In the first national election under the new Constitution from
15 December 1788 to 7 January 1789 only six of the eleven states
eligible to vote cast votes for the electoral college.
The Federalist George Washington won with 42,782 popular votes and all 69 electors.
John Adams was elected Vice President with 34 electoral votes
as Alexander Hamilton made sure he got many votes less than Washington.
Adams had declined to run to be a United States Senator for Massachusetts.
The Vice President was subordinate to the President,
though he was President of the Senate.
Adams was not sure how to act when President Washington came to the Senate.
On 20 March 1789 John Adams wrote this to Elbridge Gerry:
The Right and the Duty of throwing away Votes
I cannot cleverly comprehend, having never read
of any such Morality or Policy in my youth.
The Anxiety to obtain Washington for the first office
was very just and very universal: so unanimous
that it is and ever was astonishing to me
that any man ever doubted of his having every Vote.
For myself I only regret that the first great Election
should be tarnished in the Eyes of the World and of Posterity
with the appearance or suspicion of an Intrigue.
Who were the Knaves and who the Fools I neither know
nor care; but there is a strong appearance that
a proportion of each Species must have been concerned.
This however must be between you and me.
The House of Representatives will find it necessary
to make the Executive respectable,
or they will soon be overpowered by the Senate.
The President is the natural ally of the House of Reps.
and they must give him unequivocal Support,
or he will be made a mere Cat’s Paw
of the Junto of Grandees in the Senate.
You must give him Splendor which
shall place him decidedly above any of the Senators.1
The United States Constitution specified that the new Senate should meet
on March 4, and the new Congress did not have a quorum until April 6 1789.
Richard Henry Lee asked what title they should give
the new President and what they should call him.
John Adams proposed the they call him “His Highness,
the President of the United States of America,
and Protector of the Rights of the Same.”
This was soon rejected.
When Thomas Jefferson heard about it in France, he called it “superlatively ridiculous.”
The Anti-Federalist Senator William Maclay of Pennsylvania criticized Adams
and reminded him that the United States Constitution declared,
“No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States.”
Adams without much to do was gaining weight,
and Ralph Izard of South Carolina gave him the title “His Rotundity.”
The House of Representatives voted to address the chief executive simply
as “George Washington, President of the United States,”
and the Senate agreed to that on May 14.
Adams left his home in Braintree, Massachusetts,
the only state that had abolished slavery,
and he was cheered as he passed through New England.
He reached New York City on April 20.
President Washington was not inaugurated until April 30.
John Adams in his Inaugural Address as Vice President on 21 April 1789 said,
Gentlemen of the Senate:
Invited to this respectable situation by the suffrages
of our fellow citizens, according to the Constitution,
I have thought it my duty cheerfully and readily to accept it.
Unaccustomed to refuse any public service,
however dangerous to my reputation, or disproportioned
to my talents, it would have been inconsistent to have
adopted another maxim of conduct, at this time,
when the prosperity of the country, and the liberties
of the people, require perhaps, as much as ever,
the attention of those who possess
any share of the public confidence.
I should be destitute of sensibility, if, upon my arrival
in this city, and presentation to this Legislature,
and especially to this Senate, I could see, without emotion,
so many of those characters, of whose virtuous exertions
I have so often been a witness—from whose countenances
and examples I have ever derived encouragement
and animation; whose disinterested friendship
has supported me, in many intricate conjunctures
of public affairs, at home and abroad:
Those celebrated defenders of the liberties of this country,
whom menaces could not intimidate, corruption seduce,
nor flattery allure:
Those intrepid assertors of the rights of mankind,
whose philosophy and policy, have enlightened the world,
in twenty years, more than it was ever before enlightened
in many centuries, by ancient schools,
or modern universities.
I must have been inattentive to the course of events,
if I were either ignorant of the fame, or insensible
to the merit, of those other characters in the Senate,
to whom it has been my misfortune
to have been hitherto personally unknown.
It is with satisfaction, that I congratulate the people
of America on the formation of a national Constitution,
and the fair prospect of a consistent
administration of a government of laws.
On the acquisition of a House of Representatives,
chosen by themselves; of a Senate thus composed
by their own State Legislatures; and on the prospect
of an executive authority, in the hands of one whose portrait
I shall not presume to draw.
Were I blessed with powers to do justice to his character,
it would be impossible to increase the confidence
or affection of his country,
or make the smallest addition to his glory.
This can only be effected by a discharge of the present
exalted trust on the same principles, with the same abilities
and virtues, which have uniformly appeared
in all his former conduct, public or private.
May I, nevertheless, be indulged to inquire, if we look over
the catalogue of the first magistrates of nations,
whether they have been denominated presidents
or consuls, kings or princes, where shall we find one,
whose commanding talents and virtues,
whose over-ruling good fortune have so completely united
all hearts and voices in his favor?
who enjoyed the esteem and admiration of foreign nations
and fellow citizens with equal unanimity?
Qualities so uncommon, are no common blessings
to the country that possesses them.
By those great qualities, and their benign effects,
has Providence marked out the head of this nation,
with a hand so distinctly visible, as to have been seen
by all men, and mistaken by none.
It is not for me to interrupt your deliberations
by any general observations on the state of the nation, or
by recommending, or proposing, any particular measures.
It would be superfluous, to gentlemen of your
great experience, to urge the necessity of order.
It is only necessary to make an apology for myself.
Not wholly without experience in public assemblies,
I have been more accustomed to take a share
in their debates, than to preside in their deliberations.
It shall be my constant endeavor to behave towards
every member of this most honorable body with all that
consideration, delicacy, and decorum which becomes
the dignity of his station and character.
But, if, from inexperience, or inadvertency,
anything should ever escape me, inconsistent with propriety,
I must entreat you, by imputing it to its true cause
and not to any want of respect, to pardon and excuse it.
A trust of the greatest magnitude is committed
to this Legislature; and the eyes of the world are upon you.
Your country expects, from the results of your deliberations,
in concurrence with the other branches of government,
consideration abroad, and contentment at home—
prosperity, order, justice, peace, and liberty.
And may God Almighty’s providence assist you
to answer their just expectations.2
Adams took his oath of office as Vice President on April 23.
John Adams having recently written extensively in his
Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America
about the various forms and characteristics of monarchies, aristocracies,
and democracies, some people were concerned about his admiration
of some aspects of British government.
On May 8 he wrote this letter to Benjamin Lincoln to clarify his views:
I have received your kind favor of April 22d and Shall not
be easy till it is answered, though it is not easy
to find the time, amidst the Confusion of innumerable Visits,
formal Ceremonials, Balls, Commencements, Levees, &ca
&ca, blended with the constant
more serious Duties of my Situation.—
I agree with you entirely, that among the first dangers
to be apprehended is a contest
between the general and particular Governments.—
General Clinton, has decidedly acknowledged the Superiority
of Rank; yet it may be prudent
not to Say much upon this subject.—
He has made the first Visit and ceded the first Step,
both to President and Vice President.—
This is indispensable in all the States;
however frivolous you and I may hold this matter,
it is the Pivot on which the great Question will turn,
between the Authority of the national
and that of the State Governments.
This will be humiliating and mortifying to Governors
& Lt Governors; but they must submit to it,
or they will infallibly undermine and overturn
the whole system to avoid which Calamity the Dignity
and Splendor of the President’s office must be Supported.
There is a little Seeming difference of opinion
between you and me in one Point.—
It does not appear to me “extraordinary, that those
whose fears were alarmed that a dangerous Aristocracy
was forming” Should so soon be brought
to adopt the System proposed to them.
Nature and Art both concur, in having Recourse to one great
officer, as a Protector against a dangerous Aristocracy.
It is a common opinion that all those who dread or detest
an Aristocracy must Still more dread and detest a Monarchy;
but no opinion is more erroneous; the contrary is so true,
that in every Instance Monarchy has been resorted to,
as the only asylum against the eternal discords,
the deadly Feuds, the endless ambition, Avarice, Lust,
Cruelty, Jealousy, Envy and Revenge of uncontrolled
Aristocracies—Where the People have Virtue, public Spirit
and a Love of Liberty, they have had recourse
to Limited Monarchy and three Branches of Power.
