Adams Family Correspondence, volume 11
I have recd your Letters in Succession to N. 9. I think inclusive but they are in So much request in this Country that I can never keep them long enough to make regular Answers to them. The Last appeared to me of Such Consequence that I Sent it to The President to whom I have communicated all of them I believe or all but the first, from London. I have Reason to think that your whole Correspondence public and private has been as much esteemed as that of any former American Minister, and more admired for a brilliancy of Style, and a freedom Independence and bolness of Sentiment, as well as a Sagacity equal to any Conjuncture of national Events.1 Go on my worthy son in your glorious Career and may the Blessing of God crown you with success.
our hasty Countrymen in The Seaports, have been Sett agoing by a treacherous Publication of The Treaty and have made work to themselves for severe Repentance. It is a grief to me to See some of our oldest Members of Congress carried away by this Gust of Wind but I had seen so much before that this does not surprize me. I have no doubt the Treaty will become The Law and be carried into Execution. Your last Letter appears to have entered perfectly into the Spirit of this Business. it has happened in America as you anticipated and from the Causes which you Saw, or suspected.2
The Newspapers have been full of Defences & Vindications of the Treaty and Refutations of the objections to it. A Fœderalist a Curtius and a Camillus have been most read and applauded.3 They have turned the Tide of popular sentiment in favour of Mr Jay the senate and the Treaty. Poor Jay has gone through as fiery an ordeal As I did, when I was Suspected of a blasphemous Doubt of Tom Paines Infallibility, in Consequence of Publicolas Eloquence and Jeffersons Rashness.4 The People repent of these Faults but they are the Sin that too easily besetts them.
I can say little of myself that will give you Pleasure. The Treaty hurt me more than any one, for the Journey & a Dissentery were too much for me. at present I am better but not capable of much Exertion. My Farm has this Year Shone— The Season has been rainy equal to any former Example and the Beauty and Production of the Country in Proportion.
What shall I say to you my son concerning yourself? I would not 21 advise you to return to America, under three Years nor to stay in Europe longer unless promoted to an higher Rank and at another Court. I want your society as well as that of my other Children, but I must submit to your and their Arrangements in Life. I wish you to come home and be married after two Years. But you must return with the Spirit of a Stoick—a determind Spirit to bear any neglect, any Affront from your Countrymen without resentment. to go obstinately to the Bar, in all our Courts and attend patiently in your office for Business—and what is infinitely worse very likely see an ignorant but chattering Coxcomb preferred before you, not only by the indiscriminating Multitude but by the wise & learned, for these are at least as often wrong as the Mob.
our Friends are all well, though a Scarlet fever prevails in many Places in this Town. I am my Dear son your / affectionate father
RC (Adams Papers); internal address: “J.Q. Adams American / Minister at The Hague.”; endorsed by TBA: “Vice President of the U, S / 25 August 1795 / 27 Oct Recd:”; and by JQA: “28. Recd: at Helvoet. / 31. Answered.” Tr (Adams Papers).
On 10 Aug. JA wrote to George Washington from Quincy enclosing JQA’s letters of 12 Feb., 1 April, 4, 22 May (nos. 6–9, respectively, all Adams Papers). JA noted that the letters “contain Information of so much Importance that, although they are written in great confidential Freedom from a Son to a Father, I think it my Duty to transmit them to you” (National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg:International Exchange Section). For Washington’s response to JA of 20 Aug., see AA to JQA, 15 Sept., and note 3, below.
JQA speculated in his 22 May letter to JA, “If these conjectures have as much foundation as I apprehend, the whole french influence in America, will exert itself with more than usual activity to prevent the Ratification of the Treaty, and to produce at all Events a War between the United States and Great Britain: not assuredly from regard to our interest, which they respect as much as they do that of their friends and Allies the Hollanders, but because they are sensible of how much importance our Commerce is to Great Britain, and suppose, that the loss of it, would make that Nation outrageous for Peace, and compel the Minister to make it upon the terms they are disposed to dictate.” He believed that the appointment of Edmond Genet as French minister to the United States had been made to discourage American neutrality, as had the later replacement of Jean Antoine Joseph Fauchet with Pierre Auguste Adet in the same position (Adams Papers).
The Federalist appeared in seven parts in eight issues of the Boston Columbian Centinel, 22, 25, 29 July, 1, 8, 12, 15, 26 August. Subtitled “The OBJECTIONS to the TREATY refuted,” the series specifically responds to attacks on the treaty made by the Boston town meeting, for which see vol. 10:474 and
AA to JQA, 15 Sept., below.
Curtius, attributed to Rufus King, was published in the New York American Minerva, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 29, 30 July, 1, 4 Aug., in eleven sections, describing itself as a “Vindication of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, with G. Britain.” Answering primarily attacks on the treaty raised in another newspaper article, Curtius offers a detailed legal analysis of the treaty, especially as it relates to other treaties, trade laws, and the law of nations.
