In Pursuit of Reason

In Pursuit of Reason
The Life of
THOMAS JEFFERSON
NOBLE E. CUNNINGHAM, JR.

r ^^v
$24.95
The Life of THOMAS JEFFERSON
Few individuals have exerted as much influ-
ence on the course of American history as has
Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson's life has been
splendidK served in Dumas Malone's monu-
mental six-volume study and in Merrill Peter-
son's thousand-plus-page biographv. But sorely
lacking from the canon of materials on Jeffer-
son has been a first-rate, one-volume biography
of reasonable length that would serve the needs
of the informed reader, the scholar, and the
student alike. With his major new work, In Pur-
suit of Reason, Noble Cunningham redresses
that imbalance by presenting a concise vet com-

prehensive account of Jefferson's life. Informed
by the recent explosion of scholarship on Jef-
ferson as well as by a fresh studv of original
sources, In Pursuit of Reason skillfully presents
Jefferson's private world and his public career,
broadening our knowledge of both the man
and his times.
Cunningham follows Jefferson from his birth
in what is now Albemarle County, Virginia,
through his early education, and on to his stu-
dent days at the College of William and Mary.
Jefferson regarded his time at William and
Mary as one of the great transforming experi-
ences of his life, for it was there that he was
first introduced to, and became a disciple of,
the Age of Reason.

Beginning his political career in the Virginia
House of Burgesses at age twentv-six in 1769,
Jefferson displayed the brilliant mind and skill-
ful pen that a few vears later led the Conti-
nental Congress of 1776 to rely on him to draft
the Declaration of Independence. Returning to
Virginia to take the lead in revising the laws of
he also served two years as wartime
his state,
governor. In following Jefferson's career after
the Revolution, Cunningham highlights his ser-
vice as American minister to France, takes a
fresh look at Jefferson as secretary of state
under President Washington, and examines
Throughout,
Jeffef son's role as a party leader.
Jefferson's thought is revealed in the context
of events.
Jefferson's election to the presidency in 1800,
\
C\
B §ham, Noble
Cunningham,
JEFFER E., 1 26-
J
SON
In pursuit of
reason
DATE DUE
DEC
DEC 2
1 7 m
3 1995
FE B 3 1996
<iy
DEC 6 2000
DEC 2 7 290 £
NOV 2 5 MM
KUJ MM
s 4
NOV 22 ?00?
9 AUG n 9 2003
JUN 8 2005
JUN 2 8 20 05 (I,
GAYLORD PRINTED IN USA
© THE BAKER a TAYLOR CO.

Southern Biography Series
William J. Ccfoper, Jr., Editor
BICENTENNIAL BOOKSHELF
Purchased with a grant
of funds from the Nat-
ional Endowment for the
Humanities and the
Friends of the San
Rafael Public Library
1987
m
The Life of
THOMAS JEFFERSON
Louisiana State University Press

Baton Rouge and London
—
Copyright © 1987 by Louisiana State University Press

All rights reserved
Manufactured in the United States of America
Designer: Laura Roubique

Typeface: Baskerville
Typesetter: G&rS Typesetters, Inc.
Printer and Binder: Fairfield Graphics
10 987654321
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Cunningham, Noble E., 1926-
In pursuit of reason.
(Southern biography series)
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Jefferson, Thomas, 1743-1826. 2. Presidents
— Biography. United States —
United States 3. Politics
and government — Revolution, 1775-1783. United 4.
States — and
Politicsgovernment — Constitutional
period, 1789-1809. I. Title. II. Series.
E332C95 1987 9734'6'o924 [B] 86-27626

ISBN O-807I-I375-I
C I
It rests now with ourselves alone to enjoy in peace and
concord the blessings of self-government, so long denied

to mankind: to show by example the sufficiency of human
reason for the care of human affairs and that the will of
the majority, the Natural law of every society, is the only
sure guardian of the rights of man.
— Thomas Jefferson
February 12, 1790
Contents
Preface and Acknowledgments xiii
I The Formative Years 1
II Public Life and Private World 14

III The Road to Revolution 23
IV At Philadelphia 36
V VirginiaReformer 52
VI Wartime Governor of Virginia 64
VII Withdrawal, Sorrow, and Return 76
VIII The Scene of Europe 90
IX Romantic Interlude and New Adventures 101
X Witness to Revolution in France 113
XI First Months at the State Department 131
XII Conflict in Washington's Cabinet 150
XIII A Trying Year 178
XIV Renewal at Monticello 195
XV Vice-President 206
XVI The Election of 1800 221
XVII A President in Command 238
XVIII Presidential Zenith 259
XIX Trials of aSecond Term 275
XX Closing a Political Career 295
XXI The Sage of Monticello 322
XXII A Final Legacy 336
Notes 351
Bibliographical Note 401
Index 407
Illustrations
following page 150
Bust of Jefferson by Houdon

First page of draft of the Declaration of Independence
The Declaration of Independence by John Trumbull
Miniature of Jefferson by John Trumbull
Martha Jefferson
Maria Cosway
Jefferson as secretary of state
Jefferson on the eve of his presidency
Engraving of Jefferson by David Edwin, 1800
Engraving of Jefferson by Cornelius Tiebout
Model of the Virginia state capitol
Monticello
following page 300
Invitation to dinner at the President's House

Title page and frontispiece of Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia
Profile of Jefferson by Saint-Memin

Engraving of Jefferson by David Edwin, 1809
Engraving of Jefferson by Saint-Memin
Jefferson as president
Jefferson's drawings for the Rotunda of the University of Virginia
Jefferson's study for Pavilion VII, University of Virginia
The University of Virginia
Jefferson's design and inscription for his tombstone
Jefferson at age seventy-eight
'
Preface and Acknowledgments
On April 13, 1943, during the dark days of World War II, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt stood before the gleaming marble of the re-
cently completed Jefferson Memorial in Washington and declared:
"Today, in the midst of a great war for freedom, we dedicate a
shrine to freedom. To Thomas Jefferson, Apostle of Freedom, we
are paying a debt long overdue." It was the two-hundredth anni-
versary of Jefferson's birth, and the words and deeds of the Revolu-
tionary patriot and third president seemed particularly appropri-
ate to a nation engaged in a struggle for survival. The thirty-second
president, drawing numerous parallels between the challenges
America faced in Jefferson's day and in his own day, declared:
"Thomas Jefferson believed, as we believe, in Man. He believed, as
we believe, that men are capable of their own government, and that
no king, no tyrant, no dictator can govern for them as well as they
can govern for themselves." He concluded his address by proclaim-
ing Jefferson's ringing words chiseled into the marble of the memo-
rial: "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against
every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Roosevelt, who had been the moving force behind the building
of the monument, had played a major role in bringing Jefferson
back into the consciousness of Americans. Jefferson's profile and
the image of his home at Monticello replaced the Indian and the
buffalo on the nickel coin, and his portrait appeared on the three-
cent stamp, then the common stamp for first-class mail. Roosevelt
proudly claimed Jefferson as the founder of the Democratic party;
yet the revival of interest in Jefferson resisted the boundaries of
partisanship. With the new awareness came a growing appreciation
of Jefferson that went beyond his role as a political figure and rec-
ognized the broadness of his intellect, interests, and accomplish-
XIV PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
merits. Less than two decades after Roosevelt extolled Jefferson

as thechampion of liberty, another president, John F. Kennedy,
speaking at a White House dinner honoring Nobel Prize winners
from throughout the Western Hemisphere, addressed his guests as
"the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge,
that has ever been gathered together White House, with the
at the
possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone." 2
The breadth of Jefferson's intellectual world was strikingly dis-
played during the bicentennial of the American Revolution in 1976
in the exhibition presented by the National Gallery of Art under a
banner that read the eye of thomasjefferson. 3 As this extraordi-
nary exhibition showed, public interest in Jefferson as a political
figure had been joined by an appreciation of his intellectual versatil-
ity and accomplishments. Behind the new perception of Thomas
Jefferson in the second half of the twentieth century lay a renais-

sance of historical scholarship that brought the launching of the
definitive edition of the rich and voluminous collection of Jeffer-
son's papers under the editorship of Julian P. Boyd and the monu-
mental biography of Jefferson by Dumas Malone appearing in six
volumes between 1948 and 1981. Simultaneously, a wealth of spe-
cialized scholarly studies enriched our understanding of Jefferson
and his age. Indeed, the body of scholarly literature relating to
Jefferson has become so extensive that few besides specialists in the
history of the early nation can attempt to master it.
The present volume designed to bridge the gap between public

is
interest in Jefferson and the world of scholarship that has widened

our knowledge of the man and his times. In offering a one-volume
biography that may interest the informed reader, the scholar, and
the student alike, I have been fully aware of the difficulties of the
task. Recognizing that in any single volume of reasonable length it
is impossible to provide a complete account of Jefferson's long life,
complex thought, and many interests, I have been selective. But I

hope that I have been fair and representative and that a complete
portrait of the man emerges. By the subjects that I have chosen to
treat in some detail and the words of Jefferson that I have selected
to quote, I have imposed an interpretative framework that every
historian imposes on the records of the past, but I believe that the
material presented and the analysis provided offer an interpreta-
tive biographical portrait that the historical record supports.
Despite Jefferson's diverse interests and accomplishments, certain

basic tenets motivated his life and shaped his actions in whatever
challenge he faced. Of these, none was stronger than his belief in
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS XV
"the sufficiency of reason for the care of human affairs." As a man

of the Enlightenment who believed in the application of reason to
society as well as to nature, Jefferson throughout his life pursued
the use of reason as the means by which mankind could obtain a
more perfect society. This fundamental conviction can be sensed in
the quotation from Jefferson that I have employed as epigraph for
this book. That passage succinctly expresses Jefferson's commit-
ment to reason and to natural law, from which flowed his devotion
to the rights of man and his faith in majority rule. His belief that
"knowledge is power, that knowledge is safety, that knowledge is
happiness" flowed from that same source and inspired him to rise
to the challenge of establishing a state university long after he had
4
closed his political career. Thus, the title In Pursuit of Reason indi-
cates what in my judgment best defines the influential and produc-
tive life of Thomas Jefferson. It was a faith that nourished his belief
in progress, undergirded his political principles, explained his de-
votion to learning and to educational opportunity for every person,
and produced the optimistic outlook that failed him only as he ap-
proached the end of a very long life.
Because Jefferson achieved his place in history as a public figure,
not as a political philosopher, I have incorporated my account of
his political thought into the narrative of his public career, rather
than separating his philosophy from the context of the times in
which he acted. Throughout his adult life, Jefferson saw himself as
pursuing reason, and I have allowed him to present his own ideas
in his own terms and, as much as possible, in his own words.
I am indebted to William J. Cooper, Jr., of Louisiana State Uni-
versity for encouraging me to undertake the task of putting into a

single volume the portrait of Jefferson that has developed in my
own mind during a number of years of study of the man and his
era. Like everyone who spends time studying the records left by
Jefferson, I have continued to learn from him and to discover
avenues that still demand further study. My colleague Gerard H.
Clarfield kindly read long sections of the manuscript, and I have
profited from discussing the complications of early American di-
plomacy with him. By mastering word processing, Patty Eggleston,
of the staff of the Department of History, University of Missouri,
Columbia, has speeded my work, already indebted to her efficient
typing and that of Ida Mae Wolff, a member of the same staff.
Beverly Jarrett of the Louisiana State University Press has been un-
failingly helpful throughout the course of my work on this book,
and I am appreciative of her continuing support. For the careful
XVI PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
editing of the manuscript for publication, I am greatly indebted to

the splendid editorial talents of John Easterly of the Louisiana State
University Press. To my wife, Dana, I am particularly grateful for
help in the indexing of this book. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge
my debt to the University of Missouri, Columbia, for providing me
with a research leave to complete the writing of the book and to the
university's Research Council for its support of my research.
—a
I
The Formative Years
Shadwell, a modest frame house built in a red-clay clearing, stood

on the western fringes of settlement in the colony of Virginia. From
its well-chosen site below the gap in the Southwest Mountains, the
Blue Ridge could be seen in the distance. Closer by, heavily for-
ested slopes proclaimed an unspoiled land and marked the seasons
with splendorous 1735 Peter Jefferson patented one
displays. In
thousand acres along the Rivanna River in the newly opening area
that would become Albemarle County. He soon added another
four hundred acres and moved his wife and two young daughters
to Shadwell not long before his first son, Thomas, was born there
on April 13, 1743.
Thomas Jefferson would always feel a closeness to nature and
identify with the simpler society of the Virginia upcountry, but his
birth on the edge of the wilderness was of less immediate influence
on than his birth into the ranks of the Virginia gentry
his future —
circumstance that promised the young Jefferson economic security,
educational opportunity, and privileged status. His father was a
rising young planter and slaveholder, though he was never among
the very large landowners of the region. A justice
of the peace
one of those influential gentlemen who composed the powerful
—
county courts in eighteenth-century Virginia he was ultimately
elected to the House of Burgesses. Jefferson later recalled, "My fa-
ther's education had been quite neglected; but being of a strong
mind, sound judgment and eager after information, he read much
and improved himself." One result had been to establish himself
l
as a successful surveyor and map maker. His son noted with pride
his father's association with Joshua Fry, former professor of mathe-
matics at the College of William and Mary, in continuing the bound-
ary line between Virginia and North Carolina and in making the
first real map of Virginia. Jefferson owed his lifelong interest in ex-
2 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
ploration to his father, and he was the beneficiary of his father's de-
termination that his education should not be neglected.
Shadwell was named for the London parish in England where
Jefferson's mother had been born into one of the Virginia colony's
wealthiest, —
most influential, and well-established families the Ran-
dolphs. She was christened Jane. Her father, Isham Randolph, as a
young ship captain had married in England but returned to Vir-
ginia to settle down as the master of Dungeness in Goochland
County. Jane was his oldest daughter and nineteen in 1739 when
she married the thirty-two-year-old Peter Jefferson, whose fore-
bears had been early settlers, though they were far less prominent
than the Randolphs. Late in life Thomas Jefferson would look back
on his origins and comment lightly that the Randolphs "trace their
pedigree far back in England and Scotland, to which let every one
ascribe the faith and merit he chooses." 2 Jefferson always stressed
environment over ancestry, but he could not have failed to appreci-
ate the influence his family connections played in his own life.
Jefferson's earliestmemories were not of Shadwell and its wilder-

ness setting, but of Tuckahoe, the plantation of William Randolph
on the James River in a more thickly settled area to which Peter
Jefferson moved his family when Thomas was two or three years
old. By the time he was nine, the family, which now included five
children, had returned to Shadwell, but Thomas was away at school
much of the time after that and mainly spent his vacations at home.
Yet the young Jefferson put deep roots into the soil of Albemarle,
and one day he would inherit Shadwell and build his own home,
Monticello, on a hilltop that was part of the tract first patented by
his father. Though he had no recollection of the sparsely popu-
lated wild that his father had known and though he never experi-
enced the wilderness as his father had, he felt a closeness to the
land that was an important part of his being. He would never cease
to think of himself as a man of the soil.
The records relating to Jefferson's adult years are voluminous,

but little material relating to his childhood has survived. The earli-
est letter of Jefferson's written when he was six-
known today was
teen; it concerned go to college. 3 Any earlier papers or
his plans to
family letters that may have once existed were probably destroyed
by a disastrous fire at Shadwell in 1770. No correspondence be-
tween Jefferson and either his father or his mother has survived,
and Jefferson said little about his childhood in his brief and never-
completed autobiography. The most traumatic event of his early
years was the death of his father, whom he remembered as a strong
THE FORMATIVE YEARS 3
and vigorous man but who died at age forty-nine when Thomas
was fourteen. Jefferson later recalled that "at 14 years of age, the
whole care and direction of my self was thrown on my self entirely,
4
without a relation or friend qualified to advise or guide me." This
was an exaggeration, for his father had left his affairs in good
order, and his executors were men that Jefferson could and did
consult. But the recollection vividly reflects his sense of loss and
had exerted in directing his
suggests the strong influence his father
early education and molding the would shape his life.
habits that
The remark also indicates that the young Jefferson did not see his
mother as having provided major direction in the past and that he
did not turn to her for advice upon the death of his father.
Despite the prominence of her family, Jefferson's mother is a
little-known figure. She bore Peter Jefferson ten children. Two of
them died in infancy, but the other eight lived to maturity. The
5
— —
youngest twins were not yet two years old when her husband
died, and though she survived him by nineteen years, her whole
life was devoted to rearing a large family. She continued to live at
Shadwell until her death in March, 1776, but the only references to
her in Jefferson's papers are in his account books. In later years he
made only rare mention of her in the surviving record. The evi-
dence is too thin to speculate upon his relationship with his mother,
but there is nothing to suggest that it was a warm one, and it may
have been strained. 6
Jefferson's schooling began while the family was at Tuckahoe.
The move there after William Randolph's death had been made in
accordance with Randolph's will, which named his "dear and loving
friend" Peter Jefferson one of his executors. Randolph's wish was
that Peter Jefferson (whose wife was William's first cousin) move his
family to Tuckahoe to look after his lands and his three young,
motherless children until his only son, Thomas Mann Randolph,
came of age. The boy was only four when his father died, and Peter
and Jane Jefferson did not remain at Tuckahoe until the child
reached his majority, but they did stay for some six years. Dur-
ing this time Peter Jefferson directed the education of both the
Randolph children and his own, employing a tutor to conduct
classes in a small building in the yard at Tuckahoe. Jefferson later
referred to this as the "English school," and it was there that he be-
gan his education at the age of five. 7
When the Jefferson family returned to Shadwell, Thomas was
either left behind to continue his schooling or sent back soon there-
after. At this time, at the age of nine, he was placed by his father in
the Latin school of the Reverend William Douglas, a Scottish cler-

gyman who was minister of St. James Parish in Goochland County.
He boarded at the clergyman's house during school terms and con-
tinued under his instruction for five years, learning from Douglas,
according to his pupil's later account, the rudiments of the Latin
and Greek languages, along with French. Jefferson placed the em-
phasison rudiments, for he remembered Douglas as "but a super-
instructed in Greek." 8 These were probably the
ficial Latinist, less
unhappiest years of Jefferson's childhood, distant from home for

long periods of time and without the stimulus of an inspiring
teacher. In contrast, the next period of his schooling was among
the happiest times of his youth.
At fourteen, after the death of his father, Jefferson enrolled in
the school conducted in Albemarle County by the Reverend James
Maury, rector of the Fredericksville Parish, who had a log school-
house on his farm twelve miles from Shadwell. Too far for daily
commuting, it was close enough to go home on the weekends. More
important than the location of the school was the character of the
schoolmaster, one of the colony's best-educated men, whom Jeffer-
son admiringly described as "a correct classical scholar." 9 Jefferson
got none of his ideas about religious toleration from this rigid
churchman, but after two years in his school he could read Greek
and Roman authors in the original, a proficiency that he never lost.
He also got some exposure to English literature and other areas of
learning, and because he boarded with the Maury family during
the week, he had access to Maury's extensive library of over four
hundred volumes. It was the beginning of Jefferson's lifelong love
of books.
During the period that Jefferson attended Maury's school, one of
his father's executors recorded payment to a dancing teacher for
six months' instruction to five of the Jefferson children. We may as-
sume that Thomas was among them, for accomplishment in danc-
ing was expected of every young Virginia gentleman. By this time
also, Thomas had learned to play the violin. He would later de-
scribe music as "the favorite passion of my soul." 10 Much earlier he
—
had learned the skills of the outdoors to ride and to hunt also —
demanded of every eighteenth-century Virginia gentleman.
After two years of scholarly application under Maury's able direc-
tion and with his seventeenth birthday approaching, Jefferson was
ready for college. He wrote to one of his guardians that "by going
to the College I shall get a more universal Acquaintance, which may
hereafter be serviceable to me; and I suppose I can pursue my
THE FORMATIVE YEARS
Studies in the Greek and Latin as well there as here, and likewise
learn something of the Mathematics." Jefferson said also that he
was losing about one-fourth of his time because of the interrup-
tions caused by company at Shadwell. His habits of industry and
application had already become well fixed, as indeed they must
have been before his father's death. "It is while we are young that
the habit of industry is formed," he later reflected. "If not then, it
never is afterwards." He would also later tell his own daughter:
"Determine never to be idle. No person will have occasion to com-
plain of the want of time, who never loses any. It is wonderful how
much may be done, if we are always doing." n
In the spring of 1760 Jefferson, not quite seventeen, entered the
College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, and he would ever
regard this as one of the major transforming experiences of his life.
"It was my great good fortune, and what probably fixed the des-
tinies of my life," he later wrote, "that Dr. William Small of Scotland
was then professor of Mathematics, a man profound in most of the
useful branches of science, with a happy talent of communication,
correct and gentlemanly manners, and an enlarged and liberal
mind. He, most happily for me, became soon attached to me and
made me his daily companion when not engaged in the school; and
from his conversation I got my first views of the expansion of
science and of the system of things in which we are placed."
12
Un-
fortunately, no letters written during the first two years of his
studies in Williamsburg survive to trace his intellectual growth, but
it was surely immense, for what Dr. Small introduced to his bright
and inquiring pupil was the world of the Enlightenment. Jefferson

ever after would be one of the most devoted disciples of that Age
of Reason.
The academic community in Williamsburg was small and not
very distinguished when Jefferson went there. The entire faculty of
the college, including the president, consisted of seven men — all
of them, except Small, Anglican clergymen. The student body,

divided among the grammar school, the Indian school, the phi-
losophy school (in which Jefferson was enrolled), and the divinity
school, numbered less than a hundred. As a result of circumstances
that proved fortuitous for him, Jefferson had most of his work
under Small. During his first year the chair of moral philosophy
became vacant, and Small was appointed to fill it on an interim
basis in addition to his chair of natural philosophy. Small, it ap-
pears, taught almost everything. Jefferson recorded that he was the
first person to give regular lectures in ethics, rhetoric, and belles
lettres. "It is eminent biographer

a highly significant fact," the
Dumas Malone wrote of Jefferson's college years, "that the early
teacher who did most to fix the destinies of his life was the only
layman in the faculty of the College." It was also Small who intro-
duced Jefferson to George Wythe, with whom Jefferson would read
law, and to Governor Francis Fauquier, whom Jefferson regarded
as the ablest man who had ever filled that office and whose father
had worked for Sir Isaac Newton. It was probably after Jefferson
completed his college study in two years and began to read law with
Wythe that he was admitted as the fourth member of a frequent
dinner group of Small, Wythe, and Fauquier at the governor's table,
where, said Jefferson, he "heard more good sense, more rational
and philosophical conversations, than in all my life besides." 13
Jefferson's Williamsburg years were not quite those of a disci-
plined, cloistered scholar that his later reflections and advice to his
own children suggested. He admitted that he had been one of six
members of the college's secret Flat Hat Club, which he confessed
"had no useful object." 14 During his Christmas vacation in 1762 he
wrote to his college chum John Page more about girls than about
studies, saying of his first love, Rebecca Burwell, sister of a college
friend, that "there is so lively an image of her imprinted in my
mind that I shall think of her too often I fear for my peace of mind,
and too often I am sure to get through Old Cooke [Coke] this
winter: for God knows I have not seen him since I packed him up
in my trunk in Williamsburgh."
,5
As this and several other letters
that he wrote to Page during the following months suggest, the
young law student, despite contrived efforts to make light of it, was
deeply enamored of the sixteen-year-old Rebecca, whom he also
called Belinda. At nineteen, Jefferson may have been intellectually
mature enough to have shared the company of Small, Wythe, and
Fauquier, but emotionally he was still an adolescent. Because John
Page preserved these private letters in which Jefferson revealed his
feelings, we are able to sense his anxiety, timidity, and ultimate
disappointment.
Jefferson apparently planned to spend the winter months of
1763 at Shadwell studying the writings of Sir Edward Coke, which
every aspiring student of law was expected to master. Instead, he
got an eye infection that kept him from reading, missed his friends
in Williamsburg, pined for Rebecca, and was generally miserable.
"All things here appear to me to trudge on in one and the same
round," he wrote to Page; "we rise in the morning that we may eat
breakfast, dinner and supper and go to bed again that we may get
up the next morning and do the same." From one who would later
glory in the rural tranquillity of Albemarle County, this is strong
evidence of his youthful restlessness. But above all, he was un-
decided about the course he should follow in regard to Rebecca
Burwell. "Had I better stay here and do nothing, or go down and
do less?" he asked his friend Page. "Inclination tells me to go, re-
ceive my sentence, and be no longer in suspence: but, reason says if
you do and your attempt proves unsuccessful you will be ten times
more wretched than ever." 16 Throughout his letters there was
an underlying fear of being rejected, and he talked of traveling to
Europe to be cured of love.
Page warned his anguished friend that there was a rival for Re-
becca's affection and that Jefferson ought to return to Williamsburg
and "go immediately and lay siege in form." 17 Nevertheless, Jeffer-
son did not return to Williamsburg until October, 1763, and by
then he had persuaded himself that he should go to England be-
fore he took a wife. His long stay at home has led one biographer to
suspect that his mother may have been discouraging the court-
ship, but there is no proof of this. It is known that in February he
changed his talked-of plans to return to Williamsburg in May be-
cause there was smallpox in Williamsburg. 18
In any event, by the time he finally danced with Rebecca in the
Apollo Room of the Raleigh Tavern in Williamsburg on the night
of October 6, he had apparently decided to ask her to wait for him
while he went to England. This proved an unattractive prospect to
Rebecca, and the next morning he was miserable. "Last night,
as merry as agreeable company and dancing with Belinda in the
Apollo could make me, I never could have thought the succeeding
sun would have seen me so wretched as I now am!" he confessed to
Page. He had polished in his mind the words he would say, but
when the time came, "a few broken sentences, uttered in great dis-
order, and interrupted with pauses of uncommon length, were the
too visible marks of my strange confusion!" he lamented. He later
was able to speak his piece, but with no better results. Resigned to
being rebuffed, apparently not ready for marriage at twenty, he
dropped his pursuit of Rebecca (who soon married another man),
stopped his talk of going to England, and plunged into the study of
law. He had said that "if Belinda will not accept of my service it shall
never be offered to another," and for a time it appeared that he
19
meant it.
Jefferson devoted five years to reading law with George Wythe.

During that period he spent many months away from Williamsburg
and seems not tohave spent much time serving in an appren-

ticeship role to Wythe. The latter type of training was the most
common method of learning law in a time when there were no law
schools and training in law in America was not well structured as in
England, but Jefferson was more inclined to learning law from
books than from practice. Shortly after he was admitted to the bar,
he gave his opinion that "the placing of a youth to study with an
attorney was rather a prejudice than a help. We are all too apt by
shifting on them our business, to incroach on that time which
should be devoted to their studies. The only help a youth wants is
to be directed what books to read, and in what order to read them." 20
What Jefferson valued most was the direction that Wythe gave to
his reading. Wythe started him on Coke upon Littleton — the first part
—
of the Institutes of the Laws of England which is where he would
probably have started had he gone to England to study at one of
the Inns of Court. Sir William Blackstone's famous Commentaries on
the Laws of England was not completed until 1769, two years after
Jefferson was admitted to the bar. Thus, his initial exposure was
not to that orderly and lucid work that was soon to become the
most influential teacher of lawyers in both England and America,
but to the dense prose of that seventeenth-century legalist Sir
Edward Coke. "Well, Page," he told his friend when he was just be-
ginning his reading, "I do wish the Devil had old Cooke, for I am
sure I never was so tired of an old dull scoundrel in my life." But
Jefferson went on to conquer Coke and in time came to admire his
"uncouth but cunning learning." Coke had been a leader of the
popular party in opposition to James I and Charles I and promi-
nent in the drafting of the Petition of Right (1628), and his role as
the champion of English rights and liberties would place him in
good standing with Americans in their struggle with George III.
Years after the Revolution, Jefferson would say of Coke that "a
sounder whig never wrote, nor of profounder learning in the or-
thodox doctrines of the British constitution, or in what were called
English liberties." 21
From Coke's Institutes Jefferson went on to study the various re-
ports of cases before the King's Bench compiled by William Salkeld,
Robert Raymond, George Andrews, and others. His reading also
included Lord Karnes's Historical Law Tracts, Sir John Dalrymple's
history of feudal property in Great Britain, and Bernard Hale's
History of the Common Law. It is possible to be this precise about what
Jefferson read, because he made notes on his reading in a com-
monplace book, as he had earlier done while reading in literature

and history. 22 "When I was a student of the law," Jefferson recalled
years later, "after getting through Coke Littleton, whose matter
cannot be abridged, I was in the habit of abridging and common-
placing what I read meriting it, and of sometimes mixing my own
23
reflections on the subject." Jefferson's commonplace books, which
survived the 1770 fire at Shadwell, leave abundant proof of his dili-
gence and system as a serious student of law, and his abstracts of
cases show the importance that he gave to the case method of
studying law.
While Jefferson was reading law under Wythe, he reached his
majority and received the inheritance provided by his father's will.
The long periods that he spent at Shadwell may in part be ex-
plained by the new he then assumed. He would
responsibilities that
not come into possession of Shadwell until after the death of his
mother, who had a life interest in the house and 400 surrounding
acres, but he took possession of the major portion of the lands that
his father had acquired on the Rivanna, which totaled 2,650 acres
(including the 400 acres in the Shadwell tract). Jefferson had the
choice of the Rivanna lands or another tract of about equal size
on the Fluvanna River, which after he chose the Rivanna tract
would ultimately go to his only brother, Randolph. As the residu-
ary legatee, Jefferson also received various other tracts of land that
his father had acquired and that brought his patrimony altogether
to around 5,000 acres. By his father's will, Jefferson also inherited
24
twenty-two slaves.
Until he was twenty-one, Jefferson had no part in the supervision
of his father's estate, but after he received his inheritance he as-
sumed the active management of his property. In addition, he
rented from his mother the 400 acres at Shadwell, which were
farmed together with his larger Monticello tract and other lands on
the Rivanna, and he hired slaves from her to work the lands. He
also inherited the gristmill that his father had built on the Rivanna
River and operated it until it was swept away by a flood in 1771. In
the year that he turned twenty-one, Jefferson sold 700 acres of land
in Amherst County, presumably because he needed the cash. As
time passed, he both bought and sold other tracts, mostly at a
distance. But he held on to his major holdings in Albemarle, and
over the years he would consolidate and add to them. 25 In view of
the sizable inheritance that came into his possession when he was
twenty-one, Jefferson's persistence in his study of law shows that he
lO IN PURSUIT OF REASON
had ambitions beyond being a planter. His experiences in Williams-

burg had exposed him to a world beyond the hills of Albemarle,
and however much he loved that land, he was also attracted to the
broader world.
Jefferson's years in Williamsburg were more than a time for col-
lege studies and reading law and more than a time to enjoy the
company of college friends and his mentors Small and Wythe.
These were also the years when Jefferson first came into contact
with the men who directed the affairs of the colony and managed
its government. As the capital of Virginia, Williamsburg was the
seat of power in England's largest colony. Its major buildings, ob-

served the Oxford-trained Reverend Hugh Jones in 1724, "are
justly reputed the best in all the English America, and are exceeded
by a few of their kind in England." In words that would equally ap-
plv to Williamsburg in Jefferson's day, Jones noticed that "at the
Capitol, at publick times, may be seen a great number of handsom,
well-dressed, compleat gentlemen. And at the Governor's House
upon birth-nights, and at balls and assemblies, I have seen as fine an
appearance, as good diversion, and as splendid entertainment . . .
26
as I have seen any where else."
During the "publick times" in the spring and fall when the Gen-
eral Court and the House of Burgesses were in session, the leading
men from throughout the province crowded into Williamsburg
and nearby plantations, nearly doubling the town's normal popula-
tion of about 1,500. From the college, at one end of the Duke of
Gloucester Street, Jefferson could easily walk the broad, straight,
mile-long thoroughfare to the Capitol. At George Wythe's stately
house on the palace green, he was only a few hundred feet from
the Governor's Palace. After he became acquainted with Gover-
nor Fauquier, he also came to know some of the influential men
who composed the Governor's Council. Well connected by birth,
Jefferson was no doubt curious to see his mother's cousin Peyton
Randolph, the king's attorney, in action, and his acquaintance with
Edmund Pendleton and Patrick Henry heightened his interest in
hearing them speak in the oldest legislature in America. Thus,
Jefferson was often in the Capitol to listen to the debates and also, as
a student of law, to observe the proceedings of the General Court.
In view of the lively issues that came before the House of Bur-
gesses in the 1 760s, it may be suspected that Jefferson was more
often attracted to the proceedings of the legislature than the court.
It is certain that he was there often enough to gain an invaluable
political education. He was standing at the lobby door of the House

—
THE FORMATIVE YEARS 1 1
on May 30, 1765, when Patrick Henry spoke in support of the

Stamp Act Resolutions and connected the name of George III with
Julius Caesar and Charles I. The exact words that Henry used are
in dispute, but the governor reported that "very indecent lan-
guage" was employed, and Jefferson later recalled vividly shouts of
treason and Henry's "presence of mind with which he closed his
27
sentence and baffled the charge vociferated." Whether Jefferson's
memory, at the distance of half a century, was wholly accurate is
of less importance than the fact that he was an eyewitness to so im-
portant a scene. Never to become a great orator himself, Jefferson
was an early admirer of Henry's oratorical skills, and none of his
speeches left a more indelible impression on the young political ob-
server than this dramatic moment in the House of Burgesses.
In May, 1766, not long after his twenty-third birthday, Jefferson
made a trip of some two months to Annapolis, Philadelphia, and
New York — his first trip outside of Virginia; returning to Virginia
by he experienced his first ocean voyage. That he made An-
sea,
napolis, a neighboring provincial capital, his first major stop and
went to watch the Maryland legislature in session was indicative of
his interests. In the only letter that has survived from this journey,
he devoted more time to reporting on the Maryland Assembly
where he was surprised by the lack of decorum than to any other—
subject. He also commented on the houses, gardens, and public
buildings of Annapolis, showing an observant eye for architec-
28
ture. Unfortunately, no letters are extant to record Jefferson's first
impressions of Philadelphia and New York, but it is known that his

main reason for going was to be inoculated against
to Philadelphia
smallpox. The he carried out that purpose made him one
fact that
of the pioneers of that then risky experiment and placed him firmly
on the side of advancing science. Jefferson was nearing the end of
his formal education when he made this journey and would begin to
practice law in the following year. In a sense the trip marked his
transition from man
of an ever-widening world.
a student to a
In the spring of 1766, before his trip to Maryland, Pennsylvania,
and New York, Jefferson began what would become his Garden
Book, recording the first entry at Shadwell on March 30: "Purple
hyacinth begins to bloom." Before he left for Maryland, he noted
that the wild honeysuckle in the woods had opened and that the
blue flowers in the low lands had vanished. Thus began the close
and systematic observations of plant life that interested Jefferson
throughout his days, for he would make the last entry in his Gar-
den Book in the autumn of 1824, only two years before his death.
1 2 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
Soon he recorded the preparations for the

after starting the book,
gardens of flowers, and other plants that he
fruits, vegetables,
would make flourish in the red soil of Monticello. It was another
year before he would have the mountaintop cleared to begin his
house there, but he was already developing stock for his gardens. 29
The beginnings of his gardens and of his nearly lifelong building
project at Monticello coincided with another major step in his life:
setting up an active practice of law in Albemarle and neighboring
counties. Jefferson's close identification with the land and Mon-
ticello and the prominence of his later political career have tended
to obscure the fact that he began his working years as a practicing
lawyer. Though he may have enjoyed the study of law more than
the practice of it,he threw himself into his new vocation with con-
siderable application. In his autobiography Jefferson recorded that
George Wythe presented him before the General Court in Williams-
burg in 1767, and his casebook shows that he got his first client
30
in February, 1767. His legal practice was soon carrying him from
Albemarle to Staunton, Winchester, and neighboring county seats,
to Richmond, and to the General Court in Williamsburg. During
his first year as a lawyer, he listed in his casebook a total of 68 cases.
During the second year he recorded 1 15, and by 1769 he was em-
ployed in 198 cases. But these did not include all of his legal busi-
ness; his pocket memoranda and account books show numerous
additional clients. When he received £370 in fees in his third year
of practice, it was clear that he had achieved success as a lawyer. 31
Matters dealing with landownership, as was common in that era,
predominated in his practice, but his casebook shows a wide variety
of litigation. He numbered among his clients both the humble and
the great. During his second year of practice, he recorded that "the
Honble Wm. Byrd (Charles city) retains me generally," and his
casebook lists other prominent Virginia names. It also lists many
obscure persons and shows that he declined fees in some circum-
stances, including all actions to establish the liberty of persons
claimed as slaves. He represented plaintiffs and defendants with
about equal frequency. 32
As a young lawyer, Jefferson was better known for thorough
preparation than for courtroom oratory, in which he never rivaled
Patrick Henry. As Edmund Randolph observed, "Mr. Jefferson
drew copiously from the depths of the law, Mr. Henry from the
recesses of the human heart." But Randolph also said that "with-
out being an overwhelming orator," Jefferson was an "impressive
3
33
speaker, who fixed the attention."Jefferson drew not only from
the depths of English law but also on occasion called up the law of
nature. In a case in 1770 he argued that "under the law of nature,
all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right
to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it
own will." 34
at his
The case involved a man whose grandmother was a mulatto,
born to a white woman and a black man. According to a law of 1705
the grandmother had been subject to servitude until age thirty-one.
Before reaching that age, she had given birth to a child, who ac-
cording to a law of 1723 also was subject to service until age thirty-
one. In turn, that daughter, before attaining her freedom, had
given birth to a son, and he, like his mother and grandmother be-
fore him, was being held to service until age thirty-one. He sought
release from servitude before that age, and Jefferson, without fee,
pleaded his case. After a detailed exposition, the young, slavehold-
ing lawyer concluded that the act of 1705 "subjected to servitude
the first mulatto only. That this did not, under the law of nature,
affect the liberty of the children. Because, under that law we are all
born free." It took the act of 1723 to subject such children to ser-
vitude, he pointed out and, with no hiding of his own convictions,
concluded that "it remains for some future legislature, if any shall
be found wicked enough, to extend it to the grandchildren and
other issue more remote." What Jefferson adroitly ignored was that
the act of 1723 applied to the children born to any female mulatto
held to servitude until age thirty-one and that the statute thus oper-
ated with equal effect on the plaintiff's mother as it did upon his
grandmother. 35 After listening to Jefferson's arguments, the court
ruled against his client before the other side even presented its
position. If Jefferson's reference to the law of nature was startling to
the judges, such concepts were already well fixed in his own mind.
He was finding practical application for them well before he would
marshal them in a wider cause.
In his carefully kept casebook he entered his last case — number
—
939 on November 9, 1774, and soon turned over his pending
business to Edmund Randolph. Although during a brief period in
1782 Jefferson prepared some six legal opinions for clients, he
never fully returned to the practice of law after the Revolution. U1
Before that epochal event he had already turned his legal skills in
—
new directions and entered another career one that he repeat-
edly professed to hate but never abandoned — politics.
II
Public Life and Private World
In December, 1768, Jefferson stood for election as a delegate from

Albemarle County to the Virginia House of Burgesses. The poll
taken at that election has not survived, and only the names of the
persons elected were reported in the press. But enough is known
about the conduct of elections in Jefferson's Virginia to reconstruct
the scene that brought his Albemarle neighbors to the courthouse
in Charlottesville on There the freeholders (white
election day.
adult men who owned one hun-
twenty-five acres with a house, or
dred acres of unoccupied land, or a house and lot in town) gave
their votes orally before the sheriff and within the hearing of nu-
merous onlookers who crowded into the courthouse. Seated in the
center of a long table, the sheriff, who conducted the election, was
flanked by several justices of the peace, by the clerks who recorded
the votes, and by the candidates themselves.* The candidates were
expected not only to be present on the grounds on election day but
also to provide refreshments (rum punch and cookies were com-
mon) for the voters, who were free to accept the hospitality of all
candidates regardless of their political preferences. That Jefferson
provided such treats at his first election is known because he re-
corded the expenses in his account book. To fill the two seats to
1
which each county was entitled in the House of Burgesses, each free-
holder voted for two persons and on this occasion chose from among
three candidates. Two of them, Dr. Thomas Walker and Edward
Carter, had been members of the previous Assembly, but during the
last session Carter had failed to attend. This circumstance no doubt
played a part in Jefferson's becoming a candidate. When the poll

closed, Walker had been reelected, and Carter, a large Albemarle
landowner, had lost to the young, well-educated lawyer whose fa-
ther had been one of the earliest settlers in the county.
—
On May 8, 1769, Jefferson just turned twenty-six took the —
a
PUBLIC LIFE AND PRIVATE WORLD 15
oath of office and was seated in the House of Burgesses. It was for-
tunate that the new member arrived promptly in Williamsburg to
be present when the session opened, for the burgesses were to sit
for only ten days before the governor dissolved them. Yet during
that short period Jefferson drafted his first state paper — resolu-
tions in answer to the governor's speech — a purely ceremonial ex-
ercise but one that showed that his talents as a writer were already
known to some of the members. His draft of the address, however,
was objected to by some members of the committee and recast —
reminder that he was still a new member. 2 The young burgess from
Albemarle County was also named to two important committees:
Privileges and Elections, and Propositions and Grievances, indicat-
ing that Jefferson entered the House with influential connections,
including his mother's cousin Peyton Randolph, who was elected
Speaker. 3
Tensions with Great Britain had mounted since Jefferson had lis-
tened to Patrick Henry denounce the Stamp Act four years before.
Now the Townshend duties, voted by Parliament two years earlier,
were the focus of colonial protests. On the ninth day of the session,
the burgesses by a unanimous vote passed resolutions declaring
that they had the sole right to levy taxes on the colony, affirming
the right of petition, and protesting the removal of accused persons
to England for trial. On the next day Governor Botetourt dissolved
the House of Burgesses. Later that day "the late Representatives of
the People" gathered in the Apollo Room of the Raleigh Tavern.
"Judging it necessary that some Measures should be taken in their
distressed Situation, for preserving the true and essential Interests
of the Colony," they reassembled on the following day (May 18,
1769) and passed a series of nonimportation resolutions and formed
an association to implement them. 4 Some members had come to
Williamsburg prepared to act, and the resolutions appear to have
been based on a paper that George Washington brought with him
from Mount Vernon. Although the authorship of the resolutions
has never been fully established, the new member from Albemarle
was not among the drafters. 5 He was, however, one of the signers,
and he fully supported the actions. It was a dramatic moment to
begin his political career, and the unity of the burgesses in asserting
the rights of the colony could only have confirmed the views that
already were becoming fixed in Jefferson's own mind.
In August, 1769, Governor Botetourt issued a writ for a new
election, which was held in September. Jefferson was again elected,
as were most of the other members of the dissolved Assembly. He
l6 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
observed that the only burgesses not reelected were the few who
declined to support the proceedings at the Raleigh Tavern. The
new Assembly convened on November 7 and lasted six weeks.
named to the same standing committees as in the pre-
Jefferson was
vious session and during the session served on several select com-
mittees, reporting two committee bills to the house. Though he
must have found this session less exciting than the previous one, he
got his first real taste of the business of legislating. Toward the end
of the session when he was named to the committee to examine en-
rolled bills, it was evident that he had become one of those mem-
bers who gave close attention to his duties and to the work of the
House. When he returned to Williamsburg in the spring of 1770
for the next session, Jefferson's contributions were similar. 6 His leg-
islative service had become important to him, and he devoted him-
self to it with characteristic application.
In the same year that he entered the House of Burgesses, Jeffer-
son ordered a small shipment of books from London. Their titles
are significant not only in relation to his own legislative career but
also in view of the growing constitutional struggle with Great Brit-
ain and the onrush of events in which he would participate. Among
the books he received were John Locke's Two Treatises on Govern-
ment, Montesquieu's complete works, Jean Jacques Burlamaqui's
Principes du Droit Naturel, Anthony Ellys' Tracts on the Liberty, Spiri-
tual and Temporal, of Protestants in England, and Adam Ferguson's An
Essay on the History of Civil Society. One writer who has questioned
7
Jefferson's direct contact with Locke's work at this important period

has asserted that the Locke volume perished almost im-
in his life
mediately after Jefferson received it in the fire that ravaged his
mother's house at Shadwell on February 1, 1770. But Jefferson had
access to Locke's Two Treatises on Government in 1772, for he cited it
several times in legal notes on divorce. 8 Although Locke's Two

Treatises was not among Jefferson's books received by the Library of
Congress in 1815, it was listed in his manuscript catalogue of his
9
library. Furthermore, of the thirteen works purchased in 1769,
seven from Jefferson's library are in the Library of Congress today. 10
The books are all in editions described in the 1769 invoice that
listed the titles that were being shipped, and all have publication
dates prior to 1769.
The existence of these volumes suggests that this key shipment
of books was not lost at Shadwell. Indeed, the books may not have
reached there before the fire. Jefferson was informed by letter
from London, dated October 2, 1769, and an accompanying in-
PUBLIC LIFE AND PRIVATE WORLD 17
voice that his order of books was being shipped to Virginia on

board the Industry captained by James Lowes. 11 On December 7,
1769, Purdie and Dixon's Virginia Gazette, published in Williams-
burg, announced that the Industry under the command of Captain
Lowes had arrived in the James River from London after seven
weeks' passage. It is certain that this was the ship that carried
Jefferson's box of books. How soon thereafter or where Jefferson
uncrated the books is not known, but he was in Williamsburg at-
tending the meeting of the House of Burgesses when the Industry
arrived in the James River, and it may be that the letter and the two
invoices came on the same ship. It is of interest that these papers
were not destroyed by the fire at Shadwell and are the earliest ex-
tant papers addressed to Jefferson. It is also known that Jefferson
kept some books in Williamsburg, for in 1773, when he made a
count of the books at Monticello, he specifically noted that the
count did not include his books in Williamsburg. 12 Books on politi-
cal subjects, such as those received in the 1769 shipment, seem the
type of volumes that he might have kept in the provincial capital
for reference during legislative sessions.
The destruction at Shadwell was extensive. Jefferson said that he
lost "every paper I had in the world, and almost every book," and
calculated the loss of books at £200. "To make the loss more sen-
sible it fell principally on my books of common law," he wrote, "of
which I have but one left, at that time lent out." 13 Jefferson did not
mention his new shipment of books in reporting the details of the
fire to his friend John Page, but the weight of evidence suggests
that those books, rather than being destroyed, provided a new be-
ginning for Jefferson's library. That circumstance may have meant
that the books were the more closely read for being all he had.
While dividing his time between his law practice and his legis-
lative duties, Jefferson also began to give increasing attention to an-
other interest that more and more would absorb his attention:
building a house on the mountaintop that would become the seat of
his lands in Albemarle and the center of his dreams. "I have lately
removed to the mountain from whence this is dated," Jefferson
wrote February 20, 1771, in one of the earliest known letters from
Monticello. "I have here but one room, which, like the cobler's
serves me for parlour for kitchen and hall. I may add, for bed
chamber and study too. My friends sometimes take a temperate
dinner with me and then retire to look for beds elsewhere. I have
hopes however of getting more elbow room this summer." This
letter was written from the earlier of the two small pavilions that
—
today flank the main house then far from finished in its first state
and not to be completed in its final form for four decades. Jeffer-
son had had the mountaintop cleared and leveled in 1768; the
following year the cellar of the first pavilion was excavated, a well
dug, bricks made, and other work on the site begun. By Novem-
ber, 1770, the first building was sufficiently completed to enable
Jefferson to move there, an event no doubt speeded by the fire at
Shadwell the previous February. After that disaster, he was away
much of the time on law business, at a session of the legislature, and
on various visits before establishing himself at Monticello. 14
Jefferson was both the builder and the architect of Monticello,
and it became for him nearly a lifetime avocation. His home was the
first of a series of architectural achievements, many of them late in
life, that support a leading architectural historian's assessment of
Jefferson as America's "first great native-born architect." The first

American to make working drawings as well as architectural designs,
Jefferson produced more than five hundred such drawings the—
earliest ones in planning the building of Monticello. Twenty-one
architectural drawings date between 1767, when he first started
planning his home on the little mountain, and the end of 1770,
when he moved there; another six drawings were probably com-
pleted by early 1771. He would ultimately produce over two hun-
dred drawings, sketches, and surveys that scholars have identified
as connected with his building, rebuilding, and remodeling of
Monticello. 15
Jefferson learned architecture from observation and from books.
Although no record of his first impressions of the architecture of
Williamsburg survives, Jefferson's later comments were harsh. He
was restrained in his critique of the Capitol and the Governor's Pal-
ace, but he called the college and the hospital buildings "rude, mis-
shapen piles, which, but that they have roofs, would be taken for
brick-kilns." When he first saw Annapolis, he judged the houses
there better than in Williamsburg. Most of the houses in Virginia
were built of wood, and he thought it "impossible to devise things
more ugly, uncomfortable, and happily more perishable. . The
. .
genius of architecture seems to have shed its maledictions over this

land," he wrote. "Buildings are often erected, by individuals, of
considerable expence. To give these symmetry and taste would not
increase their cost. . .But the first principles of the art are un-
.
known, and there exists scarcely a model among us sufficiently

chaste to give an idea of them." This seems a severe assessment in
view of the existence of such James River mansions as Carter's Grove,
,
PUBLIC LIFE AND PRIVATE WORLD ig
Westover, and Berkeley. But, as Edmund Randolph would observe,

Jefferson "panted after the fine arts, and discovered a taste in them
not easily satisfied with such scanty means, as existed in a colony."
Randolph also said that "it constituted a part of Mr. Jefferson's pride
torun before the times in which he lived." 16
If Jefferson found no models about him to imitate, he discovered
them in books, and it was to those sources that he owed his earliest
architectural accomplishments. He is said to have purchased his
firstbook on architecture while a student at William and Mary, and
by the time he started drawing his plans for Monticello, he had the
beginnings of an architectural library. In his early drawings for
Monticello he used James Gibbs's Book of Architecture and his Rules
17
for Drawing along with Robert Morris' Select Architecture. Gibbs's
books, popular in America for a generation, probably introduced
Jefferson to the ideas of the Italian master Andrea Palladio, whose
Four Books of Architecture he would ultimately acquire in no less than
five editions and whose ideas would be dominant in Jefferson's ar-
chitectural thinking before he went to France in 1784. The first
state of Monticello clearly reflected the Palladian influence. Robert
Morris, who designed buildings in spheres and perfect cubes, also
appealed to Jefferson's mathematical mind. He liked the simplicity
of Morris' designs and their adaptability to small scale. Jefferson's
first idea for a house seems to have come from Morris' Select Archi-
tecture, for one of his earliest drawings is a tracing from a plate in
that work. Another of Jefferson's early studies for Monticello was

taken directly from one of the plates in Gibbs's Book of Architecture
which in turn was similar to a plate in Palladio's second volume.
Both Gibbs and Morris used the octagonal shape, which Jefferson
found attractive for both houses and gardens, first employing the
design at Monticello. 18
By 1770 Jefferson had decided on a center block with flanking
wings for the main house. His drawings show it dominated by a
two-story portico of two orders with stronger Doric capitals sup-
porting Ionic columns, as Palladio recommended. Once the foun-
dation walls were up, he decided to add octagonal bays to the par-
lor and the ends of the house. There is some question as to whether
the upper portion of the portico was ever built before later re-
modeling began. The Marquis de Chastellux, visiting Monticello in
1782, reported entering the house "through two porticoes orna-
mented with columns," but whether he meant a two-story portico
is unclear. 19
One of the most distinctive features of Jefferson's plan was to
group under one roof the scattered outbuildings — kitchen, laun-

dry room, woodhouse, storage rooms, and the like — that filledthe
grounds around most Virginia plantations and connect these sup-
porting buildings with the main house. He acquired the basic idea
from Palladio and adapted it to his mountain site by devising a plan
by which the dependencies were built on the basement level, open-
ing on one side to ground level, and covered with terraces. When
the Marquis de Chastellux visited Monticello, he was impressed
with the main house, which he described as "in an Italian style" and
"quite tasteful," and he was struck with the arrangement of the de-
pendencies. Altogether he found the place "resembles none of the
others seen in this country; so that it may be said that Mr. Jefferson
is the first American who has consulted the Fine Arts to know how
he should shelter himself from the weather." 20

When Chastellux made these observations, Jefferson had been
building at Monticello for a dozen years and had not yet completed
his original plans, but it was evident by then that Jefferson con-
ceived of his home as an extension of himself, his interests, and his
ideas. Building Monticello was a means of creative expression, an
absorbing hobby, and an exciting adventure. Nowhere else did he
find so wondrous a setting. "Where has nature spread so rich a
mantle under the eye?" he asked. "How sublime to look down into
the workhouse of nature, to see her clouds, hail, snow, rain, thunder,
all fabricated at our feet! And the glorious Sun, when rising as if
out of a distant water, just gilding the tops of the mountains, and
giving life to all nature!" Thoughts of Monticello summoned his
deepest feelings, and he once wrote, "All my wishes end, where I
hope my days will end, at Monticello." 21
At the time he started building his home, Jefferson did not know
who would share it with him, but he soon was interrupting his work
to visit Martha Wayles Skelton at the Forest, her father's house in
Charles City County, near Williamsburg. These visits began in Oc-
tober, 1770, and increased in frequency during 1771. In June of
that year Jefferson sent to England for a pianoforte "worthy the ac-
ceptance of a lady for whom I intend it," and in August he confided
that "in every scheme of happiness she is placed in the fore-ground
of the picture, as the principal figure. Take that away, and it is no
picture for me." 22 This was Jefferson's first serious romantic attach-
ment since his adolescent love affair with Rebecca Burwell. In the
intervening years nothing in the record indicates his being at-
tracted to any women except for an imprudent advance to Betsy
Walker, wife of his friend John Walker. Years later he admitted that
PUBLIC LIFE AND PRIVATE WORLD 2 1
"when young and single I offered love to a handsome and he

lady,"
23
acknowledged "its incorrectness." This appears to have been an
exceptional circumstance, and until he met Martha Skelton, he
seems to have been less interested in women than in establishing
himself in law and in politics. During these years he had taken seri-
ously his responsibilities to his mother and to his younger sisters
and brother. He had been much shaken in 1765 by the death of his
oldest sister, Jane, who was twenty-five and had been particularly
close to him. Thus, a number of circumstances may have contrib-
uted to what appeared to be a lack of interest in finding a wife. All
of this changed when he fell in love with Martha.
Five and a half years younger than Jefferson, Martha Wayles
Skelton was the young widow of Bathurst Skelton, whom Jefferson
had known while Skelton was a student at William and Mary. The
daughter of John Wayles, a prosperous lawyer with a large landed
estate, Martha had married Bathurst Skelton when she was eigh-
teen, borne a son at nineteen, and become a widow before she was
twenty. It was about two years after this that Jefferson met her,
probably in Williamsburg in the autumn of 1770, and soon there-
after began to pay her increasing attention. Indeed, he apparently
courted her with all the formality that the word suggests. Within a
year she had agreed to marry him, and on the first day of January,
1772, they were married at the Forest. Martha was twenty-three
—
and Jefferson twenty-eight somewhat older than most Virginia
men married in his day. In the summer before their marriage, her
son, John Skelton, not yet four, died, and Jefferson never gained
the stepson for whom he had already begun to make plans. 24
No portrait of Martha Wayles Jefferson survives, and the rare
contemporary descriptions of her offer few details. Family tradition
describes her as beautiful and musically talented. Her brother-in-
law Robert Skipwith told Jefferson not long before their marriage
that she was a woman "with the greatest fund of good nature" and
"all that sprightliness and sensibility which promises to ensure you
the greatest happiness mortals are capable of enjoying." 25 No de-

scription of Martha in Jefferson's own hand survives, nor any letter
between them, for he apparently destroyed such private papers as
might have revealed his deepest personal feelings. But there is
every reason to believe that he found Skipwith's prediction to be
true and that their marriage was a happy one.
There are no portraits of Jefferson at the time of his marriage,
and none would be painted until he went to Europe after the Revo-
lution. Nor are there any written descriptions dating from that
time. But we know from later descriptions that he was over six feet
tall and somewhat lanky; his eyes were hazel, his hair reddish, and
he tended to freckle in the sun. Unlike other times of his life, at this
period he appears to have been careful about his dress. While
courting Martha, he even ordered from London "a large Umbrella
with brass ribs covered with green silk, and neatly finished." 26 He
had already shown a shyness that he would only gradually over-
come and a sensitivity that he would never lose. He was never re-
ferred to as handsome, but the impression that he made on others
was generally pleasing. As he made his mark in the world, others
would more often record these impressions. When he took Martha
to Monticello as his wife, neither of them could have anticipated the
events that would make him known beyond the Virginia society
into which they both had been born and in which they expected to
live out their lives.
Their first-born daughter, Martha, would one day relate that she
had heard from her father the story of the newlyweds' arrival at
Monticello late at night in the midst of a snowstorm, finding all the
fires out and the servants in bed. The next day Jefferson recorded
in his garden book that the snow in Albemarle was about three feet
deep, "the deepest snow we have ever seen." This entry was made
on January 26; he would make no other entry until March 30. 27
Just how much of Monticello had been completed when the
newly married couple arrived there is uncertain. That the main
house was not finished is clear, but more may have been finished
than the small pavilion that had been Jefferson's bachelor's quarters.
It may be that one wing of the main house was sufficiently com-
pleted to be occupied, but the tradition is that the small outbuilding

was their first home. 28 Regardless of when they moved into the
main house, construction would continue throughout their mar-
riage. It was not finished before the Revolution. Building con-
tinued throughout the war years, and work remained to be done
when the Chevalier de Chastellux visited there in 1782.
Jefferson did not attend the session of the House of Burgesses
that met in early February, 1772, soon after his marriage, and he
was at Monticello in late September when their first child, Martha,
was born. 29 But in the years ahead he would be drawn away from
home more than he wished by events as unforeseen as they would
be epoch-making. Though he had not realized it at the time, he
had already witnessed and participated in the first steps on the
road to revolution.
Ill
The Road to Revolution
Virginia was quiet at the beginning of the 1770s. A new ministry

headed by Lord North took office in London, and in April, 1770,
Parliament repealed the Townshend duties except for the levy on
tea.Though Parliament still asserted its right to tax and to pass
other laws binding on the colonies, "nothing of particular excite-
ment occurring for a considerable time," Jefferson observed, "our
countrymen seemed to fall into a state of insensibility to our situa-
tion." He would later recall this lull in public concern as dangerous
'
to the American cause, but as a young husband and a new father,

he may not have been unduly concerned by the fact that Virginia's
Governor Dunmore kept the House of Burgesses prorogued for
another year following the 1772 session that he had missed. When
Dunmore did summon the Assembly to meet in March, 1773,
Jefferson was there to participate, and by then his concern about
colonial rights was rising sharply.
The burning of the revenue schooner Gaspee by Rhode Islanders
in 1772brought the creation of a royal commission of inquiry with
powers to send offenders to England for trial. Seeing the revival of
that crucial issue as demanding attention, Jefferson joined a group
of young burgesses who believed that many older and leading
members lacked the "forwardness and zeal which the times re-
quired." This younger group, which included Patrick Henry,
Richard Henry Lee, Francis Lightfoot Lee, and Dabney Carr, be-
gan meeting privately in the evenings at the Raleigh Tavern. "We
were all sensible," Jefferson said, "that the most urgent of all mea-
sures was that of coming to an understanding with all the other
colonies to consider the British claims as a common cause to all, and
to produce an unity of action." The plan they proposed was an
2
intercolonial system of committees of correspondence.