This has been the Case of America, large Monarchical
Powers, are given to the first office, in the new Constitution.
It is true, that an excessive proportion of Aristocratic Powers
Still exist, and it is much to be feared, that neither
the Executive Authority in the President
nor the Legislative Authority of the House of Reps. will be
sufficient to Stand long against the Powers of the Senate.—
But We may hope that a People, who have shown already,
that they see the necessity of Some balance
in a Government, will in time See the necessity
of making that balance complete.
I agree perfectly with you, in opinion, that the Gentlemen,
the Men of Property, of the description you mention,
are of vast importance, and that no quiet Govt. can ever
be instituted or Supported without their Concurrence
that these will never be easy, and indeed ought not
to be contented without a Security of their Property.—
But give me leave to Say that these are not so unanimous
as they ought to be, in the only opinion, the only measure,
that can possibly ever answer their own honest End.
They are by no means unanimous in a disposition to give
a decided Support to the Independence,
the Dignity and Splendor of the Executive department;
all will depend on this.
It is more difficult to accomplish
to lead the common People right.
But without Prophecy it may be clearly and certain
their Property will never be secure till this is done.
I am quite agreed with you, that nothing would Secure
the national Government more than uniting all these Men
in the manner you propose.—
But We must not proceed very fast in this;
at least this appears probable to me.
The House of Representatives are of this the best Judges.3
On 10 May 1789 President George Washington
gave Vice President John Adams this letter:
The President of the United States wishes to avail himself
of your sentiments on the following points.
1. Whether a line of conduct, equally distant from an
association with all kinds of company on the one hand
and from a total seclusion from society
on the other, ought to be adopted by him?
And, in that case, how is it to be done?
2. What will be the least exceptionable method of bringing
any system, which may be adopted on this subject,
before the public and into use?
3. Whether, after a little time, one day in every week
will not be sufficient for receiving visits of compliment?
4. Whether it would tend to prompt impertinent applications
& involve disagreeable consequences to have it known,
that the President will, every morning at 8 o’clock,
be at leisure to give audiences to persons
who may have business with him?
5. Whether, when it shall have been understood that
the President is not to give general entertainment in the
manner the presidents of congress have formerly done,
it will be practicable to draw such a line of discrimination
in regard to persons, as that six, eight or ten official
characters (including in the rotation the members of both
houses of congress) may be invited informally or otherwise
to dine with him on the days fixed for receiving company,
without exciting clamors in the rest of the community?
6. Whether it would be satisfactory to the Public for the
President to make about four great entertainments in a year
on such great occasions as—the anniversary of the
Declaration of Independence, the alliance with France—
the peace with Great Britain—the organization of the
general government: and whether arrangements of these two
last kinds could be in danger of diverting too much of the
President’s time from business, or of producing the evils
which it was intended to avoid by his living more recluse
than the presidents of congress have heretofore lived.
7. Whether there would be any impropriety in the
President’s making informal visits—that is to say,
in his calling upon his acquaintances or public characters
for the purposes of sociability or civility—and what as to
the form of doing it, might evince these visits to have been
made in his private character, so as that they might not be
construed into visits from the President of the United States?
And in what light would his appearance rarely
at tea-parties be considered?
8. Whether, during the recess of congress, it would not be
advantageous to the interests of the union for the President
to make the tour of the United States, in order to become
better acquainted with their principal characters and internal
circumstances, as well as to be more accessible to numbers
of well-informed persons, who might give him useful
information and advice on political subjects?
9. If there is a probability that either of the arrangements
may take place, which will eventually cause additional expenses,
whether it would not be proper that these ideas should come
into contemplation, at the time when congress shall
make a permanent provision for the support of the executive.Remarks.
On the one side no augmentation can be effected
in the pecuniary establishment which shall be made,
in the first instance, for the support of the Executive.
On the other, all moneys destined to that purpose
beyond the actual expenditures, will be left in the treasury
of the United States or sacredly applied
to the promotion of some national objects.
Many things, which appear of little importance in themselves
and at the beginning, may have great and durable
consequences from their having been established
at the commencement of a new general government.
It will be much easier to commence the administration,
upon a well-adjusted system, built on tenable grounds,
than to correct errors, or alter inconveniences,
after they shall have been confirmed by habit.
The President, in all matters of business and etiquette,
can have no object but to demean himself in his public
character in such a manner as to maintain the dignity
of office, without subjecting himself to the imputation
of superciliousness or unnecessary reserve.
Under these impressions, he asks
for your candid and undisguised opinion.4
On May 17 Vice President John Adams gave Washington this reply:
The Vice President of the United States has the honor
to present his humble opinion, on the points proposed,
for his consideration.
1. That an association with all kinds of company,
and a total seclusion from society, are extremes, which,
in the actual circumstances of this country, and under
our form of government, may be properly avoided.
2. The system of the President will gradually develop
itself in practice, without any formal communication
to the legislature, or publication from the press.
Paragraphs in the public prints may, however, appear,
from time to time, without any formal authority,
that may lead and reconcile the public mind.
3. Considering the number of strangers from many
countries, and of citizens from various States,
who will resort to the seat of government,
it is doubted whether two days in a week
will not be indispensable for visits of compliment.
A little experience however, will elucidate this point.
4. Under the fourth head, it is submitted to consideration,
whether all personal applications ought not to be made,
in the first instance to a minister of state.
Yet an appeal should be open by petition to the President,
who, if he judges the subject worthy of it,
may admit the party to a personal Interview.
Access to the supreme magistrate ought not to be rigorously
denied in any case that is worthy of his consideration.
Nevertheless, in every case, the name, quality, and, when
these are not sufficient to raise a presumption in their favor,
their business, ought to be communicated to a chamberlain,
or gentleman in waiting, who should judge
whom to admit and whom to exclude.
Some limitation of time may be necessary, too, as,
for example, from eight to nine or ten; for, without it,
the whole forenoon, or the whole day, may be taken up.
5. There is no doubt that the President may invite
what official characters, members of congress,
strangers, or citizens of distinction he pleases,
in small parties, without exciting clamors;
but this should always be done without formality.
6. The entertainments mentioned in this article would
much more properly be made by a minister of state for
foreign or domestic affairs, or some other minister of state,
or the Vice President, whom, upon such occasions,
the President, in his private character,
might honor with his presence.
But in no case whatever, can I conceive it proper,
for the President to make any formal public entertainment.
7. There can be no impropriety in the President’s
making or receiving informal visits among his Friends
or acquaintances at his pleasure.
Undress, and few attendant will sufficiently show
that such visits are made as a man,
and a citizen, a friend, or acquaintance.
But in no case whatever should a visit be made
or returned in form by the President;
at least, unless an emperor of Germany,
or some other sovereign, should travel to this country.
The President’s pleasure should absolutely decide,
concerning his attendance at tea-parties
in a private character; and no gentleman or lady
ought ever to complain, if he never, or rarely attends.
The President’s private life should be at his own discretion,
and the world should respectfully acquiesce.
As President, he should have no intercourse with society,
but upon public business, or at his levees.
This distinction, it is, with submission apprehended,
ought to govern the whole conduct.
8. A tour might, no doubt, be made, with great advantage
to the public, if the time can be spared; but it will naturally
be considered, as foreign affairs arrive every day,
and the business of the executive and judicial departments
will require constant attention, whether the President’s
residence will not necessarily be confined to one Place.Observations.
The civil list ought to provide
for the President’s household.
What number of chamberlains, aides-de-camp,
secretaries, masters of ceremonies &c.
will become necessary, it is difficult to foresee.
But should not all such establishments be distinct
from the allowance to the President for his services,
which is mentioned in the constitution?
In all events the provision for the President
and his household ought to be large and ample.