By far the longest response to opponents of the Jay Treaty was Camillus’ “Defence,” generally believed to be written by Alexander Hamilton or possibly by Hamilton in collaboration with Rufus King; see
JA to AA, 31 Jan. 1796, below. The first 21 numbers and the first half of a 22d appeared in the New York Journal, 22 July – 7 Nov. 1795. Because of its length and the Journal’s unwillingness to
22
continue to take up so much space on it (see New York Journal, 7 Nov.), the author shifted publication to the American Minerva for the second half of No. 22 and an additional 15 sections, which appeared between 9 Nov. 1795 and 2 Jan. 1796. The first 22 parts also appeared in book form as A Defence of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, N.Y., 1795, Evans, No. 28795. Camillus analyzes the treaty in considerable depth, arguing “that it makes no improper concessions to Great-Britain, no sacrifices on the part of the United States,” “that interests of primary importance to our general welfare, are promoted by it,” and “that the too probable result of a refusal to ratify is war” (New York Journal, 22 July 1795).
For Publicola, the series of essays by JQA mistakenly attributed to JA, see vol. 9:291. Thomas Jefferson’s “Rashness” refers to a letter Jefferson wrote to a Philadelphia printer in support of the publication of Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man. In the note, which was subsequently published in various editions of Paine’s work, Jefferson commented that he was pleased “that something is at length to be publickly said against the political heresies which have sprung up among us.” Although JA is not mentioned by name, this comment was widely viewed as an attack on JA’s Discourses on Davila (Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 3d edn., Boston, 1791, p. 4, Evans, No. 23661; vol. 9:263–264).
On 31 Aug. JQA wrote a letter to JA primarily reviewing the situation in France, including the implementation of the new constitution, debates over varying political structures, and party divisions there. JQA also commented on attitudes toward the Jay Treaty in France, the progress of the Anglo-French war, and the general circumstances in the Netherlands (Adams Papers).
br15 1795—
I am ashamed to say how long it is Since I last wrote to You. I have received Your Letters to No 6.1 I believe only one, viz that from England has been lost. So valuable are Your Letters that I regreet the loss of a Line.
Freeman as you fear, will not be heard of again, untill the Sea gives up its Dead. to his Parents he is a loss that never can be made up. they are disconsolate and almost refuse to be comforted. to his Friends and acquaintance he had greatly endeard himself, by his amiable manners and his engageing Deportment. The House of vance & Freeman have been peculiarly unfortunate. since his absence, a valuable vessel & cargo have been captured, belonging to them, and it is Said here that mr Freemans affairs were much embarrassd2
I have felt a reluctance at taking my pen to write you ever since the meeting of the Senate in June, to relate the dishonour and the disgrace of any portion of our Countrymen is a painfull task. no event Since the commencment of the Government, has excited so much undue heat, so much bitter Acrimony, so much base invective, as has been pourd forth against mr. Jay and the Treaty. one of the most mortifying circumstances, is to see Some worthy and respectable Characters Drawn in to the vortex and made the Dupes of 23 Jacobine leaders & F——h Emisaries Your Letter to your Father No 9 is a clue to the whole buisness. it Devolops the dark and secreet designs of those agents of mischief. the contents of that Letter were so important at the period, when it arrived that your Father immediatly inclosed it to the President, who returnd it with the following Passage,
“Mr J Q Adams Your Son must not think of retireing from the walk he is now in. his prospects if he continues in it are fair and I shall be much mistaken if in as short a period as can be expected, he is not found at the head of the Diplomatique Corps—let the Government be administerd by whom so ever the people may chuse his Letter No 9 discloses much important information and political foresight for this proof of your kindness & confidence I pray You to accept my most cordial thanks”3
Many have been the voilent publications against the Treaty. the Train was so concerted that a multilated part of the Treaty, said to be taken from memory, appeard in the Boston papers.4 this was sufficient to exasperate candid & good men. no sooner was this accomplishd, than Benny was Sent on to Boston with Masons coppy, so that the first remonstrance was drawn up in Boston, and as Peter Porcupine observes, in Such haste were the Citizens of that Town, to get the start of other places that the first copy of the Treaty had not been arrived in Town 24 hours—before a Town meeting was convened to condemn it. at this meeting a motion was made to read the Treaty, at least before they remonstrated against it, but this motion was not even Seconded. Jarvis was the Demagogue, and orator. they had an unanimous vote. few persons of Character chusing to remain at a meeting where hissing and Noise and clamour excluded reason and argument.5 N York was not much behind Boston in point of Time, and in other respects far outstriped them, as Stones and Brick Bats were Substituded in the room of Hisses— Smith was their Chairman. a proposition was made for adjourning to a more convenient place for a fair and full discussion, but this was opposed with much clamour.6 there were a great majority of the Merchants Traders and people of property both in Boston & N York in favour of the Treaty, as soon as time was given them to examine & judge for themselves. this will appear by the Names of the Protestors, but the Flame was lighted up, and it spread from capital to capital, Damning cursing the Treaty, mr Jay Senators & even President. the President by a wise and cool and judicious reply to the Boston committe, appeard to allay the Ferment for a Time. several Learned
24
and able pens have been engaged to vindicate the Treaty & enlighten the people. Camillus said to be col H
You are call’d upon to take a part in this important Buisness— You have put your hand to the plough, and I know you too well to believe or even wish you to look Back; or shrink from your Duty however Arduous or Dangerous the task assignd you. You will prove Yourself the Genuine Scion of the stock from whence You sprang. “Yet with Milton You may say, you are thrown on perilious Times.[”]
My petition to Heaven for you is, that in the Hands of an over Ruling Providence you may be instrumental of much good to your country and that your Life and Health may be preserved a blessing to your Parents and a comfort to their declining Years— this and no other is the ambition of your ever affectionate Mother
RC (Adams Papers); endorsed: “My Mother. / 15. Septr: 1795. / 21. Decr:— recd. London / 6. Jany: 1796. ansd:.”
