Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 17 December 1814
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

My Dear and respected Sir!
Oldenbarneveld. 17 Dec. 1814.

Le plus grand bien qui soit en amitié
est s’entr’escrire, ou se dire de bouche
soit bien, soit dueil, tout ce qui au cueur touche
Sings Marot—and what means can I emploÿ with more success to dispell that mournful gloom, which steadily sits on mÿ mind—Do not saÿ it is unjust to disturb the happiness of your frends bÿ such querulous tunes, while you do not place it in their power—to afford you relief. I  scarce can belief—that I would be answered in this way by my frend or his Ladÿ—although—my letters did give them some momentary pains. They may lay them aside—while they regret, that I cannot surmount difficulties—which theÿ—not unfeelingly—but triumphantly passed over—what shall I say—“mon deuil me plait” this is the worst of the thing—you say—and so it is—but what remedy—I turn’d to reading—it was inefficient—I sketched the Hist. of Plagiat—and proposed—to hold a revue of ancients and moderns—but was ere long tired—I turned my thoughts on agriculture—and congested materials for an Elementary treatise—and theÿ laÿ—and now I am again immersed in Greece ancient history but find no repose—except when I chat with my frend and my family or am employ’d in devotional exercises—and these, too often, I am inclined to give a direction, that they lead me to the objects—to them whose loss I bewail—to them—whose loss—I fore see. again I repeat your wish! oh! that I was near you! So you wrote 18. oct—and the 18 oct seems to me a year
I ventured these days—to bestow a few moments to the theosophical reveries of St. Martin—which he send me a few years past from Paris—but these dreams may please—by their ingenuity, they are not adapted—to soothe the feeling heart, and even seldom instruct the understanding—was I with you—they might entertain us—during an evening conversation. you never communicated me your opinion on Wadstrom’s Diss. “Sur L’origine du mal moral.” what do you think of it?—are you acquainted—and with what work of this class can I suppose you unacquainted—with D’Ancillon’s hist. of the Fr. Revolution? Does it deserve mÿ efforts to procure it? I believe, I asked you once, what is a rubans gris de lin? Porter le ruban gris de lin?  was there any  other connection between our Franklin and the Brittish Rev. Dr. Franklin than that the first stole a parable—the last La Harpe’s compte de Warwik—without acknowledging the theft?
I ask you intercession by your Lady—for two poems of Mr. Norton—which she was pleased to gratify me with—when under your roof—but then—to make the gift compleat—and my gratitude shall be equal—I hope—she ought to add the elegie of John Quincÿ—on the death—of a sister’s child,—She may employ her grandson—to copy it—I engage—if this from me is required—my word—that it shall not come out of my hand—with you as an Advocate I must succeed—but I perceive—I am wandering from the one object to the other. I stop then till a fairer daÿ—and yet it is a charming daÿ—but I go—to visit Mappa, 2. Dec—
How was I gratified with your favour of the 24th of last month—I was just musing on Marot’s ingenious ballad on Frere Lubin—making the application to myself—you know it, and will recollect the Envoÿ
“Pour faire plus tost mal que bien
Frere Lubin le fera bien;
Mais si c’est quelque bon affaire
Frere Lubin ne le peult faire!
I received the same daÿ a very polite Letter of the Dutch minister, mr Changuion—with the for me interesting State documents from Jan—till may past—That Nation will revive from its ashes—united once more with Braband & Flanders—it maÿ become a respectable power on the continent—between France and Russia—He offer’d me with kindness his services, and informed me, that he had sent my oration to his government, and requested a copy of the Symposium—I could wish to learn if his Ladies—wife and sister—are as amiable—as he seems to be—If ever it is in my power, to visit my Children—I must try to explore it, and do I find it so, then there might be no harm in the trial of an attempt to captivate their good opinion—you at least would not blame me, well knowing that through the hearts of the Ladies—I might penetrate to that of his Excellency—But—my Dear friend! how did you dare to apostrophize so Harshly the famous Marÿ lady? I confess—and confessions are sacred truths—that our Ideas do pretty much coincide on this subject, although I am unacquainted with her chronique scandaleuse—but with Ladies—I am usually somewhat bashful even on paper—To you I can say it, I always disliked learned women—of what class they were, to what distinction they had arrived—I was always in their presense uneasy and dull, and never could show myselves but to disadvantage. I admired their talents, but, what efforts I made never could love them, never could endure to compare their worth with the female accomplishments—which illume our understandings while theÿ warm our hearts: a well instructed mind adorned with graceful manners—shining with a brilliant lustre through her usual domestic employments—is of infinitely greater value—than the possession of all the ancient lore of Greece and Rome of all the polite literature of the whole continent of Europe—with such a one—and you—who was blessed during a Nestorean age with such society must perceive—that even a Madame Stael is clouded with darkness.
Accept my sincere congratulations in having nearly arrived at your 80 year—go on—mÿ worthy friend! and who knows! or yet I maÿ—as unexpectedly as before be blessed with the opportunity of visiting Quincÿ—when alone a doubled measure of indulgences shall be required—to bear with your frend—and his good will the only compensation for all your trouble—but—if then endured again—your Lady shall by her benevolence been prompted not to cast awaÿ an old veteran—during his few remaining days—
I know nothing of mr de Wint—and little more of mr Johnson—his father is a respectable merchant at Utica—His own character—says one of my frends is good—his fortune independent—his mental endowments recommendable and the productions of his pen have given him credit.—
Yesterdaÿ was once more a day of joÿ—we celebrated mrs v.d.kemp’s anniversarÿ—She entered her 69 year—Mappa with his Children was with us—your frend was once more as in the days of yore. He drowned every floating care and was happÿ—our frends at Quincy—at Boston at Philadelphia were pledged—and it seemed—as if the whole world was included in my little room—joÿ beamed even from the eyes of mÿ frend, and I succeeded often in enlivening our group by the smiles of his amiable daughter—and why should I not indulge in such innocent happiness?—I am no votary of Stoa—although I admire its precepts and some of its sectaries—I can not refrain—to think—if I do not say so —
Soles occidere et redire possunt
Nobis cum semel occidit brevis lux
Nox est quam longa! Una dormienda
Vivamus—atque amemus!
This I consider a duty—and thus it is becoming—to be not remiss—but acquit ourselves of it with all our strenght—all the anathemas of hyporites and Bigots notwithstanding—
I requested my friend Mappa to enable me to send you one dozen cabbage seeds—How shall I rejoÿce, and claim thank offerings—if I succeed—in bringing thy Palatable dish on your table and that of our frend Quincÿ—I shall add—if feasable 6 for him—you must save two or three plants—for seed for the next year. It is a valuable acquisition—approaches cauliflower—The name is cabage of Brussels. When the cabage is full grown—then between everÿ leaf and the stem sprouts a small cabbage—verÿ solid—of the seize of a walnut—the leave drÿs up—and the whole stem is covered with such gems. These are cut off with a knife, close to the stem, washed, cooked—and stewed with a little butter-milk and nutmeg—It is in maturity at the latter end of the fall—Now to you secretaries—how happÿ a man art thou in you grand-daughters—you would not entrust that province to one in the hundred Americans—who deem that damnable sin—of publishing scraps from letters—a venial error and abhor that meanness—with which I have been too often tortured in our N. papers—I do no consider it a want of loyalty towards you in Susan—if she offers her service to her grand-mama—in behalf of your / obliged and affectionate frend

Fr. Adr. vanderkemp


Title: From John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 20 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
Quincy December 20. 1814

The most exalted of our young Genius’s in Boston have an Ambition to See Montecello, its Library and Sage. I lately gave a Line of Introduction to Mr Everett, our most celebrated Youth: But his Calls at home, forced him back from Washington.
George Ticknor Esquire who will have the Honour to present this to you, has a reputation here, equal to the Character given him in the enclosed Letter from my Nephew, our Athenæum Man, whom you know.
As you are all Heluones Librorum I think you ought to have a Sympathy for each other.
I gave a Letter to Francis Gray a Son of our great Merchant and Patriot which I hope he will have the Honor to present in due time.
The Gentleman you recommended to me, to my great regret has not arrived. I hope no Misfortune has befallen him.
Paine, Lovell and Gerry are gone and left alone
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to James Madison, 21 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Madison, James

Respected Sir
Quincy December 21st 1814

Knowing the immense weight of your cares, it gives me pain to interrupt you a moment. But when a young Scholar, Lawyer and amiable character asks an introduction from me I cannot refuse it.
Such is George Ticknor Esqr an his travels in his own Country first, and in foreign Countries afterward. He is ranked here, with our Everett & Buckminster, choice spirits, as we think them. With great esteem
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to James Monroe, 21 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Monroe, James

Respected Sir
Quincy Decr 21. 1814

As you have many Years to live, and are likely to have Buissness enough to do with your Countrymen as long as you live: I Shall claim a merit rather than make an Apology for introducing to you George Ticknor Esqr a Schollar, a Lawyer and a Gentlemen very greatly esteemed in this northern Region. Knowing the imensity of your Burthens at this time I have no wish to increase them: but knowing also your kindness to Our Buckminster, I though you would not regret to See Another not unlike him. He is on a Pilgrimage to Montecello, and why Should not Letters and Science go on Pilgrimages as well as Superstition. More good would come of them.
Inclosed is a Letter from Richard Cranch Norton, which I Submit to your consideration. My Feelings are too much interested. I have before recommended two of his Brothers. One is an Officer in Izzards Army, the other is a Prisoner in England. Chief Justice Cranch can give Testimony to his origin Education Talents and Character, which I know to be good; though the Prisoner in England has not answered my Expectations.
I am Sir with Esteem and respect / Your most obedient Servant

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 22 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 20
Dear Sir
Quincy December 22. 1814

