Your excellent letters have been duly received. I have been much instructed by them. The necessity of turning our attention to the two great questions which now agitate the world, must be sufficiently apparent to every thinking mind I esteem myself peculiarly happy in having a father to aid my pursuits and assist me in my researches. The mind of man however it may sometimes wander in the regions of skepticism, can never be at rest until it is fixed upon some over ruling power the Nations of the earth therefore will never shake off the beleif in a Supreme power. They cannot do it. The mind is left cheerless and distressed by the attempt. We can by no means reason with the same certainty upon the duration of Christianity but should it ever be destroyed confident I am that mankind will be far less happy. The hereditary Governments appear to have arisen from principles of the strictest justice. Valour in barbarous nations is always admired. It is a qualification which never fails to attract applause hence those who are the most conspicious for bravery are singled as chiefs and leaders this is not altogether the effect of gratitude for services but the dictate of self preservation. But It may be asked why should the descendants of those who have obtained such rewards be in any manner sharers in the benefits conferred? And here I must answer that the principle of gratitude is strong in human nature, that is not content to confine itself within narrow limits. Notwithstanding the endeavors to disseminate the idea that the son of a great man must necessarily be a fool, mankind in general will not be bullied out of their affections, Nor will they consent to discard the idea that some portion of the etherial spirit which warmed the father is inherited by the offspring. These are ideas founded in nature, permanent and unchangeable. It is of this kind of gratitude which Tacitus speaks. “Insignis nobilitas aut magna patrûm merita, principis dignationem etiam adoluscentulis assignant.”1 The whole section from Polybius is well worth copying. 18 Pourquoi says he, donne t’on tant d’applaudissemens a celui qui se jette le premier dans les perils et defend ses semblables contre le choc et la fureur des plus forts animaux? Pourquoi encore n’a tón que du mepris pour [cet] homme lache qui craint de s’exposer pour le salut de ceux qu’il devroit secourir? Cela ne peut venir que de la reflection qu’on fait alors sur le honteux et sur l’honnête, et sur la différence qu’il y a entre ces deux choses. On commence alors a penser que l’honnête est digne qu’on le recherche et qu’on le pratique a cause de l’utilité qui en revient, et que le honteux mérite toute notre aversion. Lorsque celui qui est a la tête des autres et qui les surpasse en forces passe pour favoriser toujours ceux dónt nous venon’s de parler, et qu’il s’est acquis la reputation d’homme juste et equitable, alors on cesse de redouter la violence on se rend et on se soumet a lui par raison, on lui maintient son autorité quelque vieux qu’il devienne; on se joint et on conspire ensemble pour le defendre contre tous ceux qui attaquent sa puisance: et c’est ainsi que la raison aiant pris le dessus sur la ferocité et sur la force, cet homme de monarque devient Roi insensiblement et sans qu’on sen appercoive. C’est la parmi les hommes la premiere notion de l’honnété et du juste, et des vues contraires a ces deux vertus. C’est la l’origine et le commencement de la vrai Royauté. On ne les en laisse pas seulement jouir ces hommes respectable, on la conserve encore a leurs descendans parce qu’on se persuade que tenant la naisance et l’education de ces grands hommes, ils en auront aussi l’esprit et les moeurs.2

Your caution is by no means unnecessary “To keep my ideas and the result of my researches to myself” Americans are obstinately bent against ideas of hereditary succession at least in theory they are so whatever may be their practice. My mother sent three numbers of Columbus Our printers have not yet finished more than the three [that] were sent to me. The subjects you have mentioned […] arrest my attention the feild is wide.

It is reported in this City that some few people have advanced money to Mr Genet which they are not likely to have reimbursed. The particular instance I alluded to was Commodore Nicolson who has advanced as we are told about five thousand dollars such is the report I know not how true it may be.3 The house of Representatives of the State of Georgia have passed a strange act declaring it felony for the Marshal to levy upon the Lands or property of the State.4 How will the effect of that judgement be obtained? They 19 seem to have pited the State Goverment against the Federal. How is the Goverment to conduct in this instance?

Adieu My dear Sir / I am your affectionate son

I received this Morning your valuable Letter of the 6th and am much pleased with your Observations as well as with your 20 Researches. but I wish you would examine the Passage in Polybius in Greek. It is the highest Satisfaction to me to perceive that you have so just a sense of the Importance of the Beleif of a Deity and his Providence and moral Government to the Happiness of Nations as well as Individuals. Although your Opinion of the Duration of Christianity is not expressed in Terms so decided, I am also happy to find that you think it promotive of the happiness of Mankind. Let me however recommend to you, not easily to believe that it is in much danger. You may take my Word for it, that if any Gates could have easily prevailed against it, it would have disappeared long ago. If you live to the Age of Man, you will find the Faith in it very little diminished. It is founded on that eternal and fundamental Principle of the Law of Nature Do as you would be done by: and Love your Neighbour as yourself. Equality, Equality is the Element of Christianity, and how the Preachers of Equality of the present day can be so absurd as to quarrell with their best Friend & supporter I know not. You may perhaps be surprized to find me an Advocate for the modern Doctrine of Equality: but your surprize may cease when I tell you that I was one of the earliest and most explicit asserters of it. I drew the Article in the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, which has given so much offense. All Men are by Nature free And equal.1 I have heard such Men as Mr Gerry Mr Parsons & Mr Bradbury say lately that they wished this Article out of the Constitution because it is not true. I wondered at this and differed entirely in opinion. It was opposed in Convention and I was called upon to defend and explain it.— I asserted it to be a fundamental elementary Principle of the Law of Nature: and We were then in a state of Nature laying down first Principles. It meant not a Phisical but a moral Equality. common sense was sufficient to determine that it could not mean that all Men were equal in fact, but in Right. not all equally tall, Strong wise handsome, active: but equally Men, of like Bodies and Minds, the Work of the Same Artist, Children of the Same father, almighty. all equally in the Same Cases intitled to the Same Justice.

How the present Age can boast of this Principle as a Discovey, as new Light and modern Knowledge I know not. as I wish you to look into this subject I will enlarge upon it. But not at present. You may consider this as an Introduction.

To Day I recd. your Letter without date with the Paper inclosed.2

The Death of the Queen of France, affecting as it is, is not half so shocking as the last Article alledged against her. What will not those People do to render an unfortunate Woman odious.? There is nobody will believe it, but their own Dupes.3