Monticello, April 21, 1807.
Some very unusual delay has happened to the post, as I received yesterday only my letter from Philadelphia, as far back as April 9th, and Washington, April 11th. Of course yours of the 13th and 16th were then only received, and being overwhelmed with such an accumulated mail, I must be short, as the post goes out in a few hours. I return you Huston's, Findlay's, and Governor Harrison's letters. J. Smith's is retained because it is full of nominations. I had received, a week ago, from a member of the Pennsylvania legislature, a copy of their act for the Western road. I immediately wrote to Mr. Moore that we should consider the question whether the road should pass through Uniontown, as now decided affirmatively, and I referred to the commissionerto reconsider the question whether it should also pass through Brownsville, and to decide it according to their own judgment. I desired him to undertake the superintendence of the execution, to begin the work in time to lay out the whole appropriation this summer, and to employ it in making effectually good the most difficult parts. I approve of Governor Harrison's lease to Taylor, and of the conveying the salt water by pipes to the fuel and navigation, rather than the fuel and navigation to the Saline. I think it our indispensable duty to remove immediately all intruders from the lands, the timber of which will be wanting for the Salines, and will sign any order you will be so good as to prepare for that purpose. You are hereby authorized to announce to the collector of Savannah, his removal, if you judge it for the public good. I recollect nothing of Bullock, the attorney, and not having my papers here, I am not able to refresh my memory concerning him. I expect to leave this, on my return to Washington, about three weeks hence. Your estimate of the number of foreign seamen in our employ, renders it prudent, in my opinion, to drop the idea of any proposition not to employ them. As we had made up our minds on every article of the British treaty, when consulting together, and this idea was only an after thought referred for enquiry and consideration, we had better take more time for it. Time strengthens my belief that no equal treaty will be obtained from such a higher as Lord Auckland, or from the present ministry, Fox being no longer with them, and that we shall be better without any treaty than an unequal one. Perhaps we may engage them to act on certain articles, including their note on impressment, by a mutual understanding, under the pretext of further time to arrange a general treaty. Perhaps, too, the general peace will, in the meantime, establish for us better principles than we can obtain ourselves.
I enclose a letter from Gideon Fitz. Affectionate salutes.
Monticello, April 22, 1807.
Dear Sir,—I received on the 20th your favor of the 10th instant, and yesterday I wrote to desire the Secretary of State to forward your passport to Elizabethtown. In the visit you propose to make to your native country, I sincerely wish you may find its situation, and your own interests in it, satisfactory. On what it has been, is, or shall be, however, I shall say nothing. I consider Europe, at present, as a world apart from us, about which it is improper for us even to form opinions, or to indulge any wishes but the general one, that whatever is to take place in it, may be for its happiness. For yourself, however, personally, I may express with safety as well as truth, my great esteem and the interest I feel for your welfare. From the same principles of caution, I do not write to my friend Kosciusko. I know he is always doing what he thinks is right, and he knows my prayers for his success in whatever he does. Assure him, if you please, of my constant affection, and accept yourself my wishes for a safe and pleasant voyage, with my friendly salutations and assurances of great esteem and respect.
Monticello, April 25, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Yours of the 20th came to hand on the 23d, and I now return all the papers it covered, to wit, Harris's, Maunce's, and General Smith's letters, as also some papers respecting Burr's case, for circulation. Under another cover is a letter from Governor Williams, confidential, and for yourself alone, as yet. I expect we shall have to remove Meade. Under still a different cover you will receive Monroe's and Pinckney's letters, detained at the last post. I wrote you then on the subject of the British treaty, which the more it is developed the worse it appears. Mr. Rodney being supposed absent, I enclose you a letter fromMr. Reed, advising the summoning Rufus Easton as a witness; but if he is at St. Louis, he cannot be here by the 22d of May. You will observe that Governor Williams asks immediate instructions what he shall do with Blennerhasset, Tyler, Floyd, and Ralston. I do not know that we can do anything but direct General Wilkinson to receive and send them to any place where the judge shall decide they ought to be tried. I suppose Blennerhasset should come to Richmond. On consulting with the other gentlemen, be so good as to write to Williams immediately, as a letter will barely get there by the 4th Monday of May. I enclose you a warrant for five thousand dollars for Mr. Rodney, in the form advised by Mr. Gallatin.
We have had three great rains within the last thirteen days. It is just now clearing off after thirty-six hours of rain, with little intermission. Yet it is thought not too much. I salute you with sincere affection.
Monticello, May 1,1807.
Sir,—On the 14th of April I wrote to you, on the presumption that a law respecting the western road had passed the Legislature of Pennsylvania, in the form enclosed by Mr. Dorsey, and which I enclosed to you. I have now received from the Governor an authentic copy of the law, which agrees with that I forwarded to you. You will therefore be pleased to consider the contents of that letter as founded in the certainty of the fact that the law did pass in that form, although not certainly known at that time, and proceed on it accordingly. I shall be in Washington on the 16th and 17th inst., should you have occasion for further communication with me. I salute you with esteem and respect.
Monticello, May 1, 1807.
Dear Sir,—I return you Monroe's, Armstrong's, Harris's, and Anderson's letters, and add a letter and act from Gov. McKean, to be filed in your office. The proposition for separating the western country, mentioned by Armstrong to have been made at Paris, is important. But what is the declaration he speaks of? for none accompanies his letter, unless he means Harry Grant's proposition. I wish our Ministers at Paris, London, and Madrid, could find out Burr's propositions and agents there. I know few of the characters of the new British administration. The few I know are true Pittites, and anti-American. From them we have nothing to hope, but that they will readily let us back out. Whether they can hold their places will depend on the question whether the Irish propositions be popular or unpopular in England. Dr. Sibley, in a letter to Gen. Dearborne, corrects an error of fact in my message to Congress of December. He says the Spaniards never had a single soldier at Bayou Pierre till after 1805. Consequently it was not a keeping, but a taking of a military possession of that post. I think Gen. Dearborne would do well to desire Sibley to send us affidavits of that fact.
