Papers of John Adams, volume 20

To John Adams from William Cranch, 11 December 1790 Cranch, William Adams, John
From William Cranch
Sir, Braintree Decr. 11. 1790.

Having neglected writing to you for so long a time, for which I can form no possible Apology, except a general aversion to writing, I feel a degree of diffidence, in again addressing you—and being destitute of political information, I am ignorant how I shall render a letter acceptable.1 I have yet to acknowledge the receipt of two favours from 443 you, of the 14th, & 31st of last March, the latter of which inclosed the Character of an honest Lawyer. I obeyed your commands respect the printing of it, as far as I could. I regret that the vices of indolence, drunkeness, captiousness & ignorance should render it inapplicable to so great a number of the profession in this County. There are however enough left yet, I hope, to keep up the remembrance of that Character, and to invalidate that popular opinion, that every lawyer must be a dishonest Man.

I am sorry to hear that the County of Barnstable, have probably made choice of one of the Profession, for their Representative in Congress, whose intemperance has already ruined his own Character, and will, I fear bring disgrace upon the Commonwealth. It is said that the influence of General Freeman, decided the choice. His utmost Exertions were used, in order to remove Mr Bourne, that the General’s Son, who has just entered the Profession, may step into Mr Bourne’s business.2 A selfishness of Principle which, it appears to me, the good People of the District ought to resent.

All this, Sir, you may possibly have heard before—I am so little engaged in the political way at present, that I am almost the last person in the County to whom the News comes. My Sphere of Politics, like the Magician’s Circle, includes only myself; and my principle object in view at present is to obtain a support. It is extremely disagreable to me to be obliged to be dependant, even upon the goodness of a Parent, after having arrived at the Age of Manhood— I am still, however, necessitated to submit to that Condition. I do not complain that business comes no faster. I know not what right I have to expect more. For some time at least, it must be accident only that can bring me Clients—

I find myself, Sir, very ignorant of the Civil law. Where shall I begin my Course of Study in that branch? I have presumed, Sir, to trouble you with this request, relying upon that readyness to afford Instruction which I have so often experienced, and for which I hope I shall always feel Grateful.

Our friends here are all well— We feel extremely [an]xious concerning my Aunt’s health— We have not yet heard of her Arrival at Philadelphia— We regret that your distance from us is increased & are waiting with impatience for the Spring in Expectation of a visit from you & my Aunt, when none of your friends or Relations will receive you with more sincere Respect, duty or Affection than your obliged Nephew

William Cranch.
444

RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “The Vice President / Of the United States / Philadelphia”; internal address: “The Vice President—” Some loss of text where the seal was removed.

1.

Cranch last wrote to JA on 24 Jan., above.

2.

Barnstable, Mass., lawyer Shearjashub Bourne (1746–1806), Harvard 1764, defeated fourteen other candidates, including the incumbent, George Partridge, to become the new congressional representative for Plymouth County. Cranch referred to the political impact of Brig. Gen. Nathaniel Freeman (ca. 1741–1827), of Sandwich, Mass., and his son, lawyer Nathaniel Jr. (1766–1800), Harvard 1787, a classmate of JQA’s ( AFC , 8:139, 9:159; Biog. Dir. Cong. ; A New Nation Votes; Heitman, Register Continental Army ; Boston Columbian Centinel, 26 Sept. 1827).

To John Adams from William MacCreery, 11 December 1790 MacCreery, William Adams, John
From William MacCreery
Dear Sir Baltimore 11 December 1790

Altho’ it be the fate of persons high in power to be exposed to the importunity of the many, and they are obliged not only to suffer, but submit to it, I assure you I feel much repugnance in troubling you with this letter.1

The arrival of a Vessell here in the last summer with a number of German-passengers after a very tedious voyage, having communicated a contagious distemper to some of the inhabitants, hath at last convinced us of the necessity of a Pest-house near this Town, and consequently of the appointment of a health-officer; and having of late been rather over stock’d with Gentlemen of the Faculty, not less than seven have started for this small plate!2 It is for this reason that I have interested myself in behalf of my Freind & Neighbour Doctor John Coulter—not merely because he is my Freind and neighbour, but because he is well qualified for the place, and has, in my oppinion, a better claim to it than any other person whatever. He has resided in this Town upwards of Twenty Years; has been a steady, uniform patriot, served in our Navy, and several Years on the Bench with much reputation. He has rendered most essential service to his Country in the late conflicts with the enemies of the present Constitution; having served in our assembly that Year to the no small prejudice of his Family. All this is well known to Mr. Carroll of the Senate, & to Mr. Smith of the lower House, to whom I beg leave to refer you. Doctor Coulter wou’d not have needed my recommendation on this occasion, had not his competitors got a great start of him in their applications for Petitions & certificates; as they reside in Town, & he at the Point—the latter however is the most eligible situation for the office he solicits. If the appointment rested with the inhabitants of this Town at large, there is no doubt but Dr. Coulter 445 wou’d carry it by a very large Majority; Doctor Gilder (one of the applicants) having served all, or most of the war as surgeon in the Army, has certainly strong claims on the public, but Doctor Coulters situation, long residence and services amongst us, gives him I think, a superior claim to the place in question, to all the other candidates.

Let me therefore beg of you, Sir, in virtue of that goodness you were wont to shew me on former occasions, that any services you can render Doctor Coulter in this bussiness, with propriety, may be done, and placed to my debit—for his good conduct therein, if appointed, I venture to hold myself responsable—

With the greatest respect, & most sincere attachment I have the honor to be / Dear Sir / Your Obliged Hle Servt.

Will MacCreery

RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “Honorable J. Adams V. P. U. S. Philadelphia”; endorsed: “Mr MacCreery / 11. Decr. ansd 27. / 1790.”

1.

Ulster, Ireland, native MacCreery (1750–1814) was a Baltimore merchant who transmitted goods for the Adamses during the Revolutionary War. He represented Maryland in the House of Representatives from 1803 to 1809 (vol. 5:299; Biog. Dir. Cong. ).

2.

This may have been the Baltimore-bound brigantine Venus, Capt. Pajeken, which sailed from Bremen on 6 Oct. 1789 and did not return there until 20 July 1790. To address a growing need on the docks, MacCreery recommended the appointment of John Coulter (ca. 1751–1823), of County Down, Ireland, who had been a Continental Navy surgeon. Five more local physicians applied: George Buchanan, Reuben Gilder, James Wynkoop, John Ross, and Capt. Benjamin Dashiell.

Taking up the issue on 16 Dec., the House of Representatives read a petition from Baltimore citizens requesting a health officer to protect the city from foreign diseases, and it was referred to committee. On 21 Dec. the committee advised the establishment of health officers in U.S. ports and began to draft legislation, but the project languished until 6 June 1794, when the House consented to a Maryland state law of 28 Dec. 1793 appointing Baltimore doctors John Ross, Thomas Drysdale, and John Worthington as health officers (Maryland Journal, 6 Oct. 1789, 20 July 1790; Jefferson, Papers , 18:472; Washington, Papers, Presidential Series , 7:107, 108, 116, 174, 255; 13:518; Baltimore American & Commercial Daily Advertiser, 29 May 1823; John R. Quinan, Medical Annals of Baltimore from 1608 to 1880, Baltimore, 1884, p. 18, 19).