The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 5 (of 9)

P. S., September 26. In my letter of yesterday, I have omitted to observe, with respect to the arrangement of materials in the paper it speaks of, that it is not such as counsel would employ in pleading a cause. It was determined by other considerations. I thought it very possible the case might be dismissed out of court by a plea to the jurisdiction. I determined, on this event, to lay it before the public, either directly or through Congress. Respect for my associates, for myself, for our nation, would not permit me to come forward, as a criminal under accusation, to plead and argue a cause. This was not my situation. This would naturally be by way of narrative or statement of the facts in their order of time, establishing these facts as they occur, and bringing forward the law arising on them, and pointing to the Executive the course he was to pursue. I supposed it more dignified to present it as a history and explanation of what had taken place. It does not, indeed, in that form, display the subject in one great whole, but it brings forward successively a number of questions, solving themselves as they arise, and leaving no one unexamined. And the mind, after travelling over the whole case, and finding as it goes along that all has been considered and all is right, rests in that state of satisfaction which it is our object to produce. In truth, I have never known a case which presented so many distinct questions, having no dependence on one another, nor belonging even to the same branches of jurisprudence.

TO MR. GALLATIN

Monticello, September 27, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Yours of the 10th came safely to hand, and laid me under new obligations for the valuable observations it contained. The error of twelve feet instead of seven, for the rise of the batture, really sautoit aux yeux, and how I could have committed it at first, or passed it over afterwards without discovery, and having copied Pelletier's plan myself, is unaccountable. I have adopted also most of your other corrections. You observe that the arguments proving the batture public, yet prove it of such a character that it could not be within the scope of the law of March 4th, against squatters. I should so adjudge myself; yet I observe many opinions otherwise, and in defence against a spadassin, it is lawful to use all weapons. Besides, I have no pretensions to be exclusively the judge of what arguments are sound and what not. I give them, therefore, that they may weigh with those who think they have weight and have a right to decide for themselves. That act of Congress, moreover, was evidently respected, particularly in the order under which the removal was made.

With respect to the arrangement of materials in my statement, I know it is not such as counsel would employ in pleading such a cause; it is not such as I would have made myself in that character; it was determined by other considerations. I thought it possible the case might be dismissed out of court by a plea to the jurisdiction. I determined, on this event, to lay it before the public, either directly or through Congress. Respect for my associates, for myself, for our nation, would not permit me to come forward, as a criminal under accusation, to plead and argue a cause. This was not my situation. I had only to state to my constituents a common transaction. This would naturally be by way of narrative or statement of the facts, in their order of time, establishing these facts as they occur, and bringing forward the law arising on them and pointing to the Executive the course he was to pursue. I suppose it more self-respectful to present it as a history and explanation of what had taken place. It does not, indeed, in that form, display the subject in one great whole, but it brings forward successively a number of questions, solving themselves as they arise, and leaving no one unexamined. And the mind, after travelling over the whole case, and finding as it goes along that all has been considered, and all is right, rests in that state of satisfaction which it is our object to produce. In truth, I have never known a case which presented so many distinct questions, having no dependence on one another, nor belonging even to the same branches of jurisprudence. After all, I offer this as explanation, not justification of the order adopted.