Our weather continues extremely seasonable, and favorable for vegetation. I salute you with sincere affection.
P. S. The pamphlet and papers shall be returned by next post.
Monticello, May 2, 1807.
Sir,—Your favor of the 18th came to hand two days ago. That the ingenuity of an advocate, seeking for something to defend his client, should have hazarded as an objection that it did not appear on the face of the patent itself, that you had complied with the requisitions of the act authorizing a patent for your invention, is not wonderful; but I do not expect that such an objectioncan seriously embarrass the good sense of a judge. The law requires, indeed, that certain acts shall be performed by the inventor to authorize a monopoly of his invention, and, to secure their being done, it has called in, and relied on, the agency of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and President. When they are satisfied the acts have been done, they are to execute a patent, granting to the inventor the monopoly. But the law does not require that the patent itself should bear the evidence that they should have been performed, any more than it requires that in a judgment should be stated all the evidence on which it is founded. The evidence of the acts on which the patent is founded, rests with those whose duty it is to see that they are performed; in fact, it is in the Secretary of State's office, where the interloper or inventor may have recourse to it if wanting. If these high officers have really failed to see that the acts were performed, or to preserve evidence of it, they have broken their trust to the public, and are responsible to the public; but their negligence cannot invalidate the inventor's right, who has been guilty of no fault. On the contrary, the patent, which is a record, has conveyed a right to him from the public, and that it was issued rightfully ought to be believed on the signature of these high officers affixed to the patent,—this being a solemn pledge on their part that the acts had been performed. Would their assertion of the fact, in the patent itself, pledge them more to the public? I do not think, then, that the disinterested judgment of a court can find difficulty in this objection. At any rate your right will be presumed valid, until they decide that it is not. Their final decision alone can authorize your resort to any remedial authority,—that is to say, to the Legislature, who alone can provide a remedy. Certainly an inventor ought to be allowed a right to the benefit of his invention for some certain time. It is equally certain it ought not to be perpetual; for to embarrass society with monopolies for every utensil existing, and in all the details of life, would be more injurious to them than had the supposed inventors never existed; because the natural understanding of its members would have suggested the samethings or others as good. How long the term should be is the difficult question. Our Legislators have copied the English estimate of the term, perhaps without sufficiently considering how much longer, in a country so much more sparsely settled, it takes for an invention to become known, and used to an extent profitable to the inventor. Nobody wishes more than I do that ingenuity should receive a liberal encouragement: nobody estimates higher the utility which society has derived from that displayed by yourself; and I assure you with truth, that I shall always be ready to manifest it by every service I can render you. To this assurance I add that of my great respect and esteem, and my friendly salutations.
Monticello, May 5, 1807.
I return you the pamphlet of the author of War in Disguise. Of its first half, the topics and the treatment of them are very commonplace; but from page 118 to 130 it is most interesting to all nations, and especially to us. Convinced that a militia of all ages promiscuously are entirely useless for distant service, and that we never shall be safe until we have a selected corps for a year's distant service at least, the classification of our militia is now the most essential thing the United States have to do. Whether, on Bonaparte's plan of making a class for every year between certain periods, or that recommended in my message, I do not know, but I rather incline to his. The idea is not new, as, you may remember, we adopted it once in Virginia during the revolution, but abandoned it too soon. It is the real secret of Bonaparte's success. Could H. Smith put better matter into his paper than the twelve pages above mentioned, and will you suggest it to him? No effort should be spared to bring the public mind to this great point. I salute you with sincere affection.
Monticello, May 7, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Your two letters of March 27th and April 6th have been received. Writing from this place, where I have not my papers to turn to, I cannot even say whether I have received such as you ask copies of. But I am sorry to answer any request of yours by saying that a compliance would be a breach of trust. It is essential for the public interest that I should receive all the information possible respecting either matters or persons connected with the public. To induce people to give this information, they must feel assured that when deposited with me it is secret and sacred. Honest men might justifiably withhold information, if they expected the communication would be made public, and commit them to war with their neighbors and friends. This imposes the duty on me of considering such information as mere suggestions for inquiry, and to put me on my guard; and to injure no man by forming any opinion until the suggestion be verified. Long experience in this school has by no means strengthened the disposition to believe too easily. On the contrary, it has begotten an incredulity which leaves no one's character in danger from any hasty conclusion. I hope these considerations will satisfy you, both as they respect you and myself, and that you will be assured I shall always be better pleased with those cases which admit that compliance with your wishes which is always pleasing to me. Accept my salutations, and assurances of great esteem and respect.
Monticello, May 8, 1807.
I return you Monroe's letter of March 5th. As the explosion in the British ministry took place about the 15th, I hope we shall be spared the additional embarrassment of his convention. I enclose you a letter of Michael Jones for circulation, and to restwith the Attorney General. It contains new instances of Burr's enlistments. I received this from Mr. Gallatin, so you can hand it to General Dearborne direct.
I expect to leave this on the 13th, but there is a possible occurrence which may prevent it till the 19th, which however is not probable. Accept affectionate salutations.
Washington, May 20, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Dr. Bollman, on his arrival here in custody in January, voluntarily offered to make communications to me, which he accordingly did, Mr. Madison also being present. I previously and subsequently assured him, (without, however, his having requested it,) that they should never be usedagainst himself. Mr. Madison on the same evening committed to writing, by memory, what he had said; and I moreover asked of Bollman to do it himself, which he did, and I now enclose it to you. The object is, as he is to be a witness, that you may know how to examine him, and draw everything from him. I wish the paper to be seen and known only to yourself and the gentlemen who aid you, and to be returned to me. If he should prevaricate, I should be willing you should go so far as to ask him whether he did not say so and so to Mr. Madison and myself. In order to let him see that his prevarications will be marked, Mr. Madison will forward you a pardon for him, which we mean should be delivered previously. It is suspected by some he does not intend to appear. If he does not, I hope you will take effectual measures to have him immediately taken into custody. Some other blank pardons are sent on to be filled up at your discretion, if you should find a defect of evidence, and believe that this would supply it, by avoiding to give them to the gross offenders, unless it be visible that the principal will otherwise escape. I send you an affidavit of importance received last night. If General Wilkinson gets on in time, I expect he will bring Dunbaugh onwith him. At any rate it may be a ground for an arrest and commitment for treason. Accept my friendly salutations, and assurances of great esteem and respect.
