Adams Family Correspondence, volume 13
th:August 1799
I have no letter from you later than the 4th: which I mention only because the interval is a little longer than usual
between your communications and lest any you might have written may have miscarried.
From William I got a packet on Saturday, after my letter of that day was sent to town,
otherwise, I should have acknowledged its receipt.1 In J Russells paper of the 15th: which he enclosed me, I perceive a very handsome letter
addressed to Peter Porcupine by a New England man, on the
subject of expunging from the new edition of his works which he proposes to publish by
subscription, the illiberal, accrimon[ious] & unprovoked attack upon the character
of Joseph Priestly. I co[ncur] so fully in the sentiments of this writer on that
subject, that I hope [. . .] may take the whim of inserting the letter with his
“Observations on the Emigration” &ca: if he will not
adopt the advice of the writer in the other particular, which there is little reason to
think he will. Can you guess who the New Englandman is?2
I have received the letter on the subject of my brother’s affairs,
which he refers to in his last to you.3
It is very explicit & intelligible as a letter of instructions and I have the
satisfaction of having anticipated compliance with a great part of the injunctions. His
letter is dated April 29th: at which time he had received
only my two first numbers, which contained little of the detail of my transactions in
his affairs; my two next letters were filled with little else. From one of your letters
he had collected information, which detected a considerable error in the account
rendered by his Boston Agent in July 1798, in which the instalments on the shares in the
Middlesex Canal are charged to my brother as paid; that is,
the 30th: instalment fell 546 due 18th: July and is charged—no payment was made subsequent to that
and the time of his delivering up the papers, but instead of two hundred dollars only
one hundred could have been due for four month’s assessments on five shares, of course
payments for four months prior to July must have ceased and yet they were charged as
paid— How to repair this mistake would puzzle wiser heads than mine, unless the
extremity of the law were put in force.
The Minister say’s to me, “You will never think yourself entitled to betray my confidence, because I am your brother, or to ruin me, because I cannot take the law of you.” Such an insinuation would have hurt my feelings, had I been less acquainted with his character or my own— But he has had ample occasion to speak plain to those whom he entrusts with his affairs.
The fever prevails in the City to an awful degree, considering the earliness of the season—the mortality is equal to the same period of the last year. Our house is full of fugitives, but we are entirely free from danger.
I have recently become acquainted in the family of Mr: Hare, who has a pretty seat in this neighborhood. I dined
there last week and was much gratified with the conversation of the elder & younger
branches of the family. Mr: Hare told me that I reminded him
of my Father as he was more than 20 years ago, when he lodged in the same house with him
at Mrs: Yards in Philadelphia— “I
recollect your father wore his hair then much as yours is now.” Did he, indeed
Sir, said I, the information is very acceptable to me and shall not be lost, for I have
been somewhat persecuted since my return on account of the cut of my hair. Young Mr: Hare observed, he supposed because it was democratic.4 Mrs: Powell whom I saw last evening
desired me to present her best congratulations on the reestablishment of your health—
The widow looks as youthful & blooming almost as her niece Miss Hare.5 The gift of tongue
seems to pervade every branch of this family.
Present me kindly to my Father for whom the annecdote of the crop is particularly related & to whom you will
please to read it / for your Son
RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “Mrs: A Adams / Quincy”; internal address: “Mrs: A Adams”; endorsed: “T B Adams / August 26 / 1799.” Some loss of text where the seal was removed.
Not found.
William Cobbett had attacked Joseph Priestley for his French
sympathies beginning with the publication of Observations on
the Emigration of Dr. Joseph Priestly, Phila. and N.Y., 1794, Evans, No. 26778, and continuing
547 in the pages of Porcupine’s Political Censor, for Jan. 1797, for which see vol. 12:49, 50. More recent attacks appeared in the
Philadelphia Porcupine’s Gazette, 5, 15 Jan., 13 March,
12 August. The Boston Russell’s Gazette, 15 Aug.,
featured a piece by “A New-England Man” comparing the attacks to “a wren pecking at an eagle” and
calling on Cobbett to either leave them out of his upcoming collected works or to
print the letter alongside them. Although AA disputed the information in
her 4 Sept. reply to TBA,
below, an article in Porcupine’s Gazette, 26 Aug.,
identified “A New-England Man” as John Gardner. Cobbett included “Observations on
Priestley’s Emigration” and other attacks in his Porcupine’s
Works, 12 vols., London, 1801, 1:151–215.
JQA to AA, 7 May, above.
The trend toward short natural hair that gained popularity in the
1790s and was hastened in England by a 1795 tax on powder extended to the United
States, where it was often interpreted as a political statement promoting republican
ideals (vol. 9:294; Victoria
Sherrow, Encyclopedia of Hair: A Cultural History,
Westport, Conn., 2006, p. 322, 404–405). For JA’s inconsistent use of
wigs, see vols. 9:293; 11:138, 139.
