Papers of John Adams, volume 20
I have persecuted you, too much with my Letters.— I beg you would give yourself no trouble to answer them, but when you are quite at Leisure, from more important Business or more agreable Amusement.
I deny; that there is or ever was in Europe a more free Republic than England, or that any Liberty on Earth ever equalled English Liberty, notwithstanding the defects in their Constitution.
The Idea of admitting absolute Monarchy into this Country, either in this or the next Century Strikes me with horror. a little Wisdom at present, may preserve a free Government in America, I hope for ever—certainly for many Centuries.
I agree with you, that hereditary Monarchy and hereditary Aristocracy, ought not yet to be attempted in America—and that three 107 ballanced Branches, ought to be at Stated Periods elected by the People. This must and will and ought to continue, till Intrigue and Corruption Faction and Sedition Shall appear in those Elections to Such a degree as to render hereditary Institutions a Remedy against a greater Evil.
I learned in my Youth, from one of my Preceptors. Vattel. B.2. c.3
ss.41. that “a Nation may grant to its Conductor, what degree of Authority and what
rights it thinks proper: it is equally free, in regard to the Name, the Titles, and
honours, with which it would decorate him. But it is agreable to
its Wisdom, and of Importance to its Reputation, not to deviate, in this respect, too
much from the Customs’ commonly received among civilized Nations. Let Us Still
observe, that it ought to be directed there by Prudence, to proportion titles and
honours to the Power of its Superiour and to the Authority with which it would invest
him. Titles and Honours, it is true, determine nothing; they are vain names and vain
Ceremonies when they are ill placed: but who does not know the Influence they have, on
the Thoughts of Men? This is then a more Serious Affair than it
appears at the first glance. The Nation ought not to degrade its conductor, by
too low a Title. it ought to be Still more careful not to Swell his heart with a vain
name, by unbounded honours; So as to make him conceive the Thoughts of arrogating to
himself a Power answerable to them, or to acquire a proportionable Power by unjust
Conquests. on the other hand, an important Title may engage the Conductor, to Support
with greater firmness the Dignity of a Nation. Conjunctures determine the Prudence which
observes in every Thing a just Proportion.”1 All the Reading Observation and Reflection of
thirty or 35 Years, have confirmed these Truths in my mind.
Among the Romans Scipio was Imperator, and Cæsar was Pontifex Maximus.— They were Tribunus Sacer, Pater conscriptus, and Patronus excellentissimus, on all Occasions, and the Prolocutor of the Senate, was Prince of the Senate. There is not a grosser Error, in the World, than the common saying that the Romans had no Titles.
We come now to your Question, which has great Weight and solidity. “If We begin with Titles where will they end?” it is true, as you Say, “the States Still retain the Power of creating Titles.” or at least they may claim it.— You ask another very important and difficult Question “By what Rule Shall We Settle Precedency.?[”]
I will neither undertake to answer, Where We shall end, nor to determine the Rule— But this I will venture to say, that We never shall have, either Government or Tranquility or Liberty, untill Some 108 Rule of Preceedency is adopted, and some Titles settled. The question is not whether Titles shall be admitted into our Country. They are already in it, and you will annihilate the Nation before you will eradicate them.— The question is whether Provincial, Titles or Diplomatic Titles, can preserve or Acquire Consideration at home or abroad to a national Government.— I totally deny that there is any Thing in Reason or Religion against Titles proportional to Ranks and Trusts. and I affirm, that they are indispensably necessary to give Dignity and Energy to Government— and on this ground alone I am an Advocate for them. in my private Character, I despise them as much at least as any Quaker, or Philosopher on Earth.
You may depend on being the Contempt, the Scorn and the Derision of all Europe, while you call your national Condutor, General or President— You may depend on another Thing—the State Governments will ever be upper most, in America in the Minds of our own People, till you give a Superiour Title to your first national Magistrate.
