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

I have thus gone far beyond the single view of your letter, that you may, under any circumstances, form a just estimate of what he would be disposed to do. God bless you, and carry you safely through all your difficulties.

TO MR. CHARLES F. WELLES

Monticello, December 3, 1809.

Sir,—I received, within a few days past, your favor of February 29th, (for September, I presume,) in either case it has been long on the way. It covered the two pieces of poetry it referred to. Of all the charges brought against me by my political adversaries, that of possessing some science has probably done them the least credit. Our countrymen are too enlightened themselves, to believe that ignorance is the best qualification for their service. If Mr. M. solicits a seat in Congress, I am sure he will be more just to himself, and more respectful to his electors, than to claim it on this ground.

Without pretending to all the merits so kindly ascribed by the more friendly and poetical answer, I feel the right of claiming that of integrity of motives. Whether the principles of the majority of our fellow citizens, or of the little minority still opposing them, be most friendly to the rights of man, posterity will judge; and to that arbiter I submit my own conduct with cheerfulness. It has been a great happiness to me, to have received the approbation of so great a portion of my fellow citizens, and particularly of those who have opportunities of inquiring, reading and deciding for themselves. It is on this view that I owe you especial acknowledgments, which I pray you to accept with the assurances of my respect.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Monticello, December 7, 1809.

Dear Sir,—The enclosed letter is from Father Richard, the Director of a school at Detroit, being on a subject in which the departments both of the Treasury and War are concerned, I take the liberty of enclosing it to yourself as the centre which may unite these two agencies. The transactions which it alludes to took place in the months of December and January preceding my retirement from office, and as I think it possible they may not have been fully placed on the records of the War office, because they were conducted verbally for the most part, I will give a general statement of them as well as my recollection will enable me. In the neighborhood of Detroit (two or three miles from the town) is a farm, formerly the property of one Earnest, a bankrupt Collector. It is now in the possession of the Treasury department, as a pledge for a sum in which he is in default to the government, much beyond the value of the farm. As it is a good one, has proper buildings, and in a proper position for the purpose contemplated, General Dearborne proposed to purchase it for the War department at its real value. Mr. Gallatin thought he should ask the sum for which it was hypothecated. I do not remember the last idea in which we all concurred; but I believe it was that, as the Treasury must, in the end, sell it for what it could get, the War department would become a bidder as far as its real value, and in the meantime would rent it. On this farm we proposed to assemble the following establishments: 1st. Father Richards' school. He teaches the children of the inhabitants of Detroit—but the part of the school within our view was that of the young Indian girls instructed by two French females, natives of the place, who devote their whole time and their own property, which was not inconsiderable, to the care and instruction of Indian girls in carding, spinning, weaving, sewing, and the other household arts suited to the condition of the poor, and as practiced by the white women of that condition. Reading and writing were an incidental part of their education. We proposed that the War department should furnish the farm and the houses for the use of the school gratis, and add $400 a year to the funds, and that the benefits of the Institution should be extended to the boys also of the neighboring tribes, who were to be lodged, fed, and instructed there.

2d. To establish there the farmer at present employed by the United States, to instruct those Indians in the use of the plough and other implements and practices of agriculture, and in the general management of the farm. This man was to labor the farm himself, and to have the aid of the boys through a principal portion of the day, by which they would contract habits of industry, learn the business of farming, and provide subsistence for the whole Institution. Reading and writing were to be a secondary object.

3d. To remove thither the carpenter and smith at present employed by the United States among the same Indians; with whom such of the boys as had a turn for it should work and learn their trades.

This establishment was recommended by the further circumstance that whenever the Indians come to Detroit on trade or other business, they encamp on or about this farm. This would give them opportunities of seeing their sons and daughters, and their advancement in the useful arts—of seeing and learning from example all the operations and process of a farm, and of always carrying home themselves some additional knowledge of these things. It was thought more important to extend the civilized arts, and to introduce a separation of property among the Indians of the country around Detroit than elsewhere, because learning to set a high value on their property, and losing by degrees all other dependence for subsistence, they would deprecate war with us as bringing certain destruction on their property, and would become a barrier for that distant and isolated post against the Indians beyond them. There are beyond them some strong tribes, as the Sacs, Foxes, &c., with whom we have as yet had little connection, and slender opportunities of extending to them our benefits and influence. They are therefore ready instruments to be brought into operation on us by a powerful neighbor, which still cultivates its influence over them by nourishing the savage habits which waste them, rather than by encouraging the civilized arts which would soften, conciliate and preserve them. The whole additional expense to the United States was to be the price of the farm, and an increase of $400 in the annual expenditures for these tribes.