On 18 Aug. 1799 TBA recorded in his Diary that he
had had a “very sociable time” after “Charles Hare called
& invited me to dine at his father’s in a family party.” Charles Willing Hare
(1778–1827) was the eldest surviving child of Margaret Willing and Robert Hare Sr.,
for whom see JA, Papers
, 4:499. The current speaker of the Penn. senate, Hare Sr. had
resided in the boardinghouse of Sarah Yard at the same time as JA in the
mid-1770s. His only daughter was Martha (1779–1852). For Elizabeth Willing Powel, the
sister of Margaret Willing Hare, see vol. 9:168 (TBA, Diary, 1798–1799; Washington, Papers, Presidential
Series
, 10:626; JA,
D&A
, 2:115; Charles P. Keith, The Provincial
Councillors of Pennsylvania, Phila., 1883, p. 89–90, 129).
TBA wrote AA a second letter on 26 Aug. after receiving her letter of 17 Aug., above. In it he confirmed that Col. Thomas Hartley had become a supporter of Thomas McKean, downplayed Joel Barlow’s political influence, and reported the 11 Aug. birth of John Stephens Smith, son of WSS’s sister Elizabeth and her husband, John Smith (Adams Papers).
thAugust. [
1799]
I enclose, as directed, under cover to you, the Summary statement of services rendered at an important & critical period of our Country’s affairs, by an intelligent, brave, & deserving Officer.1 I think it an hardship that such merit & such services are so soon obliterated from the recollection or so much out of the knowledge of Gentlemen now in Office, that a statement under the hand of the Agent himself should be deemed necessary to obtain for them the notice they merit.
We have in the papers of yesterday and the day before the letters of the Secretary of the Navy & of Truxtun himself on the subject of his resignation. The Secretary differs, I perceive, from the President as to the right of this decision, and as I am ignorant of the principles which governed it, I can form no other opinion of its propriety, than my confidence in the deciding authority would inspire. Whether Talbot’s Commission is new, & subsequent to Truxtun’s, or whether in consideration of Talbots former services, he is judged worthy of a rank above Truxtun, is what I should like to know, for Truxtun says 548 “every palpitation of his soul tells him that the injury he has received is unaccountable.”2
I have spent two days in preparing a statement for publication on
this subject, but my information & the means of obtaining it are so insufficient
that I wave the thoughts of sending any thing to the press—3 Indeed the difficulty of sending to the
printing Office at this time operates as a restraint. I am loth to be suspected of
interference in deed on a question of this sort— The
proper authority has decided & I doubt not justly, between the disputants, and the
public will acquiesce. If Truxtun was not too proud, he might bear a Commission under
Talbot without despising himself— Even Dale would not serve under him
If none of my letters have miscarried, I ought to have a reply from you very soon— I shall deliver your enclosure of last week shortly.
Present me kindly to Boylston &ca: & believe me / Yours in haste
PS. The fever abates in town but little— The banks are not yet removed.
d:
I am going this morning to attend the Supreme Court, which is to meet at Frankfort—4 I shall apply for admission as a Counsellor during the term. I was in hopes to have got a letter last evening, but did not. I am three or four in advance with you
RC (MWA:Adams Family Letters); endorsed: “Germantown 30 Aug / T B Adams Esq. /
rec 9 Sept. / Ansd”; docketed: “1799 / Aug 30.”
The enclosure has not been found, but for the summary of Capt. Silas Talbot’s naval service, see AA to TBA, 17 Aug., and note 6, above.
The Philadelphia Gazette, 28, 29
Aug., printed two letters on the naval rank controversy. The first was from Benjamin
Stoddert implying that JA as “the proper authority” had declared Talbot
senior in rank to Capt. Thomas Truxtun, resulting in the resignation of a “gallant
officer.” The second was a letter from Truxtun explaining his reasons for re signing
and calling Stoddert “a true soldier” for supporting his claim to superior rank.
TBA wrote in his Diary on 30 Aug., “Writing all the forenoon to no purpose, destroyed what I had written” (TBA, Diary, 1798–1799).
The Penn. Supreme Court moved its September session from
Philadelphia to Frankford, Penn., due to the yellow fever epidemic. The court met at
Frankford Academy on 2, 3, 13, and 14 Sept. and heard seven insolvency cases
(Philadelphia American Daily Advertiser, 26 Aug., 7, 9
Sept.; Guernsey A. Hallowell, “History of Frankford,” in For a
Greater Frankford, Frankford, Penn., 1912, p. 55).