Washington, May 24, 1807.
Sir,—I received, in due time, your favor of April 10th, enclosing a scheme and subscription for the establishment of a museum of natural history, at Williamsburgh, by private contributions. Nobody can desire more ardently than myself, to concur in whatever may promote useful science, and I view no science with more partiality than natural history. But I have ever believed that in this, as in most other cases, abortive attempts retard rather than promote this object. To be really useful we must keep pace with the state of society, and not dishearten it by attempts at what its population, means, or occupations will fail in attempting. In the particular enterprises for museums, we have seen the populous and wealthy cities of Boston and New York unable to found or maintain such an institution. The feeble condition of that in each of these places sufficiently proves this. In Philadelphia alone, has this attempt succeeded to a good degree? It has been owing there to a measure of zeal and perseverance in an individual rarely equalled; to a population, crowded, wealthy, and more than usually addicted to the pursuit of knowledge. And, with all this, the institution does not maintain itself. The proprietor has been obliged to return to the practice of his original profession to help it on. I know, indeed, that there are many individuals in Williamsburg, and its vicinity, who have already attained a high degree of science, and many zealously pursuing it. But after viewing all circumstances there as favorably as the most sanguine of us could wish, I cannot find in them a rational ground for expecting success in an undertaking to which the other positions have been found unequal. I sincerely wish Imay be mistaken, and that the success which your zeal I am sure will merit, may be equal to your wishes, as well as ours. But, for the present, I would rather reserve myself till its prospects can be more favorably estimated; because the aid we would be disposed to give to a promising enterprise, would be very different to one we might offer to a desperate one. Although less sanguine on this particular subject, I do entire justice to the zeal for the promotion of science, which has excited your effort, and shall see it with uncommon pleasure surmounting the present difficulties, or engaged in other pursuits which may reward it with better success. Be assured that no one is more sincere in wishing it, and accept my salutations and assurances of great respect and consideration.
Washington, May 24, 1807.
Th: Jefferson presents his compliments to Mr. Clinton, and his thanks for the pamphlet sent him. He recollects the having read it at the time with a due sense of his obligation to the author, whose name was surmised, though not absolutely known, and a conviction that he had made the most of his matter. The ground of defence might have been solidly aided by the assurance (which is the absolute fact) that the whole story fathered on Mazzei, was an unfounded falsehood. Dr. Linn, as aware of that, takes care to quote it from a dead man, who is made to quote from one residing in the remotest part of Europe. Equally false was Dr. Linn's other story about Bishop Madison's lawn sleeves, as the Bishop can testify, for certainly Th: J. never saw him in lawn sleeves. Had the Doctor ventured to name time, place, and person, for his third lie, (the government without religion) it is probable he might have been convicted on that also. But these are slander and slanderers, whom Th: Jefferson has thought it best to leave to the scourge of public opinion. He salutes Mr. Clinton with esteem and respect.
Washington, May 26, 1807.
Dear Sir,—We are this moment informed by a person who left Richmond since the 22d, that the prosecution of Burr had begun under very inauspicious symptoms by the challenging and rejecting two members of the Grand Jury, as far above all exception as any two persons in the United States. I suppose our informant is inaccurate in his terms, and has mistaken an objection by the criminal and voluntary retirement of the gentlemen with the permission of the court, for a challenge and rejection, which, in the case of a Grand Jury, is impossible. Be this as it may, and the result before the formal tribunal, fair or false, it becomes our duty to provide that full testimony shall be laid before the Legislature, and through them the public. For this purpose, it is necessary that we be furnished with the testimony of every person who shall be with you as a witness. If the Grand Jury find a bill, the evidence given in court, taken as verbatim as possible, will be what we desire. If there be no bill, and consequently no examination before court, then I must beseech you to have every man privately examined by way of affidavit, and to furnish me with the whole testimony. In the former case, the person taking down the testimony as orally delivered in court, should make oath that he believes it to be substantially correct. In the latter case, the certificate of the magistrate administering the oath, and signature of the party, will be proper; and this should be done before they receive their compensation, that they may not evade examination. Go into any expense necessary for this purpose, and meet it from the funds provided by the Attorney General for the other expenses. He is not here, or this request would have gone from him directly. I salute you with friendship and respect.
Washington, May 28, 1807.
Dear Sir,—I have this moment received your letter of the 25th, and hasten to answer it. If the grand jury do not find a bill against Burr, as there will be no examination before a petty jury, Bollman's pardon need not in that case to be delivered; but if a bill be found, and a trial had, his evidence is deemed entirely essential, and in that case his pardon is to be produced before he goes to the book. In my letter of the day before yesterday, I enclosed you Bollman's written communication to me, and observed you might go so far, if he prevaricated, as to ask him whether he did not say so and so to Mr. Madison and myself. On further reflection I think you may go farther, if he prevaricates grossly, and show the paper to him, and ask if it is not his handwriting, and confront him by its contents. I enclose you some other letters of Bollman to me on former occasions, to prove by similitude of hand that the paper I enclosed on the 26th was of his handwriting. I salute you with esteem and respect.
Washington, May 29, 1807.
Dear Sir,—I have not written to you by Mr. Purviance, because he can give youvivâ voceall the details of our affairs here, with a minuteness beyond the bounds of a letter, and because, indeed, I am not certain this letter will find you in England. The sole object in writing it, is to add another little commission to the one I had formerly troubled you with. It is to procure for me "a machine for ascertaining the resistance of ploughs or carriages, invented and sold by Winlaw, in Margaret street, Cavendish Square." It will cost, I believe, four or five guineas, which shall be replaced here instanter on your arrival. I had intended to have written you to counteract the wicked effortswhich the federal papers are making to sow tares between you and me, as if I were lending a hand to measures unfriendly to any views which our country might entertain respecting you. But I have not done it, because I have before assured you that a sense of duty, as well as of delicacy, would prevent me from ever expressing a sentiment on the subject, and that I think you know me well enough to be assured I shall conscientiously observe the line of conduct I profess. I shall receive you on your return with the warm affection I have ever entertained for you, and be gratified if I can in any way avail the public of your services. God bless you and yours.
