Adams Family Correspondence, volume 15

John Quincy Adams to Thomas Boylston Adams, 30 January 1804 Adams, John Quincy Adams, Thomas Boylston
John Quincy Adams to Thomas Boylston Adams
30. January 1804.

I send this day a packet, to your father containing the Journals and other publications of the day; with an Intelligencer, containing the account of our festival on Friday last.— That is to say, of the dinner— To morrow evening there is to be a Ball for the same purpose.

One of the toasts drank at the feasts was “An Union of Parties,” which is like drinking the Millennium— I suppose they will come together— The Vice-President was there— And was treated with much coolness.1

Our bill for the protection of (deserting British) Seamen, still sleeps— But will pass in some mischievous form or other— The 333 Vice-President said to me the other day “I paused longer than usual, before putting the question upon that bill— But if you had not risen to oppose it, the bill would certainly have pass’d without one observation and without one dissenting voice”— The truth was that knowing the topic to be delicate and somewhat invidious, I waited to the last moment to see if no one else would make a stand— But I was forced to come out, and I wrote you what a hornet’s nest burst upon me for it, at the first moment—2 However, they will find it harder of digestion than they thought for— The fraud, (for it deserves no better name) of calling it a bill for the protection of the Seamen of the United States, came within a hair’s breadth of being completely successful— Several circumstances have since occurr’d to expose the real project, and I hope the federalists will in the end unite in the opposition— Not one soul of them stood by me at the first sally— Mr: Tracy was indeed absent— The opinions however upon which I grounded my opposition are apparently strengthening— And at the last vote I shall at least not be left alone.

The Louisiana Government Bill creeps with the pace of a snail— We have not yet got through the Sections prohibitive of Slavery— We have nothing material else before us.

I am delighted to the utmost to find your Spirits growing lively since your new residence— I flatter myself they will continue to do so.— Interest yourself in the objects around you— Make yourself a useful citizen to the Town— It will occupy your mind, and will soon give your life the advantages of variety— I hope to be with you some time in March or April, and promise myself great satisfaction from being so near you the Summer through—

I grieve to find my dear Mother has again been visited with illness; and hope she has ere this recovered—

My wife and children are well; and I must go home to dinner with them; it being close upon 4. o’clock.

Judge Cushing arrived here last Friday but I have not yet seen him.

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “T. B. Adams Esqr.”; endorsed: “J. Q Adams Esqr: / 30th: January 1804 / 10th: Feby Recd: / 11th: Answd:.”

1.

Among the publications JQA sent to JA, not found, was the Washington, D.C., National Intelligencer, 30 Jan., which reported that on the 27th members of Congress escorted Thomas Jefferson from his residence to Stelle’s Hotel on Capitol Hill for a dinner to celebrate the Louisiana Purchase. Proffered toasts included to “the Union of the States” and to “our brothers of Louisiana.” Aaron Burr’s attendance was also noted, and the newspaper praised the assembled officials who “by means unstained with the blood of a single victim … had acquired almost a new world, and had laid the foundation for the happiness of millions yet unborn!” JQA described the gathering in his Diary: “The President and the Heads of Departments were there by invitation— Scarcely any of the 334 federal members were there— The dinner was bad, and the toasts too numerous.” JQA and LCA attended a ball at the Union Tavern in Georgetown, D.C., on 31 Jan., which JQA described as “very much crowded with company; but the arrangements and decorations were mean beyond any thing of the kind I ever saw” (D/JQA/27, APM Reel 30; Jefferson, Papers , 37:50).

2.

JQA to TBA, 22 Jan., and note 2, above.

John Quincy Adams to John Adams, 31 January 1804 Adams, John Quincy Adams, John
John Quincy Adams to John Adams
31. January 1804.

This prohibition of the admission of slaves into Louisiana, is like the drawing of a jaw tooth. We have expedient after expedient introduced to answer this purpose— Breckenridge has at last concentrated all his wisdom on the subject in the Amendment, which I now inclose you.—1 This is a tolerably good device to reconcile the two parties of slave and anti-slave, into which the majority are divided. [It pr]ovides tolerably well for the introduction of slaves into the territory, under the form of heavy penalties against it.— This is now in general the great art of Legislation at this place— To do a thing, by assuming the appearance of preventing it— To prevent a thing by assuming that of doing it.

I intended to wait untill the question on Breckenridge’s amendmt should be taken to give you the result— But it will certainly pass.— So I may as well close my letter—

4 O’clock— Breckenridge’s Amendment has not pass’d. Something else must be tried.

RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “John Adams Esqr / Quincy. / Massachusetts.” Some loss of text due to placement of the seal.

1.

The enclosure has not been found, but for the Senate debate on slavery in Louisiana, see JQA to AA, 27 Jan., and note 1, above.

Thomas Boylston Adams to William Meredith, 8 February 1804 Adams, Thomas Boylston Meredith, William
Thomas Boylston Adams to William Meredith
Dear Sir Quincy 8th: February 1804

On the 3d inst: I enclosed to you, Bank Notes of various descriptions, amounting to two hundred and ninety dollars, accompanied by a letter of advice as to the disposal of the money. I hope you will receive it and apply it as requested.

I have, since I left your City, been leading a desultory, or as Joe says, a miscellaneous life, and have therefore collected very little information worthy of record. My promise to write to Mrs: Meredith is not forgotten, but unavoidably postponed, on divers accounts.1 My 335 thoughts have been so much occupied, with my future state that I have not applied my attention to the more immediate calls upon my time; and I must intreat, thro’ you, a little further respite, before I am condemned as a faithless man.

