As the new year began in January 1794 Thomas Jefferson
was no longer Secretary of State, and he soon left Philadelphia.
On January 16 he arrived at the home he was building as Monticello.
He worked at paying his longstanding debts.
His building plans were financed by a Dutch loan.
He eventually mortgaged many of his slaves, and they were considered collateral.
Jefferson owned 10,647 acres of land and some town plots, and he had 154 slaves.
He devoted himself and his farms to agriculture, and he even
sought the advice of President Washington on farming strategies.
While Jefferson was away for ten years, overseers had played out his farms.
He organized a seven-field system and rotated the crops
of wheat, peas, potatoes, corn, rye, and clover.
He invented a mold-plow that made better furrows.
On 3 February 1794 Jefferson wrote to his successor
as Secretary of State, Edmund Randolph:
I have to thank you for the transmission of the letters
from General Gates, La Motte, and Hauterive.
I perceive by the latter that the partisans of the one or the
other principle (perhaps of both) have thought my name a
convenient cover for declarations of their own sentiments.
What those are to which Hauterive alludes, I know not,
having never seen a newspaper since I left Philadelphia
(except those of Richmond), and no circumstances authorize
him to expect that I should enquire into them or answer him.
I think it is Montaigne who has said that ignorance is
the softest pillow on which a man can rest his head.
I am sure it is true as to everything political and shall
endeavor to estrange myself to everything of that character.
I indulge myself on one political topic only, that is,
in declaring to my countrymen the shameless corruption
of a portion of the representatives in the 1st and 2d
Congresses and their implicit devotion to the treasury.
I think I do good in this, because it may produce
exertions to reform the evil on the success of which
the form of the government is to depend.1
By early 1794 the British in their war against France were also
capturing American ships, and the number was approaching 400.
Jefferson wrote to James Monroe on April 24,
The spirit of war has grown much stronger in this part
of the country, as I can judge of myself, and in other
parts along the mountains from N.E. to S.W.
as I have had opportunities of learning by enquiry.
Some few very quiet people, not suffering
themselves to be inflamed as others are
by the kicks and cuffs Great Britain has been giving us,
express a wish to remain in peace.
But the mass of thinking men seem to be of opinion that
we have borne so much as to invite eternal insults in future
should not a very spirited conduct be now assumed.
For myself I wish for peace if it can be preserved,
salvâ fide et honore.
I learn by your letters and Mr. Madison’s
that a special mission to England is meditated,
and Hamilton the missionary.
A more degrading measure could not have been proposed:
and why is Pinckney to be recalled?
For it is impossible he should remain there after
such a testimony that he is not confided in.
I suppose they think him not thorough paced enough:
I suspect too the mission, besides the object of
Placing the aristocracy of this country under the
patronage of that government, has in view that of
withdrawing Hamilton from the disgrace and the
public execrations which sooner or later must fall
on the man who partly by creating fictitious debt,
partly by volunteering in the payment of the debts
of others, who could have paid them so much more
conveniently themselves, has alienated forever all our
ordinary and easy resources, and will oblige us hereafter
to extraordinary ones for every little contingency out of the
common line: and who has lately brought the President
forward with manifestations that the business of the
treasury had got beyond the limits of his comprehension.
Let us turn to more pleasing themes.2
On April 25 Jefferson wrote to Vice President John Adams.
The principles on which I calculate the value of life
are entirely in favor of my present course.
I return to farming with an ardor which I scarcely
knew in my youth, and which has got the better
entirely of my love of study.
Instead of writing 10 or 12 letters a day, which I have been
in the habit of doing as a thing of course, I put off answering
my letters now, farmer-like, till a rainy day, and then find it
sometimes postponed by other necessary occupations….
The rights of one generation will scarcely
be considered hereafter as depending
on the paper transactions of another.
My countrymen are groaning under
the insults of Great Britain.
I hope some means will turn up of reconciling our faith and
honor with peace: for I confess to you I have seen enough
of one war never to wish to see another.3
Jefferson wrote in a letter to Tench Coxe on 1 May 1794,
Your letters give a comfortable view of French affairs,
and later events seem to confirm it.
Over the foreign powers I am convinced they will
triumph completely, and I cannot but hope that
that triumph and the consequent disgrace of the
invading tyrants is destined in the order of events to
kindle the wrath of the people of Europe against those who
have dared to embroil them in such wickedness, and to
bring at length kings, nobles and priests to the scaffolds
which they have been so long deluging with human blood.
I am still warm whenever I think of these scoundrels,
though I do it as seldom as I can, preferring
infinitely to contemplate the tranquil growth
of my Lucerne and potatoes.
I have so completely withdrawn myself from
these spectacles of usurpation and misrule that
I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month:
and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it.
We are alarmed here with the apprehensions of war:
and sincerely anxious that it might be avoided;
but not at the expense either of our faith or honor.
It seems much the general opinion here that the latter
has been too much wounded not to require reparation,
and to seek it even in war, if that be necessary.
As to myself, I love peace, and I am anxious that we should
give the world still another useful lesson by showing to
them other modes of punishing injuries than by war, which
is as much a punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer.
I love therefore Mr. Clarke’s proposition of
cutting off all communication with the nation
which has conducted itself so atrociously.
This you will say may bring on war.
If it does, we will meet it like men: but it may not bring on
war, and then the experiment will have been a happy one.
I believe this war would be vastly more unanimously
approved than any one we ever were engaged in;
because the aggressions have been so wanton and
barefaced and so unquestionably against our desire.4
After discussing the agricultural rehabilitation of his farms,
Jefferson wrote this in a letter to President Washington on 14 May 1794:
Time, patience and perseverance must be the remedy:
and the maxim of your letter “slow and sure” is
not less a good one in agriculture than in politics.
I sincerely wish it may extricate us from the event of a war,
if this can be done saving our faith and our rights.
My opinion of the British government is that
nothing will force them to do justice but the
loud voice of their people, and that this can
never be excited but by distressing their commerce.
