Title: From John Adams to Richard Rush, 15 January 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Richard

Dear Sir
Quincy January 15. 1811

In the middle of a Letter to Petersbourg this Morning Mrs Adams came in and invited me to take a ride, in the beautiful Sleighing We have at this moment, to last perhaps two days like two Such Opportunities as We have had before this Winter and then be melted away; We took the Post office in our Course, and there I found your beautiful Letter of the 4th of this month, on my return I continued my Letter to my Son, and extracted your Elogium upon his Pamphlet, without mentioning your Name, and concluded with Advising him, if he Should ever write or read Lectures upon Oratory again, never more to doubt of the Talents of Americans at Panegyrick. This Work as you observe “is raised”, in its Style “to the highest” Tone of Elegance, and So are Several others of his prosaick Compositions. In his Lectures he found his advantage in it: for never were Lectures attended with more Unanimity or heard with more perfect Attention or applauded with more Admiration and Enthusiasm. He once indulged in this Style, I thought, beyond what was judicious; I mean in his Report to The Senate of the U.S. concerning John Smith the Preacher and Senator and Friend of Coll Burr. State Papers should be in a more Simple Strain. I have ever thought that Mr Burkes Articles of Impeachment against Warren Hastings were much too eloquent and oratorical.
Mr Adams’s Speeches in the Senate of this Commonwealth and in the Senate of The United States as well as at the Bar, have always been in a Strain of cool Reasoning without any affectation of ornament or Effort at any uncommon Elegance, Simplicity Perspicuity and Precision are the predominant Characteristicks of his Style in Conversation as well as in all his extemporaneous Discourses in Public. His public orations have been raised, a little and from his ardent Love of Poetry I have often wondered that more of it has not appeared in his Speeches. His head is full of the Poets. I never knew a Man more universally read and Studied in the English Poets. There is Scarcely one in the Language that he has not attentively read. He is too much of a Poet himself, for a Statesman. It has cost him Some Pains to restrain his Propensity to the Muses: and yet he has Spent too much time in their Company. Oberon of Wieland has been translated by him from the German into English, and I have compared many Parts of it with Sotheby’s, and Although Sotheby is unquestionably one of the best English Versifyers I am at a loss to determine which Translation is the best. His Translation of Some Parts of Juvenal are fully equal and in Some Books Superiour to Giffords. I hope you will not think him too much of a Schollar for a Statesman.
You, and all the World will Suspect me, as I Suspect myself of parental Partiality. But though I have endeavourd to divest myself of every bias and every Prejudice, I cannot see otherwise.
Cicero in this Case wanted not a Cicero to do Justice to his Eloquence: for the Style of your Letter is fully equal to that of the Subject of it.
My Letters to your Father are fit to be seen only by him and his FireSide as friendly as him.
They are the momentary and Spontaneous Effusions of good humour and ill humour and idle humour just as it happens. I dare Say I should be very much ashamed of them if I should ever read them.
I wish you every Blessing and Shall be much obliged to you for your Correspondence. I wish there may be as long a Friendship between you and my Son as there has been between the Fathers; and that you may be able to bring Pensilvania and Massachusetts nearer together in Sentiment and affection that they have been for twenty years past. They were not always at variance. Present my respectful Compliments to your Parents and your Lady and believe me your / Sincere Friend
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to Benjamin Rush, 18 January 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Benjamin

Dear Sir
Quincy January 18. 1811

As I am never weary of Writing to you, because I write always without thinking, I am not sorry to be obliged to begin another Letter and another Sheet.
J. Q. A in a Letter to his Brother T. B. A. dated St. Petersburg 27. October 1810 has these Words, vizt
“I wish you to procure and Send to me a specimen of every one of the Coins of the United States Mint of the United States, of Gold—Silver—and Copper.—Viz an Eagle, Half Eage—Quarter Eagle.—Dollar, half dollar, quarter dollar, Ten Cent and five Cent piece—Cent and half Cent, as new as you can procure, or at least perfect in Execution and undefaced, I want them for a Collection.—Perhaps by the Friendship of Dr Rush you can procure them new from The Mint. And to Save the trouble of forwarding them to you, perhaps he will be kind enough to send them to me, by Some Spring Vessel from Philadelphia.—You will transmit to him the amount of their Value, and charge it in account to me.”
Now, my good Friend, will you be so good as to let me know whether you will undertake this kind Office. Whether you send them from Philadelphia directly to Petersburg, which will probably be the best Way, or whether you send them to me or my son here at Quincy I will be answerable that the Money shall be remitted to you immediately by myself or by Thomas Boylston Adams.
Since I have been Obliged to begin a new sheet for this Little Piece of Business, I may Say a few Words in Answer to your last Concerning the Resurrection of Letters. You allow that “an Attention to the dead Languages has revived in Europe” but Alledge that “Napoleon is at the head of the Junto confederated to restore them”
I will not deny him the Glory that is due to him. It is true that no Man, Prince or Subject, has distinguished himself more by the Patronage of Science, Litterature and the fine Arts than Napoleon. This and Toleration, are the brightest Jewells in his Crown. I cannot however do So much honour to him as to ascribe this Second Resurrection of Learning to him, it is rather due to the American Revolution, That great Event turned the Thoughts and Studies of Men of Learning to the ancient Greeks their Language their Antiquities their Forms of Government. Anacharsis Gillies, Mitford, La Harp, and a thousand other Works in France England Holland, Germany and Italy were produced by the American Revolution before Bonaparte made any Figure.
The Darkness and Ignorance of the fourteenth and fifteenth Centuries were dispelled, and a new Glory Spread over Mankind by the discovery of the Classics and the Corpus Juris at Constantinoble and Amalphi: how then can you imagine that the Same Darkness and Ignorance can be brought back by the very Studies which Scattered them: ie. by a new Resurrects of the Same Learning.
We need not fear that Latin and Greek will ever be too much Studied. Not one in ten thousand of those who Study them in Schools and Colledges ever make any great Proficiency in them. In general Scollars are enabled to understand their own Languages the better for the Smattering they Acquire in the Classicks, and to examine a Passage occasionally in Latin &c
But you must be weary by this time of common Place thoughts of your Friend

John Adams,


Title: To John Adams from George Erving, 19 January 1811
From: Erving, George
To: Adams, John

Sir
New York Jany 19. 1811

I have this moment of my arrival here had the honor to receive your letter of the 16th instt, inclosing two for our minister at Petersbg, to the care & transmission of which I shall pay every possible attention.—
It gives me very peculiar satisfaction to be useful to you in this small particular, & I sincerely desire greater occasions of manifesting my very high respect for you, as well as for Mr J. Q. Adams.—
I shall proceed the day after to-morrow for Boston, where I shall be happy to receive your further commands; & if the time allowed by our government for my stay in that quarter will admit of it, I propose paying my respects in person to you & Mrs Adams:—In the mean time Sir beg you to make my best compliments and thanks for her kind wishes, acceptable to Mrs Adams, & to receive assurances of the very sincere respect with which I have the honor to be / Your most obedient hble St

George W Erving


Title: To John Adams from David Sewall, 24 January 1811
From: Sewall, David
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir
York (District of Maine) Jany. 24th. 1811.

I have a desire of knowing, (in case it will not be too troublesome for you to make the Communication) the Occurrences that took place, in a Court of Admiralty, held at Boston, toward the latter part of Govr. Barnard’s Admina. for a supposed Murder on the high Seas.—It was I belive the last trial of the kind in Massa. prior to the american revolution.—Govr. Jno. Wentworth & some Gent of N. Hampr. were members of the Court.—The Person Accused, was Acqutted of the charge, it was said, because a major part of the Court (suppose 7. in Number) could not agree to Convict him—I have had an Idea, that  you were of Council for the Prisoner Whose Name I do not recollect.—Who exhibited the charge? for I presume, there was no G. Jury.—Was the Commisn. a Special one for that particular purpose?—Was the Evidence reduced to Writing, or made ore tenus only prior to the Argument made by the council.—
Two at least of our Classmates Viz. W. Wheeler & C. Cushing have died since I have had the pleasure of any Communication from You—And Docr. Hemmengway appears near the close of life, with a Cancer—
I am with great esteem & respect / Your / Huml Servant

David Sewall


Title: From John Adams to Boston Patriot, 25 January 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Boston Patriot

					Quincy, January 25th, 1811.

				The Hague, Sept. 6, 1782—Wrote to Mr. Secretary Livingston, “In your letter of the 5th of March, you ask, whether this power has entered into any treaty with France since the war, and whether any such thing is in contemplation?They have made no treaty, but a convention concerning recaptures, which you must have seen in the papers. The East India Company have concerted operations with France in the East Indies, and the prince by the resolution of the states, has concerted operations in these European seas for this campaign, and the city of Amsterdam has lately proposed in the states of