I expected to have it in my power to inform you of my admission to the Bar in this State. I attended, yesterday, for the purpose of being sworn in, at the Shire-town for our County of Norfolk, called Dedham; but from some unknown cause, the chief Justice was absent and there being but one judge present, no Court was held; as a single judge has not even the power of adjournment; so, I had a long ride for my pains and came back no more of a lawyer than I went.2 I shall keep an Office here, at Quincy, but I do not expect very soon to be over-run with Clients.

There seems to be some prospect in your State of vacancies being made on the Bench, & such is the spirit of emulation—or ambition, or something else— I know not what to call it, in the lawyers heart, that I dare be bound there will not be a single tear shed over the departed judge-ships, should the three victims threatened, actually be immolated. I have no personal interest now in these removals; nor can I avoid condemning the accursed spirit, which has stimulated the persecution of judges, throughout the Country; but if the accusations were well-founded against the judges of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, I know not three men whose services might in their judicial capacities, so readily be dispensed with. I should like to hear from you on this subject; as also, respecting D——s trial.3

Among the original letters, published in the port-Folio, I perceive that two short ones, from John Adams to Mr: Dumas, have been published—this is expressly contrary to my injunctions to Dennie & as I understood, his promise.4 I do not know how many letters there are from the same person in the correspondence, but I wish you to charge Joe, on pain of my displeasure & wrath, not to print or suffer to be printed another line above that signature. All the others are posthumous letters and can attract no ill-will upon the living—the same cannot be said of those to which I refer. I know not who is employed to transcribe those letters, but I think some of them might be suppressed without injury to the integrity of the plan. What the d——I can be made of the cyphers?5 If I had Joe here I’d give him a scolding for his inattention to the manner of publishing those letters. I must break short off, as a boy is waiting to take my letter to the post Office— Remember me kindly to all friends.

sincerely your’s

T B Adams.
336

RC (PHi:Samuel Washington Woodhouse Coll.); addressed: “William Meredith Esqr / Philada:”; internal address: “Wm Meredith Esqr:.”

1.

TBA’s letter to Meredith and its enclosures have not been found. Philadelphia lawyer and banker William Meredith (1772–1844) and his wife, Gertrude Gouverneur Ogden Meredith (1777–1828), who was a niece of Gouverneur Morris, were contributors to the Port Folio and friends of Joseph Dennie Jr. This letter marked the beginning of a correspondence that lasted until 1817 (Morris, Diaries , 2:889; Richard Lewis Ashhurst, “William Morris Meredith, 1799–1873,” American Law Register, 55:202–203).

2.

The Mass. Supreme Judicial Court announced in the New-England Palladium, 20 Jan. 1804, that it would convene in Dedham, Mass., on 7 Feb. despite an earlier publication stating that the session would be held on 27 March. No February court session took place, however, because even though on 7 Feb. the Mass. house of representatives authorized “any one justice of the Supreme Court to hold the term at Dedham, this day,” the bill did not become law until 20 February. The court convened on 6 March, and it was at that time that TBA was admitted to the bar (Boston Columbian Centinel, 8 Feb., 14 March; New-England Palladium, 21 Feb.).

3.

Justices Edward Shippen IV, Thomas Smith, and Jasper Yeates, all Federalists on the Penn. Supreme Court, faced impeachment in early 1804, reported the New-England Palladium, 3 February. The issue arose when Philadelphia merchant Thomas Passmore petitioned the state legislature in Feb. 1803, after the justices allowed a case to proceed against him despite his opponent missing a key filing deadline. Passmore’s petition was tabled until the next session, when a committee recommended impeachment in Jan. 1804. The legislature declined to charge a fourth justice, Democratic-Republican Hugh Henry Brackenridge, but called on Thomas McKean to remove him from office, a request the governor refused on the grounds that less than two-thirds of the full branch voted, as called for in the state constitution. The Penn. house of representatives voted to impeach the three justices on 20 March. The senate did not take up the issue until the following session. It found the men guilty in Jan. 1805 but failed to achieve the two-thirds majority required for removal (Elizabeth K. Henderson, “The Attack on the Judiciary in Pennsylvania, 1800–1810,” PMHB , 61:119–120, 125–126 [April 1937]; G. S. Rowe, Embattled Bench: The Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the Forging of a Democratic Society, 1684–1809, Newark, Del., 1994, p. 270; John J. Hare, ed., The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: Life and Law in the Commonwealth, 1684–2017, University Park, Penn., 2018, p. 428; Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 27 Jan. 1804; Brackenridge, Modern Chivalry, ed. Ed White, Indianapolis, Ind., 2009, p. 573, 580–581). For Dennie’s trial for seditious libel, see JQA to TBA, 19 Aug. 1803, and note 3, above.

4.

The Port Folio had published Revolutionary-era letters exchanged by U.S. officials and C. W. F. Dumas since JQA supplied Dennie with copies of Dumas’ letters in 1802, for which see TBA to JQA, 16 May 1802, and note 3, above. Among those published were four letters from JA to Dumas on European events and Anglo-American affairs dated 21 May 1780, 6 June, 5 Sept. (printed as 3 Sept.), and 4 Oct. and printed in the Port Folio, 4:20–21 (21 Jan. 1804), 4:29 (28 Jan.), 4:35 (4 Feb.), and 4:62 (25 Feb.) (JA, Papers , 9:330–331, 380–381, 384; 10:125–126, 252–254).

5.

The Port Folio, 3:415 (24 Dec. 1803), printed a letter from Benjamin Franklin to Dumas, 29 March 1780, with enciphered passages rendered as strings of capital letters without a key or explanation. Similarly, in the same, 4:13 (14 Jan. 1804), a letter from an unidentified correspondent dated 22 April 1780 used strings of asterisks for enciphered text.