Adams Family Correspondence, volume 15

Abigail Adams to Thomas Boylston Adams, 7 February 1802 Adams, Abigail Adams, Thomas Boylston
Abigail Adams to Thomas Boylston Adams
Dear Thomas Quincy Feb’ry 7th 1802

Your Letter of the   Jan’ry I received near a fortnight ago, and have thought every day since that I would write to you;1 but few occurrences arise to amuse You, or entertain You of a domestick nature, and dissertations are not what you want; Your proposed project of removing to the state of Newyork occupies my attention. I know it must be urksome to you to pluck up stakes, (as the saying is) and quit a profession to which you have been Educated, to enter upon an untried scene, to form new acquaintance & new connections; Yet when I consider the disadvantages you must labour under where you are, that the political state of the Country, gives you no prospect of advancement in your profession; for all those who are in power, both in the National and State government where you reside, are decidedly opposed to your Sentiments and principles; and I hope presume, ever will be; so that I cannot believe you will Succeed in Buisness in that city. beside it is not a desirable place of residence for a part of the Season always being in danger of the yellow fever; I wish to learn from you what your prospects are if you go as you hinted, into the interior of Newyork? it is a large, and flourishing state, tho it has a wrong Bias in politicks. I think it must follow New England in self defence, sometime or other; we know not what is before us. there is much reason to believe that confusion will result from the new order, or rather from the disorder which will be the concequence of the measures pursued by the Administration the 171 cultivators of the Soil may find more rest for a time than any other class of men; If a Farm is your object, I should advise You to see and judge for yourself; not to be led by the Suggestions of others; to live without Society; would soon render you discontented & unhappy. and even a polishd man soon becomes assimilated to the Manners of those who Surround him; but as you have not explained Your objects, I can only conjecture. it will not however give me any pain to find you determined upon quitting the city where you now are; it is not a soil where you will ever flourish I hope however you may be transplanted to one with sentiments more congenial to the best interests of our country When I look back upon the past, I am ready to make many unpleasent reflections, but all History furnishes us with Similar Instances in republican Governments. there is not any thing stable, any thing which can long be depended upon;

I yesterday read mr Morris’s speach in reply to mr Mason & others. I do not recollect ever to have read a more masterly composition, or a finer peice of oratory.2 truths however painfull are painted as with a Sun beam; yet upon the callous Hearts of Jacobinism no impression appears to have been made. deaf to the Voice of Reason truth and justice, feeling power, they forget Right; N England is crushed, and will be trampled upon, untill oppression raises a spirit which will sweep like a whirlwind.

Your Brother has taken an office in Boston.3 how long he will have patience to hold it, depends upon circumstances I hope if any attempt should be made to send him to the National legislature he will decidely reject it—come out from among them—4 they are doomed to dissolution— an attempt has been made to get an address to the President from our Legislator, but did not succeed as the papers will inform you; the same proposition is now under debate in the Senate, but I trust will not succeed—5 Burr has Shown us what he will do when the fate of the Country, hangs suspended upon his veto in the National Goverment—6

We have had a remarkable mild winter untill this Month commenced, when we have had a taste of cold & some Snow— Your uncle Cranch is very sick with one of his old lung complaints I have many fears least it should prove too hard for him. Your Father enjoys good Health: and spirits. my own has been better through the winter than for several past. I forgot to mention to you that B Adams is married, three weeks since— I had a Letter Yesterday from Sally.7 She writes that you had been once out to see her. I hope you will go again. Sally is a valuable woman, and deserving a better lot than she 172 has met with, which make me desirious of Showing her every kind attention in my power—

the Boys are gone to N york— I cannot but regreet their removal. John had just got his ambition excited, and was pursueing his studies with great assiduity, and earnestness; he appeard dull and mortified at his removal, and fearfull of the concequences to himself. he had much thought & reflection upon the Subject, as well as anxiety for his Brother, who he thought was not inclined to the necessary application, and whose mind might easily be dissipated— it is a pitty two such fine Boys should be in a way to be ruined, and their Father has no Head for to plan out their Education;

I like to hear from you once a fortnight, if only by a few lines. Remember me kindly to all those of my acquaintance who retain any Regard for me, and be / assured alway of the tenderness / and affection of your / Mother

A Adams

RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “Thomas B Adams Esqr— / Philadelphia”; endorsed: “Mrs: A Adams / 7th: Feby 1802 / 15th: Do Recd: / 22d: ansd:.”