Holland, to renew the concert for next year, and to revive an old treaty of commerce with France. In my letter of the 18th of August, I have sent you a copy of the instructions to their ministers for peace, not to make peace, truce or armistice, but with the simultaneous concurrence of all the belligerent powers, among whom the United States of America arc certainly one, in the sense and meaning of their high mightinesses.You observe sir, that “France is interested with us in procuring a public acknowledgment of our independence.”—You desire me to write freely, and my own disposition inclines me to do so.This is a delicate subject and requires to be cautiously handled. Political jealousy is very different from a suspicious temper. We should contemplate the vices naturally allied to the greatest virtues. We should consider the fevers that lie near an high state of health.We should consider the maxim that is laid down by all the political writers in the world, and the fact that is found in all histories. viz.—“That in cases of alliance between unequal powers, almost all the advantages ever did, and ever will accrue to the greatest.” We should observe, in the Abbe Raynal’s History of this revolution, that there is a party in France, who blames the ministry for putting themselves into the chains (“Fers”) of congress; and for not keeping us dependent enough upon them. Is it not natural for them to wish to keep us so dependent upon them, that we might be obliged to accept such terms of peace, as she should think would do for us? If’ the house of Bourbon should be suspected hereafter by any neutral power, to grow too fast in wealth and force, and be disposed to form a league against it, would it not be natural for that house to wish that we may be kept from any connections with such powers, and wholly connected with itself, so as to be obliged to engage with it in all its wars?It is impossible for me to prove that the delay of Spain to acknowledge our independence, has been concerted between the French and Spanish ministry; but I candidly ask any man who has attended to the circumstances of this war, whether he has not seen cause to suspect it? For my own part, I have no doubt of it; and I do not know that we can justly censure it.I have ten thousand reasons which convince me, that one minister at least has not wished that we should form connections with Holland, even so soon as we did, or with any other power, although he had

no right and therefore would not appear openly to oppose it. When I took leave of that minister (De Vergennes) to return to America, in the spring of the year 1779, he desired me expressly to advise congress “to attend to the affairs of the war, and leave the polities of Europe to them”—“et laisser la politique a nous.” In 1778 or 1779, when Mr. Arthur Lee and I proposed to Dr. Franklin to go to Holland, or to consent that one of us should go, the doctor would not consent, but wrote to that minister, (De Vergennes) upon it, and received an answer, which he shewed me, advising against it. And when I received my letter of credence here, (i. e. to the states general) the French ambassador here, who follows the instructions communicated by that minister, took all possible pains to persuade me against communicating it. And Dr. Franklin, without reserve, in word and writing, has constantly declared that congress were wrong in sending a minister to Berlin, Vienna, Tuscany, Spain, Holland and St. Petersburgh; and doctor Franklin is as good an index of that minister’s sentiments as I know.Now I avow myself of a totally opposite system; and think it our indispensable duty, as it is our undoubted right, to send ministers to other courts, (besides France) and endeavor to extend our acquaintance, commerce, and political connections with all the world; and I have pursued this system, which I believed to be also the wish of congress and the sense of America, with patience and perseverance against all dangers, reproaches, misrepresentations and oppositions, until I thank God, he has enabled me to plant the standard of the United States at the Hague, where it will wave forever.

I am now satisfied and dread nothing. The connection with Holland is a sure stay. Connected with Holland and the house of Bourbon we have nothing to fear.I have entered into these details, in answer to your inquiries, and the only use of them I would wish to make, is this. To insist upon seeing with our own eyes, using our own judgments, and acting an independent part. And it is of the last importance we should do it now, thus early. Otherwise, we should find it very difficult to do it, hereafter. I hope I have given you my sentiments, as you desired, with freedom; and that freedom I hope will give no offence either in America or France, for certainly none is intended.In your favor of the 22d of May, you direct me to draw upon Dr. Franklin for my salary, and to send my accounts to you.

My accounts sir, arc very short, and shall be sent as soon as the perplexity of the treaty is over. As to drawing on Dr. Franklin, I suppose this was upon supposition that we had no money here. There is now nearly a million and a half of florins, so that I beg I may be permitted to receive my salary here.I have transmitted to Mr. Dana, your dispatches as desired in your’s of the 29th May, reserving an extract for publication in the gazettes, which the French ambassador is of opinion, as well as others, will have a great effect in Europe. Your letter is extremely well written, and M. Dumas has well translated it, so that it will appear to advantage.Your letter of the 30th of May, affords me the pleasure of knowing that you have received some letters from me this year, and I am glad you inclined to lay that of the 21st of February before congress. By this time I hope that all objections to the memorial are removed. But in order to judge of the full effect of that memorial, three volumes of the Politique Hollandais, several volumes of De Post Van Neder Rhin, all the Dutch gazettes for a whole year, and the petitions of all the cities, should be read; for there is not one of them but what clearly shews the propriety of presenting that memorial, whose influence and effect, though not sudden, has been amazingly extensive. Indeed the French ambassador has often signified to me lately and more than once in express words, “Monsieur votre Fermité a fait un très bon effet ici.”The cipher was not put up in this duplicate, and I suppose the original is gone on to Mr. Dana in a letter I transmitted him from you some time ago; so that I should be obliged to you for another of the same sort.Rodney’s victory came as you hoped it would, too late to obstruct me. I was well settled at the Hague and publicly received by the states and the prince, before we received that melancholy news. Had it arrived sometime sooner, it might have disarranged all our systems, and this nation possibly might now have been separately at peace; which shews the importance of watching time and tide which there is in the affairs of men.You require, sir, to be furnished with the most minute detail of every step that Britain may take towards a negotiation for a general or partial peace.All the details towards a partial peace are already public in the newspapers, and have all been ineffectual. The states general, as appears by their

instructions to their ministers, are firm against it.Since the conversations between me and Diggs first, and Mr. Laurens and me afterwards, there has never been any message, directly or indirectly, by word or by writing, from the British ministry to me. It was my decided advice and earnest request by both these messengers, that all those messages might be sent to Paris to Dr. Franklin and the Comte de Vergennes, and this has been done. Dr. Franklin wrote me that he should keep me informed of every thing that passed, by expresses; but I have had no advice from him since the second of June. Your dispatches have all gone the same way, and I have never had a hint of any of them. I hope that Dr. Franklin and Mr. Jay have had positive instructions, to consent to no truce or armistice; and to enter into no conferences with any British minister who is not authorized to treat with the United States of America.Some weeks ago, I agreed with the Duke de la Vauguion to draw up a project of a memorial to their high mightinesses, proposing a triple or quadruple alliance, according to my instructions to that purpose. The duke in his private capacity, has often declared to me that he is of opinion, it would be advisable to make this proposal as soon as the treaty of commerce shall be signed; but could not give me any ministerial advice, without consulting the Comte de Vergennes. We agreed that he should transmit the project to the comte. Two days ago the duke called upon me and informed me that he had received the comtes answer, which was, that he did not think this the time, because it would tend to throw obscurity upon the instructions lately given by the states general to Mr. Brantzen, not to make any treaty or armistice, but simultaneously with all the belligerent powers.By the 10th article of the treaty of alliance, the invitation or admission is to be made by concert. From my instructions I supposed and suppose still, that the concert was made at Philadelphia between congress and the chevalier de la Luzerne, by the order of the king his master. And my instructions being positive and unconditional to make the proposition, I shall be somewhat embarrassed. On the one hand, I would preserve not only a real harmony, but the appearance of it also, between all steps of mine and the counsels of the French ministers. On the other I would obey my instructions, especially when they are so fully agreeable to me, at all events. The proposition would have a

good effect in England, in Holland, in France, in America, and in all the neutral countries, as I think, and it could do no harm that I can foresee.—Nay further, I am persuaded that the French ministry themselves, were they to give me their private opinions as the duke de la Vauguion does, would be glad if I should make the proposition against their advice.

It is possible however, that they may secretly choose, (notwithstanding the offer made at Philadelphia, not to be bound in an alliance with America and Holland. They may think they shall have more influence with their hands unbound, even to a system that they approve and mean to pursue.It is among all these doublings and windings of European politics that American ministers have to decide and act. The result is clear in my mind, that although it is proper to be upon good terms, communicative and confidential with the French ministers; yet we ought to have opinions, principles and systems of our own; and that our ministers should not be bound to follow their advice, but when it is consonant to our own; and that congress should finally support their own ministers against all secret insinuations.—They must see that a minister of theirs, who is determined to be, as he is bound in honor to be, free and independent, is not, as yet, in a very delectable or a very enviable situation in Europe.There is but one alternative: either congress should recall all their ministers from Europe, and leave all negotiations to the French ministry, (laisser le politique à nous) or they must support their ministers against all insinuations. If congress will see with their own eyes, I can assure them without fear of being contradicted, that neither the colour, figure or magnitude of objects, will always appear to them exactly as they do to their allies. To send ministers to Europe, who are supposed by the people of America to see for themselves, while in effect they see or pretend to see nothing but what appears through the glass of a French minister, is to betray the just expectations of the people.A remark or two on the foregoing letter will not be misapplied.1. The order to draw on Dr. Franklin for my salary was one of the most extraordinary strokes of all the correspondence. What could be the design of it? For any good purpose it was superfluous; for I had long possessed a resolution of congress authorizing me to draw upon Dr. Franklin for my salary & commanding him to honor my draughts. If I had borrowed money and had it in my own hands, why should I trouble Dr. Franklin or myself with bills upon him? After congress had entrusted me to borrow ten millions of dollars—nay, after they had entrusted me with the destiny of the nation in the commission for peace, was my integrity now suspected to such a degree that I was not to be trusted to receive my own daily bread out of my own money?I was at no loss to unriddle this mystery. I did not impute this affront to Mr. Livingston; but to a Frenchified Franklinian faction; and had no doubt then, and have no doubt now in 1811, that the design was too get all the money I had borrowed or should borrow, into the power of Vergennes and Franklin, and their bankers and understrappers.I held the instruction in ineffable contempt and paid no kind of regard to it, very well knowing that they dared not call me to account for disobedience to this tyrannical mandate.2. My anxiety to secure the future independence of America and her neutrality in all future wars, if possible, appears in this letter. The future destiny of our country, her future rights, duties and policy were frequent topics of conversation between Dr. Franklin and me when we lived together at Passy and Paris. My opinion was that our true policy would always be to maintain an impartial neutrality in all future European wars, as long as possible. Franklin’s favorite doctrine was, that “we ought to unite with France at least in two future wars against England; the first to pay the debt of gratitude we owed her for assisting us in our revolution; and the second to shew ourselves as generous to her, as she had been to us.”It was easy for any man of the least reflection to foresee, that we should be solicited by France and England, with every artifice of subtlety, and by every motive of hope and fear, terror and flattery, to engage in their wars. I thought we ought to cultivate peace, and the study and labor of my life for more than thirty years has been invariably directed to this object and to place our relations with France and England upon a footing of impartial neutrality. By the treaty of 1800, with France, I flattered myself it was attained. But the British government seem to have presumptuously inferred from it, that their influence in America is irresistable and that they may do as they please. France has been sufficiently impertinent & unjust. Both together have brought us in danger of a necessary war. If injuries and provocations were exactly equal from both nations, it would be safer for us to preserve the peace with France than with England. BUT THE INSULTS, INJURIES CLAIMS AND PRETENSIONS OF GREAT BRITAIN HAVE BEEN HITHERTO MUCH MORE DANGEROUS THAN THOSE OF FRANCE.3. Mr. Livingston’s repeated and peremptory calls upon me “for the most minute details” perhaps led me into the habit and error in all my subsequent correspondence with congress, of descending to particulars too minute and circumstantial.