This is the sum of my recollections. I cannot answer for their exactitude in all details, but General Dearborne could supply and correct the particulars of my statement. Mr. Gallatin, too was so often in consultation on the subject, that he must have been informed of the whole plan; and his memory is so much better than mine, that he will be able to make my statement what it should be. Add to this that I think I generally informed yourself of our policy and proceedings in the case, as we went along; and, if I am not mistaken, it was one of the articles of a memorandum I left with you of things still in fieri, and which would merit your attention. I have thought it necessary to put you in possession of these facts, that you might understand the grounds of Father Richards' application, and be enabled to judge for yourself of the expediency of pursuing the plan, or of the means of withdrawing from it with justice to the individuals employed in its execution. How far we are committed with the Indians themselves in this business will be seen in a speech of mine to them, of January 31st, filed in the War office, and perhaps something more may have passed to them from the Secretary of War. Always affectionately yours.

TO DR. CHAPMAN

Monticello, December 11, 1809.

Sir,—Your favor of November 10th did not come to hand till the 29th of that month. The subject you have chosen for the next anniversary discourse of the Linnean Society, is certainly a very interesting and also a difficult one. The change which has taken place in our climate, is one of those facts which all men of years are sensible of, and yet none can prove by regular evidence, they can only appeal to each other's general observation for the fact. I remember that when I was a small boy, (say 60 years ago,) snows were frequent and deep in every winter—to my knee very often, to my waist sometimes—and that they covered the earth long. And I remember while yet young, to have heard from very old men, that in their youth, the winters had been still colder, with deeper and longer snows. In the year 1772, (37 years ago,) we had a snow two feet deep in the champain parts of this State, and three feet in the counties next below the mountains. That year is still marked in conversation by the designation of "the year of the deep snow." But I know of no regular diaries of the weather very far back. In latter times, they might perhaps be found. While I lived at Washington, I kept a diary, and by recurring to that, I observe that from the winter of 1802-3, to that of 1808-9, inclusive, the average fall of snow of the seven winters was only fourteen and a half inches, and that the ground was covered but sixteen days in each winter on an average of the whole. The maximum in any one winter, during that period, was twenty-one inches fall, and thirty-four days on the ground. The change in our climate is very shortly noticed in the Notes on Virginia, because I had few facts to state but from my own recollections, then only of thirty or thirty-five years. Since that my whole time has been so completely occupied in public vocations, that I have been able to pay but little attention to this subject, and if I have heard any facts respecting it, I made no note of them, and they have escaped my memory. Thus, sir, with every disposition to furnish you with any information in my possession, I can only express my regrets at the entire want of them. Nor do I know of any source in this State, now existing, from which anything on the subject can be derived. Williams, in his History of Vermont, has an essay on the change of climate in Europe, Asia and Africa, and has very ingeniously laid history under contribution for materials. Doctor Williamson has written on the change of our climate, in one of the early volumes of our philosophical transactions. Both of these are doubtless known to you.

Wishing it had been in my power to have been more useful to you, I pray you to accept the assurances of my esteem and respect.

TO W. C. NICHOLAS, ESQ

Monticello, December 16, 1809.

Dear Sir,—I now enclose you the agricultural catalogue. I do not know whether I have made it more or less comprehensive than you wished; but in either case, you can make it what it should be by reduction or addition—there are probably other good books with which I am unacquainted. I do not possess the Geoponica, nor Rozier's Dictionary. All the others I have, and set them down on my own knowledge, except Young's Experimental Agriculture, which I have not, but had the benefit of reading your copy. I am sorry to address this catalogue to Warren, instead of Washington. Never was there a moment when it was so necessary to unite all the wisdom of the nation in its councils. Our affairs are certainly now at their ultimate point of crisis. I understand the Eastern Republicans will agree to nothing which shall render not-intercourse effectual, and that in any question of that kind, the Federalists will have a majority. There remains, then, only war or submission, and if we adopt the former, they will desert us. Under these difficulties you ought not to have left us. A temporary malady was not a just ground for permanent withdrawing, and you are too young to be entitled as yet to decline public duties. I think there never was a time when your presence in Congress was more desirable. However, the die is cast, and we have only to regret what we cannot repair. You must indulge me a little in scolding on this subject, and the rather as it is the effect of my great esteem and respect.

TO MR. SAMUEL KERCHEVAL

Monticello, January 15, 1810.