But I cherish tranquility too much to suffer
political things to enter my mind at all.5
On November 6 a revised British law was published that allowed
their armed ships to seize vessels with goods belonging to any
French colony or carrying provisions or supplies to such a colony.
That law would be revoked on 8 January 1795.
On 17 December 1794 Jefferson wrote in a letter to William Branch Giles:
The attempt which has been made to restrain
the liberty of our citizens meeting together,
interchanging sentiments on what subjects they please,
and stating these sentiments in the public papers,
has come upon us a full century earlier than I expected.
To demand the censors of public measures to be given up
for punishment is to renew the demand of the wolves in the
fable that the sheep should give up their dogs as hostages
of the peace and confidence established between them.
The tide against our Constitution is unquestionably strong,
but it will turn.
Everything tells me so,
and every day verifies the prediction.
Hold on then like a good and faithful seaman
till our brother-sailors can rouse from their
intoxication and right the vessel.
Make friends with the Trans-Alleganians.
They are gone if you do not.
Do not let false pride make a tea-act of your excise-laws.
Adieu.6
Also in December 1794 Jefferson freed 32-year-old slave Robert Hemings
who had been with him at the Continental Congress.
In October 1795 his younger sister Sally Hemings gave birth to a girl at Monticello.
Jefferson was concerned about the Whiskey Rebellion
and the attacks against Democratic societies.
On 28 December 1794 he wrote to his ally James Madison
about current issues such as the whiskey rebels,
the reaction to Jay’s Treaty with Britain, and the society of the Cincinnati:
The denunciation of the democratic societies
is one of the extraordinary acts of boldness of which
we have seen so many from the faction of Monocrats.
It is wonderful indeed that the President should
have permitted himself to be the organ of such
an attack on the freedom of discussion,
the freedom of writing, printing and publishing.
It must be a matter of rare curiosity to get at the
modifications of these rights proposed by them,
and to see what line their ingenuity would draw
between democratic societies, whose avowed object is the
nourishment of the republican principles of our Constitution,
and the society of the Cincinnati, a self-created one,
carving out for itself hereditary distinctions, lowering
over our Constitution eternally, meeting together
in all parts of the Union periodically with closed doors
accumulating a capital in their separate treasury,
corresponding secretly and regularly, and of which
society the very persons denouncing the democrats
are themselves the fathers, founders or high officers.
Their sight must be perfectly dazzled by the glittering of
crowns and coronets, not to see the extravagance of the
proposition to suppress the friends of general freedom while
those who wish to confine that freedom to the few,
are permitted to go on in their principles and practices.
I here put out of sight the persons whose misbehavior
has been taken advantage of to slander the friends
of popular rights; and I am happy to observe
that as far as the circle of my observation and
information extends, everybody has lost sight of them,
and viewed the abstract attempt on their natural
and constitutional rights in all its nakedness.
I have never heard or heard of a single
expression or opinion which did not condemn it
as an inexcusable aggression.
And with respect to the transactions against the excise-law,
it appears to me that you are all swept away in the
torrent of governmental opinions, or that we do not
know what these transactions have been.
We know of none which according to the definitions
of the law, have been anything more than riotous.
There was indeed a meeting to consult about a separation.
But to consult on a question does not amount to
a determination of that question in the affirmative,
still less to the acting on such a determination:
but we shall see I suppose what the court lawyers and
courtly judges and would-be Ambassadors will make of it.
The excise-law is an infernal one.
The first error was to admit it by the Constitution.
The 2d to act on that admission.
The 3d and last will be to make it the instrument of
dismembering the Union and setting us all afloat
to choose which part of it we will adhere to.
The information of our militia returned from the Westward is
uniform, that though the people there let them pass quietly,
they were objects of their laughter, not of their fear, that
1001 men could have cut off their whole force in a thousand
places of the Allegany, that their detestation of the excise
law is universal, and has now associated to it a detestation
of the government, and that separation which perhaps was
a very distant and problematical event, is now near and
certain and determined in the mind of every man.
I expected to have seen some justification of arming one part
of the society against another, of declaring a civil war
the moment before the meeting of that body which
has the sole right of declaring war, of being so
patient of the kicks and scoffs of our enemies,
and rising at a feather against our friends,
of adding a million to the public debt and deriding us
with recommendations to pay it if we can, &c &c.
But the part of the speech which was to be
taken as a justification of the armament
reminded me of parson Saunders’s demonstration
why minus into minus makes plus.
After a parcel of shreds of stuff from Aesop’s fables
and Tom Thumb, he jumps all at once into his Ergo,
minus multiplied into minus makes plus.
Just so the 15,000 men enter after the fables in the speech.
However the time is coming when
we shall fetch up the lee-way of our vessel.
The changes in your house I see are going on for the better,
and even the Augean herd over your heads
are slowly purging off their impurities.
Hold on then, my dear friend, that we may not
ship-wreck in the meanwhile.
I do not see in the minds of those with whom I converse
a greater affliction than the fear of your retirement;
but this must not be, unless to a more splendid
and a more efficacious post.
There I should rejoice to see you:
I hope I may say I shall rejoice to see you.
I have long had much in my mind to say
to you on that subject.
But double delicacies have kept me silent.
I ought perhaps to say, while I would not give up
my own retirement for the empire of the Universe,
how I can justify wishing one, whose happiness
I have as much at heart as yours, to take the front
of the battle which is fighting for my security.
This would be easy enough to be done,
but not at the heel of a lengthy epistle.7
The Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton resigned on 31 January 1795.
John Jay acting for the United States signed a commercial treaty
with the British in London on 19 November 1794, though a copy
did not get to the State Department of the United States until 7 March 1795.
Madison wrote this to Jefferson on March 23:
While I am acknowledging your favors,
I am reminded of a passage in a former one, which
I had proposed to have answered at some length.
Perhaps it will be best, at least for the present
to say in brief, that reasons of every kind,
and some of them of the most insuperable
as well as obvious kind shut my mind against the
admission of any idea such as you seem to glance at.
I forbear to say more, because I can have no more
to say with respect to myself; and because the great
deal that may and ought to be said beyond that
restriction will be best reserved for some other occasion,
perhaps for the latitude of a free conversation.
