Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 1 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Dr Sir
Quincy Dec. 1. 1813

You have in your late Excursion made So many Conquests among the learned, the Scientifical, the powerfull and the beautiful: Aye! especially and above all, among the beautifull!, that I expect it will be very rarely, and by great favour that I shall in future be honoured with a Letter from Barneveldt. I shall not wonder. Indeed I am so poor a Correspondent that I have long wondered at your patience forebearance long Suffering and perseverance, in Writing to me, at all.
How long? and how often? have you asked questions about my Copy of “Il Consolato del Mare.”? The Book was misplaced. It has been hunted a year or two. The day before Yesterday George Washington Adams, oldest Son of John Quincy Adams found it.
I have owned it, forty Seven Years. I never heard of another Copy, in America. Judge Davis borrowed it of me, and produced it as an Authority in Support of his decree in his Court. The Lawyers gazed, as at a Comet.
My Book was printed “Tot Leyden, By Joannes du Vivie, en Isaac Severinus, 1704.
It has, as I Suppose, a faithful and elegant Translation into Dutch.
“Het Consulaat Van De Zee,” &c
There are then illustrium Virorum Judicia de hoc Libro, qui vulgo dicitur Consolato del Mare. Such as Arnoldus Vinnius Antonius Mornacius, Josephus Gibellinus, Rutgerus Rulant, Johannes Marquardus, Hugo Grotius, Ansaldus de Ansaldis, Cardinalis del Luca
The Translation into Dutch, from the Italian and Catalonian is by Eccellentissimo Signore, il Signore, Abraham Woesterveen Jurisconsulto egregio &c.
But the most curious part of the Book is yet to be mentioned. Nothing less, than such an Anarchy, or Depotism, Such Pyracies and Robberies, Such depredations Spoliations and outrages upon the Ocean as Mankind has experienced for these twenty years past, could have produced this Consulato del Mare. It Seems to have been three Centuries, in forming; Say from  A.D. 1000. to A.D 1300
Ove, e quando li presenti Capitoli Fur concessi, i quai trattano di casi di Mare, et di Mercantie.
Roma, Acri, Magiorica, Pisa, Marsilia, Almeria, Genova Brandi, Rodi, Morea, Constantinopoli, Alemania, Parisi, Constantinopoli again in 1262, Soria, Cipro, Majorca.
In all these places and by all these Governments of Emperors Kings and Republicks was a Solemn Oath taken to observe these Laws of the Consolato del Mare. The Forms and dates of their Oaths are recorded in this Volume.
It is time that another “Het Consulaat Van de Zee Should be made and Sworn. All Nations ought to Swear Allegiance to the old Emperor Neptune and his prime Minister Æolus, and renounce and adjure all other Pretenders to any part or parcell of his dominion.
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Horatio Gates Spafford, 1 December 1813
From: Spafford, Horatio Gates
To: Adams, John

Esteemed Friend—
Albany, 12 Mo. 1, 1813.

Since I was favored with thy esteemed favor of a late date, I have received a Letter from thy friend Josiah Quincy, who also informs that I may send a Gazetteer to the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, directed to thee. I now avail myself of that privilege; & I take the liberty also to send one for thy Son in Russia. I am very grateful for the friendly sentiments expressed in thy Letter. It is my ambition to devote myself to my country, abstracted from all parties or associations of men, other than considerations of respect or contempt for its friends or its foes.
I am afraid that I obtrude upon thy attention too often, & will say but little, in order to lessen the sum of my transgression. With the most reverential & hearty sentiments of esteem & respect, thy friend,

Horatio Gates Spafford.


Title: From John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 3 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
Quincy Decr. 3. 13

The Proverbs of the old greek Poets, are as Short and pithy as any of Solomon or Franklin. Hesiod has several. His Αθανατους μεν πρωτα θεους νομω, ως δiακεitai
Τiμα. Honour the Gods established by Law. I know not how We can escape Martyrdom, without a discreet Attention to this præcept. You have Suffered, and I have Suffered more than you, for want of a strict if not a due observance of this Rule.
There is another Oracle of this Hesiod, which requires a kind of dance upon a tight rope, and a Slack rope too, in Philosophy and Theology
Πίστiς δ’ ἄρα ὁμῶς καὶ ἀπίστιας ὤλεσαν ἀνδρας
If believing too little or too much, is So fatal to Mankind what will become of Us all?
In Studying the Perfectability of human Nature and its progress towards perfection, in this World, on this Earth, (remember that) I have met many curious things, and interesting Characters.
About three hundred years ago, There appeared a number of Men of Letters, who appeared to endeavour to believe neither too little, nor too much. They laboured to imitate the Hebrew Archers who could Shoot to an hairs breadth. The Pope and his Church believed too much: Luther and his Church believed too little. This little band was headed by three great Scholars, Erasmus, Vives, and Budeus. This Triumvirate is said to have been at the head of the Republick of Letters, in that Age. Had Condorcet been Master of his Subject, I fancy he would have taken more Notice in his History of the progress of Mind, of these Characters. Have you their Writings? I wish I had. I Shall confine myself at present to Vives. He wrote Commentaries on the City of God of St. Augustine, Some parts of which were censured by the Doctors of the Louvain as too bold and too free. I know not, whether the following passage of the learned Spaniard was among the Sentiments condemned, or not.
“I have been much afflicted,” Says Vives, “when I have Seriously considered, how diligently, and with what exact care, the Actions of Alexander, Hannibal, Scipio Pompey, Cæsar and other Commanders: and the Lives of Socrates Plato Aristotle, and other Phylosophers, have been written and fixed in an everlasting Remembrance, So that there is not the least danger they can ever be lost: but then the Acts of the Apostles and Martyrs and Saints of our religion, and of the Affairs of the rising and established Church, being involved in much darkness, are almost totally unknown, though they are of so much greater Advantage, than the Lives of the Phylosophers, or great Generals, both as to the improvement of our knowledge and Practice. For, what is written of these holy men, except a very few things is very much corrupted and defaced, with the mixture of many fables; while the Writer, indulging his own humour, doth not tell Us what the Saint did, but what the Historian would have had him done: and the fancy of the Writer dictates the Life and not the truth of things.” And again, Vives Says
“There have been men, who have thought it a great piece of Piety, to invent Lies for the sake of religion.”
The great Cardinal Barronius too, confesses “There is nothing, which seems so much neglected to this day, as a true and certain Account of the Affairs of the Church, collected with an exact diligence. And that I may Speak of the more Ancient, it is very difficult to find any of them, who have published Commentaries on this Subject which have hit the truth in all points.”
Canus, too another Spanish Prelate of great name Says “I Speak it with grief, and not by way of reproach, Laertius has written the lives of the Philosophers, with more care and industry, than the Christians have those of the Saints; Suetonius has represented the Lives of the Cæsars with much more truth and Sincerity, than the Catholicks have the Affairs, I will not Say of the Emperors, but even those of the Martyrs, holy Virgins and Confessors. For they have not concealed the Vices nor the very Suspicions of Vice, in good and commendable Philosophers or Princes, and in the worst of them, they discover the very colours or Appearances of Virtue. But the greatest part of our Writers, either follow the Conduct of their Affections, or industriously fain many things; So that I, for my part am very often both weary and ashamed of them; because I know they have thereby brought nothing of Advantage to the Church of Christ, but very much inconvenience.”
Vives and Canus are Moderns, but Arnobius the Converter of Lactantius was ancient. He says “But neither could all that was done be written or arrive at the knowledge of all men. Many of our great Actions being done by obscure Men, and those who had no knowledge of Letters: and if some of them are committed to Letters and Writings; yet even here, by the malice of the Devils, and of men like them, whose great design and Study it is to intercept and ruin this truth, by interpolating, or adding Some things to them, or by changing or taking out Words, Syllables, or Letters, they have put a Stop to the Faith of Wise Men, and corrupted the truth of things.”
Indeed, Mr Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism, which Greeks Romans, Hebrews, and Christian Factions, above all the Catholicks, have not fraudulently imposed upon the Publick? Miracles after Miracles have rolled down in Torrents, Wave Succeeding Wave, in the Catholic Church from the Council of Nice, and long before, to this day. Aristotle, no doubt, thought his “Οὔτε πᾶσα πιστέυοντες, Οὔτε πᾶσιν ἀπιστοῦντες,” very wise and very profound: but what is its Worth? What Man, Woman or Child, ever believed, every Thing, or nothing?
Oh! That Priestley could live again! and have leisure and means. An Enquirer after Truth, who had neither time nor means might request him to search and research for answers to a few Questions.
1. Have We more than two Witnesses of the Life of Jesus? Mathew and John?
2. Have We one Witness to the Existence of Mathews Gospel in the first Century?
3. Have We one Witness of the Existence of John’s Gospell in the first Century?
4. Have We one Witness of the Existence of Marks Gospell in the first Century?
5. Have We one Witness of the Existence of Lukes Gospell in the first Century?
6. Have We any Witness of the existence of St. Thomas’s Gospell, that is the Gospell of the Infancy in the first Century?
7. Have We any Evidence of the Existence of the Acts of the Apostles in the first Century?
8. Have We any Evidence of the Existence of the Supplement to the Acts of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, or Paul and Tecle, in the first Century?
Here I was interrupted, by a new book, Chataubriands Travels in Greece Palestine and Egypt and by a Lung Fever, with which the amiable Companion my Life has been violently And dangerously attacked.
December  13. I have fifty more questions to put to Priestley: but must adjourn them to a future Opportunity.
I have read Chateaubriand with as much delight, as I ever read Bunyan Pilgrims Progress,  Robinson Crusoes Travels or Gullivers; or Whitefields; or Westleys Life; or the Life of St. Francis, St Anthony or St Ignatius Loyaula. A Work of infinite Learning, perfectly well written, a Magazine of Information: but an enthusiastic, biggotted, Superstitious Roman Catholic throughout. If I were to indulge in jealous criticism and Conjecture, I Should Suspect, that there had been an Œcuemenical Counsel of Pope Cardinals and Bishops, and that this Traveller has been employed at their expence, to make this tour, to lay a foundation for the resurrection of the Catholic Hierarchy in Europe.
Have you read La Harpes Course de Litterature in 15. Volumes? Have you read St. Pierres Studies of Nature?
I am now reading the Controversy between Voltaire and Nonotte.
Our Friend Rush has given Us for his last Legacy, an Analysis of Some of the diseases of the Mind. Johnson Said We are all more or less mad; and who is or has been more mad than Johnson?
I know of no Philosopher, or Theologian, or Moralist ancient or modern more profound; more infallible than Whitefield, if the Anecdote that I have heard be true.
He began; “Father Abraham”! with his hands and Eyes gracefully directed to the Heavens as I have more than once Seen him; “Father Abraham,” “who have you there with you”? have you Catholicks?” No. “Have you Protestants.” No. “Have you Churchmen.” No. Have you Dissenters.” No. “Have you Presbyterians”? No. “Quakers”? No. Anabaptists”? No. “Who have you then? “Are you alone”? No.
“My Brethren! You have the Answer to all these questions in the Words of my Text, “He who feareth God and worketh Righteousness, Shall be accepted of him.”
Allegiance to the Creator and Governor of the Milky Way and the Nebulæ, and Benevolence to all his Creatures, is my Religion. Si quid novisti rectius istis, Candidus imperti.—
I am as ever
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to Richard Rush, 12 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Rush, Richard