The office, by its legal authority, defined in the constitution,
has no equal in the world, excepting those only
which are held by crowned heads;
nor is the royal authority in all cases to be compared to it.
The royal office in Poland is
a mere shadow in comparison of it.
The Dogeship in Venice, and
the Stadholdership in Holland, are not so much.
Neither dignity nor authority can be supported in
human minds, collected into nations or any great numbers,
without a splendor and majesty
in some degree proportioned to them.
The sending and receiving ambassadors, is one
of the most splendid and important prerogatives
of sovereigns, absolute or limited; and this,
in our constitution, is wholly in the President.
If the state and pomp essential to this great department
are not, in a good degree, preserved, it will be in vain
for America to hope for consideration with foreign powers.
These observations are submitted, after all,
with diffidence, conscious that my long residence abroad
may have impressed me with views of things incompatible
with the present temper or feelings of our fellow citizens;
and with a perfect disposition to acquiesce in whatever
may be the result of the superior wisdom of the President.5
The new Constitution designated the Vice President the President
of the Senate and made it clear that he could only vote if there was a tie.
John Adams was used to debating and negotiating,
and at first he lectured the senators on the British Parliament.
They resented that, and he felt frustrated that
he was only expected to preside over the Senate.
During his eight years in that office he broke a tie 31 times,
and no other US Vice President did so many until Kamala Harris.
He voted five times on the Residence Bill on where the capital was to be located.
He did not like New York and favored Philadelphia which was a larger
and more diverse city at that time than New York City.
In 1789 the city of Philadelphia had 40,000 people
while New York City had about 18,000.
Philadelphia had ten newspapers, two theaters, a college,
a public library, a museum, a hospital, and a philosophical society.
After 15 months in New York the government moved to Philadelphia.
His vote breaking a tie defeated the navigation bill that James Madison was promoting.
Washington did not consult with Adams about his cabinet appointments,
and Adams was very satisfied by the diverse group Washington chose.
Alexander Hamilton as Treasury Secretary was the most important,
and Adams supported his efforts to take on the debts of the states and organize a bank.
John Adams on 22 May 1789 in a letter to Nathaniel Peaslee Sargeant wrote,
There you know the Constitution has wisely placed
the Authority of judging in the first instance
of the Merits and Qualifications of all Candidates.
A Law will soon appear regulating the Time
and manner of taking the Oaths.
The Judicial System is in the hands of some
of the ablest men, and I hope will be digested
with all the Caution you can desire.
You call to my recollection an Idea Suggested to you
in Conversation “that we are in great danger.”
I wish I was quite delivered at this hour
from such an apprehension.
It would require a long letter to explain all the Reasons
I have for such Thoughts;
but I may say one thing which will go a great way.
The Superiority, the Sovereignty of the national Govt,
if it is in Words ascertained, it is not in fact secured.
The State Governments have so much Power still,
as to make the Whole a Composition,
of thirteen Omnipotences against one Omnipotence.
And to my Mortification I find my general expectations
too much verified in a general aversion, timidity,
or something to assume a Tone
which might supply some defects.
I do not see a Resolution nor an Inclination in Gentlemen to
make Seats in the new Govt objects of Ambition or Desire.
Seats in the new Governments are considered still
as Steps towards promotion at home.
From this state of Facts I think
we are not yet out of danger of Confusion.
Despondency is not one of my Characteristics.
On the contrary the World in general supposes me
too much inclined to be sanguine.
However this may be, I have seen
the dangers which surrounded me;
and I hope have never been afraid to meet them.
If I had been, I should have perished long ago.
I had more reasons to say that I should wear
a Crown of Thorns than you can be aware of.
Indeed I have been astonished to see how little informed
Massachusetts Gentlemen, who have never been before
in Congress, are of the real State of American Politics.
Fifteen years’ cruel experience has made
an indelible impression on my heart.
New England is reproached with local Attachments,
but the Truth is she is the least influenced
by State Prejudices of any in the Union.
She sacrifices her interests to the good of the Union.
She sacrifices one after another
all her ablest & meritorious Characters.
She mortifies herself and all her Friends in complaisance
to southern Pride, Insolence and scorn.
On the contrary She cries up to the Stars’ Southern
Characters to enable them to make her humiliation
and Abasement the more Remarkable.
A greater Insult was never offered to a People
than the Maneuver by which She was horse-jockeyed
in the late election of Vice President.
Yet she does not feel it nor see it.
You may depend upon it.
Every honest man in whatever Station in the new Govt
will wear a Crown of Thorns until New England
shall be more attentive, generous and Consistent.
Till then her honor & Interest will be sacrificed by one
Adventurer after Another who will throw himself
into the Arms of Men who are greater Politicians,
and who will give them Characters and Fortunes too?
Can there be a greater danger than that which arises from
an uncertain Sovereignty—Misera servitus ubi Ius vagum.
(Miserable servitude where justice wanders.)
If the Sovereignty is uncertain and unknown,
the Law must be uncertain and unknown.
Who can tell where the Sovereignty of this Country is!
Is it in the National Government or the State Govts?
By the Constitution be sure it is in the National Government!
But is this generally understood,
considered and acknowledged?
If it is not, will not every Culprit who offends
against the National Govt immediately be received
into the Arms of the State Govts?
Will not Collisions at once take place between
the State Judicials and the National Judicials—
between the National Executive and the State Executives,
between the National Legislature and the State Legislatures?
Can there be a greater danger than for the National Govt
to take the Impost & leave the Excises in the State Govts.
If the National Government takes both Imposts and Excises,
what becomes of State Debts and Creditors?
Is there not great danger of a separation
between National Creditors & State Creditors?
While the former attach themselves to Congress, will not
the latter fly to the State Governments for protection?
Is there any other security against this danger than
for Congress to take upon itself to pay all the State Debts?
And is there not danger that Congress or the States
will not consent to this indispensable Measure?
Is there not danger from the imbecility of the National Govt?
What has it to attract the hopes
or excite the fears of the People?
Has it power? Has it Force to protect itself or its Offices?
Has it Rewards or Punishments in its power
enough to allure or Alarm?
Is there a unity in the national Executive?
Can there be without giving the National Executive
the Appointment of the State Executives?
Creditors are interested; but Debtors are interested
the Contrary way, and which are the most numerous?
But if the Creditors should be divided, the State Creditors
drawing one way and National Creditors another,
what will be the Consequence?
Has the National Govt any negative
on State Laws inconsistent with its own?
Is there not danger from another quarter hinted at before?
Is there Pleasure, Profit or honor in any Station
in the new Govt sufficient to make it
an Object to the greatest & best Men?
If not, will they not all leave it, as they did the old Congress,
for more agreeable, more profitable, and more honorable
Places at home among their Friends, Families and Estates?
And wherever these Men are—there will the Honor,
the Power, the Sovereignty really be.
Are these dangers real or imaginary?
If these are not enough to satisfy you,
I will give you another Catalogue—at another time.6
On June 9 Adams wrote to his friend, Dr. Benjamin Rush, saying,
No! You and I will not cease to discuss political questions:
but We will agree to disagree, whenever We please,
or rather whenever either of Us thinks he has reason for it.
I really know not what you mean
by apeing the Corruptions of the British Court.
I wish Congress had been called to meet at Philadelphia:
but as it is now here, I can conceive of no way to get it
transported thither, without tearing and rending.
I own to you, that I shall wish to remain here
rather than go to any other place than Philadelphia.
Congress cannot be accommodated
in any other than a great City.
There was a dark and dirty Intrigue, which propagated
in the Southern States that New England would not vote
for G. Washington, and in the Northern States that
New York, Virginia and South Carolina would not vote
for him; but that all would vote for me in order to Spread
a Panic lest I should be President,
and G. W. Vice President: and this maneuver
made dupes even of two Connecticut Electors.
I am well aware that this plot originated in New York
and am not at a Loss to guess the Men or their Motives.
I know very well how to make
these Men repent of their rashness.