You ought to be preparing yourself however to hear truths,
which no inflexibility will be able to withstand.8
On 27 April 1795 Jefferson wrote to James Madison.
In mine to which yours of March 23 was an answer
I expressed my hope of the only change of position I ever
wished to see you make, and I expressed it with entire
sincerity, because there is not another person in the US
who being placed at the helm of our affairs,
my mind would be so completely at rest for
the fortune of our political bark.
The wish too was pure and unmixed with anything
respecting myself personally.
For as to myself the subject had been thoroughly weighed
and decided on, and my retirement from office had been
meant from all office high or low, without exception.
I can say too with truth that the subject had not been
presented to my mind by any vanity of my own.
I knew myself and my fellow citizens too well
to have ever thought of it.
But the idea was forced upon me by continual
insinuations in the public papers, while I was in office.
As all these came from a hostile quarter, I knew that
their object was to poison the public mind as to my motives,
when they were not able to charge me with facts.
But the idea being once presented to me,
my own quiet required that I should face it and examine it.
I did so thoroughly and had no difficulty to see that
every reason which had determined me to retire
from the office I then held, operated more strongly
against that which was insinuated to be my object.
I decided then on those general grounds which could
alone be present to my mind at that time, that is to say,
reputation, tranquility, labor: for as to public duty,
it could not be a topic of consideration in my case.9
Also on April 27 Jefferson wrote in a short letter to William Branch Giles:
I sincerely congratulate you on the great prosperities
of our two first allies, the French and Dutch.
If I could but see them now at peace with the rest of their
continent, I should have little doubt of dining with Pichegru
in London next autumn; for I believe I should be almost
tempted to leave my clover for a while to go and hail
the dawn of liberty and republicanism in that island.10
President Washington submitted Jay’s Treaty with the British
to the United States Senate in July 1795.
On August 31 Washington in a private letter wrote this to Hamilton:
We know officially, as well as from the effects,
that an order for seizing all provision vessels going to France
has been issued by the British government: but so secretly,
that as late as the 27th of June it had not been published
in London: it was communicated to the cruisers only,
and not known until the captures brought it to light.
By these high-handed measures of that government,
and the outrageous & insulting conduct of its officers,
it would seem next to impossible to keep peace
between the United States & Great Britain.
To this moment we have received no explanation of
Holmes’s conduct from their chargé des affaires here;
although application was made for it before the
departure of Mr. Hammond: on the statement of
Governor Fenner and complaint of the French Minister.
Conduct like this disarms the friends of Peace and order,
while they are the very things which those of a
contrary description are wishing to see practiced.
I meant no more than barely to touch upon
these subjects in this letter; the object of it being
to request the favor of you to give me the points on which,
in your opinion, our new Negotiator is to dwell;
when we come into the field of negotiation again;
agreeably to the recommendation of the Senate;
agreeably to what appears to have been
contemplated by Mr. Jay & Lord Grenville,
at the close of the treaty subscribed by them;
and agreeably also to what you conceive ought to be
brought forward and insisted upon on this occasion.11
On 21 September 1795 Jefferson wrote in a letter to Madison,
I send you by post the title page, table of contents,
and one of the pieces, Curtius, lest it should
not have come to you otherwise.
It is evidently written by Hamilton, giving a first
and general view of the subject that the public mind
might be kept a little in check till he could resume
the subject more at large, from the beginning
under his second signature of Camillus.
The piece called “the Features of the treaty” I do not send
because you have seen it in the newspapers.
It is said to be written by Coxe,
but I should rather suspect by Beckley.
The antidote is certainly not strong enough
for the poison of Curtius.
If I had not been informed the present came from Beckly,
I should have suspected it from Jay or Hamilton.
I gave a copy or two by way of experiment to honest
sound-hearted men of common understanding,
and they were not able to parry the sophistry of Curtius.
I have ceased therefore to give them.
Hamilton is really a colossus to the antirepublican party.
Without numbers he is a host within himself.
They have got themselves into a defile,
where they might be finished; but too much
security on the Republican part will give time
to his talents and indefatigableness to extricate them.
We have had only middling performances to oppose to him.
In truth, when he comes forward, there is nobody
but yourself who can meet him.
His adversaries having begun the attack,
he has the advantage of answering them
and remains unanswered himself.
A solid reply might yet completely demolish
what was too feebly attacked and has gathered
strength from the weakness of the attack.
The merchants were certainly
(except those of them who are English)
as open-mouthed at first against the treaty as any.
But the general expression of indignation has
alarmed them for the strength of the government.
They have feared the shock would be too great and
have chosen to tack about and support both treaty and
government, rather than risk the government: thus it is
that Hamilton, Jay &c. in the boldest act they ever ventured
on to undermine the Constitution have the address
to screen themselves and direct the hue and cry
against those who wished to drag them into light.
A bolder party-stroke was never struck.
For it certainly is an attempt of a party which finds
they have lost their majority in one branch of the
legislature to make a law by the aid of the other branch,
and of the executive under color of a treaty,
which shall bind up the hands of the adverse branch
from ever restraining the commerce of their patron-nation.
There appears a pause at present in the public sentiment,
which may be followed by a revulsion.
This is the effect of the desertion of the merchants,
of the President’s chiding answer to Boston and Richmond,
of the writings of Curtius and Camillus,
and of the quietism into which the people
naturally fall after first sensations are over.
For god’s sake take up your pen and give
a fundamental reply to Curtius and Camillus.12
On 30 November 1795 Jefferson wrote to Edward Rutledge.
I received your favor of October 12 by your son,
who has been kind enough to visit me here,
and from whose visit I have received all that pleasure
which I do from whatever comes from you,
and especially from a subject so deservedly dear to you.
He found me in a retirement I dote on,
living like an Antediluvian patriarch among
my children and grandchildren and tilling my soil.
As he had lately come from Philadelphia, Boston &c.
he was able to give me a great deal of information of what
is passing in the world, and I pestered him with questions
pretty much as our friends Lynch, Nelson &c. will us
when we step across the Styx; for they will wish to know
what has been passing above ground since they left us.
