полная версия

Томас Джефферсон
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 5 (of 9)

TO JUDGE COOPER

Monticello, August 6, 1810.

Dear Sir,—The tardiness of acknowledging the receipt of your favor of May 10th will I fear induce a presumption that I have been negligent of its contents, but I assure you I lost not a moment in endeavoring to fulfil your wishes in procuring a good geological correspondent in this State. I could not offer myself, because of all the branches of science it was the one I had the least cultivated. Our researches into the texture of our globe could be but so superficial, compared with its vast interior construction, that I saw no safety of conclusion from the one, as to the other; and therefore have pointed my own attentions to other objects in preference, as far as a heavy load of business would permit me to attend to anything else. Looking about, therefore, among my countrymen for some one who might answer your views, I fixed on Mr. Joseph C. Cabell, not long since returned from France, where he had attended particularly to chemistry, and had also attended Mr. Maclure in some of his geological expeditions, as best qualified. I wrote to him; unfortunately he was from home, and did not return till the latter end of July. I received his answer since our last post only. A diffidence in his qualifications to be useful to you, has induced him to decline the undertaking, having, as he assures me, paid no particular attention to that branch of science. I have in vain looked over our State for some other person who might contribute to your views. As yet I can think of nobody; and whatever may be the result of further inquiry, I have thought I ought not longer to delay informing you of my unsuccessful efforts so far. Should I be able to find a subject worthy of your correspondence, I shall not fail to engage him in it, and to give you notice. I thank you for the case of Dempsy v. the Insurers, which I have read with great pleasure, and entire conviction. Indeed it is high time to withdraw all respect from courts acting under the arbitrary orders of governments who avow a total disregard to those moral rules which have hitherto been acknowledged by nations, and have served to regulate and govern their intercourse. I should respect just as much the rules of conduct which governed Cartouche or Blackbeard, as those now acted on by France or England. If your argument is defective in anything, it is in having paid to the antecedent decisions of the British courts of Admiralty, the respect of examining them on grounds of reason; and the not having rested the decision at once on the profligacy of those tribunals, and openly declared against permitting their sentences to be ever more quoted or listened to until those nations return to the practice of justice, to an acknowledgment that there is a moral law which ought to govern mankind, and by sufficient evidences of contrition for their present flagitiousness, make it safe to receive them again into the society of civilized nations. I hope this will still be done on a proper occasion. Yet knowing that religion does not furnish grosser bigots than law, I expect little from old judges. Those now at the bar may be bold enough to follow reason rather than precedent and may bring that principle on the bench when promoted to it; but I fear this effort is not for my day. It has been said that when Harvey discovered the circulation of the blood, there was not a physician of Europe of forty years of age, who ever assented to it. I fear you will experience Harvey's fate. But it will become law when the present judges are dead. Wishing you health and happiness at all times, accept the assurances of my constant and great esteem and respect.

TO MR. DUANE

Monticello, August 12, 1810.

Sir,—Your letter of July 16th has been duly received, with the paper it enclosed, for which accept my thanks, and especially for the kind sentiments expressed towards myself. These testimonies of approbation, and friendly remembrance, are the highest gratifications I can receive from any, and especially from those in whose principles and zeal for the public good I have confidence. Of that confidence in yourself the military appointment to which you allude was sufficient proof, as it was made, not on the recommendations of others, but on our own knowledge of your principles and qualifications. While I cherish with feeling the recollections of my friends, I banish from my mind all political animosities which might disturb its tranquillity, or the happiness I derive from my present pursuits. I have thought it among the most fortunate circumstances of my late administration that, during its eight years continuance, it was conducted with a cordiality and harmony among all the members, which never were ruffled on any, the greatest or smallest occasion. I left my brethren with sentiments of sincere affection and friendship, so rooted in the uniform tenor of a long and intimate intercourse, that the evidence of my own senses alone ought to be permitted to shake them. Anxious, in my retirement, to enjoy undisturbed repose, my knowledge of my successor and late coadjutors, and my entire confidence in their wisdom and integrity, were assurances to me that I might sleep in security with such watchmen at the helm, and that whatever difficulties and dangers should assail our course, they would do what could be done to avoid or surmount them. In this confidence I envelope myself, and hope to slumber on to my last sleep. And should difficulties occur which they cannot avert, if we follow them in phalanx, we shall surmount them without danger.

I have been long intending to write to you as one of the associated company for printing useful works.