Dear Rush
Quincy Decr. 12. 13

I have nothing to Say at present to that enchanting Lady who So easily drew my Correspondent from his Letter: but that if I Should ever See her, I Shall not be contented with the Vandallik Custom So fashionable in these degenerate days, of Shaking Hands, but Shall claim the Priviledge granted by the civilized Ladies of France, 30 Years ago, to 70 Years. And I hereby Solemnly invite her to come and See me, and bring her Husband with her, that he may be an Eye Witness of the Liberties I will take.
In the infinite multitude of my thoughts concerning Wilkinson and Hampton, I Scarcely dare to commit one of them to writing. Do Heros want Health? did Alexander, Cæsar, Zingis, Frederick, Cromwell, Charles 12th complain of Sickness? Did Saxe himself, tho carried in a Litter and dying of a Consumption, complain? and apologize? Did Prince Charles whine about his Gout? The Minds of Heros are too intent on their great Employments, their Muscles are too much agitated, they are necessarily too temperate to be Sick.
No man knows what Valour Signifies. Vanity is more intelligible. Ambition is too Sublime a Passion, for every mind.
Did Hannibal or Bonaparte, ever propose So mean and corrupt a bargain as that to C. C. Pinkney to bring him in, if he would join in bringing in Jefferson? When a Government is reduced to the necessity of depending on Burrs, Ned Livingstones, Bidwells Skinners &c &c &c, that Government is to be pittied.
Your Father has left Us an immortal Legacy, on the distempers of the Mind. I know not whether our disease is of the Mind or Body or both: but one thing I know, it is the Hydrophobia. Can you cure Us of it? I will undertake to demonstrate, that every disappointment, Defeat, Disgrace Disaster, Reverse, Distress and Vexation We have experienced, has been caused by the landed aversion to Water Force. Why are We not more decidedly Superior on Lake Ontario? On St. Lawrence River? On Lake Champlain? On St. Regis River? On Chazy River? and on every River, Lake and Water that touches our Frontier? A trifling Expence would have Saved more Lives and more millions; I will not Say than Canada is worth.
How is it, that three or four miserable Gunboats have disarranged the Plans and defeated the operations of two great Armies commanded by two great Generals?
I am not able to comprehend the Military Science of these great Generals though directed by the great Armstrong. It has been a military Maxim, not to leave a Strong Fortress, and a powerful Garrison in your rear. When I learned that We had left Kingston and Prescott behind Us, I was very apprehensive that We Should be Swamped.
Congress may appoint Committees of Inquiry: The President may institute Courts Marshall: and you may Shoot Hull, Wilkinson or Hampton, or all of them: but in my Opinion, if any Body is Shot, they ought to be those who have neglected the command of the Lakes and Rivers.
You are reading the History of the Revolution, and you do well. But your Father would tell you, there is no History of it extant, and never will be. You have found two or three Genius’s. Warren, Montgomery, Green or Arnold, perhaps. Knox however, contributed, as much as any, to effectual Service.
No very Splendid Genius has yet Started in this War, at Land. Boyd and Harrison have conducted the most correctly: but their merited Laurells will not be decreed them, because they were Officers of my Appointment.
Nature must have its perfect Work: the Business of the World will do itself. This Nation must be purified in the furnace of Affliction. Politicians and Warriors, at the most and at the best, are but Midwives to watch the throws of nature and assist a little in ushering into the World, great Events. When this War Shall have been continued Some Years longer, and the Nation reduced to despair, or excited to a red hot rage with one another and against their Enemy; Some great Genius Some powerful mind will arise, and by gaining Splendid Victories in bloody Battles will carry all before him. Mankind cannot resist the Glory of Battles and Conquests. Whether this Hero is an honest Man, or one of those whose high minded Ambition Sacrifices all things to his own Ambition Interest; he will be equally dangerous to the Liberties of his Country; for he will do what he pleases. Watch him then Ye young Men: and “check and ballance him.
Is not this as infallible as one of Merlins prophecies?
I expect now, to be tortured all Winter, to read eternal Speeches in Congress repeating over and over again a thousand times the common place nonsense that We have read 20 times before in the News Papers. The times require Ships and Cannon not Tropes and Figures.
I have read the Message, of the President which flew from Washington to Quincy on the Wings of the wind. It is written with his masterly Pen and his deliberate mind. A candid Statement, in chaste and elegant Style. It is not in that mortal, more than this, to command success; but as far as I can See he has deserved it. Courage! The Tide will turn. Cure the Hydrophobia, and all will be well. Thy Friend
John Adams


Title: From John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 19 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
Quincy December 19. 1813

Ridento dicere Verum, quid vetat. I must make you and myself merry or melancholly, by a little more Phylosophical Speculation about the formidable Subject of Aristocracy.
Not long after General Dearborns return to Boston from the Army, a violent Alarm was excited and Spread in Boston and through the country, by a report at first only Secretly whispered in private circles that an Affair of Love was commencing between the General and Madam Bowdoin the virtuous and amiable Relict of my Friend and your Ambassador James Bowdoin. The Surprise, the Astonishment, were universal and the indignation very general. The exclamations were in every mouth. “Impossible”! “It cannot be”! “It is a false report”. “It is too bad”! It is a Scandalous fiction”! “It is a malicious Calumny against Mrs. Bowdoin”! “Would that Lady disgrace her Husband?” She was herself, a Bowdoin: “Would she degrade her own and her Husbands Name and Blood”? “Would she disgrace the illustrious Name of Bowdoin which has been so long famous in France”? “Would she disgrace her Husband who has been an Ambassador? And her Father in Law, who was her Uncle, and had been Governor”?
This is no exaggeration. I have heard all these exclamations. Have you read Cecilia, or the Scottish Chiefs? Is there any thing in the Character of the Delville Family, or in any of the Scotch Thanes more outrageously Aristocratical, than these popular Sentiments, in this our Democratical Country?
I undertook like a genuine Knight Errant to be the Champion of the Lady: and Said Some things very Shocking to Some Companies. To some very grave Ladies I said “Why; Madam, if Mrs Bowdoins Object is Love and domestic comfort, The General is an healthy, robust and personable Man; which her former Husband was not. If her Object is Ambition, She will advance her Degree and condition by this Alliance; for neither Governors nor Ambassadors nor Earls hold So high a Rank as a Secretary at War and Commander in Chief, of all the Armies of a great Nation. Her Object cannot be Wealth: for She has enough; but if it was, Collectorships and other Offices, must have given the General a Competency.
Till very lately the French descent of the Bowdoins has been known to very few and never boasted by anybody. But it has been published and proclaimed by Mr William Jenks, Secretary to the Board of Trustees of Bowdoin Colledge in his Eulogy on Mr Bowdoin. This Eulogy Mrs Bowdoin, I presume has Sent to you as well as to me. If not, I will Send you an extract.
The Race of Baudouins, it is true has long been notable in France. The Name I believe is to be found among the Crusaders to Jerusalem, when, no doubt they were Orthodox Catholicks: but afterwards, in the Crusades against the Albigenses, they were Suspected on both Sides. In all the Seiges and in all the battles, there were many Nobles and Cavaliers among the Sectaries. The Counts De Foix, De Comminges, De Besiers, De Bearn, and almost all the Lords who inhabited, towards the Pyrennes, were of the Sect, or at least favoured and protected it. The Count de Thoulouse, without declaring himself a Manichean, (So they called the Albigenses as well as the Waldenses) had for the Sect, and for their Preachers a respect, which bordered on extravagance, and laid the foundation of all the misfortunes, of his princely house. Baudouin, Brother of the Count De Thoulouse, was hanged on a Tree by the Hereticks, notwithstanding the Tenderness of the Family for them, and though he begged for time to confess and receive the Communion.
The Count De Thoulouse (Baudouin) acted a mysterious part. though he protested his orthodox faith, yet he obstinately protected the Hereticks. He made Promisses, but could not determine to fullfill them. The Pope innocent the third, interrested himself in his favour, and arrested, for some time, the Proceedings of the Legates against him. But he knew not how to take Advantage of these dispositions. Without Firmness, without Wisdom, without Prudence, he could not conquer the Secret Inclination he had for Heresy; nor foresee that he was commencing the misfortunes of his Family; nor that the Ambition of the neighbouring Potentate, would soon compleat its destruction. A Miracle it Seems was wrought for the destruction of this Family. Simon de Monfort with only Eight hundred Men, and One thousand Fantassins attacked the Army of the King of Arragon, and the Count de Tholouse, which was of one hundred thousand men, and totally defeated them.
This I learn from Nonotte, the Scourge of Voltaire, whom Voltaire Scourges in his turn with a long Catalogue of “Sottises”. This is however but a ray of the historical Glory of the name. Baudouin the eighth Count of Flanders was Emperor of Constantinople in 1204. Baudouin the 2d, was the last latin Emperor of Constantinople in 1228. A Baudouin was King of Jerusalem in the 12th Century and Saladin or Noraddin his Enemy Said he had not left his equal. The name has been distinguished in Letters as well as in War and Politics. A Baudouin was Solicited by Henry 3, then Duke of Anjou, to write in Justification of the Massacre of St. Bartholemy. But he was too honest a man. Another Baudouin, who died in 1650 translated all the Classicks and wrote many other Things.
All these litterary, civil, political, millitary, religious, noble, royal and imperial honours are now to be devolved on the Bowdoin Family of Massachusetts. But the name is extinct in the male Line. To repaire this breach a law of the State has been procured, to alter the Name of a Sisters Son from Temple to Bowdoin, and to him the Family Estate is given. Sir John Temple too the Father of that Son has poured a Stream of English noble blood into the mighty river of Bowdoin. A splendid Funeral Sermon of Mr Gardner has been printed “On the Death of Elizabeth Lady Temple.” The name of Bowdoin is immortalized, by a flourishing University founded by the Family. You have immortalized the Name by making an Ambassador of it; and by making a Cousin, another Ambassador.
Do you call this natural or artificial Aristocracy? Aristocracy it is most certainly; for the Name of Bowdoin in this State has more influence than the name of Russell or Howard has in England. So have the names of Livingston and Clinton in New York. We had a General Sterling, but that Title would not Satisfy. He must be called Lord Sterling, and his Daughter “Lady Kitty Duer”. Our Russell Family were wear the Arms, and claim Relation to the Dukes of Bedford. Our Quincys are descended from Saer de Quincy, Marquis of Winchester, who extorted Magna Charta from King John, and whose Signature to that Instrument, “Sayer de Winton” you have seen in the British Museum and in Blacstones Copy. General Talmadge of Connecticutt is by Law a Member of the British House of Peers. And who knows but We may have Lord and Ladies Yrujo’s from Spain and Lord and Ladies Mansfeilds from Great Britain? Aristocracy like Waterfowl, dives for Ages and then rises with brighter Plumage. It is a Subtle Venom that diffuses itself unseen, over Oceans and Continents, and tryumphs over time. If I could prevent its deleterious influence I would put it all into “The Hole” of Calcutta: but as this is impossible as it is a Phœnix that rises again out of its own Ashes, I know no better Way than to chain it in a “hole, by itself” and place a Watchfull Centinel on each Side of it.
An hundred other foreign Aristocracies have Sown and are Sowing their Seeds in this County: and We have an Abundance of them Springing up in this Country not from Virtues or Talents so much as from Banks and Land Jobbing. I am as ever yours
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from John Pintard, 22 December 1813
From: Pintard, John,Miller, Samuel
To: Adams, John