You hope I have not abandoned entirely the service of
our country: after a five and twenty years continual
employment in it, I trust it will be thought I have fulfilled
my tour like a punctual soldier and may claim my discharge.
But I am glad of the sentiment from you, my friend,
because it gives a hope you will practice what you preach
and come forward in aid of the public vessel.
I will not admit your old excuse that
you are in public service though at home.
The campaigns which are fought in a
man’s own house are not to be counted.
The present situation of the President,
unable to get the offices filled, really calls with uncommon
obligation on those whom nature has fitted for them.
I join with you in thinking the treaty an execrable thing.
But both negotiators must have understood that as
there were articles in it which could not be carried into
execution without the aid of the legislatures on both sides,
that therefore it must be referred to them,
and that these legislatures being free agents,
would not give it their support if they disapproved of it.
I trust the popular branch of our legislature will disapprove
of it, and thus rid us of this infamous act, which
is really nothing more than a treaty of alliance between
England and the Anglomen of this country against
the legislature and people of the United States.13
Jefferson wrote 220 letters in 1794-95.
On 31 December 1795 he commented on the political situation
in a letter to William Branch Giles:
I am well pleased with the manner in which
your house has testified their sense of the treaty.
While their refusal to pass the original clause of
the reported answer proved their condemnation of it,
the contrivance to let it disappear silently respected
appearances in favor of the President,
who errs as other men do but errs with integrity.
Randolph seems to have hit upon the true theory of our
Constitution, that when a treaty is made, involving matters
confided by the Constitution to the three branches of the
legislature conjointly, the representatives are as free as the
President and Senate were to consider whether the national
interests requires or forbids their giving the forms and force
of law to the articles over which they have a power.
I thank you much for the pamphlet.
His narrative is so straight and plain, that even those who
did not know him will acquit him of the charge of bribery:
those who know him had done it from the first.
Though he mistakes his own political character in
the aggregate, yet he gives it to you in the detail.
Thus he supposes himself a man of no party that his opinions
not containing any systematic adherence to party,
fall sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other.
Yet he gives you these facts, which show that they fall
generally on both sides and are complete inconsistencies.
1. He never gave an opinion in the Cabinet against
the rights of the people yet he advised the
denunciation of the popular societies.
2. He would not neglect the overtures of a
commercial treaty with France, yet he always
opposed it while attorney general and never
seems to have proposed it while Secretary of State.
3. He concurs in resorting to the militia to quell
the pretended insurrection in the West and
proposes an augmentation from 12,500 to 15,000
to march against men at their ploughs;
yet on the 5th of August he is against their marching,
and on the 25th of August he is for it.
4. He concurs in the measure of a mission extraordinary
to London but objects to the men, to wit Hamilton and Jay.
5. He was against granting commercial powers
to Mr. Jay, yet he besieged the doors of the
Senate to procure their advice to ratify.
6. He advises the President to a ratification
on the merits of the treaty but to a suspension
till the provision order is repealed.
The fact is that he has generally given his principles
to the one party and his practice to the other;
the oyster to one, the shell to the other.
Unfortunately the shell was generally the lot
of his friends the French and republicans,
and the oyster of their antagonists.
Had he been firm to the principles he professes in the
year 1793 the President would have been kept from a
habitual concert with the British and Antirepublican party.
But at that time I do not know which Randolph feared most,
a British fleet or French disorganizers.
Whether his conduct is to be ascribed to a superior view
of things, an adherence to right without regard to party,
as he pretends, or to an anxiety to trim between both,
those who know his character and capacity will decide.
Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,
as in England, to take a part with either would
be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man.
But where the principle of difference is as substantial
and as strongly pronounced as between the republicans
and the Monocrats of our country I hold it as honorable
to take a firm and decided part, and as immoral
to pursue a middle line, as between the parties of Honest
men and Rogues into which every country is divided.
A copy of the pamphlet came by this post to Charlottesville.
I suppose we shall be able to judge soon
what kind of impression it is likely to make.
It has been a great treat to me, as it is a continuation of that
Cabinet history with the former part of which I was intimate.
I remark in the reply of the President a small travesty of the
sentiment contained in the answer of the Representatives.
They acknowledge that he has contributed a great share
to the national happiness by his services.
He thanks them for ascribing to his agency
a great share of those benefits.
The former keeps in view the co-operation
of others towards the public good.
The latter presents to view his sole-agency.
At a time when there would have been less anxiety to
publish to the people a strong approbation from your house,
this strengthening of your expression
would not have been noticed.
Our attentions have been so absorbed by the first
manifestations of the sentiments of your house,
that we have lost sight of our own legislature:
insomuch that I do not know whether they are sitting or not.
The rejection of Mr. Rutledge by the Senate is a bold thing,
because they cannot pretend any objection to him
but his disapprobation of the treaty.
It is of course a declaration that they will receive none but
tories hereafter into any department of the government.
I should not wonder if Monroe were to be recalled
under the idea of his being of the partisans of France,
whom the President considers as the partisans of war and
confusion in his letter of July 31, and as disposed to excite
them to hostile measures or at least to unfriendly sentiments,
a most infatuated blindness to the true character of the
sentiments entertained in favor of France….
My friendly respects to Mr. Madison to whom
the next week’s dose will be directed.
Adieu affectionately.14
On 16 January 1796 Thomas Jefferson sent to his mentor on law
George Wythe a 3-page letter discussing laws and including a collection
of printed laws, and he offered to supervise organizing them.
In February the commercial treaty that John Jay negotiated
with the British came back from London to the United States.
President Washington proclaimed it the supreme law of the land
and sent a copy to both houses of Congress.
The Republicans complained that the President and the Senate
were taking complete control over the regulation of commerce
while the Constitution had given that power to the Congress.
On 28 February 1796 Jefferson wrote to Vice President Adams
about the value of experiments and honesty.
I am to thank you, my dear Sir, for forwarding
M. D’Ivernois’ book on the French revolution.
I receive everything with respect which comes from him.