					John Adams.


Title: To John Adams from Richard Rush, 27 January 1811
From: Rush, Richard
To: Adams, John

Philadelphia January 27th. 1811.

I was more gratified sir, than I can express at the letter which you did me the honor to write to me. The very evening before it came to hand I had finished reading, in course, the last of the lectures upon rhetoric and oratory, which for several weeks had occasionally yielded me great delight during the intervals of a busy profession. The just and often original reflections which they contain; their stores of well-arranged learning; above all, the high moral tone upon which they are set make them, I think, the best present which has yet been given to American literature. The youth of Massachusetts, as well as those of Pennsylvania, will, I hope, study them as models of scholarship and taste; while the incidental praise which they bestow upon our own institutions will serve as well to engender patriotism, as the classical spirit which marks them throughout cannot fail to awaken, wherever they are studied, a relish for letters. I cannot sir, adopt the sentiment that the author is too much of a poet for a statesman. The poets are the finest writers. They are the best philosophers too, for theirs is the phylosophy of nature and the mind. Their very art is eloquence. If they are not practical statesmen they at least know how, by their precepts, to form them. I believe it is Johnson who says, that the Iliad is the first production of the human mind, and we may ask where is the prose composition that has lived so long, or in all ages ranked so high. But sir, to prove that the two characters are compatible I will not longer forbear to seize the most apposite illustration by taking the instance before me, where my only hesitation is whether to place the scholar before the statesman, or the statesman before the scholar.
Burke’s articles of impeachment are, as you observe, too oratorical for the subject. Such style in state papers, is what physicians term error loci. Perhaps the same remark may be hazarded as to his orations, which may be regarded rather as splendid compositions, than as speeches suited to avail much in their application to the immediate objects and business of a nation. They are, indeed, monuments of genius and skill  solid as well as glittering; but perhaps too universal in their matter, too abstracted from the trains of common thought, too ornate, too ethical, and often too wise to have worked much, at the hour of delivery, upon a house of commons. The bold, downright, palpable, mind of Chatham wielded that body better.
If any thing could draw together more closely the cords of our union it ought to be the sentiments expressed under this head in the Review of Mr Ames’s works. But greatly do I fear that Mr Quincy, and others of that stamp, have not a full veneration for such sentiments. To you sir, your country would look for admonitions upon this subject should it, unhappily, too soon have to need them; and permit me to add that the power which flows from wisdom never ceases to have its force.
Your kind letters to my father are considered, and treated, as the treasures of friendship.
I can still remember with pleasure the days when, as a boy, I was sometimes honoured with Mrs Adams’s notice. On this footing I will close my page by asking permission to make my most respectful compliments to her, and to yourself I renew the offerings of my utmost respect.
Richard Rush.


Title: To John Adams from Henry Guest, 28 January 1811
From: Guest, Henry
To: Adams, John

Honoured Sir,
Brunswick East Jersy January 28th 1811

Your letter of the 6th. inst. came to hand in 4 days of the post mark; Bad as the roads are at present, & I believe they never were worse. If you knew the pleasure it gives me to see, John Adams, with Free on your letters, I apprehend that you would not be so long in answering mine to you, though, perhaps of little weight; & you would sooner & oftener revive the Low spirits of an old man, who for many years thought it was one of the greatest honours he ever received, when a letter came to him from your hands. Indeed, I began to think that you had got the start of me to the world of souls. Though much younger, I call 6 years much in the last stage of life: it is little in youth. May you live as long as this world is agreeable to your wishes!
The first part of your letter, which is all that I can now, in my weak state, answer, is The war instrument, of which you appear to desire a knowledge, that will strike 30 deadly strokes in a minute & remain charged. One part is made of a piece of tough iron, an inch square, wrought to 8 inches square, 18 inches long, weighs 3 pounds, & a half, It is fastened with a swivel, to a cap 10 inches long, It is rivitted to a staff that is elastic, on such tough wood as is your Guest, about 5 feet long & goes with great force, & is sure to break the bones of man or horse, wherever it hits. I call it a war-flail. The coat of mail (that secures the breast & bowels, & is proof against the keenest sword & bayonet), is made of half-tanned sole leather; a layer of bark on both sides, throws a horn in the middle, nearly as hard as is the horn of an ox, and I think it will glance a ball in some directions. The outside is of shining black varnish, and by the direction of Mr. De Onis is written in white capital lettres “La Libertad ò La Muerte.”
The war flails I had kept by me many years & never suffered them to be seen, not even by my nearest relations. After my notice of such an instrument to the (then) secretary of war, as the gentleman, now in the customs at Boston took no notice of it, I left it dormant, for any purpose that might turn up in time.—We frequently had accounts from Spain, that the Peasantry would rise in mass, to clear their Country from the most rascally army, that was laying it waste, but had no arms.—Some time after as Mr. De Onis, as ambassador from Spain, arrived here, I acquainted him that I possessed the above matters, but, that I was an old man, with disorders about me, & could not wait on him, to explain the above matters; he called on me, when he seemed much pleased & remarked that there should be 10,000 in the hands of the Peasants as soon as possible.—About a dozen of each parts is gone in different ships some time back as samples to Spain. Whether they will be approved of or not, by the military men, has not come to my knowledge. Possibly I shall not have the approbation, if it succeeds & is the means of checking, & clearing Spain of, their deadly foe. There are many such wretched characters among us this day— The principle, that I went on to offer it to Mr. De Onis, was, that the French Tyrant was laying all the Countries, within his power, at his feet & sacrificing the human species to his ambition. It was time, for every honest man, in the world to try to check his career: and if I could by any means be serviceable in the hands of Providence, it was my duty, to come forward with all my remaining ers, old as I am; & when we meet in the  of spirits, which will be soon, You, I trust, will join me, in the song to the Great, I am, for by that time I make no doubt, the greatest Tyrant that ever appeared, Will be annihilated.
I take the freedom to enclose a small printed paper which be pleased to have covered under your seal & sent to the Revnd. John Murray—
Yours, with great, respect.

Henry Guest.


Title: From John Adams to David Sewall, 29 January 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Sewall, David

Quincy, 29 January,  1811.

I have received your favor of the 24th, and it revived or restored many of the sensations of my youth.
The last Trial before a special court of Vice-Admiralty in Boston, before the revolution, was of Ansell Nickerson for piracy and murder on the high seas.
The case was very singular and unaccountable. Nickerson took a passage on board a small vessel and sailed from Boston for Cape Cod, with three or four other men. The next day, or next but one, the vessel was found with Nickerson alone on board. All the other men had vanished. No blood or other marks of violence appeared. A sum of money of no great amount had been shipped on board by one of the other men, which was not found. It was suspected that Nickerson had murdered all the other men, for the sake of the money, but no money was found upon him, or hidden in the ship. Nickerson’s character was unimpeachable and irreproachable in all his former life. His account was that a pirate came on board and pressed the men; but that he had leaped over the stern to avoid them, and hung there out of sight by some thing, the technical term for which, in naval architecture, I have forgotten, till the pirates departed.
Nickerson was libelled in the Special Court of Vice-Admiralty by Jonathan Sewall, Advocate-General, who was aided by Sam. Fitch, if I remember rightly.
There was no grand jury nor petit jury. I was of counsel for Nickerson, but was not engaged till the trial came on, when he requested the Court to appoint me. I did not move for any jury in this case. Josiah Quincy, the father of our foremost orator in Congress, was with me.
An act of parliament had provided for the erection of these special courts. They were to consist of fifteen judges, to be chosen out of the governors, Lieutenant-Governors, and Counsellors of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, the Judge of Admiralty, and the Commander-in-chief of the king’s ships on this station. Admiral Montague sat upon this trial with Bernard, Wentworth, Hutchinson, Auchmuty, and others, counsellors from New Hampshire and Rhode Island, &c.
The man was acquitted; but I never knew upon what principle, nor by what majority of votes. The judges in that court did not, in any case that I was concerned in, give their opinions publicly and individually from the bench. They adjourned, consulted together in private, and authorized the president to pronounce the judgment of the court, which was done by Bernard, without informing what was the majority.
I suppose the want of direct evidence afforded room for a doubt in the minds of a majority.
Nickerson lived many years, and behaved well, and is living yet, for what I know.
In a former trial, that of Michael Corbet, and three other sailors, for piracy, and murder of Lieutenant Panton, of the Rose frigate, I demanded juries, grand and petit, and drew a plea in writing for each of the four, demanding juries as a right. I almost killed myself by writing, night and day, four of those pleas of enormous length, in which a number of acts of parliament were recited at large. These pleas, when they were read, appeared to make a great impression on the court, and even Hutchinson seemed to favor the idea of juries. But before any gentleman had time to speak, he moved an adjournment. The audience believed we should have juries, and Jonathan Sewall said he did not doubt it. But the court met in retirement, and the next morning the judgment of the court was pronounced, without informing us who, or whether any, dissented. Commodore Hood sat upon this trial, and behaved remarkably well. I do not remember that the evidence was reduced to writing by any authority, besides the minutes taken by the counsel and some of the judges.
Our classmate Farrar, of New Ipswich, must be remembered with Wheeler and Cushing. He made me a kind visit a few months before his death.
Wentworth, Gardner, Sewall, Dalton, Whittemore, Adams, and Hemmenway, are all that remain; and these seven are a greater number, in proportion, than any other class has preserved. The melancholy news you give me of Dr. Hemmenway afflicts me very much. My affection for him, which began when we first entered College, has continued and increased till it is become veneration. The other six cannot long expect to survive Dr. Hemmenway. I rejoice to see in your handwriting a proof of the firmness of your health, and wish you as many days as you can make useful or agreeable, being your affectionate classmate and sincere friend.