* * * * * * * *

At length, then, we have a chance of getting a republican majority in the Supreme Judiciary. For ten years has that branch braved the spirit and will of the nation, after the nation had manifested its will by a complete reform in every branch depending on them. The event is a fortunate one, and so timed as to be a God-send to me. I am sure its importance to the nation will be felt, and the occasion employed to complete the great operation they have so long been executing, by the appointment of a decided republican, with nothing equivocal about him. But who will it be? The misfortune of Bidwell removes an able man from the competition. Can any other bring equal qualifications to those of Lincoln? I know he was not deemed a profound common lawyer; but was there ever a profound common lawyer known in any of the Eastern States? There never was, nor never can be one from those States. The basis of their law is neither common nor civil; it is an original, if any compound can so be called. Its foundation seems to have been laid in the spirit and principles of Jewish law, incorporated with some words and phrases of common law, and an abundance of notions of their own. This makes an amalgam sui generis, and it is well known that a man, first and thoroughly initiated into the principles of one system of law, can never become pure and sound in any other. Lord Mansfield was a splendid proof of this. Therefore, I say, there never was, nor can be a profound common lawyer from those States. Sullivan had the reputation of preëminence there as a common lawyer. But we have his history of land titles, which gives us his measure. Mr. Lincoln is, I believe, considered as learned in their laws as any one they have. Federalists say that Parsons is better. But the criticalness of the present nomination puts him out of question. As the great mass of the functions of the new judge are to be performed in his own district, Lincoln will be most unexceptionable and acceptable there; and on the supreme bench equal to any one who can be brought from thence; add to this his integrity, political firmness and unimpeachable character, and I believe no one can be found to whom there will not be more serious objections.

You seem to think it would be best to ascertain the probable result before making a proposition to Congress to defend Livingston's suit. On mature consideration I think it better that no such proposition should be made. The debates there would fix the case as a party one, and we are the minority in the judiciary department, and especially in the federal branch of it here. Till Congress can be thoroughly put in possession of all the points in the case, it is best they should let it lie. Livingston, by removing it into the Judiciary, has fairly relinquished all claims on their interference. I am confident that Congress will act soundly, whenever we can give them a knowledge of the whole case. But I tire you with this business, and end therefore with repeating assurances of my constant attachment and respect.

TO CAPTAIN ISAAC HILLARD

Monticello, October 9, 1810.

Sir,—I duly received your letter of September 10th, and return you thanks for that and the pamphlet you were so kind as to enclose me. The health you enjoy at so good an old age, and the strength of mind evidenced in your pamphlet, are subjects of congratulation to yourself and of thankfulness to him who gives them. I am sorry that a professor of religion should have given occasion for such a censure. It proves he has much to conquer in his own uncharitableness, and that it is not from him his flock are to learn not to bear false witness against their neighbor. But as to so much of his pulpit philippic as concerns myself I freely forgive him; for I feel no falsehood and fear no truth. That you may long continue to enjoy health, happiness and a sound mind, is my sincere prayer.