But it is on politics, a subject I never loved, and now hate.
I will not promise therefore to read it thoroughly.
I fear the oligarchical executive of the French will not do.
We have always seen a small council get into cabals and
quarrels, the more bitter and relentless, the fewer they are.
We saw this in our committee of the states,
and that they were from their bad passions,
incapable of doing the business of their country.
I think that for the prompt, clear and consistent
action so necessary in an Executive,
unity of person is necessary as with us.
I am aware of the objection to this, that the office becoming
more important may bring on serious discord in elections.
In our country I think it will be long first, not within our day;
and we may safely trust to the wisdom of our Successors
the remedies of the evil to arise in theirs.
Both experiments however are now fairly committed,
and the result will be seen.
Never was a finer canvas presented
to work on than our countrymen.
All of them engaged in agriculture or the pursuits
of honest industry, independent in their circumstances,
enlightened as to their rights, and firm in their
habits of order and obedience to the laws.
This I hope will be the age of experiments in government,
and that their basis will be founded on principles of honesty,
not of mere force.
We have seen no instance of this since the days of
the Roman republic, nor do we read of any before that.
Either force or corruption has been the principle
of every modern government, unless the Dutch
perhaps be excepted, and I am not well enough
informed to except them absolutely.
If ever the morals of a people could be made
the basis of their own government, it is our case;
and he who could propose to govern such a people
by the corruption of their legislature,
before he could have one night of quiet sleep,
must convince himself that
the human soul as well as body is mortal.
I am glad to see that whatever grounds of
apprehension may have appeared of a wish to
govern us otherwise than on principles of reason
and honesty, we are getting the better of them.
I am sure, from the honesty of your heart, you join me
in detestation of the corruption of the English government,
and that no man on earth is more incapable
than yourself of seeing that copied among us, willingly.
I have been among those who have feared
the design to introduce it here, and it has been
a strong reason with me for wishing there was
an ocean of fire between that island and us.
But away politics.
I owe a letter to the Auditor on the subject of my accounts
while a foreign minister, and he informs me
yours hang on the same difficulties with mine.
Before the present government there was a usage either
practiced on or understood which regulated our charges.
This government has directed the future by a law.
But this is not retrospective, and I cannot conceive
why the treasury cannot settle accounts under
the old Congress on the principles that body acted on.
I shall very shortly write to Mr. Harrison on this subject,
and if we cannot have it settled otherwise,
I suppose we must apply to the legislature.
In this I will act in concert with you if you approve of it.
Present my very affectionate respects to Mrs. Adams, and
be assured that no one more cordially esteems your virtues
than Dear Sir Your sincere friend & servant.15
On 2 March 1796 Jefferson wrote to James Monroe.
The most remarkable political occurrence
with us has been the treaty with England,
of which no man in the U.S. has had the effrontery
to affirm that it was not a very bad one except
Alexander Hamilton under the signature of Camillus.
Its most zealous defenders only pretend
that it was better than war.
As if war was not invited rather than avoided
by unfounded demands.
I have never known the public pulse beat so full
and in such universal unison on any Subject
since the declaration of Independence.
The House of Representatives of the US has
manifested its disapprobation of the treaty.
We are yet to learn whether they will exercise
their constitutional right of refusing the means
which depend on them for carrying it into execution.
Should they be induced to lend their hand to it,
it will be hard swallowing with their constituents but will
be swallowed from the habits of order and obedience to
the laws which so much distinguish our countrymen.16
James Madison wrote to Jefferson about how the immigrant
Albert Gallatin
who had been elected to the House of Representatives in 1794.
He was organizing the fiscal chaos on the Ways and Means Committee
which was formed on 21 December 1795.
Jefferson on 6 March 1796 wrote to Madison saying,
I do not at all wonder at the condition in which
the finances of the US. are found.
Hamilton’s object from the beginning was to throw them
into forms which should be utterly indecipherable.
I ever said he did not understand their condition himself,
nor was able to give a clear view of the excess
of our debts beyond our credits, nor whether
we were diminishing or increasing the debt.
My own opinion was that from the commencement
of this government to the time I ceased to attend
to the subject we had been increasing our debt
about a million of Dollars annually.
If Mr. Gallatin would undertake to reduce this chaos
to order, present us with a clear view of our finances,
and put them into a form as simple as they will admit,
he will merit immortal honor.
The accounts of the US ought to be and may be
made as simple as those of a common farmer,
and capable of being understood by common farmers….
The Spanish treaty will have some disagreeable features,
seeds of chicanery and eternal broils,
instead of peace and friendship.
At a period not long before that, they had been ready to sign
one giving us vastly more than we had ever contemplated;
particularly in our intercourse with their West Indies.
I by no means think of declining the work
we have spoken of.
On the contrary, I wish with ardor to begin it,
since the change of form into which I propose to put it: the
first ideas had always oppressed me from a consciousness
of my want both of talents and materials to execute it.
But it will be impossible for a year to come;
and I am not certain whether, even after the present year,
I shall not be obliged to put my farms under such
direction as that I should be considered as not here
as to them, while I should be here as to my papers….
P.S. Have you considered all the consequences
of your proposition respecting post roads?
I view it as a source of boundless patronage
to the executive, jobbing to members of Congress and
their friends, and a bottomless abyss of public money.
You will begin by only appropriating the surplus
of the post-office revenues: but the other revenues
will soon be called in to their aid, and it will be a
scene of eternal scramble among the members
who can get the most money wasted in their state,
and they will always get most who are meanest.
We have thought hitherto that the roads of a state
could not be so well administered even by the state
legislature as by the magistracy of the county on the spot.
What will it be when a member of New Hampshire
is to mark out a road for Georgia?
Does the power to establish post roads given you
by Congress mean that you shall make the roads,
or only select from those already made,
those on which there shall be a post?
If the term be equivocal, (and I really do not think it so)
which is the safest construction?
