Papers of John Adams, volume 20

To John Adams from Francis Dana, 31 July 1789 Dana, Francis Adams, John
From Francis Dana
Dear Sir Cambridge July 31st: 1789

I did not receive your very obliging favour of the 10th: inst: till yesterday, when I returned from the eastern Circuit. I have heard that the Judicial bill has been passed in the Senate without any alterations respecting the general plan of the judicial system. But you seem 121 to think great changes may be made in it in the house of Representatives—that the district Judges may be annihilated altogether, and the number of Supreme Judges as well as the number of Circuits doubled. It appears to me indispensably necessary to have district Judges who shall have jurisdiction of all Admiralty matters, and whatever may in any way concern the Revenue. This I mean as to the begining of things; and that all causes at Common Law, whether between the Citizens of different states, or foreigners and Citizens, shou’d originate in the Supreme Common Law Courts of the respective States, wherever the Justices thereof are appointed during good behaviour, and have fixed permanent salaries annexed to their offices; but that where this is not the case, that all such Causes may be originated in the federal district Court, or if you please shall be so originated, with the right of appeal to the Circuit Court, upon either plan, when judgment shall be given against the foreigner or the Citizen of another State, but no appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Common Law Courts when the judgment shall be in their favour: it appearing reasonable to me that every Citizen ought to sit down quiet under the judgments of their own Supreme Courts. A provision of this nature wou’d probably have the happy effect of bringing on a speedy establishment of the Sup: Com: Law Courts upon their only proper ground, in every State where they are now differently constituted. It has been my opinion from the first, that an augmentation of the Judges of the Supreme Federal Court wou’d be found necessary, say to nine; but I do by no means think so as to the number of Circuits. The Circuit Courts are to be holden twice a year in each State which will be sufficient, at least for some years to come. I understand an idea is gaining ground in the House of Representatives, of annihilating the district Judges, and throwing all the Admiralty & Revenue Causes originally into the State Sup: Judicial Courts. This wou’d, in my opinion, be exceedingly impolitic, as it wou’d not only be difficult to withdraw such Causes from their Jurisdiction when it shou’d be found inconvenient to continue them under it, but wou’d also infallibly have a strong tendency to render those Courts, if they shou’d discharge their duty in Revenue Causes, very unpopular, serve to lessen that opinion of their impartiality, which ought ever to be kept up among the people at large, to weaken their authority, and of course the respect for the Laws, and for Government itself; These appear to me but a part of the fatal consequences which wou’d ensue from such a temporizing system. Tho’ 122 œconomy is held up as the ostensible ground of such a system, yet it seems to be in realty nothing less than an unpardonable thirst for popularity— I have seen a letter from a Representative, in which he says, that when Salaries are under consideration (alluding to the judicial System) nothing less than 2, or 3000 Dollrs: comports with the ideas of some Gentlemen; because they say no Man of Respectability in the Law wou’d accept any office under such a salary. What may be the case of certain Law characters I do not know: but I shou’d think 1500 wou’d not be rejected by any one in this State who shou’d be appointed district judge, and a considerably lesser sum might do in the smaller States—1

I agree with you touching the characters you have named as Candidates for the Judicial Departments, except the Gentleman whose condemnations, you say, have immortalized his name. He is a friend of mine, a good federal character: but, between us, not fit for such an appointment. He is not a Lawyer.2

Whether in the case you mention, the Governour cou’d be persuaded to appoint Mr: L. I am much at a loss. I fear he wou’d rather nominate Sullivan or Hitchbourn, if he thought his Council wou’d advise to their appointment.—

I was sincere when I told you that I did not wish for an appointment upon the Sup: Federal Bench. Our Chief Justice or Lowell wou’d be worthy Members of that Court. yet I doubt whether the former wou’d accept of a Seat there, on account of their distant employment at certain times. His abilities are equal to that station. Jay wou’d give universal satisfaction, but I have thought he wou’d rather prefer his present office. The Gentn: you mention for the District of Main is not only the fittest Man, but the only fit one within that District: But our present Sup: Jud: Court must not be entirely changed: for to tell you a truth, I know not where their places can be equally well filled. I shou’d dread the appointment of some persons, under the present Administration, as the greatest curse that could fall on this Commonwealth. You know whom I allude to.