TO COLONEL DUANE

Monticello, November 13, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Your third packet is received before the second had been returned. It is now enclosed, and the other shall go by the next post. I find, as before, nothing to correct but those errors of the copyist which you would have corrected yourself before committed to the press. If it were practicable to send me the original sheets with the translated, perhaps my equal familiarity with both languages might enable me sometimes to be of some advantage; but I presume that might be difficult, and of little use, scarcely perhaps of any. I thank you for the copy of Williams. I have barely dipped into it a little. Enough, however, to see he is far short of the luminous work you are printing. Indeed I think that the most valuable work of the present age. I received from Williams, some years ago, his book on the claims of authors. I found him to be a man of sound and true principles, but not knowing how to go at them, and not able to trace or develop them for others. I believe with you that the crisis of England is come. What will be its issue it is vain to prophesy; so many thousand contingencies may turn up to affect its direction. Were I to hazard a guess, it would be that they will become a military despotism. Their recollections of the portion of liberty they have enjoyed will render force necessary to retain them under pure monarchy. Their pressure upon us has been so severe and so unprincipled, that we cannot deprecate their fate, though we might wish to see their naval power kept up to the level of that of the other principal powers separately taken. But may it not take a very different turn? Her paper credit annihilated, the precious metals must become her circulating medium. The taxes which can be levied on her people in these will be trifling in comparison with what they could pay in paper money; her navy then will be unpaid, unclothed, unfed. Will such a body of men suffer themselves to be dismissed and to starve? Will they not mutiny, revolt, embody themselves under a popular Admiral, take possession of Western and Bermuda islands, and act on the Algerine system? If they should not be able to act on this broad scale, they will become individual pirates; and the modern Carthage will end as the old one has done. I am sorry for her people, who are individually as respectable as those of other nations—it is her government which is so corrupt, and which has destroyed the nation—it was certainly the most corrupt and unprincipled government on earth. I should be glad to see their farmers and mechanics come here, but I hope their nobles, priests, and merchants will be kept at home to be moralized by the discipline of the new government. The young stripling whom you describe is, probably, as George Nicholas used to say, "in the plenitude of puppyism." Such coxcombs do not serve even as straws to show which way the wind blows. Alexander is unquestionably a man of an excellent heart, and of very respectable strength of mind; and he is the only sovereign who cordially loves us. Bonaparte hates our government because it is a living libel on his. The English hate us because they think our prosperity filched from theirs. Of Alexander's sense of the merits of our form of government, of its wholesome operation on the condition of the people, and of the interest he takes in the success of our experiment, we possess the most unquestionable proofs; and to him we shall be indebted if the rights of neutrals, to be settled whenever peace is made, shall be extended beyond the present belligerents; that is to say, European neutrals, as George and Napoleon, of mutual consent and common hatred against us, would concur in excluding us. I thought it a salutary measure to engage the powerful patronage of Alexander at conferences for peace, at a time when Bonaparte was courting him; and although circumstances have lessened its weight, yet it is prudent for us to cherish his good dispositions, as those alone which will be exerted in our favor when that occasion shall occur. He, like ourselves, sees and feels the atrociousness of both the belligerents. I salute you with great esteem and respect.

TO MR. JAMES RONALDSON

Monticello, December 3, 1810.

Sir,—I now return you the paper you were so kind as to enclose to me. The hint to the two belligerents of disarming each other of their auxiliaries, by opening asylums to them and giving them passages to this country, is certainly a good one. Bonaparte has mind enough to adopt it, but not the means. England, again, has the means but not mind enough; she would prefer losing an advantage over her enemy to giving one to us. It is an unhappy state of mind for her, but I am afraid it is the true one. She presents a singular phenomenon of an honest people whose constitution, from its nature, must render their government forever dishonest; and accordingly, from the time that Sir Robert Walpole gave the constitution that direction which its defects permitted, morality has been expunged from their political code. I think the paper might do good if published, and could do no harm. It cannot lessen our means of availing ourselves of the same resource in case of our being at war with either belligerent. The only difficulty in these cases (and in the revolutionary war we found it a great one) is the conveying the invitation to the adverse troops. Accept my salutations and assurances of respect.

TO DAVID HOWELL, ESQ

Monticello, December 15, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Our last post brought me your friendly letter of November 27th. I learn with pleasure that republican principles are predominant in your State, because I conscientiously believe that governments founded in these are more friendly to the happiness of the people at large, and especially of a people so capable of self-government as ours. I have been ever opposed to the party so falsely called federalists, because I believe them desirous of introducing into our government authorities hereditary or otherwise independent of the national will. These always consume the public contributions, and oppress the people with labor and poverty. No one was more sensible than myself, while Governor Fenner was in the Senate, of the soundness of his political principles, and rectitude of his conduct. Among those of my fellow laborers of whom I had a distinguished opinion, he was one, and I have no doubt those among whom he lives, and who have already given him so many proofs of their unequivocal confidence in him, will continue so to do. It would be impertinent in me, a stranger to them, to tell them what they all see daily. My object too, at present, is peace and tranquillity, neither doing nor saying anything to be quoted, or to make me the subject of newspaper disquisitions. I read one or two newspapers a week, but with reluctance give even that time from Tacitus and Horace, and so much other more agreeable reading; indeed, I give more time to exercise of the body than of the mind, believing it wholesome to both. I enjoy, in recollection, my ancient friendships, and suffer no new circumstances to mix alloy with them. I do not take the trouble of forming opinions on what is passing among them, because I have such entire confidence in their integrity and wisdom as to be satisfied all is going right, and that every one is doing his best in the station confided to him. Under these impressions, accept sincere assurances of my continued esteem and respect for yourself personally, and my best wishes for your health and happiness.

