Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow T. JEFFERSON TO JOHN ADAMS. - The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Return to Title Page for The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

T. JEFFERSON TO JOHN ADAMS. - John Adams, The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799) [1853]

Edition used:

The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations, by his Grandson Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1856). 10 volumes. Vol. 8.

Part of: The Works of John Adams, 10 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


T. JEFFERSON TO JOHN ADAMS.

Philadelphia, 30 August, 1791.

My dear Sir,—

I received some time ago your favor of July 29th, and was happy to find that you saw, in its true point of view, the way in which I had been drawn into the scene which must have been so disagreeable to you. The importance which you still seem to allow to my note, and the effect you suppose it to have had, though unintentional in me, induce me to show you, that it really had no effect. Paine’s pamphlet, with my note, was published here about the second week in May; not a word ever appeared in the public papers here on the subject for more than a month, and I am certain not a word on the subject would ever have been said, had not a writer, under the name of Publicola, at length undertaken to attack Mr. Paine’s principles, which were the principles of the citizens of the United States. Instantly a host of writers attacked Publicola, in support of those principles. He had thought proper to misconstrue a figurative expression in my note, and these writers so far noticed me as to place the expression in its true light; but this was only an incidental skirmish, preliminary to the general engagement, and they would not have thought me worth naming, had not he thought proper to bring me on the scene.2 His antagonist, very criminally, in my opinion, presumed you to be Publicola,1 and on that presumption hazarded a personal attack on you. No person saw with more uneasiness than I did this unjustifiable assault, and the more so, when I saw it continued after the printer had declared you were not the author. But you will perceive from all this, my dear Sir, that my note contributed nothing to the production of these disagreeable pieces. As long as Paine’s pamphlet stood on its own feet and on my note, it was unnoticed. As soon as Publicola attacked Paine, swarms appeared in his defence. To Publicola, then, and not in the least degree to my note, this whole contest is to be ascribed, and all its consequences.

You speak of the execrable paragraph in the Connecticut paper. This, it is true, appeared before Publicola, but it had no more relation to Paine’s pamphlet and my note than to the Alcoran. I am satisfied the writer of it had never seen either; for when I passed through Connecticut about the middle of June, not a copy had ever been seen by anybody, either in Hartford or New Haven, nor probably in that whole State; and that paragraph was so notoriously the reverse of the disinterestedness of character which you are known to possess, by everybody who knows your name, that I never heard a person speak of the paragraph but with an indignation in your behalf, which did you entire justice. This paragraph, then, certainly did not flow from my note, any more than the publications which Publicola produced. Indeed, it was impossible that my note should occasion your name to be brought into question; for, so far from naming you, I had not even in view any writing which I might suppose to be yours,2 and the opinions I alluded to were principally those I had heard in common conversation from a sect aiming at the subversion of the present government to bring in their favorite form of a King, Lords, and Commons.

Thus, I hope, my dear Sir, that you will see me to have been as innocent in effect as I was in intention. I was brought before the public without my own consent, and from the first moment of seeing the effort of the real aggressor in this business, to keep me before the public, I determined that nothing should induce me to put pen to paper in the controversy. The business is now over, and I hope its effects are over, and that our friendship will never be suffered to be committed, whatever use others may think proper to make of our names.

The event of the King’s flight from Paris, and his recapture, will have struck you with its importance. It appears, I think, that the nation is firm within, and it only remains to see whether there will be any movement from without. I confess, I have not changed my confidence in the favorable issue of that revolution, because it has always rested on my own ocular evidence of the unanimity of the nation, and wisdom of the patriotic party in the national assembly. The last advices render it probable that the Emperor will recommence hostilities against the Porte; it remains to see whether England and Prussia will take a part.

Present me to Mrs. Adams with all the affections I feel for her, and be assured of those devoted to yourself by, my dear Sir, your sincere friend and servant.

Thomas Jefferson.

TO “A RECLUSE MAN.”

Philadelphia, 19 January, 1792.