That which permits a majority of Congress to go
to cutting down mountains and bridging of rivers,
or the other which if too restricted may refer it
to the states for amendment, securing still
due measure and proportion among us, and providing
some means of information to the members of
Congress tantamount to that ocular inspection
which even in our county determinations the magistrate
finds cannot be supplied by any other evidence?
The fortification of harbors was liable to great objection.
But national circumstances furnished some color.
In this case there is none.
The roads of America are the best in the world
except those of France and England.
But does the state of our population, the extent of our
internal commerce, the want of sea and river navigation,
call for such expense on roads here,
or are our means adequate to it?
Think of all this and a great deal more which your good
judgment will suggest and pardon my freedom.17
On March 19 Jefferson in a letter to William B. Giles wrote,
I know not when I have received greater satisfaction
than on reading the speech of Dr. Lieb
in the Pennsylvania Assembly.
He calls himself a new member.
I congratulate honest republicanism on such an acquisition,
and promise myself much from a career
which begins on such elevated ground.
We are in suspense here to see the fate and effect
of Mr. Pitt’s bill against democratic societies.
I wish extremely to get at the true history
of this effort to suppress freedom of
meeting, speaking, writing and printing.
Your acquaintance with Sedgewick will enable you to do it.
Pray get from him the outlines of the bill
he intended to have brought in for this purpose.
This will enable us to judge whether we have the
merit of the invention: whether we were really
before hand with the British minister on this subject:
whether he took his hint from our proposition,
or whether the concurrence in sentiment is merely
the result of the general truth that great men will think alike,
and act alike though without intercommunication.
I am serious in desiring extremely
the outlines of the bill intended for us.
From the debates on the subject of our seamen,
I am afraid as much harm as good will be done by our
endeavors to arm our seamen against impressment.
It is proposed I observe to register them
and give them certificates of citizenship
to protect them from foreign impressment.
But these certificates will be lost in a thousand ways.
A sailor will neglect to take his certificate.
He is wet twenty times in a voyage.
If he goes ashore without it, he is impressed;
if with it, he gets drunk; it is lost, stolen from him,
taken from him, and then the want of it gives an
authority to impress which does not exist now.
After ten years’ attention to the subject, I have
never been able to devise anything effectual
but that the circumstance of an American bottom being
made ipso facto a protection for a number of seamen
proportioned to her tonnage: to oblige American captains
when called on by foreign officers to parade the men on deck,
which would show whether they exceeded their quota,
and allow the foreign officers to send 2 or 3 persons
aboard and hunt for any suspected to be concealed.
This Mr. Pinckney was instructed to insist upon with
Great Britain, to accept of nothing short of it, and most
especially not to agree that a certificate of citizenship should
be requirable from our seamen: because it would be
made a ground for the authorized impressment of them.
I am still satisfied that such a protection will place them
in a worse situation than they are at present.
It is true the British minister has not shown a disposition
to accede to my proposition: but it was not totally rejected:
and if he still refuses, lay a duty of 1.d. sterling a yard
on British oznabrigs to make a fund for paying the
expenses of the agents you are obliged to employ
to seek out our suffering seamen.18
On 21 March 1796 Jefferson wrote another letter to James Monroe,
The British treaty has been formally
at length laid before Congress.
All America is a tip-toe to see what the
House of Representatives will decide on it.
We conceive the constitutional doctrine to be that
though the President and Senate have the general
power of making treaties yet wherever they include
in a treaty matters confided by the Constitution to the
three branches of legislature, an act of legislation will
be requisite to confirm these articles, and that the House
of Representatives as one branch of the legislature are
perfectly free to pass the act or to refuse it, governing
themselves by their own judgment whether it is for the good
of their constituents to let the treaty go into effect or not.
On the precedent now to be set will depend the future
construction of our Constitution, and whether the powers
of legislature shall be transferred from the President, Senate
and House of Representatives to the President, Senate
and Piarningo or any other Indian, Algerine or other chief.
It is fortunate that the first decision is to be in a case
so palpably atrocious as to have been
predetermined by all America.19
On March 27 Jefferson wrote to Madison.
I am enchanted with Mr. Gallatin’s speech
in Bache’s paper of March 14.
It is worthy of being printed at the end of the Federalist,
as the only rational commentary on the part
of the Constitution to which it relates.
Not that there may not be objections and difficult ones to it,
and which I shall be glad to see his answers to:
but if they are never answered, they are more easily
to be gulped down than those which lie to the doctrines
of his opponents, which do in fact annihilate the whole
of the powers given by the Constitution to the legislature.
According to the rule established by usage & common sense
of construing one part of the instrument by another,
the objects on which the President & Senate may
exclusively act by treaty are much reduced, but the field
on which they may act with the sanction of the legislature
is large enough: and I see no harm in rendering their
sanction necessary, and not much harm in annihilating
the whole treaty-making power except as to making peace.
If you decide in favor of your right to refuse cooperation
in any case of treaty, I should wonder on what occasion
it is to be used if not on one where the rights, the interest,
the honor & faith of our nation are so grossly sacrificed,
where a faction has entered into conspiracy with the
enemies of their country to chain down the legislature
at the feet of both; where the whole mass of your
constituents have condemned this work in the most
unequivocal manner, and are looking to you as their
last hope to save them from the effects of the avarice
& corruption of the first agent, the revolutionary
machinations of others, and the incomprehensible
acquiescence of the only honest man who has assented to it.
I wish that his honesty and his political errors
may not furnish a second occasion to exclaim
“curse on his virtues; they’ve undone his country.”20
Jefferson on 24 April 1796 wrote a letter to his friend
and traveling neighbor Phillip Massei.
Here is how Jefferson described his current concerns:
The aspect of our politics has
wonderfully changed since you left us.
In place of that noble love of liberty and republican
government which carried us triumphantly through the war,
an Anglican, monarchical and aristocratical party has
sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over
us the substance as they have already done
the forms of the British government.
The main body of our citizens however remain true to their
republican principles, the whole landed interest is with them,
and so is a great mass of talents.
