Adams Family Correspondence, volume 14
d1801.
Agreeable to my promise in my last, I now inclose to
you Mr Jeffersons letter, which I consider to be the counterpart of the
letter to Mazzei and which, you must have more philosophy, than I think
you possess, to read without bitter indignation—without execrating the
author, in the most unqualified terms. The whole letter is in the
canting style of the vilest demagogue of our Country.— Throughout
insidious—in some places obscure. The letter is supposed to have been
written to T. Fairfax of Berkely county in answer to one Mr. J. received
from him, requesting him to deny that he was disbeliever of the
Christian religion. It is confidently asserted that F. wrote such a
letter to Mr. J. and there are good grounds for believing this is the
answer.— Is it true, “that the great question which divides our citizens (true democratic dialect) is
whether it is safest, that a preponderance of power should be lodged
with the monarchical or the republican branch of our government.”1 No. A man must be
politically blind, totally unacquainted with the state of parties in
this Country or an infernal rascal who would dare to make so false an
assertion. The great question in this Country is whether we shall have a
mild government, administred on the mildest principles or anarchy—“the
tempestuous sea of liberty.” This is the grand question which agitate
parties in this Country. Dont you agree with me?
Executive “patronage.” This is an old hackneyed
subject & has been harped upon by demagogues of all ages. It has
been urged as a mighty argument for a reform under a monarchical
government and has been made a principal engine of opposition in this.
It is a political bugbear, imposed upon the people by insidious and
unprincipled men to excite their passions—to make them jealous of and
withdraw their affections from their government. Undue executive
patronage does not exist in this Country and how is it possible that it
should? Comprehending an immense territory, with nearly 8 millions of
inhabitants, every one of whom thinks himself fully competent for any
& every office in the Presidents power to give? There is no office
vacant, however low in rank—however small its pecuniary reward, but 557 what there ten or fifteen,
frequently twenty and thirty and sometimes I have known nearly an
hundred, who have sollicited it. All the dissappointed candidates
immediately are become embittered
against the President and opposed to his administration and it is a
certain and well known fact, that you may trace all the principal
opposition of this Country to unseccessful sollicitations for office. So
that I have solid ground for saying, that so far from the Executive
gaining improper patronage by the
his constitutional power of appointing to office, he makes himself many
violent ennemies without any very warm friends. I say further, that
there is scarcely a single power, vested in the Executive, which if he
executes with integrity and to its full extent, will not make him as
many ennemies as friends. In this Country, under our present
Constitution, there is no danger of the a preponderance of the Executive over the legislative
branch—but experience has proved, that there is every thing to fear from
frequent attempts of the popular branch to usurp the prerogatives of the
other and thus destroy the Constitution. “Armies and navies” “useless pageants”!!
Your letter of the 29th I
have received with a sett of the Port folio— If it were not for your
brothers Silesian tour I would not give much for all the numbers, but
they render them invaluable. This seems to be the general opinion here.
No writers beside have appeared of very great merit
None of the Judges of the S.C. have yet arrived except Judge Cushing & Chace. Judge P. will not be here & it is very doubtful whether Judge More will attend.
In great haste
mS Shaw
The Senate have not yet concurred in the J. bill, the foolish conduct of Hillhouse & some others I fear, render it very doubtful whether it will pass2
RC (ViU:Adams Family Letters); internal address:
“T B. Adams Esqr”; endorsed: “W. S Shaw / 3 Feby 1801 / 6th: Dc: Recd: / 8th: Do ansd:”
Shaw quoted from Thomas Jefferson’s 4 Sept. 1800
letter to John (Johannes) Vanmetre, in which Jefferson argued that the
executive branch could not maintain superiority over the legislative
branch “but by immense patronage, by multiplying offices, making them
very lucrative, by armies, navies, &c.” Such a system, Jefferson
continued, would “doom the labouring citizen to toil & sweat for
useless pageants.” The letter was published in the Richmond, Va., Examiner, 27 Jan. 1801, after Vanmetre
shared it with local Democratic-Republicans. The Washington, D.C., National Intelligencer, 2 Feb., and the
Philadelphia American Daily Advertiser, 10
Feb., both reprinted it. Shaw misidentified Jefferson’s correspondent as
Ferdinando Fairfax (1774–1820) of Berkeley County, Va., a member of a
general standing committee of Virginia Democratic-Republicans (Jefferson, Papers
, 32:126, 33:103; Madison, Papers, Secretary of State
Series
, 1:309). For Jefferson’s 558 letter to Philip Mazzei, which
Shaw paraphrased at the end of the paragraph, see vol. 12:164–165.