The group prepared a series of resolutions introduced in the
House of Burgesses by Dabney Carr and passed on March 12,

1773, without a dissenting vote. Peyton Randolph, the Speaker, was
chosen to chair the committee of correspondence called for by the
resolutions. Jefferson and all those whom he identified as being
members of the Raleigh Tavern group were also named to the com-
mittee, which was instructed to open communications with the
other colonies. Meeting the next day, the committee composed a
circular letter sent to all colonies along with a copy of the resolu-
tions. The creation of committees of correspondence by the various
colonies provided the structure for a revolutionary political union.
Acknowledging the earlier establishment of committees of cor-
respondence within Massachusetts, Jefferson nonetheless claimed
for Virginia the leadership in the creation of the intercolonial net-
work. 3 Governor Dunmore either did not recognize or preferred to
ignore the significance of the Virginia action, reporting to London
"some resolves which show a little ill humour in the house of Bur-
gesses, but ... so insignificant that I took no matter of notice of
them." 4 He thus did not dissolve the Assembly but prorogued it
after a session of only eleven days. By repeatedly proroguing it, he
kept it from meeting until May, 1774.
Jefferson was not among the three members named as a standing
committee by the committee of correspondence at its first meet-
ing, and he left Williamsburg after the proroguing of the Assembly.
In the year between the sessions of 1773 and 1774, Jefferson's per-
sonal life was greatly affected by the death of his best friend and
brother-in-law, Dabney Carr, and the death of his father-in-law,
John Wayles. Carr had been his boyhood chum at Maury's school,
had married his sister Martha in 1765, and had recently entered
the House of Burgesses. Jefferson felt his death keenly, and when
he wrote the epitaph for tombstone, he signed it, "Thomas

his
Jefferson, who of all men loved him most." Carr was the first per-
son to be buried at Monticello. Later, probably in 1781, Martha
Carr and her children would come to live at Monticello. Shortly
after Dabney Carr's death John Wayles died, and Mrs. Jefferson
inherited a sizable estate of over 11,000 acres and 135 slaves.
Approximately half of the land had to be sold to pay her share of
her father's heavy debt, but the inheritance, by Jefferson's calcula-
tions, doubled their wealth, while increasing his responsibilities of
management. 5 These considerations must have played a part in
Jefferson's decision to cease practicing law, for within six months
following Way less death, he closed his practice. The release from
the demands of an active law business provided more time for the
THE ROAD TO REVOLUTION 25
management of his own, his mother's, and his wife's property and
also left Jefferson freer for public service. The latter would increas-
command his attention.
ingly
When the Virginia Assembly convened May, 1774, relations
in
with Great Britain were in a heightened of crisis. During the
state
previous year the ailing East India Company had been given special
privileges to sell tea in America, and once its marketing operations
were set up in the colonies, the cry of monopoly joined the cry
against the tax on tea. After protesters boarded three ships in the
Boston harbor and dumped chests of tea into the bay, Britain re-
sponded with the Boston Port Bill, closing the Boston harbor to all
commerce effective June 1, 1774. The news of the British action
reached Williamsburg in May in the midst of the legislative session. 6
Jefferson was among those who took the lead in designing the
swift Virginia reaction. He joined with Patrick Henry, Richard
Henry Lee, Francis Lightfoot Lee, and several other younger mem-
bers who believed that Virginia must take an unequivocal stand in
the support of Massachusetts. As a means of arousing Virginians
from lethargy, this group hit upon the idea of calling for a day of
general fasting and prayer. Using the library in the council cham-
ber, they searched through John Rushworth's Historical Collections
(London, 1659-1701), found a model in a proclamation issued by
Charles I in 1642, and prepared a resolution to proclaim June 1,
1774, a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer "to implore heaven
to avert us from the evils of civil war, to inspire us with firmness in
support of our rights, and to turn the hearts of the King and parlia-
ment to moderation and justice." 7 The details that Jefferson re-
membered years later about rummaging through Rushworth look-
ing for precedents and modernizing phrases in the model adopted
suggest that he had a principal hand in drafting the resolution, but
Robert Carter Nicholas, whose religious character was more in uni-
son with the resolution, presented it to the House of Burgesses on
May 24. The resolution passed immediately without opposition. It
was promptly printed in a broadside that Governor Dunmore held
in his hand two days later when he summoned the burgesses to the
council room and dissolved them, protesting that the resolution
was "conceived in such Terms as reflect highly upon his Majesty
and the Parliament of Great Britain." It was a sign of the grow-
ing distance between the royal government and the colony that the
dissolution was unexpected and that more spirited resolutions
were being withheld until the business of the Assembly could be
completed. 8
After being dissolved, the burgesses reassembled in the Apollo

Room of the Raleigh Tavern. On May 27 along with eighty-eight
other members, Jefferson signed an association to refrain from
using tea and to boycott most other commodities sold by the East
India Company. Even more important, the signers agreed that "an
attack, made on one of our sister colonies, to compel submission to
arbitrary taxes, is an attack made on all British America," and
called upon
the committee of correspondence to contact the other
colonies regarding a general congress "to deliberate on those gen-
eral measures which the united interests of America may from time
9
to time require."
The next day Jefferson attended the meeting of the committee of
correspondence, which sent letters to all the colonies transmitting
the Virginia action and soliciting sentiments on the appointment of
delegates to a general congress. Jefferson was also present two days
later at a meeting of burgesses still in Williamsburg summoned by
Peyton Randolph to respond to newly arrived dispatches in which
Bostonians appealed for the adoption of a strict nonimportation
and nonexportation agreement. Because that was a measure the as-
sociation formed at the Raleigh Tavern on May 27 had shunned,
the new gathering felt unable to commit Virginia and called an-
other meeting for August 1 in Williamsburg. Jefferson was one of
the signers of the printed letter sent to all members of the late
House of Burgesses reporting the appeal from Boston, summoning
the Williamsburg meeting, and urging all representatives mean-
while to collect the sense of the people in their counties. 10
Returning to Monticello, Jefferson was soon at his writing table
drafting resolutions and putting his thoughts on paper in prepara-
tion for the August meeting. The first of his efforts was a series of
resolutions adopted by the freeholders of Albemarle County on
July 26, 1774, at the time of the election of Jefferson and John
Walker to represent the county in the Virginia convention in Wil-
liamsburg. The resolutions asserted that "the several states of Brit-
ish America" were subject only to the laws adopted by their own
legislatures. Proclaiming that "no other legislature whatever may
rightfully exercise authority over them," they protested that "their
natural and legal rights have in frequent instances been invaded by
the parliament of Great Britain." The resolutions supported non-
importation and nonexportation measures until the port of Boston
was reopened, taxes were repealed, and restrictions on American
trade and manufacturing lifted." Jefferson also prepared a similar
series of resolutions for submission to the Virginia convention and
drafted a set of proposed instructions to the Virginia delegates to

the Continental Congress scheduled to convene in Philadelphia in
September. He intended to propose these instructions at the con-
vention, but he became ill en route and returned home.
He did, however, send two copies of his paper to Williamsburg.
One was addressed to Patrick Henry, who never communicated it
to anyone. Jefferson later wondered if he had taken time to read it.
The other copy went to the chairman of the convention, Peyton
Randolph, who laid it on the table as coming from an absent dele-
gate. Although the proposals in Jefferson's draft were not taken up
by any member nor offered to the convention, some members ar-
ranged to have the paper printed. It appeared in Williamsburg
under the title A Summary View of the Rights of British America and
was soon reprinted in Philadelphia and London. The author was
listed on the title page of the twenty-three-page pamphlet only as
"A Native, and Member of the House of Burgesses," but Jefferson's
authorship was generally known. He later thought that his proposi-
tions were considered too bold for the times and that "tamer senti-
ments were preferred." In time he came to believe that a moderate
course had been wise and that he had proposed a leap too long for
most of his fellow citizens. He also admitted that his paper was
based on an interpretation of the relationship of the colonies to
Great Britain that, except for George Wythe, he had never been
12
able to convince others to accept.
A Summary View of the Rights of British America was indeed a bold
statement. Although too extreme for 1774, it would not long be so
regarded. Its circulation propelled Jefferson into the front ranks of
the champions of American rights and established those creden-
tials that two years later placed him on the committee to draft the
Declaration of Independence. In addition to a broad statement of

principles, Jefferson presented a detailed enumeration of Ameri-
can grievances against both Parliament and the crown, formulating
the list of charges that he would add to and incorporate into the
Declaration of Independence.
Jefferson based A Summary View on the contention that the only
connection between the settlements in America and Great Britain
was through the crown. He began his argument by going back to
the migrations of the Saxons. "Our emigration from England to
this country gave her no more rights over us, than the emigrations
of the Danes and Saxons gave to the present authorities of the
mother country over England," he said in summarizing his pam-
phlet.
13
The pamphlet itself explained:
Our ancestors, before their emigration to America, were the free in-
habitants of the British dominions in Europe, and possessed a right,
which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in
which chance, not choice has placed them, of going in quest of new
habitations, and of there establishing new societies, under such laws
and regulations as to them shall seem most likely to promote public
happiness. .Settlements having been thus effected in the wilds of
. .
America, the emigrants thought proper to adopt that system of laws

under which they hitherto lived in the mother country, and to con-
tinue their union with her by submitting themselves to the same com-
mon sovereign, who was thereby made the central link connecting the
several parts of the empire thus newly multiplied. 14
As he had proclaimed Albemarle resolutions, Jefferson in-

in the
sisted that "the British parliament has no right to exercise authority
over us." This was not a widely shared view. More prevalent was the
position that Parliament had a right to regulate commerce and to
lay duties on it for the purposes of regulation but not of raising
revenue. 15
Having denied the authority of Parliament, Jefferson appealed to
the king to recommend to Parliament the total revocation of those
acts causing discontent. But in repudiating Parliament, Jefferson
had no intention of strengthening the power of the king, and he
cautioned George III that the king was "no more than the chief
officer of the people, appointed by the laws, and circumscribed
with definite powers, to use, and consequently subject to their su-
perintendance." Detailing the acts of Parliament and the policies of
monarchs and ministers that proved "a deliberate, systematical
plan of reducing us to slavery," Jefferson laid these grievances be-
fore the king "with that freedom of language and sentiment which
becomes a free people, claiming their rights as derived from the
laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate. Let
those flatter, who fear: it is not an American art." He urged George
III to "no longer persevere in sacrificing the rights of one part of
the empire to the inordinate desires of another." Though affirming
no wish to separate from Great Britain, the mere mention of the
possibility showed how far Jefferson was prepared to go. In con-
clusion he affirmed that "the god who gave us life, gave us liberty
at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot dis-
16
join them."
Most Americans in 1774 were not ready to go so far as the thirty-
one-year-old Albemarle delegate. That was evident in the resolu-
tions adopted by the Virginia convention, which were primarily
THE ROAD TO REVOLUTION 2Q
concerned with creating a vigorous nonimportation association and

halting all exports of tobacco and other products to Great Britain
after August 10, 1775, if American grievances were not redressed
by then. 17 Some Virginians in fact used Jefferson's paper to empha-
size the moderation of the convention's approach. In a preface
added upon publication, the editors applauded the "faithful ac-
curacy" with which the sources of the differences with Great Brit-
ain were examined and the "manly firmness" with which "the opin-
ions entertained by every free American" were expressed. Then
they added, "It will evince to the world the moderation of our late
convention, who have only touched with tenderness many of the
claims insisted on in this pamphlet, though every heart acknowl-
edged their justice." 18
Like most of Jefferson's political writings, A Summary View was
written for a specific political purpose, not as an abstract political
treatise. Nevertheless, since it was Jefferson's first published writing
and a precursor to the Declaration of Independence, the sources of
his ideas at this stage of his thinking are of particular interest. Be-
cause Jefferson did not record all of his reading in his commonplace
book and did not date any of the entries, it is impossible to be pre-
cise about what Jefferson was reading at any specific time, but there
is evidence to indicate some of the leading works that he had in his
possession or was familiar with prior to writing A Summary View. 19

We know the titles of the volumes in the important shipment of
books he received from London in December, 1769. Among his
major purchases then were Montesquieu's complete works, Locke's
Two Treatises on Government, and Burlamaqui's Principes du Droit Na-
20
turel. Although his acquisition of these works in 1769 suggests
Jefferson's familiarity with them before he wrote his pamphlet in
1774, he would also have been familiar with the concept of natural
rights from reading other works whose authors were influenced by
Locke. Entries in his commonplace book show, for example, that
Jefferson read extensively in the works of Lord Karnes, who was
much influenced by Locke. After a study of Jefferson's common-
place book, Gilbert Chinard concluded that Jefferson found in this
Scottish lord a complete exposition of the theory of natural rights. 21
That Jefferson copied little from Locke in his commonplace book
may suggest familiarity with ideas well known in Virginia rather
than neglect of so important a political thinker. 22
What Jefferson regarded as key works on political thought at the
time he wrote A Summary View can be glimpsed in the selected read-
ing list that he prepared three years earlier for Robert Skipwith.
Under the heading "Politicks, Trade," he listed eight titles, headed

by Montesquieu's Laws, Locke's Treatises on Government,
Spirit of
and Algernon Sidney's Discourses Concerning Government. Jefferson
later called Sidney'swork "a rich treasure of republican principles,
supported by copious and cogent arguments, and adorned with the
finest flowers of science. It is probably the best elementary book
of the principles of government, as founded in natural right,
which has ever been published in any language." On his 1771 list
Jefferson also recommended Lord Bolingbroke's political works in
five volumes, to which he himself had been particularly attracted as
a student and from which he had copied extensively in his literary
commonplace book. In addition he included Montesquieu's "Rise
and Fall of the Roman Government" and Sir James Stewart's Politi-
cal Economy — another of the works that he had purchased in 1769.
These were only a few of the best books on politics and trade,
Jefferson wrote Skipwith, while listing additional volumes on his-
tory, law, and other subjects that included works by Karnes, Locke,
23
and other political writers.
In addition to ideas absorbed from Europe's major political phi-
losophers, Jefferson also was familiar with the writings of pam-
phleteers, both British and American. There are reflections in A
Summary View of Letter 25 ( 1 769) of "Junius," a pamphleteer of the
"country party" in England, and also of Richard Bland's An Inquiry

into the Rights of the British Colonies (1766), a pamphlet written in re-
sponse to the Stamp Act. 24 Of Bland, a fellow burgess whose library
Jefferson would purchase upon his death in 1776, Jefferson said
that he "wrote the first pamphlet on the nature of the connection
with Great Britain which had any pretension to accuracy" but did
not carry his arguments to their logical conclusion. 23
A Summary View was in part a legal brief in which Jefferson sum-
marized acts of Parliament affecting the colonies and cited refer-
ences to the statutes in marginal notes. Elsewhere, he did not cite
his sources, but his study of history was in evidence throughout.
His commonplace book shows that he had given particular atten-
tion in his reading to the early populations of Europe and their mi-
grations, and he found evidence that convinced him of the exis-
tence of early popular sovereignty and historical confirmation of
the doctrine of natural rights. He was gratified to read in Stanyan's
history of Greece that "the first kings of Greece were elected by the
free consent of the people." He also found examples in ancient his-
26
tory of colonies that governed themselves independently. Such
historical precedents formed the basis of much of Jefferson's rea-
soning in A Summary View. He was a lawyer calling up precedents

rather than a philosopher constructing abstract theories. At the
same time, the reasoning that Jefferson employed in parts of his
Summary View defied history and prompted John Quincy Adams
years later to protest: "The argument of Mr. Jefferson, that the em-
igration of the first colonists from Great Britain which came to
America was an expatriation, dissolving sovereignties, was doubtful
in theory and unfounded in fact. The original colonists came out
with charters from the King, with the rights and duties of British
subjects. They were entitled to the protection of the British King,
27
and owed him allegiance."
Jefferson's contemporaries were more charitable than John
Quincy Adams at a distance of half a century. John Adams said of
the Jefferson he met in 1775 at tne second Continental Congress:
"Mr. Jefferson had the Reputation of a masterly Pen. He had been
chosen a Delegate in Virginia, in consequence of a very handsome
public Paper which he had written for the House of Burgesses,
which had given him the Character of a fine Writer." 28 The impor-
tance of A Summary View rests more upon its political effects in 1775
and 1776 than on its merits as a work of history or political theory.
If Jefferson's history was not always sound, the direction of his own
thinking toward a separate America was clear.
The Williamsburg convention did not instruct its delegation to
the Congress in Philadelphia to present Jefferson's Summary View
and did not name him among its seven delegates. However, he did
29
tie for eighth place in the voting for delegates. His absence from
the Williamsburg convention may have been a factor in his not get-
ting more votes, but this is not at all clear, for Jefferson was still a
junior colleague to the leading men chosen to speak for Virginia.
Although Jefferson did not participate in the first meeting of the
Continental Congress in September, 1774, his Summary View circu-
lated among the delegates along withJames Wilson's recently pub-
lished Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Au-
thority of the British Parliament, which also denied the power of
Parliament over the colonies but argued for loyalty to the king. 30
Sitting from September 5 to October 26, 1774, the first Con-
tinental Congress adopted a declaration of rights and grievances,
asserting among others the right to "life, liberty and property"
and the power of provincial assemblies over taxation and internal
polity, subject only to the veto of the crown. It also listed and called
for the repeal of
all the various acts since 1 763 that the colonists
found unacceptable. 31 The delegates agreed upon a strict non-

,
importation, nonconsumption, and nonexportation association

modeled on the Virginia association of August, 1774, binding the
colonies to halt all importations of British goods after December 1
1774, and to cease exports after September 10, 1775. To enforce
the association, committees were to be created in every county, city,
and town, and the names of violators were to be published as ene-
mies of American liberty. Any colony failing to subscribe to the as-
sociation, or violating it, was to be deemed "unworthy of the rights
of freemen, and . .inimical to the liberties of their country."
.
Jefferson approved the proceedings of the Continental Congress,

and when the Albemarle committee was elected to enforce the as-
sociation, his name headed the list of the fifteen men chosen. He
was soon circulating association papers to local captains throughout
the county. 32
The Virginia convention that met in Williamsburg in August,
1774, authorized its chairman, Peyton Randolph, to convene an-
other meeting of the delegates at any time that he deemed proper,
thus assuring the continuance of the convention mechanism even if
the governor continued to keep the House of Burgesses prorogued.

Under this authority Randolph summoned a second convention to
meet in Richmond in March, 1775. Jefferson and Thomas Walker
were again elected to represent Albemarle County at the con-
vention, and Jefferson was present when the convention opened on
33
March 20.
Jefferson's autobiography is nearly silent on the Richmond con-
vention, which has figured so prominently in the history of the
American Revolution meeting where Patrick Henry boldly
as the
proclaimed, "Give me or give me death." Of that dramatic
liberty,
occasion Jefferson said little more than that the Richmond conven-
tion approved the proceedings of the first Continental Congress
and reelected the same delegates to attend the second meeting to
be held in May. Perhaps he did not have more to say about the con-
vention because it was Henry who dominated the proceedings, but
he might have noted that he was among those who supported
Henry's vigorous resolutions to take steps to arm and train a mili-
tiafor the defense of Virginia. Edmund Randolph recalled that
"Jefferson was not silent" and that he "argued closely, profoundly,
and warmly" on the same side as Henry. Jefferson also was a mem-
ber of the twelve-man committee charged with preparing a plan
for a militia to put the colony into a posture of defense. Henry was
named first to the committee, while Jefferson's name was next to the
last. But a draft of the committee's report in Jefferson's hand indi-
cates that he was the principal draftsman of the plan recommended

by the committee and adopted by the convention. 34 Jefferson did
not stir Henry evoked, but unlike some members
the passions that
of the Richmond convention, he did not draw back from Henry's
advanced position. He was ready for bold action.
The most important thing that the convention did as far as
Jefferson personally was concerned was to name him as the deputy
to succeed Peyton Randolph in the Continental Congress should
Randolph be unable to serve. As the Speaker of the House of Bur-
gesses, Randolph would be forced to absent himself from the Con-
gress should the Virginia governor summon the Assembly into
session. Governor Dunmore did just that on May 12, calling the
burgesses to meet on June 1 Randolph vacated the chair of the
.
Continental Congress on May 24 to return to Williamsburg. As

a member of the House of Burgesses, Jefferson was present in
Williamsburg for the opening of the Assembly but soon set out for
Philadelphia carrying with him the news of Virginia's response to
the rapid movement of events.
In March Jefferson had sat in Saint John's Church in Richmond
and listened to Patrick Henry proclaim: "Gentlemen may cry peace,
—
peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun!" He knew
then that Henry's oratory had risen to hyperbole, but by the time
the burgesses met in June, all Virginians knew that Henry's rheto-
ric had become reality. News of the bloodshed at Lexington and
Concord on April 19, 1775, reached Virginia before the end of

the month. Soon afterward Jefferson wrote to his former mentor
William Small that the Massachusetts events had "cut off our last
hopes of reconciliation, and a phrenzy of revenge seems to have
seized all ranks of people." 35 When the second Continental Con-
gress met on May 10, it moved speedily to put the colonies in a state
of defense.
Meanwhile had mounted. On March 28,
in Virginia tensions
while theRichmond convention was in session, Governor Dunmore
issued a proclamation denouncing the Continental Congress and
commanding all officers of the colony to use their utmost efforts to
prevent the appointment of delegates to the second Congress. On

the night of April 20 Dunmore secretly had the store of gun-
powder belonging to the colony transferred from the magazine in
—
Williamsburg to a British warship in the York River an action that
aroused Virginians not only in Williamsburg but also throughout
the colony. In the aftermath of this unrest, it was an unpropitious
time to summon the House of Burgesses into session. But in May
the conciliatory proposal of Lord North reached the

colonial gover-
nors with instructions for presentation to the various assemblies,
and Dunmore proceeded to summon the Virginia burgesses to
meet on June 1.
Lord North's plan, approved by the House of Commons in late
February, proposed that whenever any colonial assembly agreed to
make a grant for the common defense of the empire and the sup-
port of civil government in the colony, the British government
would refrain from imposing on that colony any other tax for these
purposes. Governor Dunmore presented North's proposal in a con-
ciliatory address, but in light of recent events it was coldly received
by the burgesses. While taking Norths propositions under consid-
eration, the House of Burgesses approved the proceedings of the
Continental Congress and the Richmond convention and pressed
an inquiry into Dunmore's removal of the gunpowder from the
Williamsburg magazine. As the situation grew tenser, Dunmore on
the night of June 8 slipped out of the Governors Palace and took
refuge on a British warship in the York River. 36
Jefferson was on the committee to prepare the response to Norths
conciliatory proposal. In his autobiography he said that Pevton
Randolph was anxious that the response of Virginia harmonize
with the sentiments of the Continental Congress and pressed him
to draft the response, fearful that otherwise it would be done by
Robert Carter Nicholas, "whose mind was not yet up to the mark of
the times." Elsewhere, Jefferson wrote that he attended the Vir-
ginia Assembly instead of proceeding immediately to Philadelphia
because he knew the importance of the answer to North s concilia-
torv proposition and because the leading Virginia Whigs were then
7
in the Continental Congress/ Jefferson needed little persuasion to
accept the task of drafting the Virginia response, and it was largely
his draft that the House of Burgesses approved, though with "a
dash of cold water on it here and there," he said, "enfeebling it
somewhat. *
The hand of Jefferson can be seen throughout the Virginia
resolutions. They rejected Norths proposal "Because the British
Parliament has no right to intermeddle with the support of civil
government in the Colonies. Because to render perpetual our
. . .
exemption from an unjust taxation, we must saddle ourselves with

a perpetual tax adequate to the expectations and subject to the
disposal of Parliament alone." The British proposals were also
unacceptable because all of the objectionable acts of Parliament
remained unrepealed, standing armies were still to be kept in
America, and the colonies were being threatened by invasions from

land and sea. In conclusion the resolutions expressed support for
the interest of all the other colonies and advanced the hope that
"we may again see reunited the blessings of Liberty, Property, and
Union with Great Britain." 39 It was a more moderate statement than
Jefferson's Summary View and showed the marks of maturing states-
manship, but it lacked nothing in firmness and resolute commit-
ment to the American cause.
On June 1 1 Jefferson set out for Philadelphia with a copy of his
,
resolutions, which had been agreed upon in the committee of the

whole and would be presented to Governor Dunmore the next day.
The young delegate was leaving Virginia for only the second time
in his thirty-two years and entering the broader world of conti-
nental affairs for the first time. He must have recalled his first jour-
ney to Philadelphia nine years earlier, and he may have reflected on
the changes that had since taken place, both in his own life and in
America. There was little outward sign of change in the country
through which he rode, and he stopped briefly in Annapolis to buy
books and to view the state house. 40 But he well knew that much of
British America was on the brink of full revolt that would bring war
and changes that could not be foreseen but were bound to be im-
mense. There was talk of reconciliation with Great Britain, but a
revolution had in fact begun, and Jefferson was heading for the
center of the storm. He was ready for that revolution and prepared
for the role that he would play in the momentous events that lay
immediately ahead.
'
IV
At Philadelphia
It was June 21, 1775, when Jefferson arrived in Philadelphia after a

ten-day journey from Williamsburg. While he was en route, the
Continental Congress named George Washington the commander
in chief of all continental forces. Two days after Jefferson's arrival
the general departed for Boston amid bands playing and an out-
pouring of public support. "The war is now heartily entered into,"
Jefferson wrote, "without a prospect of accomodation but thro' the
effectual interposition of arms."
The second Continental Congress had been sitting since May 10,
and John Hancock was now presiding, having succeeded to the
chair when Peyton Randolph returned to Williamsburg. Jefferson
was well acquainted with the Virginia delegation, which after Wash-
ington's departure included Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry,
Richard Bland, Benjamin Harrison, and Edmund Pendleton. But
among some fifty other delegates there was no one whom he had
ever seen before. The reputations of the leading men, though,
were known to him, and he must have been as anxious to meet
Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and others as
they were curious to see the young Virginian whose reputation as a
spokesman for colonial rights had preceded him. Jefferson had be-
come known especially through his Summary View of the Rights of
British America, which had circulated during the previous Con-
gress. Samuel Ward, a delegate from Rhode Island, wrote just after
Jefferson's first appearance in Congress: "Yesterday the famous Mr.
Jefferson a Delegate from Virginia in the Room of Mr. Randolph
arrived. . .He looks like a very sensible spirited fine Fellow and by
.
the Pamphlet which he wrote last Summer he certainly is one."

Jefferson brought to Congress, John Adams said, "a reputation for
literature, science, and a happy talent of composition. Writings of
his were handed about, remarkable for the peculiar felicity of ex-
AT PHILADELPHIA 37
pression." Adams also said that Jefferson never spoke in the de-
bates and "during the whole Time I satt with him in Congress, I
never heard him utter three Sentences together." At the same time,
Adams recalled that Jefferson "was so prompt, frank, explicit and
decisive upon committees and in conversation .that he soon
. .
seized upon my heart."

2
Jefferson's talents as a writer were called upon shortly after he

took his seat in Congress. On June 23, two days following his ar-
rival, Congress named a committee to draw up a declaration to be
published by General Washington upon taking command of the
forces before Boston. When the committee's draft was presented to
Congress, was recommitted and Jefferson and John Dickinson
it
were added to the committee. Jefferson then wrote a new draft

drawing heavily on his Summary View, though with a far less de-
clamatory tone than employed earlier. The committee was not yet
satisfied and gave Jefferson's draft to Dickinson to rework before
submitting the declaration to Congress on July 6. Congress spent
the day debating it paragraph by paragraph and approved the
manifesto with only slight modification. The publication of the
various drafts of this "Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of
taking up Arms" by editor Julian Boyd in The Papers of Thomas
Jefferson shows that the statement was a joint effort to which both
Jefferson and Dickinson made important contributions and that
the differences between them have been frequently overblown.
John Adams said of the declaration: "It has Some Mercury in it,
and is pretty frank, plain, and clear. If Lord North dont compli-
ment every Mothers Son of us, with a Bill of Attainder, in Ex-
change for it, I shall think it owing to Fear." 3
Accounts of the fighting at Bunker Hill had reached Philadelphia
by the time Jefferson wrote to Albemarle neighbor George Gilmer
on July 5. He praised the valor of New Englanders and reported
heavy losses sustained by the British. While not at liberty to reveal
all of the proceedings of the Congress, he could let it be known that
Congress had directed the raising of twenty thousand troops and

that most of them had already been enlisted. The news was encour-
aging to Gilmer, who was encamped with a company of Albemarle
volunteers outside Williamsburg when Jefferson's letter reached
him, but he was alarmed by Jefferson's report of a shortage of gun-
powder. On the whole, though, Jefferson's letter was an optimistic
one that reported that "nobody now entertains a doubt but that we
are able to cope with the whole force of Great Britain, if we are but
willing to exert ourselves." The war would be expensive, he said,
but individuals would have to sacrifice their private interests. "As

our enemies have found we can reason like men," he declared, "so
now let us show them we can fight like men also." Gilmer was not
the only person to read these stirring words, for the main text of
Jefferson's letter was published in Williamsburg on July 28 in Pur-
die's Virginia Gazette as an "extract of a letter from one of the Vir-
4
ginia delegates."
At the same time that they approved the forceful "Declaration of
the Causes and Necessity of taking up Arms," members of Con-
gress endorsed a second petition to King George III, and forty-
nine delegates, including Jefferson, signed it on July 8. Jefferson
recalled that John Dickinson, who had drafted it, signed with much
satisfaction, but that some members —
among whom he included
himself — did so with less The Virginia delegation cer-
enthusiasm.
tainly put little faith in its success when they reported it to the Vir-
ginia convention, for they followed it with an urgent plea for mili-
5
tary preparations.
More significant than the petition to the king was Congress' re-
sponse to Lord North's conciliatory proposal, which had been re-
ferred to the continental body by the assemblies of New Jersey, Penn-
sylvania, and Virginia. On July 22 Benjamin Franklin, Jefferson,
John Adams, and Richard Henry Lee were appointed a committee
to report on North's proposition. Because Jefferson had drafted the
Virginia response and had brought a copy with him, he was dele-
gated the task of drafting the committee's report. Other commit-
tee members contributed suggestions, and Congress made some
changes before final adoption, but the main lines of the resolutions
approved by Congress on July 31 followed Jefferson's draft. He in
turn drew on the paper he had prepared for the Virginia House of
Burgesses. The result was a vigorous rejection of North's proposal
6
as unreasonable, insidious, and altogether unsatisfactory.
During his first six weeks in Congress, Jefferson thus had a lead-
ing role in drafting two major state papers adopted by Congress.
Both the "Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of taking up
Arms" and the response to Lord North's conciliatory plan would be
widely published in newspapers throughout the colonies. Jefferson's
name was not publicly associated with either of these declarations,
which came from Congress, but to members of that body the
papers were early demonstrations of Jefferson's literary and polemi-
cal abilities and of his commitment to the American cause. Six
weeks after leaving Virginia, he was among the leading men in
Congress and in the front ranks of the revolutionists.
AT PHILADELPHIA 39
After adopting the resolutions in reply to Lord North's proposal,

Congress recessed until early September, and Jefferson returned to
Virginia. A convention — which by then was the principal govern-
ing body of —
Virginia was sitting in Richmond; as a delegate from
Albemarle, Jefferson stopped there before going on to Monticello.
He spent only a week in Richmond but was present long enough to
witness his election again to the Continental Congress. No longer
last on the list of delegates, he came in third in the voting. With
eighty-five votes he was not far behind Peyton Randolph with
eighty-nine and Richard Henry Lee with eighty-eight votes; he was
chosen ahead of Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Richard
Bland, and George Wythe. 7 Patrick Henry, having been named
commander in chief of Virginia's military force, was considered in-
eligible for election. Jefferson could only have interpreted the con-
vention's action as a vote of confidence in his service in Congress,
but before the month was up he would be wishing for a time when
"consistently with duty, I may withdraw myself totally from the
public stage and pass the rest of my days in domestic ease and
tranquillity." This was the first of many similar declarations that
8
Jefferson would make throughout his public career, but he repeat-

edly put public service first, and he did so at this time.
Back home at Monticello, Jefferson wrote a long letter to John
Randolph, who was leaving for England, and made arrangements
to obtain Randolph's violin, which had earlier been the object of an
unusual arrangement between them. In 1771 they had executed an
agreement that should Jefferson die first, Randolph could select
books valued at £100 from his library; if Jefferson survived Ran-
dolph, he was to receive the violin. 9 However much Jefferson cov-
eted the violin, Randolph's decision not to support the colonial
cause saddened him, and he hoped that their personal friendship
might be preserved. He also used the letter as an opportunity to
restate the case for the colonies, urging Randolph to promote rec-
onciliation by enlightening the British ministry about the true state
of the colonies. The ministry had been deceived, Jefferson argued,
by their officers in America, who "have constantly represented the
American opposition as that of a small faction. . They have
. .
taken it into their heads too that we are cowards and shall sur-
render at discretion to an armed force. . . Even those in parlia-
.
ment who are called friends to America seem to know nothing of

our real determinations. ... I wish no false sense of honor, no ig-
norance of our real intentions, no vain hope that partial conces-
sions of right will be accepted may induce the ministry to trifle with
accomodation till it shall be put even out of our own power ever to
accomodate." He concluded by saying that he would rather be de-
pendent on Great Britain, properly limited, than on any nation on
earth. "But I am one of those too who rather than submit to the
right to legislating for us assumed by the British parliament, and
which late experience has shown they will so cruelly exercise, would
lend my hand to sink the whole island in the ocean." 10 The fact that
Jefferson's letter today is in the papers of the Earl of Dartmouth,
who was then secretary of state for the colonies, indicates that Ran-
dolph brought it to the attention of the British authorities. But the
course of events suggests that they were little influenced by it.
Jefferson's brief respite at Monticello was darkened by the death
of his second daughter, Jane Randolph, born in April, 1774, and he
was late in getting back to Philadelphia. When he arrived there on
October 1, Congress had been in session since September 13, and
he found the delegates struggling with the task of raising, organiz-
ing, and maintaining an army. Reports of the dispatch of additional
British troops to America were reaching Philadelphia amid fading
prospects of any conciliatory response from Great Britain. By No-
vember Congress knew that the king had refused to receive its peti-
tion and had declared the colonies in a state of rebellion. Among
the gloomy reports in his letters to Virginia, Jefferson included the
melancholy news of the death of "our good old Speaker," Peyton
11
Randolph.
When Jefferson wrote to John Randolph to inform him of the
death of his brother Peyton, he devoted only two sentences to re-
porting that event, while seizing the opportunity to lay before Ran-
dolph the critical state of the times. Previously Jefferson had placed
most of the blame for American unrest on Parliament, but in this
letter he revealed an important shift in his thinking. He now blamed
King George III. "It is an immense misfortune to the whole empire
to have a king of such a disposition at such a time," he wrote. "We
are told and every thing proves it true that he is the bitterest enemy
we have." In his attack on the king, Jefferson also raised the subject
of independence. "To undo his empire he has but one truth more
to learn, that after colonies have drawn the sword there is but one
step more they can take," he declared.
That step is now pressed upon us by the measures adopted as if they

were afraid we would not take it. Believe me Dear Sir there is not in
the British empire a man who more cordially loves a Union with Great
Britain than I do. But by the god that made me I will cease to exist
before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British parliament
AT PHILADELPHIA 41
propose and in this I think I speak the sentiments of America. We

want neither inducement nor power to declare and assert a separa-
tion. It is will alone which is wanting and that is growing apace under
the fostering hand of our king. One bloody campaign will probably
decide everlastingly our future course; I am sorry to find a bloody
campaign is decided on. 12
Randolph was in England, and Jefferson was trying to send a mes-

sage to the British, but the letter leaves little doubt that Jefferson's
own position was shifting toward independence and that he was be-
ginning to see separation from Britain as inevitable.
In the three months before Jefferson took leave of Congress on
December 28, he served on numerous committees, proving again
that he was a hardworking member more active in committees than
in debates. Yet none of his work in these months was as important
as during his first service in June and July. Meanwhile he grew des-
perate for news from home. "I have never received the scrip of a
pen from any mortal in Virginia since I left it," he wrote to Francis
Eppes after six weeks in Philadelphia. Nor had he been able by in-
quiries to hear any news of his family. "The suspense under which I
am is too terrible to be endured," he told Eppes, whose wife was
Mrs. Jefferson's sister, with whom she was staying. "If any thing has
happened, for god's sake let me know it." 13
Congress anticipated a winter recess in December, 1775. Jeffer-
son himself drafted a committee report on the unfinished business
before the body and another on the powers of a committee to sit
during recess. 14 But Congress continued to sit, and Jefferson's anxi-
ety mounted. In view of the fact that each delegation had one vote
and because the Virginia delegation was large, his absence would
not present problems; other members also came and went during
the session. Since he had left home in September, the war had
come to Virginia. Norfolk and other coastal areas had been at-
tacked. The slowness and sparsity of news from Virginia height-
ened his concerns, and he was worried about his family. After three
months away from home and with no immediately compelling
matter before Congress, he set out from Philadelphia for Mon-
ticello at the end of December and did not return for four months.
Part of his stay at Monticello was a regenerating one, but on
March 31 his mother died unexpectedly at the age of fifty-seven,
and Jefferson was soon seized by one of his periodic headaches that
immobilized him for a month. Jefferson later described one such
attack as "a paroxysm of the most excruciating pain" that "came on
everyday at sunrise, and never left me till sunset." The spells usu-
ally lasted two or three weeks and occurred about every six to eight
years until after he left the presidency. They came on when he was
suffering from extreme tension, and this was one of his most diffi-
cult attacks.
15
One
can only speculate on the source of the tension,
but it was a period of unusual stress that may have extended be-
yond the loss of his mother to the uncertainty of the expanding
war. He had already committed himself to the revolution and had
— —
much indeed everything to lose if it failed. We do not know how
his wife stood in regard to what he was doing, because he destroyed
all of the letters that passed between them. We do know that she did
r
not accompany him to Philadelphia, as some wives did their hus-

bands, but we also know that it was an arduous journey and she was
not physically strong. Whatever the stresses, Jefferson surmounted
them, and after he returned to Philadelphia, he entered one of the
most productive periods of his life.
It was May 14 when Jefferson resumed his seat in Congress. In
the interval of his absence news reached Philadelphia of George

Ill's speech at the opening of Parliament in October declaring that
"the rebellious war now levied ... is manifestly carried on for the
purpose of establishing an independent empire." Despite heated
arguments from the opposition, Parliament by large majorities
backed the king and approved waging war to return the American
colonies to their allegiance. Meanwhile the king and his ministers
contracted for German mercenaries to fight in America. These
steps forced many Americans who had previously sought only to
secure what they regarded as their rights within the empire to con-
sider the alternative of independence. The decision of the British
government to wage war, said John Adams, "makes us independent
in Spight of all our supplications and Entreaties." Amid the bleak
news from Britain, Thomas Paines Common Sense, appealing to
Americans to proclaim their independence immediately, appeared
anonymously in Philadelphia in January, 1776. Paines passionate
pamphlet was soon being read by thousands of Americans among —
them Thomas Jefferson, to whom Thomas Nelson sent a copy from
Philadelphia early in February. 16
We have no contemporary record of Jefferson's response to the
news from Britain or to Paines pamphlet, and he skipped over
these months in his autobiography. In April his old friend John
Page, assuming that Jefferson was in Philadelphia, wrote him, "For
God's sake declare the Colonies independent at once, and save us
from ruin." Another Virginian wrote him about the same time that
the notion of independence was spreading rapidly in Virginia and
AT PHILADELPHIA 43
would no doubt be adopted next convention. Jefferson would

at the
find these letters waiting for him but while in Vir-
in Philadelphia,
ginia he had already taken pains to collect the opinions of the
people and had concluded that in Albemarle and neighboring
17
counties nine out of ten were for independence.
He had been back in Philadelphia less than two weeks when the
Virginia delegates received the resolutions adopted by the Virginia
convention on May 15 instructing them to propose, and give Vir-
independence. 18 Read to the Congress on May 27,
ginia's assent to,
the resolutions were followed on June 7 by Richard Henry Lee's
motion, on behalf of the Virginia delegation, for independence.
Jefferson was soon to be involved in the event that would bring him
his most lasting fame. But before he stood with other delegates in
that July of 1776 to approve the declaration that he had largely
drafted, he would spend more time at his writing desk drafting a
proposed constitution for Virginia than in composing the Declara-
tion of Independence.
The same resolutions adopted by the Virginia convention on
May 15 calling for independence also provided for the appoint-
ment of a committee to prepare a plan of government for Virginia.
Even before the delegates in Congress received these resolutions,
the Congress had adopted recommendations to the colonies to
form new governments, and immediately upon arriving back in
Philadelphia, Jefferson turned his attention to the plan of govern-
ment for Virginia. "It is the whole object of the present contro-
versy," he wrote, "for should a bad government be instituted for us
in future it had been as well to have accepted at first the bad one
offered to us from beyond the water without the risk and expence
of contest." So keenly did he want to participate in designing the
new government for Virginia that he suggested that the Virginia
convention might want to recall its delegates from Congress for a
short time to join in the constitution-making process. His letter
hardly had time to reach Virginia before he learned that the draft-
ing of a constitution was already under way, with George Mason
taking the lead in preparing the plan. 19
Mason rather than Jefferson thus had the major hand in drafting
the Virginia constitution, though Jefferson's papers show that his
contribution to it was greater than has sometimes been recog-
20
nized. The detailed plan that Jefferson prepared with great care
and put through three drafts reached the Virginia convention too
late to be considered except as a basis for making additions to, or
changes in, a draft that was already far advanced. When George
Wythe arrived in Williamsburg on June 23 with Jefferson's draft, he

found the plan of the drafting committee before the whole house.
Wythe reported to Jefferson that two or three parts of his plan
were inserted with little alteration, "but such was the impatience of
sitting long enough to discuss several important points in which
they differ . .that I was persuaded the revision of a subject the
.
members seemed tired of would at that time have been unsuccess-

fully proposed."
21
The most important change incorporated from
Jefferson's draft was the addition of a preamble containing a bill of
charges against George III justifying the change in government. If
this list sounded much like the later one in the Declaration of Inde-
pendence, it was because Jefferson used the same composition draft
of these charges in writing the preamble for his draft of the Virginia
constitution and in drafting the Declaration of Independence. 22
As a record of Jefferson's views on government at the time of the
Revolution, Jefferson's draft of a constitution for Virginia is of con-
siderable interest. 23 In general was more democratic than that
it
adopted by the convention, proposing a broader suffrage and

more equal representation in the legislature. Jefferson would have
broadened the suffrage to include adult male taxpayers as well as
property holders, and he would have liberalized landholding by
providing that every adult not owning fifty acres would be entitled
to a grant of fifty acres or whatever land needed to raise his hold-
ings to fifty acres. Jefferson also would have reduced the heavier
representation of the eastern part of the state in the Assembly by
substituting representation proportional to population for equal
representation from each county. The new constitution, however,
retained the existing property qualifications for voting without
providing for land grants and kept the colonial system of two dele-
gates from each county in the House of Delegates.
Both Jefferson's plan and the constitution as adopted specified an
assembly of two houses but differed in the method of electing the
senate. Jefferson proposed that the senate be chosen by the lower
house, whereas the constitution provided for popular election by
districts. Though in most instances the Virginia convention tended
to continue colonial practices rather than follow Jefferson's more
forward-looking ideas, in this instance the convention, rather than
Jefferson, seemed to be on the side of greater democracy. The ar-
gument that he made to Edmund Pendleton on the subject appears
discordant with his many statements in subsequent years affirming
faith in the people. "I have ever observed that a choice by the
people themselves is not generally distinguished for it's wisdom,"
AT PHILADELPHIA 45
Jefferson wrote. "The first secretion from them is generally crude

and heterogeneous. But give to those so chosen by the people a sec-
ond choice themselves, and they generally will chuse wise men."
His aim was, he said, "to get the wisest men chosen, and to make
them perfectly independent when chosen." 24
Jefferson later admitted that his vision of republicanism at the
time of the Revolution was limited. "In truth, the abuses of monar-
chy had so much filled all the space of political contemplation, that
we imagined everything republican which was not monarchy," he
recalled. "We had not yet penetrated to the mother principle, that
'governments are republican only in proportion as they embody
the will of their people, and execute it.'" 25 Following the conven-
tional political science of mixed government, Jefferson did not
think in terms of a senate representing the people. In truth, few
contemporaries understood the implications of the changing role
of American senates embodied in the Virginia constitution of 1776.
The idea that the people might have two legislative branches speak-
ing for them at the same time was a revolutionary change in politi-
cal concepts that not even Jefferson appreciated.
26
He did not pro-
pose a democratically elected senate, because he looked upon it as
a chamber of independent wise men, not as spokesmen for the
people. Both the Virginia Constitution of 1776 and Jefferson's draft
provided for the annual election of the governor by the legislature
and placed the supreme power of the state in the General Assem-
bly. The executive was to be subordinate to the legislature. Jeffer-
son, in fact, proposed to call the governor "the administrator,"
though his plan would have left the executive with more authority
than the constitution was to permit.
Like Jefferson's draft, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, written
by George Mason and approved by the Virginia convention prior
to adopting the constitution, provided for religious freedom, but
Jefferson went further to strike at the established Anglican church
by proposing that no person "be compelled to frequent or maintain
any religious institution." 27 Jefferson also drafted a provision to
prohibit the importation of slaves into Virginia —
a proposal that
the convention did not accept, though Jefferson's condemnation of
George III for allowing the slave trade to continue was retained in
the preamble.
Altogether Jefferson did not regard the Virginia constitution as
going far enough in initiating the changes that he thought the
Revolution should effect. George Wythe anticipated Jefferson's dis-
appointment, confiding to him that the new system required refor-
mation. Meanwhile, Edmund Pendleton counseled Jefferson to use

his talents "to nuture the new constitution, while pruning it of its
28
defects." Such comments strengthened Jefferson's own desire to
return to Virginia. There can be no doubt that his dissatisfaction
with the first Virginia constitution explains much of his later effort
to achieve by legislation reforms that he had originally hoped to see
written into the fundamental law of the state. Before he would turn
his attention to those concerns, however, he had to complete the
task of justifying to mankind the natural right of Americans to de-
termine their own destiny.
On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee introduced in Congress the
resolution "That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to
be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all al-
legiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection be-
tween them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, to-
29
tally dissolved." Congress considered this resolution on June 8
and again on June 10, when action on it was postponed until July 1.
In the course of these debates it appeared that some colonies "were
not yet matured for falling from the parent stem," Jefferson noted,
"but that they were fast advancing to that state," and "it was thought
most prudent to wait a while for them." 30 It was not a question of
whether the resolution would pass or fail, for its adoption was not
in doubt. What was sought was unanimity.
Meanwhile, a committee was appointed on June 1 1 to draft a
declaration toannounce and justify the anticipated act. The com-
mittee, composed of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin
Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston, delegated to
Jefferson the task of preparing a draft. He did so, working alone in
his lodgings,using a portable lap desk recently made to his specifica-
tions by a Philadelphia cabinetmaker.
31
Why was Jefferson chosen
to do the drafting? In old age Adams said that he and Jefferson
had been named a subcommittee to prepare a draft and each had
pressed the other to do so. Adams even reconstructed the conversa-
tion that followed when Jefferson proposed that Adams prepare
the draft.
Adams: "I will not."

Jefferson: "You should do it."
Adams: "Oh! no."

Jefferson: "Why will you not? You ought to do it.
Adams: "I will not."

Jefferson: "Why?"
AT PHILADELPHIA 47
Adams: "Reasons enough."

