Adams Family Correspondence, volume 15
th:March 1802.
Your kind favors of 28th: February
& 13th: March, came safe to hand; I thank you for them,
and should have sooner acknowledged their receipt, but for the constant sitting of
Courts, ever since. I repent, that I have written so much to you and my father, on the
subject of myself, since I perceive, that it has produced so much 191 uneasiness & anxiety, not to say more, on my account. It would have been very
grateful to me, to have been able to say, in answer to the enquiries, which were
addressed to me; give yourselves no concern, on my behalf; I am safe, beyond the reach
of apprehension; my business yields me a handsome income, enough & more than enough
for all my wants. I could not truly say thus. But I think, the account I gave of myself
and my prospects, may have presented rather too gloomy an aspect, and it is incident to
all professions, whose profits are contingent, to inspire doubt. I can venture to
affirm, that I have done more ostensible business, at the
bar, since I opened an office in the fall of 1799. than any one of the same standing,
who had no particular patronage; but it has not been a profitable kind of business; it
gave considerable employment, but yielded little money.
I cannot answer the language of my father, on this subject. I know
his chastenings are meant as kindness, and his experience in life, enables him to
dictate lessons of prudence, of assiduity & economy to his children. But what reply
can I venture to make, to the conclusion of his letter of the 1st: March. “You have no relations in Philadelphia. You have no friends. Nothing
but a consciousness of great & decided superiority of genius, talents, eloquence or
knowledge or industry can excuse you for remaining there. Have you these?”1
I will only State my case, and leave it to be judged of by any body, who is acquainted with the difficulty of coming forward, at the Bar, at this time. I returned from Europe in the beginning of the year 1799. after an absence of more than four years, during which I had scarcely seen a book, connected with the law; as soon as I conveniently could I got into an Office and re-commenced the Study of law; but in less than six weeks I am driven from the theatre of business by apprehension of danger from disease, and am exiled nearly four months, during which period I was more than usually assiduous in my application to books, and prepared myself to begin the practice, with some confidence.2 I have lost no opportunity Since then, of appearing at the bar, in every shape & before the lowest tribunal; but with all this, and much kindness from my friend & former master,3 I am yet subject to the mortification of avowing to my parents, that I am in no way of making a fortune by my business. The money I have invested in Books, since I commenced practice, exceeds one thousand dollars, and I acknowledge with gratitude, that I have received the greater part of it from my parents. The account which I have yet to render is, that I am not in debt, 192 beyond my perfect ability to pay at any moment, and in answer to my father’s pressing injunction I will promise him, that I will not stay here and run in debt.
I have chosen to address this letter to you, though intended equally for my father’s perusal, and I hope, that I have not deviated from respectful expressions, in any passage of this statement.
I will shortly reply to the other letters, which relate to topicks of a different nature— I have been much gratified with the catalogue of my fathers winter’s reading.
I am very affectionately / Your son
PS. I sent a letter, yesterday to my father.4
RC (Adams
Papers); internal address: “Mrs: A Adams.”
The quoted passage is not in JA’s letter of 1 March, above, suggesting that JA wrote a second letter to TBA of the same date, not found.
For TBA’s temporary residence in Germantown, Penn., during the summer of 1799, see vol. 13:492.
That is, Jared Ingersoll.
Not found, but see JA to TBA, 10 April 1802, below.
I recd in due Course your favour of
March 18 and thank you for your prompt and punctual attention to my several
requests.1 The Harleyan Miscellany I
should be glad to have.2 Mr Dobsons account I presume is correct. I know not the Cost of
the Harleyan Miscellany: but if any ballance should remain you may take it in any Books
you may want, or Send any to me that you think have merit. I have recd the Vote of Thanks from the Secretary of the A. P. society
Mr John Redman Coxe.3
I have had it long in contemplation to write you some further hints
upon a subject on which I wrote you some time Since, which you have not mentioned to
have recd, the Common Law. Mr
Bayard in his Speech has mentioned several Topicks which I had thought of Suggesting to
you.4 The Importance of the Law of
Evidence, to Life Liberty Property, Security, Reputation, in short to Every Interest of
human Society, is beyond Calculation. consider the Evidence of other Nations, from the
Rack & Torture of all Europe, to the Suspicion and Suspicions of being Suspected of
the French Revolution, and compare them with Gilberts Law of Evidence, the Chapter on
Evidence in Tryals per Pais, or the Title of Evidence in any Abridgment, and you will
see the difference. For Example “The 193 Presumption is
always in favour of Innocence. Every Man is presumed to be innocent untill the contrary
is proved. Two guilty Men had better go unpunished than that one innocent Man should
Suffer.”5 Where do We find this candid,
humane, as well as equitable Rule? Not in the constitution of the United States: not in
any Statute of Congress: Not in the constitution of any particular State, nor in any
statute Law of any state. It is to the common Law alone that We owe the Obligation to
observe this rule—from that source alone do We derive our Right to the protection of
it.
For another Example. Hearsay Evidence shall not be admitted, but in certain particular Cases. Has this Law been enacted by any express constitution or statute in America.? Whence is it derived? from the common Law— It is the Birth Right of Us all.
For a third Example. No Man shall be a Witness in his own Case. No Man shall be a Witness in a Cause in which he is interested nor a Judge nor a Juror.— Whence comes this Rule? Not from France, nor from our states or our Congress: But from that common Law which is the natural & unalienable Inheritance of Us all.
Run through all the other Rules of Evidence. e.g. The best Evidence shall be produced which the nature of the Thing will admit &c and See the infinite Obligation We are under, above every other People under heaven, to this common Law.
I write in haste & very Superficially and keep no Copy. You know the Consequence. [Cauto].
your affectionate Father
RC (Adams
Papers); addressed: “Thomas B. Adams Esqr / Philadelphia”; internal address:
“T. B. Adams Esq”; endorsed: “John Adams Esqr: / 10 April
1802 / 17th: Do Recd: / 21st: ansd:”; notation by JA: “J. Adams.”
Not found.
The Harleian Miscellany; or, A Collection
of Scarce, Curious, and Entertaining Pamphlets and Tracts, ed. William Oldys, 8
vols., London, 1744–1746.
On 19 March Dr. John Redman Coxe, for whom see vol. 12:509, wrote to JA
on behalf of the American Philosophical Society to acknowledge his donation of vols. 2
and 3 of
Defence of
the Const.
(Adams
Papers).
For James Asheton Bayard’s 19 Feb. speech to the House of Representatives in which he defended the Judiciary Act of 1801, see TBA to AA, 22 Feb. 1802, and note 3, above.
Here, JA was referencing Sir Geoffrey Gilbert, The Law of Evidence, London, 1756, and Giles Duncombe, Trials per Pais; or, The Law of England Concerning Juries by
Nisi Prius, &c., London, 1666, ch. 15.
JA purchased an edition of The Law of
Evidence in Boston on 29 July 1766, and a 1766 edition of Trials per Pais is in his library at MB (JA, D&A
, 1:317;
Catalogue of JA’s
Library
).