1.

Not found.

2.

On 13 Jan. Stevens Thomson Mason of Virginia argued for the repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801, alleging that Federalist arguments for its retention were illogical and hypocritical. Mason also argued that during JA’s administration there was “an immoderate thirst for Executive patronage.” The speech was printed in the Boston Columbian Centinel, 3 Feb. 1802, while that of Gouverneur Morris was printed in the 6 Feb. issue ( Annals of Congress , 7th Cong., 1st sess., p. 59–69).

3.

For JQA’s Boston law office, see Descriptive List of Illustrations, No. 1, above.

4.

2 Corinthians, 6:17.

5.

On 2 Feb. the Mass. house of representatives debated a motion by Perez Morton to present an address to Thomas Jefferson that was “expressive of the confidence which this House entertain in his Integrity and Patriotism.” Supporters suggested that the statement also endorse the appointment of treasury secretary Albert Gallatin. Opponents characterized Gallatin as “a foreigner, whose language is now almost unintelligible to a native American” and also argued that the dismissal of JA’s appointees precluded such an address. Nathan Fisher moved to postpone consideration of the address, and it carried by a vote of 141 to 91. On 5 and 6 Feb., the Mass. senate debated a similar motion, which was defeated by a vote of 19 to 14 (Boston Columbian Centinel, 3, 6, 10 Feb.; Boston Independent Chronicle, 28 Jan., 4 Feb.).

6.

On 26 Jan. Vice President Aaron Burr cast a tie-breaking vote to advance the bill proposing the repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801 to a third reading. Burr’s vote, which was his first as Senate president, was reported in the Boston Columbian Centinel, 6 Feb. 1802 ( Annals of Congress , 7th Cong., 1st sess., p. 147; Burr, Political Correspondence , 2:654).

7.

SSA to AA, 23 Jan., above; AA enclosed her reply, not found, with this letter to TBA ( TBA to AA, 22 Feb., below).

Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams, 15 February 1802 Adams, Thomas Boylston Adams, John
Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams
Dear Sir. Philadelphia 15th: February 1802

I had the pleasure to receive, this morning, your favor of the 1st: currt: and now hasten to acknowledge it, with more eagerness, on 173 account of the long interval, which has elapsed, since I have written particularly to yourself.

I am not sorry, that you consider politicks, as forbidden fruit, for though you cannot fail to form an opinion, upon the very novel & extraordinary occurrences, in this Country, which are hourly presenting themselves to our senses, I should regret, that a single sentiment of yours, should become the theme of personal invective, against yourself. The present Chief Magistrate of the United States, was so restless, during the period of his retirement from Office, and was possessed of such an itch for scribbling, that he has furnished numberless weapons, which his political enemies have successfully turned against himself.1 I say, successfully, for notwithstanding the casual triumph of his party, which necessarily involved the consummation of his views, he has raised no monument, either to fame or glory, by his personal elevation. These frail systems of human government, called written Constitutions, which you have labored so hard to demonstrate to the world, as being utterly incapable of duration, upon any other principle, than that of checks & balances, are now mouldering away, with alarming rapidity, in consequence of that “full tide of successful experiment,” which your successor in office, has so warmly eulogised.2 The figure was not unhappily chosen, for by the laws of nature, there is but a momentary interval between the flood & the ebbing of tides. Stability in first principles of government, can never be looked for, so long as the doctrine of construction is deemed paramount to them. If I mistake not, this was your meaning, when in other words you said that “a Republican government, might be construed to mean any thing, or nothing”; yet, according to the fashionable declamation of the times, what an heresy was there!!3 We have a recent and a curious instance in the repeal of the late judiciary law, of the versatility of this doctrine of construction. An additional one has been furnished, by a struggle of later date, between the different branches of Government, in this State.

The Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania, which is a close imitation of the federal Constitution, so far as its provisions could be applied to State purposes, declares Art 2. Sect: 8. that “No member of Congress from this State, nor any person holding or exercising any office of trust or profit, under the United States, shall, at the same time, hold or exercise the office of judge, Secretary, treasurer, prothonotary, Register of Wills, Recorder of deeds, Sheriff, or any other Office in this State, to which a salary is by law, annexed, or 174 any other Office, which future legislatures shall declare, incompatible with offices or appointments under the United States.[”]

Governor Mc:Kean, who was as forward to reward the activity of Mr: Dallas as was President Jefferson, persuaded this gentleman, (as he says) to accept the office of Recorder of the City, a vacancy therein having occured, by the death of Mr: Wilcocks.4 To steer clear of the above provision in the Constitution, it was necessary, that the Office of Recorder should be construed, not a salary office, though it is confessedly one of trust & profit. It must be construed also, that the Recorder, is not a judge, though he is the sole organ of the Mayor’s Court and passes sentence upon all convicts; he also decides & over rules all disputed points of law; which occur during the sitting of that tribunal. He charges the Grand & pettit juries also, & in short, without the Recorder, there is supposed to be no competent Court. When this appointment was made, Mr: Dallas was already District Attorney of the United States, and the general understanding in public was, that the Offices were incompatible, and that he must of course renounce one if he meant to retain the other. This was not done; both were retained, and in order to try the right, an issue was made in the Supreme Court of the State, on a mandamus rule to shew cause, why a Mandamus, should not be granted against the Recorder for exercising the Office. This was argued, at length, and with much ability, on both sides, and the judges, after due deliberation, decided in favor of the Officer and therefore discharged the rule. Emboldened by this success, the Governor very speedily makes another appointment, of Dr Leib, a member of Congress, to be Resident Physician at the Lazaretto; another office of trust & profit, though enjoying no fixed salary, by law.5 So long as the quarrantine laws are not in operation, the presence of a Physician, at the Lazaretto, is not absolutely necessary; yet by Resident, it is understood that the Doctor ought to be somewhat nearer than 200 miles from the scene of his duty. Nevertheless Dr: Leeib passes his winter’s at the seat of Government, basking in Executive Smiles, and the best portion of the fine Season, at a cool & enviable retreat on the banks of the Delaware.

The Legislature of this State, now in session, have given, within a few days, a flagrant instance testimony of their disapprobation of these appointments, by passing a law, in spite of the Governor’s veto, annuling both of them, by name, and declaring all future appointments, to any office under the State, incompatible with the holding of any office under the federal government; thus pointedly 175 censuring the Governor for his former conduct, in this particular, and setting at naught his most favorite opinions. I have but a slender opinion of the wisdom or patriotism of the present legislature of this State, but they have at least thrown off the trammels of authority, for the sake of restoring consistency to the Constitution. The Governor met them, at the beginning of the Session, with an ostentatious display of complaisance, and an hypocritical profession of deference & respect, which almost courted the contempt into which he is really fallen, with them.6 It has been said, that no harmony has subsisted between the Executive & legislative branches of our government, at Lancaster, for some time, and present appearances indicate an open rupture. Even the federal legislature of which the Governor so indecently complained, were more civil to him, than his own partizans. Another occurrence among us, which forms a link in this chain, deserves to be mentioned here. The Bar of Philadelphia, almost to a man, signed or would have signed, if necessary, a memorial to Congress, against the repeal of the judiciary law.7 Would this have happened, had not the political predicament of this State, been such as it was? Would the names of Dallas McKean &ca: been seen to a petition of this nature, but for the dispute at Lancaster. I very much doubt it. I was one who did not sign the memorial, and I believe from substantial motives. The older gentlemen of the profession, advised me not to put my name to it, for fear of its doing more harm than good— I never expected any good would come of the memorial itself, and therefore was better reconciled to my exclusion. The persecution of yourself & children, is not yet at an end, and I have long been persuaded that, as you observe, they we are not children of fortune. Situated as I am, I know not whether the advice of Apollo, is not lost upon me. I am willing to put my shoulder to the wheel, and to encourage the cattle, but with all this & supplication beside, I do not extricate myself from the mire; I do not get a firm footing, in my profession. I should be loth to avow, that the earnings of my trade hitherto, have been less, in any given time, than the salary of the humblest Clerck in any of the public Offices, and yet, I know it to have been so. My expences, either necessity or habit have caused to “tyranize over my income.” The “viginti annorum lucubrationes,” which are requisite to the attainment of excellence at the Bar, must not roll away in cloistered inactivity; the stimulus of gain & profit, must be superceded, or attention will flag.8 It is but slender consolation to me, that others, of my standing, are no better off than myself, for this is an argument against the resources 176 of the profession itself, and I confess, that there are moments, when I look forward with such a wavering & doubtful eye to my future prospects of success, that it is with difficulty I persuade myself to “labor in my vocation.” I should not have troubled you with my confessions, if it were not, that the expression of your hopes, on my account, seemed to authorize the disclosure. I remember Johnson’s advice to Boswell, when in one of his gloomy humors, and wish it may fortify me against despondency.9