Our laws, language, religion, politics and manners are so deeply laid in English foundations, that we shall never cease to consider their history as a part of ours, and to study ours in that as its origin. Every one knows that judicious matter and charms of style have rendered Hume's history the manual of every student. I remember well the enthusiasm with which I devoured it when young, and the length of time, the research and reflection which were necessary to eradicate the poison it had instilled into my mind. It was unfortunate that he first took up the history of the Stuarts, became their apologist, and advocated all their enormities. To support his work, when done, he went back to the Tudors, and so selected and arranged the materials of their history as to present their arbitrary acts only, as the genuine samples of the constitutional power of the crown, and, still writing backwards, he then reverted to the early history, and wrote the Saxon and Norman periods with the same perverted view. Although all this is known, he still continues to be put into the hands of all our young people, and to infect them with the poison of his own principles of government. It is this book which has undermined the free principles of the English government, has persuaded readers of all classes that these were usurpations on the legitimate and salutary rights of the crown, and has spread universal toryism over the land. And the book will still continue to be read here as well as there. Baxter, one of Horne Tooke's associates in persecution, has hit on the only remedy the evil admits. He has taken Hume's work, corrected in the text his misrepresentations, supplied the truths which he suppressed, and yet has given the mass of the work in Hume's own words. And it is wonderful how little interpolation has been necessary to make it a sound history, and to justify what should have been its title, to wit, "Hume's history of England abridged and rendered faithful to fact and principle." I cannot say that his amendments are either in matter or manner in the fine style of Hume. Yet they are often unperceived, and occupy so little of the whole work as not to depreciate it. Unfortunately he has abridged Hume, by leaving out all the less important details. It is thus reduced to about one half its original size. He has also continued the history, but very summarily, to 1801. The whole work is of 834 quarto pages, printed close, of which the continuation occupies 283. I have read but little of this part. As far as I can judge from that little, it is a mere chronicle, offering nothing profound. This work is so unpopular, so distasteful to the present Tory palates and principles of England, that I believe it has never reached a second edition. I have often inquired for it in our book shops, but never could find a copy in them, and I think it possible the one I imported may be the only one in America. Can we not have it re-printed here? It would be about four volumes 8vo.

I have another enterprise to propose for some good printer. I have in my possession a MS. work in French, confided to me by a friend, whose name alone would give it celebrity were it permitted to be mentioned. But considerations insuperable forbid that. It is a Commentary and Review of Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws. The history of that work is well known. He had been a great reader, and had commonplaced everything he read. At length he wished to undertake some work into which he could bring his whole commonplace book in a digested form. He fixed on the subject of his Spirit of Laws, and wrote the book. He consulted his friend Helvetius about publishing it, who strongly dissuaded it. He published it, however, and the world did not confirm Helvetius' opinion. Still, every man who reflects as he reads, has considered it as a book of paradoxes; having, indeed, much of truth and sound principle, but abounding also with inconsistencies, apochryphal facts and false inferences. It is a correction of these which has been executed in the work I mention, by way of commentary and review; not by criticising words or sentences, but by taking a book at a time, considering its general scope, and proceeding to confirm or confute it. And much of confutation there is, and of substitution of true for false principle, and the true principle is ever that of republicanism. I will not venture to say that every sentiment in the book will be approved, because, being in manuscript, and the French characters, I have not read the whole, but so much only as might enable me to estimate the soundness of the author's way of viewing his subject; and, judging from that which I have read, I infer with confidence that we shall find the work generally worthy of our high approbation, and that it everywhere maintains the preëminence of representative government, by showing that its foundations are laid in reason, in right, and in general good. I had expected this from my knowledge of the other writings of the author, which have always a precision rarely to be met with. But to give you an idea of the manner of its execution, I translate and enclose his commentary on Montesquieu's eleventh book, which contains the division of the work. I wish I could have added his review at the close of the twelve first books, as this would give a more complete idea of the extraordinary merit of the work. But it is too long to be copied. I add from it, however, a few extracts of his reviews of some of the books, as specimens of his plan and principles. If printed in French, it would be of about 180 pages 8vo, or 23 sheets. If any one will undertake to have it translated and printed on their own account, I will send on the MS. by post, and they can take the copyright as of an original work, which it ought to be understood to be. I am anxious it should be ably translated by some one who possesses style as well as capacity to do justice to abstruse conceptions. I would even undertake to revise the translation if required. The original sheets must be returned to me, and I should wish the work to be executed with as little delay as possible.

I close this long letter with assurances of my great esteem and respect.