Against us are the Executive, the Judiciary,
two out of three branches of the legislature, all of
the officers of the government, all who want to be officers,
all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the
boisterous sea of liberty, British merchants and Americans
trading on British capitals, speculators and holders
in the banks and public funds, a contrivance invented for the
purposes of corruption and for assimilating us in all things
to the rotten as well as the sound parts of the British model.
It would give you a fever were I to name to you the
apostates who have gone over to these heresies, men who
were Samsons in the field and Solomons in the council,
but who have had their heads shorn by the harlot England.
In short we are likely to preserve the liberty
we have obtained only by unremitting labors and perils.
But we shall preserve them, and our mass of weight and
wealth on the good side is so great as to leave
no danger that force will ever be attempted against us.
We have only to awake and snap the Lilliputian cords
with which they have been entangling us during
the first sleep which succeeded our labors.21
On April 26 the eloquent Federalist Congressman from Massachusetts
Fisher Ames gave a powerful speech in the House of Representatives
in favor of accepting the Jay Treaty.
Three days later the House by one vote approved the Jay Treaty
with funding for implementation.
On June 19 Jefferson wrote to George Washington.
In Bache’s Aurora of the 9th inst which came here
by the last post, a paper appears which having been confided,
as I presume, to but few hands, makes it
truly wonderful how it should have got there.
I cannot be satisfied as to my own part till I relieve
my mind by declaring, and I attest everything sacred
and honorable to the declaration, that it has got there
neither through me nor the paper confided to me.
This has never been from under my own lock and key,
or out of my own hands.
No mortal ever knew from me that
these questions had been proposed.
Perhaps I ought to except one person who possesses
all my confidence as he has possessed yours.
I do not remember indeed that
I communicated it even to him.
But as I was in the habit of unlimited trust and counsel
with him, it is possible I may have read it to him.
No more: for the quire of which it makes a part
was never in any hand but my own, nor was a
word ever copied or taken down from it by anybody.
I take on myself without fear any divulgation on his part.
We both know him incapable of it.
From myself then or my paper this publication
has never been derived.
I have formerly mentioned to you that from a very
early period of my life I had laid it down as a rule
of conduct never to write a word for the public papers.
From this I have never departed in a single instance:
and on a late occasion when all the world seemed
to be writing; besides a rigid adherence to my own rule,
I can say with truth that not a line for the press
was ever communicated to me by any other:
except a single petition referred for my correction;
which I did not correct however though the contrary,
as I have heard, was said in a public place by one person
through error, through malice by another.
I learn that this last has thought it worth his while
to try to sow tares between you and me by representing
me as still engaged in the bustle of politics and in
turbulence and intrigue against the government.
I never believed for a moment that this could make any
impression on you, or that your knowledge of me would
not overweigh the slander of an intriguer, dirtily employed
in sifting the conversations of my table, where alone
he could hear of me, and seeking to atone for his sins
against you by sins against another who had never done
him any other injury than that of declining his confidences.
Political conversation I really dislike and therefore
avoid where I can without affectation.
But when urged by others, I have never conceived
that having been in public life requires me to bely
my sentiments nor even to conceal them.
When I am led by conversation to express them, I do it
with the same independence here which I have practiced
everywhere and which is inseparable from my nature.
But enough of this miserable tergiversator,
who ought indeed either to have been of more truth
or less trusted by his country.
While on the subject of papers
permit me to ask one from you.
You remember the difference of opinion between
Hamilton and Knox on the one part and myself on
the other on the subject of firing on the Little Sarah,
and that we had exchanged opinions and reasons in writing.
On your arrival in Philadelphia I delivered you a copy
of my reasons in the presence of Col. Hamilton.
On our withdrawing he told me he had been so much
engaged that he had not been able to prepare a copy of his
and General Knox’s for you, and that if I would send you
the one he had given me, he would replace it in a few days.
I immediately sent it to you, wishing
you should see both sides of the subject together.
I often after applied to both the gentlemen
but could never obtain another copy.
I have often thought of asking this one or a copy
of it back from you, but have not before written
on subjects of this kind to you.
Though I do not know that it will ever be of the least
importance to me, yet one loves to possess arms
though they hope never to have occasion for them.
They possess my paper in my own handwriting.
It is just I should possess theirs.
The only thing amiss is that they should have left me
to seek a return of the paper or a copy of it from you….
I take the liberty of putting under your cover
a letter to the son of M. de la Fayette,
not exactly knowing where to direct to him.22
President Washington in September 1796 released
his Farewell Address, and it was printed on the 19th.
This event started the campaign that would determine the first person
to take over the Presidency from the first President.
In his Address Washington especially warned future presidents
to “steer clear of permanent alliances” that
could involve Americans in European wars.
In the voting for the President of the United States
from November 4 to December 7
the Federalist John Adams received 35,725 popular votes
and the Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson got 31,115.
On 17 December 1796 Jefferson wrote to Madison
about the progress in the elections.
The first wish of my heart was that you should have been
proposed for the administration of the government.
On your declining it I wish anybody rather than myself:
and there is nothing I so anxiously hope as that
my name may come out either second or third.
These would be indifferent to me; as the last would leave
me at home the whole year, and the other two thirds of it.
I have no expectation that the Eastern states will
suffer themselves to be so much outwitted as to be
made the tools for bringing in Pinckney instead of Adams.
I presume they will throw away their second vote.
In this case it begins to appear possible that there
may be an equal division where I had supposed the
republican vote would have been considerably minor.
It seems also possible that
the Representatives may be divided.
This is a difficulty from which
the Constitution has provided no issue.
It is both my duty and inclination therefore to relieve
the embarrassment should it happen: and in that
case I pray you and authorize you fully to solicit
on my behalf that Mr. Adams may be preferred.
He has always been my senior from the commencement of
our public life, and the expression of the public will being
equal, this circumstance ought to give him the preference.
When so many motives will be operating to induce some
of the members to change their vote, the addition of
my wish may have some effect to preponderate the scale.
I am really anxious to see the speech.
It must exhibit a very different picture of our foreign affairs
from that presented in the Adieu,
or it will little correspond with my views of them.
I think they never wore so gloomy an aspect
since the year 1783.