TO MR. LAW

Monticello, January 15, 1811.

Dear Sir,—An absence from home of some length has prevented my sooner acknowledging the receipt of your letter, covering the printed pamphlet, which the same absence has as yet prevented me from taking up, but which I know I shall read with great pleasure. Your favor of December the 22d, is also received.

Mr. Wagner's malignity, like that of the rest of his tribe of brother printers, who deal out calumnies for federal readers, gives me no pain. When a printer cooks up a falsehood, it is as easy to put it into the mouth of a Mr. Fox, as of a smaller man, and safer into that of a dead than a living one. Your sincere attachment to this country, as well as to your native one, was never doubted by me; and in that persuasion, I felt myself free to express to you my genuine sentiments with respect to England. No man was more sensible than myself of the just value of the friendship of that country. There are between us so many of those circumstances which naturally produce and cement kind dispositions, that if they could have forgiven our resistance to their usurpations, our connections might have been durable, and have insured duration to both our governments. I wished, therefore, a cordial friendship with them, and I spared no occasion of manifesting this in our correspondence and intercourse with them; not disguising, however, my desire of friendship with their enemy also. During the administration of Mr. Addington, I thought I discovered some friendly symptoms on the part of that government; at least, we received some marks of respect from the administration, and some of regret at the wrongs we were suffering from their country. So, also, during the short interval of Mr. Fox's power. But every other administration since our Revolution has been equally wanton in their injuries and insults, and have manifested equal hatred and aversion. Instead, too, of cultivating the government itself, whose principles are those of the great mass of the nation, they have adopted the miserable policy of teazing and embarrassing it, by allying themselves with a faction here, not a tenth of the people, noisy and unprincipled, and which never can come into power while republicanism is the spirit of the nation, and that must continue to be so, until such a condensation of population shall have taken place as will require centuries. Whereas, the good will of the government itself would give them, and immediately, every benefit which reason or justice would permit it to give. With respect to myself, I saw great reason to believe their ministers were weak enough to credit the newspaper trash about a supposed personal enmity in myself towards England. This wretched party imputation was beneath the notice of wise men. England never did me a personal injury, other than in open war; and for numerous individuals there, I have great esteem and friendship. And I must have had a mind far below the duties of my station, to have felt either national partialities or antipathies in conducting the affairs confided to me. My affections were first for my own country, and then, generally, for all mankind; and nothing but minds placing themselves above the passions, in the functionaries of this country, could have preserved us from the war to which their provocations have been constantly urging us. The war interests in England include a numerous and wealthy part of their population; and their influence is deemed worth courting by ministers wishing to keep their places. Continually endangered by a powerful opposition, they find it convenient to humor the popular passions at the expense of the public good. The shipping interest, commercial interest, and their janizaries of the navy, all fattening on war, will not be neglected by ministers of ordinary minds. Their tenure of office is so infirm that they dare not follow the dictates of wisdom, justice, and the well-calculated interests of their country. This vice in the English constitution, renders a dependence on that government very unsafe. The feelings of their King, too, fundamentally adverse to us, have added another motive for unfriendliness in his ministers. This obstacle to friendship, however, seems likely to be soon removed; and I verily believe the successor will come in with fairer and wiser dispositions towards us; perhaps on that event their conduct may be changed. But what England is to become on the crush of her internal structure, now seeming to be begun, I cannot foresee. Her monied interest, created by her paper system, and now constituting a baseless mass of wealth equal to that of the owners of the soil, must disappear with that system, and the medium for paying great taxes thus failing, her navy must be without support. That it shall be supported by permitting her to claim dominion of the ocean, and to levy tribute on every flag traversing that, as lately attempted and not yet relinquished, every nation must contest, even ad internecionem. And yet, that retiring from this enormity, she should continue able to take a fair share in the necessary equilibrium of power on that element, would be the desire of every nation.