The most modest Title you can give him, in any reasonable Proportion, to the Wealth, Power and Population of this Country and to the constitutional Authority and Dignity of his office is “His Majesty, the President.” This is my opinion, and I Scorn to be hypocrite enough to disguise it.— Miracles will not be wrought for Us. We dont deserve them.— if We will have Government, We must Use human and natural means. Titles and Ranks are as essential to Government, as Reason and Justice.— in short government is nothing else but Titles Ceremonies and Ranks. They alone enable Reason to produce Justice.
I am with Usual Esteem and regard / dear sir your
RC (MB:John Adams MS Coll.); internal address: “Dr Rush.”; endorsed: “Jno.
Adams.” LbC (Adams
Papers); APM Reel 115.
Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations;
or, the Principles of Natural Law, London, 1759–1760, Book II, ch. iii, sec.
41, a copy of which, with significant annotations, is in JA’s library at
MB (
Catalogue of JA’s
Library
).
thJuly 1789
By a vessel that departs from hence in half an hour bound for the
Potowmack I send you some authentic papers which contain details of the late revolution
in the government of France.1 Mr Jefferson’s 109 last letter to me is
dated on the 16th. He confirms most of the facts contained
in the printed letter of M. Nairac and in the “Extrait d’une lettre de Paris”—and
concludes by remarking that tho’ the people of Paris are still in such a heat in
consequence of the late bloodshed that they distrust the royal word and continue
arming—yet that he (Mr Jefferson) believes that the king is
now perfectly sincere in his surrender at discretion to the states general and will do
whatsoever they desire him.2 All the
troops that were lately assembled in the vicinity of Versailles and Paris are actually
on their march to the frontier towns of the kingdom
The Queen, it is whisperd, has retired into a Convent of which she is foundress—for the present—near Versailles. Madam De Polinac has escaped to England. Count D’Artois has fled to his brother in law the King of Sardinia. The Condee’s, Conte’s Marschal de Broglio and those ministers and instruments of the court cabal who had the temerity to assemble forty thousand troops to overawe, or dissolve the states general and crush every hope of a thorough national reform have been most egregiously out-general’d and miserably defeated.3 A number of those capital culprits will be impeach’d. The soldiers the subaltern officers, the inferior clergy the lower middling and opulent classes in the cities and many patent nobles and great land holders in the country are so united in sentiment upon this great occasion and the spirit of the nation is so hot for the measure that nothing can prevent it but a miraculous mitigation of the public temper. M. Neckar on the contrary and Count Montmorrin, the two honest ministers whose dismission from office of late exile was the signal of conflict between the Court and Country—will doubtless be re-instated4
On the 17th of July the King entered
Paris guarded by the burgers only and the late President of the Commons, M. Bailly, now
Mayor of Paris delivered to him the keys of that capital with a speech which I am told
was to the following effect. “These keys that Henry the fourth restored to the City
which he had conquer’d; in the name of the City are now restored to his descendent whom
we have conquer’d.”5
The Marquis La Fayette being nominated by the armed Burgers of Paris commander in chief of their forces the states general approved the appointment and the king countersigning his commission has confirmed it. At this moment it is unquestionably the first command in the nation. The most moderate accounts state the number of armed people in Paris at two hundred thousand.
110The french troops for refusing to butcher their fellow citizens when that blind old bigot De Brolio,6 instigated by a corrupt junto of courtesans and courtiers, not only commanded but endeavoured to seduce them to do it by an offer of the whole pillage of Paris—it is said have not only in general acquir’d credit but a part of them in particular have obtain’d renown and the universal applause of the country for their gallant deeds in behalf of their bleeding brethren the burgers, in whose ranks they fought till the mercenary germans were repuls’d and then led on the same city band to attack the arsenal and storm the bastile. In the display of this honourable generous and manly spirit which guided, emulated and guarded those neighbours whom they were commanded to slaughter the corps of french guards was greatly distinguish’d—especially in that daring assault of the bastile the success of which dismayed their enemies and still astonishes the nation. This same bastile is now level’d in the dust and razed to its lowest foundations. Most of the french guards I understand and many soldiers also of other royal regiments are now incorporated with the armd burgers of Paris who with reason love & cherish them and from whose associations they are never again to seperate. Perhaps this single circumstance may partly account for the immense number of parisians in arms—now under command of the Marquis. The same soul and spirit pervades the provinces—nor does it appear that in any quarter of the kingdom there exists the shadow of an opposition to the measures of the states general nor one murmur of sympathy in favour of the court or king.