Jefferson: "What can be your reasons?"
—
Adams: "Reason first You are a Virginian, and a Virginian ought
to appear at the head of this business. Reason second —
I am obnox-
ious, suspected, and unpopular. You are very much otherwise. Reason
third— You can write ten times better than I can."
Jefferson: "Well, if you are decided, I will do as well as I can."
Adams: "Very well. When you have drawn it up, we will have a
32
meeting."
When Jefferson learned of Adams's recollections, he said Adams

was mistaken. There had never been any subcommittee, and it was
the entire committee that "unanimously pressed on myself alone to
undertake the draught." Jefferson said that at age eighty he would
not claim any advantage of memory over Adams at eighty-eight,
but he insisted that his notes made at the time did not support
Adams' version. 33 Though Adams may have recorded an imaginary
conversation, the reasons that he gave for Jefferson being chosen to
draft the Declaration ring true. He probably remembered a sub-
committee because, after preparing his draft, Jefferson submitted
it separately to Adams and to Franklin for their suggestions and
corrections before presenting it to the full committee. Both men
made alterations in their own handwriting on Jefferson's draft, pro-
ducing a unique and historic document that still survives today.
Jefferson then made a fair copy for the committee, which made a
few changes and reported it to Congress on June 28. 34
Before considering Jefferson's Declaration, Congress had to act
on Lee's resolution for independence and resumed debate on it on
July 1. The following day it was adopted with the affirmative votes
of all delegations except New York, whose delegates were bound
by instructions that obligated them to abstain. By July 15 they
would receive new instructions and make approval of indepen-
dence unanimous. Debate on the Declaration of Independence
began on July 2 and continued through three days. In the course
of the debates, Congress considerably altered Jefferson's draft as
approved by the committee, cutting about a quarter of the text,
polishing the wording, and in some instances making substantive
changes. The most significant alteration came when Congress struck
from Jefferson's text his condemnation of George III for allowing
the slave trade to continue —
a strongly worded passage in which
Jefferson had denounced the slave trade as a "cruel war against hu-
man nature itself." Jefferson said the change was made in com-
pliance with the wishes of South Carolina and Georgia but added
that "our Northern brethren also I believe felt a little tender under
those censures; for tho' their people have very few slaves them-
selves yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to
others." 35 Most of the changes that Congress made in shortening
and revising the wording of the document improved it, though the
sensitive author believed that his draft was the stronger statement.
When he sent copies of the Declaration as approved by Congress to
a few of his friends, he sent a paper showing the original draft and
the alterations so they could judge whether it was made better or
worse by his critics. 36 After the various revisions were made, Con-
gress adopted the Declaration on July 4. Although Jefferson stated
that it was signed on the same day, there is no evidence to corrobo-
rate this. If any signing took place on July 4, it was not the official
signing, for not until July 19 did Congress order the Declaration to
be engrossed and signed. The signing of the engrossed parchment
took place on August 2. 37
Despite the changes made by the committee and by Congress in
his draft, Jefferson could still rightly claim authorship of the Decla-
ration of Independence, and he would subsequently come to re-
gard it as one of the three most important accomplishments of his
life. The sources of the ideas that Jefferson drew on in writing the
Declaration would later become a source of interest to his contempo-

raries and of continuing fascination to historians. Richard Henry
Lee thought Jefferson had copied from John Locke's treatise on
government. John Adams in old age charged that the essence of
Jefferson's ideas could be found in fellow New Englander James
Otis's pamphlet The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved
(Boston, 1764). When Jefferson heard this, he said flatly that he
had never seen Otis's pamphlet. He did not deny that he had read
Locke, but he insisted that he had "turned to neither book nor
pamphlet while writing it." At the same time, Jefferson claimed no
originality for the Declaration of Independence. "I did not con-
sider it as any part of my charge to invent new ideas altogether, and
to offer no sentiment which had ever been expressed before," he
said.
38
His aim was "to place before mankind the common sense of
the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent,"
and independence. "Neither aiming at originality of prin-
to justify
ciple or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous
writing," he wrote, "it was intended to be an expression of the
American mind." 39
Before writing the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson must
have read the draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights largely
AT PHILADELPHIA 49
composed by George Mason and printed in the form that came

from the drafting committee of the Virginia convention on May 27.
That draft was published in Philadelphia in the Pennsylvania Evening
Post on June 6 and reprinted two days later in the Pennsylvania
Ledger, and it appeared again in the Pennsylvania Gazette on June 12.
Jefferson could hardly have missed seeing it. There were cer-
tainly similarities between the draft of the Virginia declaration and
Jefferson's draft of the Declaration of Independence. Mason began
by affirming, "That all men are born equally free and independent,
and have certain inherent natural rights, of which they cannot, by
any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; among which are,
the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and
possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and
safety." Jefferson wrote in the second paragraph of his "original
Rough draught" of the Declaration of Independence: "We hold
these truths to be sacred and undeniable; that all men are created
equal and independent, that from that equal creation they derive
rights inherent and inalienable, among which are the preservation
of life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." 40 Jefferson need
not have had Mason's words before him when he wrote, because
they were part of the shared philosophy that Jefferson was seeking
to communicate
— "an expression of the American mind."
Nor did Jefferson have to turn to books or pamphlets when he
took up his pen, for he had earlier read deeply in history and politi-
cal philosophy and had already absorbed the basic ideas of natural
rights and made them a part of his own political philosophy. He
was familiar with Locke, Karnes, and Burlamaqui; he had probably
received a strong dose of Francis Hutcheson when he studied
under William Small at William and Mary. 41 He did not need any of
their works before him to state the political principles that sanc-
tioned the action he sought to justify to the world. It was only "com-
mon sense" to begin by referring to "the laws of nature and of na-
ture's god." He did not originally use the word self-evident when he
began to list the natural rights of man, writing initially, "we hold
these truths to be sacred and undeniable." But he soon changed
that to "self-evident" (whether on his own or another's initiative is
not clear), 42 for self-evident truths were precisely what he was seek-
ing to enumerate. The first of these was that "all men were created
equal and independent" and from this condition derived certain
rights. Jefferson significantly did not start with Locke's rights of life,
liberty, and property (which the Continental Congress had asserted
in its Declaration of Rights and Grievances in October, 1774), but
in the earliest surviving draft he defined the "inherent and in-

alienable" rights of man more broadly as "the preservation of life,
and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." 43 He also affirmed at the
outset that governments were established to protect these rights
and derived their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Whenever any government became destructive of these ends, "it is
the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new gov-
ernment." These assertions were retained largely unchanged in the
final Declaration.
How could a slaveholder write that "all men are created equal"?
As he had demonstrated six years earlier in a case before the Gen-
eral Court in Williamsburg, Jefferson accepted the Enlightenment
view that all men were born free and that slavery was contrary to
the law of nature. 44 Unenlightened monarchs or wicked legislatures
might allow slavery to exist or in other ways restrict personal liberty
by decree or statutory law. Such acts could be revoked or repealed,
as he fully expected the laws regarding slavery would be in the
course of time. When not contravened by statutory law, the law of
nature applied to all men. Once kings or legislatures abolished slav-
ery, slaves would regain their natural status as free men.
In the scope of history the opening passages of the Declaration
of Independence containing the affirmation of natural rights, gov-
ernment by the consent of the governed, and the natural right of
revolution gave to that document its lasting influence. But the long-
est part of the Declaration was devoted to specifying the causes that
had led the American colonies to renounce the government of
Great Britain. In the weeks just before he wrote his draft of the
Declaration of Independence, Jefferson had been occupied in writ-
ing his proposed constitution for Virginia. He had begun that work
with a of charges against King George III, and he had that com-
bill
position draft before him when he drew up a similar list of charges

for inclusion in the Declaration of Independence. Thus, the two
papers shared a common origin and had many similarities, though
after he and Congress finished their editing, the Declaration of In-
dependence was distinctive. While the charges against the king
were designed to arouse support for the American cause at home
and abroad, and many of the grievances might have more logically
been charged to Parliament rather than to the king, none of the
charges was without a historical basis. Jefferson put an American
gloss on history, but he did not invent the grievances. His contem-
poraries recognized clearly enough what he was talking about. The
Declaration of Independence was a brief for the American posi-
AT PHILADELPHIA 51
tion,not an impartial summary of recent events. Jefferson was

America's advocate.
In its revisions Congress incorporated Lee's resolution for inde-
pendence into the final paragraph of the Declaration but retained
Jefferson's stirring concluding words: "We mutually pledge to each
other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." On July 1
New Hampshire's Josiah Bartlett wrote: "The Declaration before
Congress is, I think, a pretty good one. I hope it will not be spoiled
by canvassing in Congress." 45 As it turned out, Bartlett was un-
necessarily concerned. In its final form, the Declaration of Inde-
pendence was a succinct and moving statement that Americans
would take to their hearts, as they would one day take its princi-
pal author.
Congress on July 4 ordered the Declaration of Independence to
be printed in handbills and sent to all units of the army and to all
cities, towns, and counties for its proclamation throughout the
country. "It compleats a Revolution, which will make as good a Fig-

ure in the History of Mankind, as any that has preceeded it," John
Adams wrote with enthusiasm, convinced that "all America is re-
markably united." But Adams also said that he was "well aware of
the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this
Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all
the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see
46
that the End is more than worth all the Means."
Jefferson, who was more reserved than Adams in expressing his
feelings, left no similar reflections, but there is nothing in the
record to suggest that he would not have agreed fully with his Mas-
sachusetts colleague. The Declaration of Independence attracted
no public attention to Jefferson, for his authorship was not then
publicly known, and his own pride of authorship was muted by all
of the changes that Congress had made in words that he had chosen
so carefully. In time that disappointment would fade, and the Dec-
laration would bring glory to him and to the new nation that pro-
claimed it. Though neither Jefferson nor his contemporaries could
foresee it in 1776, the Declaration of Independence was to become
the most cherished document in American history, not solely be-
cause of its proclamation of independence but also because of its
affirmation of the political principles that would undergird the new
American republic.
'
V
Virginia Reformer
Once independence was proclaimed, Jefferson was anxious to re-

turn to Virginia. He had already decided to give up his seat in
Congress at the end of the year for which he had been elected and
had written to friends that he did not wish be a candidate for re-
to
election. The Virginia convention knew before balloting, but
this
Jefferson's letter formally withdrawing as a candidate had not yet
been received, and the convention proceeded to reelect him. When
he learned of this, Jefferson again asked to be relieved of his duties.
"I am sorry the situation of my domestic affairs renders it indis-
pensably necessary that I should sollicit the substitution of some
other person here in my room," he wrote. "The delicacy of the
house will not require me to enter minutely into the private causes
which render this necessary: I trust they will be satisfied I would
not have urged it again where it not necessary."
The concern that prompted this letter was his wife's health,
which continued to alarm him as he waited in Philadelphia for a
replacement. In June, 1776, the Virginia convention had reduced
the size of the delegation from seven to five members, leaving less
flexibility for members to be absent and still maintain a state quo-
rum. Thus, Jefferson found himself waiting for Richard Henry Lee
to return to Philadelphia before he could depart. "For god's sake,
for your country's sake, and for my sake, come," he wrote to Lee
on July 29. "I receive by every post such accounts of the state of
Mrs. Jefferson's health, that it will be impossible for me to disap-
point her expectation of seeing me at the time I have promised,
which supposed my leaving this place on the 1 ith of next month."
But Lee was unable to promise to get to Philadelphia before Au-
gust 20. It turned out to be later, and Jefferson did not get away
2
until September 3. Meanwhile, Mrs. Jefferson's health improved.
Although Jefferson's concern for his wife's well-being was genu-
VIRGINIA REFORMER 53
ine, other factors also help to explain his willingness to give up his
seat in Congress. Like many Americans, he expected the war to be
short. He said in July, 1776, that it was the universal opinion that
the next three months would be the severest test of the conflict.
3
He
did not foresee at this juncture the critical role that Congress would
be called upon to perform before independence was established
and peace obtained. Moreover, Jefferson was eager to participate
directly in the government of Virginia. He viewed the new states as
the real arenas where the government and society of the new na-
tion were being formed and saw what was happening there as more
important than what Congress was doing. At the very moment that
he was trying desperately to get away from Philadelphia, a plan of
confederation was before Congress. That Jefferson was concerned
about such a confederation is shown in the detailed notes he kept
on the debates, but he did not attach the importance to the instru-
ment of confederation that he did to the constitution of Virginia.
He regarded the fundamental powers of government as residing in
the states. Confederation was essential, and he strongly supported
the union of states, but he did not look upon confederation as a
step toward a national government. Thus, his concern for the
structure of government and for establishing the rights of the
people centered in Virginia.
Jefferson regretted that he had had no larger role in the mak-
ing of the Virginia constitution, and he wanted to be on the scene
when the Assembly began to implement it. He was encouraged in
this thinking by Virginia friends, such as Edmund Pendleton,
who urged him to return to take a post in the judiciary. "You are
also wanting much in the Revision of our Laws and forming a new
body, a necessary work for which few of us have adequate abilities
and attention." Pendleton was disappointed when Jefferson ex-
pressed no interest in a judgeship, but he was quick to acknowledge
4
Jefferson's usefulness in the legislature. Pendleton's reference to
the revision of the laws reinforced Jefferson's interest in that subject
and quickened his desire to participate in thework. During the
years immediately ahead, Jefferson would give no subject greater
attention. When he took his seat in the Virginia House of Delegates
in October, 1776, he would embark upon what has been called
"one of the most far-reaching legislative reforms ever undertaken
by a single person." 5
Reaching Monticello on September 9, 1776, six days after leaving
Philadelphia, Jefferson remained there less than three weeks before
leaving to attend the opening of the Virginia General Assembly.
Mrs. Jefferson accompanied him to Williamsburg, where George

Wythe made his home available to them while he and Mrs. Wythe
were in Philadelphia. The Jeffersons had not yet settled into that
handsome residence, which Jefferson had visited so often as a stu-
dent, when a special messenger from Philadelphia caught up with
him on October 8 and delivered a confidential dispatch naming
him as a commissioner to France. He was to join Benjamin Franklin
and Silas Deane in seeking to negotiate a treaty with France. The
unexpected appointment had been made by Congress on Septem-
ber 26, and an accompanying letter from John Hancock informed
him that as soon as his reply was received, a ship would be dis-
patched to take him to France. Jefferson kept Hancock's messenger
waiting three days while he made up mind what to do. The mis-
his
sion obviously was an important one, and Hancock's letter was writ-
ten in language that assumed that Jefferson would accept. But he
had been back in Virginia scarcely a month, his wife was not strong,
and they had been in Williamsburg for onlv a week. Could he leave
her again so soon for what was certain to be an extended mission?
After agonizing over the question, he decided that he could not.
"No cares for my own person, nor yet for my private affairs would
have induced one moment's hesitation to accept the charge," he
wrote to Hancock. "But circumstances very peculiar to the situation
of my family, such as neither permit me to leave nor to carrv it.
compel me to ask leave to decline a service so honorable and at the
same time so important to the American caust
In the House of Delegates Jefferson plunged immediately into
the work of legislative reform. He was not always in harmony with a
majority of his fellow delegates. Some of his proposals were not en-
acted for years; others never became law. But no one took a more
leading role in the critical legislative proceedings that followed im-
mediately after independence and the adoption of the first Vir-
ginia constitution, and in the long run no one had more influence.
Jefferson's papers reflect the matters that most concerned him at
this time. He compiled detailed lists of all the acts of Parliament
and of the Virginia Assemblv relating to religion, and he gave
much attention to drafting bills establishing courts of justice. His
interest in religious liberty coincided with a rising popular excite-
ment over that issue in the state. 7 The Virginia Declaration of
Rights in June, 1776, had affirmed the principle of religious free-
dom but had stopped short of disestablishing the Anglican Church.
The new constitution was silent on the issue. It soon became clear
that Virginia's leaders had not gone as far as most of the people
—
wanted. Dissenters now more numerous than Anglicans in Vir-
ginia— soon bombarded the legislature with petitions seeking im-
plementation of the Declaration of Rights. They wanted full equal-
ity in the exercise of religious beliefs and the disestablishment of
the Church of England.

On October 1 1 Jefferson was named
nineteen-member com-
to a
mittee on religion to which these petitions were referred. When
James Madison was added to the committee shortly thereafter,
Jefferson gained an important ally in the twenty-five-year-old dele-
gate from Orange County who had been a leading voice for reli-
gious freedom in the Virginia constitutional convention. It was also
the beginning of a friendship between the two men that lasted as
long as they lived. Jefferson later said that the dissenters' petitions
"brought on the severest contests in which I have ever been en-
gaged." 8 It would be ten years before his own ideas would triumph
in the Virginia statute for religious freedom, for he favored
nothing less than the disestablishment of the Church of England
and complete freedom of religion. He drew up resolutions to effect
those purposes in 1776, but the outcome of the legislative struggle
stopped with the repeal of all acts oppressive to dissenters and the
passage of a bill exempting dissenters from contributing to the sup-
port of the Church of England. The act specifically left unresolved
the question of a general assessment to support the clergy of all de-
nominations. As Jefferson noted, "although the majority of our citi-
zens were dissenters ... a majority of the legislature were church-
men." 9 In 1779 the law providing salaries for the established clergy
was repealed, but the issue of a general assessment to support the
ministers of all Christian sects was not resolved. Neither the idea of
a general assessment nor Jefferson's bill for complete religious free-
dom, introduced as part of the revisal of the laws in 1779, could
command a majority in the Assembly at this time. Jefferson would
be in France when his statute for religious freedom, a bold asser-
tion of the sovereignty of reason, was finally adopted in 1786. 10
Jefferson was one of those Americans who wanted the Revolu-
tion to bring more changes than simply separation from Great Brit-
ain. Along with his concerns about the structure of government
and the place of the church, he was anxious that access to land be
broadened and that the influence of landed aristocrats be dimin-
ished. He had proposed to the Virginia constitutional convention
that persons not owning fifty acres of land be granted enough land
to raise their holdings to that minimum amount. Having failed
there, the first bill that he introduced in the new House of Dele-
.
gates after the adoption of the constitution was one to abolish en-
tails. Many recipients
of large land grants in early Virginia had per-
petuated their families and estates bv conveying their lands to their
descendants in fee tail, that by limiting the inheritance of prop-
is,
erty to a specified, unalterable succession of heirs. The entailing of

land had been permitted by English law and had been widelv prac-
ticed in the older eastern areas of Virginia. The only way that an
entail could be altered was by an act of the legislature. This prac-
tice, known as "docking," had become common by Jefferson's day
and was a troublesome practice to many. To Jefferson, who had

once presented a petition for docking on behalf of his wife, it was
more than a bother. It was a system that perpetuated an artificial
aristocracy of wealth.
Primogeniture likewise perpetuated an aristocracy. Only if a per-
son died without a will did the law require that his property de-
scend to his eldest son, and most large landowners wrote wills. But
the practice had contributed to the concentration of wealth and to
inequalities at all levels of society. Jefferson himself had been nei-
ther the victim nor the beneficiary of either primogeniture or en-
tail, for his own father had provided for all of his children by will,
and his land was not entailed. But Jefferson considered the aboli-
tion of both practices as vital to a republican society. The attack on
entails and primogeniture, he later told John Adams, "laid the axe
to the root of Pseudo-aristocracy.'' To end the influence of this ar-
1
istocracy was "essential to a well ordered republic," he believed; it

would make "an opening for the aristocracy of virtue and talent,
which nature has wisely provided for the direction of the interests
of society, and scattered with equal hand through all it's condi-
tions."
12
Though the ending of primogeniture would have to wait a
decade, Jefferson's bill to abolish entails, introduced on October 14,
1776, promptly passed the House of Delegates and was agreed to
by the Senate on November 1
On the same day that the House agreed to receive a bill regard-
ing entails, it also gave permission for the preparation of a bill for
the general revisal of the laws. To Jefferson no subject was more
important. "When I left Congress, in 76," he later recalled, "it was
in the persuasion that our whole code must be reviewed, adapted to
our republican form of government, and, now that we had no
negatives of Councils, Governors and Kings to restrain us from
doing right, that it should be corrected, in all it's parts with a single
eye to reason, and the good of those for whose government it was
framed." 13 A bill for revisal drafted by Jefferson received final ap-
proval on October 26, and on November 5 he was chosen by ballot-

ing in both houses to head the revision committee. With Edmund
Pendleton, George Wythe, George Mason, and Thomas Ludwell
Lee as the other members of the committee, it was a distinguished
one, and Jefferson's choice to head it was evidence of his stature.
His selection was also recognition of his rare ability to combine a
concern for broad principles with an attention to detail. There was
an order and meticulousness to all of Jefferson's papers that his col-
leagues must have recognized when they charged him with so de-
manding a task.
The act gave the committee full authority to revise, amend, or
repeal all or any of the laws of Virginia and to introduce new ones,
subject to the approval of the General Assembly.
14
To begin the
large undertaking, the committee met in Fredericksburg on Janu-
ary 13, 1777, to decide on procedures and to distribute the work.
"The first question was whether we should propose to abolish the
whole existing system of laws, and prepare a new and complete In-
stitute, or preserve the general system, and only modify it to the
present state of things," Jefferson said. To his surprise Edmund
Pendleton, "contrary to his usual disposition in favor of antient
things," favored a completely new code. But in the end the commit-
tee agreed on a plan of revisal and modification rather than a new
code, deciding not to meddle with the common law of England ex-
cept for essential alterations and to revise and digest the statutes.
In dividing work among the h\e members, the committee took
its
into account that neitherMason nor Lee was a lawyer, promising

them assistance and assigning less demanding tasks. Soon after-
ward Mason resigned from the committee because of poor health,
and Lee died the next year without having undertaken his assign-
ment. The committee's work was then divided among Jefferson,
Wythe, and Pendleton, with Jefferson assuming the largest share of
the burden. During the next two and a half years Jefferson devoted
an incredible amount of time to the reformation of the laws, while
pressing before each session of the legislature bills that he thought
should not be delayed until the full revision of the laws was com-
pleted. Jefferson has been called "a veritable legislative drafting bu-
reau" during these years; he was responsible for the introduction
and adoption of more bills than any other single member of the
Virginia Assembly from 1776 to 1779."
By February, 1779, the committee members had completed their
individual assignments, and Jefferson and Wythe met in Williams-
burg to combine their drafts and review the result. By June their
finished work was ready to go to the General Assembly. The two

bundles of papers that comprised the report submitted on June 18,
1779, filled ninety folio pages when printed. Including several bills
that had already been presented to the Assembly, the report of-
fered the drafts of 126 bills, ranging from Jefferson's famous plan
for a system of public education to a bill for apprehending horse
thieves. The report also presented a revised criminal code in which
the death penalty would be inflicted only for treason or murder.
Jefferson believed that the 126 proposed acts digested as much of
the body of the British statutes and the acts of the assembly as neces-
sary to make the laws of Virginia consistent with "republicanism." 16
Because each bill was considered separately and some of them
had already been brought forward, the initial treatment of the re-
port did not lead to the prompt enactment of a revised code that
the committee had envisioned, but rather to a prolonged legislative
process in which the report as a whole was not brought forward for
action until 1785. By that time with the war over, the peace signed,
and the general pulse of reformation weaker than in 1776, about
half of the bills were enacted, and the revisal was never put into
effect as a unit. Jefferson was then in France, and Madison, who
17
had joined in support of Jefferson's reform efforts in the Assembly,

was left with the task of rescuing as many of Jefferson's reforms as
he could put through the legislature. One of the successful efforts
was the enactment of Jefferson's bill for establishing religious free-
dom, which provided a comprehensive guarantee of religious free-
dom for all, without any qualifications whatsoever. Jefferson, who
received the news in Paris, proudly circulated the text of the act in
Europe and would come to regard this as one of the three major
contributions of his life.
Another of Jefferson's major reforms adopted at this time was the
bill to change the rules of descent and to abolish primogeniture.
Jefferson regarded the repeal of the laws of entail, the abolition of

primogeniture, and the establishment of religious freedom as three
of the four major measures that formed "a system by which every
fibre would be eradicated of antient or future aristocracy; and a
foundation laid for a government truly republican." The fourth
cornerstone of this system was to be found in his proposed bill "for
the more general diffusion of knowledge." Introduced in the
House of Delegates in December, 1778, and presented again in
June, 1780, the measure was not seriously considered until 1786
when Madison brought it up along with other bills of the Report of
18
the Committee of Revisors. Jefferson said in 1786 while the bill was
—
pending that he thought it the most important one in the whole

report, and in the bill's preamble he extolled the vital importance of
19
education to republican government.
The plan that Jefferson offered called for each county to be di-
vided into "hundreds" and a school built in each hundred so conve-
niently located that all free boys and girls might attend daily. For
three years all children would receive free schooling, and any child
might attend longer at private expense. Pupils would be taught
reading, writing, and common arithmetic and become acquainted
with Greek, Roman, English, and American history through the
books used for reading. From each group of about ten elementary
schools one boy "of the best and most promising genius and dis-
position" whose parents were too poor to continue his schooling
would be chosen each year to proceed to one of the grammar
schools serving several counties. He would be boarded and his tui-
tion paid by the state. Other qualified students whose parents could
support their education also would be admitted to the grammar
schools, where they would be taught Latin, Greek, English gram-
mar, geography, and advanced arithmetic. After one year, the least
promising third of the state-supported scholars would be cut, and
after two years only one
— "the best in genius and disposition"
would be allowed to continue at public expense for another four
years. With twenty grammar schools proposed, Jefferson envi-
sioned "twenty of the best geniuses raked from the rubbish an-
nually." From this select group, each grammar school in alternate
years would send the most promising scholar to the College of
William and Mary to be educated, boarded, and clothed at state ex-
pense for three years. In a system with twenty grammar schools,
ten "public foundationers" would thus annually reach the peak of
the educational pyramid. 20
As Jefferson saw his proposal, "The ultimate result of the whole
scheme of education would be teaching all children of the state
reading, writing, and common arithmetic: turning out ten annually
of superior genius, well taught in Greek, Latin, geography, and the
higher branches of arithmetic: turning out ten others annually, of
still superior parts, who, to those branches of learning, shall have
added such of the sciences as their genius shall have led them to."
The system would also furnish the wealthier part of the people
convenient schools at which their children might be educated at
their own expense. 21 As his summation indicates, Jefferson's plan
was a combination of public and private education. To twentieth-
century Americans three years of free public education may seem
less than enlightened, but at the time of Jefferson's proposal there

was no public education at all in Virginia.
The heart of Jefferson's plan was not equal universal education
but a system by which the most talented children from whatever
condition of society could be given an opportunity for education.
An "aristocracy of virtue and talent" thus could be recruited from
all classes. Jefferson's interest in education rested on his conviction
that the only way of preserving republican government and prevent-

ing those entrusted with political power from resorting to tyranny
was "to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at
large." Also, in order to have the best laws and well-administered
government, it was important that those persons "whom nature
hath endowed with genius and virtue" be liberally educated and
called to government service "without regard to wealth, birth or
other accidental condition or circumstance." 22
Jefferson's education bill was not enacted by the General Assem-
bly when the report of the revisors of the laws was under considera-
tion, and it was not 1796 that any plan for establishing public
until
schools passed. That some of Jefferson's phraseology
act retained
but authorized only the establishment of elementary schools and
left it up to each local community to decide on the expediency of
doing so. 23 Jefferson's scheme for selecting and educating the most
talented was never adopted. Fortunately, this early rejection did not
diminish his lifelong interest in education.
As part of his work on the revisal of the laws, Jefferson expended
an extraordinary effort in drafting a criminal code a favorite re-—
form activity of the Enlightenment. His draft of a bill, replete with
elaborate marginal notes citing sources and ostentatiously display-
ing a broad erudition in law and philosophy, showed the attention
he had lavished on the project. He had been particularly influ-
enced by Beccaria's An Essay on Crimes and Punishments, and in the
preamble to his bill Jefferson summarized the reasoning behind his
proposals. It was a government's duty to restrain criminal acts by
inflicting punishment, he said, but a person "committing an in-
ferior injury, does not wholly forfeit the protection of his fellow
citizens." It was thus the duty of the legislature "to arrange in a
proper scale the crimes" to be repressed with "a corresponding
graduation of punishments." Capital punishment "should be the
last melancholy resource" imposed only for treason or murder. Al-
though Jefferson's bill contained some lapses from humane and lib-
24
eral standards, the main intent of the reform was humanitarian.
Had Virginia followed Jefferson's proposal to abolish the death
VIRGINIA REFORMER 6l
penalty for all crimes except treason and murder, the common-
wealth would have been in advance of every other state in the
Union, but the legislature by a single vote rejected the new code.
Madison reported to Jefferson after its final defeat that "the rage
against Horse stealers had a great influence on the fate of the Bill."
Horse stealing was a capital crime, and as Madison concluded,
25
"Our old bloody code is . .fully restored."
.
The most important aspect of Virginia society that the reformers

did not significantly alter in the revisal of the laws was slavery. In his
Notes on the State of Virginia, written while legislative action on the
report of the revisors was pending, Jefferson listed as one of the
major proposed alterations a bill to emancipate all slaves born after
the passage of the act. He went on to explain that the measures re-
ported by the revisors did not contain this proposition but that an
amendment had been prepared to be introduced in the legislature.
According to Jefferson, this amendment provided that children
born to slaves should continue with their parents until a certain
age, then be brought up and trained at public expense in farming
or other skills, and at the age of eighteen for females and twenty-
one for males be colonized outside the state as "a free and indepen-
dant people" under the protection of Virginia until strong enough
to prevail on their own. Jefferson expected to be asked why the
blacks should not be retained and incorporated into the state. And
he answered, "Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites;
ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have
sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has
made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties,
and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the
extermination of the one or the other race." 26
There is no record that the amendment for emancipation was
ever introduced, and Jefferson in his autobiography said that "it
was found that the public mind would not yet bear the proposi-
tion." In an appendix to the Notes on Virginia, Jefferson published
his draft of a constitution for Virginia containing a provision that
allpersons born after December 31, 1800, would be free. Prepared
in 1783 in expectation of a constitutional convention that was never
called, that proposition also received no serious consideration.
Though these proposals showed Jefferson in advance of the gen-
eral sentiment in Virginia of his day, the arguments for emancipa-
tion and deportation that he outlined in his Notes on Virginia rested
on the assumption of innate racial differences. Jefferson believed
at the time of the Revolution, as he did in old age, that "noth-
ing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these
people are to be free," but he also was convinced that it was no less
certain that "the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same
government." 27
Ahead of his time in his stand on emancipation, Jefferson was
much the product of his age in his views on race. The views that
he expressed in his Notes on Virginia, written in the early 1780s in
the full tide of his revolutionary fervor, stopped short of accepting
the equality of blacks, though he recognized the blacks as equal
in "moral sense." Ready to make allowances for differences of
condition, education, conversation, and the sphere in which slaves
moved, Jefferson still subscribed to the theory of black inferiority.
He said that he advanced it "as a suspicion only that the blacks . . .
are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and

mind," but most of his arguments tended to support that suspicion.
After reading Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, David Ramsay, a South
Carolina surgeon and historian, wrote to him that he admired
his "generous indignation at slavery; but think you have depressed
the negroes too low." 28 It may be argued that Jefferson's suspicion
of black inferiority was the only means by which he could deal
psychologically with his own sense of guilt in owning slaves. As
John C. Miller pointed out, Jefferson could never have lived with
the thought that white Americans might be denying opportunity
to a black Isaac Newton, a black Francis Bacon, or a black John
Locke. 29 To the twentieth-century mind Jefferson's views on race
stand in contrast to the liberal stance that he took on most of the
major issues of his day; yet his repeated condemnation of the in-
stitution of slavery and his insistent arguments that steps must be
—
taken to bring it to an end placed him in advance of most but far
—
from all eighteenth-century persons.
The Notes on Virginia included an impassioned condemnation of
slavery, which Jefferson described as a system destroying the mor-
als of society. "The whole commerce between master and slave is a
perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unre-
mitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on
the other," he wrote, seeing slavery as encouraging passion rather
than reason. He condemned statesmen for "permitting one half of
the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other." And he
asked: "Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we
have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the
people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not
to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country
when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for
ever." At the time he wrote Jefferson said he thought "a change
this,
already perceptible, since the origin of the present revolution. The

spirit of the master is abating, that of the slave rising from the dust,
his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the aus-
picies of heaven, for a total emancipation, and that this is disposed,
in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather
than by their extirpation." 30 By the end of his life, hope would be
replaced by growing despair, but he never wavered in his convic-
tion that slavery was an evil that must be extinguished.
By emphasizing the leading reform proposals of the report of
the revisors, Jefferson obscured the full magnitude of his extraor-
dinary effort. The failure of the Assembly to adopt the report as a
revised code also impaired the public perception of the accomplish-
ment. But those close to Jefferson fully understood his contribu-
tion. Madison recognized him as the leading figure in the revisal of
the laws, and he later said that the effort "exacted perhaps the most
severe of his public labours. . . . The work enacted in the
tho' not
mass as was contemplated has been a mine of Legislative wealth;
and a Model also of Statutory Composition." 31
From 1776 to 1779 Jefferson devoted most of his public effort to
drafting bills and reforming the laws. American spirits rose and fell
as the fortunes of the war shifted, but Jefferson pressed on with his
work, always thinking in terms of a new society that would follow
the war, never proceeding on any premise other than ultimate
American success. While the war raged, he was contemplating the
establishment of a state-supported library in Richmond to promote
"the researches of the learned and curious." When he drafted a bill
to that effect, he added a provision that "if during the time of war
the importation of books and maps shall be hazardous" or the cost
too high, the directors of the library could accumulate the annual
appropriation "until fit occasions shall occur of employing them." 32
Most of Jefferson's contemporaries were more concerned with the
immediate problems at hand, and his bill for a library never was
enacted, but it showed that Jefferson had a vision for the future
that not even the darkest days of the war could dispel.
VI
Wartime Governor of Virginia
On June 1, 1779, by joint ballot of both houses of the Assembly,

Jefferson was elected governor of Virginia to succeed Patrick Henry,
who had served three one-year terms and was ineligible to succeed
himself. In a close contest no candidate received a majority on
the first ballot. Jefferson led with fifty-five votes, followed by John
Page member of the Governor's Council since 1776) with thirty-
(a
eight and Thomas Nelson (commander of the Virginia militia) with
thirty-two. The voting on the second ballot between Jefferson and
Page gave Jefferson sixty-seven votes and Page sixty-one. Although
the election was close, the outcome was not unexpected. Edmund
Pendleton had predicted Jefferson's election the day before the bal-
loting. Page promptly assured his old college friend that he would
1
"do every thing in my Power to make your Administration easy and

agreeable to you." In response Jefferson wrote Page that he had
been distressed that the zeal of their respective friends had placed
them as competitors but that "the difference of the numbers which
decided between us, was too insignificant to give you a pain or me a
pleasure [had] our disposition towards each other been such as to
have admitted those sensations." 2
Considering the critical state of the war and the problems facing
Virginia, the burden of the governorship was hardly a cause for
congratulations. Indeed, Jefferson told one well-wisher that condo-
lences would be better suited to the occasion. To Richard Henry
Lee he wrote that "in a virtuous government, and more especially
in times like these, public offices are, what they should be, burthens
to those appointed to them which it would be wrong to decline,
though foreseen to bring them intense labor and great private
loss." Even then, it is unlikely that Jefferson anticipated the dif-
5
ficulties, labor, and strain the governorship would impose. The

thirty-six-year-old governor hardly would have expected to ask
WARTIME GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA 65
to be relieved of those burdens before the end of the three con-

secutive one-year terms permitted to him by the constitution. How-
ever, a few months after accepting reelection in 1780, he was con-
templating retiring from office and would do so at the end of his
second term. 4 That date in June, 1781, came during one of the
darkest periods of the war in Virginia, and he would leave office
tired, frustrated, and disappointed. Had he endured the strain an-
other five months, he could have experienced as governor the ex-
hilaration of Cornwallis' defeat at Yorktown.
Offering little glory and much labor, especially in wartime, the
governorship was a post without real authority or the resources
that effective leadership required. Totally dependent upon the leg-
islature, to which the constitution of 1776 assigned supreme power,
the governor had no veto and unlike royal governors could not dis-
solve the Assembly. He exercised the executive authority with the
advice of a council of state composed of eight members elected by
the Assembly, and he sometimes was prevented from acting be-
cause of the absence of the required quorum of four council mem-
bers. Yet the governor was responsibile for administering the laws,
and to do so on a daily basis required the working out of certain
relationships with the council that permitted him some dis-
to use
cretion. Jefferson was particularly adept and within six
at this,
months after taking office the council had given him authority to
act in certain cases when the council was not sitting and its concur-
rence could be expected. Jefferson recalled that it was also under-
stood that where the council was divided in opinion or could not be
assembled, the governor was free to act on his own opinion and re-
sponsibility and he did so during the invasions of the state by
that
the British. Minutes of the council confirm Jefferson's recollection. 5
Periods of almost daily contact between the governor and the coun-
cil of state brought a close working relationship with James Madison,
who was a member of the council when Jefferson took office, fur-
ther strengthening their growing friendship.
The war necessitated more administrative machinery than the
Virginia constitution envisioned. In May, 1779, the Assembly passed
bills, drafted by Jefferson, to establish a Board of War and a Board
of Trade. These measures were implemented early in his gover-

norship. The boards, however, proved too cumbersome for effec-
tive administration. By the end of his first year as governor the
boards were replaced by a commercial agent, a commissioner of
the navy, and a commissioner of the war office —
all appointed by
the governor with the advice of the council and under the direction
of both. 6 These changes show Jefferson's efforts to improve the ad-

ministrative structure of the executive and indicate his early atten-
tion to administrative mechanisms, so characteristic of his style in
executive posts in later years.
Although the governor of the commonwealth lacked the power
had exercised, he was still addressed as His
that colonial governors
Excellency. Jefferson, like Patrick Henry before him, moved into the
palace that royal governors had once occupied. He was to live in that
elegant house — whose architectural he never admired for
style —
less than a year, however. Soon after he was elected governor, the
Assembly passed an act to move the capital from Williamsburg to
Richmond. The new capital was only a hamlet, but it was more cen-
trally located to a population that was constantly moving westward.
Jefferson favored the move. In fact, he had drafted a bill in 1776
to move the capital westward (without specifying Richmond), be-
cause the equal rights of all inhabitants required that the seat of
government be as nearly central to all as possible. The exposure of
Williamsburg to an invading enemy was also a consideration be-
hind Jefferson's proposal. That danger was even greater in May of
1779, when the Assembly resurrected Jefferson's bill and, after
minor changes, enacted it into law. 7
Richmond was unprepared to receive the state government.
Buildings for offices had to be hastily acquired, and the governor
had to find his own dwelling. His wife and two daughters having
joined him in the palace at Williamsburg, he was anxious to keep
his family with him. Happily he accomplished this when he rented
one of Richmond's few brick houses from Colonel Thomas Turpin
and shipped forty-eight crates of furniture and furnishings from
the palace in Williamsburg. While this permitted him to live with as
much style and elegance as the circumstances permitted a habit —
of living that he always followed —
his greatest interest was in plan-
ning the future capital. When the legislature named him to head
the nine-man committee of directors of the public buildings, he im-
mediately began drawing plans for the city. 8 It would be some years
before these plans would mature and Jefferson would send from
Paris the model for the Virginia state capitol. Before those accom-
plishments could be recorded, the independence of Virginia had to
be secured. When the capital moved to Richmond in May, 1780, the
war was far from won, and the end was not in sight.
The Revolutionary War was a disorganized, joint military effort
of the states and the Continental Congress. In the absence of any
real national government the role of state governments in pros-
ecuting the war was far greater than in any later American war.
To be governor of Virginia from 1779 to 1781 was to be an execu-
tive actively involved in administering a state at war, and Virginia
was the largest of the American states in population and in ter-
ritory, stretching westward along the Ohio River to the Mississippi.
The Board of War headed its letters "War Office, Williamsburg,"
and the military situation demanded that the governor be con-
stantly concerned with enlistments, arms, military clothing and
supplies, prisoners of war, and, at times, the invasion of the state by
the enemy.
It was Jefferson's unhappy fate to be governor of Virginia during
one of the darkest times of the war and the period in which Vir-
ginia was most directly threatened by British military conquest. In
November, 1779, the Board of War predicted that the British army
would begin offensive operations in the state during the coming
winter and among other measures of preparation recommended
the appointment of a general officer to implement the orders of
the executive. "Civil Bodies," the board wrote, "tho [they] may dic-
tate to, are Illy calculated to direct military ones." The council re-
sponded that the executive had no authority to appoint such an
an actual
officer until invasion had taken place, thus leaving the re-
sponsibilityof preparing for an invasion in the governor's hands.
Jefferson was not fully convinced that the British were planning to
invade the Chesapeake Bay that winter, but on December 1 1, 1779,
General Washington informed him that Sir Henry Clinton was em-
barking eight thousand troops from New York reportedly headed
for the Chesapeake. 9 As it turned out, Clinton's destination was
Charleston. Though this removed the immediate threat to Vir-
ginia, it bode ill for the future. The were shifting their
British
major military effort to the South, and the war was soon to enter
one of its most critical phases.
By the spring of 1780 the Continental war effort was in desper-
ate straits. No period of the Revolution had been more critical than
the present moment, Madison wrote to Jefferson from Congress in
March: "Our army threatened with an immediate alternative of
disbanding or living on free quarter; the public Treasury empty;
public credit exhausted, nay the private credit of purchasing
Agents employed, I am told, as far as it will bear, Congress com-
plaining of the extortion of the people; the people of the improvi-
dence of Congress, and the army of both; our affairs requiring the
most mature and systematic measures, and the urgency of occa-
sions admitting only of temporizing expedients and those expedi-
ents generating new difficulties." A few weeks later Washington was

pleading with Jefferson to procure clothing for the Virginia line
that he had detached from his own forces and sent to join General
Benjamin Lincoln in South Carolina. 10 These bleak letters were
written at a time when it was hoped that Clinton's operations in the
South might be repulsed, but on May 12 Charleston fell to the Brit-
ish, and with it the Virginia forces sent to South Carolina were sur-
rendered. It was June 5 before certain intelligence of this disaster

reached Jefferson in the new capital at Richmond. 11 Three days be-
fore learning the dark news from Charleston, Jefferson had been
reelected to a second term as governor.
Jefferson's final year in office was even more difficult than his
first. The was desperate, inflation
financial situation of the state
rampant, and state currency becoming worthless. The military
situation in the South deteriorated rapidly, as British troops moved
northward after the fall of Charleston. Jefferson urgently appealed
to Congress for military stores, stressing that state supplies were in-
adequate even for arming the militia, while assuring Congress that
as far as they would go, state resources would be "chearfully sub-
mitted to the common cause." But state resources were either lack-
ing or not effectively mobilized, and General Horatio Gates was
soon complaining that Virginia militia were being sent to join his
command in North Carolina without arms and ammunition and
even without adequate clothing. 12
In October, 1780, a British fleet of sixty sail entered the Chesa-
peake Bay, and light horse units made a landing near Portsmouth.
"We are endeavouring to collect as large a body to oppose them as
we can arm," Jefferson wrote to Washington. "This will be lamen-
tably inadequate if the Enemy be in any force; it is Mortifying to
suppose it possible that a people able and zealous to contend with
their Enemy should be reduced to fold their Arms for want of the
means of defence; yet no resources that we know of, ensure us
against this event." On this occasion Virginia was saved only by the
departure of the British fleet for Charleston on November 22. This
was a reprieve only, for at the end of December Benedict Arnold
arrived at the head of an invading British army intent on carrying
the war into the heart of the Old Dominion. Meanwhile General
Nathanael Greene, who had assumed command from General Gates
in North Carolina, described to Jefferson the wretched state of
Gates's army when he took command, and he lectured the Virginia
governor: "Your troops may literally be said to be naked. ... It will
answer no good purpose to send men here in such a condition, for
they are nothing but added weight upon the army and altogether
incapable of aiding in its operations. ... No man will think himself
bound to fight the battles of a State that leaves him to perish for
want of covering." 13
Jefferson was under pressure from all sides: from the Congress
to supply money for the war effort and troops for the continental
line; from the imperiled army in the South seeking arms, supplies,
and clothing; and from his own citizens, who saw their state left ex-
posed to an invading enemy. Though the situation could hardly be
blamed on the governor, Virginia was unprepared for the crisis at
hand. The state's contribution to the general cause had been large,
and many of its people had sacrificed for the common good, but
the state had not been mobilized for a war that was to last so long.
The dimensions of that neglect were evident by 1780, and though
chargeable more to the General Assembly than to the governor,
Jefferson as a member of the Assembly from 1776 until his election
as governor in 1779 must share in that failure.
Virginia, like most of the other states, had not developed the sup-
ply and distribution system needed to support the war effort. The
result was that Jefferson as governor was directly involved in such
details as calculating the number of uniforms that could be cut
from 1,495 yards of cloth. When he was found to have miscalcu-
lated, he was informed that the 1,495 yards that he had counted
upon as sufficient to make 400 suits would make no more than 370
coats because it was of a narrow width. "I should have imagined
that the width as well as the length of the cloth would have been
reported to your Excellency," the colonel in charge of clothing new
recruits wrote, as if the governor had no greater responsibilities
than keeping track of the width of cloth for uniforms. 14 This was no
exceptional case. Jefferson personally requested cartridge paper
and cartouche boxes from Philadelphia, wrote out the orders of the
officer of a flag-of-truce vessel to proceed up the James, and se-
cured land for the erection of a magazine near the foundry at West-
ham. 15 At the same time, he was involved in strategic planning for
the war, particularly with regard to the West, where he played a
major role in supporting the campaigns of George Rogers Clark to
secure the Virginia frontier on the Ohio River all the way to its
juncture with the Mississippi. 16 He corresponded regularly with
General Washington and with the president of Congress, reporting
on the military situation in Virginia and relaying information from
farther south.
Jefferson faced the difficulties of the war almost philosophically.
Amid the pressures he remained outwardly calm. Despite the re-

luctance of many of countrymen to fight or to sacrifice, he re-
his
tained his faith in the cause and in the ultimate destiny of the
American people to prevail. General Daniel Morgan would ex-
plode, "Great god what is the reason we cant Have more men in the
—
field so many men in the country Nearly idle for want of employ-
ment." But the governor would explain to Lafayette, "Mild Laws,
a People not used to war and prompt obedience, a want of the Pro-
visions of War and means of procuring them render our orders
often ineffectual, oblige us to temporize and when we cannot ac-
complish an object in one way to attempt it in another." 17 To Gen-
eral Nathanael Greene, Jefferson's temporizing appeared to be in-
difference to the critical state of the war. "The struggle here is
great, the situation of the Army precarious," the general wrote
from North Carolina in March, 1781. "The least misfortune will
bring the war to your doors. You will feel the necessity, therefore of
giving me immediate support." Jefferson replied that reinforce-
ments were on the way, but added: "An Enemy 3000 strong, not a
regular within our State, nor Arms to put into the Hands of the
Militia are Circumstances which promise Difficulties. Yet I shall
think it do every Thing we can for you to prevent the
essential to
Return of Cornwallis's Army." 18
The war was in fact already at Jefferson's door. In January, 1781,
a British fleet sailed up the James River to Westover and landed
Benedict Arnold's invading army for an attack on Richmond. Gov-
ernor Jefferson called up the militia of adjacent counties, hastily
began moving records and military stores out of Richmond, and
evacuated his family from the city. With no regular troops in the
area and no militia in place to defend the capital, Arnold's army
entered the city unopposed and sent a detachment to destroy the
foundry at Westham. After twenty- four hours Arnold's forces left
the city, but not before setting fire to some public and private build-
ings and carrying off wagonloads of arms, munitions, and military
19
stores that Virginia could ill afford to lose. Never far away, Jeffer-
son spent several active and anxious nights across the James River
near Richmond and returned to the capital within thirty-six hours
of the British withdrawal. He was soon recording the loss of 150
muskets from the Capitol loft, 150 wagons on the Brook Road, 5
tons of powder from the magazine, 1 20 sides of leather from the
quartermaster, and other distressing losses. 20
Arnold's withdrawal to Portsmouth was only temporary. In March
he was reinforced by the arrival of General William Phillips and
1
2,000 men. Superseding Arnold in command, Phillips moved up

the James River to Petersburg in mid-April and occupied Man-
chester, south of Richmond across the James. Only the timely ar-
rival of Lafayette with a detachment of 900 Continental troops,
who had made a forced march from Annapolis, dissuaded the Brit-
ish from crossing the river to attack the capital. With Lafayette con-
trolling the north bank of the James, the British dropped down the
river. But again it was only a temporary maneuver. Cornwallis was
already implementing a plan to march into Virginia and link forces
When he arrived
with Phillips. in Petersburg on May 20 and as-
sumed command of all British forces in Virginia, the American
military situation became critical. Even with 1,200 to 1,500 militia
added to his forces, Lafayette was no match for the British force
of about 7,200. Governor Jefferson had summoned more militia
into service, but he had been unable to assure Lafayette that his re-
quests would produce sufficient reinforcements. "I shall candidly
acknowledge," Jefferson wrote to Lafayette on May 14, "that it
is not in my power to do any thing more than to represent to the
General Assembly that unless they can provide more effectually for
the Execution of the Law it will be vain to call on Militia."
21
When
Cornwallis crossed the James River on May Richmond,
24 to attack
Lafayette had no choice but to withdraw rapidly northward toward
Fredericksburg.
Meanwhile the General Assembly, scheduled to convene in Rich-
mond on May 7, had difficulty in making a quorum, and on May 10
the members present adjourned to meet in Charlottesville on May
24. Departing the capital on May 15 to be present for the conven-
ing of the Assembly, Jefferson was already at Monticello when
Cornwallis arrived outside Richmond. Although Jefferson earlier
had announced his intention not to accept a third year as governor
when his term ended in June, the moment was an inopportune one
tocontemplate leaving the governorship. He satisfied himself of its
propriety by reasoning that his likely successor would be General
Thomas Nelson, who commanded the state militia, and that "the
union of the civil and military power in the same hands, at this time
would greatly facilitiate military measures," especially because he
himself was "unprepared by his line of life and education for the
command of armies." 22
On last day of May, Cornwallis abandoned his pursuit of La-
the
fayetteand dispatched Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton with
250 cavalry to raid Charlottesville in hope of capturing members of
the Virginia Assembly and perhaps even Governor Jefferson. The
plan might well have succeeded had not Tarleton's movement to-
ward Charlottesville been observed about forty miles away by Cap-
tain Jack Jouett, a militia captain who rode through the night along
back roads to bring the warning to Jefferson and the legislators.
Even then, the delegates barely had time to flee across the mountain
toward Staunton, and several laggards were, in fact, caught. Jeffer-
son himself escaped on horseback through the woods as British
troops ascended the hill at Monticello. 23 Years later Jefferson wrote:
Would be believed, were it not known, that this flight from a troop of
it
horse, whose whole legion too was within supporting distance, has
been the subject, with party writers, of volumes of reproach on me,
serious or sarcastic? That it has been sung in verse, and said in humble
prose that, forgetting the noble example of the hero of La Mancha,
and his windmills, I declined a combat, singly against a troop, in which
victory would have been so glorious? Forgetting, themselves, at the
same time, that I was not provided with the enchanted arms of the
knight, nor even with his helmet of Mambrino. These closet heroes
forsooth would have disdained the shelter of a wood, even singly and
unarmed, against a legion of armed enemies. 24
These comments were written in 1816, seven years after he retired

from the presidency. That Jefferson retained such feeling about
this experience of his governorship thirty-five years distant shows
what a political issue was made of his fleeing from the British and
how deeply hurt he was by the charges.
Jefferson's agony over the final days of his governorship began
almost immediately. When Tarleton swept into Charlottesville on
June 4, Jefferson's term as governor had actually expired two days
earlier on June 2, but the recently assembled legislature had not yet
chosen his successor. In fleeing from Monticello on June 4, Jeffer-
son did not head for Staunton, where the legislature would recon-
vene, but went instead with his family to Poplar Forest, a farm in
Bedford County inherited by his wife, ninety miles southwest of
Monticello. Having declared his intention not to accept another
year as governor and his term of office having expired, he was
not required to attend at Staunton. But until the legislature chose
Thomas Nelson as governor on June 12, the state was without a
chief executive in a desperately critical moment. However clearly
Jefferson had earlier made known his determination to retire, his
disappearance from the scene at this time of crisis was bound to
arouse criticism. He should not have been surprised when such an
attack was not long in coming.
On June 12, 1781, George Nicholas moved in the House of Dele-

gates that at the next session of Assembly an inquiry be made into
the conduct of the executive during the last twelve months. 25 The
resolution, —
which had the backing of Patrick Henry an act never
forgotten by Jefferson —passed the same day. John Beckley, the
clerk of the House, immediately sent Jefferson a copy, though it did
not reach him until August 7. Meanwhile Jefferson learned of it
from friends in the Assembly, some of whom supported the in-
quiry, confident, as one member explained to Jefferson, that it
"would do you Honor." 26 Immediately after returning to Monticello
from Poplar Forest in late July, Jefferson wrote to Nicholas asking
for the specific incidents that were to be investigated. Nicholas re-
sponded that "no particular instance of misconduct was specified"
but went on to list several matters that he believed wanted explana-
tion. Mentioning first "the total want of opposition to Arnold on his
first expedition to Richmond," he enumerated other charges relat-
27
ing to the militia and the loss of arms.
Although the resolution specified an inquiry into the conduct of
the executive rather than the governor, thus embracing members
of the council, the charges appear to have been directed toward
Jefferson; he immediately began to prepare his defense. When one
of the members of the House of Delegates from Albemarle County
resigned to accept a state appointment, Jefferson sought his seat,
was elected, and was present in the Assembly on December 12,
1781, the date set for the inquiry. By then Cornwallis had surren-
dered atYorktown, and George Nicholas did not even appear in
the House of Delegates to press his charges. When no one else
moved to begin the inquiry, Jefferson himself rose from his seat,
holding in his hand a paper on which he had listed the expected
charges, having obtained a more detailed list than the one that
Nicholas had sent him. He then proceeded to read the charges and
28
to answer each in turn.
When he sat down, the House unanimously passed a resolution
of commendation and thanks, explaining that "popular rumours,
gaining some degree of credence, by more pointed Accusations,
rendered it necessary to make an enquirey into his conduct, and
delayed that retribution of public gratitude, so eminently merited;
but that conduct having become the object of open scrutiny, tenfold
value is added to an approbation founded on a cool and deliberate
discussion." The final resolution as amended by the Senate was less
profuse in apology but none the less clear in its verdict. It read:
"Resolved, that the sincere Thanks of the General Assembly be

given to our former Governor Thomas Jefferson Esquire for his
impartial, upright, and attentive administration whilst in office.
The Assembly wish in the strongest manner to declare the high
opinion which they entertain of Mr. Jefferson's Ability, Rectitude,
and Integrity as chief Magistrate of this Commonwealth, and mean
by thus publicly avowing their Opinion, to obviate and to remove
29
all unmerited Censure."
Though publicly vindicated, Jefferson was bitter that charges

based on rumors had ever been introduced. 30 But like other wit-
nesses to the controversy, he believed that the matter had been put
to rest. It would be as unexpected as it was, in his eyes, despicable
that years later, when he was a candidate for president of the
United States, attacks would be made upon him relating his con-
duct as governor of Virginia. 31
Jefferson's resentment against the unfair charges made against
him was understandable. Less easy to comprehend was his decision
to withdraw from public life when he left the governorship. At that
moment the revolutionary cause to which he had devoted most of
his energies since the beginning of the war was still unresolved. If
he could not endure another year of strain and frustration as gov-
ernor of Virginia, there were other places where his services were
still needed. The Continental Congress in fact lost no time in call-
ing for them. On June 14 the Congress named him along with Ben-
jamin Franklin, John Jay, and Henry Laurens, to join John Adams
in Paris as one of the peace commissioners to negotiate with Great
32
Britain. By the time Jefferson received word of this appointment,
he had also been informed of the scheduled inquiry into his con-
duct as governor, and he declined the appointment on the grounds
of "a temporary and indispensable obligation" to remain within the
state.
33
When Edmund Randolph suggested that the negotiations
would probably be delayed long enough for his temporary dis-
ability to be removed, enabling him to proceed on the mission,
Jefferson was forced to weigh other considerations. When he did
so, he still insisted on declining. "Were it possible for me to deter-
mine again to enter into public business there is no appointment
whatever which would have been so agreeable to me," he wrote to
Randolph. "But I have taken my final leave of every thing of that
nature, have retired to my farm, my family and books from which I
34
think nothing will ever more separate me." After accepting elec-
tion to a seat in the House of Delegates to defend his conduct as
governor, he refused reelection to the next Assembly. He also de-
clined election to the Continental Congress. The pull of home,

family, and Monticello was always great throughout his life, and he
now yielded to the impulse to return to private life. That decision
was not understood by many of his friends, most of whom were un-
aware of the delicate state of his wife's health, which figured promi-
nently in his determination. Even James Madison wrote: "Great as
my partiality is to Mr. Jefferson, the mode in which he seems deter-
mined to revenge the wrong received from his Country, does not
appear to me to be dictated either by philosophy or patriotism. It
argues indeed a keen sensibility and a strong consciousness of rec-
titude."
35
Madison was then a member of the Continental Congress
in Philadelphia, and he did not know that, at the very moment he
wrote, Mrs. Jefferson lay ill at Monticello with little prospect of
recovery.
The two frustrating years as governor were important to Jeffer-
son's political education. While he had shown less leadership skills
than the times required, the blame was not wholly his, for the pow-
ers of his office were ill demands of a state at war. At
suited to the
the same more administrative ability than is
time, he demonstrated
frequently recognized. Although he withdrew from the scene with
the intention of retiring from public affairs, future circumstances
would alter that decision. He would never forget his difficult days
as governor, but those memories would not deter him from later
returning to public life.
VII
Withdrawal, Sorrow, and Return
In late November, 1780, just after the British fleet that had been
threatening Virginia since October sailed from the Chesapeake,
Governor Jefferson wrote that he was busily employed in answer-
ing queries about Virginia for Francois Marbois (later Marquis de
Barbe-Marbois), secretary to the French minister at Philadelphia,
who had circulated among members of the Continental Congress a
listof queries concerning the various states. His questions sought
1
useful information on population, geography, natural resources,

governments, laws, religion, education, the military, commerce and
manufacturing, navigation and seaports, the native Indians, and
various other matters. John Sullivan, the delegate from New Hamp-
shire whom Marbois asked to gather data on that state, described
the French inquirer as "one of those useful Geniuss who is Con-
stantly in Search of knowledge." It is not surprising that when
2
Joseph Jones, the Virginia delegate queried by Marbois, forwarded

the list of questions to Jefferson, the busy governor searched for
time to provide answers. He had long been collecting information
on Virginia and recording it on loose memoranda kept in bundles
at Monticello. Marbois' queries would enable him to put those to
good use. Such was the origin of the only book that Jefferson ever
authored, his Notes on the State of Virginia, now widely regarded as
one of the most important scientific and political works written by
an American in the eighteenth century and one of the most famous
products of the Enlightenment in America. 3
Jefferson's last year as governor left little time for the enterprise.
A month after he started the project, Benedict Arnold's army in-
vaded Virginia, and he would not have an opportunity to return to
the work until after he left the governorship. Even then, he did so
with difficulty. Forced to flee Monticello as his term ended in June,
1781, and unable to return until August, he turned to composing
WITHDRAWAL, SORROW, AND RETURN 77
his answers for Marbois at a time when the military fortunes of Vir-
ginia hung in the balance. Only his unshakable faith in the ultimate
triumph of the American cause could have enabled him to direct
his powers of concentration to such a project. Jefferson could do
most of the writing in the isolation of Monticello, but he was unable
to collect all of the data needed until after the fighting ended. "The
general confusion of our state put it out of my power to procure
the information necessary till lately," he explained to Marbois when
he sent him his compilation in December, 1781. Although Jeffer-
son's answers to Marbois' questions were fuller than those of any of
the other few respondents who bothered to reply, he regarded
them as "very imperfect," and as soon as he finished the manu-
4
script, he began to revise it.
On the same day that he sent the work to Marbois, Jefferson
wrote to Charles Thomson, secretary of the Congress and fellow
member of the American Philosophical Society, asking his opinion
on expanding the work as a contribution to the society. Having
been elected a councillor of the society while governor, he said that
though he was unsure of his responsibilities, he did not wish to be
counted "as a drone in any society." Thomson strongly encouraged
Jefferson to pursue the work. The American Philosophical Society,
he noted, had for its object "the improvement of useful knowledge
more particularly what relates to this new world. It comprehends
the whole circle of arts, science and discoveries especially in the
natural world and therefore I am persuaded your answer to Mr.
Marbois queries will be an acceptable present. This Country opens
to the philosophic view an extensive, rich and unexplored field."
While expressing his regret at Jefferson's retirement from politics,
Thomson congratulated posterity on the advantages that they might
derive from Jefferson's "philosophical researches." Jefferson already
had become so interested in the project that he undoubtedly did
not require Thomson's encouragement, but he welcomed his inter-
est. When he later published the work, he included as an appendix
a series of observations that Thomson him

after reading the
sent
manuscript. Jefferson corrected and enlarged the work during the
winter of 1782 and continued to make revisions as late as 1784 be-
fore having printed in 1785. 5
it
The commentaries in the Notes on the State of Virginia, as Jefferson

modestly insisted, were incomplete, and some topics were treated
far more extensively than others. Although most of the work cen-
tered on Virginia, Jefferson ranged far beyond his own state on
certain subjects, such as the aborigines and the animals in the New
World. When he cited men of genius that America had produced,

he pointed to Washington, Franklin, and Rittenhouse, only one of
whom was a Virginian. Much of the work was descriptive, factual
data about Virginia. He began by describing its boundaries and
rivers, providing an amazing amount of information about the
waters that flowed through Virginia or along its borders, including
the Mississippi. In treating that channel of the future commerce of
the western country, he also included its principal source, the Mis-
souri. Even in largely descriptive passages he added opinion, call-
ing the Ohio "the most beautiful river on earth" — a verdict that he
had gleaned from others, for he had never seen it himself. 6
His chapter "Productions Mineral, Vegetable and Animal," the
longest in the book, displayed the Virginian's keen interest in nat-
ural history and included detailed lists of trees, plants, animals,
and birds. The most extensive part of the chapter was Jefferson's
argument refuting the theory of the Comte de Buffon, probably
the best known and most widely respected naturalist of his day, that
the animals and aborigines of the New World were smaller and
generally degenerate in comparison with their European equiva-
lents. To provide data, he had friends everywhere measuring and
7
weighing animals, large and small. Jefferson himself was not in-
novative as a scientist, always valuing the practical over the theoreti-
but his section on natural history attracted considerable notice,
cal,
and throughout his life he would be unexcelled as a promoter of