Sir,
New–York,  22d.  Decembr.  1813

I have the honour to inform you, that at a Meeting of the New–York Historical Society, held on the twelfth day of October last you were elected an HONORARY MEMBER of that Institution.

By Order of the Society,John Pintard Rec. Sec.in behalf ofSamuel Miller D.D.Correspond. Secretary.


Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 24 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Dear Sir
Quincy December 24th 1813

If you were in any spot between New Orleans and Passamaquaddy, I should write you every day If I could but the communication now, is so uncertain, and so dangerous, that I never write without fear of hurting you or the public. You almost from your cradle and I from 16 years of age have been Heluones Librorum. We have hunted books in Boston, in Bordeaux, in Paris, in Nantes L’orient and Brest, in Amsterdam the hague and Leyden; in London Berlin and Petersburg but I think neither of us can boast of much discriminating judgment in our choice. We have many good books; but thousands that are comparatively worth very little. I once bought Muratori and Byzantine historians, at the same shop where I might have Fabricius. I would now give more for it than for all of them. I have bought Smollets, Humes, Rapins & Tyrrels &c &c &c. I would now give all of them for Rymers Fœdera, I would now give more for the Parliamentary history, and the debates in Parliament than for hundreds of volumes of English, French, Dutch, and German Tracts. I was taught, and practiced at the bar the precept “Petere Fontes,” but how I forgot it in my travels, and you in yours I know not.
I perceive my Son you are a great student in the bible: I know you have been so a long time; perhaps all your life. But have you studied the Canon of Scriptures? its history? its evidence, its authority? In what sense do you understand the inspiration, the infallibility, and the sanctity of the books of the old and new testament? How far do you believe them inspired? and how far not? Have you considered what it is to be understood in a literal sense, and what in a figurative? What is history? and what is allegory? Have you read Lardner and Jones? Have you considered  what it is the darkness of the 3 first Centuries, and the false light of all that followed? Do you believe Solomons song the Apocalyps, and St Jude to be Canonical, inspired and infallible.
I wish you would procure the books, I have mentioned for your future use. I have a million things to say, But, Our liberal christians, and biblical Criticks, are setting up Alexander Hamilton, Fisher Ames and Theophilus Parsons, as great authorities in support of Christianity. I dare say that not one of the three knew more of the argument, than they did of Shastaism, Lamaism, or Koranism.

JA.


Title: To John Adams from John Taylor, 24 December 1813
From: Taylor, John
To: Adams, John

Sir
Virginia—Hazelwood—Port Royal—Decr.  24. 1813

Orator, and the printed Sheets you speak of in your letter of the 12th. instant, were, as you conjecture, written by me. Orator, published in the newspapers several years past, received the form of a book for the benefit of an indigent family; and the whole edition, or near it, has been sold. The paper binding and printing were all bad, and the price high. The same people have lately contracted to print for one bookseller, 3000 copies of a new edition, at a less price, and to be better executed;  and to receive also the benefit of a hasty revision, attended with some few additions. As soon as this new edition comes out, I shall be careful to do myself the honour of sending you a copy.
The printed sheets were forwarded to you by my consent, and contain nearly the whole work. The preface accounts for its appearance. Conscious of an ardency of temper, some what unfavourable to the discernment of truth, I intended to have postponed its publication for the sake of a revision at a more advanced age; but several indications both in the body politick and in my own constitution, deprived the work of this advantage. If such an ardour has led me into a single disrespectful expression, towards you Sir, it has violated a long, avowed and continuing impression upon my mind. Your works were selected, as in my judgment contending the most ably of any I had ever seen, for some doctrines I intended to controvert; and also as furnishing sundry concurrrences of opinion as to others, for which I proposed to  maintain. The acknowledgment of their weight in this second view, evinces no disposition to question it in the first, except for the end of serving the cause of truth by a comparison of ideas. But I am not surprised at learning that I have occasionally mistaken your meaning; it was an unavoidable consequence of the variety in human perception, and of an inferiour stock of erudition to that to be comprehended.
Voluminous controversies would give as little pleasure to one turned of three score, as to a father of the revolution in his seventy ninth year; nor is there in this case any occasion for them; because the explanation you propose to favour me with, shall be candidly considered by myself, and, with your permission, published in the newspapers; or appear as an appendix to the book, should it reach to a second edition.
Could my poor enquiries draw any comments from you it would be a great benefit to the publick, and a great honour to Sir (with the highest esteem and respect) / Your most obedient Servant

John Taylor


Title: From John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 25 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Jefferson, Thomas

Dear Sir
Quincy Decr 25th. 1813

Answer my Letters at your Leisure. Give yourself no concern. I write as for a refuge and protection against Ennui.
The fundamental Principle of all Phylosophy and all Christianity is “Rejoice Always in all Things.” Be thankfull at all times for all good and all that We call evil.” Will it not follow, that I ought to rejoice and be thankful that Priestley has lived? Aye! That Voltaire has lived? That Gibbon has lived? That Hume has lived, though a conceited Scotchman? That Bolingbroke has lived, tho’ a haughty arrogant Supercilious Dogmatist? That Burke and Johnson have lived, though Superstitious Slaves or Self deceiving Hypocrites both. Is it not laughable to hear Burke call Bolingbroke a Superficial Writer? To hear him ask, “Who ever read him through?” Had I been present I would have answered him “I, I, myself, I have read him through, more than fifty years ago, and more than five times in my Life, and once within five years past. And in my opinion the epithat ‘Superficial’ belongs to you and your Friend Johnson more than to him. I might say much more. But I believe Burke and Johnson to have been, as polilitical Christians, as Leo. 10th.