For JQA’s letters to AA of 25 April and 16 May (nos. 5 and 6), see vol. 10:419–422, 434–438.
Freeman & Vans, the business partnership of Jonathan Freeman Jr. and William Vans, had suffered a number of financial reverses between 1794 and 1795. They lost four ships with substantial cargo to wreck or capture, failed to receive payments due for thousands of dollars worth of goods, and faced substantial debts of their own in Great Britain (William Vans, An Appeal to the Public, by William Vans, Native Citizen of Massachusetts, against the Slanders Circulated by Stephen Codman, Salem, 1827, p. 53, 100–104). See also vol. 10:437–438.
George Washington to JA, 20 Aug. (NHi: Gilder Lehrman Coll., on deposit). See JA to JQA, 25 Aug., and notes 1 and 2, above.
The Boston Independent Chronicle, 6 July, reprinted from the Philadelphia Aurora General Advertiser, 29 June, a heavily edited
25
summary version of the treaty “collected from memory after an attentive perusal” by an unnamed “Citizen.” The introduction further notes, “There necessarily must be deficiencies in an account of this kind which depends entirely upon memory, and for the same reason there may be inaccuracies, but I trust the latter are few.”
For Benjamin Franklin Bache’s publication of the treaty, provided to him by Sen. Stevens Thomson Mason, see vol. 10:467; for the first Boston publication in the Columbian Centinel, 8 July, and subsequent town meeting on 10 July, see same, p. 472–473, 474. George Washington responded to the Boston town meeting’s petition in a reply dated 28 July and directed to the selectmen of Boston. In his letter Washington noted, “I have weighed with attention every argument which has at any time been brought into view. But the Constitution is the guide which I never can abandon.—it has assigned to the President the power of making Treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate. It was doubtless supposed that these two branches of government would combine without passion and with the best means of information, those facts and principles upon which the success of our foreign relations will always depend; that they ought not to substitute for their own conviction the opinions of others; or to seek truth through any channel but that of a temperate and well informed investigation.” The letter was printed in the Philadelphia Gazette, 15 Aug., and first appeared in Boston in the Massachusetts Mercury, 18 August.
Mason (1760–1803), a Virginia lawyer, had replaced James Monroe as Virginia’s senator in 1794; he would serve until his death (
Biog. Dir. Cong.
).
For the New York City town meeting on the Jay Treaty, chaired by WSS, see vol. 10:473, 474.
William Loughton Smith published anonymously A Candid Examination of the Objections to the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, between the United States and Great Britain. … By a Citizen of South-Carolina, Charleston, S.C., 1795, Evans, No. 29534. William Cobbett, as Peter Porcupine, wrote A Little Plain English, Addressed to the People of the United States, on the Treaty, Negociated with His Britannic Majesty, and on the Conduct of the President Relative Thereto, Phila., 1795, Evans, No. 28437.
Some 160 inhabitants of Dracut, Mass., met in a town meeting in early Aug. 1795 to debate the Jay Treaty. “After discussion thereon they passed several resolutions expressive of thir disapprobation of it, which were voted to communicated to the President of the United States. A vote also passed, for an address to His Excellency the Governor, requesting him to call the General Court together, to ‘remonstrate against the fatal instrument’” (Massachusetts Mercury, 11 Aug.; Newburyport Impartial Herald, 11 Aug.).
The Echo; or, A Satirical Poem on the Virtuous Ten, and Other Celebrated Characters, Hartford, Conn., 1795, Evans, No. 28855, appeared in the Connecticut Courant, 17, 24 Aug., as “Echo.—No. XVIII” and was first published in the Boston Federal Orrery, 20, 27 August. Later attributed to Lemuel Hopkins, the poem mocks the so-called Virtuous Ten, that is, the ten senators who voted against consenting to the Jay Treaty. In the poem, an opponent of the treaty opines, “I tho’t when Mr. Jay was sent to treat, / That Britain was to lose and we to get; / Instead of which, it seems, that Mr. Jay / Basely agrees to meet them half the way. / How foolish! how ridiculous a plan, / To take an inch, when he might had a span! / He ought at least to have made them promise well, / Even if he knew they never would fulfil. / This is the rule I practise every day, / I often promise, but I seldom pay” (p. 12).