TO ALBERT GALLATIN, ESQ

Monticello, August 16, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Yours of July 14th, with the welcome paper it covered, has been most thankfully received. I had before received from your office and that of State, all the printed publications on the subject of the batture, that is to say, the opinion of the Philadelphia lawyers and of G. Livingston himself, the publications of Derbigny, Thierry, Poydras, and the pièces probantes. I had been very anxious to get Moreau's memoire, which is only in manuscript, having heard it was the best of all. After waiting long and in vain for it, I was informed by my counsel that they were ruled to plead, and must be furnished with the grounds of defence. I was obliged, therefore, to take up the subject—had got through it and put it into the hands of Mr. Hay, when the observations you were so kind as to furnish, came to hand. Although it was too late to give to everything its shape which these, at an earlier stage, might have suggested, I was still enabled to avail myself of them usefully. The question of the chancery jurisdiction of the Orleans judges had particularly escaped me, and entirely. When Mr. Hay returned the paper therefore, I was enabled, by re-copying a sheet or two at the close, to introduce this question in its proper place. I had also, till then, been uninformed of the circumstances under which Bertrand Gravier left France, and therefore had not been aware of the reasons for which John Gravier had chosen to come in by purchase. This information enabled me to extend and strengthen much of what I had before said on that subject; and by interleaving and recopying a part, to get that also into its proper place. On the whole, you will see, with the benefit of these amendments, what I had conceived to be a true statement of the fact and law of the case. But the paper is very voluminous, and I could not shorten it. It is now in the hands of the President, who will enclose it to you by the same post which carries this; when you shall have perused it, be so good as to re-enclose it to me, as I wish to submit it to our other fellow-laborers, after such amendments as Mr. Madison and yourself will be so good as to suggest. I wish the ground I take to meet all your approbations. The uninformed state in which the debates of the last session proved Congress to be, as to this case, makes me fear they may, at the next, under the intrigues and urgency of Livingston, be induced to take some step which might have an injurious effect on the opinion of a jury. I think, therefore, to ask a member or two of each house to read this statement, merely to make themselves masters of the subject, and be enabled to prevent any unfavorable interference of Congress. Perhaps, if they see the case in the light I do, they may think of doing more—of having the Attorney General desired to attend to the case as of public concern: for really it is so. I have no concern at all in maintaining the title to the batture. It would be totally unnecessary for me to employ counsel to go into the question at all for my own defence. That is solidly built on the simple fact, that if I were in error, it was honest, and not imputable to that gross and palpable corruption or injustice which makes a public magistrate responsible to a private party. I know that even a federal jury could not find a verdict against me on this head. But I go fully into the question of title, because our characters are concerned in it, and because it involves a most important right of the citizens, and one which, if decided against them, would be a precedent of incalculable evil. The detention, too, has been so long the act of Congress itself, that for this reason I have supposed they might think it entitled to their attention, and direct the Attorney General to take care of the public interest in it, as has lately been done by the House of Commons, in the action of Sir Francis Burdett against their Speaker. But on this subject I wish to be advised by yourself and my other friends, rather than trust to my own judgment, too likely to be under bias. If I send the case to be perused by two or three members, it will be under a strong injunction not to let its contents get into other hands, my counsel having strongly advised against apprizing them of the topics of defence, as well from apprehensions of subornation of witnesses as to material facts, as from other considerations. Pray advise me on this head. My counsel are Hay, Wist and Janewell.

I have seen with infinite grief the set which is made at you in the public papers, and with the more as my name has been so much used in it. I hope we both know one another too well to receive impression from circumstances of this kind. A twelve years' intimate and friendly intercourse must be better evidence to each of the dispositions of the other than the letters of foreign ministers to their courts, or tortured influences from facts true or false. I have too thorough a conviction of your cordial good will towards me, and too strong a sense of the faithful and able assistance I received from you, to relinquish them on any evidence but of my own senses. With entire faith in your assurance of these truths, I shall add those only of my constant affection and high respect.