It would be easy to set on foot an Inquiry,
but it is not worthwhile.
That every Part of the Conduct and feelings
of the Americans tends to that Species of Republic
called a limited Monarchy I agree.
They were born and brought up in it.
Their Habits are fixed in it, but their Heads are
most miserably bewildered about it.
There is not a more ridiculous Spectacle in the Universe,
than the Politics of our Country exhibits.
Bawling about Republicanism which they understand not;
and acting a Farce of Monarchy.
We will have as you say “but one great Man,”
yet even he shall not be a great Man.
I also, am as much a Republican as I was in 1775.
I do not “consider hereditary Monarchy or Aristocracy
as Rebellion against Nature.”
On the contrary I esteem them both Institutions of
admirable Wisdom and exemplary Virtue,
in a certain Stage of Society in a great Nation.
The only Institutions that can possibly preserve the Laws
and Liberties of the People.
And I am clear that America must resort to them
as an Asylum against Discord, Seditions and Civil War
and that at no very distant Period of time.
I shall not live to see it, but you may.
I think it therefore impolitic to cherish Prejudices
against Institutions which must be kept in View
as the Hope of our Posterity.
I am by no means for attempting any Such thing at present.
Our Country is not ripe for it, in many respects,
and it is not yet necessary; but our ship
must ultimately land on that shore or be cast away.
I do not “abhor Titles, nor the Pageantry of Government.”
If I did, I should abhor Government itself;
for there never was, and never will be, because there never
can be, any Government without Titles and Pageantry.
There is not a Quaker Family in Pennsylvania,
governed without Titles and Pageantry.
Not a school, not a College, not a Club
can be governed without them.
“I love the People,” with You—
too well to cheat them, lie to them or deceive them.
I wish those who have flattered them so much
had loved them half as well.
If I had not loved them, I never would have Served them.
If I did not love them now,
I would not Serve them another hour;
for I very well know that Vexation and Chagrin must be
my Portion; every moment I shall continue in public Life.
My Country appears to me, I assure you,
in great danger of fatal Divisions, and especially
because I Scarcely know of two Persons who think,
Speak and Act alike in matters of Government.7
John Adams sent this letter to William Tudor on 14 June 1789:
What is there which the new Government possesses,
on which to found its Authority?
Has it Honors? Has it pleasures?
Has it profits to bestow, which may Attract the Attention,
excite the Love, or alarm the Fear, of Such a Majority
in every State as will compel the Minority to Obedience?
Has the national Government at this moment,
Attractions enough to make a Seat in it, an Object of Desire,
to the Men of greatest Fortune, Talents, Birth, or Virtue?
Has it Charms to give Contentment to those,
who are now in it?
Have the Representatives, Senators,
or even the Vice President or President, cause to prefer
the Situations they are in to any Stations
at home, public or private?
To leave the two first Magistrates out of the question:
do the Senators consider their present Seats as their homes,
or as Steps to promotion in their own States!
If the national Government is to be but a ladder
on which to mount into higher regions at home,
you will Say that this Government will soon die
the death of the late righteous Congress;
and the new Constitution expire like the old Confederation.
Gentlemen find under this Government, as they did
under the former, that they live at uncomfortable Lodgings,
instead of their own houses: alone, instead of
in the society of their Families and Friends:
at a great distance from their Estates and Business.
Professions, Faculties, Property, Families,
all going to ruin at home.
You will not babble to me about Patriotism, Zeal, Enthusiasm,
Love of Poverty and Country, at this time of day.
You and I have been the Dupes
of these Professions too long.
I see nothing Since, I arrived from Europe but one
universal & ungovernable Rage for the Loaves and Fishes.
The Corruption of Ambition and Avarice, has more universal
Possession of the Souls of the Gentlemen of this Country,
than of the Nobility of any Country in Europe.
But the new Government has no Objects of Ambition
or Avarice, Sufficient to Satiate the Appetites that crave.
What Allurement has it then?—
You expect it to work Miracles—
to make Brick without Straw.
If the People would give Titles or Marks of distinction,
this would go a great Way.
The Title of Right Honorable,
would raise the Senate and make it an Object of Ambition.
Senators and even Governors, Judges and Chancellors,
would be willing to leave their Places at home to obtain it.
But as it is, and as, I fear it is like to be, I expect,
that one half will resign before two Years.
Is the new Government to be founded in force?
Are We to raise a Navy and an Army,
to detect illicit Trade and to quell insurrections?
to protect the national Judicial against the State Judicials?
The national Executive against the State Executives?
Have We dominion enough
over the Minds of the People to do this?
Titles would cost much less,
and be less dangerous to Liberty.
To talk of a Government, without all Etiquette is
to betray a total Inattention to human Life and manners.
Can Subordination be preserved in the Smallest Society,
without distinctions?
Examine it in a Family.
Let the Master and Mistress, the Father and Mother,
Men Servants and Maid Servants, Sons and Daughters
all live together in the Same room.
Let them dress all alike.
Let them breakfast, dine and Sup all at the Same Table.
Let Tom the Coachman Set at the Head of the Table,
as Accident shall direct, and Polly the Milkmaid
Set at the right hand of her Mistress.
Let the Children and Servants call their Father and Master
by their names Tom, Dick and Harry,
and be themselves called so in their turns.
In this Case you would soon See the Liberty,
order, Virtue and Happiness, that would result
from such an admirable republican Economy.
Away with all this Nonsense.—
Let us not betray such gross Ignorance of the World.8
John Adams wrote to Jeremy Belnap on June 5 about insatiable
human passions and to Richard Peters on the avarice of liberty.
On 28 June 1789 John Adams wrote this to William Tudor
on national and state sovereignty:
Our Fellow Citizens will never think alike nor act aright,
until they are habitually taught to Use
the Same Words in the Same Sense.
Nations are governed by Words, as well as by Actions;
by Sounds as well as Sights.
You and I learned in our Youth from our great Masters,
the Civilians, that the Summa Imperii, is indivisible.
That Imperium in Imperio, is a Solecism,
a Contradiction in Terms.
And We have been both taught, by History and Experience,
Since, that those Instructions of our Masters
were infallible oracles.
The new Constitution, however, I fear will be found
to be too nearly related to such a Solecism.
It is an avowed Attempt to make the national Government
Sovereign in Some Cases
and the State Governments in others.
It is true that as the former embraces the whole,
and the latter but Parts; as the former has the greatest
Objects as War and Peace &c and a general
Superintendence over all the rest,
the Superiority of Rank and Dignity is allowed to it.
But I nevertheless own, that it is too clear that
in a course of Time, the little fishes will eat up the Great one
unless the great one Should devour all the little ones.
It is contended by Some that our new Constitution,
is partly national and partly federal.
But it Seems to me, that as far as it is federal,
it is wholly national.
As far as it is not national, it is not federal but consists of
individual, Separate, independent and disconnected States.
But in this View it is improper to talk of the federal
Commonwealth and the independent Republics
that compose it because the new Constitution, which is
the only League by which they are connected together,
is not a Confederation of independent Republics;
but is a monarchical Republic,
or if you will, a limited Monarchy.
Though Names are of Importance,
they cannot alter the nature of Things.
The Name of President, does not alter the Nature
of his office nor diminish the Regal Authorities
and Powers which appear clearly in the Writing.
The Prince of Orange Said to me, “Monseiur,
Vous allez avoir un Roi, Sous le titre de President,”
and his Judgment would be confirmed by every Civilian
in Europe who should read our Constitution.
Crudities enough, to be Sure, come from
a certain august Source, as you have remarked;
but the People Should not mind them.
The People themselves should honor their own Creation,
if they mean to honor themselves.
And I hope the People will assert their own Supremacy,
and give the Title of Majesty to the President.
This is the lowest that can comport with
his constitutional Dignity, Authority, and Power.
I agree entirely with you that it is Aristocratic Pride alone,
that feels itself hurt by a distinction of the President.