In a word the monarch & his ministers mistook the temper of the times and grossly miscalculated both in despising the intrepidity of citizens and disbelieving the patriotism of soldiers. I rejoice that their error is as irretrievable as it is conspicuous. I rejoice that the people are triumphant—that the rights of man are asserted—that freedom prospers—that tyranny withers—and that despotism is dying—in France.
Will Mrs Adams and yourself have the
goodness thus abruptly to accept my best compliments and believe me always to be / with
unalterable affection / and respect / Your Most Obed Servt.
RC and enclosure (Adams Papers); internal address: “John Adams Vice
President of the United States.”; endorsed: “Mr Cutting.
24. July / 1789.”
Cutting enclosed a copy of his 21 July letter to Thomas
Jefferson, describing the opening stages of the French Revolution and the formation of
the National Guard, the civil militia led by the Marquis de Lafayette to curb the
“ferment” of street violence in 111
112 and around Paris. Cutting wrote: “I have seen and
heard both in Paris and Bordeaux enough to convince me that the flame of liberty which
is now kindled in France will consume every relic of feudal and papal tyranny that yet
lingers within her confines together with the clumsy buttresses of unlimited
prerogative: and that the genius of free government may spring like a phoenix from
their ashes and permanently inhabit a new european edifice.” Cutting sent this letter,
one of the first comprehensive reports that JA received of the French
Revolution, via the Washington, Capt. Bond, which reached
New York City in late September (Jefferson, Papers
, 15:293–296; New-York Packet, 8 Oct.). For the onset of the French
Revolution, see Descriptive List of
Illustrations, No. 1, above.
Jefferson and others read an account of the chaos in Paris
written and distributed by Paul Nérac, a deputy from Bordeaux. Cutting believed that
Nérac’s article, not found, briefly soothed the protesters, writing that its
“moderating efficacy was immediately manifest. The patriots of Paris it appear’d had
overcome diciplin’d mercenaries and cut the throats of a few obnoxious chieftains. But
even had the event of that conflict prov’d otherwise nothing cou’d daunt or diminish
the spirit of all ranks of people here in support of the national assembly, nor
suppress open demonstrations of its fervency” (Jefferson, Papers
,
15:293, 296).
As mob violence mounted in the weeks following the Bastille’s
fall, King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette wove in and out of public view.
Prominent members of the court, including Charles Philippe, Comte d’Artois, scattered
abroad. On 15 July the king ordered Victor François, Marshal de Broglie (1718–1804),
to move troops out of Paris (William Doyle, The Oxford History
of the French Revolution, Oxford, 1989, p. 108, 110, 112, 122, 451).
Royal advisors who urged Louis XVI to assent to the liberal
restructuring of government powers under the June formation of the National Assembly
now faced the king’s purge. After being dismissed on 11 July, finance minister Jacques
Necker was invited to return to his post five days later by order of the National
Assembly. Armand Marc, Comte de Montmorin de Saint Herem, the foreign minister, was
also dismissed but regained his post (Bosher, French Rev.
,
p. xvii, I, 128; John S. C. Abbott, The French Revolution of
1789: As Viewed in the Light of Republican Institutions, 2 vols., N.Y., 1887,
2:522).
Jean Sylvain Bailly (1736–1793), who served as mayor of Paris
from 1789 to 1791, presided over the 20 June Tennis Court Oath, which marked the
National Assembly’s formal creation and its public commitment to drafting a national
constitution. After meeting with Bailly, Louis XVI proceeded to the Paris town hall,
where he donned a tricolor cockade (Hoefer, Nouv. biog. générale
; Bosher, French
Rev.
, p. xvii, 131, 133).
JA socialized with Broglie in Paris in 1778–1779.
Broglie was a cousin of the Chevalier de La Luzerne (JA, D&A
, 2:295, 396; Hoefer, Nouv. biog.
générale
).