Your opinion of me is certainly too partial, when you say, that you “know of none more proper than myself to undertake to enquire, ascertain and establish, all those points of the Common law, which are now in force in the United States and in the individual States; and on the contrary, all those points of the Common law, which have been altered by statutes or by the Revolution and the Constitutions of Government which have been established, in consequence of it.” I feel my own incompetency to handle this subject with dexterity, so forcibly, that were it not for the deference I wish always to pay to your reccommendations, I should shrink from the task. I can only promise you, that I will turn my thoughts and attention to the subject, and if I feel encouraged, by my first efforts, will continue the research to some definite result.

I am, with best love to the family and all friends, / Dear Sir, / Your Son

Thomas B Adams.

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “John Adams Esqr:.”

1.

One of the writings TBA was referring to was Thomas Jefferson’s 24 April 1796 letter to Philip Mazzei, for which see vol. 12:164–165. The letter was cited in the Philadelphia Gazette, 10 Feb. 1802, and the Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 13 Feb., by critics who claimed that Jefferson failed to adhere to the U.S. Constitution.

2.

TBA was quoting Jefferson’s 4 March 1801 inaugural address.

3.

JA in a 25 June 1798 answer to an address from the militia of Rutland, Vt., wrote, “The Words Republican Government which never have been and never can be generally disgraced in the Minds of Men, without danger of universal Despotism have imposed on many, who had very imperfect Ideas under them. As there are none in our Language more indeterminate, they may be interpreted to mean any Thing” (Adams Papers). Dr. Thomas Cooper cited the passage in U.S. Circuit Court in April 1800 during his unsuccessful defense against a charge of sedition, claiming it justified his attacks on JA as an opponent of Republican government (vol. 14:219, 220).

4.

Philadelphia recorder Alexander Wilcocks, for whom see vol. 10:381, died on 22 July 1801. Four days later, Gov. Thomas McKean appointed as his replacement Alexander James Dallas, who served as the U.S. district attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Dallas was sworn in on 29 July, prompting opponents in the legislature to argue that he should not be allowed to hold simultaneous state and federal appointments. In September, the Penn. Supreme Court ruled in Dallas’ favor, but in Jan. 1802 the legislature passed a bill with bipartisan support that expressly prohibited holding concurrent state and federal offices. On 3 Feb. McKean vetoed the bill, but the legislature overrode 177 the veto and Dallas resigned as recorder on 14 Feb. (Philadelphia Gazette, 22 July 1801; Raymond Walters Jr., Alexander James Dallas: Lawyer, Politician, Financier, 1759–1817, Phila., 1943, p. 122–123; Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 30 July; Alexander James Dallas, Reports of Cases Ruled and Adjudged in the Several Courts of the United States, and of Pennsylvania, Held at the Seat of the Federal Government, 4 vols., Phila., 1798–1807, 4:229–231, Shaw-Shoemaker, No. 12384; Philadelphia American Daily Advertiser, 6 Feb. 1802).

5.

Dr. Michael Leib (1760–1822), of Philadelphia, was a Democratic-Republican who represented Pennsylvania in the House of Representatives from 4 March 1799 to 14 Feb. 1806. On 19 Sept. 1801 McKean commissioned Leib as resident physician at the Lazaretto, the city’s quarantine hospital. He assumed the post two days later but resigned in 1802 after passage of the law prohibiting simultaneous holding of state and federal offices ( Biog. Dir. Cong. ; Philadelphia Gazette, 21 Sept. 1801; Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 5 April 1802).

6.

McKean delivered his message to the Pennsylvania legislature on 5 Dec. 1801, promising cooperation between the branches of government: “The spirit of party and the pride of opinion, will no longer, I am confident, embarrass the transaction of business” (Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 9 Dec.).

7.

For the Philadelphia lawyers’ petition to Congress against the repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801, see TBA to William Cranch, 30 Jan. 1802, and note 6, above.

8.

“Twenty years’ studies” (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 vols., Oxford, 1765–1769, 1:69).

9.

James Boswell, The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., 2 vols., London, 1791, 1:259–260.