8
science.
The second longest section of the book was devoted to the consti-
tution and the laws of Virginia, in which he sharply criticized the
Virginia Constitution of 1776. Noting that it "was formed when we
were new and unexperienced in the science of government," he
was of the denial of the franchise to a large number of free-
critical
men and unequal representation of the central and
also of the
western portions of the state in comparison with the old tidewater
counties. In addition, he opposed the consolidation of power in the
hands of a single branch of government, even the legislature. The
concentration of the executive, legislative, and judicial powers of
government in the same hands was "precisely the definition of des-
potic government," he wrote. "It will be no alleviation that these
powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single
one." 9
Jefferson devoted a chapter to the American aborigines, and in
response to Buffon he argued that "we shall probably find that they
are formed in mind as well as in body, on the same module with the
10
'Homo sapiens Europaeus.'" In a section on laws he discussed
slavery and the black race, expressing both his strong condemna-
tion of slavery and his suspicion that blacks were not intellectually
equal to whites. 11 He also used most of a brief chapter on manners
to describe the effects of slavery on slaveholders. One of the most
famous passages of the book was found in a section on manu-
factures,devoted largely to glorifying agriculture as superior to
manufacturing.
Those who labour in the earth are the chosen people of God, if ever
he had a chosen people, whose breasts he has made his peculiar deposit
for substantial and genuine virtue. While we have land to labour
. . .
then, let us never wish to see our citizens occupied at a work-bench, or

twirling a distaff. Carpenters, masons, smiths, are wanting in hus-
bandry: but, for the general operations of manufacture, let our work-
shops remain in Europe. The mobs of great cities add just so
. . .
much to the support of pure government, as sores do to the strength

of the human body. It is the manners and spirit of a people which pre-
12
serve a republic in vigour.
No brief examination of the work can adequately display the

erudition of the author or convey the scope of the analytical and
speculative content of the book. Throughout it revealed Jefferson's
intense interest in the environment and in natural history, his pas-
sionate concern for government and the laws, and his committed
involvement in the new society in which he lived. Just before its
publication, Charles Thomson urged him to give the book a broader
title and pronounced it "a most excellent Natural history not merely
of Virginia but of North America and possibly equal if not superior

to that of any Country yet published." 13
When the Chevalier de Chastellux visited Jefferson at Monticello

in the spring of 1782, he found Jefferson in his element and was
charmed by his experienced and learned host. He described "a
man, not yet forty, tall, and with a mild and pleasing countenance,
but whose mind and attainments could serve in lieu of all outward
graces; an American, who, without ever having quitted his own
country, is Musician, Draftsman, Surveyor, Astronomer, Natural
Philosopher, Jurist, and Statesman . . . and finally a Philosopher."
Chastellux, a major general in Rochambeau's army, man of letters,
and member of the French Academy, was captivated by his host's
house and its setting and by the breadth of Jefferson's mind and
interests. "It seems indeed," he wrote, "as though, ever since his
youth, he had placed his mind, like his house, on«a lofty height,
— —
whence he might contemplate the whole universe." Chastellux also

mentioned Jefferson's "gentle and amiable wife" and their "charm-
ing children whose education is his special care," as he sought to
explain why Jefferson preferred to remain at Monticello rather
than accept a commission to Europe. Chastellux's visit to Monticello
came at a high moment of domestic felicity in Jefferson's life, sur-
rounded by a family to cherish, "a house to embellish, extensive es-
14
tates to improve, [and] the arts and sciences to cultivate." But it
turned out to be a fleeting moment. Before six months had passed,
Jefferson's private life had plummeted from the splendid moun-
taintop that Chastellux described to the depth of gloom and despair.
Less than a month after Chastellux left Monticello, Jefferson
recorded in his memorandum and account book on May 8, "Our
daughter Lucy Elizabeth (second of that name) born at one o'clock
a.m." The first Lucy Elizabeth had died in infancy little more than
15
a year earlier in April, 1781. That loss had been the third Jefferson
child (two daughters and one son) to die in infancy or early child-
hood, and the parents felt the grief particularly intensely, com-
ing as it did at a time of great public stress when the British were
threatening a second attack on Richmond. 16 The joy of the birth of
a second Lucy Elizabeth was muted by the weakness of her mother,
who in ten years had borne six children and repeatedly had suf-
fered difficult pregnancies and childbirths. On May 20 Jefferson
wrote to Monroe that "Mrs. Jefferson had added another daughter
to our family. She has been ever since and still continues very dan-
gerously ill." 17
Martha Jefferson never regained her health, and Jefferson
watched helplessly as her life slipped away. Years later his eldest
daughter, Martha, who was ten at the time and called Patsy, re-
membered that her father had constantly attended her mother
during this final illness. "For four months that she lingered he was
never out of Calling," she recalled. "When not at her bed side he
was writing in a small room which opened immediately at the head
of her bed." 18 Sometime during her declining months Martha
Jefferson copied, with slight modification, from Tristram Shandy the
poignant lines:
Time wastes too fast: every letter

I trace me with what
tell rapidity
life follows my pen. The days and hours
of it are flying over our heads like
clouds of windy day never to return

more every thing presses on
This much was in her own hand, but it was left to her devoted hus-
band to complete the passage:
and every time I kiss thy hand to bid adieu,

every absence which follows it,
are preludes to that eternal separation
I9
which we are shortly to make!
When Martha's faltering life came to an end on September 6,
1782, Jefferson's despondency was so intense as to excite the con-

cern of those about him. Years later Patsy recalled: "A moment be-
fore the closing scene, he was led from the room in a state of insen-
sibility by his sister, Mrs. Carr, who, with great difficulty, got him
into the library, where he fainted, and remained so long insensible
that they feared he never would revive." The ten-year old Patsy was
not allowed to witness what followed, but when she sneaked into his
room at night, she long remembered her shock at his emotion. Her
father stayed in his room three weeks, she recalled. "He walked al-
most incessantly night and day, only lying down occasionally, when
nature was completely exhausted, on a pallet that had been brought
in during his long fainting-fit." When at last he left his room, "he
was incessantly on horseback, rambling about the mountain, in the
least frequented roads, and just as often through the woods." Ac-
companying him on these "melancholy rambles," the young Patsy
found the scenes "beyond the power of time to obliterate." 20
It was a period of deep depression, and not until mid-October
did Jefferson find himself "emerging from that stupor of mind

which had rendered me as dead to the world as she was whose loss
occasioned it," he admitted in November. 21 By then his friends had
rallied to his rescue in an effort to draw him away from the scene of
his grief. Prompted by Madison, the delegates to the Continental
Congress unanimously voted to renew the appointment earlier
offered him as one of the ministers plenipotentiary for negotiating
22
a peace. Jefferson received the news of the appointment on No-
vember 25, accepted immediately, and a month later was in Phila-
delphia waiting for passage to France. "I had folded myself in the
arms of retirement, and rested all prospect of future happiness on
domestic and literary objects," he wrote to Chastellux on the same
day he accepted Congress' commission. "A single event wiped away
all my plans and left me a blank which I had not the spirits to fill
up." 23 Now Congress had provided him the challenge to fill that
void, and he seized it eagerly. The man who had quitted the gover-
nor's office in despair eighteen months earlier was back in public
service. His life again had meaning.
a
With the French frigate that was to carry him to France blocked
by ice below Baltimore, Jefferson spent his time in Philadelphia
studying documents in the Department of Foreign Affairs, attend-
ing meetings of the American Philosophical Society, and renewing
his friendship with James Madison. After a month he journeyed to
Baltimore to await the freeing of the frigate from the ice. 24 Soon
more than icedelayed his passage. British cruisers blocked the en-
trance to the Chesapeake. Meanwhile word reached America that a
provisional peace treaty had been signed in November, and Con-
gress decided to delay his mission. Jefferson returned to Phila-
delphia to await instructions, and on April 1, 1783, he was released
from the mission. However much he welcomed the news of peace,
he was disappointed in missing a trip to France that he had eagerly
anticipated. But he had now made the adjustment back into the
world of public affairs. He shortly returned to Virginia and im-
mersed himself in drafting proposals for a new constitution for the
commonwealth. His willingness to return to Philadelphia, however,
was not overlooked by his friends, and on June 6 the Virginia As-
sembly elected him a delegate to Congress for a term that was to
begin in November.
Jefferson had planned to take his daughter Patsy with him on the
canceled voyage to France, and he now made plans for her to ac-
company him to Philadelphia to continue her schooling there while
Congress was in session. His two younger children were left in Vir-
ginia in the care of his sister-in-law Elizabeth Wayles Eppes. As he
prepared to spend the next winter in Philadelphia, he learned that
Congress had decided to meet in Princeton. Nevertheless, he con-
tinued with arrangements for Patsy in Philadelphia, and they pro-
ceeded there in October before he went on to Princeton. No sooner
than he arrived in Princeton, Congress adjourned to meet three
weeks later in Annapolis.
This was the first Congress to meet after the peace treaty had
been signed, and the site of the meeting of Congress and the loca-
tion of the capital of the new nation were matters of intense interest
and political maneuvering. The move to Annapolis was part of the
effort to fix the seat of government south of Philadelphia at a more
centrally locatedsite, but this was only the beginning of a lengthy
competition that would not be settled until after a new Constitution

was adopted and George Washington was inaugurated as presi-
dent. Jefferson would later play an important role in the final bar-
gaining that placed the capital on the Potomac, but at this moment
he would have preferred that Congress meet in Philadelphia —
—
city whose cultural life he found attractive, where he had friends,

and where he could spend time with his daughter.
When Jefferson departed from Philadelphia for Annapolis at the
end of November, he left Patsy under the care of Mrs. Thomas
Hopkinson, the widowed mother of Francis Hopkinson, a fellow
signer of the Declaration of Independence. His children would
provide companionship for Patsy, who would also get to know the
children of David Rittenhouse, a man whose knowledge of astron-
omy her father admired so much. Jefferson himself would have
preferred to remain in this circle rather than to spend the winter in
Annapolis, but he left Philadelphia confident that he had procured
for Patsy "the best tutors in French, dancing, music, and drawing,"
and that she would be "more improved" there than with him in the
Maryland capital. 25
Once in Annapolis, Jefferson continued to worry about Patsy and
his responsibilities for her education. "The plan of reading which I
have formed for her is considerably different from what I think
would be most proper for her sex in any other country than Amer-
ica," he wrote to Marbois. "I am obliged in it to extend my views
beyond herself, and consider her as possibly at the head of a little
family of her own. The chance that in marriage she will draw a
blockhead I calculate at about fourteen to one, and of course that
the education of her family will probably rest on her own ideas and
direction without assistance. With the best poets and prosewriters I
shall therefore combine a certain extent of reading in the graver
sciences." Jefferson did not expect Patsy to accomplish of this in
all
a winter in Philadelphia, where her time would be occupied

chiefly
in acquiring a taste for such of the fine arts as she could not so
26
easily acquire in Virginia. It was clear that his daughter's future
and even that of anticipated future grandchildren was much in—

his mind during a lonely season in Annapolis. His stay there also
provided the occasion for the beginning of a remarkable series of
letters with his daughter —
letters that are immensely revealing of
his relationship with her and the heavy burden he placed upon her
to meet his expectations.
In his first letter tofrom Annapolis he sent her a schedule
Patsy
to follow in filling thehours of her days: from eight to ten in the
morning, "practise music"; from ten to one, "dance one day and
draw another"; from one to two, "draw on the day you dance, and
write a letter the next day"; from three to four, "read French";
from four to five, "exercise yourself in music"; from five until bed-
time, "read English, write, etc." He also made clear his fatherly ex-
pectations, beginning his letter by writing stiffly that "the acquire-

ments which I hope you will make under the tutors I have provided
for you will render you more worthy of my love, and if they cannot
increase it they will prevent it's diminution." He closed the letter by
declaring: "I have placed my happiness on seeing you good and ac-
complished, and no distress which this world can now bring on me
could equal that of your disappointing my hopes. If you love me
then, strive to be good under every situation and to all living crea-
tures, and to acquire those accomplishments which I have put in
your power, and which will go far towards ensuring you the warm-
27
est love of your affectionate father."
However well-meaning, this was a heavy charge to impose on an
eleven-year-old motherless child, and it reveals a theme that ran
through Jefferson's subsequent letters to Patsy, as it would be found
in letters to his daughter Mary, when she, too, reached the age of
letter writing. Repeatedly he reminded his daughters that they
should strive to be worthy of his love. That he loved his children
cannot be doubted, but he found it difficult to express that love,
and as a father he was demanding. In this earliest known letter to
Patsy, he told her that he expected her to write him by every post, to
tell him what books she had read and what tunes she had learned,
and to send him copies of her best drawings. He also urged her to
write to her aunts in Virginia and instructed her to watch her spell-
ing. As if this long lecture were not sufficient, he added a postscript:
"Keep my letters and read them at times that you may always have
present in your mind those things which will endear you to me." 28
That Patsy preserved these letters as her father directed is sug-
gestive of the bond that was early formed between them. Patsy
would strive to merit her father's love, and she would do so through-
out his long life.
The Congress of the Confederation in which Jefferson sat in An-

napolis in 1783 and 1784 was not so distinguished or influential a
body as the Continental Congress, of which he had been a member
in 1775 and 1776, but Jefferson witnessed in this session some of
the final acts of the events that the earlier Congress had set into
motion. He participated in the ratification by Congress of the de-
of peace, and he was present on December 23, 1783,
finitive treaty
when General Washington at a formal audience granted by Con-
gress resigned his commission as commander in chief in a dramatic
and symbolic ceremony. It was Jefferson who headed the commit-
tee of arrangements and drafted a response to Washington's ad-
dress. One eyewitness to the moving event reported that there was
hardly a member of Congress who did not shed tears as the general
bade an affectionate farewell to the Congress under whose orders
he had so long acted and took his leave of "all the employments of
public life." 29 No one could have anticipated at this moment that
thirteen years later Washington would make another, and even
more famous, farewell address upon leaving an office that then did
not even exist: the presidency of the United States. Jefferson was a
younger man than Washington, and he had recently returned to
public service, but he, too, must have viewed the events more as the
ending of an era than the beginning of a new one. Yet he was ever
forward-looking, and this was demonstrated in the major contribu-
tion that he made during the remaining months that he sat in the
Confederation Congress.
On March 1, 1784, Jefferson presented a committee report of a
plan for the government of the western territory already ceded, or
to be ceded, by the states to the United States. This report became
the basis of the Land Ordinance of 1784, an act that never went
into effect before being replaced by the Northwest Ordinance of
1787. It did, however, lay the foundation for that more famous act
and established the basic principles of American territorial policy.
Although Jefferson has sometimes been given credit for all of the
ideas in the report, he drew on considerable previous congressional
discussion of the issue. Congress did not adopt all of the proposals
in the report, but it confirmed the fundamental principle that the
western territories should be formed into distinct republican states
and admitted into the Union on the basis of equality with the origi-
nal thirteen states. This was not an idea that originated with Jeffer-
son, though he was one of its early proponents, having included a
similar provision in his draft of a constitution for Virginia in 1776.
In 1780 the Continental Congress had given preliminary approval
to a Virginia resolution introduced by Joseph Jones and James
Madison stating the same principle, but it had not then been finally
adopted. 30
In 1784 Jefferson proposed the creation of fourteen new western
states, though the exact number was not specified in the report,
which suggested names for ten. 31 His list included Saratoga and
Washington, but most of the names were Indian derivatives with
classical endings, among them Assenisipia, Cherronesus, and Peli-
sipia. The measure adopted specified neither the names nor the
exact number of states, but it included a modified version of Jeffer-
son's plan for two tiers of new states between the Atlantic coast
states and the Mississippi River, each new state covering two de-
grees of latitude from north to south. Under this projection, the
Ohio River would not have formed a state boundary line in the
westernmost tier of states, and all the territory both north and
south of that river was to be organized under the same provisions.
Because the Ordinance of 1784 was thus to apply to all of the west-
ern territory, the committee's proposal that after 1800 slavery be
prohibited there was of considerable importance. This provision,
however, failed to pass Congress. Jefferson and Hugh Williamson
of North Carolina were the only southern delegates to support it.
Later the principle would be revived in the Ordinance of 1787 and
prescribed for the territory north of the Ohio River. The plan of
government for the territories agreed to by Congress in 1784 pro-
vided for stages of territorial government, beginning with the right
of settlers to form a temporary government by adopting the con-
stitution and laws of any of the original states. When a territory
acquired twenty thousand free inhabitants, Congress would autho-
rize the calling of a constitutional convention to establish a perma-
nent republican government. Once the free population reached
the equivalent of that of the least numerous of the thirteen original
states, the state would be admitted into the Union on an equal foot-
ing with the original states. Thus the 1784 plan, unlike the later
Northwest Ordinance, provided for local self-government at every
32
stage. Even if we cannot credit Jefferson with originating all of the
ideas that went into the report that he drafted, his advocacy of it
showed his vision of an expanding nation of republican states and
his faith in western settlers to govern themselves.
Soon after preparing his report on western lands, Jefferson
wrote a report for a committee on the national debt, showing that
he was not so unprepared on that subject for his later battles with
Alexander Hamilton as he is sometimes seen. 33 At the same time he
was also working on proposals to make the dollar the American
unit of money and to apply, for the first time in history, the decimal
system of reckoning to coinage. The latter proposal was part of a
broader design to use the decimal system for weights and mea-
sures, but that proposition would not be brought forward until
later. Although in his autobiography Jefferson gave first place
among his principal legislative concerns in 1784 to the system of
coinage, his proposal did not actually come before Congress in that
session. A year later, Congress would adopt the principle of deci-
34
mal coinage, and it is understandable that he would look back upon

it as one of his chief legislative achievements, but the proposal had
not matured before he left the Congress early in May.

Jefferson's service in the Confederation Congress ended abruptly

when Congress on May 7, 1784, appointed him as minister pleni-
potentiary to join John Adams and Benjamin Franklin in Europe to
negotiate treaties of amity and commerce. Four days he left
later
Annapolis, closing a legislative career that during the preceding fif-
teen years had provided his most important political education and
produced some of his most lasting contributions to Virginia and to
the new nation. Though he could not anticipate it at the time, he
would not again sit in a legislative body, except to preside over the
Senate as vice-president, where he would not otherwise be involved
in the legislative process.
Within a week after his appointment, Jefferson was back in Phila-
delphia to pick up Patsy, who was to go with him to France. He did
not plan to return home before sailing and sent to Virginia for his
mulatto slave ("servant," he called him) James Hemings to come
to Philadelphia to accompany him to Europe. He also wrote to
William Short, a young Virginian and protege, to join him as his
private secretary, and he sent a power of attorney to Nicholas Lewis
of Albemarle County and Francis Eppes, husband of his late wife's
sister Elizabeth, in whose home his two younger daughters had
been living since his wife's death. 35 It would be three years before he
again saw his daughter Mary, then called Polly; she would join him
in Paris. He would never again see his youngest child, Lucy Eliza-
beth, who succumbed to the whooping cough a few months after
he left America.
Jefferson decided to sail to Europe from Boston partly because
he wanted to see New England. Never having been north of New
York City, he convinced himself that, before negotiating commer-
cial treaties, a tour of the eastern states would better enable him to
represent their interests. 36 With John Adams a member of the com-

mission, it was unlikely that New England's interests would be ne-
glected. In fact, Jefferson had been named to the commission to
ensure that southern interests had a voice in the negotiations. Yet it
is understandable that he would want to see his own country before
he saw Europe, and he was assiduous in collecting information in

New York and New England. On the way to Boston, he stopped in
New Haven and visited with Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale, who
recorded in his diary that he found Jefferson "a most ingenuous
Naturalist and Philosopher, a truly scientific and learned Man, and
every way excellent." 37 His route took him through Hartford, New
London, Newport, Providence, and smaller towns before reaching
Boston on June 18, and while waiting for passage, he made an ad-
ditional exploration along the coast and into New Hampshire. Back
in Boston on June 26, he sailed on the Ceres bound for London

early in the morning of July 5. He hoped to be set ashore on the
coast of France at Brest. 38
In addition to the instructions from Congress and the twenty
commissions to different countries for Adams, Franklin, and him-
self that he carried with him, he took the manuscript of his Notes on
Virginia and a catalog of his library. He also traveled with consider-
able other baggage, including his phaeton (for which he would hire
horses and postilions when he reached France), the skin of a large
panther (which he took to convince Buffon that animals in the New
World were not smaller than those in the Old World), and the re-
cently painted canvas of a portrait of George Washington by Joseph
Wright, completed just before he left Philadelphia. 39
The Atlantic crossing was exceptionally smooth and swift. Patsy
wrote that "we had a lovely passage in a beautiful new ship that had
only made one voyage before. There were only six passengers,
all of whom papa knew, and a fine sun shine all the way, with the
sea ... as calm as a river. I should have no objection at making an-

other voyage if I could be sure it would be as agreable as the first."
Her father, with his passion for meticulous observations, recorded
the latitude and longitude at noon each day and calculated the dis-
tance covered during the preceding twenty-four hours, along with
the direction of the wind and the temperature. 40 Nineteen days
after weighing anchor at Boston, the Ceres was in fifty fathoms of
water off the south coast of England. Jefferson's hope of being put
ashore on the French coast was not realized, and he went ashore
at West Cowes on July 26. He did not intend to tarry in England,
but after Patsy took ill at the end of the voyage, they stopped in
Portsmouth for several days. Jefferson summoned a physician and
nurses, and Patsy soon recovered her health, while he had his first
sights of England. On the evening of July 30 they took a boat across
the channel to Le Havre. After a miserable night cramped in a tiny
cabin and tossed about in rough seas, they arrived on the coast of
France at seven the next morning. 41
When Jefferson first set foot in France, a stranger in a foreign
land, was the beginning of a new experience that would bring
it
him closer to a culture that he had admired from a distance and

also expose him to its defects. He had no idea that it would be five
years before he would return to America, for he anticipated a mis-
sion of no more than two years; he obviously could not foresee the
momentous events that he would witness in France before he de-
parted for Virginia in the fall of 1789. It would be unlike any other
period in his Although sometimes lonely, he would come to ap-

life.
preciate the experience and cherish the memories. The years in

France were broadening and rewarding, but the pull of his own
country and his longing for Monticello remained undiminished,
and his appreciation of America was even more deeply enhanced.
VIII
The Scene of Europe
Jefferson arrived in Paris on August 6, 1784, six days after landing

at Le Havre, where he had endured those difficulties perennially
greeting visitors to that shore. Although he knew French, he had
difficulty making himself understood, and he was overcharged on
handling his baggage. He traveled to Paris in his phaeton with his
daughter Patsy and his servant James Hemings, a mulatto slave
whom he would emancipate a decade later. The unusual carriage
attracted attention everywhere along the route and was frequently
surrounded by beggars. Patsy counted nine at one stop to change
horses. They stayed two days in Rouen, then followed the road
along the Seine to Paris, "thro the most beautiful country I ever saw
in my life, it is a perfect garden," Patsy reported. She also com-
mented on the beautiful stained-glass windows in the cathedrals
they visited. Jefferson said nothing about the cathedrals, but he,
too, was captivated by the farming country along the Seine. "Noth-
ing can be more fertile, better cultivated or more elegantly im-
proved," he wrote. At Marly, near Paris, Jefferson paid to see the
celebrated Machine de Marly beside the Seine, where huge wooden
wheels raised water from the river and pumping stations carried it
to reservoirs on high ground.
1
In Paris, Jefferson first took lodgings at the Hotel d'Orleans ad-

joining the Palais Royal, but after a few days he transferred to an-
other hotel of the same name on the Left Bank. The first thing that
this father of a twelve-year-old daughter did upon arriving in Paris
was to outfit her in suitable clothes. Two days later he bought him-
self a pair of lace ruffles, and shortly thereafter he purchased a
sword and belt and began fitting himself out in the Paris fashion.
He also bought a map of Paris and was soon making his first pur-
chases of books. Jefferson promptly placed Patsy in a convent
school (the Abbaye Royale de Panthemont), where no one spoke
THE SCENE OF EUROPE gi
English, and she knew hardly a word of French. Though feeling

deserted at first, Patsy quickly learned the language and a year later
was writing that she was "charmed with my situation." Jefferson
said the school was "altogether the best in France, and at which the
best masters attend. There are in it as many protestants as Catho-
and not a word is ever spoken to them on the subject of reli-
lics,
gion."However, Patsy reported that during her first year she saw
two nuns take the veil. 2
In October, 1784, Jefferson leased a house in the Cul-de-sac
Taitbout, in the vicinity of the opera. He would remain there for
about a year before moving to the Hotel de Langeac bordering the
Champs-Elysees. In that stately and spacious town mansion, he
lived in greater style during his last four years in France. His house-
hold included David Humphreys, secretary to the American com-
mission, and William Short, his private secretary. After renting a
house, Jefferson had to buy furniture and furnishings and to in-
crease hisstaff. He soon had a sizable establishment, hired a car-
riage with two horses (which required a coachman), and found that
his "firstexpences or Outfit" exceeded his total initial year's salary. 3
Jefferson's first winter in Paris was trying. His health was poor,
and in January, 1785, Lafayette brought him the sad news from
Virginia that his youngest daughter, Lucy Elizabeth, had died. "I
have had a very bad winter," Jefferson wrote in March, "having
been confined the greatest part of it. A seasoning as they call it is
the lot of most strangers: and none I believe have experienced a
more severe one than myself." 4 By then the spring sun was improv-
ing his health and his spirits. He was walking four or five miles a
day and feeling much stronger.
In the summer of 1785, as his first year in France was ending,
Jefferson began to reflect on his reactions to Europe. Urging James
Monroe, who had read law with him while he was governor of Vir-
ginia, to pay him a visit in Paris, he insisted: "The pleasure of the
trip will be less than you expect but the utility greater. It will make
you adore your own country, it's soil, it's climate, it's equality, liberty,
laws, people, and manners. My god! How little do my country-
men know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and
which no other people on earth enjoy. I confess I had no idea of it
myself." 5
A few months later Jefferson expanded on his view of French so-
ciety. "Behold me at length on the vaunted scene of Europe!" he
wrote to Carlo Bellini, an Italian friend teaching at the College of
William and Mary. "You are perhaps curious to know how this new
scene has struck a savage of the mountains of America. Not advan-

tageously I assure you. I find the general fate of humanity here
most deplorable. The truth of Voltaire's observation offers itself
perpetually, that every man here must be either the hammer or the
anvil." The great mass of people were suffering under physical and
moral oppression, he felt, while among the privileged class "in-
trigues of love occupy the younger, and those of ambition the more
elderly part of the great." Domestic happiness as experienced in
America was unknown in France. In science, the mass of people
were two centuries behind Americans, "their literati half a dozen
years before us." This latter gap was not so bad, Jefferson reasoned,
because it gave time for all the nonsense that was published to be
weeded out before it reached America. Although he began with
negative comments, he concluded with positive reactions to French
society. He wished that Americans could imitate more the manners
of polite society. "Here it seems that a man might pass a life without
encountering a single rudeness." He commented favorably on
French temperance in drinking. "I have never yet seen a man
drunk in France, even among the lowest of the people." But he re-
served his highest praise for French culture. "Were I to proceed to
tell you how much I enjoy their architecture, sculpture, painting,
music, I should want words. It is in these arts they shine." Perhaps

the thing that he most envied, he said, was the opportunity the
French had to enjoy good music. 6
This observant, appreciative, yet intensely American visitor ex-
pressed similar sentiments to others, but he also found the good-
ness of the French people and the advantages of their country ne-
gated by "one single curse, that of a bad form of government." He
was convinced that of the twenty million people in France, nineteen
million were "more wretched, more accursed in every circumstance
of human existence, than the most conspicuously wretched individ-
7
ual of the whole United States."
Such commentaries are among the most interesting passages in
Jefferson's letters from France, but Jefferson had gone to France
not as a leisured observer of European society but as a working dip-
lomat to negotiate commercial treaties. As his collecting of data be-
fore leaving America indicated, he took his charge seriously, and
upon arriving in France, he devoted all of the energies he could
muster to that task. By the fall of 1784 he had versed himself on
existing treaties with France, the Netherlands, and Sweden and
8
drafted a model treaty for use in negotiating with other nations.
The details of the various negotiations that Adams, Franklin, and
THE SCENE OF EUROPE 93
Jefferson undertook — —
most of which were futile are not essential
to this account of Jefferson's life, but an analysis of his role in these
commercial negotiations yields several findings of broad relevance.
The documents show that Jefferson was assiduous and characteris-
tically systematic in preparing himself for the negotiations, that he
became highly versed in commercial matters, and that he sought to

use the negotiations to accomplish purposes broader than those of
commerce.
He saw the signing of commercial treaties as strengthening the
new and shaky union of American The only power the Con-
states.
federation Congress could exercise over commerce was through
itstreaty-making authority. "If therefore it is better for the states
that Congress should regulate their commerce, it is proper that
they should form treaties with all nations with whom we may pos-
sibly trade," he believed. No strict constructionist at this time, he
thought it essential for Congress to regulate commerce, confiding
to Monroe:
You see that my primary object in the formation of treaties is to take

the commerce of the states out of the hands of the states, and to place
it under the superintendance of Congress, so far as the imperfect pro-
visions of our constitution will admit, and until the states shall by a
new compact make them more perfect. I would then say to every na-
tion on earth, by treaty, your people shall trade freely with us, and ours
with you, paying no more than the most favoured nation, in order to
put an end to the right of individual states acting by fits and starts to
interrupt our commerce or to embroil us with any nation. 9
Jefferson's position placed him firmly on the side of those who

wished to strengthen the union of states and reform the constitu-
tional apparatus that so fragilely held them together. In addition to
this national goal, Jefferson also saw the negotiations as an oppor-
tunity to advance important international purposes by improving
the existing law of nations. He included in his model treaty an ar-
ticle to permit merchant vessels employed solely in carrying com-
merce between nations to sail unmolested in time of war and to

allow merchants of other countries at the outbreak of war to re-
main in an enemy country for nine months to collect their debts,
settle their affairs, and depart freely. The article also would shield
from war "all women and children, scholars of every faculty, cultiva-
tors of the earth, artizans, manufacturers and fisherman, unarmed,
and inhabitating unfortified towns, villages, or places; whose occu-
pations are for the common subsistence and benefit of mankind."
Another article provided for better treatment of prisoners of war.

Frederick the Great of Prussia approved of these enlightened terms,
but other powers held back. When the treaty with Prussia was the
only one completed, Jefferson's early hope of signing treaties with
many nations was rudely dispelled. "They seemed in fact to know
littleof us, but as rebels who had been successful in throwing off
the yoke of the mother country," he later recalled. "They were ig-
norant of our commerce, which had been always monopolized by
England, and of the exchange of articles it might offer advan-
tageously to both parties. They were inclined therefore to stand
aloof until they could see better what relations might be usefully
10
instituted with us." It soon became evident to him that commer-
cial negotiations would take far longer than he had anticipated.
Jefferson carried the manuscript of his Notes on the State of Virginia

with him when he went Before leaving the United States,
to France.
he completed the revision of the work, now "swelled nearly to
treble bulk." Originally planning to have a few copies printed in
Philadelphia to give to friends, he found printing costs there so ex-
pensive that he decided to defer it until he got to France. In Paris
he discovered that the cost of printing would be one-fourth that in
Philadelphia and ordered two hundred copies printed. 11
His intention still was to circulate the work privately. When the
book came from the printers in the spring of 1785, he began send-
ing copies to friends, along with notes cautioning them not to trust
the book to anyone who might make it public. 12 "My reason is," he
explained to Monroe, "that I fear the terms in which I speak of
slavery and of our constitution may produce an irritation which will
revolt the minds of our countrymen against the reformation of
these two articles, and thus do more harm than good."
13
He told
Chastellux that he had no objection to his making extracts for the
Journal de Physique, because these would not include his passages on
slavery and the constitution of Virginia.
It is my own country these strictures might produce an

possible that in
irritation which would indispose the people towards the two great
objects I have in view, that is the emancipation of their slaves, and
the settlement of their constitution on a firmer and more perma-
nent basis. If I learn from thence, that they will not produce that ef-
fect, I have printed and reserved just copies enough to be able to give
one to every young man at the College. It is to them I look, to the ris-
ing generation, and not to the one now in power for these great
reformations."
When Jefferson sought Madison's advice on the idea of distribut-

ing copies to the students at William and Mary, Madison conferred
with George Wythe and would dis-
replied that Jefferson's strictures
please some, but "we think both the facts and remarks which you
have assembled too valuable not to be made known, at least to those
for whom you destine them." Wythe suggested, however, that Jeffer-
son deposit the books in the library, rather than distribute them
among the students, which "might offend some narrow minded par-
ents." Meanwhile, Charles Thomson had written Jefferson of his
distress "that there should be such just grounds for your apprehen-
sion respecting the irritation that will be produced in the southern
states by what you have said of slavery. However I would not have
you discouraged. This is a cancer that we must get rid of." 15
Before Jefferson received either Madison's response or Thom-
son's letter, he was already doubting that he could limit the circula-
tion of the book. "I have been obliged to give so many of them here
that I fear their getting published," he confided. His fears were
soon realized after a copy got into the hands of a bookseller upon
the death of one recipient. When he tried to recover this copy, he
learned that the bookseller had hired a translator and was about
to publish "a very abominable translation." Under these circum-
stances he accepted the offer of Abbe Morellet, a member of the
French Academy and an acquaintance to whom Jefferson had pre-
sented a copy, to provide the translation. Despite Jefferson's super-
vision of the text, the result was undistinguished. 16
Once the book became public in France, an English edition
seemed certain to follow. Madison warned Jefferson that unless he
released the original text, the French translation would inevitably
be translated back into English and be published in both England
and America. Finding Morellet's version unsatisfactory and the
prospect of an English translation from it even worse, Jefferson au-
thorized the publication of an English edition by John Stockdale,
sending him a carefully corrected copy of the 1785 Paris edition
and the plate of a map that he had prepared for Morellet's edition.
In July, 1787, Stockdale published a superior edition, which would
be the basis for all subsequent editions published during Jefferson's
lifetime. Stockdale's edition was the first to carry the author's name
on the title page. 17
Jefferson was now publicly the author of an important book at-
tracting favorable attention, though he was still reluctant to ac-
knowledge its value. At the time of its first printing he reported
from Paris to Charles Thomson in Philadelphia that there was
nothing new in literature, "for I do not consider as having added

any thing to that field my own Notes." Corresponding with Stock-
dale about the English edition, he stressed that he had never in-
tended to make his Notes public, "because they are little interesting
to the rest of the world. But as a translation of them is coming out, I
have concluded to let the original appear also." Jefferson's depre-
catory tone was rejected by his contemporaries. In thanking him
for his copy, John Adams wrote that "it will do its Author and his
Country great Honour. The Passages upon Slavery, are worth Dia-
monds. They will have more effect than Volumes written by mere
Philosophers." Chastellux, who had been so much impressed with
Jefferson when he visited him at Monticello, called it "an excellent
memoir" and judged the sections on natural history and politics to
be especially valuable. 18 The Monthly Review of London gave the
book a mildly condescending notice, finding "much to applaud, as
well as some things to which we cannot afford a ready assent." The
Mercure de France, the leading periodical in the French capital, was
more enthusiastic, and Abbe Morellet wrote Franklin that Jeffer-
19
son's work had been very well received in Paris. Whatever Jef-
ferson's reservations —
which sprang in part from his not having
started out to write a book —
his Notes on Virginia established him as
a man of letters, student of natural history, scientist, and political
theorist on both sides of the Atlantic.
Early in 1785 Congress accepted the plea of the seventy-nine-year-

old Franklin to returnhome and elected Jefferson to succeed him
as minister to France. Jefferson received his commission on May 2,
and two weeks later he went be received by Louis
to Versailles to
XVI in an elaborate ritual that he described simply as "ceremonies
usual on such occasions." 20 John Adams, who had been appointed
as minister to England, was delighted that Jefferson was to remain
in Europe. Terming Jefferson's stationing in Paris as "a very for-
tunate Circumstance, both for me and the public," he called Jeffer-
son "an excellent Citizen, Philosopher and Statesman." 21 Jefferson
would stay at this post for the next four years, a distant spectator of
those important developments in America that culminated in the
drafting of the new Constitution of 1787 and its closely contested
ratification completed in the summer of 1788. Those momentous
changes taking place in his absence would be overshadowed by the
even more portentous events that shook Europe, for before he de-
parted for home in October, 1789, Jefferson would witness the dra-
matic opening incidents of the French Revolution.
As absorbed as Jefferson became in those events, America was al-

ways his firstconcern, and throughout his residence in France he
attempted to stay abreast of happenings at home. He early discov-
ered how difficult it was to obtain news from America, and he was
solicitous of his friends, especially Madison and Monroe, to keep
him informed. "Nothing can equal the dearth of American intelli-
gence in which we live here," he wrote after his first six months in
France. "I had formed no conception of it. We might as well be
in the moon."
22
To counter this, he made arrangements to have
American newspapers from different states sent to him by the
French packet that sailed from New York on the fifteenth of every
month, and he was careful to keep up his letter-writing contacts in
the United States.
Jefferson's initial concerns as minister to France were the same as
those that had occupied his attention as a commissioner charged
with negotiating treaties of amity and commerce: to promote the
independence and economic well-being of the United States. In his
autobiography Jefferson remarked that "my duties at Paris were
confined to a few objects; the receipt of our whale-oils, salted fish,
and salted meats on favorable terms, the admission of our rice on
equal terms with that of Piedmont, Egypt and the Levant, a mitiga-
tion of the monopolies of our tobacco by the Farmers-general, and
a free admission of our productions into their islands." While this
list modestly underestimated the importance of these issues and his
duties, Jefferson's recollection was accurate in emphasizing the pri-

macy of commercial concerns. 23
One of the major problems that required Jefferson's attention
and attracted his interest while in France was that of the Barbary
pirates. The documents that he carried with him from America au-
thorized the opening of negotiations with Morocco, Algiers, and
Tripoli, but early initiatives met with little success. A treaty with
Morocco at the relative low cost of thirty thousand dollars negoti-
ated by Thomas Barclay in 1787 was the only achievement. 24 The
basic problem remained unresolved. The states along the north
coast of Africa were accustomed to exacting tributes from most
of the nations whose ships sailed the Mediterranean. They en-
forced their demands by capturing ships and cargoes and holding
their crews for ransom. Americans found European governments
secretive about the amounts of tributes they were paying, but they
surmised that it was considerable and that the demands upon
the United States would be substantial — more money, Jefferson
thought, than the American people would be willing to pay. Be-
sides, the very idea of paying tribute rankled him. "When this idea
comes across my mind, my faculties are absolutely suspended be-
tween indignation and impotence," he remarked. He early favored
the use of military force over the paying of tribute to protect Ameri-
can commerce. This later opponent of navies suggested in 1 784 that
"we ought to begin a naval power, if we mean to carry on our own
commerce. Can we begin it on a more honourable occasion or with a
weaker foe? I am of opinion Paul Jones with a half dozen frigates
would totally destroy their commerce ... by constant cruising and
cutting them to pieces by piecemeal." It was his view that "if we wish
our commerce to be free and uninsulted, we must let these nations
see that we have an energy which at present they disbelieve." 25
Jefferson quickly recognized the advantages of joining some of
the Mediterranean states already at war with the Barbary states.
This led him to the idea of some sort of international force to
patrol the Mediterranean. In 1786 he brought forward a proposal
for a confederation to be managed by a council of the diplomatic
representatives of the cooperating powers. 26 Jefferson enlisted La-
fayette in support of the plan, and the latter became so committed
to the idea that he proposed himself as "a Chief to the Antipirati-
27
cal Confederacy." Because of differences between Jefferson and
Adams regarding dealing with the Barbary issue, Jefferson relied
on Lafayette to present the plan to John Jay and other Americans
and did not himself directly submit the proposal to Congress or its
secretary of foreign affairs. Jefferson later blamed Congress for
not providing the naval force necessary to participate in such a con-
federacy, but French Foreign Minister Vergennes told Lafayette
privately that the scheme was foredoomed to failure because of the
opposition of France and England. 28 The realities of eighteenth-
century political and commercial rivalries precluded the success of
the foresighted proposal, but Jefferson revived the idea when he
became secretary of state, though with no more success than he had
met with earlier. Later as president he would return to his original
position that the United States should employ a naval force against
the Barbary states, and as commander in chief he would success-
fully order such an expedition.
Negotiations initiated by Adams in London with Tripoli and Por-
tugal prompted Jefferson to accede to Adams' request that he come
to London in the spring of 1786. He also undertook the trip with
the dim hope of joining Adams in negotiating a commercial treaty
with Creat Britain before the expiration of their two-year commis-
sion. Nothing came of the negotiations with Tripoli. A treaty was
signed with the Portuguese ambassador but rejected by his govern-

ment, and the British never even agreed to begin talking alto- —
gether a fruitless diplomatic mission. The six-week stay in England
was Jefferson's longest sojourn in the land of his ancestors and fixed
in his mind impressions that would throughout his life. These
last
impressions were not favorable. When presented to the king and

queen, he sensed that "it was impossible for anything to be more
ungracious than their notice of Mr. Adams and myself." At the first
conference with the minister of foreign affairs, he found that "the
vagueness and evasions of his answers to us, confirmed me in the
29
belief of their aversion to have anything to do with us."
The evasions and excuses of the British about beginning talks
left Jefferson with considerable free time. He had leisure to sit for a
portrait — the first ever to be taken of him —
by Mather Brown, who
had recently painted John Adams. With time to travel he made
a trip to see Windsor Castle. Later he and Adams made an ex-
tended tour of the gardens of England, stopping along the way to
see the colleges at Oxford and to visit Shakespeare's birthplace at
Stratford-on-Avon. 30 The gardens were the sights that Jefferson
most enjoyed in England, and he walked through them carrying a
copy of Thomas Whately's Observations on Modern Gardening (1770)
and jotting down in a notebook his own impressions and critiques. 31
The inquiries that he made about the expenses of maintaining such
gardens and other practical considerations showed that he was
thinking about how he might apply what he saw to Monticello.
Some of his comments were critical. He found the gardens at
Hampton Court "old fashioned"; at Chiswick "the garden shows
still too much of art; an obelisk of very ill effect"; at Stowe "the Co-
rinthian arch has a very useless appearance." But he found the

clumps of trees at Esher-Place "a most lovely mixture of concave
and convex," a beautiful Doric temple at Paynshill, and elsewhere
he mixed approving comments with criticisms. His overall verdict
was that gardening in England "surpasses all the earth. .This
. .
indeed went far beyond my ideas." 32

On the other hand, while finding the city of London handsomer
than Paris, he thought it not so handsome as Philadelphia. "Their
architecture is in the most wretched stile I ever saw, not meaning to
except America where it is bad, nor even Virginia where it is worse
than in any other part of America, which I have seen." In compar-
ing England and France, he judged the soil better in France, the
laboring people better off in England. He admired the British for
their "wonderful perfection" in the mechanical arts. Although he
lOO IN PURSUIT OF REASON
found some good things to say about their country, he left England
convinced that "that nation hates us, their ministers hate us, and
33
their king more than all other men."
Jefferson was more restrained in his official report to Jay, but the
verdict was the same. "The nation is against any change of mea-
sures; the ministers are againstit, some from principle, others from
subserviency; and the king more than all men is against it." Because
George III might be expected to have a long reign, Jefferson saw
little hope for any improvement in the near future. "Even the op-
position dares not open their lips in favor of a connection with

us, so unpopular would be the topic. It is not that they think our
commerce unimportant to them. I find that the merchants here set
sufficient value on it. But they are sure of keeping it on their
own terms." The British believed their commerce indispensable to
America, he wrote to several correspondents. "They think we can-
not unite to retaliate upon them. I hope we can, and that we shall
exclude them from carrying our produce, if not suppress their
commerce altogether." 34 Jefferson thus returned to Paris more con-
vinced than ever of the necessity of expanding and improving com-
mercial relations with France and more keenly conscious of the im-
portance of the task still before him in the French capital.
IX
Romantic Interlude
and New Adventures
In London Jefferson met John Trumbull, a thirty-year-old aspiring

American artist who had studied with Benjamin West. The son of
former governor Jonathan Trumbull of Connecticut, he had served
on Washington's staff early in the Revolutionary War and was now
planning a series of historical paintings of the Revolution a project —
that Jefferson encouraged him to pursue. Jefferson's enthusiasm
for the fine arts and his characteristic hospitality prompted him to
invite Trumbull to visit him in Paris and to make hishome with him
1
while in France.
The American minister was already directly involved in employ-
ing the fine arts to perpetuate the achievements of the Revolution,
having recently carried out a request of the Virginia legislature to
commission a statue of General Washington. He had done this in a
way that demonstrated his knowledge of the arts and his desire to
advance their appreciation in America. The Virginia Assembly
would have been satisfied with a statue taken from a painting of
Washington, but Jefferson sought out an artist whose reputation
was unrivaled in Europe, and engaged Jean-Antoine Houdon to
journey to America to make a plaster model of Washington's bust
from life and take the necessary measurements to complete the
marble statue in Paris. In justification of the expense of Houdon's
trip to America, Jefferson told the governor of Virginia that no
statue of Washington providing "true evidence of his figure to pos-
terity" could be made from a picture. In seeking the cooperation of
Washington for the sittings, he said that Houdon enjoyed "the
reputation of being the first statuary in the world." 2 Washington
obligingly sat for Houdon at Mount Vernon in October, 1785, and
when Houdon returned to Paris with the plaster bust, Jefferson ex-
pressed great pleasure with the result. 3 He himself would sit for
Houdon in 1789 before leaving France.
a
Jefferson's encouragement of Trumbull was a different sort of re-

lationship than his commissioning of Houdon, who already was in
demand in the courts of Europe, but in each case Jefferson played a
role in amajor artistic achievement commemorating the American
Revolution. Houdon's marble statue of Washington stands today in
the Virginia Capitol, and the life-size version of Trumbull's painting
of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, completed in
1818, hangs in the rotunda of the United States Capitol.
It was at the Hotel de Langeac, where the young Trumbull took
up temporary residence as part of the American minister's house-

hold in late summer of 1786, that Trumbull drew the first sketches
for The Declaration of Independence. Jefferson himself sketched a
rough floor plan of the room in Independence Hall and assisted
the artist in forming the composition of the painting depicting the
drafting committee and the other signers. Trumbull made his first
sketch of the famous painting on the same sheet of paper that
Jefferson used to sketch the plan of the room. 4 Trumbull's ambition
to draw all of the portraits of the surviving signers from life meant
that it would be years before the painting was completed, but one
of the first figures to be painted on the canvas was Jefferson, whom
Trumbull painted from life in late 1787 or early 1788. 5
The portrait of the tall, vigorous Virginian with unpowdered
hair in the prime of life, the central figure in Trumbull's painting,
would provide posterity with an indelible image. But Jefferson
would best remember Trumbull, not as the painter of historical
scenes, but as the friend who introduced him to Maria Cosway —
young Englishwoman who would upset and enliven his ordered life
as no one had done in the four years since the death of his wife.
Maria Cosway was young, cultivated, and charming, but also mar-
ried. Trumbull introduced them in August of 1786 and provided
the link to join Jefferson with Trumbull's circle of artists and friends
of the arts that Jefferson later would refer to as "our charming co-
terie in Paris." The group included Jacques-Louis David — whose
painting Jefferson admired greatly — Houdon and young wife,
his
several talented amateurs, and Mr. and Mrs. Richard Cosway of
London, like Trumbull visitors to the city. 6
A successful painter of widely popular miniatures, Richard Cos-
way was about Jefferson's age, well established but, from all reports,
far from handsome —
small, foppish, and somewhat eccentric. His
wife, Maria, then twenty-seven, had been born in Florence of En-
glish parents. Educated in Italy and early exposed to music and art,
she was talented in both. Having learned Italian as her native
ROMANTIC INTERLUDE AND NEW ADVENTURES IO3
tongue, she spoke English with an appealing accent but was never
comfortable writing in English. After the death of her father, her
mother had returned with her family to London, where the beau-
tiful and talented Maria two years later, at age twenty-two, married
the rich and successful Richard Cosway. Their home became a