Those who proudly think themselves his Compeers,
cannot bear that he should be more than Primus inter Pares.
But the common People, if they understand their own cause
and Interest, will take effectual Care to mortify that Pride
by making the Executive Magistrate a balance
against it which can be done only, by distinguishing him
clearly and decidedly, far above all others.9
On August 22 President Washington and War Secretary Henry Knox
came to the Senate chamber to discuss the Indian troubles and how to handle them.
Washington wanted to discuss treaty issues and nominations of envoys with the senators.
Adams let Washington take his chair, and hefty Knox sat next to him.
Washington handed a paper to Adams, and he began reading it aloud.
Noise from the street made it difficult for him to be heard,
and Robert Morris of Pennsylvania asked that he read it again.
He did that, and then William Maclay began asking for more information.
Senator James Gunn wanted issues related to Georgia to be postponed,
and the senators began debating that.
Washington became angry, and said vehemently,
“This defeats every purpose of my coming here!”10
After a while he left the chamber.
The next day they discussed how to treat the Indians in Georgia,
and Washington again stormed out of the chamber.
He cried out that he would never go back there again.
That began the unbroken tradition of Presidents
not engaging in verbal debates in the Senate.
The Revolution had begun in France when the Bastille was taken on 14 July 1789,
and on September 19 the New York Daily Gazette
reported “A COMPLETE REVOUTION IN FRANCE.”
The National Assembly began drafting a new constitution.
On 1 March 1790 the United States authorized
its first census, and it was taken in August.
Thomas Jefferson returned from France and visited dying Benjamin Franklin on his
way to New York where he took up his position as Secretary of State on March 21.
Franklin died on 17 April 1790 and was mourned especially in Philadelphia.
In the capital at New York the House of Representatives put on mourning,
though the Senate declined to do so.
Washington chose not to begin the precendent of a ceremony.
John Adams on April 4 in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush wrote,
The History of our Revolution will be one continued Lie
from one End to the other.
The Essence of the whole will be that Dr. Franklin’s
electrical Rod, Smote the Earth
and out Sprung General Washington.
That Franklin electrified him with his Rod—and thence
forward these two conducted all the Policy Negotiations
Legislation and War.
These underscored Lines contain the whole Fable Plot
and Catastrophe.
If this Letter should be preserved and read a hundred Years
hence, the Reader will Say,
“The Envy of this J. A. could not bear to think of the Truth!“
He ventured to Scribble to Rush, as envious as himself,
Blasphemy that he dared not Speak, when he lived.
But Barkers at the sun and Moon are always Silly Curs.”
But this my Friend, to be serious,
is the Fate of all Ages and Nations.
And there is no Resource in human nature for a Cure.
Brederode did more in the Dutch Revolution
than William 1st. Prince of Orange.
Yet Brederode is forgotten and William the Savior,
Deliverer and Founder.
Limited Monarchy is founded in Nature.
No Nation can adore more than one Man at a time.
It is a happy Circumstance that the Object of our Devotion
is so well deserving of it that he has Virtue
so exquisite and Wisdom so consummate.
There is no Citizen of America will Say that there is
in the World so fit a Man for the head of the Nation.
From my Soul I think there is not, and the Question
should not be who has done or suffered most,
or who has been the most essential
and Indispensable Cause of the Revolution,
but who is best qualified to govern Us?
Nations are not to Sacrifice their Future Happiness
to Ideas of Historical Justice.
They must consult their Own Weaknesses, Prejudices,
Passions, Senses and Imaginations as well as their Reason.
“La Raison n’a jamais fait grande chose.”
As the King of Prussia says in his Histoire de mon temps.
The more Extracts you Send me from your Journals,
the more will you oblige me.
I beg especially a Copy of my Character.
I know very well it must be a partial Panegyric.
I will send You my Criticisms upon it.
You know I have no affectation of Modesty.
My Comfort is that such vain folks as Cicero,
Neckar, Sir William Temple & I are never dangerous.
If I Said in 1777 that “We Should never be qualified for
Republican Governments till We were ambitious to be poor,”
I meant to express an Impossibility.
I meant then and now to Say that No Nation
under Heaven ever was, now is, or ever will be qualified
for a Republican Government, unless you mean by these
Words, equal Laws resulting from a Balance of three
Powers, the Monarchic, Aristocratic, & Democratic.
I meant more, and I now repeat more explicitly,
that Americans are peculiarly unfit for any Republic
but the Aristo-Democratic-Monarchy; because
they are more Avaricious than any other Nation that
ever existed, the Carthaginians and Dutch not excepted.
The Alieni Appetens Sui profusus reigns in this nation
as a Body more than any other I have ever Seen.
When I went to Europe in 1778, I was full of patriotic
Projects like yours of collecting Improvements in Arts,
Agriculture, Manufacture, Commerce, Literature & science.
But I Soon found my Error.
I found that my offices demanded every moment
of my time and the Assistance of two or three Clerks
and that all this was not enough.
I was obliged to make it a Rule never to go out
of my Road for any Curiosity of any kind.
J. J. Rousseau understood it very well when he Said that
Ambassadors “doivent tout leur tems á cet Objet Unique,
ils sont trop honnêtes gens pour voler leur Argent.”
Emile Tom. 4. p. 361.6.
If he meant this as a Sarcasm, he was in the Wrong.
I never knew one who attempted or affected Philosophy,
that was good for any Thing in the Diplomatic Line—
and I know that every Hour that I might have employed
that Way would have been a Robbery
upon the Duties of my Public Character.11
John Adams on 19 April 1790, the 15th anniversary of the start of
the American War of Independence, which was supported by
Dr. Richard Price, wrote this letter to him:
Accept of my best Thanks for your favor of Feb. 1st.
and the excellent Discourse that came with it.
I love the Zeal and the Spirit which dictated this Discourse,
and admire the general Sentiments of it.
From the year 1760 to this hour, the whole Scope
of my Life has been to Support Such Principles
and propagate Such Sentiments.
No Sacrifices of myself or my family, no dangers,
no labors, have been too much for me in this great cause.
The Revolution in France could not,
therefore be indifferent to me.
But I have learned, by awful Experience,
to rejoice with trembling.
I know that Encyclopedists and Economists,
Diderot and D’Alembert, Voltaire and Rousseau,
have contributed to this great Event,
more than Locke, Sidney or Hoadley, and
perhaps more than the American Revolution.
And I own to you, I know not what to make
of a Republic of Thirty Million Atheists.
The Constitution is but an Experiment
and must and will be altered.
I know it to be impossible that France
Should be long governed by it.
If the Sovereignty is to reside in one Assembly:
The King, the Princes of the blood, and principal Quality,
will govern it, at their pleasure, as long as they can agree.
When they differ, they will go to War, and act over again
all the Tragedies of Valois, Bourbons, Lorrains, Guises,
and Colignis, two hundred Years ago.
The Greeks sang the praises of Harmodius
and Aristogiton for restoring equal Laws.
Too many Frenchmen, after the example of too many
Americans, pant for Equality of Persons and Property.
The impracticability of this, God almighty has decreed,
and the Advocates for Liberty who attempt it,
will Surely Suffer for it.
I thank you, Sir, for your kind Compliment.
As it has been the great Aim of my life to be Useful;
if I had any reason to think I was So,
as you Seem to Suppose, it would make me happy.
For “Eminence” I care nothing.
For though I pretend not to be exempt from Ambition,
or any other human passion, I have been convinced from
my Infancy, and have been confirmed, every year and
day of my life, that the Mechanic and Peasant, are happier
than any Nobleman or Magistrate or King; and that the
higher a man rises, if he has any Sense of duty,
the more anxious he must be.
Our new Government is a new Attempt
to divide a Sovereignty.
A fresh Essay at Imperium in Imperio.
It cannot therefore be expected
to be very Stable, or very firm.
It will prevent Us, for a time, from drawing our Swords
Upon each other: and when it will do that no longer,
we must call a Convention to reform it.