Title: From John Adams to Richard Rush, 3 February 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Richard

Quincy February 3d. 1811

I have read, my dear Sir, with great pleasure your elegant Eulogium, in your favour of the 27th of January on the Lectures and Character of our Minister in Russia. The Reviewers in our Boston Anthology and in the Portfolio of Philadelphia, wanting your Partiality in favour of the Man and his political Principles, have been more avaricious of their Praise, and more liberal in minute Criticisms. Not a few indeed of their Observations are just and are acknowledged by him to be so: but I think they have been very stingy in their applauses of the beauties of the Work, and very niggardly in their allowances for a Work produced in So Short a time, and amidst avocations of Business publick and private which necessarily occupied more than half his Time;
It is not likely they will ever be printed in England or sent over by any Friend to be reviewed in London or Edinbourg. They may be Sent by an Enemy, and if they should be, I expect Sneers and Sacasms and coarse Jokes in Abundance: though I would answer for it with my Life that neither their Blair nor their Ward are worth so much.
It is remarkable that Nothing of his has been published, with out producing Snarling abuse. His Travels in Silesia, were treated by the Scotts, with much Levity and with all their natural, characteristick, fastidious Antipathy to every Thing out of Scotland and especially to every Thing American.
Those Travels have been translated into German and into French; and reviewed and abused in both those Languages, as much nearly as they have been in English and Scottish. There is a disposition in all Europe, to vilify every Thing American, which originates at bottom from a Jealousy and Envy of this happy growing Country.
Having all my Lifetime been delighted with Poetry, tho’ no Poet, I cannot but esteem you the more, for your congenial Feelings and Taste. But in what Sense is Johnsons, offhand dictum of the Iliad, true.? It is like Humes, that The oration of Demosthenes for the Crown, is the most perfect of all human Compositions. Are the Works of Homer, taken all together, before the Works of Aristotle or Cicero, or Sir Isaac Newton or even Mr Lock? Are they before The Art of Navigation in all its Branches? Are they before Euclids Elements? We Should recollect too that the Works of Homer as We have them are not the Production of one Mind. Lycurgus made one Collection of the Scattered Rhapsodies of Homer; Solon made another; and Pysistratus, who though a Tyrant, was a Leo a Louis or a Napoleon for the Encouragement of Litterature, made a third, and a more solem Compilation of Homer. He assembled all the most learned Men in Greece, who had before them the Collections of Solon Lycurgus and all others, and they arranged them in their own Way and probably left out what they pleased and added what they chose corrected and amended According to the Taste the Manners and Religion of the Times. It was to become the Sacred Book, the standard of Religion for the Greeks. The Illiad therefore is not the Effort of one Mind, like Miltons Paradise Lost. And should you or I dare to Say that the Iliad even as we have it is a more perfect production of Mind that Milton?
I agree however that Homer is a Magazine of Arts, Science and Letters and a Nursery of Heroes and Statesmen, as well as of Philosophers and Moralists
Your observation on Burke and Chatham, are made with great Judgment and nice Discrimination. Burke never carried a Point, and Chatham, though vastly inferiour in Knowledge and rather a rational Minister than a wise one, Seldom failed, and even when he failed he always made a vast Impression.
Our Union is, or ought to be held a Sacred Thing. Upon this Principle I rejoiced in the Purchase of Louisiana, and thought it one of the wisest, though the boldest Measure of his Mr Jeffersons Administration. The Union could not have been preserved without it. The Tramontanes would have joined the English or The Spaniards or Set up an Independence, without it, for the Navigation of the Missisippi, as was as essential to their Welfare, as the Fisheries and Navigation in general to New England. In the Union I comprehended the Southern and Western States as much as the Northern and Eastern, and middle or intermediate States. It was and is the Duty of the President and Congress to cherrish equally the Interests of all. I confess however, that I had doubts whether the constitution had made Provisions sufficiently explicit to embrace the object and approved of my Sons Proposition to refer it to the States, who would then I doubt not have Sanctioned it:
Mr Quincy is very confident that the Convention had no Idea of Admitting into the Union any Countries without the Limits of the then thirteen States. I am not. That they had not a glimpse of Foresight of the Purchase of Louisiana or a moments contemplation of erecting new States beyond The Missisippi, I fully believe. But that they had no Eye to the Floridas, or to Canada and Nova Scotia, I am not so clear. Mr Quincy is too young to have a distinct Recollection of the State of Things in 1787. Our affairs with England were deeply embroiled; neither Party had fullfilled the Treaty of Peace. The English held a Chain of Forts and Garrisons all along our Frontier clearly within our Territory. The Negroes were not returned nor paid for. The old British Debts were not paid, and possitive Laws existed in almost all the States against their Recovery. A War with England was apprehended on both Sides. It was therefore Scarcely possible that the Convention should not have thought of Canada and Nova Scotia. But if they really meant to give Power to receive such States they ought to have been more explicit, and to have inserted more detailed Limitations and Restrictions.
Mr. Quincy is one of the fairest Characters, and most respectable Men in this Commonwealth. His Connections, his Fortune his Education and his Talents, may compare with the proudest Son of North America, without suffering very much. He speaks the Sense of his Constituents and is a faithful Representative. But his Constituents are the Town of Boston, once the very Nursery of Patriotism, but now I think deceived into too great a Partiality for England and too great a Fear of France.
In the Ardour of his Vis Rhetorica, I think he ventured beyond the Line of Prudence, in Some of his Expressions; but the Freedom of Debate is as Sacred as The Union: and though I think Mr Poindexters answer to him a very able one, he did neither Justice to his Cause nor to Mr Quincy by his uncourtly and unparliamentary Personalities against Mr Quincy and his Constituents. I have scarcely room to subscribe the Name of your Friend
John AdamsMrs. A. desires me to Say that She recollects you and your Brothers and Sisters with great Pleasure and with the Sentiments of uninterrupted Friendship for Six or Seven and thirty years, for the whole Family, to whom in all the Branches she wishes every Blessing


Title: To John Adams from William Cunningham, 8 February 1811
From: Cunningham, William
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir.
Fitchburg, Feb. 8. 1811.

In the last Letter with which you favoured me, you expressed a hope “that you should soon find me more calm.” I am unconscious of having ever written a word to you, in the way of censure, which was tinctured with malevolence; or which rose to any higher asperity than a sensibility to Truth, and a solicitude for my Country would excuse. And I am sure that what I am now about to say is untouched with the hateful temper you have insinuated against me; a temper too often, indeed, found in minds of the noblest structure; but a temper which, in its utmost extent, obliterates from the heart every impression of refinement, and hardens it against the entreaties of Candour, of Truth and of Justice.
I have complained, and I think with reason, that when on your own request, I examind some of your late publications, it soon appeared that you was uneasy with my acting in the independency of Philoxenus and of Lysias. I can say this without meaning to compare you to Dionysius. Cambyses asked his friend Prexasses, the same question which you proposed to me. Prexasses answered with frankness, and what was the consequence? It is generally the wisest to say “Apollo himself could not have shot more dexterously”—but when said for safety how bitter the hatred which is concealed!
The whole world accord, in their sober moments, with that Governour of an Arabian City, who refused to hear the complaint of a boatman until he could make it cooly, and who then said to the boatman, “I refused to hear you before because you were intoxicated with anger, the most dangerous of all intoxications.” I repeat, that I am not sensible of having been hurried away with anger passion in my correspondence with you, but yet I must acknowledge, that anger strangely inspires the conceit of the Blacksmith in Bedlam, who fancied himself shut out from the world for being the only sober man in it. I trust that my understanding has not been so perverted.
From the tenour of my last letters to you, I think it probable, that your apprehensions respecting the disposition I might make of our Correspondence and Conversations, have been alarmed. I assure you that no eye but mine has seen a line nor a word of your Letters addressed to me, since my reception of them; nor has any ear heard a recitation of their contents to any farther extent than might be collected from a hasty reading, by myself, of some parts of two of my letters to you in January, last year. One of those Letters I read to Mr. Shaw; and some parts of the same letter, and as much of another, I read, confidentially, to two persons of high reputation, and no more. Besides this, I communicated to a single character, under the same reserve, one accusation, of deep atrocity, against Gen. Hamilton, which led to a cautious enquiry, the result of which is of more importance to you, in various views, than any thing, of which I have any knowledge, that ever took place in the course of your life. The enquiry was closed some months since. It is altogether on the suggestions of my own mind that I give you this information—the motives to it are not lightly imprinted with a sincere concern for your best interests:
. . . “In the modesty of fearful duty,
You may read as much as from the ratling tongue.”
Let this be received as it will, of one thing I am positive (and it is the sole point I need concern myself about,) that this intimation will stand an impenetrable shield forever against any blame from yourself or Family. I have discovered the long ears, and reeds shall spring from the places where I whisper it to declare it with their rustling.
In my letter of Aug. 18. 1809. I engaged, that if Hamilton had been so thoroughly vitiated with lewdness as you had represented, I would give him a gabardine from a certain wardrobe. This engagement I am not disposed to retract. History displays no truth clearer, than that the heaviest judgments have been provoked by debaucheries. It is astonishing how much of the warfare and distresses of the world have been occasioned by the corrupt congress of the sexes, and by attempts at seduction. I will notice a few instances as they rise in my mind, without regarding chronological exactness: If we go back to the time of the Babylonians, we have Herodotus and Strabo for authority, that women were obliged by law to prostitute themselves to appease Venus. The denunciations of Heaven against Babylon, were for her whoredoms—What city suffered a more awful destruction?
It was an unchaste connexion between Alboine and Rosamond, and it involved Italy in a furious war of ten years.
The connexion of Fredegonde, daughter of a peasant, with Chilperic is, perhaps, as strongly marked with iniquity as any case of unlawful amours, and the consequences agree in character with the flagitiousness of the lovers.Dagobert &c.