Connecticut senator James Hillhouse served on a
committee of five Federalists that on 29 Jan. recommended passage of the
House version of the judiciary bill without amendment, fearing the bill
would be doomed if an amended version was sent back to the House for
reconsideration. The gambit worked; several amendments proposed on the
floor of the Senate were defeated, and the House version was approved
without alteration and signed into law (
Annals of
Congress
, 6th Cong., 2d sess., p. 735, 737;
Biog.
Dir. Cong.
;
Doc. Hist. Supreme
Court
, 4:292). For the passage of the bill, see Shaw to
TBA, 8 Jan., and note 7, above.
ry7
th1801
I Suppose the reason why I have not had a Letter from
You for a long time, arrises from Your expectation that I am upon my
Journey; the Roads have been represented to me as so intolerable bad,
and I know them to be So, that I have been prevaild upon to remain
longer than I designd. I now think I shall stay untill after the 13th of Febry,1 the great important Day
which may in its concequences deside the fate of our Country; I feel as
it is so near at hand, as tho I could not quit the city untill I know
what, or rather who is to be our future Ruler; never were a people
placed in more difficut circumstances than the virtuous part of our
Countrymen are at the present Crisis— I have turnd, & turnd, and
overturned in My mind at various times the merrits & demerrits of
the two candidates; long acquaintance private friendship and the full
belief that the private Character of one is much purer than the other,
inclines me to him who has certainly from Age Succession and public
employments the prior Right. yet when I reflect upon the visonary System
of Government which will undoubtedly be adopted, the evils which must
result from it to the Country, I am sometimes inclined to believe that,
the more bold daring and decisive Character would Succeed in Supporting
the Government for a longer time.
what a lesson upon Elective Governments have we in our Young Republic of 12 years old? what is the difference of Character between a Prince of Wales—& a Burr—? have we any claim to the favour or protection of Providence, when we have against warning admonition and advise Chosen as our chief Majestrate a Man who makes no pretentions to the belief of an all wise and supreem 559 Govenour of the World, ordering or directing or overruling the events which take place in it. I do not mean that he is an Atheist for I do not think that he is—but he believes Religion only usefull as it may be made a political Engine, and that the outward forms are only as I once heard him express himself, Mere Mummery in short, he is not a believer in the Christian System— the other if he is More of a believer, has More to answer for, because he has gravely offended against those Doctrines by his practise
Such are the Men whom we are like to have as our Rulers— whether they are given us in wrath to punish us for our sins and transsgressions, the Events will disclose— but if ever we saw a day of darkness—I fear this is one which will be visible untill kindled into flame’s
My Health is better than it was the first part of the winter; I hope I shall be able to encounter this dreadfull journey, but it is very formidable to me, not only upon account of the Roads, but the Runs of water which have not any Bridges over them, and must be forded— Mr and Mrs Cranch are very well and dinned with me last sunday, as did William and Richard. to day the Judges and Many others with the heads of departments & Ladies dine with me for the last time— My best Regards to all My Friends and acquaintance. with the hope of seeing them e’er long I am / Your truly affectionate / Sister
Susan sends her Duty She has had the hooping cough, but is getting better—
RC (MWA:Abigail Adams Letters); addressed by
William Smith Shaw: “Mrs. Cranch / Quincy / MA.”; endorsed
by Richard Cranch: “Letter from Mrs. / A
Adams from / Washington Feb: 7th. /
1801.”
AA departed Washington, D.C., on 13 Feb.
and arrived in Baltimore the same day, the Baltimore Federal Gazette, 14 Feb., reporting that
“Lady Adams arrived in town last
evening, on her way from the city of Washington to Massachusetts.” She
reached Philadelphia on 17 Feb., and TBA informed
JA that he and AA would travel to New York
on 22 February. AA arrived at Quincy on 10 March (
AA to
JA, 13, 19 Feb., both below; TBA to
JA, 20 Feb.; AA to TBA, 22
March, both Adams
Papers).
Shakespeare, King John,
Act III, scene iv, lines 135–138.