Adams Family Correspondence, volume 15
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:.”
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).
JQA to TBA, 22 Jan., and note 2, above.
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.
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.
th: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
RC (PHi:Samuel Washington Woodhouse Coll.); addressed: “William Meredith Esqr /
Philada:”; internal address: “Wm Meredith Esqr:.”
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).
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.).
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.
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).
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.