Washington, May 29, 1807.
Sir,—I have received, through the care of Gen. Armstrong, the medal of gold by which the society of agriculture at Paris have been pleased to mark their approbation of the form of a mould-board which I had proposed; also the four first volumes of their memoirs, and the information that they had honored me with the title of foreign associate to their society. I receive with great thankfulness these testimonies of their favor, and should be happy to merit them by greater services. Attached to agriculture by inclination, as well as by a conviction that it is the most useful of the occupations of man, my course of life has not permitted me to add to its theories the lessons of practice. I fear, therefore, I shall be to them but an unprofitable member, and shall have little to offer of myself worthy their acceptance. Should the labors of others, however, on this side the water, produce anything which may advance the objects of their institution, I shall with great pleasure become the instrument of its communication, and shall moreover execute with zeal any orders of the society in this portion of the globe. I pray you to express to them my sensibility for the distinctions they have been pleased to confer on me, and to accept yourself the assurances of my high consideration and respect.
Washington, June 2, 1807.
Dear Sir,—While Burr's case is depending before the court, I will trouble you, from time to time, with what occurs to me. I observe that the case of Marbury v. Madison has been cited, and I think it material to stop at the threshold the citing that case as authority, and to have it denied to be law. 1. Because the judges, in the outset, disclaimed all cognizance of the case, although they then went on to say what would have been their opinion, had they had cognizance of it. This, then, was confessedly an extrajudicial opinion, and, as such, of no authority. 2. Because, had it been judicially pronounced, it would have been against law; for to a commission, a deed, a bond,deliveryis essential to give validity. Until, therefore, the commission is delivered out of the hands of the executive and his agents, it is not his deed. He may withhold or cancel it at pleasure, as he might his private deed in the same situation. The Constitution intended that the three great branches of the government should be co-ordinate, and independent of each other. As to acts, therefore, which are to be done by either, it has given no control to another branch. A judge, I presume, cannot sit on a bench without a commission, or a record of a commission; and the Constitution having given to the judiciary branch no means of compelling the executive either todelivera commission, or to make a record of it, shows it did not intend to give the judiciary that control over the executive, but that it should remain in the power of the latter to do it or not. Where different branches have to act in their respective lines, finally and without appeal, under any law, they may give to it different and opposite constructions. Thus, in the case of William Smith, the House of Representatives determined he was a citizen; and in the case of William Duane, (precisely the same in every material circumstance,) the judges determined he was no citizen. In the cases of Callendar and others, the judges determined the sedition act was valid under the Constitution, and exercised their regular powers of sentencing them to fine and imprisonment. But theexecutive determined that the sedition act was a nullity under the Constitution, and exercised his regular power of prohibiting the execution of the sentence, or rather of executing the real law, which protected the acts of the defendants. From these different constructions of the same act by different branches, less mischief arises than from giving to any one of them a control over the others. The executive and Senate act on the construction, that until delivery from the executive department, a commission is in their possession, and within their rightful power; and in cases of commissions not revocable at will, where, after the Senate's approbation and the President's signing and sealing, new information of the unfitness of the person has come to hand before thedeliveryof the commission, new nominations have been made and approved, and new commissions have issued.
On this construction I have hitherto acted; on this I shall ever act, and maintain it with the powers of the government, against any control which may be attempted by the judges, in subversion of the independence of the executive and Senate within their peculiar department. I presume, therefore, that in a case where our decision is by the Constitution the supreme one, and that which can be carried into effect, it is the constitutionally authoritative one, and that that by the judges wascoram non judice, and unauthoritative, because it cannot be carried into effect. I have long wished for a proper occasion to have the gratuitous opinion in Marburyv.Madison brought before the public, and denounced as not law; and I think the present a fortunate one, because it occupies such a place in the public attention. I should be glad, therefore, if, in noticing that case, you could take occasion to express the determination of the executive, that the doctrines of that case were given extrajudicially and against law, and that their reverse will be the rule of action with the executive. If this opinion should not be your own, I would wish it to be expressed merely as that of the executive. If it is your own also, you would of course give to the arguments such a development as a case, incidental only, might render proper. I salute you with friendship and respect.
June 3, 1807.
I gave you, some time ago, a project of a more equal tariff on wines than that which now exists. But in that I yielded considerably to the faulty classification of them in our law. I have now formed one with attention, and according to the best information I possess, classing them more rigorously. I am persuaded that were the duty on cheap wines put on the same ratio with the dear, it would wonderfully enlarge the field of those who use wine, to the expulsion of whiskey. The introduction of a very cheap wine (St. George) into my neighborhood, within two years past, has quadrupled in that time the number of those who keep wine, and will ere long increase them tenfold. This would be a great gain to the treasury, and to the sobriety of our country. I will here add my tariff, (see opposite page,) wherein you will be able to choose any rate of duty you please, and to decide whether it will not, on a fit occasion, be proper for legislative attention. Affectionate salutations.
Washington, June 5, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Your favor of the 31st instant has been received, and I think it will be fortunate if any circumstance should produce a discharge of the present scanty grand jury, and a future summons of a fuller; though the same views of protecting the offender may again reduce the number to sixteen, in order to lessen the chance of getting twelve to concur. It is understood, that wherever Burr met with subjects who did not choose to embark in his projects, unless approved by their government, he asserted that he had that approbation. Most of them took his word for it, but it is said that with those who would not, the following stratagem was practised. A forged letter, purporting to be from General Dearborne, was made to express his approbation,and to say that I was absent at Monticello, but that there was no doubt that, on my return, my approbation of his enterprises would be given. This letter was spread open on his table, so as to invite the eye of whoever entered his room, and he contrived occasions of sending up into his room those whom he wished to become witnesses of his acting under sanction. By this means he avoided committing himself to any liability to prosecution for forgery, and gave another proof of being a great man in little things, while he is really small in great ones. I must add General Dearborne's declaration, that he never wrote a letter to Burr in his life, except that when here, once in a winter, he usually wrote him a billet of invitation to dine. The only object of sending you the enclosed letters is to possess you of the fact, that you may know how to pursue it, if any of your witnesses should know anything of it. My intention in writing to you several times, has been to convey facts or observations occurring in the absence of the Attorney General, and not to make to the dreadful drudgery you are going through the unnecessary addition of writing me letters in answer, which I beg you to relieve yourself from, except when some necessity calls for it. I salute you with friendship and respect.