The difficulty of bringing millions to agree
in any measures, to act by any rule;
can never be conceived by him, who has not tried it.
It is incredible, how Small is the number,
in any Nation of those who comprehend any System
of Constitution, or Administration:
and those few it is wholly impossible to Unite.
I am a Sincere Inquirer after Truth.
But I find very few, who discover the Same Truths.
The King of Prussia has found one,
which has also fallen in my Way.
“That it is the peculiar quality of the human Understanding,
that Example Should correct no man.
The Blunders of the Fathers are lost to their Children,
and every Generation must commit its own.”
I have never Sacrificed my Judgment to Kings,
Ministers, nor People; and I never will.
When either Shall See as I do, I Shall rejoice
in their Protection, Aid and honor: but I See no prospect
that either will ever think as I do;
and therefore I Shall never be a favorite with either.
I do not desire to be.
But I Sincerely wish, and devoutly pray,
that a hundred Years of civil Wars may not be the Portion
of all Europe for the want of a little Attention
to the true Elements of the Science of Government.12
During an influenza epidemic that began in May in the capital
Washington nearly died; he recovered in June.
On 11 June 1790 John Adams wrote this to Thomas Brand Hollis:
You seem to suppose our coast in danger from
African pirates; in this I presume you are deceived
by the Artifices of the London insurance offices,
for we are in no more danger than the Empire of China is.
The great revolution in France is wonderful
but not supernatural.
The hand of Providence is in it, I doubt not;
working however by natural and ordinary means,
such as produced the revolution in the fifteenth century.
That all men have one common nature, is a principle which
will now universally prevail, and equal rights
and equal duties, will in a just sense I hope
be inferred from it: but equal ranks and equal property
never can be inferred from it, any more than
equal understanding, agility, vigor or beauty.
Equal laws are all that ever can be derived
from human equality.
I am delighted with Doctor Price’s sermon on patriotism;
but there is a sentiment or two
which I should explain a little.
He guards his hearers and readers, very Judiciously
against the extreme of adulation and contempt.
The former is the extreme he says to which
mankind in general have been most prone.
“The generality of Rulers have treated men,
as your English Jockeys treat their horses—
convinced them first that they were their masters
and next that they were their friends,
at least they have pretended to do so.”
Mankind have I agreed behaved too much like horses:
been rude, wild and mad until they were mastered,
and then been too tame, gentle and dull.
I think our friend should have stated it thus.
The great and perpetual distinction in civilized societies,
has been between the rich who are few,
and the poor who are many.
When the many are masters, they are too unruly and then
the few are too tame and afraid to speak out the truth.
When the few are masters they are too severe,
and then the many are too servile.
This is the strict truth.
The few have had most art and union,
and therefore have generally prevailed in the end.
The inference of wisdom from these premises, is,
that neither the poor, or the rich,
should ever be suffered to be masters.
They should have equal power to defend themselves,
and that their power may be always equal, there should be
an independent mediator between them, always ready,
always able and always interested to assist the weakest.
Equal laws can never be made or maintained without this.
You see I still hold fast my scales,
and weigh everything in them.
The French must finally become my disciples, or rather
the disciples of Zeno: or they will have no equal laws,
no personal liberty, no property, no lives.
I am very much employed in business, and this must be
my apology for neglecting so much to write to you:
but I will be as good a correspondent as I can.
I hope you will not forget your old friend.
In this Country the pendulum has vibrated too far
to the popular side, driven by men without experience
or Judgment, and horrid ravages have been made upon
property, by arbitrary multitudes or majorities of multitudes.
France has severe trials to endure from the same cause.
Both have found or will find, that to place property
at the mercy of a majority who have no property is
“Committere agnum lupo.” (to commit the lamb to the wolf)
My fundamental maxim is never trust the lamb
to the custody of the wolf.
If you are not perfectly of my mind at present,
I hereby promise and assure you that
you will live to see that I am precisely right.
Thus arrogantly concludes your assured friend.13
In July it looked as though Britain may be going to war against Spain
over an issue by Vancouver in the northwest, and the administration was also
concerned about the Spanish territory in the Floridas and New Orleans.
President Washington posed several questions and asked
for
responses from Hamilton, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, and Knox.
Adams advised refusing any request that might be made,
and his opinion was that under no circumstances should they go to war.
New Yorkers, hoping to make their city the permanent capital,
began building an executive mansion by the Battery.
New Englanders favored it and considered Philadelphia acceptable.
Virginians definitely wanted the capital to be by the Potomac River.
In June the Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton and Secretary of State Jefferson
met outside the President’s house in June and agreed to compromise.
Jefferson invited Hamilton to Madison’s house the next day.
Madison was the leader in the House of Representatives.
He agreed not to block Hamilton’s assumption of debts, and Hamilton promised
to persuade Pennsylvanians to vote for the permanent capital on the Potomac.
An effort in the Senate to keep the capital at New York
for two more years had a tie vote, and Adams voted no.
On July 12 both houses of Congress voted to locate the capital
in Philadelphia for ten years before moving it to the Potomac.
Congress adjourned on August 12, and the government began preparing for the move.
On December 6 the Congress would reconvene in Philadelphia.
On 29 August 1790 John Adams wrote this on neutrality to George Washington:
That New Orleans, and the Spanish Posts on the
Mississippi, will be among the first attempts of the English,
in case of a war with Spain, appears very probable:
and that a combined operation from Detroit,
would be convenient to that end cannot be doubted.
The Consequences, on the western Settlements,
on the commerce with the West Indies, and on the general
Security and tranquility of the American confederation,
of having them in our rear, and on both our flanks,
with their navy in front, are very obvious.
The interest of the United States duly weighed,
and their Duty conscientiously considered, point out to them,
in the case of such a War, a neutrality,
as long as it may be practicable.
The People of these States would not willingly Support
a War, and the present Government has not Strength
to command, nor enough of the general Confidence
of the nation to draw the men or money necessary,
until the Grounds, causes and Necessity of it
should become generally known, and universally approved.
A pacific Character, in opposition to a warlike temper,
a Spirit of Conquest, or a disposition to military Enterprise,
is of great importance to us to preserve in Europe:
and therefore We should not engage even in defensive War,
until the Necessity of it, should become apparent,
or at least until We have it in our Power
to make it manifest, in Europe as well as at home.
In order to preserve an honest Neutrality,
or even the Reputation of a disposition to it,
the United States must avoid as much as possible,
every real Wrong, and even every
Appearance of Injury to either Party.
To grant to Lord Dorchester in case he should request it,
permission to march troops through the territory
of the United States, from Detroit to the Mississippi,
would not only have an appearance offensive
to the Spaniards, of partiality to the English,
but would be a real Injury to Spain.
The Answer therefore to his Lordship should be a refusal,
in terms clear and decided, but guarded and dignified,
in a manner, which no Power has more at command
than the President of the United States.
If a measure so daring, offensive and hostile,
as the march of Troops through our Territory
to attack a Friend, should be hazarded by the English,
without leave, or especially after a refusal,
it is not so easy to answer the Question,
what notice ought to be taken of it.
The situation of our Country is not like that
of most of nations in Europe.
They have generally large numbers of Inhabitants
in narrow territories;
we have small numbers scattered over vast regions.
The Country through which the Britons must pass
from Detroit to the Mississippi, is, I suppose,
so thinly inhabited, and at such a distance
from all the populous settlements,
that it would be impossible for the President
of the United States to collect Militia
or march troops sufficient to resist the Enterprise.
After the step shall have been taken,
there are but two Ways for us to proceed:
one is War and the other negotiation.
Spain would probably remonstrate to the President
of the United States but whether she should or not,
the President of the United States should
remonstrate to the King of Great Britain.
It would not be expected I suppose by our Friends or
Enemies that the United States should declare War at once.
Nations are not obliged to declare War
for every Injury or even Hostility.
A tacit Acquiescence under such an Outrage,
would be misinterpreted on all hands;
by Spain as inimical to her and by Britain,
as the effect of Weakness, Disunion and Pusillanimity.