Dagobert, a descendant of Fredegonda, ascended the throne of France under very auspicious appearances, but corrupted with the vices of his grandmother, a war of signal ferocity ensued, which he did not long survive. His sons and successors, Sijebert II. and Clovis II. were equally contemptible. Thierry III. son of this Clovis, fell a prisoner into the hands of Pepin Heristel, the elected Duke, or Governour of Australia, and though Pepin was worthy of his dignity, there was not in France a true display of power and greatness, until the Supreme authority fell into the hands of Charles Martel.
Henry IV. of Castile, passed his time among minions and mistresses. The example of the monarch was contagious. His minister, Bertrand de la Ceuva, lived in an adulterous correspondence with the Queen; civil wars were fomented; Joanna, suspected of being a daughter of the Queen by Bertrand, the King was compelled to exclude from the succession, and to appoint his sister Isabella; this arrangement he afterwards reversed, when Isabella and Joanna became the names under which the vilest works of popular inflammation were perpetrated.If the sin of the sexual excesses of rulers, is visited upon a people, it would agree with Justice that the visitation should be mitigated by what remained of virtue in the offenders. Charlemagne may be cited as a case in which it was so attemperated. He was himself inconstant, but there were great and glorious traits in his character. His acquisitions were so extensive and so well secured, that it appeared as if his successours had an exhaustless stock of grandeur provided for them. It did not prove so. The Empress of Louis had her count of Barcelona, and Charles, who was probably the fruit of their unauthorized commerce, created the disaffection among the legitimate children of Louis, which brought on the battle of Fontenai, in which an hundred thousand fell. The Empire of Charlemagne first split into the branches of Italy, France, and Germany; and the Carlovingian race became extinct in a little more than two centuries.
The same mixture of favour and dislike, may be discovered in the history of Louis XIV. a great prince, but he had his Madame de Pompadore, and the virtue of many more was yielded to his pleasure.
A massacre of all the French in the Island of Sicily was occasioned by the rudeness of Drochet, a Frenchman, towards a bride as she was passing.
The kingdom of Benin, in Africa, was desolated with a war waged to avenge the violence of Beelsyder, a Dutch factor, towards a beautiful female of high rank.
Boleslaus II. after Kiev fell into his hands, reposed there with his army, immersed in vereal venereal pleasures, and every species of voluptuousness. The Polish women, in retaliation of the wrongs done them, admitted their slaves to the privileges of husbands. This roused the soldiers of Boleslaus, who accused him of being the cause of their dishonour, and the rage which was enkindled flooded Poland with the blood of her own people. The king was expelled, and ended his days in a scullery.
Christian, of Denmark, had his Columbula. The cohabitation sharpened violence, whose acts were closed with his deposition, & confinement in a dungeon.
Henry II. of France, on his accession, took the dutchess of Valentinois for his mistress. The Sovereign was sunk in the sensualist, and fiery zealot. Wars against Faith followed, in which he proved himself the tool of Maurice in relation to Germany; and the instrument of the Pope and the Guises with respect to his own kingdom, deluging it with the sword of persecution. The Bourbons and the Guises rent the realm with their feuds. The troubles in the State continued, with short intervals of melioration, (heightened, indeed, in the reign of Henry III. a prince of still more infamous lustfulness,) till the appearance of Henry IV. who displayed great qualities, but who was a gross debauchee, and fell by the hands of an Assassin. His conduct relaxed the respect of his people for the holy rite of matrimony, and many thousands of the first characters fell in private combats, on no other subject of difference than a mistress, or a punk!
Dermod, king of Leinster, allured to his embraces the wife of O’Rourke, king of Breffry, and eloped with her. The whole Island was enflamed, and a war was obstinately maintained against an English party under Pembroke, who undertook to reinstate Dermod on his throne.
The union of king John with Isabella, on the day of the death of the Count of Angouloume, if not effected by the violence of lawless love, was yet brought about unlawfully. Under this king, England experienced calamities, little if any lighter, than those which sprang from the rivalry of the Houses of York and Lancaster.
When a tax-gatherer of Richard II. seized the Blacksmith’s daughter, his views were of a different kind from exhibiting evidence of a taxable age. His outrage ripened the insurrection under Tyler and Straw.
The prospect of subjugating France to the British Crown, which was opened by Henry V. and appeared ready to be realized by the Duke of Bedford, Regent of France in the minority of Henry VI. was darkened immediately on the unwarrantable connexion of the Duke of Gloucester, Regent of England, with Jaqueline, consort of the Duke of Brabant; and that connexion contributed materially to its total obscuration, the merits of the Maid of Orleans not denied.
Edward IV. when the victory of Taunton, had released his military genius from active employment, gave a loose to his amorous passions, and allied himself to Elizabeth Gray after he had been actually engaged to a daughter sister of the French King. It was for this, the Kingdom was so violently convulsed, that Edward was driven into Holland. He did, indeed, recover his crown, but by means which struck the impression of his misconduct too deeply on the fortunes of his country to be eradicated by his valorous deeds.
It was oweing to a rival passion between Richelieu, and the Duke of Buckingham for the Queen of France, that the war was prolonged between Charles I. and Louis XIII. What effect had that war in bringing on the decapitation of Charles, and the Protectorate of Cromwell, and the attendant miseries of a convulsed state?
Charles II. was a most libidinous prince, and though no extraordinary calamities of war mark his reign (the Nation had been thoroughly scourged with war during the interregnum.) yet the Plague, which raged in his reign, nearly depopulated London, and the Fire of 1666, nearly consumed it. The nation was degraded by the profligacy of the King’s council; by his own notorious venality; and the corruption of the Parliament. His reign lowered with the storm which burst on his successor.
The princess Ann, of Mecklinburg, Regent of the Russian Empire, was criminally familiar with the Polish Count Linav. Their intercourse so alienated the affections of the Russians from the Regent, and her infant son Iwan, destined to fill the throne, that Elizabeth successfully aspired to the crown. Elizabeth became as impure as her neice; and the events of her reign are notched to some conformity to her demerits. Her court of secret chancery was a hot-house of callamity, strewed every day with seeds, and bearing every day a crop. But the beastly concupisence of Catherine II. exceeded either of the other examples. The wars in which she proudly engaged, were they not more pompous than prosperous? The Plague of 1771, took off 150.000 of her subjects; and when she made peace with the Porte in 1791. she found that the war had wasted 200.000 of her subjects, and had drawn from her treasury two hundred millions of rubels. What was the equivelant? Of what consequence will her conquests on the Turkish frontier, and the partition of Poland, eventually prove? Time will answer. Her talents qualified her for the Cabinet, but as her licentiousness was unbounded, it is not inconsistent with the drift of these reflections to suppose, that the consequences of it are have been long and silently accumulating, for a more remarkable irruption. The succession of her natural son Paul, may be considered as a continuance of her own corruption on the throne, because it was done by her own express order. The conduct of that prince was well calculated to accellerate the destruction of the state. His son Alexander succeeded, and it remains to be seen whether he is not flouning in the way of the Leviathan to be swallowed up; or in allusion to the Mountain whether the Gallic fire it embosoms fuel collected in his Country will not burst but in an overwhelming torrent of destruction.
Of the Great Elector, Frederick William, it is expressly remarked, that he was unheated with the desire of forbidden love. Whose administration was more glorious? I do not recollect that Frederick William II. was laciviously inclined; he augmented the advantages for the display of the extraordinary capacity of Frederick the Great, of irreproachable purity. Frederick William III. was a gross debauchee, and the wealth, fame and power of his Country dissolved in his hands faster than they were formed by the hands of his predecessors. Prussia, under him, has, indeed, been once devoured, and was vomited from the Grampus’ belly only because he had not grown to a size to digest her. She will probably be swallowed again, never more to be voided.
Struensee bled on the scaffold for the enjoyment he had of Caroline Matilda. Is it less than probable, that the fermentation in Denmark occasioned by the misconduct of the Queen and her paramour, facilitated the affair which has made Copenhagen so noticeable in the present war?
These are some of the instances of the miseries and afflictions brought on a people by fleshly lusts. If incorrectly stated, I have relied too confidently on the faithfulness of my memory. They will be properly closed with the simple mention of the one which is the subject of a grand Epic of Homer—Of the two which disgraced Tarquin and Appius—immortalized Brutus and Virginius—and which produced two Revolutions in celebrated Rome. The imbrutal practices of the Emperours finished the ruin of the Roman State: The fate of Carthage was sealed at Capua:
“Vengeful memorials of Almighty ire
Against the sons of lewdness exercis’d.”
These speculations are, I believe, novel. It would be amusing to pursue them farther, and shew, in various directions, the roots and ramifications of national misfortunes as they have appeared spread and expanded in nations polluted with uncontroulled salacity. If these thoughts are liable to objection, I yet persuade myself, that there is enough in them to claim serious considerations; and enough to slacken the confidence of a people in any man, however exalted, who breaks the bars of virtue to feed his appetites.
Dugald Stewart speaks of Robertson’s Charles V. as describing a meridian on the map of time. Pursuing this idea, would the political astronomer direct the telescope to the sky of civil science, he would perceive at its farthest reach, and in all the intermediate spaces to the objects which strike the naked eye, lights elicited from human wickedness and hung in the wide expanse for the illumination of our path. If to these discoveries he would combine an accurate knowledge of the existing state & progress of corruption in any nation, he could foretel the day, hour and duration of its eclipse. This comparison, I may close with a happy thought of your own: Those heavenly bodies, whose existence and movements we are as yet only permitted faintly to perceive, do not appear to be governed by laws more uniform and or certain than those which regulate the moral and political world. The hectick symptoms, the waste of vitals, and final fall of Nations, originate, increase and ripen with their moral diseases.
One of the ten maxims of the Minister Ching-Tsong, and by which the Emperour prosperously regulated his conduct, was, “to hold Debauchery in horror.” An excellent maxim, and surely not less deserving a Christian’s than a Mahometan’s regard. Sully adopted it when he said, “that if he had a principle to establish it should be this, that good morals and good laws are reciprocally formed by each other.” Montesquieu thought in the same way when he declared, “that bad examples produce worse consequences than crimes, and more States have been ruined by infringements of the laws morals, than by violations of the laws.” Civilians of not less celebrity, and Esayists of deep thought, have expressed the same sentiment: the maxim needs more to be followed than fortified.
But notwithstanding the signal displeasure which has been at any time manifested against unhallowed love, it is yet true, that the fruits of such love have, in many instances, far surpassed,the in animal strength and mental energy, the productions of the chaste embrace. If this is mysterious, it is not more so than many other things in the Divine economy. Is it more so than the story of the birth and sufferings of the Virgin’s Son? The elegant author of the “pursuits of Literature,” has founded a new argument in favour of Christianity on Paul’s cloak. Butler, with more power,and if withas much less ingenuity, might have founded another point of Analogy on the subject under consideration. Had it occurred to him, that according to the Constitution and Course of Nature, a man, for the most important purposes to his fellows, may be begotten out of the ordinary legalized mode, the case would have been made out to his hand. This idea sprouted as I was writing, and I have gathered it. I will let it go with one observation;—the point of analogy I have supposed is absolutely stronger than many points in Butler’s book. Blinded, perhaps, by his earnestness, it appears not to have been perceived by that sensible author, that many of his arguments make precisely as much for Mahomet, or for any other Impostor, as for Christ.
Heros comes, according to some, from the Greek έρως, both words importing by this etymology, that Heroes have a portion above other men, of the divine fire; or that “they are the most illustrious product of Love.” and they are themselves, as Hierocles remarks, the most sensibly alive to the tender passion—the coat of Nessus cannot keep it out of them. Armstrong founds the following on the legends of Jupiter, and Rhea Silvia, or Mars:—
. . . . . “From the stolen embrace
Untir’d with worn acquaintance, keenly urg’d
Elate with generous rapture, likliest springs
The noblest breed, most animated, best;
What Heroes hence have issued! What fam’d Chiefs,
And demi-gods of old! The stealth of love
Gave Greece her Hercules, and mighty Rome
First rose beneath a random son of Mars.”
How many polished shafts of the Muses have been winged with the same idea?
Man his like begets, yet from languid Love ne’er sprang
The Foetus with a curly pate, the athletic sign.
The ethereal spirit is lodg’d alike in frames of strength
And symmetry, and those slender and misshapen,