Washington, June 7, 1807.
Sir,—Your favor of March 30th never reached my hands till May 16th. The friendly views it expresses of my conduct in general give me great satisfaction. For these testimonies of the approbation of my fellow citizens, I know that I am indebted more to their indulgent dispositions than to any peculiar claims of my own. For it can give no great claims to any one to manage honestly and disinterestedly the concerns of others trusted to him. Abundant examples of this are always under our eye. That I should lay down my charge at a proper season, is as much a duty as to have borne it faithfully. Being very sensible ofbodily decays from advancing years, I ought not to doubt their effect on the mental faculties. To do so would evince either great self-love or little observation of what passes under our eyes; and I shall be fortunate if I am the first to perceive and to obey this admonition of nature. That there are in our country a great number of characters entirely equal to the management of its affairs, cannot be doubted. Many of them, indeed, have not had opportunities of making themselves known to their fellow citizens; but many have had, and the only difficulty will be to choose among them. These changes are necessary, too, for the security of republican government. If some period be not fixed, either by the Constitution or by practice, to the services of the First Magistrate, his office, though nominally elective, will, in fact, be for life; and that will soon degenerate into an inheritance. Among the felicities which have attended my administration, I am most thankful for having been able to procure coadjutors so able, so disinterested, and so harmonious. Scarcely ever has a difference of opinion appeared among us which has not, by candid consultation, been amalgamated into something which all approved; and never one which in the slightest degree affected our personal attachments. The proof we have lately seen of the innate strength of our government, is one of the most remarkable which history has recorded, and shows that we are a people capable of self-government, and worthy of it. The moment that a proclamation apprised our citizens that there were traitors among them, and what was their object, they rose upon them wherever they lurked, and crushed by their own strength what would have produced the march of armies and civil war in any other country. The government which can wield the arm of the people must be the strongest possible. I thank you for the interest you are so kind as to express in my health and welfare, and return you the same good wishes with my salutations, and assurance of respect.
Washington, June 10, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Your favor of June the 1st has been received. To a mind like yours, capable in any question of abstracting it from its relation to yourself, I may safely hazard explanations, which I have generally avoided to others on questions of appointment. Bringing into office no desires of making it subservient to the advancement of my own private interests, it has been no sacrifice, by postponing them, to strengthen the confidence of my fellow citizens. But I have not felt equal indifference towards excluding merit from office, merely because it was related to me. However, I have thought it my duty so to do, that my constituents may be satisfied, that, in selecting persons for the management of their affairs, I am influenced by neither personal nor family interests, and especially, that the field of public office will not be perverted by me into a family property. On this subject, I had the benefit of useful lessons from my predecessors, had I needed them, marking what was to be imitated and what avoided. But in truth, the nature of our government is lesson enough. Its energy depending mainly on the confidence of the people in the chief magistrate, makes it his duty to spare nothing which can strengthen him with that confidence.
* * * * * * * *
Accept assurances of my constant friendship and respect.
Washington, June 11, 1807.
Sir,—Your letter of May the 9th has been duly received. The subject it proposes would require time and space for even moderate development. My occupations limit me to a very short notice of them. I think there does not exist a good elementary work on the organization of society into civil government: I mean a work which presents in one full and comprehensive viewthe system of principles on which such an organization should be founded, according to the rights of nature. For want of a single work of that character, I should recommend Locke on Government, Sidney, Priestley's Essay on the first Principles of Government, Chipman's Principles of Government, and the Federalist. Adding, perhaps, Beccaria on crimes and punishments, because of the demonstrative manner in which he has treated that branch of the subject. If your views of political inquiry go further, to the subjects of money and commerce, Smith's Wealth of Nations is the best book to be read, unless Say's Political Economy can be had, which treats the same subjects on the same principles, but in a shorter compass and more lucid manner. But I believe this work has not been translated into our language.
History, in general, only informs us what bad government is. But as we have employed some of the best materials of the British constitution in the construction of our own government, a knowledge of British history becomes useful to the American politician. There is, however, no general history of that country which can be recommended. The elegant one of Hume seems intended to disguise and discredit the good principles of the government, and is so plausible and pleasing in its style and manner, as to instil its errors and heresies insensibly into the minds of unwary readers. Baxter has performed a good operation on it. He has taken the text of Hume as his ground work, abridging it by the omission of some details of little interest, and wherever he has found him endeavoring to mislead, by either the suppression of a truth or by giving it a false coloring, he has changed the text to what it should be, so that we may properly call it Hume's history republicanised. He has moreover continued the history (but indifferently) from where Hume left it, to the year 1800. The work is not popular in England, because it is republican; and but a few copies have ever reached America. It is a single quarto volume. Adding to this Ludlow's Memoirs, Mrs. M'Cauley's and Belknap's histories, a sufficient view will be presented of the free principles of the English constitution.
To your request of my opinion of the manner in which anewspaper should be conducted, so as to be most useful, I should answer, "by restraining it to true facts and sound principles only." Yet I fear such a paper would find few subscribers. It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more completely deprive the nation of its benefits, than is done by its abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief, that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time; whereas the accounts they have read in newspapers are just as true a history of any other period of the world as of the present, except that the real names of the day are affixed to their fables. General facts may indeed be collected from them, such as that Europe is now at war, that Bonaparte has been a successful warrior, that he has subjected a great portion of Europe to his will, &c., &c.; but no details can be relied on. I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false.