Let those come to the helm who think
they can steer clear of the difficulties.
I have no confidence in myself for the undertaking.23
At Monticello on 28 December 1796 Jefferson wrote this letter to John Adams:
The public and the public papers have been
much occupied lately in placing us
in a point of opposition to each other.
I trust with confidence that less of it
has been felt by ourselves personally.
In the retired canton where I am, I learn little
of what is passing: pamphlets I see never;
papers but a few; and the fewer the happier.
Our latest intelligence from Philadelphia at present
is of the 16th inst. but though at that date your election
to the first magistracy seems not to have been known
as a fact, yet with me it has never been doubted.
I knew it impossible you should lose a vote North of the
Delaware, and even if that of Pennsylvania should be
against you in the mass, yet that you would get enough
South of that to place your succession out of danger.
I have never one single moment expected a different issue;
and though I know I shall not be believed,
yet it is not the less true that I have never wished it.
My neighbors, as my compurgators, could aver that fact,
because they see my occupations
and my attachment to them.
Indeed it is possible that you may be cheated of your
succession by a trick worthy the subtlety of your arch-friend
of New York who has been able to make of your
real friends tools to defeat their and your just wishes.
Most probably he will be disappointed as to you;
and my inclinations place me out of his reach.
I leave to others the sublime delights of riding in the storm,
better pleased with sound sleep and a warm birth below,
with the society of neighbors, friends and fellow
laborers of the earth than of spies and sycophants.
No one then will congratulate you
with purer disinterestedness than myself.
The share indeed which I may have had in the late vote,
I shall still value highly, as an evidence of the share
I have in the esteem of my fellow citizens.
But while in this point of view a few votes less would be
little sensible, the difference in the effect of a few more
would be very sensible and oppressive to me.
I have no ambition to govern men.
It is a painful and thankless office.
Since the day too on which you signed the treaty of Paris,
our horizon was never so overcast.
I devoutly wish you may be able to shun
for us this war by which our agriculture,
commerce and credit will be destroyed.
If you are, the glory will be all your own; and that your
administration may be filled with glory and happiness to
yourself and advantage to us is the sincere wish of one who
though in the course of our voyage through life,
various little incidents have happened or been contrived
to separate us, retains still for you the solid esteem of the
moments when we were working for our independence,
and sentiments of respect and affectionate attachment.24
In the Electoral votes Adams became President with 71,
and Jefferson with 68 was made Vice President.
Others who got electoral votes were Federalist Thomas Pinckney 59,
Republican Aaron Burr 30, Republican Samuel Adams 15,
Federalist Oliver Ellsworth 11, Republican George Clinton 7,
and Federalist John Jay 5.
Each elector could vote for two candidates,
though not two votes for the same candidate.
On 28 December 1796 Jefferson wrote this letter to John Adams
that he mailed with another letter on 1 January 1797:
The public & the public papers have been much occupied
lately in placing us in a point of opposition to each other.
I confidently trust we have felt less of it ourselves.
In the retired canton where I live,
we know little of what is passing.
Pamphlets I see none: papers but a few,
and the fewer the happier.
Our last information from Philadelphia is of the 16th inst.
At that date the issue of the late election seems
not to have been known as a matter of fact.
With me, however, its issue was never doubted.
I knew the impossibility of your losing a single vote
North of the Delaware; and even if you should lose
that of Pennsylvania in the mass, you would get
enough South of that to make your election sure.
I never for a single moment expected any other issue;
& though I shall not be believed, yet it is not the less true,
that I never wished any other.
My neighbors, as my compurgators, could aver this fact,
as seeing my occupations & my attachment to them.
It is possible, indeed, that even you may be cheated of
your succession by a trick worthy the subtlety of your
arch friend of New York, who has been able to make of
your real friends tools for defeating their & your just wishes.
Probably, however, he will be disappointed as to you;
and my inclinations put me out of his reach.
I leave to others the sublime delights of riding in the storm,
better pleased with sound sleep & a warmer berth it,
encircled with the society of neighbors, friends & fellow
laborers of the earth, rather than with spies & sycophants.
Still, I shall value highly the share I may have had
in the late vote, as a measure of the share I hold
in the esteem of my fellow citizens.
In this point of view, a few votes less are but little sensible,
while a few more would have been in their effect
very sensible & oppressive to me.
I have no ambition to govern men.
It is a painful and thankless office.
And never since the day you signed the treaty of Paris,
has our horizon been so overcast.
I devoutly wish you may be able to shun for us this war,
which will destroy our agriculture, commerce, & credit.
If you do, the glory will be all your own.
And that your administration may be filled with glory &
happiness to yourself, & advantage to us is the sincere
prayer of one who, though in the course of our voyage,
various little incidents have happened or been contrived
to separate us, yet retains for you the solid esteem of
the times when we were working for our independence,
and sentiments of sincere respect & attachment.25
Notes
1. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VII ed. Paul Leicester Ford, p. 137-138.
2. Ibid., p. 143-144.
3. Ibid., p. 144-145.
4. Thomas Jefferson Writings, p. 1014.
5. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VII, p. 149-150.
6. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VII, p. 155.
7. Thomas Jefferson Writings, p. 1015-1017.
8. The Life of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 2 by Henry S. Randall, p. 256.
9. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VIII, p. 169-170.
10. Ibid., p. 172.
11. To Alexander Hamilton from George Washington, 31 August 1795 (Online)
12. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VIII, p. 191-193.
13. Ibid., p. 201-204.
14. Ibid., p. 199-200.
15. Thomas Jefferson Writings, p. 1033-1035.
16. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VIII, p. 221.
17. Ibid., p. 223-227.
18. Ibid., p. 254-256.
19. Ibid., p. 230.
20. Ibid., p. 230-232.
21. Ibid., p. 238-241.
22. Ibid., p. 245-249.
23. Ibid., p. 254-256.
24. Thomas Jefferson Writings, p. 1040-1041.
25. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Volume VIII, p. 261.
This work has not yet been published as a book, and all the chapters are free in this website.