I feel happy in withdrawing my mind from these anxieties, and resigning myself, for the remnant of life, to the care and guardianship of others. Good wishes are all an old man has to offer to his country or friends. Mine attend yourself, with sincere assurances of esteem and respect, which, however, I should be better pleased to tender you in person, should your rambles ever lead you into the vicinage of Monticello.

TO DOCTOR BENJAMIN RUSH

Monticello, January 16, 1811.

Dear Sir,—I had been considering for some days, whether it was not time by a letter, to bring myself to your recollection, when I received your welcome favor of the 2d instant. I had before heard of the heart-rending calamity you mention, and had sincerely sympathized with your afflictions. But I had not made it the subject of a letter, because I knew that condolences were but renewals of grief. Yet I thought, and still think, this is one of the cases wherein we should "not sorrow, even as others who have no hope."

* * * * * * * *

You ask if I have read Hartley? I have not. My present course of life admits less reading than I wish. From breakfast, or noon at latest, to dinner, I am mostly on horseback, attending to my farm or other concerns, which I find healthful to my body, mind and affairs; and the few hours I can pass in my cabinet, are devoured by correspondences; not those with my intimate friends, with whom I delight to interchange sentiments, but with others, who, writing to me on concerns of their own in which I have had an agency, or from motives of mere respect and approbation, are entitled to be answered with respect and a return of good will. My hope is that this obstacle to the delights of retirement, will wear away with the oblivion which follows that, and that I may at length be indulged in those studious pursuits, from which nothing but revolutionary duties would ever have called me.

I shall receive your proposed publication and read it with the pleasure which everything gives me from your pen. Although much of a sceptic in the practice of medicine, I read with pleasure its ingenious theories.

I receive with sensibility your observations on the discontinuance of friendly correspondence between Mr. Adams and myself, and the concern you take in its restoration. This discontinuance has not proceeded from me, nor from the want of sincere desire and of effort on my part, to renew our intercourse. You know the perfect coincidence of principle and of action, in the early part of the Revolution, which produced a high degree of mutual respect and esteem between Mr. Adams and myself. Certainly no man was ever truer than he was, in that day, to those principles of rational republicanism which, after the necessity of throwing off our monarchy, dictated all our efforts in the establishment of a new government. And although he swerved, afterwards, towards the principles of the English constitution, our friendship did not abate on that account. While he was Vice President, and I Secretary of State, I received a letter from President Washington, then at Mount Vernon, desiring me to call together the Heads of departments, and to invite Mr. Adams to join us (which, by-the-bye, was the only instance of that being done) in order to determine on some measure which required despatch; and he desired me to act on it, as decided, without again recurring to him. I invited them to dine with me, and after dinner, sitting at our wine, having settled our question, other conversation came on, in which a collision of opinion arose between Mr. Adams and Colonel Hamilton, on the merits of the British constitution, Mr. Adams giving it as his opinion, that, if some of its defects and abuses were corrected, it would be the most perfect constitution of government ever devised by man. Hamilton, on the contrary, asserted, that with its existing vices, it was the most perfect model of government that could be formed; and that the correction of its vices would render it an impracticable government. And this you may be assured was the real line of difference between the political principles of these two gentlemen. Another incident took place on the same occasion, which will further delineate Mr. Hamilton's political principles. The room being hung around with a collection of the portraits of remarkable men, among them were those of Bacon, Newton and Locke, Hamilton asked me who they were. I told him they were my trinity of the three greatest men the world had ever produced, naming them. He paused for some time: "the greatest man," said he, "that ever lived, was Julius Cæsar." Mr. Adams was honest as a politician, as well as a man; Hamilton honest as a man, but, as a politician, believing in the necessity of either force or corruption to govern men.