crews, or be laid up or left on their stocks? Shall the frigates and Wasp be unmanned? Affectionate salutations. TO MR. GALLATIN. April 2, 1808.