TO COLONEL WM. DUANE

Monticello, September 16, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Your favor of August 17th arrived the day after I had left this place on a visit to one I have near Lynchburg, from whence I am but lately returned. The history of England you describe is precisely Baxter's, of which I wrote you; and if you compare him with Hume, you will find the text preserved verbatim, with particular exceptions only. The French work will accompany this letter. Since writing to you I have gone over the whole, and can assure you it is the most valuable political work of the present age. In some details we all may differ from him or from one another, but the great mass of the work is highly sound. Its title would be "A Commentary on Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws;" perhaps the words "and Review" might be inserted at the–. Helvetius' letter on the same work should be annexed, if it can possibly be procured. It was contained in a late edition of the works of Helvetius published by the Abbé de la Roche. Probably that edition might be found. I never before heard of Williams' lectures on Montesquieu, but I am glad to hear of everything which reduces that author to his just level, as his predilection for monarchy, and the English monarchy in particular, has done mischief everywhere, and here also, to a certain degree. With respect to the Notes on Virginia, I do contemplate some day the making additions and corrections to them; but I am inclined to take the benefit of my whole life to make collections and observations, and let the editing them be posthumous. The anecdote respecting the paper put into my hands by Dr. Franklin has not been handed to you with entire correctness. I returned from France in December 1789, and in March following I went on to New York to take the post assigned me in the new government. On my way through Philadelphia I called on Dr. Franklin, who was then confined to his bed. As the revolution had then begun, indeed was supposed to be closed by the completion of a constitution, and he was anxious to know the part all his acquaintances had taken, he plied me with questions for an hour or two with a vivacity and earnestness which astonished me. When I had satisfied his inquiries, I observed to him that I had heard, and with great pleasure, that he had began the history of his own life, and had brought it down to the revolution, (for so I had heard while in Europe.) "Not exactly so," said he, "but I will let you see the manner in which I do these things." He then desired one of his small grand-children who happened to be in the room, to bring him such a paper from the table. It was brought, and he put it into my hands and said, "there, put that into your pocket and you will see the manner of my writing." I thanked him and said "I should read it with great pleasure, and return it to him safely." "No," said he, "keep it." I took it with me to New York. It was, as well as I recollect, about a quire of paper, in which he had given, with great minuteness, all the details of his negotiations (informal) in England, to prevent their pushing us to extremities. These were chiefly through Lord Howe and a lady, I think the sister of Lord Howe, but of this I am not certain; but I remember noting the particulars of her conversation as marking her as a woman of very superior understanding. He gave all the conversations with her and Lord Howe, and all the propositions he passed through them to their minister, the answers and conversations with the minister reported through them, his endeavors used with other characters, whether with the ministers directly I do not recollect; but I remember well that it appeared distinctly from what was brought to him from the ministers, that the real obstacle to their meeting the various overtures he made was the prospect of great confiscations to provide for their friends, and that this was the real cause of the various shiftings and shufflings they used to evade his propositions. Learning, on his death, which happened soon after, that he had bequeathed all his unpublished writings to his grandson, W. T. Franklin, with a view to the emolument he might derive from their publication, I thought this writing was fairly his property, and notified to him my possession of it, and that I would deliver it to his order. He soon afterwards called on me at New York, and I delivered it to him. He accepted it, and, while putting it into his pocket, observed that his grandfather had retained another copy which he had found among his papers. I did not reflect on this till suspicions were circulated that W. T. F. had sold these writings to the British Minister. I then formed the belief that Dr. Franklin had meant to deposit this spare copy with me in confidence that it would be properly taken care of, and sincerely repented the having given it up; and I have little doubt that this identical paper was the principal object of the purchase by the British government, and the unfortunate cause of the suppression of all the rest. I do not think I have any interesting papers or facts from Dr. Franklin. Should any occur at any time, I will communicate them freely, nobody wishing more ardently that the public could be possessed of everything that was his or respected him, believing that a greater or better character has rarely existed. I am happy to learn that his blood shows itself in the veins of the two of his great grandchildren whom you mention. But I should think medicine the best profession for a genius resembling his, as that of the elder is supposed to do. I have received information of Pestalozzi's mode of education from some European publications, and from Mr. Keefe's book which shows that the latter possesses both the talents and the zeal for carrying it into effect. I sincerely wish it success, convinced that the information of the people at large can alone make them the safe, as they are the sole depository of our political and religious freedom. The idea of antimony in this neighborhood is, I believe, without foundation. Some twenty or thirty years ago a mineral was found about ten miles from this place, which one of those idle impostors, who call themselves mine-hunters, persuaded the proprietor was gold ore. The poor man lost a crop in digging after it. After fruitless assays of the mineral, some other person, knowing as little of the matter, fancied it must be antimony. A third idea was that it was black lead. It was abandoned, and the mine hole filled up, nor can we at this day hear of any piece of the mineral in possession of any one.

You say in your letter that you will send me the proofs of the commentary on Montesquieu for revisal. It is only the translation I should wish to revise. I feel myself answerable to the author for a correct publication of his ideas. The translated sheets may come by post as they are finished off; they shall be promptly returned, the originals coming with them. Accept the assurances of my esteem and respect.