In my Apology, if you like that Word better than “Defence” I passed over England for more reasons than One. I very well knew, that there had been no nation that had produced so many materials for the illustration of my System and confirmation of my Principles as that in which I wrote. There was antiently no People, but Serfs; no House of Commons. The Struggles between Kings, Barrons and Priests from Thomas a Kempis to Cardinal Woolsey and from him to Archbishop Laud and from him to King William would have been instructive enough. And it would not have been difficult to have Shewn that “the Wars, Rebellions, Persecutions and Oppressions of the English Form,” arose, (the Frenzy of Superstition apart) from the Want of that Limitation of Power in the King the Lords, the Commons and the Judges, and of the ballances between them for which I contended. I had nothing to do with the Ecclesiastical Establishment in England. My Observations related exclusively to the civil and political Arrangement of Powers. These Powers were never accurately defined and consequently ballanced, till the Revolution, nor the Judges compleatly independent till the present Reign.
Nor had I any thing to do with the hereditary quality Superadded to the Monarchical and Aristocratical Powers in England. The three great Powers may be Seperated for some purposes, united for others, as clearly defined limited and ballanced for one, two or three Years, as in the Constitutions of Maryland, New York and Massachusetts, as they can for an Age, or as they are in England for endless Ages.
A large proportion of “the Wars, Rebellions, Persecutions and Oppressions” in England have arisen from Ecclesiastical Artifices and the intoxication of religious Enthusiasm. Are you Sure that any form of Government can at all times Secure the People from Fanaticism? Although this Country has done much are you confident that our moral civil or political Liberties are perfectly Safe, on this quarter? Is a Democracy less liable to this Evil than a mixed Government?
It is true, that in my Apology I expressed in Strong Terms my Admiration of the English Constitution: But I meant no more of it, than was to the purpose of my Argument: ie the Division and Union of Powers in our American Constitutions which were indeed So far, imitations of it. My Argument had no more to do with hereditary descent, than it had with the Church or the Bank of England.
My Mind, I acknowledge was deeply impressed with Apprehensions from the Accounts of the dangerous and irregular Proceedings in Several Counties in Massachusetts, and the alarming Extent of Similar discontents in all the other States. And more than all this.
The Fountains of the great deep were broken up in France and the proud Wave of Democracy was Spreading and Swelling and rolling not only through that Kindom but into England and Holland and Geneva and Switzerland and indeed threatened an Inundation all over Europe. Innovation was making bold and large Strides in every direction. I had great doubts of their the Success of the Leaders in any Usefull degree: but of one thing I was fully convinced, that if they aimed at any Constitution of civil Government more popular then the English they would ruin themselves after Setting Europe on Fire and Shedding Oceans of blood. The Rise progress and termination, to this time need only be hinted. Are you now convinced that France must have a more permanent Executive than She had in the time of Barrere?
The Constitutions in France Spain and Holland have at last approached nearer, to Such a Division and ballance of Powers as are contended for, than ever was attempted before. But these Constitutions of 1814 are all essentially defective and cannot endure.
As to Rebellions in England there was one in 1715, another in 1745. I recollect no more unless you claim for one, Ld. George Gordons Insanity and that of his Stupid biggotted Followers.
After all our “Discoveries of new Principles of moral Liberty,” We have had Shaises, Fries’s and I know not whose Rebellion in the Western Counties of Pensylvania. How near, did Virginia and Kentucky approach, in the last Years of the last Century? And how near is New England approaching at this hour, in Hartford?
Must you and I humble ourselves “in dust and Ashes to acknowledge that the United States have had more Rebellions and Quasi Rebellions in thirty Years than England has had in  one hundred and twenty.
John Wilkes Said to a confidential Friend who broke in unexpectedly to his Closet when he was writing his North Briton No. 45 “I have been Studying these four hours, to See how near I could come to Treason without committing it.” This Study, Mr Taylor, has become a fashionable Study, in the South, the Middle and the North of America.
You “admit that Man is physically always the Same, but deny that he is So morally.” I have not admitted that he is physically always the same nor have I asserted he is so morally. On the contrary Some are born Strong others weak, Some tall other Short, Some agile others clumsy, Some handsome others ugly, Some black others white. These physical qualities too may be and are both improved and depraved by Education, practice Exercise Nourishment. They are all born alike morally innocent, but do not all remain so. They soon become as different and Unlike And unequal in Morals as Virtue and Vice, Merit and Guilt. In their Intellects they are never equal, nor the Same. Perception is more quick, Memory more retentive, judgment more mature, Reason more correct, thoughts better arranged in Some than in others. And these Inequlities are the Sources of the Natural Aristocracy Among Makind, according to my Express Words quoted by you. I am

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 25 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 21.
Dear Sir
Quincy December 25. 1814

The Corporeal Inequalities among Mankind, from the Cradle, and from the Womb, to the Age of Oglethorp and Parr,  the intellectual Inequalities from Blackmore to Milton, from Cocker to Neuton and from Behmen to Lock, are So obvious and notorious, that I could not expect they would have been doubted. The moral Equality, that is, the Innocence, is only at the Birth; As soon as they can walk and Speak you may discern a moral Inequality. These Inequalities, physical, intellectual and moral I have called Sources of a natural Aristocracy, and Such they are have been and will be. And it would not be dangerous to Say they are Sources of all the artificial Aristocracies that have been, are, or will be.
Can you Say that these physical and intellectual and moral Inequalities produce no Inequalities of Influence, Consideration and Power in Society?
You say “Upon the truth or Error of this distinction, the Truth or Error of this distinction Mr. Adams’s mode of reasoning, and of this Essay, will Somewhat depend.” I know not, whether I ought not to join Issue with you, Upon this point.
State the question or questions then fairly and candidly between Us.
1. Are there or are there not physical, corporeal, material Inequalities, among Mankind from the Embrio to the Tomb?
2. Are there or are there not intellectual Inequalities, from the first opening of the Senses, the sight, the hearing, the taste the Smell and the touch, to the final loss of all Sense?
3 Are there not moral Inequalities, discernible almost if not quite from the original Innocence to the last Stage of Guilt and depravity?
4 From these Inequalities, physical intellectual and moral, does there or does there not arise a natural Aristocracy among Mankind? or in other Words, some Men, who have greater Capacities and Advantages to acquire the Love Esteem and respect of their fellow Men, more Wealth Fame Consideration, honour Influence and Power in Society, than other Men?
When, where, have I Said, that Men were always morally, the Same? Never; in word or writing. I had Said,1 p. 109 V. 1. There is an Inequality of Wealth, and in2. p. 110. There is an Inequality of Birth. 3. page 116. There are great Inequalities of Merit Talents, Virtues, Services and Reputations. 4. p. 116 There are a few, in whom all these Advantages of Birth, Fortune  & Fame are united.
I then go on to Say These Sources of Inequality common to every People, founded in the constitution of nature, a natural Aristocracy &c. &c.
Now Sir, Let me modestly and civilly request of you a direct and simple Answer to the Three foregoing Questions. Aye or No. Yea or Nay. You and I have been So drilled to Such answers that We can have as little difficulty in pronouncing them as in Understanding them: at least unless We have become greater Proficients in Pyrrhonism, than We were when We lived together.
When I Shall be honoured with your Yea or Nay, to those three questions I hope I shall know the real questions between Us, and be enabled to confess my Error, express my doubts or State my Replication.
But, Sir, Let me ask you, Why you direct your Artillery at me alone? At me, a simple Individual “in Town obscure, of humble Parents born”? I had fortified myself, behind the Entrenchments of Aristotle, Livy, Sidney, Harrington, Dr. Price, Macchiavel Montesquieu Swift &c. You should have battered down these Strong Outworks, before you could demolish me.
The Word “Crown” which you have quoted from me in your Eighth page, was used merely to Signify The Executive Authority. You, Sir, who are a Lawyer, know that this Figure Signifies nothing more nor less. “The Prince” is used by J. J. Rousseau and by other Writers on the Social Compact for the Same thing. Had I been blessed with time to revise a Work which is full of Errors of the Press, I should have noted this as an Erratum, especially if I had thought of guarding against malevolent Criticisms in America. I now request a formal Erratum Page 117, at the Botom. Dele “Crown” and insert “Executive Authority.”
In your 8th. page You begin to consider my natural Causes of Aristocracy.
1. “Superior Abilities.” Let Us keep to nature and Experience. Is there no difference among Children or Men in natural Abilities? Is there no Such Thing as Genius? Had Raphael no more Genius than the common Sign Post Painters? Had Neuton no more Genius than even his great Master, that learned profound and most excellent Man Dr. Barrow? Had Alexander no more Genius than Darius? Had Cæsar no more than Cataline or even than Pompey? Had Napoleon no more than Santerre? Has The Honourable John Randolph no more than Nimrod Hughs and Christopher Macpherson? Has every Clerk in a Counting house as great a Genius for Numbers as Zerah Colburne, who at Six Years of Age demonstrated faculties which Sanderson and Neuton never possessed in their ripest days? Is there in the World a Father of a Family who has not perceived diversities, in the natural Capacities of his Children?
These plain questions deserve direct Answers. If you allow that there are natural Inequalities of Abilities: consider the Effects. What Effects did the Genius of Alexander produce? They are visible to this day. And what Effects has the Genius of Napoleon produced? They will be felt for 3000 years to come. What Effects have the Genius of Washington and Franklin produced? Had these Men no more Influence in Society than the ordinary Average of other Men? Genius is Sometimes long lived and accumulates Fame Wealth and Power, greater than can be commanded by Millions of ordinary Citizens. These Advantages are Sometimes applyed to good Purposes and Sometimes to bad,

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from James Lloyd, 26 December 1814
From: Lloyd, James
To: Adams, John