I feel myself infinitely obliged to you for the favourable sentiments you have been pleased to express of me. It is my highest ambition to merit in some degree the good opinion of all good men.

We beg your & your Lady’s acceptance of our most sincere regards, and we shall be ever happy in keeping up that friendly connection which has been formed between us.

I am, dear Sir, with much respect & esteem / Your obliged friend & humble Servant

FRA DANA
123

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “The honble the Vice President / of the United States”; endorsed by CA: “Judge Dana / July 31.”

1.

The Judiciary Act of 1789 set the Supreme Court’s annual salaries at $4,000 for the chief justice and $3,500 for each associate justice. Yearly compensation for district judges varied from state to state, ranging from $800 to $1,800 (Judicial Salaries, www.fjc.gov/history/judges/judicial-salaries-supreme-court-justices; Doc. Hist. Supreme Court , 1:666, 719, 722, 723).

2.

Nathan Cushing.

From John Adams to Joseph Hardy, 6 August 1789 Adams, John Hardy, Joseph
To Joseph Hardy
Sir Richmond hill Augt 6 1789

In 1779 at Bilbao I was solicited for releif by a number of American seamen who had been captured by the English and turned adrift in Portugal. These wandered to Spain with much difficulty and in great distress. I had no means of supplying them: but Mr Gardoqui very generously offered to assist them upon my advice.1 The article in his account, ought to be allowed him with interest and thanks. I only regret, that the multiplicity of other cares, prevented me from doing justice to my own feelings as well as to the honor of this Country by remitting the money to Bilbao from Holland, when I had money of the public in my hands— I am &

John Adams

LbC in CA’s hand (Adams Papers); internal address: “Mr Hardy”; APM Reel 115.

1.

Two days after reaching Bilbao, Spain, in mid-Jan. 1780, JA dined with merchant Joseph de Gardoqui and solicited aid for fifteen American prisoners who had escaped from Portugal. Gardoqui agreed to furnish them with “Cloaths to the Amount of six dollars a Man.” JA explained that while he lacked any formal authority to make the request, he “believed Congress would do all in their Power to repay him.” Hardy (d. 1813), who acted as the first clerk in the comptroller’s office of the Treasury Department from 1789 to 1791, facilitated Gardoqui’s claim (JA, D&A , 2:431, 432; 4:236; Franklin, Papers , 38:19; Washington, Papers, Presidential Series , 2:439).

To John Adams from John Brown Cutting, 6 August 1789 Cutting, John Brown Adams, John
From John Brown Cutting
My Dear Sir, Bordeaux 6 Aug 1789

Before this reaches You I hope You will have authentic accounts of the late revolution in France.

At such a distance from Paris it is difficult to asscertain the truth of such important transactions as have continually taken place since the 14th of July, at court and in the capital. By Capt Bond of the Washington I inclosed you a parcel of pamphlets and newspapers which afforded You I hope some satisfaction.

I now add a few more. This City was beautifully illuminated last night in honor of Mr Neckar’s reinstatement in office.

124

No new administration is yet formed— The establishment of a national constitution it is thought will precede that measure; meanwhile those ministers who did not manifest their guilt by fear or flight continue to perform the functions of their respective offices.1

I sit off for Paris tomorrow, whence you shall again hear from me if Mr Jefferson be not sailed.

I take advantage of a ship that sails in a day or two for Philadelphia2 to transmit this scrawl to You and am, with much respect and attachment / Your Mo. Obedt: Sert:

John Brown Cutting

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “John Adams Vice President of the United States.”

1.

Despite the popular momentum for political change in the wake of the 20 June Tennis Court Oath, the National Assembly’s committee to draft a constitution struggled from 6 July 1789 to 3 Sept. 1791, riven by internal politicking and complex debates over defining the rights of the citizen in conjunction with the powers of the king. France’s new constitution was finally adopted on 3 Sept., and Louis XVI consented to it eleven days later (Bosher, French Rev. , p. 133–146).

2.

Cutting likely sent this letter via the Pallas, Capt. Collins, which reached Philadelphia in early Oct. 1789 (Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, 14 Oct.).