I return to Priestley, though I have great Complaints against him for personal Injuries and Persecution, at the Same time that I forgive it all, and hope and pray that he may be pardoned for it all, above. Dr Broklesby an intimate Friend and convivial Companion of Johnson told me, that Johnson died in Agonies of Horror of Annihilation, and all the accounts We have of his death corroborate this account of Brocklesby. Dread of Annihilation? Dread of Nothing? A dread of Nothing I should think would be no dread at all. Can there be any real Substantial rational fear of nothing? Were you on your deathbed, and in your last moments informed by demonstration or Revelation that you would cease to think and to feel, at your dissolution, Should you be terrified? You might be ashamed of yourself for having lived So long, to bear the proud Man Contumely. You might be ashamed of your Maker, and compare him to a little Girl amusing herself her Brothers and Sisters by blowing Bubbles in Soap Sudds. You might compare him to Boys Sporting with Crakers and Rocketts; or to Men employed in making more artificial Fire Works; or to Men and Women at Farces and Operas, or Sadlers Wells Exploits; or to Politicians in their Intrigues; or to Heroes in their Butcheries; or to Popes in their Devilisms. But what Should you fear? Nothing. Emori nolo sed me mortuum esse nihil estimo.
To return to Priestley. You could make a more luminous Book than his upon “the Doctrines of Heathen Phylosophers compared with those of Revelation.” Why has he not given Us a more Satisfactory Account of the Pythagorean Phylosophy and Theology? He barely names Ocellus, who lived long before Plato. His Treatise of Kings and Monarchy has been destroyed, I conjecture by Platonic Phylosophers, Platonic Jews or Christians, or by fraudulent Republicans or Despots. His Treatise of The Universe has been preserved. He labours to prove the Eternity of the World. The Marquiss D’Argens translated it, in all its noble Simplicity. The Abby Batteux has since given another translation. D’Argens not only explains the Text, but sheds more light upon the antient Systems. His remarks are so many Treatisses, which devellop the concatenation of antient opinions. The most essential Ideas of the Theology, of the Physics and of the Morality of the antients are clearly explained: and their different Doctrines, compared with one another, and with the modern discoveries. I wish I owned this Book and 100,000 more than I want every day, now when I am almost incapable of making any Use of them. No doubt he informs Us that Pythagoras was a great Traveller.
Priestley barely mentions Timæus: but it does not appear that he had read him. Why has he not given Us an Account of him and his Book? He was before Plato and gave him the Idea of his Timæus, and much more of his Phylosophy. After his Master he maintained the existence of Matter: that Matter was capable of receiving all Sorts of forms: that a moving Power agitatated all the Parts of it: and that an Intelligence directed the moving Power; that this Intelligence produced a regular and harmonious World. This Intelligence has seen a Plan, an Idea (Logos) in conformity to which, it wrought, and without which it would not have known what it was about, nor what it wanted to do. This Plan was the Idea; Image or Model, which had represented, to the Supream Intelligence, the World before it existed, which had directed it, in his Action upon the moving Power, and which it contemplated in forming the Elements the Bodies and the World. This Model was distinguished from The Intelligence which produced the World as the Architect is from his plans. He divided, The productive Cause of the World, into a Spirit, which directed the moving Force, and into an Image, which determined it in the choice of the directions which it gave to the moving Force, and the forms which it gave to matter.
I wonder that Priestley haves overlooked this because it is the same Phylosophy with Plato’s and would have shown that the Pythagorean as well as the Platonic Phylosophers probably concurred in the fabrication of the Christian Trinity. Priestley mentions the name of Archytas, but does not appear to have read him; tho he was a Sucessor of Pythagoras, and a great Mathematician, a great Statesman and a great General. John Gram a learned and honourable Dane has given a handsome Edition of his Works with a latin translation, and an ample Account of his Life and Writings. Saleucus The Legislator of Locris and Charondas of Sybaris were Disciples of Pythagoras, and both celebrated to immortality for the Wisdom of their Laws, 500 Years before Christ. Why are those Laws lost? I say the Spirit of Party has destroyed them. Civil, political and ecclesiastical Bigotry. Despotical, monarchical Aristocratical and democratical Fury, have all been employed in this Work of destruction of every Thing that could give Us true light and a clear insight of Antiquity. For every One of these Parties, when possessed of Power, or when they have been Undermost and Struggling to get Uppermost, has been equally prone to every Species of fraud and Violence, and Usurpation.
Why has not Priestley mentioned these Legislators? The Preamble to the Laws of Zaleucus, which is all that remains, is as orthodox Christian Theology as Priestleys: and Christian Benevolence and forgiveness of Injuries almost as clearly expressed.
Priestley ought to have done impartial Justice to Phylosophy and Phylosophers. Phylosophy which is the result of Reason, is the first, the original Revelations of The Creator to his Creature, Man. When this Revelation is clear and certain, by Intuition or necesary Induction, no Subsequent Revelation Supported by Prophecies or Miracles can Supercede it. Phylosophy is not only the love of Wisdom, but the Science of the Universe and its Cause. There is, there was and there will be but one Master of Phylosophy in the Universe. Portions of it, in different degrees are revealed to Creatures. Phylosophy looks with an impartial Eye on all terrestrial religions. I have examined all, as well as my narrow Sphere, my Streightened means and my busy Life would allow me; and the result is, that the Bible is the best book in the World. It contains more of my little Phylosophy than all the Libraries I have seen: and Such Parts of it as I cannot reconcile to my little Phylosophy I postpone for future Investigation.
Priestley ought to have given Us a sketch, of the Religion and Moral of Zoroaster of Sanchoniathon of Confucius, and all the Founders of Religions before Christ, whose Superiority, would from Such a comparison have appeared the more transcendant.
Priestley ought to have told Us, that Pythagoras passed twenty Years, in his Travels in India, in Eygpt, in Chaldea, perhaps in Sodom and Gomorrah, Tyre and Sydon. He ought to have told Us that in India he conversed with the Brahmans and read the Shasta, 5000 Years old, written in the Language of the Sacred Sanscrists with the elegance and Sentiments of Plato. Where is to be found Theology more orthodox or Phylosophy more profound than in the Introduction to the Shasta? “God is one, creator of all, Universal Sphere, without beginning, without End. God governs all the Creation by a general Providence, resulting from his eternal designs.–Search not the Essense and the nature of the Eternal, who is one; your research will be vain and presumptuous. It is enough that, day and night by day, and night by night, you adore his Power, his Wisdom and his Goodness, in his Works.” The Eternal willed, in the plenitude of his Power fullness of time, to communicate of his Essence and of his Splendor, to Beings capable of perceiving it. “They as yet existed not. The Eternal willed, and they were. He created Birma, Vitsnow, and Sib.” These Doctrines, Sublime if ever there were any Sublime, Pythagoras learned in India and taught them to Zaleucus and his other disciplines. He there learned also his Metempsychosis, but this never was popular, never made much progress in Greece or Italy, or any other Country besides India and Tartary, the Region of the Grand immortal Lama: And how does this differ from the Possessions of Demons in Greece and Rome, from the Demon of Socrates from the Worship of Cows and Crocodiles in Egypt and elsewhere. After migrating throw various Animals from Elephants to Serpents according to their behaviour, Souls that at last behaved well became Men and Women, and then if they were good, they went to Heaven. All ended in Heaven if they became virtuous. Who can wonder at the Widow of Malabur. Where is the Lady, who if her faith were without doubt, that she should go to Heaven with her Husband on the one, or migrate into a Toad or a Waspe on the other, would not lay down on the Pile and Set fire to the Fuel? Modifications and disguises of the Metempsichosis that crept into Egypt and Greece and Rome and other Countries. Have you read Farmer on the Dæmons and Possessions of the New Testament?
According to the Shasta Moisazor, with his Companions rebelled against the Eternal, and were precipitated, down to Ondero, the region of Darkness. Do you know any thing of the Prophecy of Enoch? Can you give me a Comment on the 6th. the 9th. the 14th. Verses of the Epistle of Jude?
If I am not weary of writing, I am sure you must be of reading Such inchohent rattle; I will not persecute you So Severely in future, if I can help it.
So farewell
John Adams
    I should have given my Reason for rejoicing in Voltaire &c. It is because I believe they have done more than Even Luther or Calvin to lower the Tone of that proud Hierarchy that shot itself up above the Clouds, and more to propagate religious Liberty than Calvin or Luther, or even Lock.


Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 26 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Dear Vanderkemp
Quincy Dec. 26. 13

Be not anxious. I am not jealous. Had your Packett arrived one day Sooner, I Should have delivered it in Person to Mr and Mrs Quincy at this house. I shall Send it to Boston where they now live, by the first opportunity.
Mrs Adams is very low, in consequence of a pulmonary fever of dangerous Symptoms: but she is So much better as to bid me tell you She Should have answered your very polite Letter, but for this Sickness: and She begs me add that She looks now ten times worse, than when She frightened You So much. I too have been Sick and am So Still. We have neither of Us any need of Phillips daily morning Monitor “Memento mori.”
You can Scarcely Say too much in praise of Luzac or your Self, in the Judgment of Mrs A or her Husband
What think you of Free thinking,? Free Speaking? and Free Writing? Is there a Man in his Senses, now upon our Globe, who dares to Speak his mind? Is there a Country in which he could do it, with out Persecution and Martyrdom? Think not these questions foolish. They are very grave and Solemn. I add was there ever Such a Man or Such a Country.
Our Theologians, liberal, candid and critical as they are, now Sett up Alexander Hamilton, Fisher Ames and Theophilus Parsons as great Authorities in Support of Revelation. Suppose I should publish, what I fully believe, that neither of the three knew more of the controversy than they did about the Shasta and the Koran and the immortal Lama; do you think I could walk the Streets without having my brains beat out? I might: but Calumny is worse than Death; worse than the Stoning of Stephen. I Should be held up in the Pulpit and the Press, and what is worse, circulated in private Letters and Secret Whispers as a Deist An Atheist, and the Devil knows what.
An Embargo is laid on all your Lucubrations. And why? Have you the Fredom of the Press? The Repository cannot live. And Why? Thousands of Cartloads of Trash foreign and domestic circulate freely and Sell well.
The Syllabus is returned, according to plighted honour and the Phylosopher would be unwise to let a Copy be taken. Repose is all that he or I can desire.
Neither Monticello nor Mount Wollaston are ambitious of being quoted as Authorities in the Science of Theology. It has not been our Profession. We Should make no great Figure, nor even any little discoveries in Controversies that have employed the Minds of Phylosophers, Divines Statesmen Generals and Armies for 5 or 6 thousand Years and deluged our Globe in blood.
You mentioned and I have ecchoed Mount Wollaston: but I have a great mind to Change the Name of this little Hillock from Mount Wollaston to Shepherds Hill. The Sound is less pompous. The Hill is in the Center of a Sheep Pasture and the Sunny Side of it very Suitable for a Shepherds Cot. If I was worth a hundred pure Marinos I would not hesitate. A metaphisical ill natured New England Historian might Surmise another Motive. That Emminence, or Protuberance was owned, after the Indians by Shepherds, two Clergymen, one of Cambridge, the other of Charleston who by all that I have read or heard were the most learned, the most candid and the least Superstitious of all the Priests who first emigrated to New England. Such names deserve commemoration more than a mere Sea Captain of whom nothing is known but his name.
To the Surprise of the Publick, a Mr English, a young Preacher has renounced his Profession and commenced an Attack upon the Christian Religion. I could get the Book but for an hour and have not read a third part of it. I have read Mr Carey’s and Mr Channings Notices of it. But neither Mr English nor Mr Carey nor Mr Channing will throw any new Light upon this great Subject which has employed all the Learning Genius and Talents of the World for So many Centuries. I wish they would endeavour to enlighten the darkness of the three first Centuries especially the first. Or at least lay together in a Short Compass all that can now be known. I have read Lardner and Jones. They give Us their very learned Opinions but I want their Witnesses, their Authorities and their Proofs. Abdias and Hegesippus are not inspired Oracles.
The Bible is the best Book in the World and for that reason among a thousand others, I want to know more about it.
I am, my dear Sir, as ever Yours
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 28 December 1813
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Mÿ Dear Sir!
Olden barneveld  28 Dec. 1813.