					G. 26 Decr. 1814.

				It has now been for a full  ascertaining that unless new pretense. on the part of G. Bn. were advanced, a treaty, of peace wd. be signed, but it was not till last thursday that I ceased to doubt if it wd. receive my signature.—The B. Ps. had declared to us at the outsett that it was not the intention of the B. Govt. to grant to the People of the U.S. in future the liberties of fishg & drying & curing fish, within the exclusive British juris diction without an equivalent, there is as you must remember in the Treaty of 1783. a diversity of expressions, by wh. the gen: fisheries on the Bank, are acknowledged as our right, but then fishing pivileges within British jurisdiction are termed liberties—the British Govt. considered the latter as franchises forfeited ipso facto by the War, & declared they wd. not grant them anew without an equivalent,  too by this principle they too had forfeited their right to navigate the Mississippi recognized in the treaty of 1783. they now demanded  a new provn. to secure it to them again.—We were instd. not to suffer our right to the fishrs. to be brot. into discussion—we had no authy. to admit any discussion. between the 1t & the Last parts of the 3rd. art: of the treaty of 1783.—no provn. to offer or agree for an equivalent either for the rights on the liberties—I considered both as Standing on the same footing—Both as the continuance of franchises always enjoyed—and the difference of the expressions only as arising from the operation of an change from the condn. of B. subjects to that of a sovereign People; upon an object in one part of general, and in the other of special jurisdiction—the special jurisdiction had been that of our own sovereign—by the revolution & the Treaty of Peace it became a foreign, but still remained a special jurisdiction—By the same instrument in wh: we thus acknowledged as a foreign jurisdiction, we reserved to ourselves the full assent of its sovereign, & without any limtn. of time or events the franchise of wh: we had always enjoyed, while the jurisdn. had been our own.—It was termed a liberty, because it was a freedom to be enjoyed with a Special foreign Jurisdict’n—the fisheries on the Bank, were termed rights because they were to be enjoyed on the ocean the common jurisdiction of all nations, but there was nothing in the terms themselves, & nothg in the Art: or the Treaty implying an intention or expectn. of either of the contracting parties that one more than the other should be liable to forfeiture by a subsequent war.—On the  delibn. I still held this argt. to be sound, and it is to my mind the only one by wh: one claim to the fishs. within the jurisdn. can be maintained—but after the decn. made by the Bh. Govt. it was not to be expected that they wd be converted to this opn. without much discussion wh: was forbidden to us, and The result of wh: must have been very doubtful upon minds at all times p inclined and at this time most particularly prone rather to lean upon powr. than listen to reason.—We stated the princips. in one of our notes to the B.P.—as are the ground upon wh. our Govt. dcerned no new stipn. necessary to secure the enjoymt. of all our rights & liberties in the fishs.—They did not ansr. that part of the note, but when they came to ask a stipn. for the right of B. Subjts. to navigate the Mississippi, we objected that by our constn. of the treaty of 83. it was unnecessary—if we admitted their constn. of that treaty, so as to give them a new right to the navign. they must give us an equivalt. prot—we offd. an article recognizing the contn. of the rights to both sides,—this offer met however wh. gt oppositn. among ourselves, for there were two of us agt. working it, & who thot the navign. of the Mississippi incomparably more valuable than the contested part of the fisheries—not so did the British Govt. think—for they instead of acceipting it offd us an article, stipulating to negotiate hereafter for an equivalent to be given by Gt. Bn. for the right of navigatg. the Mississippi. & by the U:S: for the liberties of the fishs. within the B. jurisdn.—this was merely to obtain from us the adminin that both the rights were abrogated by y.—to that adminsn. I was determined not to subscribe—The article was withdrawn last thursdy by the B.Ps. who accepted our proposal to say nothing in the Treaty abt either,  & to omit the art: by whc they agreed that our boundary West from the Lake of the woods shd. be the 49th. parallel of No. Lat.—They at the same time referred agn. to the orign. decln. that the fishs. within the n. Jurisdiction shd. not hereafter be granted without an equivalent—It is evident it must be the subject of a future negn.—the only thing possible to be done now, was to reserve our whole claim unimpaired, and to that I consented to sign the Treaty.We were also obliged to except from the immediate restitution of territory taken during the war the Islands in Passamaquoddy Bay—the British claim them as having been before the treaty of 83. within the limits of Nova Scotia, & insisted upon holding them not as taken during the war, but as of right belonging to them, at first they declared their right to be too clear even for discussion, but they finally agreed to refer to Commissions and to a friendly person the title to them, and even to the Island of Grand Menan in the Bay of Fundy wh: has been since 84 in their possn.—we persisted in demanding that the Passamaquoddy Islands shd be included in the general restoration., they manifested a detemn. to break off rather than yield this point—their inflexibility upon two objects exclusively interestly to Massachusetts Is a melancholy comment upon that policy by wh: Massa: has arrayed herself agt the Govt of the Union—Had massa: been true to herself & to the Union, G.B wd not have dared to hinge the questn. of peace or war upon Moose Isld. or upon the protn of Massa: fishermen—as a Citizen of Massa: I felt it to be most peculiarly her duty not to abandon any of her rights, & I wd have refused to sign the Treaty had any one of them been abandoned—but it was inpossible to form a stipn. in favor of the fishs. & for a temporary possesion of Moose Isld. merely until it shall be ascertained whether it belongs to her or not, we cd. not think of contg the war.—


Title: To John Adams from Horatio Gates Spafford, 26 December 1814
From: Spafford, Horatio Gates
To: Adams, John

					Hond. & Esteemed Friend—
					Albany, 12 Mo. 26, 1814.

				I am lately favored with a Letter from thy Son, one of our Ministers at Ghent, acknowledging the receipt of two copies of my Gazetteer, which thou wast good enough to forward for me. That Gentleman, in my estimation, stands on very high ground, & I am gratified to thee for  having, so far, procured me his favorable notice. While lately at Washington, I learnt, both from the President & Col. Monroe, that they wished his return, that he might fill the vacant office of Secretary of State. Thy Son, I perceive, is held in very high estimation by all intelligent, good men; & I share in thy happiness on this occasion.A long time since, I received a Letter from Boston, which mentioned that I had been, or should be, proposed as a Member of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences,  & this is all I have yet heard. If my memory Serves me correctly, thou art the President of that institution. What about it, may I ask? I should deem it a high honor, & wish to learn if it be correct that I was ever proposed. I hope thou art favored with health, & pray thee to accept assurances of my esteem.

					Horatio Gates Spafford.


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 27 December 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 22
Dear Sir
Quincy December 27. 1814.

When Superior genius gives greater Influence in Society than is possessed by inferiour Genius or a mediocrity of Genius, i.e than by the ordinary level of Men, this Superiour Influence, I call natural Aristocracy. This cause you Say is “fluctuating.” What then? It is Aristocracy Still while it exits. And is not Democracy “fluctuating” too? Are the Waves of the Sea, or the Winds of the Air or “the Gossamour that idles in the wanton Summers air, more fluctuating than Democracy? While I admit the Existence of Democracy, notwithstandings its Instability, You must acknowledge the Existence of natural Aristocracy notwithstanding its fluctuations.
I find it difficult to understand you, when you Say that “Knowledge and Ignorance are fluctuating.” Knowledge is unchangeable and Ignorance cannot change, because it is nothing. It is a Non Entity. Truth is one, uniform and eternal: Knowledge of it, cannot fluctuate any more than itself. Ignorance of Truth being a Non Entity, cannot Surely become Entity and fluctuate, and change like Proteus, or Wind or Water. You Sport away So merrily, upon this Topick, that I will have the pleasure of transcribing You. You Say “the Aristocracy of Superior Abilities, will be regulated by the Extent of the Space, between Knowledge and Ignorance. As the Space contracts or widens, it will be diminished or increased, and if Aristocracy may be thus diminished it follows, that it may be thus destroyed.”
What is the Amount of this Argument? Ignorance may be destroyed, and Knowledge increased ad Infinitum. And do you expect that all Men are to become omnicient, like the Almighty and omnicient Hindoo perfect Brachmans.? Are your hopes founded upon an Expectation that Knowledge will one day be equally divided? Will Women have as much Knowledge as Men Will Children have as much their Parents? If the time will never come, When all Men will have equal Knowledge, it Seems to follow that Some will know more than others, and that those who know most will have more Influence than those who know least, or than those who know half Way between the two extreams, and consequently will be aristocrats. “Superior Abilities” comprehed Abilities acquired by Education and Study as well as Genius and natural Parts; and what a Source of Inequality and Aristocracy is here? Suffer me to dilate a little in this place. Massachusetts, has probably educated as many Sons to Letters in proportion to her Numbers, as any State in the Union, perhaps as any Nation ancient or modern. What Proportion do the Scollars bear to the whole Number of People. I wish I had a Catalogue of our Harvard University that I might State exact numbers. Say that in almost 200 Years there have been 3 or 4 thousand educated from perhaps two or three millions of People. Are not these Aristocrats? Or in other Words, have they not had more Influence than any equal Number of uneducated Men? In fact these Men governed the Province from its first Settlement; these Men have governed and Still govern the State. These Men, in Schools, Accademies, Colledges and Universities; these Men in the shape of Ministers Lawyers and Physicians; these Men in Accademies of Arts and Sciences, in Agricultural Societies, in Historical Societies, in Medical Societies and in Antiquarian Societies, in Banking Institutions and in Washington benevolent Societies; govern the State at this 26th. of December 1814. The more you educate without a Ballance in the Government the more Aristocratical, will the People and the Government be. There never can be, in any Nation more than one fifth; no nor one Tenth of the Men regularly educated to Science and Letters. I hope then you will acknowledge that “Abilities” form a Distinction and confer a Privilege in Fact though they give no peculiar Rights, in Society
2 You apear Sir to have overlooked or forgotten, one great Source of Natural Aristocracy, mentioned by me in my Apology Vol. 1. p 110 and dilated in Subsequent pages, I mean Birth. I Should be obligd to you for your candid Sentiments upon this important Subject. Exceptions have been taken to the phrase “Wellborn”; but I can See no Imprpriety in it, more than in the Epithets “Wellbred” “Well educated,” Well “brought up,” “Well taught” “Well informed,” Well read, “Well to live” Well dressed, “Well fed,” Well cloathed, Well armed, Well accoutred, Well furnished, well mounted, Well made, well fought, well aimed, Well meant Well mounted, well fortified, Well tempered, Well fatted, Well Spoken Well argued well reasoned, well decked Well ducked, Well trimmed Well wrought or any other Well in common Parlance.
And here, Sir, permit me, by Way of digression to remark, another discouragement to honest political Litterature, and the Progress of real political science. If a well meant publication appears, it is instantly Searched for an unpopular Word, or one that can be made So by misconstruction misrepresentation, or by any credible and imposing deception. Some ambitious popular Demagogue gives the Alarm “Heresy”! Holy democratical Church has decreed that Word to be “Heresy”! Down with him! And if there was no Check to their Passions and no ballance to their Government, they would Say “A la lanterne”! “A de guillotine”! Roast him! “bake him! boil him fryin fry him! The Inquisition in Spain would not celebrate more joyfully an Auto de Fee. Some Years ago, more than forty a Writer, unfortunately made Use of the term, “Better Sort.” Instantly a popular Clamour was raised and an Odium excited which remains to this day to Such a degree that no Man dares to employ that Expression at the Barr in Conversation, in a Newspaper, or Pamphlet: No nor in the Pulpit, though the “baser Sort” are Sufficiently marked and distinguished in the New Testament, to prove that there is no Wrong in believing a “better Sort.” And if there is any difference between  Virtue and Vice, there is a “better Sort” and a worse Sort in every human Society;
With Sincere reverence, let me here quote one of the most profound phylosophical, moral and religious Sentiments that ever was expressed: “We know not, what Spirit We are of”
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Mathew Carey, 31 December 1814
From: Carey, Mathew
To: Adams, John