Negotiation then is the only other Alternative.
Negotiation in the present state of Things
is attended with peculiar difficulties.
As the King of Great Britain, twice proposed
to the United States, an Exchange of Ministers,
once through Mr. Hartley and once through the
Duke of Dorsett, and when the United States agreed
to the Proposition, flew from it: to send a Minister again
to St. James till that Court explicitly promises
to send one to America is an humiliation
to which the United States ought never to submit.
A Remonstrance from Sovereign to Sovereign cannot
be sent, but by an Ambassador of some order or other:
from Minister of State to Minister of State,
it might be transmitted in many other ways:
a Remonstrance in the form of a Letter from the
American Minister of State to the Duke of Leeds,
or whoever may be Secretary of State for foreign affairs,
might be transmitted, through an Envoy,
Minister Plenipotentiary, or Ambassador of the
President of the United States, at Paris, Madrid,
or the Hague and through the British Ambassador
at either of those Courts.
The Utmost length, that can be now gone, with Dignity,
would be to send a Minister to the Court of London, with
Instructions to present his Credentials, demand an Audience,
make his Remonstrance, but to make no Establishment
and demand his audience of leave and quit the Kingdom
in one, two, or three Months if a Minister of equal degree
were not appointed and actually sent to the President
of the United States from the King of Great Britain.
It is a Misfortune, that in these critical moments
and Circumstances, the United States have not a
Minister of large Views, mature Age, Information
and Judgment, and strict Integrity at the Courts
of France, Spain, London, and the Hague.
Early and authentic Intelligence from those Courts
may be of more importance than the Expense:
but as the Representatives of the People, as well as
the Legislatures, are of a different Opinion they have made
a very scanty Provision for but a part of such a system.
As it is, God knows where the Men are to be found who
are qualified for such Missions and could undertake them.
By an Experience of ten Years which made me too unhappy
at the time to be ever forgotten, I know, that every Artifice
which can deceive, every temptation which can operate
on hope or fear, Ambition or Avarice, Pride or Vanity,
the Love of society, Pleasure or Amusement will be
employed to divert and warp them from the true line of their
Duty and the impartial honor and interest of their Country.
To the superior Lights and Information derived
from office; the more serene temper and profound
Judgment of the President of the United States,
these rude and hasty thoughts concerning the
Points proposed, are humbly Submitted,
with every sentiment of respect and Sincere Attachment,
by his most obedient and most humble servant.14
John Adams on 18 October 1790 wrote this to his cousin Samuel Adams:
I am thankful to our common friend as well as to you
for your favor of the 4th which I received last night.
My fears are in Unison with yours, that Hay, Wood
and Stubble will be the materials of the new political
Buildings in Europe, till Men shall be
more enlightened and friendly to each other.
You agree, that there are undoubtedly Principles
of Political Architecture; but instead of particularizing
any of them, You Seem to place all your hopes
in the universal or at least more general
prevalence of Knowledge and Benevolence.
I think with you that Knowledge and Benevolence
ought to be promoted as much as possible;
but despairing of ever Seeing them Sufficiently general
for the Security of Society, I am for Seeking Institutions
which may Supply in some degree the defect.
If there were no Ignorance Error or Vice,
there would be neither Principles nor Systems
of civil or political Government.
I am not often Satisfied with the opinions of Hume,
but in this he Seems well founded that all Projects
of Government founded in the Supposition or Expectation
of extraordinary degrees of Virtue are evidently chimerical.
Nor do I believe it possible, humanly Speaking that Men
should ever be greatly improved in Knowledge
or Benevolence without assistance
from the Principles and system of Government.
I am very willing to agree with you in fancying,
that in the greatest Improvements of Society,
Government will be in the Republican form.
It is a fixed Principle with me that
all Good Government, is and must be Republican.
But at the Same time, your Candor will agree with me,
that there is not in Lexicography, a more fraudulent Word.
Whenever I Use the Word Republic, with approbation
I mean a Government, in which the People have, collectively
or by Representation, an essential Share in the Sovereignty.
The Republican Forms of Poland and Venice, are much
worse, and those of Holland and Bearn very little better,
than the Monarchical form in France
before the late Revolution.
By the Republican form, I know you do not mean,
the Plan of Milton, Nedham or Turgot: for after a fair Trial
of its miseries, the Simple monarchical form will ever,
be, as it has ever been, preferred to it, by Mankind.
Are We not, my Friend, in danger of rendering the Word
Republican, unpopular in this Country, by an indiscreet,
indeterminate and equivocal Use of it?
The People of England have been obliged to wean
themselves from the Use of it by making it unpopular
and unfashionable, because they found it was artfully
used by Some and simply understood by others,
to mean the Government of their Interregnum Parliament.
They found they could not wean themselves from that
destructive form of Government, So entirely, as that
a mischievous Party would not Still remain in favor of it,
by any other means, than by making the Words
Republic and Republican unpopular.
They have Succeeded to Such a degree, that with a vast
Majority of that nation, a Republican is as unamiable
as a Witch a Blasphemer, a Rebel or a Tyrant.
If, in this Country, the Word Republic should be generally
understood, as it is by some, to mean a form of Government
inconsistent with a mixture of three Powers
forming a mutual balance We may depend upon it,
that Such mischievous Effects will be produced by the Use
of it, as will compel the People of America to renounce,
detest and execrate it, as the English do.
With these Explanations, Restrictions and Limitations
I agree with you in your Love of Republican Governments,
but in no other Sense.
With You, I have also the honor most perfectly to
harmonize, in your Sentiments of the Humanity
and Wisdom of promoting Education in
Knowledge, Virtue and Benevolence.
But I think that these will confirm mankind in the opinion
of the necessity of preserving and Strengthening
the Dykes against the Ocean, its Tides and Storms.
Human Appetites, Passions, Prejudices and self Love,
will never be conquered by Benevolence and Knowledge
alone introduced by human means.
The millennium itself neither Supposes nor implies it.
All civil Government is then to cease,
and the Messiah is to reign.
That happy and holy State is therefore
wholly out of this question.
You and I agree in the Utility of universal Education.
But will nations agree in it, as fully
and extensively as We do?
and be at the Expense of it?
We know with as much certainty as attends
any human Knowledge that they will not.
We cannot therefore Advise the People to depend for their
Safety, Liberty and Security, upon hopes and Blessings,
which We know will not fall to their Lot.
If We do our duty then to the People,
We shall not deceive them, but advise them to
depend upon what is in their Power and will relieve them.
Philosophers ancient and modern do not appear to me
to have Studied Nature, the whole of Nature,
and nothing but nature.
Lycurgus’s Principle was War and Family Pride.
Solon’s was what the People would bear, &c.
The best Writings of Antiquity upon Government,
those I mean of Aristotle, Zeno and Cicero, are lost.
We have human Nature, Society, and universal History
to observe and Study, and from these We may draw,
all the real Principles which ought to be regarded.
Disciples will follow their Masters, and interested
Partisans their Chieftains, let Us like it, or not.
We cannot help it.
But if the true Principles can be discovered and fairly fully
and impartially laid before the People, the more light
increases the more the Reason of them will be Seen,
and the more disciples they will have.
Prejudice, Passion and private Interest, which will always
mingle in human Enquiries, one would think might be
enlisted on the Side of Truth, at least in the greatest
number, for certainly the Majority are interested in the Truth
if they could See to the End of all its Consequences.
“Kings have been deposed by aspiring Nobles.”
True, and never by any other.
“These” the Nobles I Suppose “have waged
everlasting War against the common Rights of Man.”
True, when they have been possessed of the
Summa imperii, in one body, without a Check.
So have the Plebeians—so have the People, so have Kings.
So has human Nature in every shape and Combination,
and So it ever will.
But on the other hand the Nobles have been
essential Parties in the preservation of Liberty,
whenever and wherever it has existed.
In Europe they alone have preserved it, against Kings
and People, wherever it has been preserved:
or at least with very little assistance from the People.