Everÿ mail I flattered my Self to receive a Line from Mount Wallaston, till I received your favour of the 1st. and long before that day I Should have written had I not been prevented bÿ that malignant demon, which haunts me from time to time, when I expected to have devoted a moment of leisure in writing to you. Besides, I had imposed upon me a task of correcting and copÿing my memoir on the use of copper by the Greeks for mr Quincÿ—which I now include, with request, to forward it to Him with the adjoining Letter, after you have glanced over it. Not that it contains anÿ considerable improvements, which could make you an amend for reading it over again, but that I wished to draw your attention upon a note on the first page—devoted to our late friend Luzac. If you and mrs Adams approve the tribut paid bÿ me to that excellent man—if it is the opinion of your Both, that I have been not extravagant—in Speaking So much of my Self I Shall have reason to boast of mÿ exertions, and mÿ labour is well rewarded. I endeavoured in another note to give a Succinct and faithful account of BP. Watkin’s memoir on Orientaleum bÿ which the reader is prepared to decide, who of us did hit nearest the truth. As I have no prospect of Seeing published the Researches—this memoir Shall be returned to Mr. Norton to be deposited, with the Researches, and the Scketches on the life of Calvin and Servetus—in Cambridge Librarÿ—Had Charles lived, he would have corrected the Idiom and adorned them in So far, that a book Seller might have been lured to run the risk of the publication, without mÿ participating in the expences. I do not complain, that this opportunity is lost.
But, how could you, even in jest, how could you, who know me So well, Suppose, that I could forget, much less Slight the man, who has bestowed, So manÿ favours upon me—by his esteem, by his friend Ship, during thirty-years? there it is, Shall I Saÿ, your fault in recommending me So highly above my real deserves—and which your partial kindness only can gloss over, if during my Staÿ in N. England I was honoured with the good opinion of Some of your distinguished Ladies. It is So. I glorÿ indeed in this acquisition and it was always the chief aim of my exertions in better days to gain their applause—and, had I been a Statesman—or a Missionarÿ I would by preference have applied to gain the good will of the Mothers and Sisters, and the Success of mÿ mission would not have failed—but never—no, not even to please the delight of my Soul, would I Sacrifice the frend of mÿ heart on that altar—You know—I could not.
I am daylÿ at Quincÿ—Seeing your leaving your Seat at the table and placing your Seat it next mine, to honour me with this distinction—I hear with delight the chat of your female companions—and listen to mrs Adams—as often She pleases to amuse or instruct her Society—How manÿ moments of exquisite pleasure we Spent together in those few daÿs—unbosoming ourselves without restraint, not caring—if prudence and discretion would put her Stamp on everÿ expression—and God forbid So that ever I Should Search to associate, where I ought to weigh everÿ thought, before it is uttered—mÿ heart must keep the command over mÿ tongue and lips—and a peccavi, is the utmost that a good natured audience will require—and So I obtain a fresh licence of Sinning again.
What a loss—that I did not ransack your Librarÿ—but what could I do in So few daÿs—for which So manÿ weeks would have been too Short—and your valuable librarÿ did fall Short to the conversation of mr. & mrs Adams—How I regret, that I could not Stay—only a few weeks—What Subjects would have been canvassed—in Politics in Theology and Philosophÿ—What whims and paradoxes protruded—and defended with zeal: and what bickerings might have ensued—and been maintained with warmth—till a Significant look of your Ladÿ—or a well directed raillerÿ would have placed us both Hors de combat—when the truth of amantium iræ would here received a fresh proof. It is pretty certain we Should not always have been in unison,—What defference and homage I paid to your judgment—as you know—we are not the properest persons to be kept in Leading-Strings—and your Ladÿ might deem the task too difficult—to take the care of two—except—which for mÿ own Sake I hope not, I was considered as an appendix onlÿ. Nevertheless I Should have been—pleased, to trÿ the experiment, but, as it must not be So, I thank God, in having been favoured—to Staÿ So long with you—to have obtained—if possible a larger Share in your esteemed friendship, and having ingratiated myself more or less in that of Mrs. Adams—ringentibus licet invidis, and know—I Should not fear, that mÿ bluntness—and absence of mÿ mind can injure me much, much less bereave me of her favour if I am permitted to return once again—and—So unexpected my first visit was—So maÿ be a Second—Posse—quia posse videntur.
Accept my thanks for your detail of the Consolato—Why did you not join Monticello’s Syllabus?—Lett this consulat be renewed and Sworn bÿ all Nations—as Soon a general durable peace is established! Amen—! Good god! What a time!—would you run a great risk in promising, to Send me at that time your coach—and have the glasses rinsed—and the cork-Screws in the bottles about that time?
What perjured fellows are those of the European Continent Parisians—Romans—Parthians—Elamites and those of Mesopotamia! It does good—that our ci-devant faithful Allies—the Goody children of John Bull—neither we, the most enlightened and civilised part of the creation—had anÿ deal in that compact, and must be thus considered in Statu naturæ, So that we maÿ Still continue to Steal and pilfer, as much we can. It might nevertheless be adviseable, that Both—if it was onlÿ pro forma, entered that Compact—to avoid, to make our brethren envious of our Situation.
Had you lately tidings from Petersburg. The diplomatic business can not keep J. Q. unremittingly employ’d—What monument ære perennius—is he erecting for himself?
If you deem it not to petulant, I shall not request—now to recommend me to Mrs Adams—assure Her of mÿ high and affectionate regard—and tell—that I ardently wished—that two young Ladies—now my correspondents—could form herselves in her School—and Letter writting would be celebrated as an exquisite ornament of a Ladÿ—even after She had taken her flight to regions of eternal bliss—Where you and I hope to See her again—if we do not Smooth the path before her.
With affectionate esteem I remain / Your obliged frend

Fr. Adr. vander Kemp


Title: From John Adams to Horatio Gates Spafford, 29 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Spafford, Horatio Gates

Friend Spafford
Quincy Dec. 29. 1813

I have delivered the Copy of your Gazetteer of New York, intended for the American Accademy of Arts and Sciences, into the hand of The Hon. Josiah Quincy, their corresponding Secretary; and the Volume for The Emperor of Russia and that for J. Q. Adams to Mr Geyer to be taken to St Petersburg by Mr Ingraham who Sails from New York in a Cartel for England and thence to Russia. My Letters and Packetts go by the same hand, and all must have the same fate. I know of no other conveyance.
Your State grows So fast than a new Edition will soon be wanted with large Additions. I wish you Success in all your Researches, being / your Friend

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Richard Rush, 31 December 1813
From: Rush, Richard
To: Adams, John

Dear Sir.
Dec: 31. 1813.

Since writing the enclosed, which I wrote at home, I have come to the Treasury building where mr Nourse has stepped into my office to ask if I have heard any thing of the report of the morning. It seems it is, that a flag of truce arrived at Annapolis yesterday after a short passage from England with dispatches from Lord Castlereagh to our government, which came on by express from Annapolis to the secretary of state last night. That dispatches have arrived I have no doubt from what Mr Nourse states. Their nature I have heard nothing of. Should they be important and I hear, I will, have great pleasure in informing you, knowing the interest you take in all that concerns your country. Our affairs look so unpropitious at this moment that any opening to peace on honorable terms ought, one would think, to be joyfully hailed I misunderstand your life and writings, sir, if you would wish it on any other terms, low as things seem with us.

R. R.


Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 31 December 1813
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Dear Sir
Quincy Decr. 31. 13.

“That old Vertigo in his head
Will never leave him, till he’s dead” was Said of Dr Swift.
I say, that “malignant Dæmon” will never cease to haunt you, till you learn more temperance in reading, writing and thinking.
I am glad you mentioned this Dæmon, because it gives me an Opportunity of enquiring into the natural history of that Species, or Genus of Beings. Have you read Farmers Treatise of the Dæmons and Possessions of the new Testament? He makes them all, Diseases of the mind, Such as my Friend Rush has described in his last printed Volume. A vulgar Opinion prevailed, that all Ideots and Lunaticks were possessed by Dæmons. There were good Dæmons, and evil ones. Socrates had a good one, who led him however to the Hemlock.
I have, Somewhere, read that about the Time of Archelaus and Agripa, there appeared in Palestine, a Prophecy of Enoch. Will you be So good as to give me a Commentary on the Epistle of St. Jude,?
The Syllabus I returned upon honour to its Author. I was not permitted to take a Copy.
I have a Letter from St. Petersburg, which I inclose, with a prayer and an injunction that it be returned, upon honour to me by the mail. Vanderkemp! Thou art an Enthusiast, as I am Sensible I am. Have a care how you form or propagate too extravagant Ideas and Explanations of J. Q. You know not the Perplexities, the Uncertainties, the Agonies of Ambassadors at 3, or 4 thousand miles from their Country. Do you Suppose that an Ambassador has leisure, to pursue Studies? To investigate Sciences? to cultivate Letters? Your new Correspondent, Mrs Adams, would have given You much Employment, if a Lung Fever had not reduced her to extream Weakness of Body. Her Spirit, thank God is not yet impaured impaired. Your Pillars, Props, and Supports fail you, as mine do every year and almost every day.
I write nothing to you, of the political Ecclesiastical, or military State of the World. We have little Influence in Either. And it would require Volumes, that I cannot write nor can you write or read, that would have any Influence. The Business of the World must and will do itself.
Now as always for three and thirty years / Your Friend
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 1813
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Mÿ Dear and respected Sir!
ca. 1813