Sir,—

I received by the last post a sheet subscribed “A Recluse Man,” inclosed with another in print, and have read both with feelings and reflections, some of which I should not choose to commit to paper. The printed one I had read with much pleasure in its season, and felt myself obliged to the writer, although I had no knowledge or suspicion of the author.1 I have sometimes thought of collecting together, and printing in volumes, all that has been written at me since my return from Europe to my native country. If I had more regard for my own glory in the eyes of posterity than for that of my fellow-citizens, I should esteem such a monument far preferable to Mr. Ceracchi’s marble. Such a torrent could flow only from the foul source of secret enmity to the Constitution of the United States, united with another stream of ill will to the present constitution of Pennsylvania; both mingled with foreign politics and domestic envy, jealousy, and disappointment. And all these parties and individuals have done me the choice honor to give to the world and to posterity, in the bitterness and agony of their hearts, the fullest proofs that they consider me as the first obstacle in their way. It gives me pain, however, to perceive that all their endeavors were ever able to impose for a moment on a man of letters, of so much candor, sagacity, and information as the “recluse man.” The writers in opposition to me have founded their speculations on my Defence of the Constitutions. These volumes will answer for themselves to any one who will inquire of them, and will prove that no other books that ever were written, except the Bible, were ever so much belied. If you will do me the favor to accept a set of them, and the greater favor to read them, I will order them to be presented to you.

The history of my “passion for titles” is briefly this. In 1788 and 1789, there was much inquiry, in conversation in Boston and its neighborhood, concerning the titles which were to be given to the representatives, senators, and president, in the new government. Many were for “Majesty” to the latter; others for “Highness,” some for “Excellency,” and others for no title at all. The title of “most honorable” was constantly given to the senators in one of the Boston papers at least, Russell’s Centinel, and it seemed to be a general opinion that some title or other must be given to the president and senators. When I took my seat in Senate at New York, a committee of both Houses reported a plan of receiving the President, when he should arrive, one part of which was, that the Vice-President should receive him at the door of the senate chamber, and conduct him to the chair, and afterwards address him, to inform him that both Houses were ready to attend him while he took the oath. This report was accepted by the Senate, after having been accepted by the House. Upon this I arose in my place, and asked the advice of the senate, in what form I should address him; whether I should say, “Mr. Washington,” “Mr. President,” “Sir,” “May it please your Excellency,” or what else? I observed that it had been common while he commanded the army to call him “His Excellency,” but I was free to own it would appear to me better to give him no title but “Sir,” or “Mr. President,” than to put him on a level with a governor of Bermuda, or one of his own ambassadors, or a governor of any one of our States. After I had made my observations, a senator arose and said it was an important point, and this was the precise moment to settle it. He therefore moved for a committee of both Houses to consider and report upon it. This is the substance of the charge against me for a possion for titles. For my own part, I freely own that I think decent and moderate titles, as distinctions of offices, are not only harmless, but useful in society, and that in this country, where I know them to be prized by the people as well as their magistrates as highly as by any people or any magistrates in the world, I should think some distinction between the magistrates of the national government and those of the State governments proper. There is not, however, in the United States, personally, a citizen more indifferent upon the subject, or more willing to conform to the public will or wish concerning it. If the proofs that have been given me in the newspapers of a deep malice against a man who has spent a life of anxiety, hazard, and labor in the service of his country, have given me pain, it has been in some measure compensated by bringing me to the knowledge of the “recluse man,” whose goodness of heart, and elegance of composition, I shall not soon or easily forget.1

John Adams.

[2 ]Is it possible that Mr. Jefferson, at this time holding the office of Secretary of State, could have persuaded himself that his position in the country was of so little weight? Some idea of the effect in Philadelphia of the publication may be gathered from the extracts from a letter of Mr. Lear, of the 8th May, printed in Washington’s Writings, vol. x. pp. 161-163, note. Mr. Jefferson, in his letter of the same date, anticipated the consequences very clearly.

[1 ]If this was criminal, Mr. Jefferson, probably, erred with him. He attributes one article in Fenno’s paper, at least, to Mr. Adams. Sparks’s Washington, vol. x. p. 159, last line of note.

[2 ]But on the other hand is the following, addressed to another person; “That I had in my view the Discourses on Davila, which had filled Fenno’s papers for a twelvemonth without contradiction, is certain.” Jefferson to Washington, (8 May, 1791,) in Sparks’s edition of Washington’s Writings, vol. x. p. 160, note. Those who are curious in such matters would do well to compare the tone of the two letters throughout.

[1 ]This was a New York gentleman, who subsequently disclosed his name to Mr. Adams, and furnished him some information as to the sources of the attacks made upon him.

[1 ]The uneasiness created by this question of titles is singularly characteristic of the disturbed condition of the times. In Virginia, an addition had been made to the charges against Mr. Adams on this subject, in the report, currently believed, that he never appeared in public except with a coach and six. See Sparks’s Washington, vol. x. p. 20, note. Yet in Massachusetts, the social system in which had been far more democratic than that in Virginia, the titles to be given to the two chief officers were fixed by the constitution of 1780, and have been continued down to the present day. The public estimation of the dignity of the offices has, nevertheless, been steadily declining under the effect of more powerful causes than mere titles can counteract.