7
popular salon, but the marriage was not a happy one. 8 When the
Due d'Orleans invited Cosway to Paris to paint the duchesse and
her children in the summer of 1786, the Cosways became close
friends of Trumbull's, and their paths soon crossed with that of the
American minister. 9
Jefferson would vividly remember the day that he met Maria
Cosway. He had gone to see the Halle aux Bleds, a large municipal
grain market covered by a huge dome — a structure that attracted
because he was considering plans for a public market in
his interest
Richmond. He was overjoyed with "this wonderful piece of archi-
tecture," but his interest soon shifted to the party to whom Trum-
bull introduced him. His eyes fixed upon Maria Cosway, and the
noble dome and superb arches of the Halle aux Bleds shrank into
insignificance. The forty-three-year-old widower was swept off his
well-planted feet by the beautiful and charming young Maria. He
saw in her all the ideals that he associated with feminity "music,
—
modesty, beauty, and that softness of disposition which is the orna-
ment of her sex and charm of ours." He contrived to join the party
for dinner, sending off a messenger to the Duchesse d'Enville say-
ing that dispatches had arrived requiring his immediate attention
and forcing him to break his dinner engagement. After dining to-
gether, the new group rode to Saint-Cloud, made other stops, and
Jefferson later confessed to contriving to extend the day as long as
possible. The adventures of the day were never to be forgotten.
"How well I remember them all," he told Maria, "and that when I
came home at night and looked back to the morning, it seemed to
have been a month agone." 10
This was only the beginning of a month of nearly constant going.
Trumbull recalled that Jefferson joined the party of friends almost
daily, exploring the artistic treasures of Paris and nearby points of
interest. Richard Cosway, busy with his painting, was apparently
absent from many of the excursions, and with Maria at his side
Jefferson found every scene enchanting. He recalled the day they
went to Saint-Germain. "How beautiful was every object! the Port
de Neuilly, the hills along the Seine, the rainbows of the machine of
Marly, the terras of Saint-Germains, the chateaux, the gardens, the
[statues] of Marly. . Every moment was filled with something
. .
agreeable. The
wheels of time moved on with a rapidity of which
those of our carriage gave but a faint idea, yet in the evening, when
one took a retrospect of the day, what a mass of happiness had we
11
travelled over!"
Jefferson was completely infatuated with Maria, so much in love,
his letters toher suggest, that he no longer felt middle-aged. At the
height of his exhilaration he was led into "one of those follies from
which good cannot come, but ill may," as he expressed it. Strolling
along a promenade by the Seine, he attempted to jump over a
fence, came crashing to the ground, and dislocated his right wrist. 12
The wrist was poorly set, and he was still suffering painfully from it
when the Cosways left to return to London some two weeks later on
October 5. Still, he accompanied them outside Paris to Saint-Denis,
shared a farewell meal, and saw them off in their carriage. "More
dead than alive," he returned to Paris. 13
There, writing tediously with his left hand, he penned one of the
most remarkable letters of his long life. Addressed to Maria and
filling twelve laboriously transcribed pages, the letter took the form
of a dialogue between his head and his heart. When his heart
spoke, it expressed his joy in throwing reason to the wind and pur-
suing the fleeting days of happiness with Maria. He confessed his
follies but admitted that he cherished the memories. On the days
that they had passed together, he wrote,
the sun shone brightly! How gay did the face of nature appear! Hills,
vallies, chateaux, gardens, rivers, every object wore it's liveliest hue!
Whence did they borrow it? From the presence of our charming com-
panion. They were pleasing, because she seemed pleased. Alone, the
scene would have been dull and insipid: the participation of it with her
gave it relish. Let the gloomy Monk, sequestered from the world, seek
unsocial pleasures in the bottom of his cell! Let the sublimated phi-
losopher grasp visionary happiness while pursuing phantoms dressed

in the garb of truth! Their wisdom is supreme folly: and they mistake
for happiness the mere absence of pain. Had they ever felt the solid
pleasure of one generous spasm of the heart, they would exchange for
14
it all the frigid speculations of their lives.
When his head spoke, it reminded him of its warning that "you
were imprudently engaging your affections under circumstances
that must cost you a great deal of pain," that he might never see
Maria again, and that his dream that he might show her the sights
of America was fanciful. "The art of life is the art of avoiding pain,"
his reason told him. "The most effectual means of being secure
ROMANTIC INTERLUDE AND NEW ADVENTURES IO5
against pain is and to suffice for our own

to retire within ourselves,
happiness. Those, which depend on ourselves, are the only plea-
sures a wise man will count on. Hence the inestimable value of
. . .
intellectual pleasures." It was his heart, however, that had the last
word. "I feel more fit for death than life," he wrote. "But when I
look back on the pleasures of which it is the consequence, I am con-
scious they were worth the price I am paying." He hoped that
Maria would return to Paris in the spring. 15
If Maria could not be quite certain from Jefferson's lengthy and
complex dialogue whether the head or the heart had won the argu-
ment, so too have historians seen the dialogue in different lights.
Julian Boyd was convinced that the letter demonstrated that "rea-
son was not only enthroned as the chief disciplinarian of his life,
but also . . was itself a sovereign to which the Heart yielded a
.
ready and full allegiance, proud of its monarch and happy in his
rule." On the other hand, Dumas Malone wrote that "the most sig-
nificant conclusion that emerges from the dialogue is that this
highly intellectual man recognized in human life the superior claims
of sentiment over reason." 16 The words of the dialogue support Ma-
lone's conclusion, but the outcome of the relationship demonstrated
that reason ultimately prevailed in ordering Jefferson's life.
When he closed the dialogue, he seemed determined to pursue
the relationship with Maria. "God only knows what is to happen,"
his heart told him. "I see things wonderfully contrived sometimes
to make us happy." His letters to her were affectionate and warm,
though none was so long, so ebullient, nor so introspective as his
initial dialogue. On Christmas Eve of 1786 he wrote her that if he
could fly, he would fly to her side and not wish to leave. "If I cannot
be with you in reality, I will in imagination," he said. 17 By then he
had received three letters from Maria since her return to London.
She seems to have been taken aback by his dialogue and found her-
self so uncomfortable in trying to express herself in English that
she reverted to writing in Italian. The modern reader may sense
that her letters conveyed to Jefferson less reason for encourage-
ment than his letters to her, but he refused to give up hope of
seeing her in the spring. 18 "I had rather be deceived, than live with-
out hope," he confessed. "Think of me much, and warmly. Place
me in your breast with those who you love most: and comfort me
with your letters." Maria responded with a long letter holding out
hope that she would be able to visit Paris in the summer. 19
Carrying on a correspondence with Maria presented problems
to Jefferson that Maria never fully appreciated. All letters of the
lo6 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
American minister sent through the mail were opened by the French
post office before they left France and read by British officials be-
fore they were delivered in England. Thus Jefferson had to find
trusted private persons, such as John Trumbull, to carry his let-
ters to London and deliver them to Maria, and he could only have
been disappointed that she devoted so much space in her letters
to reproaching him for neglecting to write to her. But if their
trans-Channel communications were less than satisfying to either
of them, Jefferson eagerly looked forward to Maria's return to
Paris, and she, often melancholy during the bleak winters of Lon-
— —
don "the air darkened by the fog and smoke" was anxious to
return to the sunshine of Paris. After Jefferson received Maria's
letter indicating that it would be summer before there was any
prospect of her getting to Paris, he left on a trip to the south of
France and northern Italy at the end of February and did not re-
turn to Paris until June. It was July 1 before he wrote to Maria, who
was clearly upset by his long silence, though his letter was a warm
one. "Why were you not with me?" he asked. "So many enchanting
scenes which only wanted your pencil to consecrate them to fame."
When was she coming to Paris? he wanted to know. 20
After scolding him for neglecting her, Maria replied that she
feared she would be unable to come. "My husband begins to doubt
just at the time when one should begin to prepare to leave. You
it,
cannot believe how much this uncertainty displeases me, when I

have everything to fear against my desire." The next reference to
Maria's summer plans found in Jefferson's papers is in a letter from
Trumbull from London on August 28, saying that "be-
to Jefferson
fore this reaches you, Mrs. Cosway will be with you." Trumbull was
sorry that he could not be there at the same time. Shortly afterward
21
Jefferson confirmed that Maria had arrived in Paris. She had
come alone. What had happened in the Cosway household is not
known. Under what circumstances she left or what her husband
thought of it is not known. But she was in Paris, and both she and
Jefferson must have anticipated repeating the joys of the preced-
ing summer. This was not to be. We can only speculate as to the
reasons.
We know that she spent time with Jefferson and that they re-
turned to some of the places they had visited the year before.
There is also the hint in one of her notes to him before leaving
Paris that Jefferson had discreetly sought to arrange for them to be
alone when she had visited him at his house. But something went
wrong that second summer; whether it was from Jefferson's recov-
ROMANTIC INTERLUDE AND NEW ADVENTURES 107
ery from his earlier infatuation or from Maria's unwillingness to

pursue the relationship further can only be surmised. In Novem-
ber Jefferson confided to Trumbull that he had not seen Maria as
much as he had expected. "From the meer effect of chance, she has
happened to be from home several times when I have called on
her, and I, when she called on me." Maria herself told Jefferson
that "if my inclination had been your law I should have had the
pleasure of seeing you more than I have." Jefferson on the other
hand felt that she was putting obstacles to their seeing each other
in private. She was staying with her friend Princess Lubomirski,
whose house was some distance from Jefferson's Hotel de Langeac,
and she seemed more interested in being a part of a fashionable
salon than escaping with Jefferson to Saint-Cloud. Jefferson later
referred to her being "surrounded by a numerous cortege" and his
being able to see her "only by scraps." "The time before we were
half days, and whole days together, and I found this too little," he
wrote her after she returned to London. 22
Jefferson's sense of a growing gulf between them may be ex-
plained by Maria's own ambivalence about what she was doing.
There seems little doubt that her marriage to Richard Cosway was
an unhappy one, but she was totally dependent upon him for fi-
nancial support, and she was a devout Catholic who had earlier
considered becoming a nun. She might have grasped Jefferson as a
replacement for her father, and when it was clear that Jefferson
would not be satisfied with such a relationship, she was unsure of
herself. Marie Kimball saw Maria Cosway 's letters as evidence of "a
spoiled, egocentric young woman, with a very limited emotional ca-
pacity." Fawn Brodie, willing to carry speculation even further,
guessed "some kind of crucial failure for Maria in the act of love." 23
Historians do not have enough evidence to probe very deeply into
the intimate relationship between Jefferson and Maria Cosway, but
after she left Paris in December, 1787, Jefferson would never see
her again. Some letters passed between them, and she implored
him to come to London, but he never did. He had let his heart
reign for a period; now his head reclaimed its dominance.
When Jefferson left Paris on the last day of February, 1 787, on his
long-delayed trip to the south of France, he did not intend so ex-
tensive a tour as he ultimately made. On the way he decided to go
on to northern Italy and did not return to Paris until the second
week of June. It turned out to be the longest trip he ever took. The
— —
immediate occasion or at least official justification for the jour-
ney was to try the mineral waters at Aix-en-Provence to strengthen
his crippled right wrist. Concerned that, five months after his acci-
dent, he could not use his wrist for anything except writing, Jeffer-
son was ready to follow the advice of his surgeon to try the waters,
though he placed no great faith in their restorative powers. In-
deed, he chose Aix-en-Provence from several places suggested to
—
him because it was located near Marseilles close enough "to take
the tour of the ports concerned in commerce with us, to examine
on the spot defects of the late regulations respecting our com-
merce, [and] to learn further improvements which may be made on
it." Promoting American trade with France had the highest priority
in his diplomacy. In his view "nothing should be spared on our part

to attach this country to us. It is the only one on which we can rely
for support under every event." When Jefferson's daughter Martha
told him that she was inclined to think that his trip was more for
pleasure than for health, she was only partly correct. 24 Had she
been aware of her father's diplomatic efforts, she would have in-
cluded commerce as a reason more compelling than the hope of
restoring strength to his wrist.
Heading southeast from Paris through Fontainebleau and Sens
to Dijon, where he stopped for two days, Jefferson turned south
toward Lyon. 25 The weather was miserable. Pelted with rain, hail,
and snow, with only "a few gleamings of sunshine to chear me by
the way," he welcomed a stop at the Chateau de Laye-Epinaye, and
he was glad to reach the Hotel du Palais Royal in Lyon for a four-
day stay. He had left Paris without a servant, planning to hire one at
each principal city to accompany him to the next. He believed that
"having servants who know nothing of me, places me perfectly at
ease," and it also helped him avoid the official recognition and en-
tertainment that his identity as the American minister to France
would have produced. He had been unable to get a servant at Fon-
tainebleau as he had intended, but at Dijon he got one who pleased
him so much that he decided to retain him throughout the journey.
He traveled in his own carriage and used post horses, stopping
along the way to see the sights and only occasionally visiting the
chateau of a French nobleman to whom he carried an introduction.
"To make the most of the little time I have for so long a circuit, I
have been obliged to keep myself rather out of the way of good din-
ners and good company," he wrote after five weeks on the road.
"Had they been my objects, I should not have quitted Paris. I have
courted the society of gardeners, vignerons, coopers, farmers etc.
and have devoted every moment of every day almost, to the busi-
ness of enquiry." He had found particularly useful his letters of
ROMANTIC INTERLUDE AND NEW ADVENTURES log
introduction to abbes. "They are unembarrassed with families,

uninvolved in form and etiquette, frequently learned, and always
obliging," he told Chastellux, who had furnished him with many of
his letters of introduction. 26
In his first report on his travels to William Short, written from
Lyon, he said that he had derived as much satisfaction and delight
from his journey as he could have anticipated. "Architecture, paint-
ing, sculpture, antiquities, agriculture, the condition of the la-
bouring poor fill all my moments." He
was a close observer of the
countryside, constantly comparing it He thought
with Virginia.
Burgundy "resembles extremely our red mountainous country, but
is rather more stony, all in corn and vine." In Beaujolais, he felt
"nature has spread it's richest gifts in profusion." The plains of the
Saone were the richest country he had ever seen. 27
From Lyon to Nimes the classical-trained Virginian was "nour-
ished with the remains of Roman grandeur," as he wrote excitedly
from Nimes, where for the first time he saw the Maison Carree.
"Here I am, Madam, gazing whole hours at the Maison quarree,
like a lover at his mistress," he wrote to Madame de Tesse. Jeffer-
28
son had fallen in love with that ancient Roman structure from
drawings and paintings. He considered it as "the best morsel of an-
cient architecture now remaining" and had copied it for the plans
of the Virginia State Capitol. The year before visiting Nimes, he
had had a plaster model made and shipped to Virginia. At the very
moment that he stood in awe before the original building, construc-
tion of the Capitol in Richmond was under way. 29
Jefferson reached Aix-en-Provence on March 25 and decided
after four days that the waters were not helping his wrist. He was,
however, delighted with the climate. "I am now in the land of corn,
wine, oil, and sunshine," he wrote. "What more can man ask of
heaven?" Being able to receive the waters of Aix in Marseilles daily,
he proceeded on to the coast. He found Marseilles charming. "All
life and activity, and a useful activity like London and Philadel-
phia." he preferred the countryside. "In the great cities, I go
Still,
to see what travellers think alone worthy of being seen; but I make
a job of it, and generally gulp it all down in a day," he admitted to
Lafayette. "On the other hand, I am never satiated with rambling
through the fields and farms, examining the culture and the culti-
vators, with a degree of curiosity which makes some take me to be a
fool, and others to be much wiser than I am." 30
The American minister reported to Jay from Marseilles that he
had informed himself about all matters that might be interesting to
HO IN PURSUIT OF REASON
American commerce and that he had also sought to discover why

Piedmont rice was preferred over Carolina rice. He had heard in
Paris that the Italians used a different cleaning machine that left
their grain less broken than the American product. His inquiries in
Marseilles led him to believe that he would find the Piedmont rice
fields just beyond the Alps and be able to see the machines used for
cleaning. He thus decided to extend his journey to include north-
ern Italy. When he got to Nice, he learned that the rice fields were
farther away than he thought, and he ultimately discovered that
Piedmont was actually grown in Lombardy. Once he had com-
rice
mitted himself to the venture, he never turned back, however, and
—
he set out to cross the Maritime Alps an adventure this lover of
the mountains of Virginia would never forget. 31 Jefferson was over-
whelmed by the grandeur of the Alps, and he urged other Ameri-
can travelers to discover the majesty of the crossing through the
Tende Pass. In his notes Jefferson described the setting of the Cha-
teau of Saorgo as "the most singular and picturesque I ever saw.
The castle and village seem hanging to a cloud in front. On the
right is a mountain cloven through to let pass a gurgling stream; on
the left a river over which is thrown a magnificent bridge. The
whole forms a bason, the sides of which are shagged with rocks,
32
olive trees, vines, herds etc."
Jefferson stopped in Turin and in Milan, but in his travel notes
he recorded, as he had in France, his most detailed observations
about the countryside. He showed nearly as much interest in cheese-
making in Italy as he did in wine-making in France, though he did
not neglect Italian wine either. When the Virginia farmer reported
on his trip to George Wythe in Williamsburg, he said that he found
much pleasure in Italian architecture, painting, and sculpture "but
more than all in their agriculture, many objects of which might
be adopted with us to great advantage." 33 In the neighborhood of

Vercelli he found the rice fields and was able to inspect the rice-
cleaning machines. To his surprise, he discovered that they were
like the machinery that Edward Rutledge had described to him as
being in use in South Carolina. Only one conclusion was to be
drawn: the rice was of a different species. Despite a law that pro-
hibited the exportation of seed rice on pain of death, Jefferson was
determined to smuggle some out of the country, and he paid a
muleteer to run a couple of sacks across the Apennines to Genoa.
Having no faith that he would ever see this, however, he filled his
—
own coat pockets with rice from Vercelli the best grown and —
carried it out himself. 34
ROMANTIC INTERLUDE AND NEW ADVENTURES 111
As he did in all the cities that he visited, Jefferson bought a

guidebook to Milan and saw the sights. He was particularly im-
pressed by the architecture and embellishments of several im-
pressive houses and said that the salon of the Casa Belgioioso was
superior to anything else that he had seen. He pronounced the
35
Cathedral of Milan "a worthy object of philosophical contempla-

tion, to be placed among the rarest instances of the misuse of
money. Onviewing the churches of Italy it is evident without cal-
culation that the expence would have sufficed to throw the Appen-
nines into the Adriatic and thereby render it terra firma from
36
Leghorn to Constantinople."
Jefferson returned to France by way of Genoa. "I scarcely got
he wrote. "I calculated the hours it would
into classical ground,"
have taken to carry me on to Rome. But they were exactly so many
more than I had to spare." He had to be content with "a peep only
into Elysium." Journeying along the Italian Riviera between Luano
and Albenga, he reflected that "if any person wished to retire from
their acquaintance, to live absolutely unknown, and yet in the midst
of physical enjoiments, it would be in some of the little villages of
this coast, where air, earth and water concur to offer what each has
most precious." 37
By May 4 Jefferson was back in Marseilles ready to continue his
tour of the principal French seaports with which Americans traded.
Before returning to Paris he planned to visit the Atlantic ports of
Bordeaux, Nantes, and Lorient. Another long-projected plan to —
inspect the canal of Languedoc —
fitted neatly into this itinerary.
That complicated waterway, built during the reign of Louis XIV to
connect the Mediterranean with the Atlantic, had long been an ob-
ject of great interest to him. Even before dislocating his wrist, he
had planned a trip to southern France to see the canal in order to
gather information for Americans who might undertake canal
building. 38
Jefferson entered the waterway at Cette (Sete) on the Mediterra-
nean and followed it the entire two hundred miles by water to the
canal'swestern terminus at Toulouse, where the Garonne River

connected it to the Atlantic. He spent nine days on the trip,
minutely examining the canal and making elaborate notes, with de-
tailson the locks, their distances from each other, their fall of
water, and other information. 39 It was a trip that this observant
traveler enjoyed intensely. He had the wheels removed from his
carriage, placed the carriage on the deck of a light canal barge, and
was towed along the canal, proceeding at his own speed and sleep-
ing ashore. "Of all the methods of travelling I have ever tried this is
the pleasantest," he reported. "I walk the greater part of the way
along the banks of the canal, level, and lined with a double row of
treeswhich furnish shade. When fatigued I take seat in my carriage
where, as much at ease as if in my study, I read, write, or observe.
My carriage being of glass all round, admits a full view of all the
varying scenes thro' which I am shifted, olives, figs, mulberries,
vines, corn and pasture, villages and farms." At one point, he was
treated to a double row of nightingales in full song along the banks
of the canal. 40
From Toulouse, Jefferson traveled to Bordeaux through wine
country that attracted the same close attention as his trip through
Burgundy. His detailed notes show that he had become an expert
on almost every aspect of wine production. As he continued on
from Bordeaux to Nantes and into Brittany to visit the seaport at
Lorient, he persisted, as he had throughout his long journey, in re-
cording detailed notes on the geography, the soil, the crops, and
the conditions of the laboring men and women. When he reached
Paris on June 10, he had enough notes to write a book. He had
enjoyed the adventure tremendously, and he told his secretary,
William Short, that the fellow Virginian should not think of return-
ing to America without taking such a tour. 41 Jefferson said he had
"never passed three months and a half more delightfully. ... I was
alone thro the whole, and think one travels more usefully when
they travel alone, because they reflect more." 42 One surmises that
the satisfaction that he received from the months of roaming alone
through France and Italy must have played some part in the more
restrained attitude that he displayed toward Maria Cosway after he
returned to Paris. The long journey may not have helped Jefferson's
injured wrist, but it raised his spirits immensely.
X
Witness to Revolution in France
Less than three weeks after returning to Paris —

and before he had
—
caught up on all of his work Jefferson received word from Abigail
Adams that hisyounger daughter, Mary (then called Polly), had ar-
rived safely from Virginia and was waiting for him at the Adamses'
house in London. This was an event to which Jefferson had been
1
looking forward for nearly two years. After he succeeded Franklin

as minister to France in 1785 and could expect to remain in Europe
beyond the two years of his original commission, he wrote to Vir-
ginia for Polly to be sent to him. His instructions, designed to en-
sure the best and safest possible voyage for the child, were explicit.
She should sail from Virginia aboard a good vessel during the
months of April, May, June, or July only. The ship must have made
at least one Atlantic crossing and not be more than five years old.
Most ships that were lost at sea, Jefferson believed, were either on
their first voyage or over five years old. Polly might be entrusted to
the care of "some good lady" coming to France or England or to "a
careful gentleman" who would superintend her passage. In the
latter case she must be attended by some woman who had had the
smallpox. He mentioned one of his slaves, Isabel, as the type of
"careful negro woman" who might make the voyage with Polly. "My
anxieties on could induce me to endless details," he
this subject
concluded after composing this list of specific instructions, and he
left other arrangements to Elizabeth and Francis Eppes, his sister-
in-law and her husband, in whose home Polly was living. 2

In writing to Polly, Jefferson addressed her in much the same
vein that had characterized his earlier letters to her sister. His ex-
pressions of love were coupled with admonitions that she must en-
deavor to merit his love. He even reminded her not to go out in the
sun without her bonnet "because it will make you very ugly and
then we should not love you so much." Polly, who was four when
her mother died, had been living with the Eppes family since then.
When she received her father's request to come to Paris, she was
seven and had not seen him for two years. That Polly was not eager
to leave her aunt, uncle, and cousins in Virginia to join her father in
a distant country is not surprising, and she wrote him frankly: "I
am very sorry that you have sent for me. I don't want to go to
France, I had rather stay with Aunt Eppes." 3
Jefferson had hoped that his daughter might make the voyage
during the summer of 1786, but he said that he would rather wait a
year than to trust her to any but a good ship and a summer passage.
It was thus 1787 before arrangements were made for her trip, and
throughout the months of preparation Polly remained adamant

against going to France. "We have made use of every strategem to
prevail on her to consent to visit with you without effect," Elizabeth
Eppes wrote to Jefferson, hoping that he would countermand his
orders. 4 But he had no intention of doing so, convinced that Polly's
continued separation from him and her sister would make them
strangers throughout life. In May, 1787, Polly was lured aboard
ship with her cousins, who stayed and played with her for several
days. Then they slipped away while she slept, and the ship set sail.
The under the charge of the ship's captain, Andrew

child was left
Ramsay, to whom she became so attached during the five-week voy-
age that she cried when she had to leave him. Instead of the mature
woman that Jefferson had wanted to accompany her, a fourteen-
year-old slave girl, Sally Hemings (whose brother James had accom-
panied Jefferson to Paris), was sent as her servant and companion. 5
Polly was met in England by Abigail Adams, to whom she became
so attached during her three-week stay with the Adamses that she
had to be pried away from her. Mrs. Adams was nearly as taken
with the amiable child, who was not yet nine. "I never felt so at-
tached to a child in my Life on an acquaintance," she wrote
so short
to Polly's father. Jefferson did not ease the trauma of the young
girl's adjustment to a new environment, sending a French servant to
London to accompany her to Paris instead of going himself, as he

had earlier said he would do if she landed in England. When Polly
finally reached Paris in July, 1787, she did not recognize either her
father or her sister, but Jefferson was soon reporting that she had
"renewed her acquaintance and attachment." Placed in the convent
school with Patsy, she would make visits to her father once or twice
a week. Having her sister to ease the adjustment to the new school,
Polly was soon "perfectly happy," her father observed, but he also
noticed that "her face kindles with love" at the mention of her Aunt
5
WITNESS TO REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 1 1
Eppes. Within a year she was speaking French easily, but her father
noted that her thoughts were about Virginia. Polly's coming to Paris
and her closeness to family in Virginia no doubt rekindled her
father's attachments to home, for he was soon noticing that daugh-
ter Patsy, approaching sixteen, might learn from her Aunt Eppes
"things which she cannot learn here, and which after all are among
6
the most valuable parts of education for an American." By the sum-
mer of 1788 Jefferson was thinking about returning to America,
but it would be another year before those plans matured.
It is impossible to find in Jefferson's voluminous papers any in-
dication that the arrival of Sally Hemings in Paris with Polly made
any difference in his Abigail Adams guessed Sally to be about
life.
fifteen or sixteen years of age but quite a child and reported that
Captain Ramsay was of the opinion that she would be of so little
service to Jefferson that he had better carry her back with him.
Abigail felt that Jefferson must be the judge of this, but she did
note that Sally seemed fond of Polly and appeared good-natured. 7
There is no reason to assume that Jefferson thought of Sally in any
other way than as the child that Mrs. Adams saw, and there would
be no need to introduce Sally into an account of Jefferson's life at
this point had not some writers charged that she became Jefferson's
mistress in Paris and remained so through the remainder of his
life. Not only is there no valid historical evidence to support this,
but the weight of evidence against it is also preponderant. The ori-

gins of the charges can be found in the attacks first made while
Jefferson was president by James Thomson Callender, a scurrilous
writer and disappointed office seeker —a most unreliable source.
The pieces of the historical record seized upon by Fawn Brodie in
her Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History to indicate a passionate re-
lationship between Jefferson and Sally in Paris fail the test of objec-
tive analysis. Brodie suggested that Jefferson's frequent use of the
word mulatto to describe the soil in Holland and Germany dur-
ing his trip there in 1788 indicated a preoccupation with Sally
Hemings. But as one reviewer pointed out, Brodie did not apply
a similar interpretation to Jefferson's repeated reference to red
or reddish soil during his trip through southern France. Under
Brodie's method, that would have revealed some subconscious sex-
ual preoccupation with his daughter Patsy who had reddish hair.
Equally unconvincing is Brodie's emphasis on the fact that Jeffer-
son bought new clothes for Sally Hemings in Paris, for Jefferson
would hardly allow his daughter to be escorted in Paris by a shab-
bily dressed servant. Indeed, the first thing Mrs. Adams did when
Polly and Sally arrived in London was to outfit both of them in new
clothes proper for their new environment. 8 The defects of Brodie's
work having been fully examined elsewhere, it is unnecessary to
dwellupon them here. The evidence indicates that any Paris ro-
mance between Jefferson and Sally Hemings belongs in a work of
fiction, not of history. 9
When Jefferson returned from his trip to southern France and
northern June, 1787, he found waiting for him in Paris
Italy in
letters from America reporting the activities under way that would
lead to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. By this time
the convention was already in session and hard at work. Having
been absent from America since 1784, Jefferson had played no part
in the events that led to the Philadelphia convention, but he was
supportive of the movement
reform the Articles of Confedera-
to
tion. He said that he would not go as far in reforms as some of his
correspondents in America, but he was prepared to accept such
changes as the members of the convention thought necessary. 10 He
was less alarmed by Shays's Rebellion than many of his country-
men. Madison saw the turbulent scenes in Massachusetts as por-
tending a crisis in civil government and feared the Confederation
was "tottering to its foundation." 11 Jefferson, on the other hand,
wrote: "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a re-
bellion. . . . What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers
are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the
spirit of resistance? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
. . .
time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." But if Jefferson
thought the fears of anarchy exaggerated and saw the government
of the Confederation as "the best existing or that ever did exist," he
still recognized the need to reform its imperfections. His experi-
ence as minister to France especially demonstrated the difficulties

resulting from Congress' lack of control over commerce and the
problems created by its attempts to conduct foreign affairs. 12
While the convention was sitting, Jefferson wrote to Washington,
who presided, that the great objects of the new federal Constitution
should be "to make our states one as to all foreign concerns, pre-
serve them several as to all merely domestic, to give to the federal
head some peaceable mode of enforcing their just authority, [and]
to organize that head into Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary de-
partments." At that time Jefferson knew that the members of the
convention were empowered to make a thorough reform in
the
Confederation, but he had no idea what shape the Constitution was
taking. Because the convention held its deliberations behind closed
doors and swore its members to secrecy, months passed before

Jefferson learned of its outcome and received a copy of the pro-
posed Constitution. Deploring the secrecy, he waited impatiently
for news from Philadelphia. With the end of the convention in
sight,Madison on September 6 sent him his first report on the pro-
ceedings, confident that the convention would have adjourned
before the letter reached Paris. It was in fact three months be-
fore Jefferson read that letter. Meanwhile, in early November he
received his first copy of the Constitution from John Adams in
London. 13
Jefferson's immediate reaction after reading the document was
that "there are very good articles in it: and very bad. I do not know
which preponderate." 14 In a letter to Madison he elaborated on
what he saw as the principal strengths and weaknesses of the new
instrument.
I like much the general idea of framing a government which should
go on of itself peacefully, without needing continual recurrence to the

state legislatures. I like the organization of the government into Legis-
lative, Judiciary and Executive. I like the power given the Legislature
to levy taxes; and for that reason solely approve of the greater house
being chosen by the people directly. ... I am captivated by the com-
promise of the opposite claims of the great and little states, of the
latter to equal, and the former to proportional influence. I am much
pleased too with the substitution of the method of voting by persons,
instead of that of voting by states: and I like the negative given to the
Executive with a third of either house, though I should have liked it
better had the Judiciary been associated for that purpose, or invested
15
with a similar and separate power.
Among the things that he did not like, Jefferson emphasized two
major defects. First, he objected to the omission of a bill of rights.
He told one correspondent that he was astonished by its absence.
Second, he deplored the abandonment of the principle of rotation
in office, particularly in the case of the president's unrestricted eli-
gibility for reelection. He feared that without a restriction the

16
president would always be reelected and hold office for life.
After studying the document closely and reading detailed com-

mentaries from Madison on the proceedings of the convention,
Jefferson concluded: "Were I in America, I would advocate it
warmly till nine [states] should have adopted, and then as warmly
take the other side to convince the remaining four that they ought
not to come into it till the declaration of rights is annexed to it. By
this means we should secure all the good of it, and procure so re-
1 l8 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
spectable an opposition as would induce the accepting states to

offer a bill of rights. This would be the happiest turn the thing
could take." This advice, which became known in America before
ratification was completed, caused some embarrassment to sup-
porters of the Constitution in the Virginia ratifying convention.
when that convention met on June 2, 1788,
Eight states had ratified
and a ninth was expected from New Hampshire. Patrick
ratification
Henry, leading the opposition to ratification, appealed to the con-
vention to follow Jefferson's advice and reject the Constitution until
amended. Madison, who led the proponents of ratification in the
Virginia convention, argued that it was improper to introduce the
opinions of men who were members of the convention, but his
not
acquaintance with Jefferson's views compelled him to say that he be-
lieved that if Jefferson were present on the floor he would favor
adoption. 17
Jefferson's own papers indicate that Madison was correct in this
opinion. Near the end of May, 1788, Jefferson had written to Ed-
ward Carrington: "I learn with great pleasure the progress of the
new Constitution. Indeed have presumed it would gain on the
I
public mind, as I confess my own." He said that he had

it has on
rejected his earlier proposal that four states should withhold ratifi-
cation until amendments were added and now favored the plan fol-
lowed by Massachusetts of ratifying the Constitution and propos-
ing amendments at the same time. This letter had not yet reached
Virginia before that state ratified the Constitution on June 25, but
it shows that Jefferson was fully in accord with the decision of his
native state. In July he told Madison: "I sincerely rejoice at the ac-
ceptance of our new constitution by nine states. It is a good canvas,
on which some strokes only want retouching." 18
With the adoption of the Constitution and the steady progress
toward the establishment of a new federal system of government in
the United States, Jefferson's attention increasingly focused on the
rapidly moving events in France, where before his tour of duty
ended he would witness some of the most momentous happenings
in the history of France. Early in 1787, before Jefferson left on his
trip to the south of France, Louis XVI, facing an acute financial cri-
sis, summoned an Assembly of Notables —
the first to meet in 160
years. Jefferson saw great hope for change when the Notables
gathered, and he watched their proceedings with great interest. By
the time he got back to Paris, major forces of change were at work
in the country, and by August he was reporting that "the spirit of
this country is advancing towards a revolution in their constitu-
tion."He placed great faith in the establishment of provincial as-

semblies that promised "to be the instrument for circumscribing
the power of the crown and raising the people into consideration."
He marveled at the freedom with which the government was allow-
ing criticism. Caricatures and placards were all over Paris. In a con-
fidential letter to John Adams in London he described the period
following the meeting of the Notables as "perhaps the most inter-
esting interval ever known country" and went so far as to say
in this
that "in the course of three months the royal authority has lost, and
the rights of the nation gained, as much ground, by a revolution of
public opinion only, as England gained in all her civil wars under
19
the Stuarts."
That was an optimistic view, colored by his own experience in
America, his faith in human nature, and his belief in the inevitable
spread of liberty. 20 He was no doubt also influenced by his discus-
sion of the principles of government with French intellectuals and
his friendship with some of the French leaders, especially Lafa-
yette, who was a member of the Assembly of Notables. With the
French ministry engrossed in the internal crisis, Jefferson found
fewer opportunities to press American discussions of commercial
regulations and more time to watch the changing scene in France.
His observations would afford posterity the unique opportunity to
view the coming of the revolution in France through the eyes of the
author of the American Declaration of Independence.
Early in 1788, however, the immediate problems of the financial
affairs of the United States pressed more heavily upon the Ameri-
can minister than the happenings in France. Under the Articles of
Confederation the Congress had been so unsuccessful in raising
revenue that it had had to borrow money in Holland even to pay
interest on its debt held there. While stationed at the Hague, John
Adams had received general authority to borrow sums necessary to
pay the interest on the debt and maintain the diplomatic establish-
ment in Europe, and he had continued to exercise that authority
while minister to England. When Adams began making arrange-
ments to return to the United States in 1788, his duties seemed des-
tined to fall on Jefferson, who regarded himself as "the most unfit
person living" to assume such responsibilities. 21
In December, 1787, the commissioners of the Treasury notified
bankers in Amsterdam that they would not be able to pay anything
until the new government got into operation in the United States
and that the payment of Dutch interest would have to come from
the unsubscribed portion of the last loan negotiated by Adams.
The Dutch bankers immediately wrote to Jefferson that there was

no probability of raising enough money to meet the next interest in
June and indicated that a single day's default would have serious
consequences on American credit. At the same time, they pre-
sented a scheme in which they agreed to take all the unsubscribed
loan in return for being allowed to retain from it the payment of
one year's interest on domestic American debt that they held. When
Jefferson reported the proposal to Adams, the New Englander was
both amused and indignant at its disingenuousness. "I feel no Van-
ity in saying that this Project never would have been suggested, if it
had not been known that I was recalled," he confided to Jefferson.

Were he to continue in Europe, he would go to Amsterdam and
open a new loan with another banking house rather than submit
to this plot. The bankers were buying up immense quantities of
American domestic debt, selling at a large discount, and trying to
establish the precedent of having the interest on that debt paid in
Europe. Jefferson seems not to have suspected this scheme when he
wrote to Adams, who had a word of advice for his harassed friend.
"I have been constantly vexed with such terrible Complaints and
frightened with such long Faces these ten years," he wrote. "De-
pend upon it, theAmsterdammers love Money too well, to execute
their Threats. They expect to gain too much by American Credit to
22
destroy it."
Jefferson was still reluctant to assume Adams' role, believing that

he did "not understand bargaining nor possess the dexterity requi-
site to make them." Thus, when he learned that Adams was going
to the Hague for an official leave-taking, he immediately set out

for Holland. "Our affairs at Amsterdam press on my mind like a
mountain," he wrote to Adams. "I am so anxious to confer with you
on this, and to see you and them together, and get some effectual
arrangement made in time that I determine to meet you at the
Hague." When it took him longer on the road than he had calcu-
lated, he nearly panicked, as he envisioned Adams on the packet
sailing back across the Channel. Happily, Adams was still at the
Hague when Jefferson arrived. The New Englander completed his
leave-taking,and together they proceeded to Amsterdam. There
they negotiated anew loan that not only ended the immediate crisis
but also provided funds to meet the demands of interest and the
needs of the diplomatic missions in Europe through 1790. By that
time it was expected that the machinery of the new government
would be in operation. 23 The loan also provided enough money to
pay the interest on debts to French officers who had fought in
WITNESS TO REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 121
America during the Revolutionary War, the neglect of which by the

Confederation government had been a source of acute embarrass-
ment to the American minister. The outcome of the frantic journey
was such a relief to Jefferson that he lingered to see the sights
in Holland, then took a leisurely route back to Paris, traveling
along the Rhine through Cologne, Bonn, and Wiesbaden and on to
Strassburg, before turning west toward Paris. He spent nearly four
weeks on the return trip, reaching Paris on April 23, 1788. 24
Jefferson found the city in the state of "high fermentation" that
prevailed when he left, observing that the "gay and thoughtless
Paris is now become a furnace of Politics."
25
Summing up the situa-
tion for Jay on May 23, he reported that the king had been called
upon to summon the Estates General immediately, that some lead-
ers were maneuvering to get a declaration of rights, and that there
was uncertainty about the role and loyalty of the army. "There is
neither head nor body in the nation to promise a successful opposi-
tion to 200,000 regular troops." His opinion was that a firm but
quiet opposition would be the most likely to succeed. "Whatever
turn this crisis takes, a revolution in their constitution seems inevi-
table, unless foreign war supervene, to suspend the present con-
test." By July he was describing rioting, yet still hoping that changes
would come without convulsions. Early in September he reported
popular demonstrations in Paris, the deaths of several participants
when Paris guards charged with bayonets, and escalating violence
26
until martial law was imposed.
A period of calm returned to Paris after the government con-
sented to summon the Estates General to meet early in 1 789. Jeffer-
son repeatedly commented on the "internal tranquillity." Even
while following the controversies regarding the composition of the
Estates General, he remained exceedingly optimistic about the
chances for successful reform of the French government. As he saw
it,the king's need for money would create an alliance between the
crown and the people, represented by the Third Estate, against the
clergy and the nobles, who controlled the wealth of the nation. This
would begin a process by which the Estates General would gradu-
ally come to share power in the government. He thought the first
goals of that body should be to establish the precedent of periodic
meetings, the exclusive right of taxation, and the authority to regis-
ter laws and propose amendments to them. "This would lead, as it
did in England," he wrote, "to the right of originating laws." If the
Estates General stopped with those gains, future reforms would
follow. "But it is to be feared that an impatience to rectify every
thing at once, which prevails in some minds, may terrify the court,
and lead them to appeal to force, and to depend on that alone."
Such an argument for gradual change from this American revolu-
tionary seems uncharacteristically conservative. Jefferson, however,
did not believe the mass of French people were prepared for re-
publican government. "They are not yet ripe for receiving the
blessings to which they are entitled," he told Madison. At the same
time, he had faith in the ultimate progress of French society toward
self-government. "The nation has been awakened by our revolu-
tion, they feel their strength, they are enlightened, their lights are
27
spreading, and they will not retrograde." Overly optimistic, he ei-
ther ignored or failed to recognize the rising tide of aristocratic re-
surgence and continued to trust the nobility to accept enlightened
change after many other observers had abandoned this wishful ex-
pectation. Indeed, he so much expected a period of gradual change
that in November, 1788, he requested permission to return home
28
in the spring for a six-month leave of absence.
There were, it is true, more immediate and personal considera-
tions that prompted the request. Just prior to seeking leave, he had
successfully concluded a consular treaty with France that had been
in the process of negotiation for some time, leaving him with no
major diplomatic problems that required his continuing super-
29
vision. After nearly five years in France his lands and affairs in
Virginia needed his attention. Above all, he thought it was time to
take his two daughters back to America. Sixteen-year-old Martha
(Patsy) had spent her teenage years in a convent school, and her
father was anxious to get her home in the environment of Virginia
where she could meet eligible young men. He had delayed their
return because he wanted his younger daughter, Polly, to perfect
her French before going home, but now, as he wrote to Elizabeth
Eppes, "their future welfare requires that this should no longer be
postponed." 30 What he did not tell his sister-in-law was that Martha
was giving serious thought to becoming a nun. A year earlier the
papal nuncio in Paris, a good friend of Jefferson's, had written to
John Carroll of Baltimore that Martha was inclining toward the
Catholic religion. "Her father, without absolutely opposing her vo-
cation, has tried to distract her," he wrote, adding that Jefferson
hoped that she would wait until she was eighteen until she made a
decision. Though Jefferson's desire to remove his daughters from
31
the environment of a convent was not the only reason for his re-
quest to return home, it was no doubt a compelling one.
He hoped to sail from France in April, 1789, and to return in

November, but his request for leave came at the time of transition
from the old government under the Articles to the new one under
the Constitution, and he did not receive authorization to leave his
post until August. Had his application been acted upon promptly
and had he sailed for America in April, he would not have been
witness to those dramatic events that shook France and all of Eu-
rope in the late spring and summer of 1789.
Jefferson's optimism about the movement of events in France was
tempered by the unusual severity of the winter of 1788-1789,
when temperatures in Paris dropped to nine below zero, increasing
the problems of the government. "They had before to struggle
with the want of money, and want of bread for the people, and now
the want of fuel for them and want of emploiment." Nevertheless,
he continued to send encouraging long-range predictions back to
his own government. "Every body here is trying their hands at
forming declarations of rights," he wrote to Madison in January,
sending him two examples. One of them was written by Lafayette,
whose draft, Jefferson said, "contains the essential principles of
ours accomodated as much as could be to the actual state of things
here." 32 Though Jefferson did not elaborate on his association with
Lafayette, he was in close contact with him and other reform-
minded French leaders and met regularly with some of them.
Moreover, his own assessments of events were often shaped by La-
fayette's views. At the beginning of March, Jefferson took note of a
recent riot in Brittany and rising opposition in several other prov-
inces, but he still reported that "the revolution is going on quietly
and steadily." His expectations for the meeting of the Estates Gen-
33
eral remained high.
When the Estates General assembled in Versailles on May 4,
1789, the American minister was present for the imposing and dra-
matic opening meeting, and he continued to be a frequent visitor.
By June so absorbed was he in the proceedings that he went to Ver-
sailles almost every day. Jefferson was also giving advice to Lafay-
ette and meeting privately with him and others, and in doing so he
was departing from the established code of diplomatic conduct. In-
deed he went so far as to draft a charter of rights to be proclaimed
by the king and sent copies to Lafayette and Rabaut de St. Etienne. 34
Jefferson's high expectations for "the progress of reason" were
shaken by the deadlock over whether voting would be by estates or
persons. For the first time he began to express concern that the
steady process of revolution would receive a serious check. He ad-

mitted that the "progress of light and liberality" among the nobles
had equaled his expectations only in Paris and its vicinities. "The
great mass of deputies of that order which come from the country
show that the habits of tyranny over the people are deeply rooted
in them." Jefferson had been slow in recognizing the resistance of
the nobles, partly, perhaps, because of his personal contacts with
Lafayette. But once he sensed the probability that "the Noblesse
will go wrong," he advised Lafayette to repudiate his instructions
and join the Third Estate. 35
On June 10 the members of the Third Estate invited the nobles
and clergy to meet with them in a common assembly and announced
that they would proceed with or without the cooperation of the
other estates. A week later, on June 17, the Third Estate pro-
claimed itself to be the National Assembly of France and moved im-
mediately to deal with the question of taxation. Jefferson was hope-
ful of the outcome. "The Commons have in their chamber almost
all the talents of the nation," he believed. "They are firm and bold,
yet moderate. There is indeed among them a number of very hot

headed members; but those of most influence are cool, temperate,
and sagacious. Every step of this house has been marked with cau-
tion and wisdom. The Noblesse on the contrary are absolutely out
of their senses." 36
On June 20 the National Assembly found the doors of their
chamber locked by royal orders, moved to a nearby indoor tennis
court, and took an oath not to separate until they had given France
a constitution. In his reports on these momentous events and others
in late June, Jefferson provided Jay with day-by-day accounts of the
rapidly changing scene. He believed that the fear that the army
would any confrontation with the crown was
side with the people in
responsible for Louis XVI's decision to allow the Assembly to pro-
ceed by requesting the nobles and clergy to take their seats with
the Third Estate in the National Assembly. When they did so on
June 27, amidst demonstrations of popular joy in Versailles and
Paris, Jefferson thought the revolution had succeeded. "This great
crisis being now over," he reported to Jay, "I shall not have matter
interesting enough to trouble you with as often as I have done
37
lately."
Jefferson's analysis was obviously premature, and it reflected
more his own hope of the outcome of the Revolution than the real-
ity of the French political situation. Though the king had appeared
—
to side with the people, he in fact was siding with the nobility and
was soon assembling troops, mainly foreign mercenaries, in Ver-
sailles and Paris. Even while observing the massing of troops, Jeffer-
son still trusted Louis XVI and blamed the nobles for the military
measures. Three days before the storming of the Bastille, Jefferson
assured Thomas Paine that the National Assembly was in com-
mand. "The executive and the aristocracy are now at their feet," he
said."The mass of the nation, the mass of the clergy, and the army
are with them. They have prostrated the old government, and are
now beginning to build one from the foundation." 38 But on the same
day that he wrote to Paine, the popular finance minister Jacques
Necker was dismissed and ordered to leave the country. When
word of this circulated in Paris, mobs poured into the streets and
detachments of royal troops took up positions in the city. Before
the day was over, a mob had stoned a detachment of German cav-
alry. Jefferson hurried off a note to Paine to update his recent
letter, but he did not yet recognize the full meaning of the events.
"The progress of things here will be subject to checks from time to
time of course," he advised Paine. "Whether they will be great or
39
small will depend on the army. But they will be only checks."
By the time Jefferson sent his next report to his own government
on July 19, the Bastille had been stormed, and Paris had been
through a violent convulsion. Lafayette was now in command of
the Paris Guard, and foreign mercenaries had been withdrawn. A
humbled Louis XVI recalled Necker and rode to Paris to make
peace with his disaffected subjects. On the outskirts of the city he
was met by Lafayette and escorted into the city. The streets were
lined with French Guards and thousands of citizens "armed with
guns, pistols, swords, pikes, pruning hooks, scythes, and whatever
they could lay hold of." Shouts of "Vive la nation!" greeted the king.
At the Hotel de Ville, he was presented with a red and blue cock-
ade, and after a series of ceremonies he appeared on a balcony
wearing the cockade in his hat. The crowd responded at last with
40
"Vive le roi et la nation!" Once more, as Paris returned to normal,
Jefferson thought the Revolution was over —at least in Paris, for he
suspected that the whole country would pass through the parox-
ysm that city had endured. He had not yet sensed the full scope of
the French Revolution, but he knew that he had witnessed "such
events as will be for ever memorable in history." By now Jefferson
who in the spring had his baggage packed and was waiting anx-
iously for permission to return home — was no longer eager to
depart. The scene was "too interesting to be left at present," he

thought, noting his singular fortune "to see in the course of four-
teen years two such revolutions as were never before seen." 41
In truth, Jefferson was more than an observer in France. As an
adviser to Lafayette, he was, to an extent not ordinarily permitted a
representative of a foreign nation, a participant in the events. The
times were, of course, not ordinary times, and Jefferson, who per-
ceived the rights of man in universal terms, had no qualms about
contributing to their advancement in a foreign country, especially
one that had played such an important role in the success of the
American Revolution. Lafayette consulted closely with Jefferson in
drafting a declaration of rights to submit to the National Assembly.
Prior to introducing it, he specifically requested his American
friend to "send me the Bill of Rights with Your Notes," and Jeffer-
son promptly responded. Just before presenting it to the Assembly,
Lafayette asked Jefferson to consider it again and offer his observa-
42
tions. It is impossible to establish Jefferson's precise influence on
the declaration of rights that Lafayette presented to the National

Assembly on July 1 1 and many others would have a hand at draft-
,
ing such a declaration before the Assembly adopted the Declara-

tion of the Rights of Man and the Citizen on August 26, 1789. 43
Only parts of the final Declaration resembled Lafayette's draft, but
the influence of the American Declaration of Independence on the
French Declaration was evident.
The American minister's most overt involvement in the affairs of
France came while the National Assembly was engaged in trying to
work out the principles of a constitution. He turned down an invi-
tation from the archbishop of Bordeaux on July 20 to meet with
the drafting committee, but he could not refuse a later request
from Lafayette that would intimately involve him in French matters.
On August 25 Jefferson received an urgent note from Lafayette
pleading "for liberty's sake" that he break every engagement and
host a dinner for eight members of the National Assembly the next
day. Lafayette feared that if some compromises were not made and
a coalition formed, the Assembly would never agree on a new gov-
ernment. He saw the proposed gathering as "the only Means to
prevent a total dissolution and a civil war." 44 Jefferson consented
to the request and hosted the dinner. He described his guests as
"leading patriots, of honest but differing opinions sensible of the
necessity of effecting a coalition by mutual sacrifices." At the end
of the dinner, about four in the afternoon, the tablecloth was re-
moved, wine set on the table, and discussions continued until ten in
the evening, by which time the French leaders had worked out their
differences and agreed on a plan that Jefferson thought decided
the fate of the constitution. In his autobiography he remembered
proceedings, but at the time he was
sitting as "a silent witness" to the
so concerned about overstepping the boundaries of diplomatic pro-
priety that the next morning he went immediately to the French
foreign minister to explain his actions. Comte de Montmorin had
already heard of the gathering and went so far in sanctioning it
that Jefferson was convinced that he must have known about it

in advance. Others were less tolerant. The Spanish ambassador,
Comte Fernan Nunez, commented sarcastically on the use of Jeffer-
45
son's house as a rendezvous for radicals.
All the drafting of bills of rights and constitutions prompted
Jefferson to speculate upon the question whether one generation
had the right to bind another. That question he thought had not
been raised either in Europe or America, and it led him into one of
the most theoretical discussions of political principles in which he
ever engaged. In the first week of September, 1789, while confined
to his chambers by a sudden illness —
perhaps one of his periodic
—
violent headaches Jefferson committed his thoughts to paper. It
may be that he intended the commentary initially for friends in
France, but he put it into final form in a letter to Madison (though
he did not place it in Madison's hands until January, 1790, after his
return to America). The composition of the letter suggests that
Jefferson was thinking primarily of France when he drafted it, and
he gave a copy of it to Dr. Richard Gem, an English physician of
philosophical mind and republican principles, who attended him
during his illness and with whom he discussed the question. 46
Jefferson reasoned that "the earth belongs always to the living
generation," not to the dead, and that one generation did not have
the right to bind a subsequent generation. No society, he argued,
could make a perpetual constitution or even a perpetual law. He
moved from the statement of general principle to the elabora-
tion of its application. Though he regarded
the principle as being
of extensive application, was France that was uppermost in his
it
mind when he wrote: "It enters into the resolution of the ques-
tions Whether the nation may change the descent of lands holden
in tail? Whether they may change the appropriation of lands given
antiently to the church, to hospitals, colleges, orders of chivalry,
and otherwise in perpetuity? Whether they may abolish the charges
and privileges attached on lands, including the whole catalogue ec-
clesiastical and feudal? It goes to hereditary offices, authorities and
jurisdictions; to hereditary orders, distinctions and appellations; to

perpetual monopolies in commerce, the arts and sciences; with a
long train of et ceteras." 47
These were for the most part questions he had not had to face in
America, where the absence of a feudal past distinguished Ameri-
cans from Europeans. Yet, he sought universal application for the
principle. Studying the mortality data compiled by Buffon, he cal-
culated with mathematical precision that nineteen years repre-
sented the span of a generation and that every law and every consti-
tution naturally expired at the end of that period. Furthermore, no
nation could contract a debt that could not be repaid within nine-
teen years. He thought that this was an application particularly ap-
propriate for the United States. "It would furnish matter for a fine
preamble to our first law for appropriating the public revenue." He
feared that at first blush his idea might be ridiculed as theoretical
speculation, but he expected that closer examination would prove
it "solid and salutary." He urged Madison to apply his cogent logic
48
to the proposition.
Madison responded by approving the general principle but chal-
lenging on practical grounds virtually every specific application
that Jefferson suggested. Madison pointed out that "if the earth be
the gift of nature to the living," as Jefferson argued, "their title can
extend to the earth in its natural State only. The improvements made
by the dead form a charge against the living who take the benefit of
them." He noted that debts may be incurred for the benefit of pos-
terity, and here he cited the debts from the Revolutionary War as an
example. He was also concerned about the instability that Jefferson's

proposition would produce, and he pointed to the impracticability
of implementing his ideas when generational lines changed daily
and hourly as individual members of society came of age. In his
enthusiasm for his new idea, Jefferson had not sufficiently exam-
ined the difficulties posed by its practical application. Adrienne
Koch concluded after a searching examination of the celebrated
exchange that Jefferson was "more speculative and more daring in
putting forward dynamic generalizations" and that Madison was
49
"the more astute politician."
By the time Jefferson received permission in August to return
home, he was again convinced that the revolution in France was
over. The good harvest would remove the danger of the want of
bread. The National Assembly was "wise, firm and moderate" and
would establish the English constitutional system purged of its de-
fects. America would continue to supply the model for France to
WITNESS TO REVOLUTION IN FRANCE 12g
follow. "It is impossible to desire better dispositions towards us,

than prevail in this assembly," he wrote to Madison. With calm re-
turning to France and future prospects promising, Jefferson pre-
pared to depart as soon after the first of October as he could get
passage on a ship bound for Virginia. Before he left Paris, he
would recognize that events were not moving forward as smoothly
as he had anticipated, but expecting to return, he did not wish to
delay his departure. 50
On September 6 Jefferson sent thirty-eight boxes, hampers, and
bales of baggage to Le Havre to await his sailing. There were boxes
of books, a harpsichord, works of art, furniture, plants, hampers of
wine, and sea stores for the voyage. One of the boxes contained six
—
muskets made with interchangeable parts an innovation whose
potential the inventive-minded Jefferson had recognized imme-
diately when he first learned of it. He was eager to introduce it in
America. 51 Boxes of pictures for Monticello may have contained
copies of portraits that he had asked Trumbull to purchase for him
in England of Bacon, Locke, and Newton
—
"the three greatest men
that ever lived, without any exception," Jefferson said. He also
brought with him or had shipped later from France portraits of Co-
lumbus, Americus Vespucius, Cortez, and Magellan that he had
had copied in Italy. "Our country should not be without the por-
52
traits of it's first discoverers," he explained. Before leaving Paris,
Jefferson paid Houdon one thousand livres for several works,
which probably included the busts of Washington, Franklin, and
Lafayette; he also had obtained busts of Voltaire, Turgot, and John
Paul Jones by Houdon. At least some of these were among the
boxes that accompanied him, and he may also have included one or
more of the plaster busts of himself executed by Houdon, for
whom Jefferson had sat in 1789. Houdon had exhibited one of
these in the summer Salon of 1789 in Paris. 53 Houdon's superb like-
ness of Jefferson would provide posterity with one of the most im-
portant images of the American who so much admired Houdon's
genius and played such an important role in promoting Houdon's
work in America.
Because he had so much baggage, two children, two servants,
and two carriages, Jefferson hoped to find a ship sailing from Le
Havre to Virginia. If not, he sought one leaving from England that
would stop on the French coast to pick him up and spare rrm an
extra seasickness. As the first weeks of September passed without
finding a suitable ship, Jefferson began to despair about booking a
passage before winter. When he left Paris on September 26 for Le
Havre, he stillhad not received word that a ship had been found
for him. Fortunately, —
John Trumbull who did all sorts of errands
for Jefferson in England —engaged a ship sailing from London for
Virginia. Although the captain refused to make a stop at Le Havre,
he agreed to board Jefferson on the English coast at Cowes. By the
time Jefferson received word of this, he was so relieved to have a
good ship with suitable accommodations that he was willing to en-
dure the seasickness of another Channel crossing. 54
Arriving in Le Havre on September 28, Jefferson discovered that
his baggage sent from Paris three weeks earlier had not yet reached
there, and he spent two days worrying about its fate before it finally
arrived. Then a period of "the most tempestuous weather ever
seen" set in, preventing the Channel boat from sailing for a week. It
was not until the night of October 7 that the vessel slipped out of Le
Havre. Jefferson and his two daughters were soon "exceedingly
seasick." After a two-week wait at Cowes, the Jeffersons on Octo-
ber 22 embarked at noon on board the Clermont, bound for Nor-
folk. Anchoring at evening off Yarmouth, the Clermont weighed an-
chor at daylight. Jefferson was at last on his way to Virginia. He ex-
pected to return to Paris in the spring. 55
XI
First Months at the State Department
On November 23, 1789, one month after weighing anchor at Yar-

mouth, the Clermont arrived in Norfolk, and Jefferson set foot
on American soil for the first time in over five years. The voyage
had been far quicker than he had anticipated. Experienced sea cap-
tains at Cowes told Jefferson to expect a nine-week passage by the
planned southern route, but unusually fine weather in the Atlantic
prompted Captain Nathaniel Colley to sail directly to Virginia. A
native of Norfolk, Colley was a bold yet judicious seaman, Jefferson
said. His ship, only two years old, was "uncommonly swift, inso-
much that we passed every thing most rapidly that we came in sight
of." After the usual period of seasickness at the beginning of the
voyage, the American travelers found the passage exceptionally
pleasant. Thick mist and heavy winds off Virginia, however, threat-
ened disaster and required all of Captain Colley's boldness and
knowledge of the coast to bring the Clermont into Norfolk with only
the loss of topsails and some rigging. An hour after Jefferson left
the ship, and before his baggage had been unloaded, a fire broke
out and for a time threatened to destroy the vessel. But the fire was
brought under control, and Jefferson's baggage miraculously es-
caped harm. 1
Upon going ashore, Jefferson learned for the first time that
President Washington had named him secretary of state in the new
government under the Constitution and that the Senate had al-
ready confirmed his nomination. Washington's official letter of noti-
fication would not catch up with him for another two weeks, but in
a welcoming address the city officials of Norfolk thanked Jefferson
for his services in France and wished him well in his new post. In his
reply Jefferson gave no hint whether he would accept the position. 2
He was not yet prepared to say what he would do. Intending to re-
turn to France, he had not anticipated the appointment, though
with John Adams now vice-president, Jefferson must have realized

that he was the most experienced American diplomat available for
the post. While Washington hoped that Jefferson would join his
official family, he assured him that he would not nominate a suc-
cessor to the court at Versailles until he learned of his decision.
Pressure on Jefferson to accept was more direct from others. Madi-
son wrote that he wanted to talk with him in person before he made
up his mind. Meanwhile he urged him to make no hasty decision,
confiding that the president would not expect him to assume the
post until after his visit to Monticello. "It is of infinite importance
that you should not disappoint the public wish on this subject,"
Madison insisted, adding that "the Southern and Western Country
have it particularly at heart." 3 Jefferson would not receive this letter
until after he had made his decision, but it may be assumed that
Madison made the same arguments when he saw him in person at
Monticello.
On the road between Norfolk and Monticello, the Jeffersons vis-
ited with family and friends. They stopped long enough in Rich-
mond for Jefferson to receive and reply to addresses from both
houses of the Virginia Assembly, and he got his first look at the
progress of construction on the new State Capitol. It promised to
be "an edifice of first rate dignity," he thought, and, when finished
with the proper ornamentation, would be "worthy of being ex-
4
hibited along side the most celebrated remains of antiquity."
Washington's letter offering him the office of secretary of state
reached Jefferson on December 1 1 and he replied a few days later
,
expressing his appreciation for the president's confidence in him

but indicating his concern about the scope of the office. Congress
initially had set up a Department of Foreign Affairs but later, after
establishing the Treasury and War departments, decided to com-
bine the administration of all other domestic affairs with foreign
affairs under a Department of State. "When I contemplate the
extent of that office, embracing as it does the principal mass of
domestic administration, together with the foreign, I cannot be in-
sensible of my inequality to it," the secretary-designate wrote the
president. Yet, while expressing his personal preference to return
to France, he indicated his willingness to accept whatever assign-
ment the president decided was best for the public interest. 5
Washington declined to make the final determination, insisting
that the choice between the two posts was up to Jefferson. Never-
theless, he waited to reply to Jefferson's letter until after he had
an opportunity to confer with Madison, who visited Jefferson at
FIRST MONTHS AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT 133
Monticello soon after Jefferson reached home on December 23.