A proof that Mind and Body, how near soe’er
Associated, are not akin. When might and
Genius couple in full extacy, then comes the
Prodigy, his caput coated with the coarse and crinkled
Auburn or the dark red of more decisive indication,
Himself the Serpents master in his cradle, his piercing eye
And quick perception, pronouncing the parentage of Wisdom.
Locks of fine and flaggy azure shew less of muscle, but
The window of the soul may, with as much intelligence,
Be illum’d. Rare the union, in perfection full,
Of a sound Mind in a Body sound.”
Hence it was that Lycurgus, to improve the breed of men in Sparta, inflamed desire by creating difficulties to its indulgence even between man and wife. No man ever understood this business better than Lycurgus. It was his policy to have chastity respected, and yet to provoke the passions to the utmost bearing. It was a difficult undertaking, but the rigour of the laws, and the severity of public manners, maintained a salutary co-operation for a considerable time. When the laws and manners unbent their power, it was then, observes Aristotle, that Sparta declined.
From such a view of the potency of illicit love, the deduction is just, that
“True Love to Reason never does aspire;
Dull Reason damps the Lover’s noble fire,”
from Wilkes’ Essay on Women; a parody of Popes’ on Man, but the not less deserving of consideration because it was burnt by the hands of the hangman. The fourth book contains an offering at the shrine of female virtue, at once so just and happy as to entitle it to the laurels of the Mount.
A Shaw may descant on the text, “Bastard slips shall not thrive,” but in truth it must be said, that Experience has discoursed otherwise.
The brothers of Alexander objected to his succession because he descended from the repudiated Olympias. The remark of Philip was worthy of the greatness which raised him to a throne: “Be patient, and your merits shall shew that the crown is your just inheritance.”
Cyrus, who overthrew &c
Cyrus, who overthrew the Babylonish Empire, was the son probably, of Cambyses, King of Persia, by Mandane, daughter of the King of Media. The Persian Empire was extended by the conquests of Cyrus beyond the bounds of any other Empire which, until his day, had existed in the world. And, according to Xenophon, he was a finished pattern for Princes, and for the imitation of mankind. An act of his generosity is and its effect, are worthy of particular notice—His prisoner, the enchanting Princess Panthea, he restored to her husband, who was so much affected with the protection her virtue found in him, that he joined the standard of Cyrus.
Artaxares, who restored the Persian Empire, after its subjection for 475 years to the Parthians, was of mean descent, and spurious birth.
Helgo killed himself for the incestuous commerce which produced Rolfo; but who, of the kings of Denmark, equalled Rolfo?
Henry de Transtamara, son of Alphonso by Leonora de Guzman, makes a figure in the history of Spain, and shines in contrast with Don Pedro, Alphonso’s only son by his Queen.
Constantine the Great, was natural son of Char Constantius by Helena, a victualler’s daughter. He was appointed by his Father to succeed in the Empire to the exclusion of his children by the Empress Theodora. Constantine’s are religious honours—Believers continue to credit the marvellous accounts of this prince, and they regard his conversion and conduct as ranking next in importance to the world, to the mission of Christ, and the Acts of the Apostles.
Dyoclesian was of the meanest origin—the son, as some assert, of a slave; but he had a kingly character; and there can be no doubt but that he would have restored the Roman Empire to the highest glory it enjoyed under Augustus, had it not have sunk below the possibility of restauration before his accession.
Arnolf, natural son of Carloman, understood the intricacies of State much better than either of the legitimante descendants of Charles V. The same may be said of Manfred, a natural son of Frederick of Germany. To me it appears probable, that Popery would have been swept from the earth, had the affairs of the Italian and German States been in the hands of these persons rather than in the hands of their connexions of uncorrupted blood.
William of Normandy, was a bastard by a Butcher’s daughter. He carried on the butchery all his days; he certainly deserves to be quoted among examples of extraordinary men, the issue of illicit love.
Don Juan, natural son of Charles V. inherited a larger portion of the genius of his Father, than fell to Philip. The naval victory of Lepanto, obtained by John, was the most splendid event in the reign of his brother. A sense of the important services of John led Pius V. to exclaim, “There was a man sent from God, and his name was John.” I would not quote an expression from this, nor from scarcely any other Pope, as any proof of piety, virtue, or intelligence; but proceed from whom it will, the observation supposes the superintendency of Providence, that a man preeminently useful in a great cause, is purposely given for its promotion.
Can it be doubted, that the disasters which ensued on the succession of Philip IV. would have been repaired; and the greater misfortunes which followed the succession of Charles II. would have been prevented, had the Government been committed to Don Juan, natural son of Philip by the actress Calderona, instead of being confided to Charles?
In a former letter, I mentioned John of Portugal, but that instance deserves to have some thing more said upon it. The discovery of America grew out of the immense talents of his son Don Henry, whose knowledge of the astronomical science of the Arabs, whose concern in the invention of the Astrolabe, and whose understanding of the magnetic needle, were employed to the immediate advantage of his country, and led directly to the cultivation of the genius of genius of Columbus. As much as Columbus was depending on Henry, so much, the it is probable, was Henry depending on having a Monarch for a Father.
On the Death of the English Charles II. to which, on the score of sound policy, should the crown have descended, Monmouth the natural son of Charles, or the bigotted James? It is a question, I think of as easy solution, as whether Wallace or his contemner, should have commanded at Falkirk.
Of that groupe of martial geniuses which flourished in the age of Louis XIV. was there one of brighter bay than the Duke of Berwick? Fortune was more propitious to others, but Justice must be impartial.
Mareschal Saxe was a natural son of that Augustus of Poland, of whose gallantry a remarkable anecdote is related. Saxe was recommended to Louis XV. as the only person capable of recalling to the Empire the prosperous days of Louis XIV. The Duke himself, though one of the most illustrious men of his time, offerred to serve in a subordinate grade to the greater Saxe.
Instances might be much extended. Sforza, Dunois, and a host of others, will occur to you. Tamerlane was base born. It is wholly irreconcileable with the notion of a governing providence, to suppose that a man of such extraordinary fortune as Tamerlane overturning Empires, and establishing a new dynasty of immense extent, was not particularly endeared for his great transactions. This admitted, objections are silenced. I will only add, that a French divine, I think Malanethon, discoursing on the character of David, the man after God’s own heart, gives in extenuation of his particular frailty, the very oeconomy of Providence I am illustrating, and refers to Solomon in justification of the economy.
But birth out of the question, every extraordinary talents will command respect—They rise as we recede, till exalted to immortality; whilst midocrity, with whatever advantages of patronage it may have, and through the fluctuations in the public estimation it may pass, finds ere long its level, at which remaining for a period, it is doomed gradually to decline until it sinks in oblivion.
Frederick I. of Brandenburg, acted on this view of talents, when he bequeathed only a crucible to his eldest son because his mind was abstracted from Government, and devoted to alchymy. And the Duke of Savoy deserved more commendation when he declined the Imperial throne, at the time Selim was preparing for the invasion of Germany, because “Times of danger require an Emperour able to secure safety.
Armstrong remarks of Love, that its
“Heavenly warmth
Inspires whate’er is noble, generous, and humane,
Or elegant; whate’er adorns the mind,
Graces or sweetens life”
Besides the proofs which a man can discover in those around him, or feel in himself, of this truth, there is some evidence of it derived from the character of those naturally deficient, and of those deprived of virility. Honorious, son of Theodosa, and Emperour of the Western division of the Roman Empire, was a remarkable instance of the depravity associated with animal inability. His Empress, Maria, died a virgin, though she had been ten years his wife, such is the story; and he divorced Thermantia in the same condition. He was a prince of miserable weakness, and with other wantonness, was excited to the sacrifice of Stilicho, the Father of his neglected wives, and the sole glory of his reign. Such men as Honorious, are of less value than the interstices between the teeth of a mill-saw, for these lengthen out the plate though they do none of the cutting.
Eunuchs have been actuated by as much ambition as men unrob’d of virility. One of this description founded the kingdom of Pergamus. It has been generally true of these persons, that in malignity they have been tygers, whom no kindness could soften, no blood could satisfy. If the kitten countenances at an Opera, and of the attendants in a bed-chamber, betray no ferocity, remember, the kitten itself displays not the fierceness of its nature until instigated to seek its prey.
Of soul-ennobling Love, Alexander gave an instance when,
“In the May of youth, and bloom of lusty hood,” he denied the importunity of his passions, inflamed with the charms of his captives, the wife and daughter of Darius. Publius Scipio gave another when, in the frolic of the blood, he restored the captive of whom he was enamoured to the prince to whom she was betrothed. Generosity and humanity are naturally and inseparably allied to true heroism, and love is the first in the fraternity of these virtues, as appears by the these examples. But fierce fits of passion have been felt without a single generous emotion in the heart. Of this phrenzied feeling, described by the line of Virgil,
“Degere more farae.”
and which has incited to deeds of the blackest stain, Gyges is an example who inflamed with the beauties of Candeaulus’ Queen, did not scruple to assassinate the king, though his friend, that he might enjoy his consort and his crown together. For criminals of this stamp, nature cannot plead, and Justice passes a sentence unmixed with mercy.
Hamilton may have had the animal accomplishments of Priapus, but whether made “for a stool or a God,” is the point to be determined. Enough has been given me respecting him tomake assay me in the tenours, to the Ladies, of the Mumbo Jumbo of Mandingo. And if all be true, a number of our citizens, hitherto considered as the most meritorious, will be set inextricably in the marshes of Minturnum. Let such marshes be their stocks forever, if such is their desert—let sepulchres be searched for the skeletons of their copartners in crime to be stuck in with them . . . But—it is unnecessary to depict the course of Justice on the reverse of this proposition.—I leave it—If you perceive that I stand between Iisaphernes and the Athenians you will not look upon me as Alcibiades—I am above the meanness of Battus.
You will take into consideration, that your Letters and verbal communications have all been given with permission to disclose them after your decease, and in the expectation, on your part, of that they will then be revealed. This appears very clearly in several of your Letters. Your Executors will be left as much in the mastery of this subject as I shall, should I survive you, or of those into hands my papers may fall after my departure. As the business stands, then, a blow must be struckunavoidably be struck which shall resound to the last period of our history, and wounds must be given which shall remain forever incurable—The egg is placed under the unfailing incubation of time.
The conduct of Napoleone in revoking his Decrees, appears like the enigma proposed by Solomon at his marriage, which, if we solve to his liking, he will give us clothing, but if not he will take away our garments. Or, we shall be fined for giving the true solution, and can only escape forfeiture by such explanations as will please the Emperour! So he treats us.
Mr. Smith can address a Letter of some tone to Jurreau, but we have not all forgotten, that Requesens, in apparent displeasure, broke down the statues of Alva, with no other view than to facilitate the operation of Alva’s plans.
Pa-pu, is written on every political schedule, but for all that our politicians are the veriest cheats alive. In moments of public delirium, it is in vain that the sober sense of any citizen is exercised to remove the malady. We should build around us walls while negociation is pending, and when done they will support us in the decision we may make. It is a Navy alone on which we can with confidence inscribe ΤΟΥ ΤΩ ΝΙΚΑ. Our opposition to France amounts to no more than the rolling of a tub, and we are as impatient of entering into a war with England as if we had the promise of a prophet that the sins of the first army against her should be forgiven. The measures pursued by the Government to bring on a war with that power, keep a sub-terras track, like the Gaudina, and it is only by their breaking out here and there, that we know their course. Courage exercised in defence of our rights would prove, between the two belligerents, the rod of Mercury. But if we remain in apathy until England falls; or should we hasten her destruction by giving to our vengeance the direction of injustice, we shall be drawn into the belly of France as a serpent sucks in a frog. It is poison which is administered to us in the adulations of France, and should she even arrest our hand when raising it to our lips, and tell us of our danger, it would be only to increase a confidence in the innocency of more fatal preparations. We need the songs of Alcaeus to rouse us to valour; the moving and melting strains of Eurepedes; the Decades of Livy to mark out the sources of corruption; and the hand of Vulcan to spread an invisible net, and yet a net of iron, over the secret lurking place of Guilt to entangle and expose it.
Mrs. C. is in no better health than when you saw her. She unites in affectionate respects to Mrs. Adams and your Family.
With veneration and esteem, / I am, Dear Sir, / Your Friend & Servt.