				Hon John Adams,
					Sir,
					Philada. Decr 31. 1814

				I have recd your favour of the 20th and should have before now sent you a copy of the Olive Branch; but the first Edition is so very imperfect, having been very much hurried in the execution, that I determined to wait till the second is ready. This will  probably be about the middle of next week.Mean while I send you by this opportunity such part of the new one as is ready. You may from thence form some opinion of the nature of the work.I feel convinced this Book will ruin me in fame & fortune. Such is The infernal spirit of perfection that pursues every man who dares speak the truth—& the truths to be told are so hideous—that I shall never be forgiven, dead or alive. My memory will be loaded with maledictions as long as the memory of these affairs remains.For myself I really care not. I could have & disregard the worst that may happen. But I am distressed for the effects upon my children, on whom vengeance will be taken for my offences. There is no remedy for it. I have one consolation, that whatever  may be the result, I could not suffer in a nobler cause—the cause of eight Millions of people & their posterity.The leaders of the federal party at present are as profligate & abandoned as the Catilines & Clodii of ancient Rome. Indeed, I think they are in one respect worse. The state of society in Rome was so corrupt, that they wanted a master. And whether it was Marius or Sylla, a Cataline, or Cesar, a master they wd. have.—But it is awful to think that such a blessed state of society as ours should be disturbed—the pillars government torn away—& civil war be introduced to gratify the ambition of a few wicked & ambitious men! It terrifies me to think of it.The astonishing part of the business is that the wealthy portion of the community look on with apathy & terpor while this horrible scene of ruin is preparing for them.I believe this is the first instance in the history of the world in which the lower order of society were upholding, the higher orders tearing down that fabric of government which protected the  property of the latter from the depredations of the former.I am, respectfully, / Your obt. hble Servt

					Mathew Carey

					To afford the OB. a better chance of doing good, I have permitted an Edition to be printed in Boston


Title: To John Adams from Winthrop Sargent, 1814
From: Sargent, Winthrop
To: Adams, John

					1814

				Mr. Sargent has perused the Connecticut pamphlet, & returns it with his very respectful acknowledgments. From the terrible “counterblast” against the Hartford Convention, it would hardly be supposed, that this pamphleteer could be an advocate for toleration in anything. Unless quieted by a feeling of complete security, it is to be supposed, that the “Missionary society” is by this time a perfect Hornet’s nest. Mrs. Sargent renews her respectful compliments to Mr. & Mrs. Adams.


Title: From John Adams to Richard Rush, 2 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Richard

Dear Sir
Quincy January 2 1815

Thanks for yours of Dec. 24. I Still entertain hopes that New England will not be forever alienated from the Southern and the middle States, and therefore take with pleasure, the Liberty of introducing Some of our most promising Young Gentlemen.
Mr Gray is on his Travels and Mr George Ticknor. I believe I did not give the latter a Line to you. He has a most amiable Character. He is Said to read Greek Latin French Spanish Italian and German with facility, and to possess Science and Literature in proportion. As the Everetts, the Grays, the Ticknors &c are likely to have much to do in New England, I wish you to have Some early notice of them.
Have you read The Hon. John Taylor’s “Inquiry”? Have you read The Hon. John Randolphs Letter to a late Senator of Massachusetts? I advise you to Study these and the Writings of Calender, Hamilton, Paine, Duane, Ben, Austin and John Lowell, to learn the Art and obtain the Means of reviving Credit and cementing the Union.
I make no Inquiry who was the Penman at Ghent. The five Gentlemen are all able Men; any one of whom could have made the Draught. The course pursued was the same as in all Such cases. The five consulted together. Each expressed his thoughts and made his observations. Some one was desired to put them down in Words and in Order. When this was done, it was reported and Submitted again to the Five each of whom made his Criticisms and Corrections. And it is not fair to distinguish one from the others.
These Negotiations have no tendency to restore the Son to the Arms of his Father or Sons; a consummation most devoutly wished. The Sons are growing Up to Manhood, almost without the Knowledge of Such a Father to their incalculable loss and Misfortune. Oh! Factious Politicks, I wish you all; in Pandæmonium among Miltons fallen Angels; reasoning high on Fate.
Our Privateers are at last flitting out like Grasshoppers. If this had been done three Years ago, We Should not now have been in so “unhappy a Condition.” We have rumors from New Orleans and Newport, but nothing certain.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to Horatio Gates Spafford, 2 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Spafford, Horatio Gates

Sir
Quincy January 2nd 1815

I resigned the office of President of the Academy, before your nomination, and have not since attended a meeting of that learned, and respectable Assembly.
When I shall embrace my Son, a felicity for which I devoutly pray, I know not. The President & Mr Munroe’s wishes are complementary, but a great gulph is fixed between him and them. I wish we may not have cause to repent of continuing our ministers so long abroad, to be the sport of insidious chicanery.
Did you see Mr Jefferson on your Tour, and how does he do? I am respectfully yours
J Adams.


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 9 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 25
Dear Sir
Quincy January 9. 1815

I am Still upon Birth and my Seventh Argument is.
7. It was a Custom among the Greeks and Romans; probably in all civilized Nations to give Names to the Castles Palaces and Mansions, of their Consulls Dictators and other Magistrates Senators &c This practice is still followed in England France Etc. Among the Ancients the distinctions of Extraction were most commonly marked by the Spots on which Men were born. “Illustri Loco natus,” “claro loco natus” “clarissimo loco natus,” “illustrissimo loco natus” were common expressions of conspicuous Origin: on the contrary “Obscuro Loro nati,” vili loco nati designated low original base Extraction Sordid descent, and were Expression, however unjustly, of Odium or at least contempt.
I perceive Sir, that You, worthy Gentlemen of Virginia, who are good classical Scollars, have not suffered this Observation to escape you. You have taken the modest name of “Hazel Wood.” My Friend Richard Henry Lee, the Superb name of Chantilly, Mr. Madison the beautiful name of Montplier, and Mr Jefferson the lofty name of Montecello, and Mr. Washington the very humble name of a British Sea Captain Mount Vernon, The Honourable John Randolph that of oranoke I would advise the present Proprietor of Mount Vernon to change the Name to Mount Talbut, Truxton, Decator Rogers, Baimbridge or Hull. And I would advise our Boston Gentlemaen who have given this name of the British Sea Captain to the most beautifull Hill on the Globe; to change it to Mount Hancock or Mount Perry or Mount Macdonnough. And I would advise our worthy Lieutenant Governor who has given to a magnificent Block of brick Buildings, the Name of a bastard Brat Scotch Pedlar Man of base Extraction, to change it, to Phillips Place Senior a name and a Race that have done more good to this Country, than all the Scottsmen that ever existed, he having another Still more costly which should be called Phillips Place junior.
8. I wish I could take a Walk with you in all the Church Yards and burying grounds in Virginia, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodistical, or what You will. Are there not Tombs, Monuments, Grave stones and Inscriptions, ancient and modern? Is there no distinction made among these Memorials! Are they all Seen with equal Eyes? With equal Indifference? Is there no peculiar Attachments no particular Veneration for any of them? Are they all beheld by the whole People and by every Individual with Similar and equal Sensations and Reflections? How many hundreds of thousands of Men Women and Children have lived and died in Virginia to whom no Monument has been erected? Whose Posterity know not and cannot conjecture where their Ancestors were deposited. Do all these Cemetaries, which are found all over the World exhibit no distinctions of Names and Families and Persons? Are not those distinctions natural? Produced by natural and inevitable causes?
9. I should be highly honoured and vastly delighted to visit with you every great Planter in Virginia. I should admire to look into their Parlours, Banquetting Rooms, Bedchambers and great Halls; as Mr Jefferson and I, once did together the most celebrated of the Gentlemens Country Seats in England. Should We there see no statues, No Busts no Pictures no Portraits of their Ancestors? No trinketts, no Garments, no Pieces of Furniture carefully preserved because they belonged to great grandfathers; and estimated at ten times the value of similar Articles of superior quality that might be bought at any shop or store? What are Ancestors or their little or great Elegances or Conveniences to the present Planter, more than those of the fifty Acre Man his Neighbour who perhaps never knew the Name of his Grandfather or Father? Are there no natural Feelings, and consequently no natural distinctions here?
I think I have been impartial, and have suspected no Vanity or Weakness in Virginians, which I have not recognized in Massachusettentions. And I could enumerate many more. I will go farther.
It seems to be generally agreed and settled among Men, that John Adams is a weak and vain Man. I fall down under the Public opinion, the general Sense, and frankly and penitently acknowledge that I have been all my Life time and still am a weak and vain Man. One Instance of my Vanity and Weakness I will distinguish. Within two or three Years, I have followed to the Tomb the nearest the dearest the tenderest Connections Relations and Friends of my Life, from almost Ninety Years of Age to the Eighteen Months. This has made me contemplate much among the Tombs, a gloomy Region to which I had been much a Stranger. In this Church Yard I found the Monumental Stones of my Father and Mother, my Grandfather and Grand Mother, My Great grandfather and Great Grand Mother, and my great, great grand Father, my Great Great Grand Mother died in England. If you will do me the favour Sir to come to Quincy and spend a few Weeks with me, I will take a Walk with you, and Shew you all these Monuments and Inscriptions; and will confess to you, that I would not exchange this Line of Ancestors, for that of Guelphs or Bourbons, or Napoleons, or Howards or Montmorencys, or Baudoins or Carters or Winthrops. Such is my Vanity Imbecility and Dotage. And I suspect that you are not a Whit wiser than I am in this respect. Open your Soul, Sir, and disclose your natural Feelings and frankly Say whether you would change Ancestors with any Man living. I believe you would not. Is there a human Being who would? If these feelings for Ancestors are universal, how shall any Legislator prevent the rich, the great, the powerful the learned the ingenious from distinguishing by durable costly and permanent Memorials their own Ancestors, and consequently their Children and remote Posterity, from the descendants of the vast, the immense Majority who lie mingled with the Dust totally forgotten? And how shall he prevent these Names and Families from being more noted and respected by Nations as well as smaller Communities, than names never before heard.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 12 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 26.
Dear Sir
Quincy. January 12. 1815