Madison was disappointed to find Jefferson not more inclined to
accept the secretaryship, but he reported to the president his opin-
ion that Jefferson's reluctance sprang primarily from his concern
about the domestic duties attached to the office. Madison regarded
this fear as unwarranted, and we may suppose that he sought to
reassure Jefferson on that point. Once Madison returned to New
York for the second session of the First Congress, where he was a
member of the House of Representatives, he reported directly to
the president. Washington wrote immediately to Jefferson, assur-
ing him that it was not expected that the domestic duties of the
State Department would be burdensome and that if they should be-
come so, he was convinced that Congress would separate them
from foreign affairs and create a new department. Still claiming
that the final choice was in Jefferson's hands, he nonetheless left no
doubt as to his preference, telling Jefferson that "so far as I have
been able to obtain information from all quarters, your late ap-
pointment has given very extensive and very great satisfaction to
the Public." 6 Washington's letter left Jefferson little choice, unless he
was willing to ignore the president's wishes, the advice of Madison,
and the expectations of many of his fellow citizens. He still waited a
week to reply after a special messenger delivered Washington's
letter to him at Monticello. On February 14 he informed the presi-
dent of his acceptance.
That Jefferson's decision had been made earlier in his own mind
can be seen in his response two days before to an address of the
citizens of Albemarle County welcoming him home. His brief ad-
dress, published in newspapers throughout the nation, was one of
the most memorable that Jefferson ever delivered. In a moving and
succinct way, Jefferson expressed the political philosophy that had
guided him throughout his adult life and would continue to direct
him until the end of his days. He addressed his Albemarle neigh-
bors as "fellow-labourers and fellow-sufferers" in "the holy cause of
freedom" and told them:
It rests now with ourselves alone to enjoy in peace and concord the
blessings of self-government, so long denied to mankind: to show by
example the sufficiency of human reason for the care of human af-
fairs and that the will of the majority, the Natural law of every society,
is the only sure guardian of the rights of man. Perhaps even this may
sometimes err. But it's errors are honest, solitary and short-lived. Let—
us then, my dear friends, for ever bow down to the general reason of
the society. We are safe with that, even in it's deviations, for it soon re-
turns again to the right way. These are lessonswe have learnt together.
We have prospered in their practice, and the liberality with which you
are pleased to approve my attachment to the general rights of man-
kind assures me we are still together in these it's kindred sentiments. 7
Compressed into this short passage was Jefferson's basic political

creed: his belief in reason, natural law, and the rights of man; his
commitment and his faith in the wisdom of the
to majority rule;
majority, even when it it would always return to the right
erred, for
way. America had taken the lead in "the holy cause of freedom"
and must continue to set the example for mankind. With a new r
government struggling to establish itself under the Constitution, he

could not refuse to serve "wherever I may be stationed, by the will
of my country." No doubt remained that the will of his country was
that he assume the duties of the first secretary of state.
In his letter of acceptance Jefferson informed the president, who
was anxious for him to join the administration at once, that circum-
stances beyond his control —
which he would explain when he saw
—
him prevented him from leaving immediately for New York. The
explanation that Jefferson chose not to reveal in his letter was the
approaching marriage of his eldest daughter, Martha, who had
turned seventeen the previous September. Nathaniel Cutting, a
young American who had become acquainted with the Jeffersons
while they waited out the stormy weather at Le Havre and crossed
the Channel with them to Cowes, had been much impressed with
Miss Jefferson. He described her as "amiable," "tall and genteel,"
and despite her exposure to the habits of France, possessed of "all
that winning simplicity, and good humour'd reserve that are evi-
dent proofs of innate Virtue and an happy disposition" charac- —
teristics that Cutting saw as distinguishing American women from
those of any other country. Yet he also thought he detected behind
her "happy serenity" some chagrin at being separated from her
European friends. 8
Whatever apprehensions Martha may have had about leaving fa-
miliar surroundings to return to a place she had not seen since she
was twelve, she could never have anticipated how quickly her life
would change after she reached home. Two months after returning
to Virginia, she was engaged to be married. Three months to the
day after arriving in Norfolk, she became the wife of Thomas
Mann Randolph, Jr., a third cousin whom she had known as a child
but had not seen for years. 9 Randolph, twenty-one, had studied in
Edinburgh but was still unsure of his future course. Jefferson in a
letter to Madame de Corny in Paris explained: "My daughter, on

her arrival in Virginia, received the addresses of a young Mr. Ran-
dolph, the son of a bosom friend of mine. Tho' his talents, disposi-
tions, and connections and fortune were such as would have made
him my own first choice, yet according to the usage of my country, I
scrupulously suppressed my wishes, that my daughter might in-

10
dulge her own sentiments freely. It ended in their marriage."
This brief account is the most detailed record that survives of their
courtship. That Jefferson was pleased with the match is evident,
and it is unlikely that Martha failed to sense this, despite his efforts
to remain neutral.
Thomas Mann Randolph, Sr., and Jefferson had spent much of
their childhood together at Tuckahoe, the Randolph plantation
where Peter Jefferson moved his family for some six years to look
after the lands and the children of his deceased friend William
Randolph. In writing to his lifelong friend and second cousin,
Jefferson said that "the marriage of your son with my daughter
cannot be more pleasing to you than to me. Besides the worth
which I discover in him, I am happy that the knot of friendship
between us, as old as ourselves, should be drawn closer and closer
n
to the day of our death."
In anticipation of the marriage, Randolph deeded his son a tract
of 950 acres, called Varina, in Henrico County, together with forty
slaves. Jefferson settled on his daughter 1,000 acres of his Poplar
Forest tract in Bedford County, together with twenty-seven slaves.
At Jefferson's initiative a marriage settlement was signed at Mon-
I2
ticello on February 19, i790. J0f the six families of slaves trans-
IxTMartha, hvFwereâlready living on the land given to her,
and the other family lived on adjoining acreage. However much
Jefferson disapproved of slavery, by transferring the ownership of
these slaves to his daughter and her descendants, Jefferson was
helping to perpetuate the system that he deplored.
With Jefferson anxious to get off to New York to assume his new
duties, Martha Jefferson and Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., were
married at Monticello on February 23, 1790. On March 1, Jefferson
left for New York. The relationship between Jefferson and his
eldest daughter was close, and Jefferson would feel the separation
keenly. Since the death of his wife, Jefferson had taken Martha with
him on his public assignments and closely directed her education.
With his younger daughter, Maria, he never developed the same
bonds that existed with Martha. After he reached New York, he
wrote to Martha that "having had yourself and dear Poll to live with
me so long, to exercise my and chear me in the intervals

affections
of business, I from you." But he said he
feel heavily the separation
found consolation in Martha's happiness and the prospects for its
continuance. "Your new condition will call for abundance of little
sacrifices," he advised the young bride. "But they will be greatly
overpaid by the measure of affection they will secure to you. The
happiness of your life depends now on the continuing to please a
single person. To this all other objects must be secondary; even
your love to me, were it possible that that could ever be an ob-
stacle." In reply Martha wished for her father to visit Virginia in
the fall and assured him that "my happiness can never be compleat
without your company. Mr. Randolph omits nothing that can in the
least contribute to it. I have made it my study to please him in every
thing and do consider all other objects as secondary to that except
my love for you." 13 There is no evidence that Martha ever departed
from this commitment.
On the way to New York Jefferson spent a week on business in
Richmond, was delayed by a snowstorm in Alexandria, stopped in
Philadelphia to see Benjamin Franklin (then in his final illness), and
did not reach New York until March 2 1. It seemed to him the most
laborious journey he had ever made. He had hoped to find a house
on Broadway, where the president's house and the State Depart-
ment offices were located, but none was available, and he took a
small house at 57 Maiden Lane. He considered the dwelling an "in-
different" one and did not expect to remain there long, but he
nonetheless extravagantly built a windowed gallery across the back
of the house to accommodate his books, papers, and plants. He was
soon sending detailed instructions to William Short in Paris for
procuring household goods and shipping his belongings from
France. 14
When Jefferson arrived in the temporary capital, the new gov-
ernment had been in operation for nearly a year. "The opposition
to our new constitution has almost totally disappeared," he ob-
served, and he believed that if Washington lived a few years to es-
tablish the authority of the government, the republic would be se-
cure. The first session of Congress had created the structure of
governance, and President Washington was in the process of devis-
ing the procedures to make the machinery work. Many of the
mechanisms of the executive branch were still evolving when Jeffer-
son appeared on the scene, but in matters of social style the pat-
terns of Washington's administration had largely been set. Washing-
ton had no desire to become a king, but he wanted to make the
—
presidential office one of dignity and authority. His personality and

bearing conveyed an impression of aloofness. He had been accus-
tomed to command and had no inclination to pose as a man of the
people. Washington presided ceremoniously over a formal weekly
levee, or reception,and on official public appearances rode in a
carriage drawn by four or six horses, followed by his official family
15
in other coaches. Jefferson later would be critical of Washington's
"court," and he himself could never be comfortable in such a role.
But he had great respect for the president and did not initially ap-
pear to have been disturbed by Washington's ceremonial role.
The administration that Jefferson joined as the ranking depart-
—
ment head was small only three departments and the attorney
general, who served as the counsel for the government but headed
no department. When he went to his new office, Jefferson found the
entire staff of the State Department consisted of two chief clerks,
two assistant clerks, and a translator. His total budget, not in-
cluding the diplomatic establishment abroad, was less than $8,000,
—
of which $3,500 was his own salary. 16 Jefferson's colleagues Alex-
ander Hamilton at the Treasury, Henry Knox at the War Depart-
—
ment, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph all had had time
to settle into their jobs before Jefferson assumed his duties, and
Hamilton's first report on the public credit was already before Con-
gress. There is nothing in the record to indicate that Jefferson an-
ticipated any difficulties in working with the other members of the
administration.
President Washington looked to his department heads and the
attorney general for adviceand at times also sought the opinions of
Vice-President John Adams and Chief Justice John Jay. He re-
garded the department heads as his assistants, not asindependent
ministers, in administering the laws, and from the outset he made it
clear that he was in charge of his administration and expected that
all policy matters be presented to him for approval.
17
The mecha-
nism of the cabinet was not initially employed, but it gradually
evolved from the president's regular practice of consultation with
the members of his administration. As the commanding general
under whom Knox had served during the Revolution, Washington
dominated the War Department. He exercised less control over the
Department of State but retained the final authority in all foreign
policy decisions. Less sure of himself on financial matters, Washing-
ton allowed Hamilton more freedom to formulate policy than he
permitted to any other member of his administration.
Jefferson reported to the president on his first day in New York
a Sunday — and plunged immediately into his duties. Within six

weeks, however, he was stricken with one of his periodic headaches
that immobilized him for a week and stayed with him for over a
month. 18 At times during this period he was able to do some work,
and in fact he drafted his famous report to Congress on weights
—
and measures a report that one scholar has called "an almost per-
fect embodiment of his dual allegiance to Newtonian physics and to
Lockean concepts of government." 19 The problem of deriving a
universal standard from nature was one that interested many men
of the Enlightenment, and Jefferson drew on their theories and ex-
periments in arriving at his recommendation: "Let the Standard of
measure then be an uniform cylindrical rod of iron, of such length
as in lat. 45. ° in the level of the ocean, and in a cellar or other place,
the temperature of which does not vary thro' the year, shall per-
form it's and equal arcs, in one second of mean
vibrations, in small
time." 20
Most modern readers will hardly be more interested in the
explanation of how Jefferson arrived at this proposed standard
than were most members of Congress, but every reader will be in-
trigued by the second aspect of Jefferson's proposal. Here he pro-
posed to apply the decimal system to weights and measures just as
Congress had earlier done, at his recommendation, in regard to
coinage. For measures of length the rod used for the standard was
to be divided into five equal parts, each to be called a foot (about
one quarter of an inch shorter than the present foot). Each foot was
to be divided into ten inches, each inch into ten lines, and each line
into ten points. Ten feet would make a decad, ten decads a rood,
ten roods a furlong, and ten furlongs a mile. He provided similar
details for measures of capacity and for measures of weight. His
system, he said, had the advantage of "bringing the calculation of
the principal affairs of life within the arithmetic of every man who
can multiply and divide plain numbers." 21 Congress was not ready
for such a revolutionary step, and Jefferson's report languished
without action, leaving it to revolutionary France to introduce the
metric system.
Before he had recovered from his disabling headache,
fully
Jefferson made appearance before a Senate committee, to
his first
testify in behalf of the president's authority to conduct foreign rela-
tions. That authority included, he insisted, determining rank and
assignments of diplomats, their pay, and other details that Con-
gress under the Confederation had prescribed. The occasion pro-
vided the opportunity for Senator William Maclay to record a de-
tailed description of the forty-seven-year-old secretary of state. In
his diary for May 24, 1790, Maclay wrote:
When I came to the Hall Jefferson and the rest of the Committee were
there. Jefferson is a slender Man. Has rather the Air of Stiffness in his
Manner. His cloaths seem too small for him. He sits in a lounging
Manner on one hip, commonly, and with one of his shoulders elevated
much above the other. His face has a scrany Aspect. His whole figure
has a loose shackling Air. He had a rambling Vacant look and nothing
of that firm collected deportment which I expected would dignify the
presence of a Secretary or Minister. I looked for Gravity, but a laxity
of Manner, seemed shed about him. He spoke almost without ceasing.
But even his discourse partook of his personal demeanor. It was loose
and rambling and yet he scattered information wherever he went, and
some even brilliant Sentiments sparkled from him. 22
By the time the secretary of state was back to full-time work, the
new government was at an impasse that threatened to stall its prog-
ress, and Jefferson was soon deeply involved in working out a po-
litical solution. Since Hamilton had presented his report on the
public credit to Congress in January, 1790, Congress had become

sharply divided over his proposals to fund the national debt and
assume the debts incurred by the states during the Revolution. No
differences existed over making provision to fulfill all foreign ob-
ligations, a fact that Jefferson relayed to William Short in Paris
to reassure French officials. But in regard to the domestic debt,
some members of Congress opposed allowing speculators who had
bought up depreciated securities to make windfall profits under
Hamilton's plan to fund the debt at par value with arrears of in-
terest. Madison proposed in the House of Representatives that
Congress discriminate between original holders and subsequent
purchasers, but his proposition was voted down. Even more contro-
versial was Hamilton's proposal for the assumption of state debts,
which pitted states with large debts against those with small debts
and threatened to deadlock Congress. Jefferson came to fear that if
some compromise were not worked out, the funding bill would not
pass, and the nation's credit would "burst and vanish and the states
23
separate to take care everyone of itself."
As he later recounted his role in the events, he met Hamilton one

day outside the president's door, and the secretary of the treasury
brought up the subject of the assumption of state debts. He thought
Hamilton looked "sombre, haggard, and dejected beyond descrip-
tion" as the Treasury chief expressed his concern about the threat
to the Union. Arguing that members of the administration should
support each other, Hamilton urged Jefferson to use his influence
among southern members in Congress to help break the impasse.
Refusing to intercede directly, Jefferson agreed to invite Hamil-
ton and Madison to dinner at his house the next day to discuss
the issue. The outcome of that dinner, according to Jefferson, was
the bargain that led to the passage of the assumption act and a
billto locate the national capital on the Potomac. While Madison
would not consent assumption, it was agreed that two
to vote for
Virginia members whose along the Potomac would be
districts lay
approached with the proposal. It was also necessary that Pennsyl-
vania members be party to the agreement, the understanding
being that the temporary capital would be transferred to Phila-
delphia for ten years. 24 The question of the site of the capital, one
of the most sensitive issues before the First Congress, had become
deeply divisive. The scheme to combine the assumption proposal
and the residence bill in a legislative compromise would end what
Jefferson saw as the spectacle of a Congress "unable to get along as
to these businesses, and indisposed to attend to any thing else till
they are settled." 25
A compromise along the lines that Jefferson described was ac-
complished when in July, 1790, the funding, assumption, and resi-
dence measures all passed Congress. Scholarly investigations show
that not all of the provisions of the agreement were worked out at
Jefferson's famous dinner. Two Maryland members as well as two
Virginia members of Congress switched their votes on assumption,
and other persons were also involved in the bargain, both before
and after the dinner. Indeed the understanding between southern-
ers and Pennsylvanians may have been worked out before the din-
ner, and the main task was to keep it from unraveling while the
assumption measure was enacted. 26 Still, Jefferson played an im-
portant role in the business, and he later would confess regret at
ever having contributed to advancing one of Hamilton's measures.
Two years afterward, when Hamilton's program had been more
fully revealed, Jefferson looked back on his cooperation as the
greatest error of his political life. He felt that he had been "duped"
by Hamilton and "made a tool for forwarding his schemes, not
then sufficiently understood by me." At the time he acted, however,
his differences with Hamilton had not yet become sharp, and in the
summer of 1790 he argued for compromise as necessary to pre-
serve the Union. 27
Jefferson spent part of his first months as secretary of state spar-
ring with Congress over the size and expense of the diplomatic es-
tablishment. He shared a widely held belief that a large diplomatic
establishment was unnecessary, but he did not agree with Senator
William Maclay that there should be none. Maclay thought all
money spent on posts abroad was wasted. "I know not a single
thing thatwe have for a minister to do in a single court in Europe,"
28
he said. "Indeed, the less we have to do with them the better."
Jefferson thought it wiser to economize by having lower grades of
diplomatic officers and restricting them to countries with which the
United States had important concerns. France was the key post for
an American minister, Jefferson believed, because it was at the
crossroads of Europe where the diplomatic corps was largest. He
initiallyfavored a minister plenipotentiary only for that post but,
after consulting with Washington, decided that England should re-
ceive equal treatment, if and when that nation named a minister to
the United States. The diplomatic establishment that he proposed,
and which Congress ultimately approved, provided for ministers in
Paris and London, charges d'affaires at Madrid and Lisbon, an
agent at the Hague, and a consul in Morocco, at a total annual cost
of forty thousand dollars. 29
The first major crisis in foreign affairs that Jefferson faced as sec-
retary of state was the threat of war between England and Spain
following the Spanish seizure of British ships in Nootka Sound off
Vancouver Island. Two weeks after William Pitt publicly disclosed
the war crisis in early May, 1790, Gouverneur Morris, the agent of
the president in London, had an interview with Pitt and the Duke
of Leeds, the foreign secretary. After the conference, Morris re-
ported to Washington that if war came, both England and Spain
would pay a price for American neutrality and recommended the
moment for immediate negotiations with Spain in regard to the
30
Mississippi.
Meanwhile, the British ministry instructed Lord Dorchester,
governor general of Canada, to collect information on the expected
American reaction to war. Dorchester dispatched his aide Major
George Beckwith, an intelligence officer, to New York, where he ar-
rived at the beginning of July. On earlier information-gathering
missions to the United States Beckwith had talked with Hamilton,
though the secretary of the treasury had not reported these con-
tacts to either the president or the secretary of state. On this occa-
sion Hamilton informed Washington of his conversation with Beck-
with and reported on it in a meeting attended by the secretary
of state. 31
The supposition that Beckwith, in the absence of any official
British diplomatic mission to the United States, was an unofficial
envoy has been shown to be unfounded by Julian Boyd, who dem-
onstrated that Beckwith was in fact a secret agent. Boyd also ar-
gued that Hamilton, whom Beckwith designated as "Number 7" in

his reports to his superiors, did not accurately present to the presi-
dent the contents of Beckwith's communication in July, 1790. It is
a matter of interpretation whether Hamilton deliberately misin-
terpreted the instructions that Beckwith showed him (as Boyd be-
lieved) or unwittingly saw in them what he wanted to believe: that
the British were suggesting the possibility of an alliance. 32 The de-
tails of Hamilton's relationship with Beckwith need not be pursued
here, but it is essential to an understanding of Jefferson's tenure as

secretary of state to recognize that the secretary of the treasury was
intimately involved in matters of foreign affairs, and Hamilton's
view of what the policy of the United States should be was di-
ametrically opposed to that of the secretary of state, to whom the
idea of an alliance with England suggested not the opportunity for
peaceful growth that Hamilton envisioned but renewed subjuga-
tion to a former master.
In a memorandum to the president on July 12, 1790, worked
out after conferring with Madison, Jefferson outlined a proposed
American policy in the event of war between England and Spain.
He directed his attention largely to the most threatened interest of
the United States: the navigation of the Mississippi River and access
to the sea. What should the United States do if Great Britain at-
tempted the conquest of Louisiana and the Floridas? Jefferson as-
sumed that France would join Spain against England. If not, En-
gland would prevail and render the situation of the United States
worse. Summarizing the dangers of a successful British conquest of
Louisiana, the secretary of state stressed that "instead of two neigh-
bors balancing each other, we shall have one, with more than the
strength of both." British control of the Mississippi River and of a
territory half the size of the United States on the west bank would
put that powerful nation in a position to seduce the whole area of
the United States west of the mountains and dependent upon the
waters of the Mississippi. The young republic would be encircled
—
by the British by land and by sea. Jefferson's memorandum made
it clear that the United States could not stand by and allow this to
happen but concluded that there was no need for the United States
to take speedy action. Great Britain might decide not to attack
Louisiana and the Floridas, or fail in the attempt, or France and
Spain might recover them. "If all these chances fail, we should have
to re-take them." But delay would allow the United States time to
become better prepared and also provide an opportunity to obtain
33
concessions in return for American assistance.
Jefferson's fear of the threat to the territorial integrity of the

Union posed by a British presence on the Mississippi was not with-
out foundation. Had he had access to the minutes of the Commit-
tee of the Privy Council for Trade, he would have been struck by its
report of April 17, 1790, declaring that "in a commercial view, it
will be for the benefit of the country to prevent Vermont and Ken-
tucky and all the other Settlements now forming in the interior
parts of the great Continent of North America from becoming de-
pendent on the Government of the United States, or on that of any
other foreign country, and to preserve them on the contrary in a
state of Independence and to induce them to form Treaties of
Commerce and Friendship with Great Britain." 34
For immediate policy, Jefferson advised the president that the
United States seek to encourage Spain to view giving independence
to Louisiana and the Floridas as preferable to allowing conquest by
the British. Britain should be informed through Beckwith that the
United States would look with favor on a commercial treaty based
on "perfect reciprocity," that the objects of any alliance would have
to be made known before the United States could respond, and
that such objects could not be inconsistent with any existing ar-
rangements (i.e., the alliance with France). In case of war between
Great Britain and Spain "we are disposed to be strictly neutral," but
"we should view with extreme uneasiness any attempts of either
power to seize the possessions of the other on our frontier, as we
consider our own safety interested in a due balance between our
neighbors." 35
After conferring with Jay and Hamilton, Washington decided
not to deliver Jefferson's warning to Beckwith but to instruct the
secretary of the treasury to extract as much information as he could
from the British agent without committing the United States in any
way, "leaving it unreproached, such a line
entirely free to pursue,
of conduct in the dispute as her interest (and honour) shall dic-
tate."
36
On the subject of an alliance, Hamilton was to tell Beckwith
that the precise objects of the British government could not be dis-
cerned from his communication.
In the report that he made to Lord Dorchester on his interview
with Hamilton, Beckwith said that Hamilton assured him:
There is the most sincere good disposition on the part of the govern-
ment here to go into the consideration of all matters unsettled be-
tween us and Great Britain, in order to effect a perfect understanding
between the two countries, and to lay the foundation for future amity;
this, particularly as it respects commercial objects, we view as condu-

cive to our interest.
In the present stage of this business it is difficult to say much on the
subject of a Treaty of Alliance; Your rupture with Spain, if it shall take
place, opens a very wide political field; thus much I can say, we are
perfectly unconnected with Spain, have even some points unadjusted
with that Court, and are prepared to go into the consideration of the
37
subject.
While both the president and the secretary of state favored the
negotiation of a commercial treaty with Great Britain and were also
prepared to use the war crisis to press Spain for concessions, the
impression that Beckwith gained from his interview with the sec-
retary of the treasury indicated a more conciliatory stance than ei-
ther Washington or Jefferson was displaying at this time. This sug-
gests that Hamilton did not accurately convey to Beckwith the
position of his government. Even more exceptional was what Hamil-
ton said to Beckwith about the secretary of state with respect to any
negotiations between the two countries. Not wanting to leave nego-
tiations to Gouverneur Morris in London, Hamilton preferred that
they take place in the United States. Such a course posed one diffi-
culty, as he explained to Beckwith.
If it shall be judged proper to proceed in this business by the send-

ing or appointing a proper person to come to this country to negotiate
on the whoever shall then be our Secretary of State, will be the
spot,
person in whose department such negotiation must originate, and he
will be the channel of communication with the President; in the turn
of such affairs the most minute circumstances, mere trifles, give a

favorable bias or otherwise to the whole. The President's mind I can
declare to be perfectly dispassionate on this subject. Mr. Jefferson our
present Secretary of State is I am persuaded a gentleman of honor,
and zealously desirous of promoting those objects, which the nature of
his duty calls for, and the interests of his country may require, but
from some opinions which he has given respecting Your government,
and possible predilections elsewhere, there may be difficulties which
may possibly frustrate the whole, and which might be readily ex-
plained away. I shall certainly know the progress of negotiation from
the president from day to day, but what I come to the present explana-
tion for is this, that in any case any such difficulties should occur, I
should wish to know them, in order that I may be sure they are clearly
38
understood, and candidly examined.
The secretary of the treasury was in effect offering to assist the ne-
gotiator of a foreign power to counteract the efforts of the secre-
tary of state. Jefferson, of course, did not know what Hamilton told
Beckwith, but the incident shows that the resentment Jefferson
would display over Hamilton's meddling in his department was well
founded. Almost from the outset, Hamilton made Jefferson's job as
secretary of state more difficult.
Although the president chose not to convey Jefferson's proposed
warning to Britain through Beckwith, he approved the basic policy
of the secretary of This can be seen in Jefferson's instructions
state.
to Gouverneur Morris, which according to routine the president
reviewed before they were sent. Writing to Morris on August 12,
Jefferson said that British actions indicated the likelihood of war
and of British designs on Spanish possessions bordering the United
States. He instructed Morris, if war came, to intimate to the British
government that the United States could not remain indifferent
and would "contemplate a change of neighbours with extreme
uneasiness; and that a due balance on our borders is not less de-
sireable to us, than a balance of power in Europe has always ap-
peared to them." 39 War did not come, and Morris did not deliver
the warning. But had hostilities begun, Hamilton's conversations
with Beckwith could only have served to undermine the admin-
istration's policy.
As Washington contemplated the possibility of a war between En-
gland and Spain, it appeared to him more and more likely that the
British would attack Louisiana by an operation from Detroit. In a

secret memorandum he asked his principal advisers for their opin-
ions as to what answer should be if Lord Dorchester requested
his
permission to march troops through United States territory to the
Mississippi or, as was more likely, if he moved his troops through
American territory without asking leave. 40
Jefferson prefaced his reply by stating that the dangers to the
United States posed by the possible addition of Louisiana and the
Floridas to the British Empire were so great that the United States
should go to war if that were the only means of preventing the ca-
lamity. Nevertheless, he favored preserving neutrality as long as
possible and entering the war as late as possible. Neutrality could be
maintained if Britain were allowed to move troops through Ameri-
can territory, so long as Spain were allowed the same privilege. If
Britain were refused permission and moved its troops anyway,
there was no choice but to go to war. Jefferson's recommendation
was that the United States avoid any answer to a request from Brit-
ain to cross American soil. Should they proceed nevertheless, or
march without asking for leave, the United States should remon-
strate and keep the issue alive to be used as a cause for going to war
if events dictated that course. 41
General agreement prevailed among the president's other ad-
visers thatmaintaining neutrality was the best policy, but only John
Adams and Henry Knox believed that it was necessary to deny pas-
sage to the British to remain neutral. Hamilton offered far more
qualified answers than Jefferson but ultimately concluded that the
United States ought not to refuse passage. Jefferson was the only
person to advise the president to evade the issue by not respond-
ing. To Hamilton, evasive conduct indicated timidity. Jefferson,
however, saw his proposed evasion as a way to play for time, allow-
ing the United States the opportunity to choose the circumstances
for entering the war, should that become necessary. 42
Jefferson never lost sight of his first priority: to secure for the
United States unhampered navigation of the Mississippi River.
Eager to use the threat of war to pressure Spain for concessions, he
secretly dispatched David Humphreys to Madrid with instructions
for William Carmichael to bring up the navigation of the Missis-
sippi with the Spanish foreign minister. Carmichael should "im-
press him thoroughly with the necessity of an early and even an im-
mediate settlement of this matter," Jefferson said. It should be
made clear that the United States was not interested in a negotia-
tion unless Spain was prepared "in the first opening of it, to yield
the immediate and full enjoyment of that navigation." With this
concession achieved at the outset, the United States would then
press negotiations for the use of a port at the mouth of the Missis-
sippi. The secretary of state expected war between Spain and Great
Britain to have begun before Humphreys reached Madrid. But
should some accommodation have taken place, Carmichael was to
press, more softly, for the same objectives, "which we are deter-
mined in the end to obtain at every risk." 43
As it turned out, the war crisis of 1790 provided only a hypo-
thetical exercise for American policy makers. When France failed
to support Spain in the Nootka Sound dispute, Spain backed down
and came to terms with England. Yet, by directing the secretary of
state's attention to the Mississippi question, the crisis led to the for-
mulation of clear foreign-policy goals that would play a key role in
the years ahead. The events demonstrated that Jefferson was pre-
pared to seize opportunities provided by European disputes to ad-
vance American interests and to move promptly and decisively
when those interests were at stake. He showed himself to be a
tough-minded diplomat, ready to play foreign powers against one
another, determined to hold as many options in his own hands for

as long as possible, and wary of being caught in a position that de-
manded the defense of honor without clear benefits to the national
interest.
In his early months as secretary of state, Jefferson showed again,
as he had as governor of Virginia, that he was a careful admin-
istrator who instituted systematic procedures that promoted effi-
ciency and competence. He organized his small staff toperform
and domestic functions of
specialized duties relating to the foreign
and established careful practices of record keeping. He
his office
had always been ahead of his time in retaining copies of his own
correspondence, and he made multiple copies a routine practice
in the State Department. He made a study of the time it took for
him to receive communications from American diplomatic posts in
Europe and devised routes and schedules to speed this essential
communication. 44 Although he gave the highest priority to for-
mulating foreign policy, he was a working administrator as well as a
policy maker.
In mid- August after Congress adjourned, Jefferson accompanied
Washington on a short sailing trip to Rhode Island, where the
president went to welcome the state into the Union after its belated
ratification of the Constitution. After a pleasant sail of two days,
they visited Newport and Providence, where the president was re-
ceived with great cordiality, and were back in New York within a
week. 45 Jefferson had paperwork to finish and arrangements to
make for the removal of his department to Philadelphia before he
could get away to Virginia, all of which he hoped to complete by the
time the president left for Mount Vernon at the end of the month.
On September 1 a tired secretary of state, accompanied by Madi-
son, set out in his phaeton for Monticello. They stopped for several
days in Philadelphia, where Jefferson completed arrangements for
his office and living quarters for when the government moved
from New York. An even more important stop was in Georgetown
to inspect lands for the site of the future capital and to confer with
neighboring landholders. Washington, too, stopped in Georgetown
on his way to Mount Vernon, but he deferred his inspection tour
until the following month and left it to his secretary of state to
make the preliminary contacts and tour the potential sites. The
speed with which the president and the secretary of state moved to
implement the residence bill is of considerable interest. Before
Washington left New York, Jefferson prepared a memorandum,
which, despite his later penchant for strict construction, proposed
that the president interpret the law with as much latitude as the
language of the act would support. He urged the president to act
promptly to obtain the land for the capital, appoint the commis-
sioners to lay out the city, and begin the construction of public
buildings. He was convinced that "if the present occasion of secur-
ing the Federal seat on the Patowmack should be lost, it could never
be regained." He also believed that it would be dangerous to rely on
Congress or the legislatures of Virginia and Maryland for assis-
tance and that measures should be taken to carry the residence bill
46
into execution without recourse to any of these bodies.
Madison also had drawn up a memorandum on the residence act
for the president before leaving New York. Having fought the resi-
dence battle in Congress, he, too, was anxious that the president
proceed quickly. 47 Many members of Congress, especially those
from Pennsylvania, were convinced that once the capital returned
to Philadelphia, it would never be moved. As long as no town or
buildings on the Potomac could accommodate the government, the
capital would remain at Philadelphia. Both Jefferson and Madison
recommended that the construction of the government buildings
be financed by selling lots in the new city from lands donated by
landowners who would profit from the rise in the value of adjoin-
ing lands. This would avoid going to Congress for appropriations
that might provoke debates to obstruct or delay moving forward
with construction. 48 The details of the locating of the District of Co-
lumbia and the construction of the capital need not concern us, but
it is important to recognize the role that Washington, Jefferson, and
Madison played in pushing ahead immediately to implement the

residence bill, for without their efforts the new capital might never
have become a reality.
After visiting Georgetown, Jefferson and Madison stopped briefly
at Mount Vernon to report to the president. They reached Mont-
pelier on September 18, and Jefferson was back home the next day.
After six months of pressure in his new job, he was ready for a res-
pite at Monticello. While at home Jefferson had business affairs to
attend to, but he gave the highest priority to efforts to situate his
newly married daughter and son-in-law nearby. Once Thomas
Mann Randolph, Jr., indicated a preference to establish himself
in Albemarle County instead of developing his Varina property
(where Martha was not eager to live), his father-in-law moved im-
mediately to help him secure a portion of the Edgehill tract owned
by his father across the Rivanna River from Monticello. He wrote
to the elder Randolph about the matter from New York, and after
he got home, he made a special trip to Tuckahoe to make an ar-

rangement with his old friend. He was overjoyed when he and
Randolph reached an agreement, but almost immediately Ran-
dolph, who had recently remarried, began to have second thoughts
and wanted to revise the understanding. Jefferson advised his son-
in-law to release his father from the agreement, but at the same
time he patiently continued to seek to persuade the elder Randolph
to proceed with it by revising its terms. Jefferson was unable to
complete the negotiations while in Virginia, but the young couple
remained at Monticello in his absence, and he continued to hope
that some arrangement could be reached. The elder Randolph and
his quick-tempered son were not able to continue the negotiations
with Jefferson's calm approach. Such hard feelings developed on
both sides that the younger Randolph began looking for other suit-
able property in Albemarle County. Ultimately, however, father
and son became reconciled, and in January, 1792, the elder Ran-
dolph sold his son 1,523 acres of the Edgehill property, together
with the slaves living there, thus pleasing Martha and fulfilling
Jefferson's wish that she and her family (which by then included his
first grandchild) near him. 49
live
Jefferson stayed longer at Monticello in the fall of 1 790 than he

had intended and did not leave home until November 8. He had
delayed his journey to Philadelphia to travel with Madison, and on
the way the two men stopped at Mount Vernon to confer with Presi-
dent Washington. At this time both Jefferson and Madison were in
the close confidence of the president, and their trust in him was
unreserved. We can be sure they talked about plans for the new
capital, the latest intelligence from Europe, and the upcoming ses-
sion of Congress, which would convene on December 6. The presi-
dent would follow the secretary of state and the congressional
leader to the capital a week later. The winter campaign — as Jeffer-
son came to call the meetings of Congress — was about to begin.
XII
Conflict in Washington's Cabinet
The chill of winter was in the air on November 20, 1790, when
Jefferson and Madison arrived in Philadelphia and took rooms at
Mrs. Mary House's boardinghouse at Fifth and Market streets.
Madison always stayed there when in Philadelphia and had done so
since entering the Continental Congress in 1780. Jefferson, how-
ever, had expected the dwelling that he had rented from Thomas
Leiper to be available by October. That it was not ready was partly
because of his own requests for changes to be made in the three-
story house, which was under construction when he leased it. He
ordered a room built across the back at the second level to shelve
his books, a carriage house for three carriages, and stables for five
horses. In addition, he offered such detailed directions concerning
the interior of the dwelling that Leiper dispatched his master car-
penter to confer with him in person. 1
The attention that Jefferson devoted to the finishing of a house

that he was expecting to rent for only a few years was extraordinary
but fully in harmony with his habit of seeking to establish himself in
comfortable, convenient, and pleasing surroundings wherever he
lived. In this instance he had to suffer considerable inconvenience
before he could enjoy the results of his efforts. Three weeks passed
before he could vacate his room at Mrs. House's and move into the
two rooms on the third floor of Leiper's still-unfinished dwelling on
December 1 1. It was another eight days before he got possession of
his bedroom on the second floor and not until January 8 that the
drawing room and parlor could be used and he was able to dine
at home, though not yet in the dining room. On January 20 he
recorded in his account book that he had taken possession of the
dining room and front room on the first floor. 2 The house was his
at last.
Meanwhile, seventy-eight large crates of furniture, household
Thomas Jefferson. Marble bust by Jean-Antoine Houdon, 1789. Taken
from life while Jefferson was minister to France.
Courtesy Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, George Nixon Black Fund
—
a V^^.Ay^L^vrJ^^ ylL WAtpD STATED

OT AHtKiCA, Ux C^ruî Crr^^r *^Je~M*2
T<£L+t^ 6
~fc> Th»- trfrilniim^l J) •VruiW^ -Y^^srCJ fh^t r&**± J%**>+t4 *"^»*t. rfu.
-f>** *Lr~ t\4£*ae^- ^^€p~+4fc
Vt. kju HL*^ u~aL»'& !» L__Vt*- ffudut- a ti rr<~C'T\_ .i_.1 r _-
^7 IT *r3 " -° c
^^} *~™~* ' **"
e if /* ^*X
.£G;fL*t
A
^ry o^nu^ aUîu^f Muu^rj<^ f**~~~1 fy^r^
JtAvr>^ ,^*it r u y^cU-^c*, »vAfjx
/j <rru* t^^m.t^\iL) j borzoi ^^t •
' •
îttm I
J. i
r
- O <^C^ A^-t
«£• ~*
-
<^4 usrr*a*i-rr^<f .rcL^-um-Zi LJfLi*A, to C*ryC&y<L _
First page of Jefferson's original rough draft of the Declaration

of Independence
Thomas Jefferson Papers, Manuscripts Dnnsion, Library of Congress
Miniature of Jefferson painted by John Trumbull
for Maria Cosway, 1788
Courtesy White House Collection
Martha Jefferson.
Miniature of Jefferson's daughter
by Joseph Boze, 1789.
Maria Cosway.
Diplomatic Reception Rooms, United States
Department of State. Painting by Richard Cosway.
Photograph by Will Brown Courtesy Cincinnati Art Museum
Jefferson as secretary of state. Painted from life by Charles Willson Peale
in Philadelphia, 1791.
Courtesy Independence National Historical Park Collection
Jefferson on the eve of his presidency. Painted from life by Rembrandt
Peale in Philadelphia, 1800.
Courtesy White House Collection
Courtesy National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
The Peale portrait (opposite page) became the major source of popular
images of Jefferson during his presidency, including the two on this page.
At the top is the engraving by David Edwin published in 1800. The other
engraving is by Cornelius Tiebout. It was published in Philadephia in
1 80 1 and offered for sale to the public for two dollars soon after
Jefferson's inauguration as president.

Plaster model of the Virginia state capitol, sent in 1786 by Jefferson from
Paris to Richmond
Courtesy Virginia State Library, Richmond
Monticello. Drawing attributed to Robert Mills, about 1803.

Courtesy Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston
—
CONFLICT IN WASHINGTON S CABINET 159
furnishings, books, and other belongings shipped from France ar-

rived in Philadelphia. He paid a "monstrous bill of freight"
—
$544.53 for the shipment from Le Havre, and on December 22,
draymen delivered the first load of crates from the wharf. Twenty-
six more loads arrived before the end of the month, filling the
house with crates and littering it with packing materials as the care-
fully packed containers were opened — all while workmen were try-
3
ing to put the finishing touches on the house's interior.
What a shipment of goods from Paris it was! Packed among nu-
merous mattresses, blankets, and pillows were enough chairs to fill
a mansion, as indeed they had in his Paris residence. One crate
after another was filled with chairs: 10 crimson ones (2 of them
armchairs), another set of 8 covered in crimson velvet, 6 in red mo-
rocco, and 12 in blue. There were also 2 blue easy chairs, a blue silk
ottoman, and a red morocco ottoman. Other crates contained 7
mahogany tables, 4 marble tops with gilt borders, 4 floor-length
mirrors with gilt borders (still to be seen at Monticello today),
14 blue damask curtains, 22 bell pulls, and 145 rolls of wallpaper.
There were 3 gaming tables, 2 daybeds, a library ladder, and also
porcelain dishes, crystal goblets, silver candlesticks, and brass and-
irons. There were figurines, epergnes, vases, clocks, and fine writing
paper. Even 6 stoves were crated, and among numerous kitchen
utensils could be found a waffle iron and four molds for ices. Nor
did his packers in Paris fail to send the fountain and its basin from
his anteroom. In addition, they shipped a dozen cases of wine and
4
2 cases of macaroni. Then, of course, there were his books.
Fifteen of the 78 crates shipped to Philadelphia were packed
with books, and it was a magnificent library indeed that he had col-
lected during his five years in France. Years later when he sold his
collection to Congress for its library, he said, "While residing in
Paris, I devoted every afternoon I was disengaged, for a summer or
two, in examining all the principal bookstores, turning over every
book with my own hands, and putting by everything which related
to America, and indeed whatever was rare and valuable in every
science." He also added that he had standing orders with book-
sellers in major European cities for books relating to America not
found in Paris. Not immodestly he concluded that "such a collec-
tion was made as probably can never again be effected, because it is
hardly probable that the same opportunities, the same time, indus-
try, perseverance, and expense, with some knowledge of the bibli-
ography of the subject, would again happen to be in concurrence."

Jefferson had taken special precaution to secure the safe shipment
l6o IN PURSUIT OF REASON
of these treasures, having instructed that each book be wrapped

separately in paper and each box wrapped in oilcloth. 5 When the
books were finally unpacked and shelved, he had at hand a library to
serve his needs as secretary of state as well as for his own enjoyment.
Two months after arriving in Philadelphia, half of the crates had
not been opened, and Jefferson did not get his household affairs
fully in order until Adrien Petit, the trusted and efficient maitre
d'hotel who had managed his house in Paris, arrived in Phila-
delphia in July, 1791. 6 He had tried to get Petit to join him in New
York, but the Frenchman preferred to stay in Paris, hoping that
Jefferson's successor as minister would employ him. Not until after
moving to Philadelphia did Jefferson succeed in changing Petit's
mind. By then Jefferson was willing to offer higher wages, and Petit
had tired of waiting for Jefferson's replacement. 7 Jefferson was de-
lighted when Petit finallydecided to come. Besides getting his
house in order, Petit's arrivalmade it easier for him to bring his
daughter Maria (Polly), now thirteen, back with him after his trip
home in the fall of 1 79 1 Petit would remain in his service as long as
.
Jefferson was secretary of state, even though the debts that Jeffer-
son accumulated during that period show that he could hardly af-
ford to employ him. 8
When everything was uncrated and in place, Jefferson had estab-
lished himself in elegant and convenient surroundings. His resi-
dence, the fourth west of Eighth Street on the south side of Market,
was near the building that he had rented for the State Department
offices on the northwest corner of Market and Eighth streets. At
first, Jefferson had thought of renting two adjoining houses, using
the top two floors for his apartment and the first floor of both
houses for department offices, but he found that the funds allowed
for his office rent were insufficient to permit this. Though he had a
secretary's room in the modest State Department offices, he did
most of his serious work in his better-appointed residence, with his
9
library close at hand. His house was convenient to the president's
residence, formerly occupied by Robert Morris, about three blocks
away on the same street. He was also close to Congressional Hall
and to the nearby American Philosophical Society, whose members
earlier had chosen him as a councillor and in January, 1791, elected
him one of the three vice-presidents of the society. Philadelphia
was the American city that Jefferson liked best, and one reason was
the circle of friends he had there, especially in the American Philo-
sophical Society. At this moment, however, the duties of his office
left him little time to devote to scientific enterprises.
conflict in Washington's cabinet 161
From the convening of the final session of the First Congress on

December 6, 1790, until its adjournment on March 3, 1791, Jeffer-
son was unusually pressed with preparing reports for Congress
and the president. Indeed, during much of the period he com-
pleted a major report nearly every week. A few days after Congress
assembled, Washington asked the secretary of state to review the
correspondence relating to Gouverneur Morris' mission to London
and to recommend measures be pursued. After studying the
to
record, Jefferson concluded that the British had decided not to
evacuate the posts still occupied on United States soil and that they
did not intend to negotiate a commercial treaty unless the United

States would agree to an alliance undermining American obliga-
tions to France. He recommended, and the president agreed, that
Morris' mission be ended and that any further initiative for nego-
tiations come from England. 10
The adoption of this policy did not mean abandoning efforts to
push the British toward reciprocity, as demonstrated in Jefferson's
report on cod and whale fisheries, submitted to the House of Rep-
resentatives on February 1, 1791. His exhaustive analysis of the de-
pressed state of the fisheries concluded by drawing attention to the
obligation of the government to promote free world markets and
indicated that markets for the products of American fisheries could
be maintained "by friendly arrangements towards those nations
whose arrangements are friendly to us." While Jefferson spoke of
developing markets in France, he saw no disposition on the part of
England "to arrange this or any other commercial matter to mutual
convenience. The exparte regulations which they have begun for
mounting their navigation on the ruins of ours, can only be opposed
by counter- regulations on our part." 11 Jefferson's views coincided
with Madison's legislative efforts to enact navigation and trade mea-
sures that would "meet the regulations of foreign nations on terms
of reciprocity." The First Congress failed to act on Madison's naviga-
tion bill before adjourning, but after the end of the session Jeffer-
son sent copies of the proposed measure to diplomatic represen-
tatives William Short in Paris, David Humphreys in Lisbon, and
William Carmichael in Madrid suggesting that they work to en-
courage France, Portugal, and Spain to enact similar laws. The pro-
posed act, he said, "is perfectly innocent as to other nations, is
strictly just as to the English, cannot be parried by them, and if
adopted by other nations would inevitably defeat their navigation

act and reduce their powers on the sea within safer limits." 12
Convinced that British trading restrictions could be successfully
countered by retaliations in trade policies by other countries, Jeffer-

son saw concerted action as the most effective tactic. Yet, he was
prepared for the United States to act alone. That stance clearly
placed him on a confrontation course with Hamilton, who opposed
any discrimination against England. When Jefferson's report on
fisheries was presented to Congress and published in the news-
papers, Hamilton did not publicly respond, but he continued to
oppose Jefferson's policy within the administration. At a cabinet
meeting in December, 1791, when Jefferson indicated that he was
planning to recommend retaliation against Great Britain in a re-
port to Congress, Hamilton argued vigorously against it, insisting
that any such proposal would undermine the chances of obtain-
ing the British evacuation of the western posts through negotia-
tions with the recently arrived British minister, George Hammond.
Hamilton's reasoning persuaded Jefferson to hold back his report
as long as there was any hope that the British intended to sur-
render the posts. By the time he discovered that Hammond had no
authority to negotiate on that subject, it was too late to submit his
report to Congress. Jefferson blamed Hammond's delaying tactics
on Hamilton's revealing to him the cabinet discussions. Even with-
out Hamilton's interference it is not at all clear that Jefferson's and
Madison's proposed policy of commercial retaliation against Britain
would have worked. Britain was indeed concerned about the threat
of American retaliation, but there is considerable evidence that the
British were prepared to retaliate against the United States in re-
turn. 13 No immediate settlement of the disputes with Britain was
reached.
Meanwhile, the leading objectives of the secretary of state's for-
One of the first sub-
eign policy were becoming clear in other areas.
jects that Jefferson had discussed with the president after joining
the cabinet concerned Americans being held captive by the Al-
gerines, and one of the first matters referred to him by the House
of Representatives was a petition from those same captives. Not un-
til the next congressional session, however, did Jefferson complete
his report on the subject, submitting it to Congress on December

30, 1790. The delay may have resulted from secret negotiations
under way for release of the Americans or from Jefferson's desire to
connect the question of the Algerine captives with the broader
issue of American commerce in the Mediterranean. His slow re-
sponse certainly did not indicate any lack of interest in the mat-
ter on his part. On the contrary, the problem of the capture of
American seamen by Mediterranean pirates had long concerned
him. He had devoted considerable attention to the issue as minister

to France, at which time he had favored using naval force, prefera-
bly in league with other states, to suppress piracy rather than pay-
ing ransom. Secretary of State Jefferson still held the same opinion
when he reported to Congress on the American captives and trade
in the Mediterranean. "Upon the Whole, it rests with Congress to
decide between War, Tribute, and Ransom, as the Means of re-
establishing our Mediterranean Commerce," he concluded. But his
report and the documents accompanying it left little doubt as to the
course that he believed should be followed. Senator Maclay thought
the papers "seemed to breathe resentment, and abounded with
14
martial estimates in a naval way." Such a position was consistent
both with the policies Jefferson had pursued as minister to France
and with the larger objectives of his foreign policy as secretary of
state. Protection of American trade in the Mediterranean would
promote American commerce and simultaneously strike against
British commercial supremacy.
Britain was willing to pay tribute and allow the Barbary pirates to
prey on the ships of smaller states because there was more to be
gained by this policy than by keeping the Mediterranean free of
pirates for the ships of all countries. It was this aspect of the issue
that may explain why Jefferson's proposal did not attract greater
support from the advocates of commerce and naval power and why
Hamilton was not an ally in the business. The secretary of the trea-
sury was more interested in not offending England and in drawing
the United States closer to that commercial power than in advanc-
ing the growth of independent American commerce or freedom of
the seas. The result was that though a Senate committee, whose
members included some of Hamilton's most influential supporters,
reported that the "trade of the United States to the Mediterranean
cannot be protected but by a naval force," it also equivocated by say-
ing "it will be proper to resort to the same as soon as the state of
public finances will admit." After a Senate resolution to this effect
was allowed to die in committee, the Senate resolved that the presi-
dent be authorized to spend forty thousand dollars to redeem citi-
zens of the United States held in captivity in Algiers. 15 Congress
thus chose to pay ransom and delay confrontation. Jefferson would
have to wait until he became president to employ naval power to
end the paying of tribute in the Mediterranean.
Foreign-policy differences between the secretary of state and the
secretary of the treasury were evident in regard to France as well as
Britain. When the French protested that Congress' failure to ex-
empt France from the higher tonnage duties levied on foreign ves-
sels contradicted the treaty of amity and commerce, Jefferson re-
jected the argument. But he recommended that, considering the
value of the interests at stake and the small amount of money in-
volved, the concession to France be made. Hamilton opposed the
proposal, and it failed towin support in Congress, which earlier
had rejected Madison's effort to impose higher duties on ships of
countries not having a commercial treaty with the United States.
While Jefferson sought to nurture relationships with France and to
counter commercial subservience to England, Hamilton looked for
opportunities to lessen ties with France and to develop links with
England. "In the case of the two nations with which we have the
most intimate connections, France and England," Jefferson ex-
plained, "my system was to give some satisfactory distinctions to
the former, of little cost to us, in return for the solid advantages
yielded us by them; and to have met the English with some restric-
tions which might induce them to abate their severities against our
commerce." This policy, he believed, had the support of the presi-
dent. "Yet the secretary of the treasury, by his cabals with mem-
bers of the legislature, and by high-toned declamation on other
occasions, has forced down his own system, which was exactly
the reverse." 16 This bitter protest, which Jefferson penned amid
heightening clashes between the two cabinet officers, reveals how
important foreign-policy matters were in producing the deep an-
tagonisms between the two men.
By 1791 foreign affairs and domestic policy intertwined to end
the earlier cooperation that Jefferson had extended to Hamilton
on funding and assumption. After the secretary of the treasury
submitted his proposal for a national bank to Congress in Decem-
ber, 1790, Jefferson privately began to express his concerns about
Hamilton's policies. 17 In Congress Madison openly led the opposi-
tion to the bank bill but failed to block the measure, which passed
both houses in February, 1791, and was sent to the president. Be-
fore deciding whether to sign the bill, Washington sought opinions
on its constitutionality, first from Attorney General Randolph and
then from both Jefferson and Hamilton. These confidential memo-
randa prepared for the president's use were not made public. None-
theless, they were immensely important papers and in time became
known. Their importance lies less in the evidence of the emerging
split between the two cabinet members than in the constitutional
interpretations advanced. The reasoning of each officer would
have far-reaching influence in American history. Jefferson's argu-
ments for strictconstruction laid the foundation for the states'

rights interpretation of the Constitution, while Hamilton's opinion
served as the model that Chief Justice John Marshall would later
follow in giving judicial sanction to the doctrine of implied powers.
Jefferson's concise brief arguing that the bill to charter a na-
tional bank was unconstitutional rested on the dictum of the still-
unratified Tenth Amendment that "the powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States,
are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Jefferson
insisted that "to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus spe-
ciallydrawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of
a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition."
The incorporation of a bank had not been delegated to the United
States by the Constitution. He first examined the specially enumer-
ated powers of Congress, particularly the powers to tax, to borrow
money, and to regulate commerce, and concluded that the charter-
ing of a bank was not included among any of the enumerations. He
then considered the general phrase of the Constitution that identi-
fied the purpose of the taxing power as "to pay the Debts and pro-
vide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United
States." Congress, he said, was to levy taxes only for these purposes,
not for any purpose they pleased. "In like manner they are not to do
anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay
taxes for that purpose." To interpret this provision in any other way
would reduce the Constitution to "a single phrase, that of institut-
ing a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of
the U.S. and as they would be the sole judges of good or evil, it
would be also a power to do whatever evil they pleased." 18
Jefferson next turned to the constitutional provision giving Con-
gress the authority to make all laws necessary and proper for carry-
ing into execution its enumerated powers. He insisted that this key
clause be read strictly. A bank was not necessary for Congress to
carry into execution any of its enumerated powers and therefore
was not authorized by the Constitution. It mattered not how useful
or convenient a bank might be in collecting taxes or borrowing
money; Congress was restricted to only that which was necessary.
Otherwise there was nothing "which ingenuity may not torture into
a convenience, in some way or other, to some one of so long a list of enu-
merated powers." Congress, he concluded, was limited to "those
means without which the grant of the power would be nugatory."
In offering his opinion to the president, Jefferson also gave a strict
reading to the president's veto power and advised Washington that
—
ifhe were not clearly convinced in his own mind that the measure
was unauthorized by the Constitution, "a just respect for the wisdom
of the legislature would naturally decide the balance in favour of
19
their opinion."
The strict construction of the Constitution that Jefferson here
advocated would remain his fundamental view of the Constitution
throughout his life. Even when he allowed himself to be a party to
actions that he considered outside the scope of the Constitution
as in the purchase of Louisiana —
he never justified it on a loose
reading of the Constitution but on the necessity of implementing
the will of the people in exceptional circumstances in which time
did not permit constitutional amendments. As president, Jefferson
would follow the rule he advocated to the first president in regard
to the use of the veto power, and in eight years he would never em-
ploy the executive veto.
Jefferson had not seen Randolph's opinion when he drafted his
memorandum for the president, but the attorney general also
viewed the bank as unconstitutional. With two opinions against the
bank bill, Washington wanted the arguments on the other side and
sent both papers to Hamilton with a request for his views. 20 With
their opinions before him when he prepared his lengthy exposi-
tion, Hamilton directed much of his argument to answering his col-
leagues. He began by asserting "that every power vested in a Gov-
ernment is in its nature sovereign, and includes by force of the term, a
right to employ all the means requisite, and fairly applicable to the
attainment of the ends of such power; and which are not precluded
by restrictions and exceptions specified in the constitution." He
then went on to challenge the specific arguments of the attorney
general and the secretary of state. Disputing Jefferson's interpreta-
tion of the necessary and proper clause, he insisted that "it is essen-
tial to the being of the National government, that so erroneous a
conception of the meaning of the word necessary, should be ex-

plored. It is certain, that neither the grammatical, nor popular
sense of the term requires that construction. According to both,
necessary often means no more than needful, requisite, incidental,
useful, or conducive to." Jefferson, he said, was interpreting necessary
as if it were prefixed by the word absolutely or indispensably. We need
not follow all of Hamilton's detailed argument, but it is important to
note his conclusion. What he wrote would be convincing not only to
Washington but also to John Marshall, who later would use much
the same language in the famous case of McCulloch v. Maryland
(1819) to uphold the constitutionality of the second Bank of the
United thereby establishing the judicial interpretation of the