Wm. Cunningham, Jun.
    See the derivation variously stated in Tookes Pantheon.


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 9 February 1811
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Mÿ Dear and respected Sir!
Olden barneveld 9 Febr. 1810— 1811

It is certainlÿ a long while, that you received not a line from me, and this nothwithstanding I was So highly gratifiede, and as it were buoy’d by your kind favour of 30 Nov. last—But—how could I do else, as I wrote not even to mÿ Son—labouring Since the three last months under an increasing debility, which Seemed to threaten the total destruction of the machine. As long however it was only a high probalility as long I had not ascertained its full certainty, at which I was not appalled, I deemed it a duty—presuming—that over stretched mental exertions and an unusual anxiety of mind—and want of bodily exertions were its proximate cause—restlessness at night—continued head-ache—and total loss of appetite its effects—to try Some exertions of removing the causes—if mÿ conjectures were founded. Having at lenght Succeeded in this point—I under took the Course of Bark and Steel—with a more generous diet—abstinence from Studÿ—and applying to exercise—with which I continued Since three weeks—and am nearly the Same old fellow firm and strong—and within a week—I shall leave the Bark—and return to my Books—and correspondence—I doubt not, or mÿ apologÿ Shall be accepted—Tho I could not answer—your Letter howewer was a restorative—and I did Suppose you enjoy’d perfect health—and made happÿ all around you—I Saw you at the funeral of President Hillard, I did See you at Kirkland’s installation. As long Adams breathes—at his friends or countrÿ’s call he will be alert—all-waÿs on the wing—
Tho my weaning was an arduous task—I wanted now and then a Small draught—I took Manilius astronomicon—this would not do—then Phædrus—this had a better Success and made the Spirits flow thro another channel. I made however one discoverÿ in Manilius—You recollect we admired with others the Eripuit coelo fulmen Sceptrumque Tyrannis. I have a proof from Manilius that J. Luzac could not be the author—and now I dare Saÿ—neither the classical and unassuming van Santen.
Eripuitque Jovi fulmen viresque tonandi
Lib. i vs. 104—
This looks more like plagiat—than an innocent imitation—Encouraged by Phædrus I turned my Self to Rousseau—and perused his Nouv. Heloise—after 20 years—with fresh pleasure—then I read Walter Scott—his Lady of the Lake 3 times—without interuption. Do no laugh at me—as they belong to the course of Physic—by which I have recovered the tone—which Seemed gone for ever. I have now only lost three months—tho not be entirelÿ idle But I go astraÿ—with your Letter before me—that might be Stamped—with Sinning in the confidence of obtaining indulgence—
I could have wished for a place in your pew—at Whitney’s Sermon—If I was at Quincÿ—or if I now could explain me Self fullÿ—It would—I am confident, appear, that we do not disagree in the great outlines—we maÿ do So in filling up Some Striking features in the resemblance of both Portraits—viewed by us—from different parts. Your General lucid observations I fullÿ adopt—Brittain is yet a more Powerful nation—can not conquer France—grasps at everÿ objects—she can reach—and maÿ nevertheless Sit upon a tottering throne—be ripe for destruction. The all conquering Corse—is Safe at home—compelled to arms by necessity—moral and Physical, and can not rests—till Gr. B—is ruined by him—or herself—and—if we had followed the System of preparing to defend ourselves, and assert our rights against Both—We were Safe—we might defÿ both—would be cajoled by both—and Supplÿ the whole world with what they wanted.
Who is that Ivernois? is he the author of Effets du Blocus continental Sur le commerce, les finances le credit et la prosperite des Isles Brittanniques? If he is the Same Genevois who wrote Le Tableau des Revolutions de Geneve—I Should much long, to peruse it. I never Saw a more Striking picture of the truth of your Doctrine of the necessity of Balances in government—than in that treatise—I wished—everÿ American could and would read it.
Thus far I had written last week, when I felt my Self compelled to Stop—I had presumed too much—This temporising had been beneficial I now believe, I have nearly recovered my Strenght—yesterdaÿ I ventured to plaÿ a game of chess—My appetite is restored and ere long I Shall return to my old companions—Since mondaÿ I bid farewel to the bark—health and contentment Sit again—at our board—and I enjoÿ this happÿ Society.
I doubt not, mÿ Dear and high respected frend—or I Should adopt your opinion with regard to the Lectures on Rhetoric—I Shall Study them—when ever I can meet with an opportunity of procuring them—Have you Seen John Wood’s new theorÿ of the diurnal rotation of the earth? if So—what is your opinion about it.
I had an idea of devoting this winter—to try a Sketch—of “the moral and Physical causes of the Revolutionary Spirit in the latter part of the 18th centurÿ—and its presumtive final issue on both Continents” but I lost now the winter months—and perhaps the task might be too arduous for mÿ Strenght—after all—could I accomplish it—then it would remain in Embryo. It Seems however to me an undertaking worthÿ a first rank man—If Your Son would undertake it—He would not repent of the Labour bestowed upon it—It is a vast field—from which unfading laurels might be gathered. I admire Wellington and Massena—it Seem—they respect one another—what I am apprehensive of is—that at lenght M. Shall obtain Such reinforcements, that—as at Jamappe; he may Sacrifice 15 a 20000 brave fellows—and drive W to Search for a refuge—for his remaining forces on his fleet—If that apprehensions is founded—I would rather risk and court the possibility of the same catastrophe—in Storming Massena’s retrenched camp—trusting on my faithful Soldiers and hoping—that once Voltaire taught no lie
Le Francais qu’on attaque est a demi vaincu—
I think, I must make an excursion of a few days—to See mÿ few good friends and enjoy their companÿ—
If my ardent prayers avail—health contentment and the choice of Providences blessing Shall continue the portion of you and Your familÿ—till you reach the end of your Course and let then your final parting be Soothed by the mutual prospect—of Seing ere long one another once more in a State of uninterrupted bliss.
Recommend me to the remembrance of your Noble Ladÿ—I firmly am persuaded—you cannot forget / your old and obliged frend