One hideous Despotism, as horrid as that of Turkey
would have been the Lot of every nation of Europe,
if the Nobles had not made Stands.
By Nobles I mean not peculiarly, a hereditary Nobility,
or any particular modification,
but the natural and actual Aristocracy among Mankind.
The Existence of this You will not deny.
You and I have Seen four noble Families rise up
in Boston the Craft’s, Gores, Dawe’s and Austins.
These are as really a Nobility in our Town,
as the Howards, Sommersets, Berties &c in England.
Blind undistinguishing Reproaches, against the Aristocratic
part of Mankind, a Division which Nature has made,
and We cannot abolish are neither pious nor benevolent.
They are as pernicious as they are false.
They serve only to foment Prejudice, Jealousy, Envy,
Animosity and malevolence.
They Serve no Ends but those of Sophistry,
Fraud and the Spirit of Party.
It would not be true, but it would not be more
egregiously false, to say, that the People have waged
everlasting War against the Rights of Men.
“The Love of Liberty, you Say
is interwoven in the Soul of Man.”
So it is, according to La Fontaine, in that of a Wolf.
And I doubt whether it be much more rational,
generous or Social, in one than in the other until in Man,
it is enlightened by Experience, Reflection, Education
and civil and political Institutions, which are
at first produced and constantly Supported
and improved by a few, that is by the Nobility.
The Wolf in the Fable, who preferred running in the forest,
lean and hungry, to the Sleek plump and round Sides
of the Dog, because he found the latter was sometimes
restrained, had more Love of Liberty than most Men.
The Numbers of Men in all ages have preferred
Ease, Slumber and good cheer, to Liberty
when they have been in Competition.
We must not then depend alone upon the Love of Liberty
in the soul of Man, for its Preservation.
Some political Institutions must be prepared
to assist this Love, against its Enemies.
Without these, the Struggle will ever end,
only in a Change of Impostors.
When the People who have no Property, feel the Power
in their own hands to determine all questions by a Majority,
they ever attack those who have Property till
the injured Men of Property, lose all Patience and recur
to finesse, Trick and Stratagem, to outwit those, who have
too much Strength because they have too many hands,
to be resisted any other Way.
Let Us be impartial then and Speak the whole Truth.
Till We do We shall never discover
all the true Principles that are necessary.
The multitude therefore as well as the Nobles
must have a Check.
This is one Principle.
“Were the People of England free, after they had obliged
King John to concede to them, their ancient Rights.”
The People never did this.
There was no People who pretended to any Thing.
It was the Nobles alone.
The People pretended to nothing but to be Villains,
Vassals, and Retainers to the King or the Nobles.
The Nobles, I agree, were not free, because all
was determined by a majority of their Votes,
or by Arms, not by Law.
Their feuds deposed their “Henrys, Edwards,
and Richards,” to gratify Lordly Ambition,
Patrician Rivalry and “Family Pride.”
But if they had not been deposed those Kings would have
become Despots, because the People would not
and could not join the Nobles in any regular
and constitutional opposition to them.
They would have become Despots, I repeat it, and that
by means of the Villains, Vassals and Retainers aforesaid.
It is not Family Pride, my Friend, but Family Popularity
that does the great Mischief, as well as the great good.
Pride in the heart of Man, is an evil fruit and concomitant of
every Advantage; of Riches, of Knowledge; of Genius, of
Talents, of Beauty of Strength, of Virtue, and even of Piety.
It is Sometimes ridiculous, and often pernicious:
but it is even sometimes and in Some degree Useful.
But the Pride of Families would be always and only
ridiculous, if it had not Family Popularity to work with.
The Attachment and Devotion of the People
to some Families, inspires them with Pride.
As long as Gratitude or Interest, ambition or avarice, Love,
hope or fear Shall be human motives of Action, So long
will numbers attach themselves to particular Families.
When the People will, in Spite of all that can be Said
or done, cry a Man or a Family up to the Skies,
exaggerate all his Talents & Virtues, not hear a Word
of his Weakness or faults, follow implicitly his advice,
detest every Man he hates, adore every Man he loves,
and knock down all who will not swim down
the Stream with them; here is your Remedy?
When a Man or Family are thus popular,
how can you prevent them from being proud.
You and I know of Instances in which Popularity
has been a Wind, a Tide, a Whirlwind.
The History of all Ages and Nations is full of Such Examples.
Popularity that has great Fortune to dazzle;
Splendid Largesse to excite warm Gratitude, Sublime,
beautiful and uncommon Genius or Talents to produce
deep Admiration; or any Thing to support high hopes
and Strong Fears, will be proud, and its Power will be
employed to mortify Enemies, gratify friends,
procure Votes, Emoluments, and Power.
Such Family Popularity ever did and will govern,
in every nation in every Climate, hot and cold wet and dry—
among civilized and Savage People.
Christians and Mahometans, Jews and Heathens.
Declamation against Family Pride is a pretty
Juvenile Exercise: but unworthy of Statesmen.
They know the Evil,
and danger is too Serious to be Sported with.
The only Way, God knows, is to put these Families
into a Hole by themselves, and Set two Watches upon them;
a Superior to them all, on one side,
and the People on the other.
There are a few Popular Men in the Massachusetts,
my Friend who have I fear less honor,
Sincerity and Virtue than they ought to have.
That if they are not guarded against,
may do another Mischief.
They may excite a Party Spirit, and a mobish Spirit
instead of the Spirit of Liberty,
and produce another Wat Tyler’s Rebellion.
They can do no more.
But I really think their Party Language ought not
to be countenanced; nor their Shibboleths pronounced.
The miserable Stuff that they utter about the Well-born
is as despicable as themselves.
The ευγενεισ of the Greeks, the bien neés of the French,
the Gewellgebornen of the Germans and Dutch,
the beloved Families of the Creeks, are but a few Samples
of national Expressions of the Same Thing,
for which every nation on Earth has a Similar Expression.
One would think that our Scribblers were all the sons
of Redemptioners or transported Convicts.
They think with Tarquin, In novo populo, ubi omnis
repentina atque ex virtute nobilitas fit,
futurum locum forti ac Strenuo viro.
Let Us be impartial.
There is not more of Family Pride on one Side,
than of Vulgar Malignity and popular Envy on the other.
Popularity in one Family raises envy
in another and in others.
But the Popularity of the least deserving will triumph
over Envy and Malignity, while that which is acquired by
real Merit will very often be over born and oppressed by it.
Let Us do Justice to the People and to the Nobles,
for Nobles there are, as I have before proved in Boston,
as well as Madrid.
But to do Justice to both,
you must establish an Arbitrator between them.
This is another Principle.
It is time that you and I should have
some Sweet Communion together.
I don’t believe, that We who have preserved for more
than thirty Years an uninterrupted Friendship,
and have So long thought and acted harmoniously together
in the worst of times, are now so far asunder
in sentiment as some People pretend.15
On 6 December 1790 the United States Government moved
from New York City and took up residence at Philadelphia for ten years.
Notes
1. John Adams Writings from the New Nation 1784-1826
ed. Gordon S. Wood, p. 171.
2. Ibid., p. 172-173.
3. Ibid., p. 188-189.
4. The Works of John Adams: Second President of the United States, Volume 8
by Charles Francis Adams, p. 489-491.
5. Ibid., p. 491-493.
6. John Adams Writings from the New Nation 1784-1826, p. 203-206.
7. Ibid., p. 219-220.
8. Ibid., 215-216.
9. Ibid., p. 222-223.
10. The Founding Fathers by Nathan Schachner, p. 74.
11. John Adams Writings from the New Nation 1784-1826, p. 243-244.
12. From John Adams to Richard Price, 19 April 1790 (online).
13. John Adams Writings from the New Nation 1784-1826, p. 245-246.
14. Ibid., p. 247-249.
15. Ibid., p. 251-257.
This work has not yet been published as a book, and all the chapters are free in this website.