Perhaps an editor might begin a reformation in some such way as this. Divide his paper into four chapters, heading the 1st, Truths. 2d, Probabilities. 3d, Possibilities. 4th, Lies. The first chapter would be very short, as it would contain little more than authentic papers, and information from such sources, as the editor would be willing to risk his own reputation for their truth. The second would contain what, from a mature consideration of all circumstances, his judgment should conclude to be probably true. This, however, should rather contain too little than too much. The third and fourth should be professedly for thosereaders who would rather have lies for their money than the blank paper they would occupy.
Such an editor too, would have to set his face against the demoralizing practice of feeding the public mind habitually on slander, and the depravity of taste which this nauseous aliment induces. Defamation is becoming a necessary of life; insomuch, that a dish of tea in the morning or evening cannot be digested without this stimulant. Even those who do not believe these abominations, still read them with complaisance to their auditors, and instead of the abhorrence and indignation which should fill a virtuous mind, betray a secret pleasure in the possibility that some may believe them, though they do not themselves. It seems to escape them, that it is not he who prints, but he who pays for printing a slander, who is its real author.
These thoughts on the subjects of your letter are hazarded at your request. Repeated instances of the publication of what has not been intended for the public eye, and the malignity with which political enemies torture every sentence from me into meanings imagined by their own wickedness only, justify my expressing a solicitude, that this hasty communication may in nowise be permitted to find its way into the public papers. Not fearing these political bull-dogs, I yet avoid putting myself in the way of being baited by them, and do not wish to volunteer away that portion of tranquillity, which a firm execution of my duties will permit me to enjoy.
I tender you my salutations, and best wishes, for your success.
Washington, June 12, 1807.
Dear Sir, * * * * *
The proposition in your letter of May the 16th, of adding an umpire to our discordant negotiators at Paris, struck me favorably on reading it, and reflection afterwards strengthened my first impressions. I made it therefore a subject of consultationwith my coadjutors, as is our usage. For our government, although in theory subject to be directed by the unadvised will of the President, is, and from its origin has been, a very different thing in practice. The minor business in each department is done by the Head of the department, on consultation with the President alone. But all matters of importance or difficulty are submitted to all the Heads of departments composing the cabinet; sometimes by the President's consulting them separately and successively, as they happen to call on him; but in the greatest cases, by calling them together, discussing the subject maturely, and finally taking the vote, in which the President counts himself but as one. So that in all important cases the executive is, in fact, a directory, which certainly the President might control; but of this there was never an example, either in the first or the present administration. I have heard, indeed, that my predecessor sometimes decided things against his council. * * * * * I adopted in the present case the mode of separate consultation. The opinion of each member, taken separately, was that the addition of a third negotiator was not at this time advisable. For the present therefore, the question must rest. Mr. Bowdoin, we know, is anxious to come home, and is detained only by the delicacy of not deserting his post. In the existing temper between him and his colleague, it would certainly be better that one of them should make an opening for re-composing the commission more harmoniously.
I salute you with affection and respect.
Washington, June 12, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Your letter of the 9th is this moment received. Reserving the necessary right of the President of the United States to decide, independently of all other authority, what papers, coming to him as President, the public interests permit to be communicated, and to whom, I assure you of my readinessunder that restriction, voluntarily to furnish on all occasions, whatever the purposes of justice may require. But the letter of General Wilkinson, of October the 21st, requested for the defence of Colonel Burr, with every other paper relating to the charges against him, which were in my possession when the Attorney General went on to Richmond in March, I then delivered to him; and I have always taken for granted he left the whole with you. If he did, and the bundle retains the order in which I had arranged it, you will readily find the letter desired, under the date of its receipt, which was November the 25th; but lest the Attorney General should not have left those papers with you, I this day write to him to forward this one by post. An uncertainty whether he is at Philadelphia, Wilmington, or New Castle, may produce delay in his receiving my letter, of which it is proper you should be apprized. But, as I do not recollect the whole contents of that letter, I must beg leave to devolve on you the exercise of that discretion which it would be my right and duty to exercise, by withholding the communication of any parts of the letter, which are not directly material for the purposes of justice.
With this application, which is specific, a prompt compliance is practicable. But when the request goes to "copies of the orders issued in relation to Colonel Burr, to the officers at Orleans, Natchez, &c. by the Secretaries of the War and Navy departments," it seems to cover a correspondence of many months, with such a variety of officers, civil and military, all over the United States, as would amount to the laying open the whole executive books. I have desired the Secretary at War to examine his official communications; and on a view of these, we may be able to judge what can and ought to be done, towards a compliance with the request. If the defendant alleges that there was any particular order, which, as a cause, produced any particular act on his part, then he must know what this order was, can specify it, and a prompt answer can be given. If theobjecthad been specified, we might then have some guide for our conjectures, as to what part of the executive records might be usefulto him; but, with a perfect willingness to do what is right, we are without the indications which may enable us to do it. If the researches of the Secretary at War should produce anything proper for communication, and pertinent to any point we can conceive in the defence before the court, it shall be forwarded to you.
I salute you with respect and esteem.
Washington, June 17, 1807.
Sir,—In answering your letter of the 9th, which desired a communication of one to me from General Wilkinson, specified by its date, I informed you in mine of the 12th that I had delivered it, with all other papers respecting the charges against Aaron Burr, to the Attorney General, when he went to Richmond; that I had supposed he had left them in your possession, but would immediately write to him, if he had not, to forward that particular letter without delay. I wrote to him accordingly on the same day, but having no answer, I know not whether he has forwarded the letter. I stated in the same letter, that I had desired the Secretary at War to examine his office, in order to comply with your further request, to furnish copies of the orders which had been given respecting Aaron Burr and his property; and in a subsequent letter of the same day, I forwarded to you copies of two letters from the Secretary at War, which appeared to be within the description expressed in your letter. The order from the Secretary of the Navy, you said, you were in possession of. The receipt of these papers had, I presume, so far anticipated, and others this day forwarded will have substantially fulfilled the object of a subpœna from the District Court of Richmond, requiring that those officers and myself should attend the Court in Richmond, with the letter of General Wilkinson, the answer to that letter, and the orders of the departments of War and the Navy, therein generally described. No answer toGeneral Wilkinson's letter, other than a mere acknowledgment of its receipt, in a letter written for a different purpose, was ever written by myself or any other. To these communications of papers, I will add, that if the defendant supposes there are any facts within the knowledge of the Heads of departments, or of myself, which can be useful for his defence, from a desire of doing anything our situation will permit in furtherance of justice, we shall be ready to give him the benefit of it, by way of deposition, through any persons whom the Court shall authorize to take our testimony at this place. I know, indeed, that this cannot be done but by consent of parties; and I therefore authorize you to give consent on the part of the United States. Mr. Burr's consent will be given of course, if he supposes the testimony useful.