Fr. Adr. vanderkemp


Title: From John Adams to Benjamin Rush, 13 February 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Benjamin

Dear Sir
Quincy February 13. 1811

In your Favour of the 4th., according to my Judgment you have given up the whole Controversy. You have no Objection, you say to teaching the youth in our Schools to read the dead Languages. By reading them, no doubt you, meant that they should so read them as to understand them. and they can be read to be understood, in no Way so well as by Writing and Speaking them. I therefore regret very much the discontinuance, in the Universities of Europe and America, of the Practice and Fashion of talking in Latin. I regret too the Exchange of French for Latin as the Language of Courts, Camps, Travellers, Merchants, Science and Letters. If Franklins division of the Labour of acquiring a Language into ten Parts be correct, I think the five for reading, the two for speaking and the three for Writing should all be employed, and the whole Ten will be little enough to acquire a Language as it should be mastered. The late wonderful increase of Knowledge in all useful Arts and Sciences, will facilitate the Acquisition of Languages as much as other Things. The profound Investigations of the Principles of all Languages, and Universal grammar, and the great variety of excellent Translations into English, French, Italian, German &c will make the Progress more easy and delightful than ever it has been.
I most cordially congratulate you, and my Friend Mr. Rush, on his unsolicited and unexpected appointment to the very respectable and very important office of Attorney General of the State of Pensilvania. Gentlemen of his Talents accomplishment, Wisdom and Moderation, I fear are very rare: but among those who might be found, it appears to me that neither the People, nor their Government have been very fortunate in their Elections or Selections. Parties have too much Influence and are too monopolizing and exclusive in their dispositions.
I rejoice in the appearance on the Stage of another Benjamin Rush. May he live as long as his Grandfather has lived or shall live and serve his species and his Country as meritoriously.
The Rage for Banks is a Fever a Mania. I wish you would invent a Tranquillizer to tame it. Every Bank in America is an enormous Tax upon the People for the Profit of Individuals. All the Salaries of all the officers of all our government State and National, do not cost the People So much Money as these Banks. But I despair of ever Seeing Common Sense prevail in Money Matters in America. No People ever had so much Experience of the Injustice, Impolicy and Inhumanity of Paper Money: but Experience and Demonstration is lost upon Us. Our Banks are the Madness of the Many for the Profit of a Few. If the Termination of the National Bank is to be a Precedent for the demolition of all the rest I should rejoice in its End: but if it is to be a Signal for augmenting the Number of State Banks it will cure no distemper, prevent no Evil. Our Banks are all founded on a fundamental Principle of Iniquity.
It requires, however, great Prudence, Moderation and Delicacy to extricate us from these Briars without Scratching the Skin and lacerating the Flesh.
I will write to my Neighbour Mr Quincy in Congress and ask the favour of him to take The Coins with him to Boston when he returns: Unless you should receive a different advice from me or my Son Thomas before Mr Quincy arrives at Philadelphia. Mr Quincy is my Neighbour and Friend, though We are not precisely in the same system of Politicks, at present.
I wish to be informed of the amount of the Coins, that We may remit it to you. I am my Dear Sir, as / ever Yours
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from David Sewall, 14 February 1811
From: Sewall, David
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir
York 14th. February 1811

I have been much gratified by your Communication of Jany 29th. ult.— When I requested the Information, I did not, I think, mention the occurrence, which gave rise in my mind to the Application, I will therefore mention it.— Two person stand Indicted in the District Court of Maine, for piratically runing away with a Vessell & cargo— One (the Master) as Principal: the other (the Mate) as Accessory before the fact, by being present Advising aiding & assisting therein.— The Accessory only is yet apprehended; And upon his arraiment in Decemr. last prayed the Opinion of the Court, Whether He ought by law to answer to the Charge until the Principal (Who had not been Apprehended) should be tried: And was heard thereon by his Councell— I determined, from the Authoritys of Hawking, Hale, Foster & Malloy, that his Objection was substantial, and He ought not (unless by his free concent) to compelled to answer until the Person charged as Principal, in the Offence had answered: And continued the Cause, to the end the Principal might be apprehended.—In the Consideration of the Case mention was made of all trials for Piracy or felony on the high Seas, that had Occurred in Massa. since my recollection of Which this of Nicholson was the last, prior to the American Revolution—one at Cambridge, under the Ordinance of Congress, before the  S. J. Court and one, under the Act of Congress of 1790. in the district Court of Maine none of Which had afforded any precident, respecting the Question. But it must remaine, as to the distinction of Principal & Accessory—as it was by the Civil Law. That the Mode of trial; by Grand & Petit Jurors, had not done away, or altered this distinction. And that the Act of Congress by which alone the Courts of the U. S. under their present Organization, had Authority to try & punish the Offence, seemed to hold up the distinction of Principal and Accessory.—I do not at present see, how the Admiralty Courts, before the Revolution, could call in, a Jury to determine the Fact of Piracy, or felony on the high Seas.— And Courts of that kind in the Brittish Plantations, I suppoze are in the like predicament at the present time.—In your mentioning our surviving Classmates Baily is omitted I do not Recollect, to have heard of his Death— He removed during the revolutionary War, to some part of Nova Scotia and While Docr Parker of Boston was liveing, he had frequent commun. from him—I am really glad to find your recollection so perfect—Docr. Hemmengway, has once and again mentioned to me, that We three Were born in the same Month—Octr. 1735. I have had thro’ divine goodness, a large portion of Health, But my faculties I really find decaying I now and then amuse myself with calculating an Eclipse, (this I suppose will make you Smile) the Solar one of Sepr. 17th. of the Current Year I have found the general Element of— But for want of some Instruments to Projet it, for our Lat & Long. I have not ascertained it’s particular appearan
But I will not be further tedious, in detaining your attention from matters of more consequence / Your assd. friend & / Hume Sert. David Sewall


Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 20 February 1811
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Lord! Sir,
Quincy Feb. 20. 1811

You have planned more Work in your favour of the 9th than could be executed by any Body in twenty years: by me, not in 50 or 100.
But Sobrius esto! Oh my Soul! I must not Speak of your Indisposition lightly. Your Bark and Exercise and friendly Visits and Games of Chess are better for you, than Study or Writings. If your lovely Daughter reads to you The Lady of the Lake, I approve of that Medicine. “Laugh at you”! Why I can make you laugh at me with much more reason. Within three Months past, I have bonâ fide read not only The Lady of The Lake twice, but The Lay of the last Minstrel, and Marmion, and besides these The Scottish Chiefs in three Volumes, and what is more laughable than all, The Oberon of Wieland in two Translations one by John Quincy Adams in Manuscript and the other by Sotheby, in Print. I ascribe much of my good health and Spirits to these Medicaments of Such high Powers. Why! Macclaurin the Astronomer, the Friend of Newton was the Standard Judge of all The Novels and Romances of his Time.
Upon such a Subject it is almost impossible to be grave, but I will endeavour to be So.
The Manners, Laws, Customs of these Feudal Times may be collected from these Romances, better than from all the grave  Historians, profound Philosophers, and crabbed Jurists that have ever written about them. That devoted Attachment to their Lairds, their Thanes or their Barons which So remarkably distinguished the Clans in Scotland, above all the Subjects Vassals or slaves of the Nobility through out Europe, I never understood or could conceive, till I read These Romances. Rhoreric Dhu, and his History, explains the whole. Clanship was Such a System of Discipline, founded in a Mixture of Superstition and Despotism, as equalled any of the Military Discipline of Greece or Rome. The Minstrels the Second Seers, the bloody Crosses, the Fiery Crosses united with the Certainty of Death and Conflagration in Case of Disobedience or failure in prompt instantaneous Obedience gave the Thane a reign of Terror over all his followers even greater than the modern French Conscriptions. It was like the Institution of Tomans in the North of Asia in the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth Centuries, when certain districts were obliged at a minutes Warning to march, to the Army of the Emperor Ten Thousand Men. Was not a Ballance wanting, both in Asia and in Scotland and in all Europe? Without a Ballance all is Despotism, throughout all Ages and all Nations either of one Military Conqueror, or of ten, twenty or a hundred petty Tirants, under the Names of Emirs or Visirs or Dukes Earls or Barons each of whom in his Circle is more arbitrary and oppressive and cruel than a Single Despot over one Nation can be. And if We do not preserve and Strengthen our Ballance We Shall Soon have a Feudal System of Bankers and Landjobbers.
I thank you for the Line
Eripuit Jovi Fulmen, Viresque Tonandi. But who is the Franklin in Manilius? Who was daring and Strong enough?
Sir Francis D’ Ivernois, Mr Pitts Knight who has been twenty years writing for the British Ministry, and who has prophecied the Bankuptcy of France as often and as erroneously as Wicked Will Whiston foretold the Millenium is the Genevan whom I knew in England and Holland, to whom I gave a Set of my Defences, and who wrote The Tableau and the Effets du Blocus.
I have not Seen John Woods new Theory of the diurnal Revolutions of the Earth.
The Moral—and Physical Causes of the Revolutionary Spirit in the latter Part of the 18th Century, and the probable Issue on both Continents are a vast Subject indeed. The Changes in Philosophy and Religion; The Enciclopedist, The Œconomists, The Atheists the Deists, the Extension of Commerce the decline of Ecclesiastical Power, the decay of Feudal Power Montesquieu Voltaire, Frederic, D’Alembert, Turgot, Diderot Rainall, Otis Hancock Dickinson Lees Franklin &c &c La Harpe promised a History of the Philosophy of the 18th Century: but he left only a very imperfect Sketch. How will these Revolutions affect South America, China India Asia and Affrica? The subject is too great for my Comprehension or Imagination. My Son will never have Time nor means to attempt it.
With best Wishes for your Health, Long Life / Family Friends &c
John Adams