States,
implied powers clause. The criterion of what is constitutional and
what is not, Hamilton wrote, "is the end to which the measure re-
lates as a mean. If the end be clearly comprehended within any of
the specified powers, and if the measure have an obvious relation to
that end, and is not forbidden by any particular provision of the
constitution — it may safely be deemed to come within the compass
of national authority." 21
Hamilton's persuasive arguments prevailed over Jefferson's rigid
interpretation and in the course of time sustained an expansion of
national authority that Jefferson's strict construction would never
have permitted. Jefferson's answer to the problem of adjusting gov-
ernment to changing times was that expressed in his belief that "the
earth belongs always to the living," which encouraged the peri-
odical drafting of new constitutions. It was not change he opposed
but altering the powers of government without returning to con-
stituent authority. Hamilton, he thought, was trying to alter the
government without consulting the people.
Jefferson objected to the creation of a national bank not only on
constitutional grounds but also as a matter of public policy. He saw
the bank as a tool of special interests and an unhealthy concentra-
tion of economic power, part of a design to promote moneyed in-
terests at the expense of farmers. When the bank bill was before
Congress, he confided to George Mason that "the only corrective of
what is amiss in our present government will be the augumentation
of the numbers in the lower house, so as to get a more agricultural
representation, which may put that interest above that of the stock-
jobbers." 22 This was an early indication of Jefferson's recognition of
the need to marshal political opposition in Congress against Hamil-
ton's programs, but he was reluctant to move openly to organize
such a movement. Indeed, his first major appearance in the public
press as a dissenter within the administration resulted from an in-
advertent act on his own part. In returning a borrowed copy of
Thomas Paine's Rights of Man to the Philadelphia printer who was
planning to publish the pamphlet, he enclosed a brief note in which
he remarked that he was extremely pleased that the work was to be
reprinted in Philadelphia and that "something is at length to be
publicly said against the political heresies which have sprung up
among us. I have no doubt our citizens will rally a second time
round the standard of Common Sense." 23 To his astonishment an
extract from the letter was published at the head of Paine's pam-
phlet when it appeared in early May, 1791. John Adams took great
offense at the publication — and justly so, because Jefferson con-

fessed to Madison that he had had Adams' "Discourses on Davila"
in mind when he wrote the comments. "I tell the writer freely that
he is a heretic, but certainly never meant to step into a public news-
paper with that in my mouth." 24 Jefferson was less forthright in his
explanations to Adams, but he tried to smooth the matter over and
placate his old friend, though he did not attempt to do so in regard
to Hamilton, who, Jefferson said, was "open-mouthed" against
him. 25 As newspaper editors throughout the country reprinted
Jefferson's comment and joined in the controversy, Jefferson came
more and more to appear in the public mind as the champion
of republicanism and increasingly to be seen as the opponent of
Hamilton.
Just as the controversy was beginning to swirl, Jefferson and
Madison out on a trip to New York and New England. Their
set
itinerary took them to Lakes George and Champlain and back
through Bennington, Vermont, western Massachusetts, Connecti-
cut, and Long Island. Political observers immediately saw partisan
motives in the journey. One of Hamilton's allies in New York re-
ported "every appearance of a passionate courtship" between the
Virginia travelers and Chancellor Robert R. Livingston and Aaron
Burr while they were in New York, and he concluded that Hamilton
was the target of their plans. 26 Such observations fostered the suspi-
cion that the two Virginians used the trip to build a political alliance
with New Yorkers. But all evidence indicates that the journey was
primarily what they said it was — a vacation and a tour to study the
flora and fauna of the region. Jefferson's notes written along the
way offer abundant descriptions of trees, flowers, wildlife, lakes,
rivers, and related matters, and not a word on politics. Madison's
notes on the journev are crowded with comments on farmland,
27
crops, and the price of wheat and likewise are devoid of politics.
While sailing on Lake Champlain, Jefferson wrote his daughter
Martha about the previous day on Lake George. That lake, he said,
was "without comparison the most beautiful water I ever saw:
formed by a contour of mountains into a bason 35 miles long, and
from 2 to 4 miles broad, finely interspersed with islands, its waters
limpid as chrystal and the mountain sides covered with rich groves
of Thuya, silver fir, white pine, Aspen and paper birch down to the
water edge, here and there precipices of rock to checquer the scene
and save it from monotony. An abundance of speckled trout, salmon
trout, bass and other fish with which it is stored, have added to our
other amusements the sport of taking them." 28 Not much political
conspiracy here! The two men no doubt talked of politics, and in-
deed they made contacts in New York and elsewhere that later
would be politically useful, but Jefferson and Madison were not yet
in the business of organizing a political party. 29
Nonetheless, they had taken steps in that direction by seeking to
persuade Philip Freneau to establish a newspaper in Philadelphia.
That move was not part of any conscious plan to organize a political
party — for both Jefferson and Madison still saw parties as divisive.
It was prompted by their desire to get a fairer and wider hearing
for their political views. Yet, once Freneau's paper was established, it
would contribute to the growth of parties. Freneau, who had gained
something of a reputation as a poet during the Revolution, was
writing for a New York newspaper when Henry Lee, a former class-
mate of Freneau's at Princeton, interested another Princetonian,
James Madison, in Freneau's less-than-prosperous situation and his
desire to relocate. The State Department then had an opening as
a translating clerk, and Jefferson offered him the part-time job,
which paid only $250 a year but also gave "so little to do as not to
interfere with any other calling the person may choose," so long as
he stayed in Philadelphia. 30 Although Freneau at first declined this
offer, Madison kept in contact with him and, after various negotia-
tions and considerable indecisiveness on Freneau's part, worked out
an arrangement under which the New York printing firm of Childs
and Swaine took Freneau into a partnership to establish a paper in
Philadelphia, and Freneau agreed to become the editor. 31
Although Madison took the lead in making the arrangements
with Freneau, Jefferson regarded it as a joint enterprise and, be-
sides the small salary in his department, promised the editor "the
perusal of all my letters of foreign intelligence and all foreign
newspapers; the publication of all proclamations and other public

notices within my department, and the printing of the laws." 32 Both
Jefferson and Madison were active in soliciting subscriptions for
Freneau's paper, especially in Virginia, for one of their purposes
was paper established that would circulate nationally. The
to see a
name National Gazette, under which Freneau began to publish his
paper on October 31, 1791, reflected that aim.
A nationally circulating newspaper was not, however, the only
object of Freneau's sponsors. They also wanted a paper that would
"furnish a whig-vehicle of intelligence" to counteract the influence
—
of John Fenno's Gazette of the United States a publication Jefferson
regarded as "a paper of pure Toryism, disseminating the doctrines
of monarchy, aristocracy, and the exclusion of the influence of the
people." Jefferson expected that Freneau "would give free place

to pieces written against the aristocratical and monarchical prin-
ciples." But the poet-editor was even more spirited than his backers
anticipated and launched a bold attack on Hamilton's policies as
well. Jefferson insisted that he had not expected Freneau to go that
far. "My expectations looked only to the chastisement of the aristo-
cratical and monarchicalwriters, and not to any criticisms on the
proceedings of the government," he said. 33
Jefferson regarded his employment of Freneau and other favors
to him as support for a man of genius, but Hamilton and his
friends were unwilling to be so generous, charging that Freneau
was the paid tool of the secretary of state. In a piece in Fenno's
paper, Hamilton himself pointed to the salary that Freneau re-
ceived from the government and asked whether it was paid for
translations or publications designed to oppose the government's
measures, vilify its officers, and disturb the public peace. 34 Hamil-
ton followed with more detailed charges of "a news paper insti-
tuted by a public officer, and the Editor of it regularly pensioned
with the public money, in the disposal of that officer." He said that
the whole complexion of Freneau 's paper was "an exact copy of the
politics of his employer foreign and domestic, and exhibits a de-
cisive internal evidence of the influence of that patronage under
which he acts." 35 This attack, which came some nine months after
—
Freneau began his paper and while Jefferson, Madison, and Wash-
ington were all away on vacation in Virginia —
rapidly escalated into
bitter exchanges between Freneau and Fenno, prompting further
anonymously published accusations by Hamilton. 36 Freneau coun-
terattacked with charges that Fenno, who received the considerable
printing business of the Treasury Department, was "a vile syco-
phant" who obtained "emoluments from government, far more lu-
crative than the salary alluded to," while "disseminating principles
and sentiments utterly subversive of the true republican interests
of this country." 37
Hamilton, who
published pieces under various pseudonyms, as-
sumed But Jefferson assured the
that Jefferson was doing the same.
president that he "never did by myself or any other, directly or in-
directly, write, dictate or procure any one sentence" to be published
in Freneau's paper or in any other gazette, to which he had not
signed his name, with the exception of a paragraph about the Al-
gerine captives thai he once put into Fenno's paper. There is no evi-
dence to dispute Jefferson's affirmation that he never wrote any-
thing anonymously for Freneau's gazette, and technically he may
never have procured pieces for publication. But he was not being
candid in his assurances to the president, for he had encouraged
others to contribute to Freneau's paper. More important, Jefferson
gave Freneau access to a wide variety of materials from the Depart-
ment of State that he did not make available to other editors for- —
eign newspapers, official pamphlets, letters, documents, American
consular reports, and other foreign intelligence that he supplied
selectively. He did not open up his files to Freneau. Indeed, he was
careful to guard the confidentiality of diplomatic and other corre-
spondence. But he did select items that he wanted to see published,
and he held back others that he did not want Freneau to see.
Madison was more direct in his contributions to Freneau. Eighteen
unsigned pieces published in the National Gazette have been iden-
38
tified as from Madison's pen. Neither Jefferson nor Madison was
involved as directly as Hamilton in the newspaper war between
Freneau and Fenno. Yet their role in attracting Freneau to Phila-
delphia, putting him on the payroll of the State Department, and
giving him privileges denied to other editors left Jefferson vulner-
able to charges difficult to refute no matter how circumspect he
tried to be in his relations with the editor.
Ultimately the president hinted to Jefferson that he should inter-
vene in some way to restrain Freneau, perhaps by withdrawing his
appointment as translating clerk. Jefferson would not do so. In his
view Freneau's paper had "saved our constitution which was gallop-
ing fast into monarchy." He believed that "the President, not sensi-
ble of the designs of the party, has not with his usual good sense
and sang froid, looked on the efforts and effects of this free press,
and seen that tho' some bad things had passed thro' it to the public,
yet the good have preponderated immensely." 39 Jefferson's fears of
a monarchical party appear overblown, but Freneau's paper played
a major role in promoting republican views and in presenting
Jefferson before the public as a champion of republicanism and the
arch foe of the Hamiltonian system. Before Freneau's paper folded
after two tumultuous years, it did much to speed the development
of national political parties.
When ended in March, 1791, political parties
the First Congress
had not formed either in Congress or in the electorate, but dur-
yet
ing the Second Congress two opposing political blocs began to
coalesce in the legislature and increasingly came to dominate its
proceedings. Madison, who emerged in the First Congress as the
principal leader of the opposition to Hamilton's policies, headed
one group; the opposing bloc comprised supporters of Hamilton.
Less than half of the members of Congress aligned themselves with

either group, so that can hardly be said that Congress was rigidly
it
divided into parties, but such voting blocs had not been evident in
the First Congress. Moreover, the new party blocs were observable
in Congress before equally clear divisions were found among the
The first national political parties in the United States
electorate.
thus developed at the national center of government and from
there spread into the broader political arena, carrying the issues
that divided Congress to the electorate, which tended to align along
40
the lines that their representatives in Congress had marked out.
Jefferson's early role in the formation of the Republican party
that he would lead to victory at the polls in 1800 must be viewed
more broadly than as part of the split in the cabinet. He shared the
leadership of the early Republican interest with Madison, whose ac-
tivities in Congress were more important in an organizational sense
than his. Jefferson's role was most important as the symbol of Re-
publicanism, but he was not aloof from the business of politics and
was more active in working with Madison in Congress than has
sometimes been recognized.
In the spring of 1792 Jefferson for the first time began to talk
about the "heats and tumults of conflicting parties." Soon after-
ward Alexander Hamilton charged that the last session of Congress
had convinced him that "Mr. Madison cooperating with Mr. Jeffer-
son is at the head of a faction decidedly hostile to me and my ad-
ministration, and actuated by views in my judgment subversive of
the principles of good government and dangerous to the union,
peace and happiness of the Country." Hamilton found it difficult to
understand how Madison, who had earlier agreed so fully with him
and joined him in writing the Federalist papers, could now be so
much in opposition, and he was inclined to explain it on personal
and partisan grounds. He viewed Jefferson's actions in much the
same way. In various conversations that had been reported to him,
Jefferson had "thrown censure on my principles of government and
on my measures of administration," he observed. "In the question
concerning the Bank he not only delivered an opinion in writing
against its constitutionality and expediency, but he did so in a stile
and manner which I felt as partaking of asperity and ill humour to-
wards me." In regard to foreign policy he accused both Jefferson
and Madison of having "a womanish attachment to France and a wom-
anish resentment against Great Britain" and predicted that "if these
Gentlemen were left to pursue their own course there would be in
less than six months an open War between the United States and Great
Britain." He also accused Jefferson of being motivated

by presi-
dential ambitions. Marshalling evidence from Freneau's paper, re-
ports from informants, and his own observations, he was convinced
that Jefferson and Madison were conspiring to drive him from his
Treasury post. 41
By late summer of 1792 the growing controversy in the press led
by Fenno's Gazette of the United States and Freneau's National Gazette
had focused so much public attention on the disputes between
Jefferson and Hamilton that President Washington wrote a confi-
dential letter to each of them expressing his concern and urging
them to reconcile their differences. It was regrettable, he said, that
while the new nation was surrounded by enemies "internal dissen-
sions should be harrowing and tearing our vitals." If this continued,
he feared it would destroy the Union. The letters were couched in
similar language but contained enough variation to show that the
president had the particular individual in mind as he drafted each
letter. He mentioned to Jefferson the danger of one officer of gov-
ernment pulling one way and another the other way after measures
had been decided and urged "more charity for the opinions and
acts of one another." He told Hamilton that political differences
were unavoidable, perhaps necessary, but it was to be regretted
"that subjects cannot be discussed with temper on the one hand, or
decisions submitted to without having the motives which led to
them improperly implicated on the other." While not specifically
mentioning the press to Jefferson, Washington in his letter to Hamil-
ton referred to the "irritating charges, with which some of our Ga-
zettes are so strongly impregnated." Despite the shadings, his plea
to both men was the same, "that instead of wounding suspicions,
and irritable charges, there may be liberal allowances, mutual for-
bearances, and temporising yieldings on all sides."* 2
In a lengthy response to the president, Jefferson acknowledged
the dissensions within the administration and expressed his regret
at being a part of them, but he placed most of the blame on the
secretary of the treasury. Upon taking office as secretary of state,
he had determined not to intermeddle at all with the legislature, he
said, and as little as possible with other departments. In regard to
Congress, he had departed from the rule only once, and that was in
connection with the assumption business. As for the Treasury, he
had never swerved farther from his rule than "the mere enuncia-
tion of my sentiments in conversation, and chiefly among those
who, expressing the same sentiments, drew mine from me." He ad-
mitted that in his private conversations he had utterly disapproved
of the system of the secretary of the treasury, and he pronounced

Hamilton's policies as based on principles "adverse to liberty" and
"calculated toundermine and demolish the republic, by creating an
influence of his department over the members of the legislature."
Nevertheless, he flatly declared that "if it has been supposed that
I have ever intrigued among the members of the legislatures to
defeat the plans of the Secretary of the Treasury, it is contrary to
43
all truth."
Jefferson contrasted this with Hamilton's cabals with members of
the legislature, his interference in the conduct of foreign affairs,
and on him in the press. There was not the least doubt
his attacks
that Hamilton was the author of the pieces signed "An American"
appearing in Fenno's Gazette of the United States, Jefferson told the
president. (We know today that Hamilton was indeed the author of
those pieces.) It astounded Jefferson that anyone who was shuffling
millions of dollars backward and forward from money to paper
and back and forth between Europe and America while dealing out
Treasury secrets among his friends could charge him with un-
ethical conduct in hiring Freneau as a translating clerk at $250 a
year. He went to great pains to defend his relationship with the edi-
tor. He also answered Hamilton's charges that he had no desire to
see the public debt paid by saying that the difference between
Hamilton and himself was that "I would wish the debt paid tomor-
row; he wishes it never to be paid, but always to be a thing where
with to corrupt and manage the legislature." 44 Jefferson closed his
letter with an announcement of his determination to retire from
office at the end of Washington's first term.
Hamilton said in his reply to the president that he considered
himself the deeply injured party. "I know," he wrote, "that I have
been an object of uniform opposition from Mr. Jefferson, from the
first moment of his coming to the City of New York to enter upon
his present office. I know, from the most authentic sources, that I
have been the frequent subject of the most unkind whispers and
insinuating from the same quarter." He also charged that a party
had been formed in the legislature under Jefferson's auspices, bent
upon his subversion. He admitted taking part in retaliations, but he
said that he could not for the present recede from that course. Sug-
gesting that it might be necessary for the president to replace the
differing members of his administration, he indicated that he would
45
cheerfully acquiesce in such a plan. Hamilton may have consid-
ered himself indispensable and have seen this offer as a way to get
Jefferson out of the government, not knowing that his rival had al-
ready told the president of his plans to retire. Hamilton's letter was
far less detailed and explanatory than Jefferson's, but it left the dis-
tinct impression that he had little intention of altering his ways.
The bitterness that Jefferson and Hamilton displayed toward
each other in their letters surprised Washington. He told Jefferson
that he had been aware of their political differences but "had never
suspected it had gone so far in producing a personal difference."
He still hoped, however, to act as a mediator and urged Jefferson to
46
stay in office as a check within his administration. If Washington
fully recognized the depth of their ideological differences and con-
flicting principles of administration, he could not realistically have
hoped to reconcile the two principal officers of his government,
especially after Hamilton had indicated that he could not alter
his course for the present. At the same time, the president could
hardly have been prepared for the escalation of the public dispute
that ensued.
Hamilton's attacks on Jefferson in the newspapers continued, in-
creased in volume and intensity, and along with the responses they
provoked, they kept the war of words raging in the press until the
end of the year. Jefferson, as he had assured the president, never
directly entered the fray, but his friends did, and he supplied them
with materials for responding. "Aristides" (probably Edmund Ran-
dolph) replied to Hamilton's "An American," charging the author
with "the basest calumny and falsehood" and speculating that "a
certain head of a department is the real author or instigator of this
unprovoked and unmanly attack on Mr. Jefferson." 47 "Aristides"
reasoned that if opposition to the funding system, the national
bank, and other measures of the secretary of the treasury made
Jefferson a patron of disunion, national insignificance, and public
disorder, as "An American" indicated, then "a great majority of
the independent yeomanry of our country" were equally guilty.
"Aristides" prompted a response from Hamilton using the signa-
ture "Catullus." "Mr. Jefferson," he said, "has hitherto been distin-
—
guished as the quiet modest, retiring philosopher as the plain
simple unambitious republican." It was time that he be recognized
as "the intriguing incendiary — the aspiring turbulent competitor."
It had been amply demonstrated that "Mr. Jefferson's politics, what-
ever may be the motives of them tend to national disunion, insignifi-

cance, disorder and discredit." As Jefferson's defenders entered the
contest, Hamilton continued the Catullus series in the Gazette of the
United States through six installments that did not cease until late
December. 48
Jefferson's principal defense came from Madison and Monroe,

who together prepared a series of six essays appearing under the
title "Vindiction of Mr. Jefferson" in Dunlap's American Daily Adver-
tiser, published in Philadelphia. Monroe did the bulk of the work,
being the principal author of five of the six pieces, but Madison was
an active collaborator. Besides defending the hiring of Freneau, the
essayists answered Hamilton's charges that Jefferson had been hos-
tile to the Constitution before its adoption. They published ex-
cerpts from letters that Jefferson had written to Madison from

France expressing his reservations about the absence of a bill of
rights but indicating his general approval. 49
The months during which newspaper editors unfolded the ri-
valry between Jefferson and Hamilton before readers throughout
the country coincided with the congressional and presidential elec-
tions of 1792. Washington had contemplated retiring after four
years in office, and in May, 1792, he went so far as to persuade a
reluctant Madison to draft a farewell message for him. 50 Mean-
while, he came under increasing pressure to stand as a candidate
for another term. Madison appealed for "one more sacrifice, severe
as it may be, to the desires and interests of your country." Jefferson
wrote a long and impassioned plea proclaiming Washington's ser-
vices to be indispensable to preserving republican government and
preventing the breakup of the Union. He feared that a "corrupt
squadron" in Congress aimed at getting rid of the constitutional
limitations on its power and changing the republican form of gov-
ernment into a monarchy modeled on the English constitution. It
was essential that Washington remain in office a few years longer
until the republican character of the legislature could be estab-
lished. Hamilton, seeing enemies of a different stripe trying to take
over the government, also appealed to the president not to leave
51
office. In response to these pleas, Washington delayed his an-
nouncement of retirement, but he held back from committing him-
self to a second term until late in the fall of 1792, believing that a
month before the election was ample time to announce his decision.
Meanwhile, elections for the House of Representatives were
under way in different states at different times, and there was sig-
nificant political maneuvering in regard to the vice-presidential
election. Jefferson had little part in the measures relating to the
election of 1792, but his close friends and political allies Madison
and Monroe were actively involved. They played a major role in the
arrangements worked out with Pennsylvania and New York Repub-
lican leaders to organize support for Governor George Clinton of

New York for vice-president in the place of John Adams. John
Beckley, the clerk of the House of Representatives and one of the
most ingenious and effective party managers of the early republic,
was the leading intermediary in the behind-the-scenes activities
that produced the cooperation. The principals were Aaron Burr in
New York and Madison and Monroe in Virginia, but Jefferson
clearly was aware of what was going on, for on a trip to New York in
September, 1792, Beckley carried a letter from Jefferson's good
friend Dr. Benjamin Rush introducing Beckley as having "the con-
fidence of our two illustrious patriots Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madi-
son." Rush urged Burr "to take an active part in removing the
monarchical rubbish of our government." This early interstate co-
operation among Republican leaders was remarkably successful in
producing unanimous electoral votes for Clinton in New York, Vir-
ginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, giving him 50 electoral votes to
77 for John Adams. That showing against the incumbent vice-

president gave notice of the rising strength of the Republican op-
position and the beginnings of a political alliance between New
York and Virginia Republicans. 52 Unchallenged in the presidential
contest, Washington received the unanimous vote of all 132 electors.
Jefferson assessed the results of the congressional elections, which
he regarded as critical, to be "generally in favor of republican and
against the aristocratical candidates." Despiteall of Hamilton's ef-
forts in the newspapers, the Treasury head lost support. Counting

"a decided majority in favor of the republican interest" in the next
Congress, Jefferson predicted that the government would soon re-
turn to "the true principles of the Constitution." 53 It would be
nearly a year, however, before that Congress met in December,
1793. By that time Jefferson would be counting the days until he
left the cabinet to return to Virginia.
XIII
A Trying Year
Jefferson planned to resign as secretary of state at the end of Wash-

ington's first term as president. He gave up the lease on his house in
Philadelphia effective in mid-March, 1793, began packing his con-
siderable belongings for shipment to Monticello, and said he con-
templated his approaching retirement "with the fondness of a
sailor who But early in February he told the
has land in view." 1
president that he would stay on for a while longer, at least until

summer or fall. His concern that leaving office would be seen as
retreating under from Hamilton and other writers in the
attack
press weighed heavily in making that decision. He confided to his
daughter Martha that he feared resigning would injure him in the
eyes of the public, who would suppose that he "withdrew from in-
vestigation" or "had not tone of mind sufficient to meet slander." 2
In the months ahead Jefferson may have wondered whether he
had made the right decision, for his final year as secretary of state
turned out to be one of the most arduous of his many years in pub-
lic life. The year 1793 was a difficult one in world affairs —
a time of
general war in Europe, terror in France, and uncertainty through-
out the Western world. The president suggested that Jefferson re-
turn as minister to France in the critical times, but Jefferson pro-
tested that he would never again cross the Atlantic and insisted that
when he left the State Department it would be to retire to Mon-
3
ticello. At home, political divisions grew sharper and the admin-
istration more divided. In addition, the scourge of yellow fever

spread through Philadelphia in late summer and forced the gov-
ernment to flee the capital. It was a trying year.
When the new year opened, domestic politics more than foreign
affairs loomed uppermost in Jefferson's mind. His Virginia friends
in Congress, led by Representative William Branch Giles, pressed
an investigation into the Treasury Department that seemed aimed
A TRYING YEAR 179
at driving Hamilton from his post. Jefferson's role in this is not
clear, but a draft in Jefferson's handwriting of Giles's resolutions

censuring the conduct of the secretary of the treasury suggests that
Jefferson was a party to the business and that he was not so aloof
from the proceedings of Congress as he claimed to be. 4 In the clos-
ing days of the Second Congress, the resolutions were soundly de-
feated, and as members scattered to their homes in early March,
public interest in disputes about Treasury policies faded, while
news from Europe seized the attention of most Americans.
Since his return from France, Jefferson had watched the events
in that troubled country with equanimity. He had difficulty in get-
ting information about what was happening there, and the reports
he received were always six to eight weeks old. Whatever the news,
he never wavered in his optimism about the ultimate success of the
Revolution. As time passed, he came to see the French Revolution
as essential to the spread of liberty not only in Europe but also in
the United States. He wrote privately in 1791 that "a check there
would retard the revival of liberty in other countries. I consider the
establishment and success of their government as necessary to stay
up our own and to prevent it from falling back to that kind of Half-
way-house, the English constitution." Although he had approved
of the constitution that established a constitutional monarchy in
France, he accepted the overthrow of the king as necessary to main-
tain the Revolution and was prepared to condone considerable tur-
moil to preserve that advance. When the violent events in Paris
caused William Short, Jefferson's protege and former private secre-
tary now at the Hague, to turn against the Revolution, Jefferson
wrote him a long letter defending the events in France. He de-
plored the violence and loss of lives, but he said, "The liberty of the
whole earth was depending on the issue of the contest, and was
ever such a prize won with so little innocent blood?" 5
Gouverneur Morris, who succeeded Jefferson as minister to
France, never shared Jefferson's support for the French Revolution,
and after the overthrow of the king, the secretary of state felt com-
pelled to instruct him on the question of what kind of government
he should do business with. "It accords with our principles," Jeffer-
son wrote in a historic formulation of recognition policy, "to ac-
knowledge any government to be rightful which is formed by the
6
will of the nation substantially declared." In a subsequent letter
he elaborated: "We surely cannot deny to any nation that right
whereon our own government is founded, that every one may
govern itself under whatever forms it pleases, and change these
l8o IN PURSUIT OF REASON
forms at it's own will, and that it may transact it's business with for-
eign nations through whatever organ it thinks proper, whether
King, convention, assembly, committee, President, or whatever else
itmay chuse. The will of the nation is the only thing essential to be
regarded." 7
Jefferson was convinced that most Americans shared his view of
the French Revolution, and he reported to Short the "universal
feasts and rejoicings" with which Americans greeted the arrival of
the news of the French victories over Prussia and the establishment
of the French republic. 8 The latter event, proclaimed in September,
1792, became known in America in December and provoked a tre-
mendous outpouring of enthusiasm. The new year began with nu-
merous toasts to the French republic and its future. Celebrations
reached new heights when the first minister of the French republic,
Edmond Charles Genet, arrived in Charleston, South Carolina, on
April 8, 1793. By this time, however, the news had arrived that
Louis XVI had been executed on January 21, and on the day be-
fore Genet landed in Charleston, Jefferson informed the president
that at the beginning of February France had declared war against
England and Holland. These developments deeply affected Ameri-
cans, who remembered the aid of Louis XVI during their own
revolution and the treaty of alliance signed with France in 1778.
In reporting the outbreak of war between England and France to
the president, the secretary of state advised that the United States
9
"take every justifiable measure for preserving our neutrality." Ear-
lier, war clouds darkened in Europe, Jefferson had written
as
American envoys and consuls that the United States expected to be
neutral. "We wish not to meddle with the internal affairs of any
country, nor with the general affairs of Europe. Peace with all na-
tions, and the right which that gives us with respect to all nations,
are our object." He instructed agents to be vigilant in securing for
American vessels all the rights of neutrality and preventing foreign
vessels from usurping the flag of the United States. Jefferson's
commitment to neutrality is clear enough in the historical record,
but contemporary perceptions of his policy were clouded by par-
tisanship. At almost the same time that Jefferson penned the above
letter, Oliver Wolcott was writing to his son, the comptroller of the
treasury and a strong Hamiltonian supporter, expressing his hope
that the president would closely watch the secretary of state so that
his "indiscretion" would not involve the United States in "the vortex
of European politics." Whatever the fears of some of his contempo-
raries, as long as he remained secretary of state, Jefferson pursued
A TRYING YEAR l8l
a policy of neutrality. He believed in the French cause, but he

placed the interests of his own country first, and those interests dic-
tated a policy of peace. At the same time, Jefferson did recognize
that this course would benefit France more than England, because
the United States would be more useful as a neutral supplying
France with provisions than as a militarily weak ally. He admitted
thatAmericans could not suppress their affections for France, but
he promised that they would "suppress the effects of them so as to
preserve a fair neutrality." 10
The opening of hostilities between France and England, followed
amonth later by France's declaration of war on Spain (March 7),
made it urgent that the administration define a clear policy. On
April 18, President Washington, returning from a brief spring va-
cation at Mount Vernon cut short by the news of the war, sent a list
of questions for consideration to all members of the cabinet and
called a meeting at his house at nine o'clock the next morning. He
asked his advisers to consider whether a neutrality proclamation
should be issued, whether a minister from the French republic
should be received, and, if so, whether without reservations. He
also posed a series of questions relating to the alliance with France,
the critical issue being whether the treaties of 1778 with France
were still valid in light of the change of government in France. When
he read the president's memorandum, Jefferson was convinced
that, though the handwriting was Washington's, the language was
Hamilton's and "the doubts his alone." n There was no doubt in the
mind of the secretary of state that the treaties with France were still
valid and that Genet ought to be received.
At the cabinet meeting on April 19, Jefferson argued that the
president had no authority to issue a declaration of neutrality or to
do anything more than declare the actual state of things to be that
of peace. He also thought "that it would be better to hold back the
declaration of neutrality, as a thing worth something to the powers
at war, that they would bid for it, and we might reasonably ask a
price, the broadest privileges of neutral nations." 12 Jefferson's views
did not prevail in the cabinet or with the president. There is no evi-
dence that, had they been followed, Great Britain would have been
willing to pay the price Jefferson suggested for neutrality. Out of
deference to Jefferson's opinions, the cabinet agreed not to employ
the term neutrality, and the secretary of state joined in the unani-
mous recommendation that the president issue a proclamation
warning American citizens against becoming involved in the hos-
tilities.
13
The declaration, drafted by Attorney General Randolph
and proclaimed by the president on April 22, 1793, thus never

used the word neutrality, but that intent could not be mistaken. The
preamble stated that the United States would "pursue a conduct
friendly and impartial towards the belligerent Powers," and the
main body of the proclamation admonished all citizens to avoid any
actions that might contravene this policy, specifically forbidding
any involvement in hostilities or the carrying of contraband goods
to warring nations. 14
The cabinet next took up the question of receiving a minister
from the Republic of France. It was unanimously agreed that Genet
should be received, but Jefferson recorded that Hamilton did so re-
luctantly, expressing great regret that any incident had obliged the
United States to recognize the new French government. 15 Consider-
able debate followed regarding whether Genet should be received
without qualifications. Hamilton took up the whole issue of the
treaties with France, arguing that they had been signed when France
was a monarchy, that France had now proclaimed itself to be a re-
public, that tomorrow it might be something else, and that the
treaties should be suspended until it was clear what form the gov-
ernment would take. The United States could then decide whether
16
the treaties should be reinstated or abrogated.
Jefferson's position was that treaties were made between nations
and that the people, as the source of all authority in a nation, had
the right to change their agents at any time. This did not affect the
acts of a nation. Thus the treaties between the United States and
France were still valid though both nations had changed their forms
of government since making the treaties. Hamilton maintained that
if Genet were received without qualification, it would amount to
electing to continue the treaties with France, and if it later devel-

oped that this was dangerous to the United States, the United States
would not then be free to renounce them. Jefferson countered that
if carrying out a treaty becomes self-destructive, the law of self-
preservation overrules the laws of obligation to others. The provi-

sion of the treaties with France that raised the greatest concern was
the clause guaranteeing France assistance in defense of its West
Indies. Jefferson questioned whether this guarantee would inevi-
tably require the United States to go to war and listed a series of
questions that offered grounds to doubt that the guarantee clause
would draw the United States into war. 17
After the cabinet meeting adjourned without deciding the issue,
Jefferson, Randolph, and Hamilton each supplied the president
with written opinions. Washington confided to Jefferson that he
A TRYING YEAR 183
had felt all along that the French treaties were valid, and after
weighing the opinions from his advisers, he confirmed that view.
He also believed that he should receive Genet, though he decided
that it should be done "not with too much warmth or cordiality, so
only as to be satisfactory to him." Jefferson convinced himself that
this was a small sacrifice to the opinion of Hamilton. Washington
accordingly received the French minister on May 18, two days after
Genet finally reached Philadelphia following an exuberant over-
18
land journey from Charleston.
Determining the lines and limits of fair neutrality was difficult.
"Cases are now arising which will embarrass us a little till the line of
neutrality be firmly understood by ourselves and the belligerent
parties," Jefferson wrote to Madison less than a week after the neu-
trality proclamation. The unneutral actions of many Americans
complicated the problem. When a French frigate brought a British
prize into the port of Philadelphia, thousands of the yeomanry of
the city flocked to the wharves and "burst into peals of exultation,"
Jefferson reported, when the British colors were seen reversed and
the French flying above them. "I wish we may be able to repress the
spirit of the people within the limits of a fair neutrality," he said,
while admitting that he feared that "a fair neutrality will prove
a disagreeable pill to our friends." When it turned out that the
French prize that aroused such celebration in Philadelphia had
been taken in American waters in the Delaware Bay, the American
government ordered the liberation of the crew and the restitution
of the ship and cargo. 19
Despite the cool correctness of his reception by the president,
Genet was enthusiastically feted by the citizens of Philadelphia.
The secretary of state was also caught up in the warmth of the occa-
sion and in private observed extravagantly that it was "impossible
for anything to be more affectionate, more magnanimous than the
purport of his mission." When Genet met with him for the first
time, he told the secretary of state that France would not call upon
the United States to guarantee the French West Indies, vindicating
Jefferson's judgment on that matter. Genet alsoannounced that
France was throwing open all its colonies to American trade and
produced his authority to negotiate a new commercial treaty. After
the meeting Jefferson told Madison that Genet "offers everything
and asks nothing." In his own mind Jefferson contrasted that with
Great Britain's "sullen silence and reserve," which had not even inti-
mated a wish that the United States remain neutral. "Our corre-
spondence with her consists of demands where she is interested, and
delays where we are." Jefferson did not expect to find much support
in the cabinet for negotiating a treaty with Genet, and he com-
plained that Hamilton and Knox "under pretence of avoiding war
on the one side have no great antipathy to run foul of it on the
other, and to make a part in the confederacy of princes against
human 20
As it turned out, Jefferson could be glad that
liberty."
there was no rush by the cabinet to embrace Genet, for it would be
only a matter of weeks before Jefferson himself was becoming dis-
illusioned with the ebullient French minister. He had been overly
generous in his initial reaction to Genet's mission, but he was not
long misled.
In view of the broad public sympathy for France that Genet's ar-
rival in Charleston and his journey to Philadelphia demonstrated
and the known French sympathies of the secretary of state, Genet
discounted the reserved reception by the president and believed
that he need not interpret the neutrality proclamation strictly.
While in Charleston, he had begun fitting out privateers and re-
cruiting Americans for military service both at sea and on land
against Spanish territory in Florida. Before he reached Philadel-
phia, these French privateers were already bringing English prizes
into American ports, and in Charleston the French consul, under
instructions from Genet, had assumed the authority of selling
prizes. The secretary of state protested these actions as violations of
American sovereignty, but Genet refused to accept his interpreta-
tion of the treaties of 1778. The French minister construed a treaty
provision that prohibited the enemies of France from fitting out
privateers or selling prizes in American ports to mean that such a
privilege was granted to France. He also justified consular sale of
21
prizes on the ground that captured ships were French property.
Jefferson saw no validity in Genet's claim for consular sales of
prizes, which he regarded as a clear violation of national sover-
eignty, but he understood Genet's agrument that the provision
making unlawful for enemies of France to fit out privateers
it
implied that it was lawful for France. Though he did not reveal
to Genet his sympathy for this line of reasoning, he in fact had
employed it in the cabinet to argue that privateers fitted out in
Charleston before the French were informed of the American in-
terpretation of the treaty should not be ordered out of American
ports.No one in the cabinet had agreed with his position, and the
22
president decided to order out such privateers. Jefferson fully ac-
cepted that decision, and his position on that specific issue in no
way affected his opinion on the broader rights and treaty obliga-
A TRYING YEAR 185
tions of the United States. He believed that the treaty provision

prohibiting the enemies of France from fitting out privateers or
selling their prizes in American ports left the United States "free
to refuse the same thing to France, there being no stipulation to
the contrary, and we ought to refuse it on principles of fair neu-
trality."
23
He explained to Genet that "it was the right of every na-
tion to prohibit acts of sovereignty from being exercised by any
other within its limits, and the duty of a neutral nation to prohibit
such as would injure one of the warring powers." He thus let stand
24
his protest that consular sales of prizes violated the sovereignty of

the United States, warned Genet against granting military commis-
sions and fitting out privateers, and repeated the president's order
that all previously equipped vessels depart from American ports.
Genet rejected Jefferson's definition of fair neutrality and con-
tinued to challenge the administration's decisions and actions. In a
less tolerant tone than he had used earlier, Jefferson wrote to
Genet on June 17, repeating that the arming of vessels in American
ports was incompatible with the sovereignty of the United States.
He added that this was not, as Genet seemed to think, contrary to
the principles of natural law, the usage of nations, the treaties be-
tween the United States and France, or the proclamation of the
president. Jefferson's style of communicating these positions to
—
Genet as the opinions of the president the proper form for the
secretary of state — may have caused Genet to think that Jefferson
was transmitting views that he did not fully endorse. Genet would
later charge that Jefferson misled him. However, the record shows
that once the president decided an issue, Jefferson gave it his full
support. Moreover, on the key question of denying France the
privilege of fitting out privateers in American ports, Jefferson had
advised that course prior to the president's decision. Jefferson's
early cordiality toward Genet, his undisguised attachment to France,
and his openness in admitting divisions within the administration
may have led the French minister to believe that Jefferson was the
passive instrument of the president. 25But that the secretary of state
deliberately misled Genet not supported by the evidence.
is
At the same time, Jefferson's attitude toward Genet's intrigues

against Spanish territory in Louisiana could hardly have been re-
garded by the French minister as discouragement, however care-
fully the secretary of state emphasized his determination to main-
tain neutrality. When the French minister privately revealed to
Jefferson that he was planning to recruit troops in Kentucky to at-
tack Louisiana, Jefferson himself recorded: "I told him that his en-
ticing officers and souldiers from Kentucky to go against Spain, was

really putting a halter about their necks, for that they would as-
suredly be hung, if they commenced hostilities against a nation at
peace with the U.S. That leaving out that article I did not care what
insurrections should be excited in Louisiana." 26 This reply may be
partly explained by Jefferson's belief that Spain was picking a quar-
rel with the United States, but it hardly seems the language of fair
27
neutrality.
It is unnecessary to examine the various incidents that produced
clashes between the secretary of state and the French minister.
They filled much of Jefferson's time from Genet's arrival in Phila-
delphia in May until the administration made its final decision on
what to do about him in August. Jefferson said that he found him-
self "worn down with labours from morning to night, and day to
day," and he placed much of the blame on Genet.
28
Jefferson's position was also made more difficult by the mounting

party conflict and the concern among his own political friends
about the administration's policy. To many of them the president's
neutrality proclamation had the mark of Hamilton's pro-British
proclivities. Madison thought the proclamation "a most unfortu-
nate error. It wounds the national honor, by seeming to disregard
the stipulated duties to France. It wounds the popular feeling by a
seeming indifference to the cause of liberty. And it seems to violate
the forms and spirit of the Constitution, by making the executive
Magistrate the organ ... of the Nation in relation to War and
peace." Jefferson assured his friend that he had argued against it in
the cabinet but to have opposed the final decision would have haz-
—
arded an even more critical question whether the treaties with
France would be suspended. He also privately defended Washing-
ton's role. He said that "every inch of ground must be fought in our
councils to desperation in order to hold up the face of even a
sneaking neutrality." Hamilton was "panic-struck if we refuse our
breach to every kick which Great Britain may chuse to give." If the
United States preserved even a sneaking neutrality, the country
would be indebted to the president. The main factor preventing
the neutrality policy from becoming a mere English neutrality,
Jefferson thought, was that the penchant of the president was not
29
in that direction.
The extent to which the events in Europe aroused the public sur-
prised Jefferson, who sensed a spirit of 1776 rising again against
England. He also believed that the war had "kindled and brought
forward the two parties with an ardour which our own interests
A TRYING YEAR 187
merely, could never excite." Into this atmosphere Hamilton re-

leased his letters of "Pacificus," published in the Gazette of the United
States beginning on June 29, 1793- The Treasury head insisted that
he wrote to counteract attempts being made "very dangerous to the
peace" and "not very friendly to the constitution." He began by
charging that criticisms of the neutrality proclamation were de-
signed to promote opposition to the government by weakening the
confidence of the people in the president. Then he proceeded to
defend the proclamation in what was primarily a political tract, de-
spite his expositions on the Constitution and his citations of writers
30
on international law.
Jefferson immediately recognized "Pacificus" as coming from
Hamilton's pen. The day after the first number appeared he told
Madison that the piece contained the same arguments that Hamil-
ton had made in the cabinet and expressed concern that these
"heresies" might go unanswered. Lest Madison fail to take the hint,
Jefferson wrote again after two more numbers of "Pacificus" came
off the press, saying that no one was answering Hamilton and ex-
claiming: "For God's sake, my dear Sir, take up your pen, select the
most striking heresies and cut him to pieces in the face of the pub-
lic. There is nobody else who can and will enter the lists with him."
Madison, at home in Virginia, was reluctant to accept the challenge,

but Jefferson pressed him with materials to use, and the con-
gressman forced himself to the task that he found "the most grating"
that he had ever experienced. The result was a series of five letters
31
of "Helvidius" that appeared in the Gazette of the United States in Au-

gust and September in which Madison directed his replies primarily
32
to the ideas of executive power advanced by Hamilton. The "Pacifi-
cus" and "Helvidius" exchange attracted extraordinary interest be-
cause there was little doubt about the identity of the authors. Five
years earlier they had collaborated to write the Federalist papers.
Meanwhile, the problem of Genet became critical. By July, Jeffer-
son had decided that "never was so calamitous an appointment
. . .
made." He exploded to Madison that the French minister was "hot

headed, all imagination, no judgment, passionate, disrespectful and
even indecent towards the President in his written as well as verbal
communications, talking of appeals from him to Congress, from
them to the people, urging the most unreasonable and groundless
propositions, and in the most dictatorial style." He was certain that if
he ever had to lay Genet's communications before Congress, they
would excite "universal indignation." He hardly needed to add that
Genet "renders my position immensely difficult." 33
This outburst from Jefferson was provoked by a meeting that he

had just come from with the French minister. It was Sunday, July 7.
Only a few days before, Jefferson had learned that the Little Sarah,
a British merchant ship taken prize by the French and renamed the
Petite Democrate, had been equipped as a privateer and its arma-
ment secretly augmented. When a crew went aboard, its departure
from Philadelphia appeared imminent. As soon as Jefferson heard
this, he hurried into the city from his house on the Schuylkill
(which he had rented after giving up his Market Street residence)

and called on the French minister, asking him to detain the ship
pending the return of the president from Mount Vernon. In a
highly emotional harangue, Genet refused to promise to do so, but
he indicated that the Petite Democrate was not ready to put to sea.
Genet's look and gesture in making the latter statement led the sec-
retary of state to interpret it as a commitment to keep the ship at
anchor until the president's return. The belief that he had an
understanding with Genet induced Jefferson to oppose the opin-
ions of Hamilton and Knox to establish a battery on Mud Island in
the Delaware River to prevent the departure of the ship. Jefferson
was fearful that such an action might touch off a larger conflagra-
tion, since he was convinced that the crew of the Petite Democrate
would resist. With a large French fleet daily expected at Phila-
delphia, the incident might easily lead to an expanded conflict.
Only the president should make such a crucial decision. 34
The secretary of state well knew that Genet might be deceiving
him, but under the circumstances he regarded the risks of military
confrontation as unacceptable. Nor did he disguise his true feel-
ings. He wondered if his colleagues in the cabinet would be equally
ready to fire on British vessels violating American neutrality, and
he admitted that he himself "would not gratify the combination of
kings with the spectacle of the two only republics on earth destroy-
ing each other." Hamilton at the same time was insisting that not
to act with decision would prostrate the government and "that
nothing is so dangerous to a Government be wanting either in
as to
35
self-confidence or self-respect." Jefferson was outvoted in the
cabinet, which met in the president's absence, but before Secretary
of War Knox could establish a battery on Mud Island, the Petite
Democrate dropped down the river to Chester on July 9 and posi-
tioned itself to put out to sea. On the same day Genet informed the
secretary of state that the vessel, now anchored beyond the range of
shore batteries or militia, would sail when ready. 36
Such was the state of affairs when Washington arrived back in the
A TRYING YEAR 189
capital on July 1 1 to find a packet of papers from the secretary of

state marked "instant attention." He read them immediately and
called a cabinet meeting for the next morning. Upset to find such a
crisis awaiting that Jefferson was at home ill with
him and unaware
a fever, he was irritated that his secretary of state was not in the
city. The letter that he sent off to Jefferson by special messenger
showed it. "Is the Minister of the French Republic to set the Acts of
this Government at defiance, with impunity}" he asked, "and then
threaten the Executive with an appeal to the People? What must
the World think of such conduct, and of the Goverment sub- . . .
37
mitting to it."
Washington had calmed down by the time Jefferson joined Hamil-

ton and Knox in the cabinet meeting the following morning. Still,
Jefferson sensed that the president wished that the Petite Democrate
had been detained by military force, but he did not believe that
Washington would have ordered it himself had he been on the scene.
Now it was too late for military action, and the cabinet turned its
attention to what to do about Genet and to the broader problem of
defining more clearly what the neutrality proclamation meant. With
his department heads divided, Washington accepted Jefferson's sug-
gestion to ask the Supreme Court for an advisory opinion on the
validity of the principles of neutrality. This move produced a re-
markable formulation of the problem of neutrality in the series of
questions posed by Hamilton and Jefferson to be answered by the
justices, but when the justices declined to consider the issue, the cabi-
38
net was forced to formulate the rules of neutrality itself. The out-
come was Governing Belligerents," approved on Au-
a set of "Rules
gust 3. Thus, with Congress never called into session and the
Supreme Court demurring, the cabinet, pressed by Genet's vexing
actions, took the unprecedented step of implementing the presi-
39
dent's neutrality proclamation with a body of regulations.
Meanwhile, the cabinet decided Genet's fate. Hamilton and Knox
had been urging the recall of the French minister since Washington's
return to the capital, and on August 2 the cabinet unanimously
agreed to demand Genet's recall and to send copies of his correspon-
dence to Gouverneur Morris in Paris to support the demand. Hamil-
ton urged that Genet's correspondence also be made public and ha-
rangued his colleagues for three-quarters of an hour in a speech
Jefferson called "as inflammatory and declamatory as if he had been
speaking to a jury." The opposition of both Randolph and Jefferson
blocked the proposal, but Jefferson was well aware of the political
repercussions of such a move and wrote immediately to warn
igo IN PURSUIT OF REASON
Madison that Genet "will sink the republican interest if they do not
abandon him." 40
In the midst of the final turbulence of the Genet mission, the sec-
retary of state informed the president on July 31 that he planned to
resign at the end of September. The circumstances that had led
him to postpone his retirement at the beginning of the year no
longer existed, he believed. He could now leave office without ex-
citing adverse opinions or conjectures. He may also have chosen
this moment on the president to handle the recall
to exert pressure
of Genet in a manner that would not be offensive to France. 41 A few
days later the president rode out to Jefferson's house on the Schuyl-
kill to appeal to him to delay the date of his departure until the end
of the year. He reminded him, as he had earlier when Jefferson

wanted to leave the government, that the secretary of state had
been one of those who had persuaded him to continue for a second
term. He talked about the difficulties of finding a capable replace-
ment, and he reflected on the uncertainties of the times "the fer-
—
mentation which seemed to be working in the mind of the public"
(which Jefferson understood to mean the rising Republican party)
and the new Congress that would assemble in December. He also
revealed that the secretary of the treasury had indicated his inten-
tion to resign at the end of the next session of Congress, and he
suggested that it would make it easier, especially with regard to
geographical considerations in the composition of his cabinet, if he
could fill both vacancies about the same time. Jefferson assured the
president that nothing was to be feared from the Republican party,
which was firm in its support of the government, and that the next
Congress would attempt nothing more than to render the legis-
lature independent of the executive. He expressed his own uncom-
fortableness in being in a post that required him "to move exactly
in the circle which I know to bear me peculiar hatred, that is to say
the wealthy aristocrats, the merchants connected closely with En-
gland, the new created paper fortunes," and he stressed how much
his affairs in Virginia needed his attention. Still, he agreed to
reconsider. Whether he was moved by Washington's plea or his
handling of Genet's recall, he informed the president a few days
later that he would stay on until the last of December, when his and
42
Hamilton's expected departures would be nearer together. It
would, however, be necessary for him to make a trip home in

the fall.
The cabinet decision to demand Genet's recall did not imme-

diately lessen the public controversy surrounding the minister, for
A TRYING YEAR 191
that decision was not made public, and Genet himself would not be
notified of it for six weeks.Time was required for the secretary of
state to prepare the detailed summary of Genet's actions for trans-
Gouverneur Morris. Weeks would elapse before the docu-
mittal to
ment reached Paris. Meanwhile rumors filled the newspapers that
Genet had threatened to appeal over the president to the people of
the United States. Public demonstrations of support for the presi-
dent's neutrality proclamation were organized, including a public
meeting in Richmond, arranged by John Marshall, where Jeffer-
son'smentor George Wythe was prevailed upon to preside. In re-
sponse Madison and Monroe began organizing other public meet-
ings throughout Virginia to counteract the Federalist efforts to gain
43
partisan advantage from Genet's indiscretions.
Jefferson's concern about the political effects of the Genet affair
on the Republican party is evident in his correspondence. While
encouraging Republican friends to take up their pens in the cause,
he also began plotting Republican strategy. In a confidential letter
to Madison he noted that Genet's conduct was exciting public indig-
nation and urged Republicans to support the president's policy.
Looking ahead to the assembling of Congress, he advised that "it
will be true wisdom in the Republican party to approve unequivo-
cally of a state of neutrality, to avoid little cavils about who should
declare it, to abandon Genet entirely, with expressions of strong
friendship and adherence to his nation and confidence that he has
acted against their sense. In this way we shall keep the people on
our side by keeping ourselves in the right." This letter that Jeffer-
son cautioned Madison to share only with Monroe offers one of the
clearest records of the leadership role that Jefferson played in the
Republican party while still secretary of state. Besides recommend-
ing the Republican course in regard to Genet and neutrality, he
also outlined a plan to divide the Treasury Department between
two equal chiefs of customs and internal taxes and proposed a con-
gressional declaration of the true sense of the Constitution on the
national bank. He thought the latter, even if passed by only the
House of Representatives, would serve to divorce the bank from
the government. 44
Before the hot summer of 1793 passed, another crisis more
threatening than Genet or Hamilton's bank descended on Phila-
—
delphia the plague of yellow fever. Breaking out in August and
spreading rapidly, the epidemic stilled the controversy over Genet
and made all disputes of government seem unimportant. "Every-
body who can, is flying from the city," Jefferson wrote to Madison
ig2 IN PURSUIT OF REASON
on September 1. But he himself was still going into the city to his
office every day and playing down the danger of the peril that
would leave more than five thousand Philadelphians dead in a city
of forty-four thousand before it ran its deadly course in Novem-
45
ber. Fortunately Jefferson had moved outside the city when he
gave up his residence in town in March, and he removed his daugh-
ter Maria from the city when the fever began. He had planned to
work at his country house after Washington left for Mount Vernon
on September 10, delaying his own trip to Monticello until October
following the president's return. However, he soon changed his
mind. When he went to his office on the day Washington left the
city, he found only a single clerk. Hamilton, who had contracted
the fever and was recovering, was planning to go to New York as

soon as he was able to travel. With government offices decimated
and the affairs of state at a standstill, Jefferson cleared out his cor-
respondence file and left for Monticello on September 17. 46
On the way home he stopped to see the president at Mount Ver-
non and to visit with Madison at Montpelier, arriving back on his
own hilltop before the end of September. He was there a month
before setting out again on October 25 for the temporary seat of
government at Germantown, where the president had directed the
officersof government to assemble until it was safe to return to
Philadelphia. 47 By the time Jefferson arrived in Germantown on
November 1 the yellow fever was abating, but the town was crowded
,
with refugees from the city. The only lodging Jefferson could find
was a bed in the corner of the public room in the King of Prussia
Tavern and that, he said, only "as a great favor, the other alter-
native being to sleep on the floor in my cloak before the fire." Just
how long it was before Jefferson was able to obtain better accom-
modations isnot known, but Philadelphians soon began returning
to the city, and by the middle of the month he had been able to
reserve a room for Madison and Monroe for their arrival for the
convening of Congress at the beginning of December. Washington
had earlier sought advice as to whether he should summon Con-
gress to meet at Germantown rather than Philadelphia, but Jeffer-
son and Randolph convinced him that he had no constitutional
authority to change the meeting place of Congress. Washington
himself decided to keep the executive officers at Germantown until
Congress convened. 48
Preparing for the meeting of Congress, the president and his
cabinet gave particular attention to drafting his annual message. In
view of the extraordinary events that had transpired since Con-
A TRYING YEAR 193
gress had adjourned in March, that address and its accompanying

documents would be of immense interest. An explanation of the
neutrality proclamation, a review of relations with England and
France, and the whole history of the Genet mission headed the list
of matters that the legislators would expect to hear explained.
They would also want to know what progress had been made in
getting the British to evacuate the posts that they occupied in
still
the Northwest ten years after the signing of the peace and about
the recent orders-in-council directed against American trade with
French colonies. In his brief oral address the president would be
unable to go into detail on any of these matters, but he would
be expected to elaborate in accompanying documents and subse-
quent communications.
Jefferson was deeply involved in the discussions over the content
and wording of the president's address and in the preparation of
the papers that would accompany it. The cabinet spent hours de-
bating how the record should be presented and interpreted, re-
hashing many of the arguments aired in earlier discussions and in
the press. 49 What emerged was a presidential report that neither
Jefferson nor Hamilton alone would have devised but that balanced
their conflicting assessments of the past and their projections of the
course to be charted through the troubled waters of world affairs.
With the danger of yellow fever over and Congress about to as-
semble, the president moved back to Philadelphia on the last day of
November. On the same day Jefferson took temporary lodgings at
the corner of Seventh and Market streets. Among the unfinished
business that the secretary of state pressed to complete before his
last month in office ended was a paper on the privileges and restric-
tions on American commerce in foreign countries, submitted to the

House of Representatives on December 16, 1793. Congress had re-
quested this report earlier, and Jefferson had it ready by the end of
the Second Congress. But he had asked and received permission to
present it at the beginning of the next Congress. 50 Now, with the
end of his tenure as secretary of state in sight, there was no longer
time for delay, and mounting British efforts to cut off American
trade with the French West Indies made it a propitious time to put
the report before the public.
In the long course of preparation and revision Jefferson had em-
ployed the help of Tench Coxe and others in assembling data, but
the report reflected the approach to commerce that had character-
ized his own policies and actions when he was minister to France
and to which he had continued to adhere. He affirmed his belief in
free trade —
that "every country be employed in producing that
which nature has best fitted it to produce, and each be free to ex-
change with others the mutual surplusses for mutual wants" but —
he recognized that this was a distant hope and placed his emphasis
on the principle of reciprocity. Friendly arrangements with other
nations were to be preferred, but if they could not be negotiated,
counterdiscriminations, prohibitions, protective duties, and other
regulations should be imposed. The report affirmed that American
commerce was vital to the progress of the nation and also acknowl-
edged the need to encourage household manufactures. Because
England more than any other country had shown no inclination to
negotiate reciprocal commercial arrangements with the United
States, the report lent support to Madison's longstanding efforts to
induce Congress to discriminate against that dominant commer-
cial power. Soon after Jefferson left office, Madison would use
Jefferson's report to introduce new resolutions for discrimination.