As to our personal attendance at Richmond, I am persuaded the Court is sensible, that paramount duties to the nation at large control the obligation of compliance with their summons in this case; as they would, should we receive a similar one, to attend the trials of Blannerhassett and others, in the Mississippi territory, those instituted at St. Louis and other places on the western waters, or at any place, other than the seat of government. To comply with such calls would leave the nation without an executive branch, whose agency, nevertheless, is understood to be so constantly necessary, that it is the sole branch which the constitution requires to be always in function. It could not then mean that it should be withdrawn from its station by any co-ordinate authority.
With respect to papers, there is certainly a public and a private side to our offices. To the former belong grants of land, patents for inventions, certain commissions, proclamations, and other papers patent in their nature. To the other belong mere executive proceedings. All nations have found it necessary, that for the advantageous conduct of their affairs, some of these proceedings, at least, should remain known to their executive functionary only. He, of course, from the nature of the case, must be the sole judge of which of them the public interests will permit publication.Hence, under our Constitution, in requests of papers from the legislative to the executive branch, an exception is carefully expressed, as to those which he may deem the public welfare may require not to be disclosed; as you will see in the enclosed resolution of the House of Representatives, which produced the message of January 22d, respecting this case. The respect mutually due between the constituted authorities, in their official intercourse, as well as sincere dispositions to do for every one what is just, will always insure from the executive, in exercising the duty of discrimination confided to him, the same candor and integrity to which the nation has in like manner trusted in the disposal of its judiciary authorities. Considering you as the organ for communicating these sentiments to the Court, I address them to you for that purpose, and salute you with esteem and respect.
Washington, June 19, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Yours of the 17th was received last night. Three blank pardons had been (as I expect) made up and forwarded by the mail of yesterday, and I have desired three others to go by that of this evening. You ask what is to be done if Bollman finally rejects his pardon, and the Judge decides it to have no effect? Move to commit him immediately for treason or misdemeanor, as you think the evidence will support; let the Court decide where he shall be sent for trial; and on application, I will have the marshall aided in his transportation, with the executive means. And we think it proper, further, that when Burr shall have been convicted of either treason or misdemeanor, you should immediately have committed all those persons against whom you should find evidence sufficient, whose agency has been so prominent as to mark them as proper objects of punishment, and especially where their boldness has betrayed an inveteracy of criminal disposition. As to obscure offenders and repenting ones, let them lie for consideration.
I enclose you the copy of a letter received last night, and giving singular information. I have inquired into the character of Graybell. He was an old revolutionary captain, is now a flour merchant in Baltimore, of the most respectable character, and whose word would be taken as implicitly as any man's for whatever he affirms. The letter writer, also, is a man of entire respectability. I am well informed, that for more than a twelvemonth it has been believed in Baltimore, generally, that Burr was engaged in some criminal enterprise, and that Luther Martin knew all about it. We think you should immediately despatch a subpœna for Graybell; and while that is on the road, you will have time to consider in what form you will use his testimony;e. g.shall Luther Martin be summoned as a witness against Burr, and Graybell held ready to confront him? It may be doubted whether we could examine a witness to discredit our own witness. Besides, the lawyers say that they are privileged from being forced to breaches of confidence, and that no others are. Shall we move to commit Luther Martin, asparticeps criminiswith Burr? Graybell will fix upon him misprison of treason at least. And at any rate, his evidence will put down this unprincipled and impudent federal bull-dog, and add another proof that the most clamorous defenders of Burr are all his accomplices. It will explain why Luther Martin flew so hastily to the "aid of his honorable friend," abandoning his clients and their property during a session of a principal court in Maryland, now filled, as I am told, with the clamors and ruin of his clients. I believe we shall send on Latrobe as a witness. He will prove that Aaron Burr endeavored to get him to engage several thousand men, chiefly Irish emigrants, whom he had been in the habit of employing in the works he directs, under pretence of a canal opposite Louisville, or of the Washita, in which, had he succeeded, he could with that force alone have carried everything before him, and would not have been where he now is. He knows, too, of certain meetings of Burr, Bollman, Yrujo, and one other whom we have never named yet, but have him not the less in our view.
I salute you with friendship and respect.
P. S. Will you send us half a dozen blank subpœnas?
Since writing the within I have had a conversation with Latrobe. He says it was five hundred men he was desired to engage. The pretexts were, to work on the Ohio canal, and be paid in Washita lands. Your witnesses will some of them prove that Burr had no interest in the Ohio canal, and that consequently this was a mere pretext to cover the real object from the men themselves, and all others. Latrobe will set out in the stage of to-morrow evening, and be with you Monday evening.
Washington, June 19, 1807.