A Word or two more upon Birth.
10thly. Birth is naturally and necessarily, and inevitably So connected and blended with Property Fame, Power, Education, Genius, Strength Beauty, Learning Science Taste, Figure Air, Attitudes, Movements &c &c &c that it is often impossible and always difficult to Seperate them. Two Children are born on the Same day, of equal Genius; one the Son of Mr Jefferson, the other of Nimrod Hughs; which will meet with most favour in the World? Would a Child of Anthony Benezet, good Creature as he was, have an equal Chance in Life with one of Robert Morris when the Wealth of Nations was believed to be in his Power? Would a Son of the good Rutherford the Predecessor of General Morgan have an equal favour in the World with a son of the great General and President Washington? Would a Son of Sir Isaac Neuton have no more favour in the Sight of the whole human Race, than a Son of Mr Rittenhouse, the worthy President of the Phylosophical Society of Phyladelphia? Would not a Son of beau Nash, meet more complaisance, than one of the Hercule du Roi, whom I have Seen leap at Sadlers Wells, and turn his heels over his head at a height of ten or twelve feet, and come down on the other Side of the Stage, erect? I leave Sir, to your fertile Genius ample Reading and long Experience to pursue the Inquiries. I could continue to enumerate Examples through Sheets of Paper.
11. Have you not observed in Life, and have you not remarked in History, that the common People, and by common People I  here mean all Mankind Despots, Emperors, Kings Princes, Nobles, Presidents Senators Representatives, Lawyers Divines Physicians Marchants Farmers, Shopkeepers, Tradesmen Mechanicks Day Labourers, Tavern Haunters Dram Shop frequenters, Mob, Rabble and Canaille; that is to Say all human kind: Have you not observed that all these feel more respect, more real respect for Birth than even for Wealth? May I not Say, than for Genius, Fame Talents or Power? Though they follow and hosanna for the Loaves & Fishes, you will often hear them Say “Proud as he is I knew his Father who was only a Blacksmith, his Grandfather who was only a Carpenter or his Great Grandfather who was only a Shoemaker. He need not be so topping.”
12. Has not the Experience of Six thousand Years Shewn, that the common People Submit more easily and quietly to Birth, than to Wealth Genius, Fame, or any other Talents.? Whence the Prejudices against Upstarts, Parvenus &c Whence the general Respect, Reverence and Submission in All Ages and Nations of Plebeians to Patricians, of Sieurs to Monsieurs of Juffrows to Meffrows.? If a Man of high Birth is promoted little or nothing is Said, by the Plebeians. If one of their own Level, the Son of a Tradesman or common Farmer, is advanced all the Envy and bile of his equals is excited. He is abused and belittled if not reviled by all his former equals as they thought themselves, whatever may have been the Superiority of his Genius Education Services Experience or other Talents. There is nothing Mr Taylor, to which the Vulgar in general, So quietly and patiently and cordially Submit, as to Birth.
13 What in all ages has been the source of the Submission of Nobility to Royalty? Every Nobleman envys his Sovereign and would pull him down, if he could get into his Throne and wear his Crown. But when Nobles and Ignobles have torn one another to pieces for Years or Ages in their eternal Squabbles of Jealousy Envy Rivalry hatred and revenge and all are convinced that this Anarchy will not do, that the World will be depopulated, that a head must be Sett up and all the Members must be guided by it, then and not till then will Nobles Submit to Kings; But nothing will reconcile their Feelings, unless the King is of Superiour Birth. What Subjects all the Nobility of Europe to all the Kings of Europe, but Birth? though Some of them cannot well make out their Pretensions, particularly the proudest of them all, the House of Austria.
14. What has excited an universal Insurrection of all Europe against Bonaparte, (if We dive to the Bottom of this awfull Gulph, and recollect the Succession of Coalitions against him and against Republican France) but because he was Obscuro loco natus, the Son of a Simple Gentiliatre of Corseca?
15 Such and So manifest universal are the manifest distinctions of Birth in every Village and every City; So tremendous are their Effects on Nations and Governments, that one might almost pronounce them Self evident. I may justly be ridiculed for labouring to demonstrate, in “Re non dubiâ, testibus non necessariis.”
16 Can you discern no good in this eternal Ordinance of Nature the Varieties of Birth. If you cannot, As the Facts are indisputable, you must assert that as far as you can See, the World is ill made and that the Whole of Mankind are Miscreants. For there are no two of them born alike, in any Thing but divine right and moral Liberty.
17 Please to remember that Birth confers no right on one more than another! But Birth naturally and unavoidably produces more Influence in Society in Some more than in others: and this Superiority of Influence is Aristocracy.
18 When Birth Genius Beauty, Strength, Wealth, Education Fame Services Heroism Experience, unite in an Individual, they produce Inequality of Influence, that is Aristocracy with a Witness, So that one can chase a thousand and two put ten thousand to fight in any political Conflict: and without any hereditary descent or any artificial Marks Titles or Decorations what ever.
I am, Sir &c
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 16 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 28
Dear Sir
Quincy January 16 1815

Give me leave to add a few Words, on this Topick. I remember the Time when three Gentlemen, Thomas Hancock, Charles Apthorp and Thomas Green, the three most oppulent Merchants in Boston, all honourable virtuous and humane Men if united could have carried any Election, almost unanimously in the Town of Boston.
Harrington, whom I read forty or fifty Years Ago and Shall quote from Memory, being too old to hunt for Books and fumble over the leaves of Folios: has been called the Neuton in Politicks and Supposed to have made a great discovery, namely that Mankind are governed by the Teeth and that Dominion is founded on Property in Land. Mr. Locke and the French Œconomists countenance this opinion. Landed Gentlemen are generally not only Aristocrats, but Tories. What but Commerce, Manufactures Navigation and Naval Power Supported by a monied Interest, restrains them from establishing Aristocracies or Oligarchies as absolute arbitrary oppressive and cruel as any Monarchy ever was? What has annihilated the astonishing Commerce and Naval Power of Holland but the Influence of the landed Gentlemen in the Inland Provinces overbearing and outvoting the maritime Provinces? What is it, that prevents France from reducing and restraining, if not annihilating the Commerce Manufactures and Naval Power of Great Britain, but the landed Gentry, the Proprietors of Lands in France? Who nver would suffer commerce, Manufactures or Naval Power to grow in that Kingdom? Who would never permit Colbert or Neckar to hold Power, or even enjoy Popularity, but with the monied Interest? Yet these Gentlemen could never be Satisfied with the Number of Soldiers and Land Armies. No Expence, no exertion to increase the number of Officers and Soldiers in the Army could be too much. What, has prevented our beloved Country, to the Astonishment of All Europe, from having at this hour, a Naval Force amply Sufficient to burn Sink and destroy or bring capture into our Harbours all the Men of War that Britain has Sent or can Send to our Coasts, but the Landed Gentleman, the great and little Planters, the Yeomen and Farmers of The United States? Such it was in the beginning, is now, and I fear ever will be, world without End.
All these Considerations prove the mighty Influence of Property in human affairs. They prove the Influence of Birth too; for landed Property is hereditary, generally, all over the World.
Truth, Mr. Taylor, cannot be ridiculed into Error. Aristophanes could laugh Socrates out of his Life, but not out of his Merit or his Fame. You Seem to admit, that “Aristocracy is created by Wealth” but you seem to think it is “artificially,” not “naturally” so “created.” But if superior genius Birth, Strength, and Activity naturally  obtain Superior Wealth, and if Superior Wealth, has naturally Superior Influence in Society; where is the impropiety in calling the Influence of Wealth “natural.” I am not however biggoted to the epithet natural; and you may Substitute, the epithet “Actual” in the place of it, if you think it worth while.
“Alienation” you Say, “is the Remedy for an Aristocracy, founded on landed Wealth.” But Alienation only transfers the Aristocracy from one hand to another. The Aristocracy remains the Same. If Brutus transfer to Cassius, a Villa, or a Principality purchased by the unrighteous profits of Usury, Cassius becomes as influential an Aristocrat as Brutus was before. If John Randolph should manumit, one of his Negroes and alienate to him, his Plantation, that Negro would become as great an Aristocrat as John Randolph. And The Negro, John Randolph, Brutus and Cassius, were and are, and would be Aristocrats of a scarlet colour and a crimson die, if they could. Alienation therefore is no Remedy, against an Aristocracy founded on landed Wealth.
You Say, Sir, that “Inhibitions upon Monopoly, and Incorporation, are Remedies for Aristocracy founded on paper Wealth.” Here, Sir, once for all, let me Say, that you can write nothing too Severe for me, against “Paper Wealth. You may Say, if you please As Swift Says of Party, that it is the Madness of the Many for the Profit of the Few. You may call it a Swindler, a Pick pocked, a Pirate, a Thief, or a Robber, and I will not contradict you, nor dispute with you. But, Sir, how will you obtain your “Inhibitions upon Monopoly and Incorporation” when The Few are craving and the many mad for the same thing? When Democrats and Aristocrats all Unite, with perhaps only two or three exceptions, in urging these Monopolies and Incorporations to the last Extremity, and when every Man who opposes them is Sure to be ruined? Paper Wealth has been a Source of Aristocracy in this Country, as well as landed Wealth with a Vengeance. Witness the immense Fortunes, made per Saltum by Aristocratical speculations both in Land and Paper. In human affairs, Sir, We must consider, what is practicable as well as what is theoretical.
But, Sir, Land and Paper are not the only sources of Aristocracy. There are Master Shipwrights, Housewrights, Masons, &c &c &c who have each of them from twenty to an hundred Families in their employment and can carry a Posse to the Polls, when they will. These are not only Aristocrats, but a Species of Feudal Barons. What are Demagues and popular orators, but Aristocrats, Jack Cade and Wat Tyler were Aristorcrats, Calender and Paine were Aristocrats. Shaise and Fries were Aristocrats. Mobs never follow any but Aristocrats.
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Hendrick W. Gordon, 17 January 1815
From: Gordon, Hendrick W.
To: Adams, John

Dear SirMerrimack N.H. January 17th. 1815.It having been the will of divine providence that I should be visited with a severe fit of sickness last winter, I was induced to remove into the country, which I did in the spring for the benefit my of health; It has greatly improved—The friendly aid you were pleased to give me in obtaining the Office I held under the direct Tax laws, makes me gratefull to you, and I trust I shall ever veiw the favour as a distinguished one.It affords me great pleasure to be able to tell you, that my concerns with the Government were promptly and satisfactorily closed, and my books transferd in perfect order to my successor. My worthy freind Mr Rush, having become acquainted with my Character and fitness for some respectable situation under the Government, I hope will not at some future day, fail to add his good word in my behalf.I take the liberty to ask after the health of your Lady as well as that of yours and remain with great and sincere respect your faithfull, and Obliged / Humble Servant,Hendrick W Gordonlate of Boston.


