Adams Family Correspondence, volume 15
th:July 1802
I have received & thank you for your favor of the 6th: currt:. This day, twelve
months ago, I left Philadelphia to visit my friends, in N. England, but however strong
my inclination to see them often, I must forego that gratification for the sake of
bettering my condition here. Should any serious cause occur, such as the yellow fever,
(of which we have already had some alarm), which should make it dangerous to abide here,
I shall then set my face towards a more healthful dwelling, and perhaps renounce the
design, to which I have hitherto so pertinaciously adhered, of making this City my
permanent residence.
You notice the jealousies, which are daily disclosing themselves, between the chiefs of the prevailing sect. They are indeed worthy of remark, as they have a tendency to display the characters of principals, no less than of subordinate agents. Here is that John Wood, who falls out with Duane, and they begin to expose each other’s villainy, in print.1 There is that J T Callender, who wrote “the prospect before us,” so much praised & extolled by the Jacobins, and who disagreeing with his employers about the wages of his sins, now comes out, with his “secrets worth knowing,” which for your amusement I herewith enclose.2 This unprincipled scoundrel, who was actually caressed by Jefferson, until he became importunate for his recompense, may be believed when he testifies against himself, however unworthy of credit on other subjects, and when he confesses his own venality, we must suppose that he knew to whom he was indebted for the bribe. The low & dirty malignity of this transaction, if Jefferson was really guilty of it, ought to blast his name & fame to all eternity. But what else can we expect from “a man of the people”?
Burr & Hamilton are alike inimical to my father, and though they could agree in nothing else, they are both glad to see & hear him traduced. Woods testimony goes thus far. There cannot be a coalition between their adherence, and if the breach with Burr & the Republicans widens, Clinton or McKean will throw him out. It seems that Jefferson thinks Burr ought not to be travelling about, so much, 218 and it begins to be understood that Burr would have willingly been chosen President, by the Representatives.3
There is an abusive paragraph in the Aurora of the 13th: currt: partly aimed at JQA,
and partly at the Junto. I knew not whence Duane got this, unless from some of the
Boston correspondents— He did not write it. It made me
angry when I read it, and heaped one more coal of fire upon that miscreants head. The
defeat of the bronze Statue of Washington, is attributed to JQA—s amendment, and the
paragraph says there was zeal & activity displayed on the occasion by the mover— You
will have a better idea of the matter from reading the paper itself, which I send you,
with my best love to the old woman.
4
Your’s
RC (Adams
Papers); internal address: “Mrs: A Adams.”
Although John Wood relied on William Duane as a source for his
History of the Administration of John Adams, Duane in
the Philadelphia Aurora General Advertiser, 5 July,
labeled the resulting work as “stupid and vapid.” This prompted a 6 July letter from
Wood, published in New York newspapers on 8 July, claiming the dispute stemmed from
Duane’s displeasure with Wood for showing his letters to Aaron Burr and his dislike of
Wood’s characterization of Alexander Hamilton. Duane responded by printing Wood’s
letter in the Aurora, 12 July, and offering additional
detail on the History’s suppression. Wood offered a final
rebuttal on 30 July, when he published A Correct Statement of
the Various Sources from which the History of the Administration of John Adams was
Compiled, and the Motives for its Suppression by Col. Burr, N.Y., 1802, Shaw-Shoemaker, No. 3578, and attributed
the errors within his History to Duane (Burr, Political
Correspondence
, 2:727).
The enclosure has not been found, but it was an article titled
“Secrets worth Knowing” in the Philadelphia Gazette and the Philadelphia American
Daily Advertiser, both 14 July. The article was extracted from James Thomson
Callender’s letter “To the Public” in the Richmond, Va., Recorder, 7 July, which claimed that in 1798 Thomas Jefferson had
characterized Callender as one of America’s best writers and had made two $50 payments
to Callender in support of The Prospect before Us, for
which see vol. 14:228 (Jefferson, Papers
, 44:6). See also
AA to Jefferson, 1 July 1804, below.
New York City’s Democratic-Republicans were embroiled in a
dispute that pitted Clintonians against Burrites. Jefferson’s assessment was that the
Clintonians embraced “the whole republican interest” of New York while supporters of
Burr sought only to advance his personal agenda. Burr’s decision to travel to North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia during the early stages of the dispute was seen
by critics as an attempt to curry favor with southern Democratic-Republicans, a move
that invited questions about Burr’s loyalties to Jefferson and the interests of the
party as a whole. He returned to New York on 23 June 1802 and avoided participating
publicly in the debate until September (Freeman, Affairs of Honor
, p. 182; Jefferson, Papers
, 38:89; Burr, Political Correspondence
, 2:720, 724–728; Thomas N.
Baker, “‘An Attack Well Directed’: Aaron Burr Intrigues for the Presidency,”
JER
,
31:572–574 [Winter 2011]).
TBA enclosed the Philadelphia Aurora General Advertiser, 13 July, which reported on
divisions among Massachusetts Federalists and blamed the cause, in part, on “the Adamite dynasty.” In particular, the article pointed to
JQA’s actions on a bill to erect a monument to George Washington. The
bill originated in the Mass. house of representatives, and when it reached the state
senate JQA introduced an amendment to alter the material from bronze to
marble. The amendment passed, but when the house disagreed over the change, the issue
was tabled until the following legislative session. The Aurora offered JQA’s actions as evidence that he and “the old woman”—a reference previously used 219 for AA—pursued a different agenda to
that of the Essex Junto, to the detriment of Federalist political aspirations (vol.
13:421, 425; Boston Columbian Centinel, 12, 19 June; Boston Independent Chronicle, 17 June).