Sir,—Your favor of December 12th has been duly received, as was also that of September 28th. With the blank subscription paper for the academy of Frederic county, enclosed in your letter of September, nothing has been done. I go rarely from home, and therefore have little opportunity of soliciting subscriptions. Nor could I do it in the present case in conformity with my own judgment of what is best for institutions of this kind. We are all doubtless bound to contribute a certain portion of our income to the support of charitable and other useful public institutions. But it is a part of our duty also to apply our contributions in the most effectual way we can to secure their object. The question then is whether this will not be better done by each of us appropriating our whole contributions to the institutions within our own reach, under our own eye; and over which we can exercise some useful control? Or would it be better that each should divide the sum he can spare among all the institutions of his State, or of the United States? Reason, and the interest of these institutions themselves, certainly decide in favor of the former practice. This question has been forced on me heretofore by the multitude of applications which have come to me from every quarter of the Union on behalf of academies, churches, missions, hospitals, charitable establishments, &c. Had I parcelled among them all the contributions which I could spare, it would have been for each too feeble a sum to be worthy of being either given or received. If each portion of the State, on the contrary, will apply its aids and its attentions exclusively to those nearest around them, all will be better taken care of. Their support, their conduct, and the best administration of their funds, will be under the inspection and control of those most convenient to take cognizance of them, and most interested in their prosperity. With these impressions myself, I could not propose to others what my own judgment disapproved, as to their duty as well as my own. These considerations appear so conclusive to myself, that I trust they will be a sufficient apology for my not having fulfilled your wishes with respect to the paper enclosed. They are therefore submitted to your candor, with assurances of my best wishes for the success of the institution you patronize, and of my respect and consideration for yourself.

TO MR. EPPES

Monticello, January 17, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Yours of the 10th came safely to hand, and I now enclose you a letter from Francis; he continues in excellent health, and employs his time well. He has written to his mamma and grandmamma. I observe that the H. of R. are sensible of the ill effects of the long speeches in their house on their proceedings. But they have a worse effect in the disgust they excite among the people, and the disposition they are producing to transfer their confidence from the legislature to the executive branch, which would soon sap our constitution. These speeches, therefore, are less and less read, and if continued will cease to be read at all. The models for that oratory which is to produce the greatest effect by securing the attention of hearers and readers, are to be found in Livy, Tacitus, Sallust, and most assuredly not in Cicero. I doubt if there is a man in the world who can now read one of his orations through but as a piece of task-work. I observe the house is endeavoring to remedy the eternal protraction of debate by setting up all night, or by the use of the Previous Question. Both will subject them to the most serious inconvenience. The latter may be turned upon themselves by a trick of their adversaries. I have thought that such a rule as the following would be more effectual and less inconvenient. "Resolved that at [viii.] o'clock in the evening (whenever the house shall be in session at that hour) it shall be the duty of the Speaker to declare that hour arrived, whereupon all debate shall cease. If there be then before the house a main question for the reading or passing of a bill, resolution or order, such main question shall immediately be put by the Speaker, and decided by yeas and nays.

"If the question before the house be secondary, as for amendment, commitment, postponement, adjournment of the debate or question, laying on the table, reading papers, or a previous question, such secondary, [or any other which may delay the main question,] shall stand ipso facto discharged, and the main question shall then be before the house, and shall be immediately put and decided by yeas and nays. But a motion for adjournment of the house, may once and once only, take place of the main question, and if decided in the negative, the main question shall then be put as before. Should any question of order arise, it shall be decided by the Speaker instanter, and without debate or appeal; and questions of privilege arising, shall be postponed till the main question be decided. Messages from the President or Senate may be received but not acted on till after the decision of the main question. But this rule shall be suspended during the [three] last days of the session of Congress."

No doubt this, on investigation, will be found to need amendment; but I think the principle of it better adapted to meet the evil than any other which has occurred to me. You can consider and decide upon it, however, and make what use of it you please, only keeping the source of it to yourself. Ever affectionately yours.

TO MR. SAMUEL KERCHEVAL

Monticello, January 19, 1810.

Sir,—Yours of the 7th inst. has been duly received, with the pamphlet enclosed, for which I return you my thanks. Nothing can be more exactly and seriously true than what is there stated: that but a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State: that the purest system of morals ever before preached to man has been adulterated and sophisticated by artificial constructions, into a mere contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves: that rational men, not being able to swallow their impious heresies, in order to force them down their throats, they raise the hue and cry of infidelity, while themselves are the greatest obstacles to the advancement of the real doctrines of Jesus, and do, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ.

