I do not take the Washington Federalist; and it is now in general so poorly conducted as hardly to be worth sending you if I did— But I sent you some time since one of its numbers, and will send you others if they should contain any thing interesting to the fire-side. 1

I can also inclose to you the Intelligencer which contains a pretty good report of the debates in the House— Those in the Senate are not reported at-all, unless upon some favourite topic— And as hearers are now shut out from our floor, we are as undisturbed as if the galleries were always closed— I am not sorry for this—for if our debates were reported I am afraid the fire-side itself would think me too loquacious.

Louisiana Revenue, Louisiana Government, and AMERICAN (say read FOREIGN) Seamen, are now the important topics of controversy— You will mark in the Journals and papers I send you the progress of the two first—the third is meant to drive us into a War with England, and I fear will answer its purpose— Yet as the TITLE of the bills is for the protection of American Seamen, and Seamen of the United States, when I attacked its frantic provisions, at the second reading, I wish you had seen the hornet’s nest that burst down upon my head on the first day’s debate— Not a soul supported me in my principle, and half the federalists declared against me— However they at last thought it was worth thinking a little more about, and at the second day’s debate the federalists rallied a little, and the others began to stagger— Tuesday it is to come on again— My amendment will be rejected, I suppose unanimously—or at least next to it— Some modification however will take place, but not enough to make the Law consistent with the Laws of Nations.—2 The project is a deep-laid one, and they thought, by the colour of protecting American Seamen to scare all opposition out of doors— The fraud however is 328 detected and I hope will be exposed. There is not one single word for the protection of American Seamen in either of the bills— It is to protect British Seamen, deserting from the British service, and contriving to get on board an American Merchant vessel, even within the British Jurisdiction— To protect a sailor, who may desert from a Man of War in the river Thames, against impressment by his lawful Commander.— Judge of the principle and its inevitable consequences.

Adieu.

I am sorry to say that I write you from my Sick Chamber, where I have been confined for near a week with the Severest attack of the Rhumatism Which I have experienced for many Years in my Limbs. I hope it will not be very durable, but Submission is my lesson, and patience my Study—

We last Evening received the port folio containing the Character of your much Loved Friend.1 I read it with a sympathizing heart, 329 and dropt a tear over the well delineated Character. no Man in this Country so well knew his worth, or perhaps so possessd his confidence, as he who has paid this tribute of Justice & respect to his memory. towards that Friend Mr Murray always exprest an invariable attachment from his earlyest acquaintance.

At length we have been favord with part of a debate in a Washington paper upon the alteration of the constitution. it has not yet graced our Boston papers. it is a full refutation to mr Russels correspondent.2 if the subject of Bridges so much more important does not engrose all the papers in Boston a Month hence it may appear.3 I presume You have had the pamphlet which creates So great allarm in Newyork under the Signature of Aristides. amidst a torrent of calumny, there are many observation Worthy of note to which every honest Heart will Subscribe. that which I particularly allude to, is upon the Subject of parties, “That a Man is bound to pursue indiscriminately the measures of his Party, however unjust in themselves, or Dangerous to the Community, is a doctrine not novel in this Country, but not the less Wicked. That in defiance of his own conviction he should be driven by an exasperated party, to the Support of measures Which he deems hostile to the prosperity & happiness of the Nation, supposes too outrageous an attack on Mental independance to be tollerated for a Moment”4 I wish the Blind followers of the Blind would consider concequences, but what else is to be expected from those who compose the Majority of Voters? How few look into concequences, or see the end and aim of measures which they adopt? You will find yourself constantly rolling up the Stone of Syssiphus

Your Brother received a Letter from You to day of Janry 6th5

the point of Etiqutte is curiously adjusted. We are told in Scripture that the wife is the crown of the Husband.6 I certainly would not so much underrate myself as to Yeald a point, which my Husband considerd necessary to Support his dignity. What the Ladies Yeald! give up their Etiquette and their Husbands retain theirs? oh fie— never let the Gentlemen again accuse them upon this Head—

I wrote to You and to Mrs Adams last week, but I realy was so Stupified for want of rest, that I know not what I wrote.7

Your Uncle & Aunt are Without a line from washington to assertain the Situation of Mrs Cranch. I trust She is not worse, or You would have said Something respecting her in your Letter

My Love to mrs Adams and the Children from your truly affectionate Mother