Although I am not perfectlÿ free from head-ache a fixed oppression in the forehead which leaves a disagreable Stupor, and without whose removal I shall be unable to return to my charge with usual alacrity, I got in so far the better of it, that I take up mÿ pen and I hope, ere long it shall again be in mÿ power to expel everÿ gloomÿ thought by plunging head long in Philosophical enquiries: Thus far—since five weeks I do nothing.—as working a little in mÿ garden—reading Hesien’s tragedies and plaÿing at evening—now and then at games at cards—or Back-gammon—even the chess board I was constrained to give up till the evening before last. Your Recipe is good but the medicine becomes less palatable—in propertion that the desease deminishes in malignity—But I beg you, do not give me up—as an obstinate Sinner:
Pater noster nunc pro me, quoniam peccavi;
Dicat Quincy’s Presbyter cum Sua Suavi:
Servetus was in manÿ respects inferior to Calvin—principally as a Scholar—and Divine—but his talents were far from despicable and at that period above mediocritÿ. Calvin—to know him in full ought to be considered as much in a Political view as in that of a Sectarian—He was the Secret mover of the Aristocratic faction in Geneve—and did rise or fall with it. This point of view must not be lost out sight—in discussing his merits or demerits in the transactions with Servetus—
I requested mÿ frend Mappa to enquire if the Package was yet at Webster and—if so—to take it under his care, wrap it in an envelope and address it to you—If he did so—then you after its perusal will convey it to mr Norton—Cambridge—The Letter to mr Abbot—be so kind to seal—and have it Super Scribed. If I do not ask too much—Let It be insinuated—that the Papers shall be convey’d to Cambridge, and mr Norton requestedµto transact the Papers—he does not make use of to the Rev. mr. Abbot. During all my life I have not been so much in Correspondence with the Clergÿ as now—and God knows—it is not mÿ fault.
I wished you had bought that thin folio of Servetus writings and Life! I doubt not—or at this time—it would have been mine—and you would have redeemed more than the thousand guineas, you owe me—in honor and justice—besides the 3d. and following vol. of the Philos. Trans. which you know that I cannot purchase—and ought to possess—Since you created me—unasked—your Academician: and R. T. Payne—as Attorney General would have taken my cause in hands—and Parsons would have condemned you—Must you not My Dear Sir! confess then, that I possess a meek and conciliatorÿ Spirit—in accepting such a trifle as a compensation for such a debt, and even considering it as a Boon? but alas—I lament, that you lost such an opportunity—and seeing nothing to retrieve it as that—when you send the Transactions—you Join a triffling vol—from your Treasurÿ of Books—to make one hour of leisure slide imperceptibly away from your frend—This shall be a powerful Physic—more so-of taken—after I have been obedient to your prescription—altho I could not—by all what is dear to you I could not—when you preaches equanimitÿ—&c. &c—Avoid, to recollect your Seneca—discanting on the vanity of Riches with good Solomon—and—Perhaps similar lessons might   known from mÿ pen, were our Situations reversed.
I do not Suspect, that you dispute my claim:—is your word not so good as your most Solemn engagement?—I am sure it is—and is not your assurance  one word of John Adams so good as thousand of others? and has he not offered me One Guinea? and would that Guinea, even if it was not stamped with his identical portrait, and this too the Lord of Mount Wollaston owes me, but had been particularly dear to Him as a holy family relict, not have been reputed to have been cheaplÿ recovered at the bagatelle of a thousand Novitia? Nevertheless I would cordially and freely give you a receipt in full, did I only live two hundred miles nearer—that I might see—and peruse your Librarÿ—to manÿ of its Inhabitants perhaps I am not a Stranger—but cruelly Separated from them—and with many Scot’s and La Harpe’s—and Davina’s &c I would make a more intimate acquaintance. But it must not be so—and I thank God sincerelÿ—that here in the wilderness I am gratified and honoured with your friendship—may this blessing may be continued till mÿ last moment! You I shall give you a short account of mÿ beloved Master vander Marck—but before I do it—I must trÿ to dispatch the remainder of your Letter.
You can not suppose to get so easilÿ rid of me by sending me to the Hon. P—— who might  me to friend B—— and this to another after your kind invitation “ if you wish to know more of it, I will give you a Sketch in my next” This I eagerly accepted—You may consider it now a frivolous thing, but must know too, that it is not the Safest waÿ—to get rid of a child’s importunities, to offer it a valuable plaything—to morrow—I must know that whole historÿ should I institute my inquiries at Boston—or Philadelphia. Thus as soon I obtain some information—you shall hear from me again on this Subject—Now to the man—whom I can not do justice—He did resemble mÿ Honoured frend of Quincÿ in manÿ respects—in mind—in Stature—in an ardent love of truth and Liberty—in hatred against Despotism—civil or religious; Tho a man of eminent talents, he was amiable in Society—pleasing to his friends—
So far had I written—a few days past—I was musing—on my happiness in my retirement—of having friends—as John Adams—I was pleased with a short visit of his grandson Smith—who assured me—that the next time he would eat of my bread under mÿ humble roof—I was collecting my thoughts on mÿ beloved matter—when a report, that young Charles Eliot had followed Buckminster—broke this charm, and filled mÿ bosom with anguish—you know—I cannot love by halv—that young man gained mÿ esteem, and captivated mÿ affection—and He too gone with such a brilliant prospect—Such a blossoming hope—and I remain—It is wonderful—that Buckminster and He should—as it were—be obtruded to mÿ endearing affection, and born from it, the instant I presumed to gain their recipricated good will. I am—Sad and distressed—my  Dear and high respected frend—and in the darkness of night—alone awake in mÿ family, I unbosom mÿ grief to you—but how can you feel for me, surrounded by your frends, crowned with God’s blessings—looking on more undismay’d upon the nothing-ness of our enjoyments, and trusting more fullÿ on God’s all wise Providence. But the widow who loses an only Son—the poor man robbed of his only ewe—Lamb—are certainly objects of pity—and mÿ heart bleads at similar Strokes—tho it seemed invulnerable about those of fortune. I indulge in these effusions—knowing you shall not take it amiss—although you did deem it a weakness. And now—tho the midnight clock calls to repose—I shall trÿ—to acquit me of mÿ delay’d promise; as succint I can.
My Master Frederic Adolph van der Mark was a celebrated Lawyer before the Supreme Court, in Arnhem—Guelderland—when he was called to the chair as Prof. Jur. Letr. Nature & Gentrum at Groningue: He was a Disciple of Abraham Wieling at Utrecht—of the Erastian School, and pressed close the Steps of his master. He was married to a Patrician Ladÿ—and met from the beginning great Success. His auditorÿ was all-ways crowded. The youth from everÿ province flocked to his School. Presuming that the knowledge of the Laws of their countrÿ was the first Step to render them good magistrates, and wise Statesmen—He opened Lectures on the Jus Publicum—and then on Jus Gronings—borlandicum—During this seventeen—partly Lawyers of distinction—partly Judges of the Supreme Court were his constant auditors—Alternately he read in Grotius and Wolff—year by year. When his credit was fully established—and several of his pupils placed in high Stations—


Title: From John Adams to Horatio Gates Spafford, 2 January 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Spafford, Horatio Gates

Sir
Quincy Jan. 2. 1814

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 Presidents and Mr Monroes Wishes are complimentary; 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

John Adams


Title: From John Adams to François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 4 January 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan

Dear Sir.
Quincy January 4. 1814.

The Apostle Paul in the 11th. Chapter and 5th. Verse, of his Epistle to the Hebrews, Says
“Πίστεί ἐνωχ μετετέθη τοῦ μὴ ἰδεῖν θάνατον· καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκετο, διότι μετέθηκεν αὐτον ὁ θεός. πρὸ γὰρ τῆς

μεταθέσεως αὐτου μεμαρτύρηται εὐηρεστηκέναι τω θεῶ.”The Apostle Jude, in the 6th. Verse of his Epistle, Says,Αγγέλους τε τοὺς μὴ τηρήσαντας τὴν εαυτῶν αρχὴν, ἀλλὰ ἀπολιπόντας τὸν ἴδιον οἰκητήριον, εἰς κρίσιν

μεγάλης ἡμέρας δεσμοῖς ἀϊδίοις ὑπο ζόφον τετήρηκεν.In the 14th. Verse this Apostle Says
Προεφήτευσε δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ ἀδαμ, Ἑνὼχ, λέγων, ἰδοὺ, ἦλθε κύριος εν μυριάσιν ἁγίαις αὑτοῦ.Verse 15th. Ποιῆσαι κρίσιν &c.
In Genesis 5:24. It is Said “Enoch walked with God, and he was not: for God took him.”
Brown in his Dictionary of the holy Bible Says, “That Enoch wrote any thing does not appear.” But that the eastern Writers Arabic and Persian make a great ado about the Prophet Enoch, or Edris, as they call him. They tell Us, he received thirty Volumes from Heaven, filled with mysterious Science. There is a Book, ascribed to him, but it is certain it is was none of his; but was written, either by a fanciful Jew, before the coming of Christ, or by a foolish Christian, Soon after. For about a thousand years, it was buried in Oblivion, till Joseph Scaliger about 200 years ago, recovered part of it. It Stupidly maintains, that before the flood, the Angels Seeing the beautiful daughters of 73 men, took them in marriage, begat on them, the ancient giants, and introduced Idolatry, Astrology, and other unlawful Arts, into the World. In the American Edition of the Encyclopædia, tittle Enoch, We have the Same Account and more. It is there Said “The ancients greatly esteemed the Prophecy of Enoch. Tertullian expresses his concern, that it was not generally received in the World” That Father, on the authority of this book, deduces the original of Idolatry, Astrology, and unlawful Arts, from the revolted  Angels, who married with the daughters of Men. St Augustin allows indeed, that Enoch wrote Something divine; because he is cited by St. Jude; but he Says it was not without reason, that this book was not inserted in the Cannon, which was preserved in the Temple at Jerusalem This Father Sufficiently insinuates, that the Authority of this Book is doubtful, and that it cannot be proved that it was really written by Enoch. Indeed the Account it gives of Giants engendered by Angels, and not by Men, has manifestly the Air of a Fable, and the most judicious Critics believe it ought not to be ascribed to Enoch. Scaliger, Vossius and other learned Men attribute this Work to one of the Jews who lived between the time of the Babylonish Captivity, and that of Christ. Others are of opinion, that it was written after the rise and establishment of Christianity, by one of those fanatics, with whom the primitive Church was filled, who made a ridiculous mixture of the Platonic Phylosophy and the Christian Divinity.”
Do you possess Scaliger’s Enoch? Have you ever Seen it? Will you be So good, My worthy Friend, as to give me Some Account of it? The contents of that Book, by all I can learn of it, came from India, or it might come from India, Egypt, Babilon, Phœnicia or Persia, or any part of Chaldea. For traces of the Seditions Insurrections and Rebellions of millions of Angells against the Supream Being may be found among all the Nations of Antiquity: between whom in the early Ages there was much more Intercourse, than can now be known in detail. The Hebrews themselves and the Greeks too had more Communication with India, Egypt, Babilon and Tyre, than We are allowed to know. That this Prophecy of Enoch was as gross a Forgery as the Gospell of the Infancy, which Some ascribed to St. Mathew and Some to St Thomas; or as the Acts of Paul and Thecle, I have no doubt. To call Such impious and execrable forgeries by the pious Epithet Apocryphal, is abominable. Pray enlighten your / Friend
John Adams


Title: To John Adams from Thomas McKean, 7 January 1814
From: McKean, Thomas
To: Adams, John

               Dear Sir,
               Philadelphia, Jan. 7, 1814.