You expect that your book will have some effect on the prejudices which the society of Friends entertain against the present and late administrations. In this I think you will be disappointed. The Friends are men formed with the same passions, and swayed by the same natural principles and prejudices as others. In cases where the passions are neutral, men will display their respect for the religious professions of their sect. But where their passions are enlisted, these professions are no obstacle. You observe very truly, that both the late and present administration conducted the government on principles professed by the Friends. Our efforts to preserve peace, our measures as to the Indians, as to slavery, as to religious freedom, were all in consonance with their profession. Yet I never expected we should get a vote from them, and in this I was neither deceived nor disappointed. There is no riddle in this to those who do not suffer themselves to be duped by the professions of religions sectaries. The theory of American Quakerism is a very obvious one. The mother society is in England. Its members are English by birth and residence, devoted to their own country as good citizens ought to be. The Quakers of these States are colonies or filiations from the mother society, to whom that society sends its yearly lessons. On these, the filiated societies model their opinions, their conduct, their passions and attachments. A Quaker is essentially an Englishman, in whatever part of the earth he is born or lives. The outrages of Great Britain on our navigation and commerce, have kept us in perpetual bickerings with her. The Quakers here have taken side against their own government, not on their profession of peace, for they saw that peace was our object also; but from devotion to the views of the mother society. In 1797-8, when an administration sought war with France, the Quakers were the most clamorous for war. Their principle of peace, as a secondary one, yielded to the primary one of adherence to the Friends in England, and what was patriotism in the original, became treason in the copy. On that occasion, they obliged their good old leader, Mr. Pemberton, to erase his name from a petition to Congress against war, which had been delivered to a Representative of Pennsylvania, a member of the late and present administration; he accordingly permitted the old gentleman to erase his name. You must not therefore expect that your book will have any more effect on the Society of Friends here, than on the English merchants settled among us. I apply this to the Friends in general, not universally. I know individuals among them as good patriots as we have.

I thank you for the kind wishes and sentiments towards myself, expressed in your letter, and sincerely wish to yourself the blessings of heaven and happiness.

TO MR. BALDWIN

Monticello, January 19, 1810.

Thomas Jefferson returns to Mr. Baldwin his thanks for the copy of the letters of Cerus and Amicus just received from him. He sincerely wishes its circulation among the Society of Friends may have the effect Mr. Baldwin expects, of abating their prejudices against the government of their country. But he apprehends their disease is too deeply seated; that identifying themselves with the mother society in England, and taking from them implicitly their politics, their principles and passions, it will be long before they will cease to be Englishmen in everything but the place of their birth, and to consider that, and not America, as their real country. He is particularly thankful to Mr. Baldwin for the kind wishes and sentiments expressed in his letter, and sincerely wishes to him the blessings of health and happiness.

TO MR. THOMAS T. HEWSON

Monticello, January 21, 1810.

Sir,—I have duly received your favor of the 8th inst., informing me that the American Philosophical Society had been pleased again unanimously to re-elect me their President. For these continued testimonials of their favor, I can but renew the expressions of my continued gratitude, and the assurances of my entire devotion to their service. If, in my present situation, I can in any wise forward their laudable pursuits for the information and benefit of mankind, all other duties shall give place to that.

I pray you to be the channel of communicating these sentiments, with the expressions of my dutiful respects to the Society, and to accept, yourself, the assurance of my great esteem and respect.

TO THE HONORABLE PAUL HAMILTON

Monticello, January 23, 1810.

Sir,—The enclosed letter would have been more properly addressed to yourself, or perhaps to the Secretary of War. I have no knowledge at all of the writer; but suppose the best use I can make of his letter, as to himself or the public, is to enclose it to you for such notice only as the public utility may entitle it to; perhaps I should ask the favor of you to communicate it, with the samples, and with my friendly respects, to the Secretary of War, who may know something of the writer. I recollect that his predecessor made some trial of cotton tenting, and found it good against the water. Its combustibility, however, must be an objection to it for that purpose, and perhaps even on shipboard. I avail myself of the occasion which this circumstance presents of expressing my sincere anxieties for the prosperity of the administration in all its parts, which indeed involves the prosperity of us all, and of tendering to yourself in particular the assurances of my high respect and consideration.

TO MR. BARLOW

Monticello, January 24, 1810.

Dear Sir,—Yours of the 15th is received, and I am disconsolate on learning my mistake as to your having a dynamometer. My object being to bring a plough to be made here to the same standard of comparison by which Guillaume's has been proved, nothing less would be satisfactory than an instrument made by the same standard. I must import one, therefore, but how, in the present state of non-intercourse, is the difficulty. I do not know * * * personally, but by character well. He is the most red-hot federalist, famous, or rather infamous for the lying and slandering which he vomited from the pulpit in the political harangues with which he polluted the place. I was honored with much of it. He is a man who can prove everything if you will take his word for proof. Such evidence of Hamilton's being a republican he may bring; but Mr. Adams, Edmund Randolph, and myself, could repeat an explicit declaration of Hamilton's against which * * proofs would weigh nothing.