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 18 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 29
Dear Sir
Quincy January 18. 1815

“Knowledge” you Say invented Alienation, and became the natural Enemy of Aristocracy. This “Invention” of “Knowledge” was not very profound or ingenious. There are hundreds in the Patent office more brilliant. The Right, Power and Authority of Alienation is essential to Property. If I own a snuff box, I can burn it in the Fire, cast it into a Salt pond crush it to attoms under a Wagon Wheel, or make a Present of it to you, which last alienation I Should prefer to all the other; or I could Sell it to a Pedlar to give it to a Beggar. But in either case of Gift or sale, would the Aristocratical Power of the snuff box, be lessened by Alienation? Should a Palatine of Poland, or a Prince of Russia, alienate his Palatinate or his Principality or his Palatinate with all the serfs attached to them, would not the Buyer derive all the Aristocratical Influence from the Purchase which the Seller alienated by the Sale? Should a Planter in Virginia Sell his clarissimum et illustrisimum et celeberrimum Locum, with his thousand Negroes to a Merchant, would not the Merchant gain the Aristocratical Influence which the Planter lost by the Transfer? Run down, Sir, through all the Ranks of society; or if you are Shocked at the Word, Ranks, Say all the Classes, Degrees, the Ladder, the theatrical benches of Society, from the first Planter and the first Merchant, to the Hog driver the Whiskey dram seller or the Scottish Pedlar, and consider whether the alienation of Lands Wharves Stores, Houses, Funded Stock, Bank Stock, Bridge Stock, Canal Stock, Turnpike Stock or even Lottery Ticketts, does not transfer the Aristocracy as well as the Property. When the thirsty Soul of an hundred Acre Man carries him to the Whiskey Shop, till he has mortgaged all his Acres, has he not transferred his Aristocracy with them? I hope these hints, Sir, have convinced you that Alienation is not an Adequate Remedy against the Aristocracy of Property. When the thirsty soul of an hundred Acre Man carries him to the Whisky shop, till he has mortgaged all his Acres, has he not transferred his Aristocracy with them? I hope these hints, Sir, have convinced you that Alienation is not an adequate Remedy against the Aristocracy of Property.
“Inhibitions upon Monopoly and Incorporation” You Say “are Remedies, for an Aristocracy founded on Paper Wealth.” And are Such “Inhibitions” your only hope against Such an Aristocracy? Have those Principles of government which We have discovered and those Institutions which We have invented, which have, established a “Moral Liberty” undiscoved and uninvented by all Nations before Us, “inhibited Monopolies, and Incorporations”? Is not every Bank a Monopoly? Are there not more Banks in the United States than ever before existed in any Nation under Heaven? Are not these Banks established by Law, upon a more Aristocratical Principle than any others under the Sun? Are there not more legal Corporations, litterary, Scientifical, Sacerdotal, Medical, Accademical Scholastic Mercantile, Manufactural, Marine, Insurance, Fire, Bridge, Canal, Turnpike &c. &c. &c. than are to be found in any known Country of the whole World? To these might be added Biblical Societies, Missionary Societies, political Conventions Caucusses and Washington Benevolent Societies, and if you will a projected Emigrant Society? And are not all these, Nurseries of Aristocracy?
If “Alienations” and “Inhibitions” fail Us, where Shall We took next for a Remedy against Aristocracy? Shall We have recourse as you have done, page 9th. to the Art of Printing? But this has not destroyed Property or Aristocracy, or Corporations or Paper Wealth, in Europe or America, or diminished the Influence of either;, on the contrary it has multiplied Aristocracy and diminished Democracy. I pray you, Sir, not to think this a Paradox. You may hereafter be convinced that it is a Serious, a Solemn and melancholly Truth.
Admit that the Press, transferred, the Pontifficate of Rome, to the Pontifficate of Henry the 8th. and to all the Subsequent Kings of England even, if you will, down to his Present Royal Highness, the Prince Regent. Admit that the Press, demolished in Some Sort the Feudal System and Sett the Serfs and Villains free. Admit that the Press demolished the Monasteries, Nunneries and religious houses. Into whose hands did all these Alienated Baronies, Monastries and religious Houses and Lands fall? Into the hands of the Democracy? into the hands of Serfs and Villains? Serfs and Villaines were the only real Democracy in those times. No. They fell into the hands of other Aristocrats, and there remain to this day, notwithstanding all the innumerable “Alienations” and transfers from Aristocrat to Democrat Aristocrat to this hour. Admit, Sir that the press produced the Reformation, as well as the dissolution of the Feudal System, and the Tenures in Mortmain; what was the Consequence?
Two hundred Years, at least of Thefts, Larcenies, Burglaries Robberies, Murders Assassinations, Such as no Period of human History has had before exhibited. The civil Wars in England, the Massacres in Ireland, the civil Wars in France, the Massacre of Saint Bartholomews Day, all proceeded from the Same Source, and So did the late French Revolution; and the Consequences are not yet ended and cannot yet be all foreseen. The real Democracy of Mankind has found very little Alteration for the better or the worse, through all these Changes. The Serfs of the Barons or the Church Lands lived as well and were as humanely treated as the Manufactures or labourers are in England France, Germany or Spain at this day. These are the real Democracy of every Nation and every Age. These, who have either no Vote at all, or at best but one Vote, are the most numerous Class in every Society. Property in Land they have none; property in goods besides their Cloaths they have very little. When the National Convention in France voted all the Negroes in St. Domingo, Martinique, Guardaloupe, St. Lucie &c free, at a breath did the poor Democracy among the Negroes gain any thing by the Change? Did they not immediately fall into the Power of Aristocrats of their own Colour? Are they more free, from Toussaint to Petion & Christophe? Do they live better? Bananas and Water, they Still enjoy, and a whole Regiment would follow a Leader, who should hold at a Salt fish to their Noses.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 19 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 30.
Dear Sir.
Quincy January 19th. 1815

Suppose Congress Should at one Vote, or by one Act, declare all the Negroes in the United States, free, in imitation of that Great Authority the French Sovereign Legislature? What would follow? Would the Democracy, Nine in ten, among the Negroes be gainers? Would not the most Shiftles among them be in danger of perishing for Want? Would not Nine in ten perhaps Ninety nine in a hundred of the rest, petition their Old Aristocratical Masters to receive them again, to protect them, to feed them to cloath them and to lodge and Shelter them as usual? Would not Some of the most thinking and phylosophical among the Aristocratical Negroes, ramble into distant States, Seeking a poor and precarious Subsistence by dayly labour? Would not Some of the most enterprising Aristocrats allure a few followers into the Wilderness and become Squatters? Or perhaps incorporate with Indians? Would not others who have the Courage of Crime, “Le Courage du Crime,” as well as of Enterprise, collect little Parties of followers, hide themselves in caves behind Rocks and Mountains in deep Forrests or thick and boggy Swamps: and commit Inroads Depredations and Brigandages as the Villaines did in Europe for Ages, after the dissolution of Fiefs and Monastries.? Will the poor Simple democratical Part of the people gain any happiness by Such a rash Revolution?
1 I hope, Sir, that all these considerations will convince You 1st. that Property has been, is, and everlastingly will be, a natural and unavoidable cause of Aristocracy; and that God almighty has made it Such, by the Constitution of human Nature and the Globe, the Land the Sea, the Air the Water and the Fire, among which he has placed it
2. That the Advice which was given to me by a good Deacon in a quotation from an ancient Divine, in the spring of 1774, after I was chosen to go to Congress, “In all Cases of difficulty and danger, when You know not what to do; be very careful, that you do not do, you know not what,” was good Advice. You and I have lived to See the Rise Progress, Perfection, decline and termination of hot rash blind, headlong furious Efforts to ameliorate the condition of Society, to establish Liberty, Equality, Fraternity and the Rights of Man: and in what have they ended? Festine lente! Sobrius Esto.
Property makes a permanent distinction between Aristocrats and Democrats. There are many more Persons in the World who have no Property, than there are who have any: and therefore the Democracy is and will be more numerous than the Aristocracy. But We must remember, that the Art of Printing, to which you appeal to level Aristocracy is almost entirely in the hands of the Aristocracy.
You resort to the Press for the protection of Democracy and the Suppression of Aristocracy! This, Sir, in my humble Opinion is “Committere Agnum Lupo.” It is to commit the Lamb, to the kind Guardianship and protection of the Wolf.! an hungry Wolf.! a Starving Wolf.! Emperors and Kings and Princes, know the Power of the Press, at least as well, perhaps better, than you and I do. It is known to Nobles and Aristocrats of all Shades, Colours and denominations much better than to Democrats. It is known to domestick Ministers of State, and to foreign Ambassadors, quite as well as to Duane, Benjamin Austin, or John Randolph. Oxenstiern bid his Son go among Ambassadors and Ministers of State, to See, by “what Sort of Men this World is governed.” That Sensible Man might as Sensibly have recommended to his Son to go among the Booksellers, the hireling Scribblers, Printers and Printers Devils. He might have more easily found how this lower World is Governed. Half the Expence would have let him into the Secret. The Gazettes, the Journals, the Newspapers and Fugitive Pamphlets govern Mankind at this day, and have governed at least Since the Art of printing has become universal or even general. And what Governors are these?
Here, Mr. Taylor, give me leave to relate an Anecdote which upon my honor, and if you doubt that I will attest upon oath. There were times, when I had the honor to be, in high favor with the Count De Vergennes, and to enjoy his Confidence. I had found means to convey into English Newspapers Paragraphs and little Essays, which he knew could come only from me. It would require a little Volume to explain all this. At his Office one Morning upon Some particular Buisiness with him, he received me alone, and walked with me backwards and forwards, in the most familiar Conversation. “Mr. Adams,” Said the Count, “The Gazettes, the Journals govern the World.” “It is necessary, that We Should attend to them, in all parts, and even in England, and I Should be glad to communicate with you in this Plan.” You cannot conceive the Impression, these few Words made upon me. I was dumb, but I Said in my heart, “Monsieur Le Comte, Your Spies have informed You, that I dayly read the foreign Gazettes, and that I have communicated Some trifles in England, and I doubt not you know my Channels of Conveyance.” The Truth was I dayly read the foreign Gazettes from Holland, Germany England &c and daylay Saw the hand of the Count de Vergennes and his Office of Interpreters of three hundred Clerks, as I was told, Skilled in all the Languages of all Nations. I give you but a Sketch or rather a hint of what would require Volumes to explain at large. And I give you this hint, merely to convince you that Ministers of State know the Power of the Press, as well as John Randolph or any other Democrat Aristocrat or Mongrell.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 21 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No. 31
Dear Sir
Quincy January 21st. 1815

