Adams Family Correspondence, volume 14

Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams, 30 August 1800 Adams, Thomas Boylston Adams, John
Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams
Dear Sir Philadelphia 30th: Aug: 1800.

I have received your favor of the 23d: instt: I hesitated for some days, whether I should enclose the paper containing the Number of Horatius, which was so ridiculously headed as that you refer to, but I finally concluded that the intention of the Author was good, and that an honest though deluded zeal, had transported him, like so many others, whom we have seen, to bolster up a cause, certainly capable of sustaining itself or not worthy to be supported at all, with the charm of a name. It is a mortification to me also, that so few men in this Country, are wise or honest enough to discover & to avow, that the Administration of the last four years, & the measures 390 that have been carried into effect during that period, have exalted this nation, in her own esteem & in the consideration of foreign powers, infinitely beyond the attainments of the eight preceeding years. Has this been, because Washington approved? But it is useless to dwell upon this subject. “Popularity is” I am well persuaded, “more arbitrary than despotism.” It is in this State always a matter of calculation, how far it may be necessary to bend to it for the sake of interest. This will be illustrated by a recent example. It is usual for the two great political parties here to assemble in separate meetings some time prior to any election of considerable consequence, for the purpose of fixing upon such candidates as may be necessary to fill the different offices, whom they can recommend to the support of their friends & adherents— Such meetings have lately been held here, by both parties, and tickets agreed upon to run at the approaching election— It is a considerable object with the federalists to secure a majority of their number in the City Councils; but a very unpopular measure, that of taxing the Citizens for supplying the City with water, has been pursued by the present members at the instigation of a very numerous list of petitioners, among their Constituents— The labor is yet incomplete, more money must probably be raised; a great clamor has been excited against the present Councils & in order to appease the wrath of the Sovereign people—the federalists have consented, under an idea of necessity, to abandon the principal number of their servants of last year, who have conducted entirely to their satisfaction, discharged their duty with zeal, & fidelity, would have deserved to be censured & turned out of office with disgrace if they had not conducted as they have; and yet—they are unpopular & we must not run the risk of running their names again, but assure them how highly we value their former services, by substituting an entirely new set of members to take their places, because, the democrats will carry the day, if we do not thus accommodate— I was present at several of these meetings, & grieved at such irrational, unjust & dishonorable behavior— I said nothing, but gave a silent vote against the sense of the majority— A motion was made to reconsider at the last meeting, what had been done at a preceeding respecting the City Councils. It was lost by a majority of two to one— I was again in the minority—went from the meeting with disagreeable reflections but never expected to hear any thing more of the business— It seems however that even my silent vote was narrowly watched by somebody present— It disgusted & vexed the leaders of the majority & they cast some illnatured & 391 hasty remarks upon my motives—this was heard by some of the minority, who had resolved upon having a separate meeting in another place, for the purpose of proposing obtaining an alteration in the ticket proposed. I received an invitation to attend—went, and the meeting, which though small was respectable, agreed to appoint a committee of conference to endeavour to obtain from the other meeting’s committee, an alteration in favor of the old & tried servants. I am named as one of the Committee to confer, but we have not yet met on the business.1

This seems to me to be an epitome of the State of parties on the great political scale. The object in this instance is small, but human passions are often developed in very trifling concerns, so as to afford lessons of wisdom— The real cause of dispute, which I might never have known, but for the schism, is whether the City shall be supplied with water, by Latrobe’s Engines, or whether the Canal Company, which sunk so much property in leveling rocks & mountains to no purpose, shall have a chance to make a market for their stock, by bringing their scheme once more into view.2 I never can agree in opinion with a majority of these people.

Your letter to Tench Coxe, which he so obligingly & honorably gave over to “the Aurora,” has appeared, twice already; the remarks & comments must afford you amusement— I hope the types will never be unset, until the electioneering campaign is closed— It is an excellent standing dish for all palates—

I am, dear Sir / Your Son

T. B. Adams.

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “The President.”

1.

Philadelphia’s political parties convened separately between June and September to endorse candidates for upcoming state and local elections. A meeting of Democratic-Republicans took place on 14 June, while Federalists convened at Dunwoody’s Tavern on 29 July and 6 and 25 August. The ticket for the city council was not made final until an 18 Sept. meeting at which TBA acted as secretary. Ultimately, nineteen of twenty seats on the city council went to Federalists (Philadelphia Gazette, 25, 28 July; Philadelphia American Daily Advertiser, 30 July, 20 Sept.; Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 7, 27 Aug., 19 Sept.; A New Nation Votes).

2.

In 1798 Benjamin Henry Latrobe proposed using steam engines to pump water through a tunnel from the Schuylkill River to Philadelphia. Latrobe’s plan conflicted with that of the Delaware and Schuylkill Canal Navigation Company, which since 1792 had advanced a plan to build a canal to the city from the Schuylkill. Latrobe’s plan was approved on 7 Feb. 1799, and Philadelphia’s city council took out a 6 percent loan of $150,000 in shares of $100 each. A further $50,000 was raised through direct taxation, and work began on the waterworks on 12 March. Despite cost overruns the waterworks began delivering water on 27 Jan. 1801 and remained in use until 1811. The canal was not completed, and the canal company was dormant until 1836 when it began construction of a waterway to a city suburb (vol. 12:xv; Talbot Hamlin, Benjamin Henry Latrobe, N.Y., 1955, p. 157–162, 165; John C. Van Horne and others, eds., Correspondence and 392 Miscellaneous Papers of Benjamin Henry Latrobe, 3 vols., New Haven, 1984–1988, 1:143; Martin V. Melosi, Precious Commodity: Providing Water for America’s Cities, Pittsburgh, Penn., 2011, p. 44).