Dear Sir,—In acknowledging the receipt of your favor of the 3d instant, I avail myself of the occasion it offers of tendering to yourself, to Mr. Lincoln and to your State, my sincere congratulations on the late happy event of the election of a republican executive to preside over its councils. The harmony it has introduced between the legislative and executive branches, between the people and both of them, and between all and the General Government, are so many steps towards securing that union of action and effort in all its parts, without which no nation can be happy or safe. The just respect with which all the States have ever looked to Massachusetts, could leave none of them without anxiety, while she was in a state of alienation from her family and friends. Your opinion of the propriety and advantage of a more intimate correspondence between the executives of the several States, and that of the Union, as a central point, is precisely that which I have ever entertained; and on coming into office I felt the advantages which would result from that harmony. I had it even in contemplation, after the annual recommendation to Congress of those measures called for by the times, which the Constitution had placed under their power, to make communications in like manner to the executives of theStates, as to any parts of them to which the legislatures might be alone competent. For many are the exercises of power reserved to the States, wherein an uniformity of proceeding would be advantageous to all. Such are quarantines, health laws, regulations of the press, banking institutions, training militia, &c., &c. But you know what was the state of the several governments when I came into office. That a great proportion of them were federal, and would have been delighted with such opportunities of proclaiming their contempt, and of opposing republican men and measures. Opportunities so furnished and used by some of the State Governments, would have produced an ill effect, and would have insured the failure of the object of uniform proceeding. If it could be ventured even now (Connecticut and Delaware being still hostile) it must be on some greater occasion than is likely to arise within my time. I look to it, therefore, as a course which will probably be to be left to the consideration of my successor.
I consider, with you, the federalists as completely vanquished, and never more to take the field under their own banners. They will now reserve themselves to profit by the schisms among republicans, and to earn favors from minorities, whom they will enable to triumph over their more numerous antagonists. So long as republican minorities barely accept their votes, no great harm will be done; because it will only place in power one shade of republicanism, instead of another. But when they purchase the votes of the federalists, by giving them a participation of office, trust and power, it is a proof that anti-monarchism is not their strongest passion. I do not think that the republican minority in Pennsylvania has fallen into this heresy, nor that there are in your State materials of which a minority can be made who will fall into it.
With respect to the tour my friends to the north have proposed that I should make in that quarter, I have not made up a final opinion. The course of life which General Washington had run, civil and military, the services he had rendered, and the space he therefore occupied in the affections of his fellow citizens, take from his examples the weight of precedents for others,because no others can arrogate to themselves the claims which he had on the public homage. To myself, therefore, it comes as a new question, to be viewed under all the phases it may present. I confess that I am not reconciled to the idea of a chief magistrate parading himself through the several States, as an object of public gaze, and in quest of an applause which, to be valuable, should be purely voluntary. I had rather acquire silent good will by a faithful discharge of my duties, than owe expressions of it to my putting myself in the way of receiving them. Were I to make such a tour to Portsmouth or Portland, I must do it to Savannah, perhaps to Orleans and Frankfort. As I have never yet seen the time when the public business would have permitted me to be so long in a situation in which I could not carry it on, so I have no reason to expect that such a time will come while I remain in office. A journey to Boston or Portsmouth, after I shall be a private citizen, would much better harmonize with my feelings, as well as duties; and, founded in curiosity, would give no claims to an extension of it. I should see my friends too more at our mutual ease, and be left more exclusively to their society. However, I end as I began, by declaring I have made up no opinion on the subject, and that I reserve it as a question for future consideration and advice.
In the meantime, and at all times, I salute you with great respect and esteem.
Washington, June 20, 1807.
Dear Sir,—Mr. Latrobe now comes on as a witness against Burr. His presence here is with great inconvenience dispensed with, as one hundred and fifty workmen require his constant directions on various public works of pressing importance. I hope you will permit him to come away as soon as possible. How far his testimony will be important as to the prisoner, Iknow not; but I am desirous that those meetings of Yrujo with Burr and his principal accomplices, should come fully out, and judicially, as they will establish the just complaints we have against his nation.
I did not see till last night the opinion of the Judge on thesubpœna duces tecumagainst the President. Considering the question there ascoram non judice, I did not read his argument with much attention. Yet I saw readily enough, that, as is usual where an opinion is to be supported, right or wrong, he dwells much on smaller objections, and passes over those which are solid. Laying down the position generally, that all persons owe obedience to subpœnas, he admits no exception unless it can be produced in his law books. But if the Constitution enjoins on a particular officer to be always engaged in a particular set of duties imposed on him, does not this supersede the general law, subjecting him to minor duties inconsistent with these? The Constitution enjoins his constant agency in the concerns of six millions of people. Is the law paramount to this, which calls on him on behalf of a single one? Let us apply the Judge's own doctrine to the case of himself and his brethren. The sheriff of Henrico summons him from the bench, to quell a riot somewhere in his county. The federal judge is, by the general law, a part of theposseof the State sheriff. Would the Judge abandon major duties to perform lesser ones? Again; the court of Orleans or Maine commands, by subpœnas, the attendance of all the judges of the Supreme Court. Would they abandon their posts as judges, and the interests of millions committed to them, to serve the purposes of a single individual? The leading principle of our Constitution is the independence of the Legislature, executive and judiciary of each other, and none are more jealous of this than the judiciary. But would the executive be independent of the judiciary, if he were subject to thecommandsof the latter, and to imprisonment for disobedience; if the several courts could bandy him from pillar to post, keep him constantly trudging from north to south and east to west, and withdraw him entirely from his constitutionalduties? The intention of the Constitution, that each branch should be independent of the others, is further manifested by the means it has furnished to each, to protect itself from enterprises of force attempted on them by the others, and to none has it given more effectual or diversified means than to the executive. Again; because ministers can go into a court in London as witnesses, without interruption to their executive duties, it is inferred that they would go to a court one thousand or one thousand five hundred miles off, and that ours are to be dragged from Maine to Orleans by every criminal who will swear that their testimony "may be of use to him." The Judge says, "it is apparentthat the President's duties as chief magistrate do not demand his whole time, and are not unremitting." If he alludes to our annual retirement from the seat of government, during the sickly season, he should be told that such arrangements are made for carrying on the public business, at and between the several stations we take, that it goes on as unremittingly there, as if we were at the seat of government. I pass more hours in public business at Monticello than I do here, every day; and it is much more laborious, because all must be done in writing. Our stations being known, all communications come to them regularly, as to fixed points. It would be very different were we always on the road, or placed in the noisy and crowded taverns where courts are held. Mr. Rodney is expected here every hour, having been kept away by a sick child.
I salute you with friendship and respect.