You remember I have reserved a right of employing twenty years to answer your Book, because you consumed that number in writing it. I have now written you thirty Letters and have not advanced beyond a dozen pages of your Work. At this rate I must ask indulgence for forty or fifty years more. You know that your Amusement and my own are the principal Objects that I have in View. In the fine Season of Spring, Summer and Autumn, dayly labours in my little Garden and frequent Rambles over my hundred Acre Farm, afforded me and I presumed they did You upon your more ample Possessions, more Amusement; and I therefore neglected the Correspondence; but since I have retired to Winter quarters, I have resumed my Pen, My last Letter, No. 30 was upon the Power of the Press, and the Influence of the Art of Printing: and I endeavoured to convince You that the great Cause of Democracy would not be exclusively promoted by that noble Invention. It is certain that Property is Aristocracy; and that Property commands the Press. Think of this, Sir.! The Types, the Machinery, the Office The Apprentices, the Journeymen, require a Capital, and that Capital is Aristocracy.
It does not appear, that Democracy has ever distinguished itself, more than Aristocracy in Zeal or Exertion for the promotion of science Litterature, the fine Arts or Mechanic Arts, not even the Art of printing. In ancient days, when all Learning was in Manuscript It required a fortune to procure a Small Library. Books were in the hands only of the rich. The Roman Knights with their gold rings, might have Some Knowledge: but the Plebians had none but such as they acquired from the Actors on their Theatres and their popular orators in Town Meeting, all of whom were as proudly and vainly Aristocratic and nearly as flashy and superficial as that Bete venemeux your Baron of Oranoake Roanoke. Will you call Terence and Epictetus and other Greeks slaves, or the wandering Sophists, the, græci esurientes, rambling about the World like strolling players to beg or earn a pitiful subsistence, Democrats? Will you quote the rambling French dancing Masters, Drawing Masters, Fencing Masters, and Grammarians, Democrats.
Have Democrats been the Promoters of Science Arts and Litterature? The Ariscrat, Monarchists, or Tyrant Pisistratus, his sons &c who assembled all the learned Men of Greece to form a System of Religion and Government by the compilation of Homer, were not Democrats. Themistocles and Pericles Alexander and the Ptolomies, were not Democrats. Augusuts nor Scipio nor Leslius were Democrats. The Medici, who raised Popes Empresses Queens and Kings by the Machinery of Banks, were not Democrats. Elizabeth, Ann, Louis 14, Charles 1. George 3d. Katharine, were not Democrats. You may call Napoleon a Democrat if you will. These have been the great Encouragers of Arts Sciences and Litterature.
But, perhaps Sir, I have rambled a little from the Point. The Question then is, concerning the Influence of the Art of Printing, in diminishing Aristocracy and protecting, encouraging, Supporting, increasing and multiplying Democracy. This subject, would require Volumes. My great misfortune, through a pretty long Life, has been, that I never had time, to make my poor productions shorter. And I am more embarrassed now than ever; for I have neither Eyes nor fingers, nor Clerks nor Secretaries nor Aids du Camp, nor Amanuensis any more than time at my command to abridge and condense, or arrange or methodize any thing. Correction, Revision, nono prematur, in Anno, have all been forbidden Fruit to me.
Has the Art of Printing increased Democracy? It has humiliated Kings, It has, humiliated Popes; it has demolished, in some degree, Feodality and Chivalry, it has promoted Commerce and Manufactures. Agreed if you will: and sing io, tryumphe, if you will. But is Democracy increased or bettered? Remember always as We go along, that by Democrats I mean, exclusively those who are Simple Units, who have but one Vote in society. How Shall We decide this question? Have these simple units acquired Property? Have they acquired knowledge? Do they live better? Are they become more temperate more industrious, more frugal, more considerate? Run over all Europe and see! in France 25,500,000 who can neither write nor read. In England, Protestant as it is, not much less in Proportion. Nor in holland, nor Germany nor Russia, nor Italy nor the Peninsula of Spain and Portugal. Knowledge, in France, I may acknowledge, has been more Spread and divided among the Aristocracy of five hundred thousand Aristocrats but the Democratical 24 Million five hundred thousand have gained nothing. Bread and Water, Oatmeal and Potatoes are Still their Rations. The Benevolence of Henry the 4th and all this Successors have never procured so much as a Chicken in the Pott, once a Week, for the poor Democrats. Depend upon it, unless you give a Share in the Souvereignty, to the Democrats, the more you increase Knowledge in the Nation, the more you will grind and gripe the Democrats, till you reduce them to the calculations concerning West India Negroes, Scottish and English Coal heavers, Dutch Turf Lifters, and the Street Walking Girls of the Night in Paris and London, or Knowledge will for ever be monopolised by the Aristocracy. The Moment you give Knowledge to a Democrat, you make him an Aristocrat. If you give more than a share in the sovereignty to the Democrats, i.e. if you give them the Command or Preponderance in the Sovereignty, i.e. the Legislature, they will vote all Property out of the hands of You Aristocrats and if they let you escape with your Lives, it will be more humanity and Consideration and Generosity than any tryumphant Democracy, ever displayed since the Creation. And what will follow? The Aristocracy among the Democrats, will take your Places and treat their Fellows as Severely And Sternly as you have treated them. For every Democracy and portion of Democracy, has an Aristocracy in it as distent as that of Rome, France or England.
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to John Taylor, 24 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Taylor, John

No 32
Dear Sir
Quincy January 24th 1815

That the first Want of Man is his Dinner, and the second his Girl, were truths well known to every Democrat and Aristocrat, long before the great Phylosopher Malthus, arose, to think he enlightened the World by the discovery of them. It has been equally well known, that the Second Want is frequently So impetuous as to make Men and Women forget the first; and rush into rash Marriages, leaving both the first and the Second Wants, their own as well as those of their Children and Grandchildren, to the Chapter of Accidents. The most religious, very often leave the consideration of all these Wants to him who supplies the young ravens when they cry. The natural, necessary and unavoidable Consequence of all this is, that the Multiplication of Population, so far transcends the Multiplication of the means of Subsistence, that the constant Labour of nine tenths of our Species will forever be necessary to prevent all of them from Starving with hunger, cold and Pestilence. Make all Men Neutons, or if you will, Jeffersons, or Taylors, or Randolphs, and they would all perish in a heap.
Knowledge, therefore, Sir, can never be equally divided among Mankind, any more than Property real or personal; any more indeed than Wives or Women.
In Pride, in reasoning  Pride, our Error lies
All quit their spheres, and rush into the Skies
Men would be Angels, Angels would be Gods
Aspiring to be Gods, if Angells fell
Aspiring to be Angles, Men rebell.
The modern, Improvers of Society, Ameliorators of the Condition of Mankind, Instructors of the human Species have assumed too much. They have not only condemned all the Phylosophy and Policy of All Ages of Men but they have undertaken to build a new Universe, to ameliorate the System of eternal Wisdom and benevolence. I wish, Sir, that you would agre with me and my, and I hope your Friends Pope and Horace
There are my Friend, whose phylosophic Eyes
Look through and trust the Ruler with his Skies.
This Vault of Air, this congregated Ball
Self centured Sun, and Stars that rise and fall.
Hunc Solem et Stellas &ca.
Turn our Thoughts, in the next place, to the Characters of Learned Men. The Priesthood, have in all ancient Nations, nearly monopolized Learning. Read over again all the Accounts We have of Hindoos Chaldeans, Persians Greeks, Romans, Celts, Teutons, We Shall find that Priests had all the Knowledge, and really governed all Mankind. Examine Mahometanism Trace Christianity from its first Promulgation, Knowledge has been almost exclusively confined to the Clergy. And even since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting Sect, who would tolerate, A free Inquiry? The blackest Billinsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolenc, the most yahooish brutality, is patiently endured countenanced propagated and applauded: But touch a solemn Truth in collission with a dogma of a Sect, though capable of the clearest proof; and you will Soon find you have disturbed a Nest, and the hornets will swarm about your legs and hands and fly into your face and Eyes. When We are weary of looking at Religion, We will if you please, turn our Eyes to Government. Is there tolleration in Politicks? Where Shall We find it, if not in Virginia? The Honourable Mr John Randolph, The Baron of Roanoke, for I will not yet allow him to be a Duke, informs Us; “this Noble and high minded Gentleman informs Us that in consequence of the Independence of his Soul, he is on bad terms, with the World; that his Nerves are of too weak a fibre to bear the questions ordinary and extraordinary, from our political Inquisitors; talks of the rancorous hatred of the numerous Enemies he has made in his Course; and Says that the Avenue to the public Ear is Shut against him in Virginia, where the Press is under a virtual Imprimatur, and where it would be easier to force into Circulation the Treasurers Notes, than opinions militating against the Administration from through the Press, in Virginia. If these Things, are So, in Virginia, Sir, where Calander was applauded nourished cherished and paid, where the great Historian Wood who wrote and printed in two large Octavo Volumes the elegant and classical History of the Administration of John Adams, was kindly received and employed, and where the Sedition Act, the Gag Law was So unpopular; where can We look wish any prospect or hope of finding a candid Freedom of the Press? The Truth is Party Opinions, Interests, Passions and Interests Prejudices, may be as decisive an Imprimatur as that of a Monarch; And the Public opinion, which is not always right untill it is too late, is Sometimes as arbitrary a Prohibition as an Index expurgatorius. I hope it will be no Offence to Say that Public Opini. is often formed upon imperfect partial and false Information from the Press. Public Information cannot keep pace with Facts. Knowledge cannot always accompany Events. How many days intervene between a Victory or a Defeat and the Universal Knowledge of it? How long do We wait for the Result of a Negotiation? How many erroneous public opinions are formed in the Intervals? How long is a Law enacted before the Proclamation of it can reach the Extremities of the Nation?
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815
From: Adams, John
To: Lloyd, James