            In your favor of 26th November last, you say “that you venture to say that about a third of the people of the Colonies were against the Revolution.” It required much reflection before I could fix my opinion on this subject; but, on mature deliberation, I conclude you are right, and that more than a third of influential characters were against it. The opposition consisted chiefly of the Friends, or Quakers, the Menonists, the Protestant Episcopalians, whose clergy received salaries from the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and from the officers of the Crown and Proprietors of Provinces, with their connections, adding the timid and those who believed the Colonies would be conquered, and that of course they would be safe in their persons and property from such conduct, and also have a probability of claiming office and distinction; and also the discontented and capricious of all grades.I have not heard the specific sum of money Mr. C. J. Marshall received for his copyright of the “Life of Washington,” nor have I been able to obtain any certain information concerning it; but, if he obtained a sixth part of what you mention, I think he ought to be contented.During my protracted life, I neither have had leisure or inclination to write a history, and at my present age it is out of the question. It is true I have been often spoken to, and even solicited, by a great many of my learned acquaintance, to undertake that of the American Revolution, beginning at the year 1760 or before: among the, Dr. Rush, your former correspondent, was not the least anxious.Though I shall never write a history, I will give you a historical fact respecting the Declaration of Independence, which may amuse, if not surprise.On the 1st of July, 1776, the question was taken in committee of the whole of Congress, when Pennsylvania, represented by seven members then present, voted against it, four to three. Among the majority were Robert Morris and John Dickinson. Delaware (having only two present, namely, myself and Mr. Read) was divided. All the other States voted in favor of it. The report was delayed until the 4th; and, in the mean time, I sent an express for Cæsar Rodney to Dover, in the County of Kent, in Delaware, at my private expense, whom I met at the State House door, on the 4th of July, in his boots. He resided eighty miles from the city, and just arrived as Congress met. The question was taken. Delaware voted in favor of Independence. Pennsylvania (there being only five members present, Messrs. Dickinson and Morris absent) voted also for it. Messrs. Willing and Humphries were against it. Thus the thirteen States were unanimous in favor of Independence. Notwithstanding this, in the printed public journal of Congress for 1776, Vol. II., it appears that the Declaration of Independence was declared on the 4th of July, 1776, by the gentlemen whose names are there inserted: whereas, no persons signed it on that day; and, among the names there inserted, one gentleman, namely, George Read, Esq., was not in favor of it; and seven were not in Congress on that day, namely, Messrs. Morris, Rush, Clymer, Smith, Taylor, and Ross, all of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Thornton, of New Hampshire; nor were the six gentlemen last named members of Congress on the 4th of July. The five for Pennsylvania were appointed delegates by the convention of that State on the 20th of July, and Mr. Thornton took his seat in Congress, for the first time, on the 4th of November following; when the names of Henry Hinds, of New York, and Thomas McKean, of Delaware, are not printed as subscribers, though both were present in Congress on the 4th of July, and voted for Independence.Here false colors are certainly hung out. There is culpability somewhere. What I have heard as an explanation is as follows: When the Declaration was voted, it was ordered to be engrossed on parchment, and then signed; and that a few days afterwards a Resolution was entered on the secret journal that no person should have a seat in Congress during that year until he should have signed the Declaration of Independence. After the 4th of July, I was not in Congress for several months, having marched with a regiment of Associators, as Colonel, to support General Washington, until the flying camp of ten thousand men was completed. When the Associators were discharged, I returned to Philadelphia, took my seat in Congress, and signed my name to the Declaration on parchment. This transaction should be truly stated, and the then secret journal should be made public. In the manuscript journal, Mr. Pickering, then Secretary of State, and myself, saw a printed half-sheet of paper, with the names of the members afterwards in the printed journals stitched in. We examined the parchment, where my name is signed in my own handwriting.A glimmering of peace appears in the horizon. May it be realized. But every preparation should be made for a continuance of the war. When the British arms have been successful, I have never found their rulers or ministers otherwise than haughty, rude, imperious, nay, insolent. They and their allies have this year been successful, both in the north and south of Europe.My sight fades very fast, though my writing may not discover it.God bless you.

               [Signature cut out.]


Title: To John Adams from D.C. Ballard, 10 January 1814
From: Ballard, D.C.
To: Adams, John

                            Sir,
                            Patriot Office, Boston, Jany. 18, 1814.

                        At so interesting a period as the present, when our country is contending for the re-establishment of it’s most essential rights, the labors of gentlemen of political weight and literary acquirement are peculiarly desirable and important. Having purchased the respectable and extensive establishment of the Boston Patriot of it’s late proprietors, it is my earnest desire that its columns should continue to be irradiated by the effusions of genius and patriotism. Under this impression, I have taken the liberty of addressing you, Sir, in the hope that my wishes may meet your approbation, and that the Patriot may be render’d still more interesting, and more serviceable to the great cause of our country, by the productions of your pen.While making this request, I am fully sensible of the many and important favours heretofore conferred; but, while engaged in the cause of philanthropy and his country, the patriot finds this reward of his labors in that flow of self-satisfaction which spontaneously arises in his own bosom.Still, Sir, it would be indecorous in me to urge anything beyond your perfect pleasure and convenience; and I can only add, that if it would be agreeable to you, at any time, to continue your valuable lucubrations, they will always be received by me with the liveliest emotions of pleasure.With sentiments of the highest respect, / I am, / Sir, / Your Obt Servt.

                            D. C. Ballard


Title: To John Adams from Henry Colman, 11 January 1814
From: Colman, Henry
To: Adams, John

					Dear Sir,
					Hingham 11 January 1814—

				I have made repeated appointments and attempts to visit you, since you did us the favour of your company; but my professional and parochial duties, which have been much increased of late, have confined me entirely at home for the last two months.—I avail myself however of this opportunity to forward you the third volume of Search’s Light of Nature, persuaded that his chapter entitled, “The Vision”, will afford you, if you have not met with it, a high gratification. Dr Kirkland & Mr Holley have pronounced it a most wonderful effort of genius, and therefore I may confidently recommend it to your notice, if you have leisure and inclination to peruse it.—It will be necessary to give a cursory reading to the two preceding chapters, on the “vehicular state” and “mundane soul” in order to enter upon it with advantage. Some parts of it are truly rapturous and sublime and I have read them with an ecstasy which I cannot describe, but which I think when you peruse it, you will be quite ready to pardon.One of the last subjects upon which you did me the favour of your remarks, was the evidence of a future state as deducible from reason and nature. Since that time I have been led more particularly then ever to review the arguments which you and my subsequent inquiries suggested in favour of the belief from those sources; to my mind they are quite sufficient, if not to convince, at least to inspire the strongest hope of a future life; I think I can more justly than ever appreciate the goodness of God in the explicit assurance given us by the gospel to confirm our hopes and establish  our belief on this subject, and I feel greatly obliged to Search, as I should have felt to any one, for giving me some scheme on a subject, of necessity so obscure and undefined; for obviating in any way some of the objections and difficulties, with which the belief will be encumbered even in the most enlightened minds; and for giving form and substance to the many visions & fancies which crowd upon our minds, when we venture to speculate on this interesting but incomprehensible topick.—With his leading ideas and especially his moral sentiments, I think you will be peculiarly gratified, and though they cannot be new to you, they will always recur to your mind with a feeling of refreshment and delight; and as for the gay and brilliant and sometimes gaudy dress in which he has seen fit to present them perhaps his apology at the close of the chapter should be sufficient. It is certainly a curious exhibition.—I hope, my dear Sir, you will excuse the liberties which I so frequently take with you and believe me ever / With great respect, / Yr obliged friend & Servt

					Henry Colman


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 13 January 1814
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Mÿ Dear and respected Sir!
Oldenbarneveld 13 Jan 1814.

It might cause Some Surprise, if I tell you, that your last of the 26 Dec. did reach me in due time, and yet was not answered before this daÿ, notwithstanding all mÿ warm protestations of mÿ deep interest in all that, which regards your welfare—nevertheless I was informed of mrs Adams Serious indisposition, and that you were not well. This latter might not have made a verÿ deep impression, as your letter was too well, too cheerfully written, to awake much anxiety for your health—but your report of mrs Adams was too alarming, to be Slighted—and yet, your Surprise Shall cease, when I tell you, I could not, and it is the first effort I make again in taking up my pen. A traiterous fiend, who murdered my father, laid hidden in embuscade to kill the Son—and the foul deed might have been perpetrated, without mÿ alertness. An odious Swelling in my right upper jaw—rendring mÿ face So monstrous—to frighten babes in their mother’s lap—aided with accute head-ache and Severe fevers, as auxiliaries, made me apprehensive, that in Storming the outworks the destruction of the Strong hold of life was really intended—and I—poor fellow—alone alas!—against this host—I could not even crÿ alarum—by want of voice or call for assistance. Had I a few old Hog-veterans—or had I been So near Quincÿ to Send for a few generous troops of choosen Madeira, I would Soon have driven the enemÿ from the field, or drowned them in their entrenchments I had not the most distant hope, that I could Succeed by inundating the land with humble—home-Spun Current—thus my only refuge was—in waiting mÿ State—with quiet and abstinence and Sprinkling the odious fellows with a lotion of Ammoniac and Vinaiger—of which they are nearly as much in dread as—Some others—whom—to make use of a great Devine’s phraseologÿ—I dare not name in a Letter to your August personage—And I drove them nearly of—They are lurking yet in the neighbourhood—but—aut vincam aut moriar—However—my Dear frend! Setting all raillerÿ aside—Similar assaults are the tolling of the bell for the convent of worms—that the carcase for the feast is preparing—Be it So:—but Spare mÿ friends! oh Heaven! their lives are precious—my usefulness is nearly gone—or confined in cheering a drooping frend—in Soothing a broken heart—o frendship!—balm of mÿ life!—let thy endearing Sounds—compose and illume mÿ Soul at the instant of my last Summons! I am nearly well—and Shall go to night—tell it not in Gath—to make a party of Quadrille at mÿ frend Mappa. You will agree with me that Similar communications—without a blush—without fear, that they Shall be trumpeted thro the Streets, is one of the precious and most delicious fruits of frendship—this we can not—we dare not—we will not do to our familÿ—we hide, or try to hide our nakedness with a garb of decorum, and impose on our credulity, that they See it through this pellucid cloak, because they are reverently Silent, but to our frend we Show our nakedness and bear his reproaches—his condemnation—without a frown.
I flatter myself—that mrs Adams has alreadÿ recovered her health—It must be so Plato! or She would not laugh on your frightened frend! or She dared not now—to entertain you with the bright prospect of times to come—and that with all the glow of maternal tenderness—Tu Marcellus eris! Tell Her, with the tender of mÿ affectionate respect, that the worst and best of mÿ wishes are, that the Good God maÿ preserve her life and health as long as mrs v. d. k.’s grand-mama, who at 92 enjoy’d all her mental powers in perfection, and that She maÿ See her most ardent vows for her children, overtopped yet bÿ God’s bountiful blessings on their offspring. But, my Dear frend! are you not apprehensive, that in this case eather of us—both perhaps—Shall fall back and leave her alone—while we are crumbled to dust? but never mind—if we depart without murmuring, if we part, and are regretted by her.
You See an embargo can no more lay hold on my pen than upon my tongue—I will make use of both—dum Spiritus hos regit artus. well you did in returning the Syllabus! you would not violate a trust—nor—confiding it even to a v. d. k. you would not do it, even if Iscariot hath unbosomed his Secrets into your heart. To ask it, was inconsiderate—but my views were pure—the contents of that paper imbued me with Some less unfavorable opinions about the moral principles of that man. Mÿ frend Braÿ informs me, that he Send Inglish—Carÿ’s and Channing’s performances—I have not yet Seen them, and, Shall, if received, communicate you mÿ Sentiment upon it. Perhaps—I Shall then give you Some Theological Strictures, for which I am now too much tired—
I have laid aside all Serious Studies—for a while—to which ere long I hope to return—I have turn’d to Shakspeare—and amused myself with the exquisite Dithyrambic verses of Redi il bacco in Toscana—now I am delighted with—Fortiguerra’s admirable Ricciardetto—Pray—can you not Send me Ronsard’s Poësies, and—when the time of Studÿ approaches again—Condorcet—whom you once recommended—The gap Shall not be observed in your librarÿ—but if you art loath to part with either of them—decline mÿ request with the Same frankness I make it. Can it be true, that Jefferson Should have written more letters than one, on the Subject of the next presidencÿ, and Said "that it would be inexpedient to take the next Pres. from Virginia—that N. york ought to give the next Pres.—and—that Tompkins is the man”! It Seems to me, he could not Stoop So low—If this State must provide one—a king—a Platt—a Clinton or anÿ other one, whose little finger is bigger than the Soul and body of that manikin—Shall Step forward—would to God—that the good and the wise were reconciled—and went united hand in hand—then—neither Virginian—or a N.Y. Stateman—but a full-blooded yankee would renew the reign, of bliss—amen!—adio!
What others may protest, you know—than no man can bear you a more affectionate respect—than your obliged