Dear Sir
Quincy January 28th. 1815

Although I have no recollection, that I ever met you more than once in Society; and that I presume was the instance that you have recorded; Yet I feel as if I was intimately acquainted with you. The Want of familiarity between Us, I regret, not only because I have known esteemed and I may Say, loved your Family from an early Age: but especially, because whatever I have heard or read of your Conduct in Life, has given me a respect for your Talents and an high Esteem for your Character.
Having read Mr Randolphs Letter to you and your Answer to him I shall not question the propriety of your taking So much notice of him.
It would give me pleasure to dilate on the various parts of your letter, and mark the many points in which I fully agree with you, as well as the few which are not So clear to me: but I Shall confine myself, at present, to those things which personally relate to myself and my Administration.
You Say, Sir, that I “built upon the Sand.”! And So indeed, I did. I had no material, for a foundation, but a rope of it. The Union of the States was at that time, nothing better. In this respect, I was in a worse Situation, than Mr Madison is at this hour.
You are pleased to Say, Sir, that “upon the earlier part of my Administration you could dilate, con amore.” I believe you, Sir. Those Addresses, of which Mr Randolph, “defy’s you to think without a bitter Smile;” will remain immortal monuments in proof, that one third at least of the People of the United States, thought and felt as you did. But, Sir, did you then consider, or have you Since considered, that this Mr Randolph with two thirds of the People of the United States, then “dilated on that earlier part of my Administration,” con Odio.?
There is not, Sir in your masterly letter, a more correct or important Observation, than that of “the unhappy Ignorance which exists, among the members of this great family, but resident in different Sections of it, with regard to the Objects and qualities of each other. This Ignorance the offspring of narrow prejudice and illiberality; is now presenting brimfull the chalice of envy and hatred; where it Should Offer nothing but the Cup of conciliation and confidence. It Sprang from the little intercourse and less knowledge which the People of the then British Provinces possessed of each other, antecedently to the American Revolution; and instead of being dissipated by an event So honourable to them all; has been cherrished and perpetuated for political Party purposes, and for the promotion of the Sinister views and ambitious projects of a few restless and unprincipled individuals, untill the present period.”
Of this Ignorance, when I went to Congress, in 1774, I can assure you, Sir, I had a most painfull consciousness in my own bosom. There, I had the disappointment to find, that almost every Gentleman in that Assembly, was, in this kind of Information, nearly as ignorant as myself: and what was a more cruel Mortification than all the rest, the greatest part even of the most intelligent full of Prejudices and Jealouses, which I had never before even Suspected. Between 1774 and 1797, an interval of 23 Years this Ignorance was in some measure removed from some minds. But Some had retired in disgust, Some had gone into the Army Some had been turned out for timidity, Ssome had deserted to the Enemy, and all the Old Stedfast Patriots, weary of the Service, always irksome, in Congress, had retired to their Families and States, to be made Governors, Judges, Marshalls, Collectors &c &c, so that in 1797, there was not an Individual, in the House of Representatives, in the Senate, or in either of the Executive departments of  Government, who had been in the National controversy from the begining. Mr Jefferson himself, the Vice President, the oldest in Service of them all, was but a young and a new Man, in comparison with the earliest conductors of the cause of the Country; the real Founders and legitimate Fathers of the American Republick. The most of them had been but a very few years in public Business, and a large proportion of these were of a Party which had been opposed to the Revolution, at least in the beginning of it.
If I were called to estimate the divisions among the People of America, as Mr Burke did those of the People of England; I Should Say that one full third were averse to the Revolution; These retaining that over weaning fondness in which they had been educated for the English could not cordially like the French indeed they most heartily  detested them   An opposite third, conceived  an hatred of the English and gave themselves up to an enthusiastic gratitude to France. The middle third composed principally of the Yeomanry the soundest part of the Nation and always averse to War, were rather luke warm both to England and France; and Sometimes Stragglers from them and Sometimes the whole body, united with the first or the last third according to Circumstances.
The depredations of France upon our Commerce, and her Insolence to our Ambassadors and even to the Government, united for a Short time, though with infinite reluctance, the second third with the first, and produced that Burst of applause to the Administration in which you concurred though it gave So much Offence to Mr Randolph. Nor to him alone, I assure you. It appeared much offence to Mr Randolph. Nor to him alone, I assure you. It appeared to me then and has appeared ever Since, that a great Majority of the People of the United States and even in New England in their hearts disapproved of those Addresses, as much as they did of those pompous Escorts, public dinners, and childish Festivals, which tormented me much more than they did them. They thought that such things led to Monarchy and Aristocracy as well as to a long and interminable War. A War with France our Sister Republick; and a War with anybody must bring Expences and Taxes. Those hozannas moreover excited Envy and bitter Jealousies in many Breasts in the first Class whose Names I will not mention at present.
National defence is one of the Cardinal Duties of a Statesman. On this head, I recollect nothing, with which to reproach myself. The Subject has always been near my heart.  The delightfull Imaginations of universal and perpetual Peace, have often amused, but never been credited by me. From the year 1755 to this day almost three Score years, I have thought a Naval force, the most natural, Safe, efficatious and œconomical Bulwark for this Country. In 1775 I laboured night and day to lay the Foundation of a Navy, and in the four last Years of the last century I hesitated at no expence to purchase Navy Yards, to collect timber, to build Ships; and Sspared no Pains to Select Officers. And what was the Effect? No part of my Administration was So unpopular: not only in the Western, the Southern and Middle States, but in all New England, and Strange to tell, even in Marblehead, Salem, Newbury Port and Boston. The little Army, the Fortifications The Manufactures of Arms and Ammunition were all unpopular. They were the Reign of Terror. They were to introduce Monarchy and Aristocracy. “John Adams and John Jay were Sold to Great Britain.”
In this critical State of Things; when Virginia and Kentucky, too nearly in Unison with the other Southern and Western States, were menacing a Seperation; when Insurrection was flaming in Pennsylvania; When Baltimore at the head of one half of Maryland was glowing with Opposition When the two great Interests in New York headed by the Clintons and Livingstones were united with Colonel Burr General Gates and their little band, in Open Opposition to the Administration and the Contest with France; when the Administration was threatened even in the Town of Boston, with—I will not Say at present by whom, nor with what: there was not one Man in either house of Congress, of the then majority, nor in any executive department of Government, who was not chargeable with the grossest Ignorance of the Nation, which you impute to the North and South before and Since the Revolution, nor one who had any Experience of foreign affairs. Never was any Majority more grossly deceived in their Opinion of their own importance and Influence; No! not Napoleon, when he undertook the Conquest of Russia,
Had the Administration persevered in the War against France, it would have been turned out at the Election of 1800, by two Votes to one. Had Washington himself with his transcendant popularity and all the fascination of his name been a Candidate, he would have undergone the Same Fate.
The democratical Societies affiliated without Number and concatenated to an unknown Extent had long been laying their Trains to explode Washington, to Sacrifice Adams and bring in Jefferson. The Population in the Southern and middle States had increased and their Votes with it to an astonishing degree. Yet all these Things were unknown to the ruling Majority: or if partially known, they were not Sufficiently considered. Their Self love deluded them to believe what they wished to be true.
Washington was aware of this and prudently retreated. But what had he done before left the Chair? Elsworth the firmest Pillar of his whole Administration in the Senate, he had promoted to the High Office of Chief Justice of the United States; King he had Sent Ambassador to London; Strong was pleased to resign as well as Cabot. Hamilton had fled from his unpopularity to the Barr in New York; Ames to that in Boston; And Murray was ordered by Washington to Holland. The utmost Efforts of Elsworth King and Strong in the Senate had scarcely been Sufficient to hold the head of Washingtons Administration above Water during the whole of  his Eight years.
And how was I elected? By a Majority of one or at most Two Votes. And was this a Majority Strong enough to Support a War? especially against France? Mr Madison can now Scarcely Support a War against England a much more atrocious Offender, elected as he was and Supported as he is by two thirds of the Votes. And what was my Support in the Senate Mr Goohue from Massachusetts. Of this man I will Say nothing. Let the World Speak. Mr Sedgwick, without dignity, never able to win the complacency or command the Attention of his Hearers in either house, but ever ready to meet in private Caucusses and Secret Intrigues to oppose me. Mr Langdon of New Hampshire was constant in Opposition, as was one from Rhode Island. Had Elsworth, Strong and King been there the World would never have heard of the disgracefull Cabals and unconstitutional proceedings of that Body.
You Say, Sir, that my Missions to France, the great Shade in my “Presidential Escutchion, paralized the Public Feeling, and weakened the foundations of the goodly Edifice” I agree, Sir, that they did, with that third part of the People, who had been averse to the Revolution; and who were then and always before and Since, governed by English Prejudices; and who then and always before and Since constantly sighed for a War with France and an Allyance with Great Britain; But with none Others. The House would have fallen with a much more violent Explosion if those Missions to France had not been instituted.
I wish not to fatigue you, with too long a Letter at once: but, Sir I will defend my Missions to France as long as I have an Eye to direct my hand or a finger to hold my pen. They were the most disinterested And meritorious Actions of my Life. I reflect upon them with So much satisfaction that I desire No other Inscription on my Grave Stone than “Here lies John Adams who took upon himself the Responsability of the Peace with France in the Year 1800.
In the meantime I recommend to you, Sir, to enquire into the State of this Nation at that time, and into the State of Europe, especially of France and Great Britain, and the State of our Relations with both. And to consider at the Same time, the important question; Whether it is our Interest to inlist under the Banners of either against the other: or to Support at all hazards and at every Sacrifice our Independance of all?
I am, Sir, with great Esteem, and Sincere Affection / your Friend
John Adams.
P.S. I beg your Pardon Sir for Sending you a Letter in this indecent Condition but I have no Secretary, Clerk or Amanuensis.
J.A.


Title: To John Adams from Timothy Alden, 1 February 1815
From: Alden, Timothy
To: Adams, John

					President Adams.Sir,
					New York, 1 Feb. 1815.

				I hope you will excuse the liberty I have taken in dedicating the first volume of my biographical and historical Collection to you. Taught from my earliest years to cherish an exalted opinion of the distinguished services which, under Providence, you have rendered to our beloved country, I took a peculiar pleasure in prefixing your name to a work, which is the fruit of much patient investigation and laborious research.Should you honour me with a line excusing the freedom I have taken and at the same time making any remark upon my novel kind of publication, please to direct the same to me at Meadville in Pennsylvania, where I am shortly to reside.Wishing you all the blessings of the present life and an inheritance in the kingdom, which infinite grace has prepared, and where you shall receive the crown of unfading glory, I am, sir, with great respect, your hum. sert

					Timothy Alden.


Title: To John Adams from Catherine Elizabeth Murray Rush, 1 February 1815
From: Rush, Catherine Elizabeth Murray
To: Adams, John

					Respected Sir.
					Washington. February 1st. 1815.

				Your favor of the 11th. of December to Mr Rush, brought by Mr Gray, I had the pleasure (as sole private secretary to the former) to open, and therefore venture upon the liberty of acknowledging.My husband being in his sick chamber, had not the gratification to see Mr Gray when he was kind enough to call; I saw him but for a moment, but we both anticipate the pleasure of seeing much more of him, should he not return to new England before my invalid husband gets released from his prison. I am happy to think there is now some prospect of this being soon the case. His convalescence has been very tedious; and he is, this week, suffering under blisters, applied to remove an obstinate cough, from which, however we expect the best effects.I share Sir, in the pleasure he derives from all your letters, and this must be taken in part as my motive for answering one in his name. He desires his most respectful and affectionate remembrance to you and with a large portion of mine to Mrs Adams I have to beg your acceptance / of my highest respect.

					Catharine E Rush