Fr. Adr. v. d. Kemp

P. one Word more—explain me—in what manner is Spun with the distaff—I can not conceive how? it is ÿet done in Silesia—perhaps J. Quincÿ—has told the manner in his Itnerarÿ? Some linens are made from yarn Spun in that waÿ—I am in want of this knowledge; and when did you Send me awaÿ with empty hands?Did I Send you the prayer of Norton—composed for my Charles—during his fatal illness, which I admired for its Simplicity and fervent piety? if not—it is at your Service.


Title: From John Adams to Henry Colman, 14 January 1814
From: Adams, John
To: Colman, Henry

Dear Sir
Quincy Jan. 14. 1814

I thank you for the Loan of Tuckers Vision. Homer as We have him, was not his Effort of Genius. Compilations of Homer were made by Lycurgus, by Solon, and by Pysistratus, and the most Learned Men in Greece were employed in forming that Sacred Book. Spencers Fairy Queen, though We have but half of it, is the greatest Effort of Genius, that I recollect. But not So entertaining or instructive as the Vision. I wish his Uncle Locke had introduced him to Zoroaster to Sanchoniathon, to Confusius and to Brama: and to Hiram and Solomon, and Melckisedeck, King of Salem.
I have the Vanity to claim a distant remote Kindred to the Family of Searches: about as near as Dr Styles’s relation to Sir Thomas, in the 15th Generation. But this drop of Searches blood has drawn upon me a flood of Volumes from all quarters, and has involved me in more business at this moment than at any former period of my Life.
Every Thing I receive from your affords me delight. Caroline reads the Vision to me by Candle Light when I cannot See.
Accept, dear Sir, my thanks my Esteem and respect

John Adams


Title: To John Adams from François Adriaan Van der Kemp, 14 January 1814
From: Van der Kemp, François Adriaan
To: Adams, John

Mÿ Dear Sir!
Oldenbarneveld 14 Jan. 1814.

I did rise yesterdaÿ morning with Severe headache—and espied, entering the room a Letter on the chimneÿ-piece, which, when I discovered it was from you, did give me a fearful foreboding. I laid it down, till I had breakfeasted, and found then to my great Satisfaction, that it contained a favorable report of mrs Adams—with a fresh proof of your high-valued friendship and unbounded confidence; and with less—my Dear friend! I can not remain Satisfied—I can answer, tho’ I do it with a Secret reluctance, formal civilities with a cold politeness, but He or She, who has gained or conquered mÿ frendship or love, must Surrender their hearts at discretion reciprocallÿ. I know the wise of this world will call it foolishness, but you, mÿ high-respected frend would not blush, at being unawares discovered—of galopping a while on this Dear, Dear hobbÿ horse; I durst, I would ride and Spurr it, if Surrounded bÿ a gaping crowd. What else has remained me—except contentment within, and in mÿ familÿ—being Scarce known to half a dozen worthÿ people in this State, and without a horse to visit them—I feed—now Mifflin is gone—upon your frendship—as Since two years I have no tidings of mÿ beloved madame La Roche—and, can you find fault, because you maÿ wander from the enjoyment of one luxurÿ to another, that I read—and write and think, when I do not converse with mÿ familÿ—obstrepentibus licet diabolis—then forsooth! I Should Suspect, you did enter with them in a conspiracÿ  against me and bereaving me from this balm of life. You perceive, I am again Some-what better—and, this impels me, to answer your favour directly. Had this not been in mÿ power, I would have returned the inclosed with an envelope.
I perused Farmer’s well written treatise;—before him—about a centurÿ—Balthasar Becker—broached and defended—with a great deal of acuteness—in oni ire legant cumbrous Quarto—the Same opinion—was for it Superseded as minister—of the Ref. Church in Amsterdam—Sans his Salarÿ—how manÿ of his Brethren would preach heresÿ—could theÿ obtain bÿ that means—otium cum Stipendio, but alas—those good times are gone. Frederick the great was the last, who punished in this manner, one of mÿ respected Correspondents.
I do no more believe in the Devil than in hell—and yet—I Suppose—I firmly believe, our misconduct here can not remain unpunished hereafter—no, no more—than a good wish unrewarded—and yet, I See nothing incongruous, that invisible beings maÿ wander in this Sphere, maÿ be rendered visible, when it pleases their Supreme ruler for certain wise purposes, not to harm, but to guide frail mortal man—but their existence or non existence—their Sphere of action and rest can have nothing to do with our belief, can make no part of our creed—can makes us wiser nor better. It maÿ, nevertheless! in Some particular circumstances Sooth a pious mind, untinctured with Superstition, to indulge in a reverie that we are watched—with tenderness—that we are heard—that we are strenghtened bÿ an inward impulse, that we are warned from despondencÿ and animated—to go on in our course with fresh vigour and renewed alacrity. I doubt not, if or all the demoniacs were wretches with incurable deseases, bÿ empÿricks ascribed to malignant Spirits—and the remaining glimmerings of this doctrine, Scattered in the Jewish writings, originated from the Oriental Schools—and the whole maÿ have Sprung from anterior traditions:—whÿ maÿ not the good and bad angels be the pristine Inhabitants—which dwelled in this globe before its renewal about the time of the Mosaic creation—and So we, and our posterity maÿ enlarge their number, and colonise other Spheres—and Situations in it, according with our merits or demerits; I, ardently hope, and Shall endeavor to exert mÿ Selves, that I then maÿ preserve Some Share at least in the good opinion of those, who in this world have Scattered their bounties upon me with Such profusion.
I return you the Letter with the warmest thanks—If you do not desire to encrease mÿ admiration of John Quincÿ—whÿ then do you Send his Letters? or is it more Strange, that a Federalist pays homage to exalted merit, as that Republicans would honour it—even with an Embassÿ to Japon or North-pole—even with permission—of bearing the title of Archi-Sepea-piu che. excellentissimo Ambasciadore provided—he would remain there in Secula Seculorum. Grotius too was a Christian—and with all his Philosophÿ and elegant accomplishments Cambridge’s Professor seems to glorÿ in this distinction: blasted be the hand, who would tear this wreath from his brow! palsied! who would hurl dust and dirt, to make its lustre fading; And yet, did I knew Him as well as his Father—I might discover—that this brilliant sparkling gem had its points.
I maÿ not know the perplexities, uncertainties and Agonies of Embassadors—but am pretty certain—that Grotius and Beverningh—and D’avaux and D’Estrades—and John Adams—knew the art to find leisure; to pursue Studies—investigate Sciences—cultivate Letters—and publish Books—and what the Father did—what Should prevent, that the Son—better educated—with a tenfold larger apparatus—could not accomplish—what the former contemplated as possible.
If mrs Adams Spirit remains un-impaired—then She will Soon compel that refractorÿ bodÿ—to recruit, and resume its functions. It will not do, that the matter Shall be on the alert, and the Sluggish Servant creeping,—however if he is only Some what Slow but faith-ful upon the whole, advise her, not to discard him yet—we all—and you principally Should be the loosers—Follow Paul’s prescription—let her take a glass of generous wine—this Shall renew the elasticity of the vital Springs. we can not do this bÿ proxÿ—or I Should not object to Submit to this penance in her place.
Your’s

Fr. Adr. vanderkemp

P.S. Can you procure a conveÿance for a Letter—to Mad. La Roche, Nieulles en France? If you Say So—I Shall Send it. God’s blessings on the Peace-Negotiators! maÿ the Son be So Successful as the Father—So their countrÿ Shall be indebted to them—as their benefactors! hail—happÿ Peace!


Title: To John Adams from Richard Rush, 17 January 1814
From: Rush, Richard
To: Adams, John

					Dear Sir:
					Washington January 17. 1814.

				Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes. Nothing can be more applicable to our situation, and the late offer of Britain. I repeated it in conversation a few days ago in the hearing of Mr Ingersoll, of the house or representatives from Pennsylvania, and I have since heard with pleasure that he took occasion to thunder it out in his place at the capitol, and that it caught the ear of the house to a charm. In the midst of our misfortunes I think, that since the war began I have not witnessed so determined a spirit in all branches of the government to push it with vigor, Mr Munroe’s letter to Lord Castlereagh and the nomination of Mr Clay and Mr Russell notwithstanding, as at this present time.I send for your acceptance by this Mail, a pamphlet upon expatriation written by George Hay of Virginia. I have read it with singular interest as an able discussion of a question of high importance in jurisprudence, and deriving great additional importance at present from being so conspicuous in our public affairs. It is dispassionate and learned, and more full than any discussion of the same question, on either side, I have ever met with or heard of in any book of law. Mr Governeur Morris in an oration he delivered last 4th of July asserted, after Blackstone, the principle of perpetual allegiance as one of universal law. I once thought so too; but Mr Hay’s book is entitled to a perusal from any one who holds this opinion. If, sir, you, who have so long and so well considered all the great questions of law and government, shall find any amusement in looking through this pamphlet I shall be highly gratified. It is in great repute at Washington.With the utmost respect and attachment I am, dear sir, your constantly devoted and thankful friend.

					Richard Rush.