51
Jefferson would not be involved in that new move. Soon after

submitting his report to Congress, he began packing his books
and remaining belongings in Philadelphia for shipment to Vir-
ginia. On December 21 the president made his last effort to per-
suade Jefferson to continue in office but found him immovable.
Jefferson himself confided to a friend that he was determined "to
be liberated from the hated occupations of politics, and to remain
in the bosom of my family, my farm, and my books."
52
On the last
day of 1793, he resigned his office into the hands of the president.
Writing to his daughter Maria that he expected to be home by the
middle of January, he said that he hoped "no more to leave you." 53
Once more Jefferson seemed determined never again to return to
public life.
'
XIV
Renewal at Monticello
The fifty-year-old Virginian had looked forward to the tranquil en-

joyment of his family, his farm, and his books, but after a month at
home he was complaining of his isolation and the dearth of news.
He had not seen a Philadelphia newspaper since he left the city,
and only one letter from there had reached him. He said that he
"could not have supposed, when at Philadelphia, that so little of
what was passing there could be known even at Kentucky, as is the
case here." A harsh and lingering winter kept him indoors, and
without his books, which had not yet arrived from Philadelphia,
Jefferson was depressed. When spring came, his spirits brightened.
Soon he was writing friends that he had returned to farming with
an ardor that he had scarcely known in his youth. "Instead of writ-
ing 10 or 12 letters a day, which I have been in the habit of doing as
a thing of course, I put off answering my letters now, farmer-like,
till a rainy day, and then find it sometimes postponed by other nec-
essary occupations." A year later he remarked that he had become

"the most ardent and active farmer in the state. I live constantly on
horseback, rarely taking a book and never a pen if I can avoid it."
After being away from Monticello for ten years, leaving farming
operations to overseers, Jefferson found his lands far more de-
pleted by ill-usage than he had expected. His first priority was to
restore their productivity, and he immediately implemented an
elaborate system of crop rotation that he had been formulating for
some time. Dividing his tillable acreage into seven fields, he settled
on a rotation of wheat; peas and potatoes; corn and potatoes; peas
and potatoes; rye; clover; and clover. His lands, he concluded, were
so worn out that they required such gentle treatment to renew
them. He preferred wheat to tobacco culture because wheat pre-
served fertility and offered greater social benefits, supplying food
and requiring less labor for cultivation. To provide beauty as well as
fruit, he directed the planting of nearly nine hundred peach trees

as dividing lines to mark the fields. 2
Of the over 5,500 acres of land that Jefferson owned in Albemarle
County — —
and neighboring farms only about 1,100
at Monticello
to 1,200 acres were under cultivation. The crop system employed
reveals that a large portion of the farm production went to sustain
those who lived there. When Jefferson made a census of his slaves
in November, 1794, he listed 64 slaves living at Monticello, 15 at
Tufton, 1 1 at Shadwell, and 15 at Lego, for a total of 105 slaves on
the lands in Albemarle that constituted his seven-field system. In
addition, he had 49 slaves on his lands in Bedford County. 3 Whether
slavery was profitable for Jefferson is no easier to determine than the
broader question of the profitability of slavery. Jefferson himself, in
compiling data on capital invested in Virginia agriculture for the
English agriculturalist Arthur Young, reached the conclusion that
slave labor was cheaper than free labor in England, but Young chal-
lenged some of his figures. Slavery sustained Jefferson's comfort-
able life style, and he employed an unusually large number of
slaves in household duties and as craftsmen. But he never grew
wealthy on slave labor. Nonetheless, he did at times sell slaves to pay
4
his creditors. Even then, he died deeply in debt.
—
Under his rotation system the only cash crop wheat was not —
produced in sufficient volume to support him. In searching for
supplemental income until his lands could be made more produc-
tive,Jefferson set up a shop to manufacture nails at Monticello, em-
ploying a dozen slave boys, aged ten to sixteen, and supervising the
details of the business himself. "What with my farming and my nail
manufactory I have my hands full," he wrote to John Adams. "I am
on horseback half the day, and counting and measuring nails the
other half." 5 By 1 796 he was turning out a ton of nails a month but
finding it difficult to sell his production. He believed that local mer-
chants were unwilling to take his nails because import merchants
refused to handle them "from a principle of suppressing every
effort towards domestic manufacture." Local merchants, reluctant
to alienate their suppliers, took nails from the importers along with
other goods. Jefferson thus set up his own retailers under a con-
signment system, which obligated him to carry the full burden of
6
capitalization. Even more difficult was the task of collecting re-
ceipts due him from his agents.
His limited income from farming encouraged the efficiency-
minded Jefferson to try to increase crop production by better orga-
nization of his labor force and greater use of labor-saving devices.
RENEWAL AT MONTICELLO 197
He recorded his idea of improving the moldboard plow while

first
in France, and he now worked out a design of least resistance and

began testing it at Monticello. 7 He continued to perfect his in-
vention, which he had no thought of patenting, and in time his im-
provement attracted considerable attention from scientists and ag-
riculturalists, including a gold medal from the Societe d'agriculture
du department de la Seine in 1805. Always interested in agricul-
tural machinery, Jefferson also directed the building of a threshing
machine at Monticello from a model sent to him from England by
Thomas Pinckney. He built the horse-powered works compact
enough to be portable from field to field on a wagon and first used
8
it in the harvest of 1796.
In addition to improving his lands and farming operations,
Jefferson turned to rebuilding his house. He once remarked that
"architecture is my delight, and putting up, and pulling down, one
of my favorite amusements." Nowhere is this better illustrated than
in the years following his retirement as secretary of state, when he
directed his attention to remodeling and enlarging Monticello, be-
ginning the transformation that gave the mansion the character
it retains today. After completing the first version of the house,
Jefferson had been much influenced by the new architecture he saw

in France, returning home with his Palladian views much altered by
the Louis XVI style. He was especially enthralled by Paris' beautiful
hotels (mansions or townhouses) designed by leading architects dur-
ing a period of great architectural creativity. He said that he lacked
words to describe how much he enjoyed French architecture, and
he was so "violently smitten" by the Hotel de Salm in Paris that he
went almost daily to watch its construction. The style that im-
pressed him most was the one-story mansion. In the French coun-
tryside all the good houses built within the past twenty or thirty
years were single story, and the trend was spreading to the cities, he
observed. "In Paris particularly all the new and good houses are of
a single story —
that is of the height of 16 or 18 feet generally, and
the whole of it given to the rooms of entertainment; but in the parts
where there are bedrooms they have two tiers of them from 8 to 10
feet high each, with a small private staircase. By these means great
staircases are avoided, which are expensive and occupy a space
which would make a good room in every story." 9
Jefferson employed this style in remodeling and expanding Mon-
Doubling the exterior dimensions of the house and adding a
ticello.
dome modeled on that of the Halle aux Bleds in Paris, he gave the
house a one-story appearance while hiding its second story, which
was reached by narrow, private staircases. He had begun planning

and assembling materials for the reconstruction while still secretary
of state, and he put men to making bricks during the first year of
his retirement. But he did not begin the construction work until
1 796, and he would not complete the project before his return to
public life in 1797. Isaac Weld, seeing Monticello in its unfinished

state in the spring of 1796, predicted that when completed it would
be "one of the most elegant private habitations in the United States."
The Due de La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, visiting there the same
year, went further and said "his house will certainly deserve to be
ranked with the most pleasant mansions in France and England."
To achieve that distinction Jefferson and his family would have to
endure much inconvenience before the work was completed and
the house free of the noise, confusion, and discomfort that Jeffer-
son said required all of one's patience to endure. 10
By late summer of 1797 Jefferson was planning to unroof the
still-livable portions of the original dwelling and to send his fam-
ily elsewhere for shelter, but apparently this was delayed, for his
daughter Maria was married there in October, 1797, to John Wayles

Eppes. By this time Jefferson was vice-president, and when he was
not on the scene, the work moved slowly. He wrote from Philadel-
phia in May, 1798, that he hoped to find the house nearly roofed by
summer and to be able to reunite his family under shelter. But he
returned home to find that nothing had been done because the
sheeting and shingles had not been delivered as promised. When
he left for Philadelphia in December, the roof was still not com-
pleted. The north end would remain open for a second winter.
Upon his return in March he found "scarcely a stroke" had been
done in his absence. "It seems as if I should never get it inhabit-
able," he wrote to Maria." He apparently got the roof finished that
spring, flooring put down in the summer, and enough work com-
pleted to make the house usable again. It is uncertain when the
dome was built. Regardless, much work remained to be done. The
house was still unfinished when Jefferson assumed the presidency
12
in 1801. Its builder had a vision that he would one day achieve,
but few men would have had the patience and optimism to persist
through so many years. Building was a creative effort to which
Jefferson turned when freed of other duties. When he started the
reconstruction, he had no intention of ever again leaving Mon-
ticello.
13
Had he known that he would be elected vice-president and
president, Jefferson might not have begun the project when he did,
though he was always overly optimistic about how much time con-
struction required.
After retiring from Washington's cabinet, Jefferson considered

an end. Unlike Hamilton, who continued to
his political career at
advise Washington and influence cabinet members long after he
left the government, Jefferson shunned such a role. "I cherish tran-
quillity too much, to suffer political things to enter my mind at all,"
he told the president a few months after leaving office, and he
wrote to Edmund Randolph, his successor as secretary of state,
that "no circumstance will ever more tempt me to engage in any-
thing public." 14 Nor did he try to manage the Republicans in Con-
gress from behind the scenes, as some political opponents charged.
Madison, not Jefferson, was the party leader during these years.
When Jefferson's name was brought forward in 1796 as a candidate
for president, some even referred to him as the candidate of Madi-
son's party.
For a while, the newly retired secretary of state ceased reading
newspapers. He told Tench Coxe in 1795 that he had "interdicted
to myself the reading of newspapers, and thinking or saying any-
thing on public matters beyond what the conversation of my neigh-
bors draws me into." However, letters from Madison and William B.
Giles reported regularly on proceedings in Congress, and John
Beckley kept him supplied with political pamphlets. Madison and
Giles both visited him at Monticello, as did other political leaders,
including Aaron Burr, who journeyed there in the fall of 1795,
when politicians were turning their thoughts to the approaching
presidential election. By 1796 Jefferson was reading newspapers
again and asking Madison to send him a weekly report of what was
happening in government "behind the curtain." 15 Both the content
and tone of his letters in 1796 showed more interest in politics than
those written in the first year or so of his retirement.
Despite his disclaimers Jefferson, in fact, had never lost interest
He shared his views only with friends, but he did
in national affairs.
not refrain from commenting privately on the course of events. He
wrote feelingly about what he considered to be an excessive use of
military force to put down opposition to the excise tax in Pennsyl-
vania. He expressed alarm at the denunciation of the Democratic
Societies. He thought the Jay Treaty was an "infamous act, which is
really nothing more than a treaty of alliance between England and
the Anglomen of this country against the legislature and people
of the United States." He gave his support to efforts of Republicans
in the House of Representatives to block its implementation, argu-
ing that the House had a constitutional right to refuse the means
dependent on them to carry it into effect. He did not hesitate to
urge Madison to take up his pen to reply to Hamilton in the press.
"When he comes foward," he told his long-time political ally, "there

is nobody but yourself who can meet him." Jefferson had with-
drawn from public office but not from the world of political affairs,
which he repeatedly confessed to dislike but could never block
from his thoughts. Still, he insisted that he would never accept
office again. When his friends talked about who might succeed
Washington as president, Jefferson declared firmly that his retire-
ment was "from all office high or low, without exception" and said
that the question was forever closed. "The little spice of ambition
which I had in my younger days has long since evaporated," he told
Madison, whom he considered to be the person Republicans should
support as Washington's successor. 16
Jefferson's opposition to becoming a contender for the presi-
dency did not deter his supporters from promoting him as a candi-
date, but they were obliged to do so without his approval or cooper-
ation. In late February, 1796, Madison told Monroe that it was
pretty certain that Washington would not seek a third term, though
the president had made no announcement. Until Washington re-
vealed his intentions, party leaders were unwilling to put candi-
dates before the public, but both Federalist and Republican leaders
expected the president to retire and acted accordingly. Madison in-
dicated to Monroe that it was expected that Adams would be the
—
candidate of the Federalists "the British party," Madison called
—
them and he said that "the Republicans, knowing that Jefferson
alone can be started with hope of success, mean to push him." 17
Madison, however, did not tell Jefferson this, because the Albemarle
farmer had already firmly told his friend that the question of his
becoming a candidate for any office was not open to reconsidera-
tion. Madison and other party leaders thus proceeded without
Jefferson's knowledge. Though Madison spent the summer in Vir-
ginia, he did not even visit Jefferson, in order to give him no oppor-
tunity to protest against being embarked in the contest. Jefferson
later avowed that his name was brought forward "without concert
or expectation on my part."
18
The campaign of 1796 did not get under way until September,
when Washington released to the press his now famous farewell ad-
dress. Some Republicans saw this delay as a Hamiltonian scheme
"designed to prevent a fair election, and the consequent choice of
Mr. Jefferson." Although off to a late start, the campaign was none-
theless vigorous. It was the first party contest for the presidency. As
newspapers filled with electioneering pieces, political announce-
ments, and campaign reports, Jefferson obviously knew that he was
being "pushed" by the Republicans. He did not request that they

cease their activities, but neither did he move to promote his own
election. Adams, likewise, was inactive, believing it improper to
seek office. Yet, while neither of the two principal candidates was
pursuing the office, the campaign was hard fought, and the elec-
tion close.Among those most completely engaged in Jefferson's be-
half wasJohn Beckley, clerk of the House of Representatives, who
organized one of the party's most advanced and aggressive cam-
paigns in Pennsylvania. There Republicans would win fourteen of
the fifteen electoral votes in a striking demonstration of the value
of effective party management and organization. 19 In a growing
number of states, candidates for presidential electors pledged in
advance whether they would vote for Adams or Jefferson.
The Jay Treaty was a key campaign issue in 1796, but the charac-
ters of the two candidates furnished the major subject for campaign
literature and newspaper debate. Republicans extolled Jefferson
as the "steadfast friend to the Rights of the People" and "the uni-
form advocate of equal rights among citizens," while charging
Adams with being the "advocate for hereditary power" and "the
champion of rank, titles, and hereditary distinctions." 20 One Re-
publican handbill told voters that "Thomas Jefferson is a firm Re-
publican, John Adams is an avowed monarchist." Another said the
election was to decide "whether the Republican Jefferson, or the
21
Royalist Adams, shall be President of the United States." Republi-
can writers pointed out that Adams had sons who might aim to suc-
ceed their father, while Jefferson, like Washington, had no son.
Voters were reminded that "Jefferson first drew the declaration of
American independence" and were Adams was "a fond
told that
admirer of the British Constitution." Republicans described Jef-
ferson as combining "every requisite qualification for the Presi-
—
dency a consistent uniformity of conduct, firmness and intrepid-
ity, with an unconquerable love of liberty [and] a profound
. . .
knowledge of politics." Jefferson's supporters defended him against

charges that he had mismanaged the office of governor of Virginia,
opposed the Constitution, quit his post as secretary of state at a
critical moment, and headed a French party determined to alter
the whole system of government. 22
The description of Jefferson that Congressman Robert Goodloe
Harper provided his constituents in a circular letter written shortly
after the election is indicative of the image that Federalists at-
tempted to paint of the Republican candidate. Harper said that
Jefferson possessed "much knowledge, chiefly however of the sci-
whose business it is to
entific kind, the least useful for a statesman;
judge an act,not to write books." Harper was willing to concede
Jefferson's "considerable literary genius" and even skill in diplo-
matic writings. "But from his public conduct, I take him to be of a
weak, weavering, indecisive character; deliberating when he ought
to act, and frequently acting, when he does attempt it, without
steadiness, judgment or perseverance . .always pursuing certain
.
visionary theories of the closet, which experience constantly contra-

dicts; like most literary men, greatly liable to flattery." He thought
Jefferson "fit to be a professor in a College, President of a Philo-
sophical Society, or even Secretary of State; but certainly not the
23
first magistrate of a great nation." This was a Federalist image of
Jefferson that would die hard, if ever, and throughout the rest of
his public life he would be challenged to contradict it.
The question of Jefferson's sympathy toward France was omi-
nously thrust forward late in the campaign by the actions of the
French minister in the United States, Pierre Adet. At the end of Oc-
— —
tober a week before the Pennsylvania voting Adet delivered a
note from his government to Secretary of State Timothy Pickering
announcing that henceforth all American ships would be treated
by France in the same manner as Americans allowed the English to
treat them. Then Adet released the notice to the press. Two weeks
later, he sought to produce an even greater shock by announcing
the suspension of his duties as minister to the United States "as a
mark of just discontent, which is to last until the Government of the
United States returns to sentiments, and to measures, more con-
formable to the interests of the alliance, and the sworn friendship
between the two nations." 24 Adet was trying to influence the elec-
tion by creating fears of a confrontation with France, which Jeffer-
son would be seen as the more likely candidate to resolve peace-
fully. The French minister's reports to his own government leave no
doubt of his purposeful interference in the election.

If Adet believed he was helping Jefferson, he was mistaken. Al-
though some Federalists thought the alarm provoked by Adet in-
fluenced the election in Pennsylvania in Jefferson's favor, the reac-
tion of Republican leaders was one of deep concern about the
adverse effect of Adet's interference in American politics. Madison
lamented that Adet's note was "working all the evil with which it is
pregnant. Those who rejoice at its indiscretions, and are taking ad-
vantage of them, have the impudence to pretend that it is an elec-
tioneering manoeuvre, and that the French Government have been
led to it by the opponents of the British Treaty." Charges that Re-
publicans were behind Adet's movements were as unfounded as his

actions were unwelcome. In a nation still studying the words of
Washington's farewell address warning against "the insidious wiles
of foreign influence," Republicans could only suffer in the long run
from Adet's actions. Secretary of the Treasury Oliver Wolcott was
already saying that should Jefferson be elected, it would be "fatal to
our independence, now that the interference of a foreign nation in
our affairs is no longer disguised." 25 It is impossible to measure the
effectsof Adet's actions, which may have come too late in the cam-
paign to alter the outcome of the election. But the incident in-
creased the burden of Republicans in defending their party against
charges of French influence.
Because neither the Constitution nor Congress prescribed the
manner of choosing presidential electors, each state determined
for itself themethod of selection. In 1796 six states permitted
popular election, either by districts or on a general ticket; in seven
states, the legislature made the choice; and three states had mixed
systems. With the election of electors taking place in various states
at different times, Jefferson kept track of the contest as the reports
slowly reached Monticello. By December he was aware that the
election would be Writing to Madison that "there is nothing I
close.
so anxiously hope, as that my name may come out either second or
third," he said that the latter would leave him at home the whole
year, the other two-thirds of it. In case of a tie in the electoral col-
lege, which he then thought possible, he authorized Madison, on

his behalf, to urge preference for Adams. "He has always been my
senior, from the commencement of my public life, and the expres-
sion of the public will being equal, this circumstance ought to give
him the preference." 26
By the end of December, Jefferson believed that Adams had the
votes to win, and he was saying that he had never doubted that out-
come. He said that he would not have refused election, but he re-
joiced at escaping, being convinced that no man would ever leave
the presidency with the reputation that he carried into it. "I have
no ambition govern men; no passion which would lead me to de-

to
light to ride in a storm," he mused. "The newspapers will permit
me to plant my corn, peas, etc., in hills or drills as I please while . . .
our Eastern friends will be struggling with the storm which is gath-
ering over us; perhaps be shipwrecked in it. This is certainly not a
moment to covet the helm." 27
When the electoral votes were counted, Adams, with 71 electoral
votes, won the presidential office by the narrow margin of 3 elec-
toral votes over Jefferson's 68. Thomas Pinckney received 59 votes,

Aaron Burr 30, and the remainder were widely scattered. Adams
carried allof New England, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware
and won in seven out often districts in Maryland. Jefferson won 14
out of 15 electoral votes in Pennsylvania, 20 out of 21 in Virginia,
1 1 out of 1 2 in North Carolina, and shut out Adams completely in
South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. A glance at the

electoral returns showed that Adams' margin of victory rested on
the single electoral votes he received in three states that otherwise
—
were unanimous for Jefferson Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North
Carolina. The meaning of this would not be lost on party leaders as
they prepared for the next presidential contest.
Until 1804 the Constitution did not provide for separate ballot-
ing for president and vice-president, specifying instead that the
candidate with the second-highest number of electoral votes as-
sume the second office. Under this provision Jefferson was elected
vice-president. The possibility of choosing a president from one
party and a vice-president from another had not worried the fram-
ers, because they were not anticipating the rise of political parties.
When that occurred, the Twelfth Amendment (1804) was required
to revise the rules and make such a circumstance unlikely.
Many people wondered whether Jefferson would accept the sec-
ond office. Itwas generally assumed that after two terms as vice-
president, Adams would not have taken the post again. Some feared
that Jefferson also might decline. Before the final outcome was
known, Madison sought to persuade Jefferson that he must not re-
fuse the vice-presidency if it fell to him. Madison need not have ar-
gued the case, for Jefferson had already decided to accept the
lesser station. He also was willing to work with Adams. This may
seem surprising in light of the growing political distance between
the two men while Jefferson was secretary of state and the heated
rhetoric of the election campaign. But Jefferson at Monticello had
been isolated from the campaign and had not yet lost faith in his
Massachussetts colleague of revolutionary days. Moreover, he saw
greater threats to the republic than Adams. "If Mr. Adams can be
induced to administer the government in it's true principles, and to
relinquish his bias to an English constitution," Jefferson confided to
Madison, "it is to be considered whether it would not be on the
whole for the public good to come to a good understanding with
him as to his future elections. He is perhaps the only sure barrier
28
against Hamilton's getting in." To another correspondent he sug-
gested that there was reason to believe that Adams was "detached
from Hamilton, and there is a possibility he may swerve from his

politics in a greater or less degree." He thus thought it advisable for
Republicans to be silent until they saw what turn the new admin-
istration would take. Jefferson was successful in circulating the
word thathe was willing to work with Adams, and Adams was soon
saying that he felt no apprehensions from Jefferson and was look-
ing forward to administering the government with him. 29

Jefferson at first thought that it would not be necessary to be
present in Philadelphia for the inauguration. Not having been
more than seven miles from home since he settled into his retire-
ment, he dreaded a February journey to Philadelphia. But he de-
cided to go as a mark of respect to the public and in order to dispel
any rumors that he considered the second office beneath him.
When he set out for the capital on February 20, he may not have
envisioned the scope of the new political role that was opening be-
fore him or the higher office to which it would lead, but in return-
ing to the world of politics, he did so without reservations. Before
leaving Monticello, he wrote to George Wythe saying that it had
been so long since he sat in a legislature that he was rusty in the
parliamentary rules and asked Wythe, whom he considered the
best-versed man in America on the subject, to loan him some notes. 30
Presiding over the Senate would be a new challenge to which he
would respond with system and energy. He would be less attracted
to the unavoidable role of party leader that his earlier leadership
and recent upon him, but he would not shrink from
election thrust
that task either. When he arrivedin Philadelphia on March 2,
1797, after an absence of over three years, a new era was opening
in his political career and in the life of the nation.
XV
Vice-President
Jefferson spent ten days on the road from Monticello to Phila-

delphia. Traveling by public stage from Alexandria, the newly
elected vice-president hoped to slip into the city without ceremony.
But his arrivaltwo days before the inauguration did not pass un-
noticed. An artillery company was on hand to fire a welcoming
salute, and enthusiastic supporters raised a banner proclaiming
jefferson the friend of the people. He went immediately to pay
1
his respects to John Adams, who returned the call the next day at
the Madisons', where Jefferson stopped for one night before taking
lodging at Francis' Hotel on Fourth Street. The president-elect
shared with Jefferson reports of deteriorating relations with France
and discussed the composition of the mission he proposed to send
to negotiate with the Directory. He talked about including Jef-
ferson or Madison on the commission, an assignment Jefferson
thought inappropriate for the vice-president, though he welcomed
the bipartisan sentiment of the proposal. 2
The inauguration on March 4, 1797, took place in an atmo-
sphere of mutual goodwill, without any display of party differences
between the new Federalist president and his Republican vice-
president. Jefferson— —
soon to be fifty-four years of age took the
oath of office as vice-president in the Senate chamber and pre-
sented a brief address. He then proceeded to the House chamber
where Adams, resplendent with a handsome sword strapped to his
side, took the presidential oath and delivered a moderate and con-
ciliatory inaugural address. The burying of party differences, how-
ever, did not last long. Two days after the inauguration, when
Jefferson reopened the subject of the French mission that Adams
had earlier discussed with him, he got the distinct impression that
the president did not want to talk about it. Jefferson surmised that
Adams had decided to abandon his initial moves to forget party di-
VICE-PRESIDENT 207
vision after meeting with his cabinet —a Hamiltonian clique that

Adams inherited when he chose to retain Washington's advisers.
The vice-president was soon writing friends that he considered his
confined to legislative functions and that
office as constitutionally
he could not take part in executive consultations even if such were
proposed. According to Jefferson, Adams never again consulted
him about any measure of his administration. 3
To Jefferson a more memorable occasion than inauguration
his
as vice-president may have been of the
his installment as president
American Philosophical Society on the evening before the inaugu-
ration. Soon after learning the outcome of the presidential vote, he
had received notice of his election to succeed the late David Rit-
tenhouse, successor to Benjamin Franklin, as president of the na-
tion's most important scientific and philosophical organization. Its
chair was an honor that he cherished and a post that he did not
relinquish until 1815. A week after his installation, Jefferson pre-
sented a paper on the fossil remains of a huge animal recently dis-
covered in the western part of Virginia. The audience, which in-
cluded the English scientist and theologian Joseph Priestley and the
French social philosopher Comte de Volney, made for the kind of
winter "philosophical evening" that he had contemplated enjoying
in Philadelphia, while the vice-presidential office left him free to
enjoy rural, summer days at Monticello. 4
Jefferson preferred the "tranquil pursuits of science," for which
he believed nature had intended him, to politics, but he soon found
the world of politics commanding his prime attention. 5 Remaining
in Philadelphia little more than a week following the inauguration,
he returned May for the special session of Congress
in called by
President Adams to deal with the crisis caused by France's refusal to
receive Charles Cotesworth Pinckney as American minister. In nor-
mal times Congress would not have convened until December, and
Jefferson would have had no reason to return to the capital until
then. Instead, only two months into the new administration, he was
presiding over the Senate and back in the center of national politics
and political controversy.
Jefferson arrived in Philadelphia to find that one of the most sen-
sational topics in the public press was a private letter that he had
written to his old friend Philip Mazzei more than a year earlier dur-
ing the contest over the Jay Treaty. Mazzei had released the letter to
a Florentine paper for publication. It was soon translated from Ital-
ian into French and published in the Paris Moniteur, from which it
was converted back into English and appeared in New York in
Noah Webster's Minerva. Jefferson had unfolded to Mazzei a harsh

and partisan assessment of American politics. He indicated that in
place of the love of liberty and republican government that had
carried Americans through the Revolution, "an Anglican monar-
chical, and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object
is to draw over us the substance, as they have already done the
forms, of the British government." The mass of Americans were

still republican, but all the officers of government, merchants trad-
ing on British capital, speculators, bankers, and all who preferred

"the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty" were striv-
ing to assimilate the Republic to the British model. "It would give
you a fever were I to name to you the apostates who have gone over
to these heresies," he confided, "men who were Samsons in the field
and Solomons in the council, but who have had their heads shorn
by the harlot England." 6
This was strong enough, but successive translations made some
passages even stronger, and Jefferson's meaning was especially al-
tered when forms became form. By the forms of the British govern-
ment Jefferson meant the levees, celebration of the president's
birthday, "inauguration pomposities," and other ceremonies. Form
implied that he was hostile to the Constitution itself. Even more se-
rious was the addition of a long sentence that Jefferson had not
composed at all. This was not in the Italian version, but it appeared
7
in the French version and in the English translation. In his original
letter to Mazzei, Jefferson had not mentioned France, but the added
sentence had him charging his countrymen with ingratitude and
injustice toward France and accusing the pro-British party with
seeking to alienate Americans from France in order to bring the
United States under British influence. 8 Jefferson saw this interpola-
tion as the passage most seized upon by his critics and "made the
subject of unceasing and virulent abuse." Yet, had the letter as
Jefferson composed it been published, the effect would have been
little different. Readers still would have concluded that he included
Washington among the apostates to republicanism. Years later Jef-

ferson said he was talking about the Society of the Cincinnati, but
he did not say so at the time. 9
As the controversy spread in the press, Jefferson remained silent
and cautioned his correspondents not to let any of his letters get
out of their hands lest they find their way into the newspapers. He
felt he could not deny the letter because the substance of it was his,
even though altered by the various translations. At the same time,

he could not avow it in its published state, and any comments would
VICE-PRESIDENT 20g
only draw him into public controversy. When he sought advice

from Madison and Monroe, the latter thought Jefferson should ac-
knowledge the letter and say publicly that he believed that the gov-
ernment was swerving from the principles of the Revolution and
republican government. 10 The more experienced Madison advised
against such a course, considering it "a ticklish experiment" to
reply to "the interrogatories of party spirit" and warning of unfore-
seen dilemmas and disagreeable explanations. He also cited the
precedent of Washington's remaining silent about letters imputed
to him. Jefferson never publicly acknowledged the letter nor re-
sponded to attacks on him in the press. But Republican editors re-
plied, among them Benjamin Franklin Bache, whose Philadelphia
Aurora voiced strong support for the views expressed in the letter,
no matter who wrote it. 11
At another time, such a controversy in the press might have re-
pelled the sensitive Virginian from a further activist role in politics,
but such was not now the case. With Madison, who had not stood
for reelection to Congress, home in Virginia, Jefferson was thrust
into a position of party leadership that he had shunned during the
recent presidential campaign. Despite his reluctance to return to
political life, once back in Philadelphia Jefferson did not hesitate to
take up the leadership of the Republican party. He may have been
more comfortable in other roles, but he did not draw back from the
party role for which he seemed destined. He never admitted liking
the task of party leader, but he exercised that role with skill until he
left the presidency twelve years later.
Jefferson's assumption of party leadership is nowhere better re-

vealed than in a letter he wrote in June, 1797, to the leading Re-
publican activist in New York, Aaron Burr. The New York- Virginia
alliance had recently been strained by the weak support given Burr
in Virginia for the vice-presidency in 1796, and Jefferson's letter to
Burr was warm and confiding. Revealing his disappointment with
the new administration, he said he feared that the future character
of the Republic was at stake. He shared his concern about the loss
of Republican strength in Congress and sought Burr's help in "the
penetration of truth" into the eastern states. "But will that region
ever awake to the true state of things?" he asked. "Can the middle,
Southern and Western states hold on till they awake? These are
painful and doubtful questions: and if, in assuring me of your
health, you can give me a comfortable solution of them, it will
relieve a mind devoted to the preservation of our republican gov-
ernment." Pleased with Jefferson's display of friendship and con-
2 lO IN PURSUIT OF REASON
fidence, Burr responded promptly, agreeing that "the moment

requires free communication among those who adhere to the prin-
ciples of our revolution." But the cautious Burr suggested that it
would not be easy or discreet to respond to Jefferson's questions in a
letter and arranged to meet the vice-president in Philadelphia on
No more striking a vignette of Jefferson as a
the following Sunday. 12
party leader can be found than that meeting with Burr, held when
the Adams administration had not yet completed fourth month.
its
While Burr was in Philadelphia, Jefferson also brought him to-

gether with Albert Gallatin, who succeeded Madison as the Repub-
lican leader in Congress, and with James Monroe, recently dis-
missed as American minister to France, who had just arrived home.
In an open display of support for the recalled diplomat, Jefferson,
Gallatin, and Burr boarded Monroe's ship to greet him and spent
two hours in a consultation that had all the appearances of a con-
clave of party leaders. When a few days later Jefferson attended a
public dinner given by Republicans to demonstrate support for
Monroe, he provided an even clearer signal of his return to par-
tisan politics.
13
More visibly than ever before, Jefferson was acting
as a party leader.
After stopping to visit Madison on his way home not long after-
ward, Jefferson invited both Madison and Monroe to visit him at
Monticello. Among important things to be discussed was a recent
presentment by the grand jury of the federal circuit court at Rich-
mond. In May that jury, presided over by Associate Justice James
Iredell of the Supreme Court of the United States, presented "as a
real evil" the circular letters of several members of Congress, par-
ticularly those of Samuel J. Cabell, who was accused of disseminat-
ing "unfounded calumnies" against the government of the United
States, thereby alienating the people from their government, and
increasing "a foreign influence ruinous to the peace, happiness and
independence of these United States." 14
The presentment touched off a storm of controversy in Virginia.
Cabell indignantly replied that he would not be intimidated from
corresponding with his constituents. Other Virginia members who
were in the habit of addressing circular letters to their constituents
also joined in the attack on the grand jury and Justice Iredell.
Jefferson, too, was alarmed over the Federalist use of the judiciary.
He believed that "the charges of the federal judges have for a con-
siderable time been inviting the grand juries to be inquisitors on
the freedom of speech, of writing and of principle of their fellow-
I5
citizens." His indignation was even greater because he lived in
Cabell's congressional district. Upon his return to Monticello, he
VICE-PRESIDENT 2 1 1
drafted a petition for his neighbors to present to the Virginia

House of Delegates. The petition protested the grand jury's action
as a violation of the natural right of free communication between
citizens and called upon the legislature to impeach and punish the
jury for "a great crime, wicked in its purpose, and mortal
members
in consequences unless prevented." He sent the draft to Madison
its
for his opinion and revisions, consulted with political friends in Al-
bemarle County, and took the lead in making arrangements to have
the petition submitted to the legislature without his authorship be-
coming known. He even concerned himself with the timing of the
presentation of the petition, so that it would coincide with the con-
vening of the next session of Congress. His Republican friends in
the House of Delegates not only arranged this but also succeeded
in getting the House to approve the printing and distribution of a
thousand copies of the petition. Over Federalist opposition the
House approved the Republican resolution denouncing the grand
jury's action but took no action against the jurors. Meanwhile, the
charges against Cabell were never pressed. 16
Jefferson's role in the Cabell incident provides evidence of his en-
ergetic assumption of party leadership. While showing his concern
for civil liberties, the episode also reveals his willingness to use the
legislature of a state to criticize the Federalist-dominated judiciary,
setting a precedent for the challenges to a Federalist Congress a
year later in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Indeed, his
reasoning for directing the petition to the Virginia Assembly rather
than to Congress, as Monroe suggested, foreshadowed his more
systematic formulation of states' rights doctrines in the Kentucky
Resolutions of 1798. He believed that petitioning Congress would
only make matters worse and that a majority in the House of Rep-
resentatives would rebuff the protest. "The system of the General
Government is to seize all doubtful ground," he told Monroe. "We
must join in the scramble, or get nothing. ... It is of immense con-
sequence that the States retain as complete authority as possible
over their own citizens." n
After Monroe took up residence in Albemarle County in late
summer of 1797 and with Madison not very distant in neighboring
Orange County, Jefferson's closest political advisers were near at
hand, restoring the inner circle of party leadership. Before return-
ing to preside over the Senate at the second session of the Fifth
Congress, Jefferson advised Monroe on the publication of his de-
fense of his conduct as minister to France, and he stopped to visit
with Madison again on his way back to Philadelphia. 18
When the vice-president arrived in the capital on December 12,
Congress had been in session for several weeks and would sit until
the middle of July in the longest session yet under the new Consti-
tution. Although Jefferson would not stay until the very close, leav-
ing at the end of June to return to Monticello, he would still find
the session a long and difficult one. As the crisis with France deep-
ened, it widened party divisions, raising issues that Jefferson saw as
critical to the survival of the Republic.
For weeks that turned into months Congress did very little while
waiting impatiently for news from the envoys — Charles Cotesworth
Pinckney, John Marshall, and Elbridge Gerry — sent to Paris to ne-
gotiate. Jefferson expected the mission to be successful. He be-
lieved that France wanted peace with the United States, that Adams
had overreacted to the earlier French refusal to receive Pinckney by
summoning the special session of Congress the previous May, and
that Adams' call for defense preparations was unnecessary. As time
passed with no report from the envoys, Jefferson came to believe
that no news was good news and even began to suspect that the ad-
ministration was holding back dispatches. There was, in fact, little
basis for Jefferson's optimism. At about the same time, Andrew
Jackson, then a member of the Senate with no sources of informa-
tion any better than the Senate's presiding officer, wrote that re-
ports were circulating in Philadelphia that the envoys were return-
ing without having been admitted. 19
Jefferson certainly was not the only person unprepared for what
was to follow. On the evening of March 4, 1798, Secretary of State
Timothy Pickering finally received a bundle of dispatches from the
American commissioners. As soon as he read enough of them to
sense their content —it would take days to decipher the coded dis-
patches — he rushed them to the president. The next day Adams

sent Congress the most recent report from the envoys, which indi-
cated that there was no hope of their being received by the French
government or accomplishing the objects of their mission. The
president also reported an impending French order for the seizure
of all neutral ships carrying any goods produced in England or its
20
possessions.
As Adams read more of the dispatches, he learned that French
agents had demanded an apology for his references to France in his
message to Congress in May, 1797, asked for a large loan to their
government, and sought a substantial bribe for French officials be-
fore even opening negotiations. Adams' initial reaction was that the
conduct of the Directory demanded a declaration of war. But with-
—
out spreading the dispatches before Congress which he thought
VICE-PRESIDENT 213
might endanger the envoys — Congress would not be ready to take

that step. He thus recommended a more limited response, calling
upon Congress to take measures to protect shipping and defend
the coasts, while replenishing arsenals, manufacturing arms, and
raising revenue to pay for these extraordinary expenses. He told
Congress that, after examining the dispatches, he saw no ground
for expecting the mission to France to succeed "on terms compat-
ible with the safety, honor or essential interests of the nation," and
he announced that he was rescinding an order of President Wash-
ington forbidding the arming of American ships. 21
One Republican member of Congress called Adams' message "a
declaration of war as far as the President's ipse dixit can go." Jeffer-
son called it "insane." Like many Republicans, he wondered what
revelations the dispatches contained, and he believed that "if Con-
gress are to act on the question of war, they have a right to informa-
tion." Republican demands for disclosure were supported by ex-
treme Federalists, who had gained some idea of the contents of the
papers, and the House on April 2 by a vote of 65 to 27 called for
the papers. The next day Adams sent Congress transcripts of all
the dispatches, substituting the letters W, X, F, and Z for the names
of the French agents who had communicated with the American
envoys. 22 As the dispatches were read behind closed doors, Repub-
lican members were stunned, and as portions leaked to the press,
so too was the public. Soon afterward Congress voted to publish the
documents, and as their contents became known, a wave of pro-
administration and anti-French sentiment spread across the land.
Some Republican congressmen, such as Virginia's Samuel J.
Cabell, tried to calm the rising fever against France and the talk of
war by pointing out the lack of evidence incriminating the French
government in the "nefarious scheme to swindle" by the unautho-
rized French spokesmen. A Republican colleague told his North
Carolina constituents that it was to be regretted that the informa-
tion in the dispatches was not more favorable but pointed out that
the greatest part of their contents reported conversations of unoffi-
cial and unauthorized persons. Jefferson took a similar position. In
sending his nephew Peter Carr a copy of the envoys' dispatches, he

noted, "You will perceive that they have been assailed by swindlers,
whether with or without the participation of Talleyrand is not very
apparent." Knowing the character of that French minister, Jeffer-
son thought it very possible that Talleyrand expected to share in the
bribe demanded, but he believed it was neither proved nor prob-
able that the Directory knew anything about it. 23
Jefferson's analysis of the dispatches placed the primary

blame
for the French actions on President Adams. In his opinion Adams'
insult to the French at the opening of the special session of Con-
gress in May had prevented negotiations. In reacting to France's
refusal to receive Pinckney as minister, Adams had accused the
French of treating the United States "neither as allies nor as friends,
nor as a sovereign state" and said that the United States should
show France that they were not "the miserable instruments of for-
eign influence, and regardless of national honor, character, and
interest." Jefferson thought the content of the dispatches from
France showed that Adams' speech was the only obstacle to accom-
modation and the real cause of war, if war came. 24 But most Ameri-
cans did not draw this conclusion and saw the French rather than
their president as offering the greater insult.
Jefferson viewed the public reaction with alarm, fearing that the
administration would now find support for a war against France
that he suspected the Federalists of favoring all along. The dis-
patches did not offer any new motive for going to war, he told
Madison on the day the House voted to publish the paper. "Yet such
istheir effect on the minds of wavering characters, that I fear, that to
wipe off the imputation of being French partisans, they will go over
to the war measures so furiously pushed." The vice-president did
not know that Secretary of State Pickering was sending bundles of
the pamphlets containing the XYZ papers to correspondents all
over the country with instructions for their extensive distribution,
even into the backcountry. 25 But all around him was evidence of the
impact of the disclosures on the public mind. In Philadelphia the
excitement over the XYZ dispatches had been maintained, and war
addresses were "showering in from New Jersey and the great trad-
ing towns." The growth of Republicanism in the eastern states had
been checked. In his view the dispatches from France had "carried
over to the war-party most of the waverers in the House of Repre-
sentatives," giving the Federalists a strong majority to carry what
they pleased. 26
came first. Congress provided for building a
Military measures
navy, created theNavy Department, increased coastal fortifications,
and authorized the capture of French armed ships operating off
American shores. The legislators expanded the regular army, au-
thorized the president to raise a provisional army of ten thousand
men and to accept volunteer companies, and passed measures for
obtaining quantities of arms, munitions, and supplies. To pay for
these extensive measures, Congress imposed a direct tax on land,
5
VICE-PRESIDENT 2 1
houses, and slaves. As one discouraged Republican representative

wrote his constituents at the end of the session, "the conduct of the
French government . . have irritated the public mind very much
.
against them, and cause the adoption of measures which I fear

27
place us in a state of war."
But military preparations were only the beginning. Jefferson had
early heard rumors that the Federalists planned to pass a citizen
bill, an alien bill, and a sedition bill, and he was soon reporting to
Madison the proceedings on these Federalist measures to tighten

internal security. First came a proposal to modify the naturalization
act. Next came proposals regarding aliens. Finally Jefferson wrote
to Madison that "they have brought into the lower house a sedition
bill, which among other enormities, undertakes to make printing
certain matters criminal, though one of the amendments to the

Constitution has so expressly taken religion, printing presses, etc.
out of their coercion." He was convinced that the object was the sup-
pression of Republican presses, and especially Benjamin Franklin
Bache's Aurora, Philadelphia's leading Republican newspaper. The
alien and sedition bills, Jefferson said, "are so palpably in the teeth of
the Constitution as to show they mean to pay no respect to it." 28
Jefferson did not remain in Philadelphia to see the last of these
measures adopted in a Senate over which he presided, but he did
delay his departure for a week when he learned of John Marshall's
arrival in New York from France. He was not among the officials led
by Secretary of State Pickering who went to greet the envoy when
he reached Philadelphia, and he thought the procession was cir-
cuitously paraded through the streets to draw crowds, which he ad-
mitted were immense. He had stayed less to see Marshall than
to hear the news from France, and he was relieved to learn that
Marshall had told Robert R. Livingston in New York that they had
no idea in France of a war with the United States. But he heard
nothing like that circulating in the streets of Philadelphia. On the
other hand, he could not avoid hearing the reports of the welcom-
ing banquet the Federalist members of Congress hosted for the re-
turning envoy, at which his exuberant admirers drank the toast
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute." 29
As the crisis with France unfolded, Jefferson counseled, "A little
patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells
dissolved, and the people recovering their true sight, restoring
their government to its true principles." 30 The optimistic Virginian
still held to that opinion when he left the capital on June 27 for
Monticello. But by patience he did not mean inactivity, and in the

months ahead he would take the lead in trying to move the people
to restore the government to those true principles that he cher-
ished. Arriving back on his mountaintop on July 4, he found that
the remodeling of his house took so much of his time that there was
little left spend at his writing desk. But when copies of the alien
to
and sedition acts reached him, he knew he would have to find some
time and some way to answer them.
The first alien act (June 25, 1798) empowered the president to
order the deportation of any alien he judged "dangerous to the
peace and safety of the United States" or had reasonable grounds
to suspect was involved in any treasonable intrigue against the gov-
ernment. It was up to the president to determine what constituted
a danger. Only after receiving a deportation order would the alien
have an opportunity to present evidence in his own behalf or, as
one Republican pointed out, to prove that the president was wrong
in deciding that he was dangerous. The second alien act (July 6,
1798) was a permanent statute permitting the president in time
of war to imprison or deport alien subjects of an enemy power.
Operative only in war time, it raised no controversial constitutional
questions. The first alien law, on the other hand, was a temporary
peacetime measure designed for the crisis with France and limited
to two years. It gave the administration power to deal with objec-
tionable aliens, especially those who supported the Republicans,
whether war came or not. 31
Even more sweeping and more objectionable to Republican op-
ponents of the administration was the sedition act (July 14, 1798).
Passed in the final days of the session, after Jefferson had left for
Virginia, the act made it unlawful for any persons to combine or
conspire together to oppose any lawful measure of the govern-
ment, to prevent any officer of the United States from performing
his duties, or to aid or attempt to procure "any insurrection, riot,
unlawful assembly, or combination." Furthermore, it provided for
the punishment of any person writing, uttering, or publishing "any
false, scandalous and malicious writing" against the president, the
Congress, or the government of the United States, made with the
intent to defame then) or to excite against them "the hatred of
the good people of the United States." Underscoring the blatant
political purposes of the measure, the act was to expire on March 3,
32
1801, the last day of President Adams' term of office.
Jefferson saw the alien and sedition laws not only as attempts to
silence Republican newspapers and drive Republican-minded aliens
from the country but also as "an experiment on the American
VICE-PRESIDENT 2 1
7
mind, to see how far it will bear an avowed violation of the constitu-
tion." When he took up his pen to reply, he would direct his atten-
tion to the basic constitutional issue. Because he was vice-president
and the head of the Republican party, to which the acts were largely
directed, his response would be secretly composed and indirectly
put before the public. In October he remarked causally to one Vir-
ginia correspondent that he fancied that some of the state legis-
latures would take strong ground in response to the alien and sedi-
tion acts. Before then he had already initiated the process to make
33
certain that would happen.

By October he had finished the final draft of a set of resolutions
protesting the unconstitutionality of the acts and sent them to
Wilson Cary Nicholas, a Republican member of the Virginia As-
sembly, to arrange their introduction in the legislature of neighbor-
ing North Carolina. By a fortuitous coincidence former Virginian
John Breckinridge, a member of the Kentucky House of Represen-
tatives, was visiting in Nicholas' neighborhood, and Nicholas ar-
ranged for him to carry the resolutions to Kentucky (where opposi-
tion to the alien and sedition laws was already stirring) and to
sponsor them in the Kentucky legislature. Nicholas revealed Jeffer-
son's authorship of the resolutions to Breckinridge, who pledged
himself to secrecy and abandoned an intended visit to Monticello to
avoid possible speculation. Sharing Nicholas' confidence in Breckin-
ridge, Jefferson fully approved of the arrangements. He also urged
Nicholas to discuss the resolutions with Madison, from whom he
had no secrets. 34 Just how much Jefferson had already conferred
with Madison regarding the resolutions is unclear, but Madison vis-
ited Jefferson at Monticello in October, and they consulted on a
similar set of resolutions that Madison secretly was drafting for
presentation to the Virginia Assembly by John Taylor of Caroline
County. 35
Jefferson stated the theoretical basis of the Kentucky Resolutions
in the opening sentence affirming: "Resolved, That the several
States composing the United States of America, are not united on
the principle of unlimited submission to their general government;
but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for
the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a
general government for special purposes, —delegated to that gov-
ernment certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the
residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that
whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers,
its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."
36
He went on to
say that the general government was not made the final or exclusive
judge of its powers and that each party to the compact had an equal
right to judge for itself infractions of the Constitution. Subsequent
resolutions specified the provisions of the Constitution violated by
the alien and and declared that because they were un-
sedition acts
constitutional, the acts were void and of no effect.
The resolutions as adopted by the legislature of Kentucky in No-
vember, 1798, affirmed these principles, essentially in Jefferson's
own words, but they departed from Jefferson's draft in regard to
the means of redress. The supposition is that Breckinridge toned
down Jefferson's draft before submitting it to his colleagues in the
Kentucky legislature. In his draft Jefferson stated that "where pow-
ers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of
the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in
cases not within the compact ... to nullify of their own authority all
assumptions of powers by others within their own limits." Jeffer-
son's draft had not gone so far as to proclaim the nullification of the
alien and sedition acts, but he had employed the word and affirmed
the right. The resolutions that came from the Kentucky legislature
in 1798 did not contain this passage and did not use the word nul-
37
lification. The Kentucky Resolutions followed Jefferson's draft in
concluding with a call to all other states to express their sentiments
in regard to the alien and sedition laws. Framed with the hope that
other states' views would coincide with those of Kentucky, the reso-
lutions urged all states to concur in declaring the acts void and of
no force. But the Kentucky protest dropped Jefferson's further ap-
peal to each state to "take measures of its own for providing that
neither of these acts, nor any others of the General Government,
not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall
be exercised within their respective territories." In place of this ex-
treme proposition, Breckinridge or other Kentucky revisers sub-
stituted a call for all states to unite in requesting the repeal of the
38
alien and sedition laws at the next session of Congress.
Influenced by the more cautious Madison, Jefferson was pre-
pared to accept this more moderate approach. To John Taylor, who
was to shepherd Madison's milder resolutions through the Virginia
Assembly, Jefferson wrote in late November, 1798, "For the present
I should be for resolving the alien and sedition laws to be against
the constitution and merely void, and for addressing the other
States to obtain similar declarations; and I would not do anything
at this moment which should commit us further, but reserve our-
VICE-PRESIDENT 2ig
selves to shape our future measures or no measures, by the events

which may happen." Jefferson did make a last-minute effort to
strengthen the language of Madison's resolutions, but in the end
39
Madison's more moderate stance prevailed.
In response to the passage of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolu-
tions, a number of states replied unfavorably to the arguments ad-
vanced, and no state voiced support. A disappointed Jefferson
strongly favored a rebuttal of these negative responses. "That the
principles already advanced by Virginia and Kentucky are not to be
yielded in silence, I presume we all agree," he wrote to Madison,
outlining the main points he thought should be emphasized in

their reply. In these suggestions he went so far as to propose a
threat "to sever ourselves from that union we so much value, rather
than give up the rights of self government which we have reserved,
and in which alone we see liberty, safety and happiness." Again
Madison's moderating influence prevailed. When Jefferson sent a
similar outline to Nicholas, who was to convey his views to Breckin-
ridge in Kentucky, he was more cautious and eliminated the idea of
threatening secession. He also specifically declined to prepare any
draft of new resolutions to be transmitted to Kentucky to avoid sus-
picions, which he thought had been strong in some quarters in the
preceding year. 40
The resolutions adopted by the Kentucky legislature in 1799
thus were not of Jefferson's composition. Breckinridge or some
other person revived the word nullification, which had been edited
out of Jefferson's draft of the preceding year, and incorporated it
into the new resolutions. Jefferson never objected to this restora-
tion, but he did not initiate it. The Kentucky Resolutions of 1799
justified nullification as a rightful remedy, but the claim was not
pressed. The resolutions concluded by issuing only a "solemn pro-
test."
41
The more moderate Virginia response directed by Madison,
who had returned to the Virginia House of Delegates, did not raise
the specter of nullification and emphasized that the Virginia Reso-
lutions were an expression of opinion only. 42
In the course of time the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions be-
came famous for their systematic formulation of the doctrine of
states' rights and for the germ of nullification. At the moment
when they were written, they were most important as a political
protest in defense of civil liberties. It was Jefferson's deep concern
for the protection of those rights that moved him to take up his pen
in their behalf. The resolutions that Jefferson and Madison au-
thored were more than expositions of constitutional theory. They

were also political statements directed against unpopular measures
of a Federalist-controlled Congress and the Federalist administra-
tion of John Adams. Indeed, they were the opening guns of the
election campaign of 1800.
XVI
The Election of 1800
Vice-President Jefferson took his job as presiding officer of the

Senate seriously. Except at the very beginning and the end of ses-
sions, when he was not always present, he occupied the chair daily
and wielded the gavel with an authority backed by careful regard
for parliamentary rules. With his usual attention to system, his
orderly mind was troubled by the fact that the legislative practices
of the body over which he presided were not more regularized.
Finding no authority to which to turn for the fine points of proce-
dure, he began preparing a manual of parliamentary practice. Pub-
lished in 1801, the manual has ever since been the fundamental
guide to Senate procedures, and the House of Representatives also
later adopted applicable portions of the work.
1
While conscientiously performing his duties as president of the

Senate, Jefferson also filled the role of Republican party leader in
preparing the party and the electorate for the election of 1800.
Chafing powerlessly under a Federalist administration, the vice-
president, unlike the reluctant candidate of 1796, was ready to run
for president in 1800. Midway through Adams' presidency he be-
gan laying the groundwork for the campaign. Presidential candi-
dates were expected to refrain from openly campaigning for office,
and Jefferson would not challenge that tradition. But he would do
all that he could to advance his own election and a Republican vic-
tory in 1800 by writing letters, supporting Republican newspapers,

circulating political pamphlets, urging supporters to write pieces
for the press, and generally encouraging Republican party activity.
Early in 1 799 Jefferson wrote from Philadelphia to Madison in
Virginia that the coming summer was "the season for systematic
energies and sacrifices. The engine is the press. Every man must lay
his purse and his pen under contribution." He urged Madison to
set aside a portion of every post day to write something for the
newspapers and to send it to him in Philadelphia. "When I go away

I will let you know to whom you may send," he instructed, "so that
your name shall be sacredly secret." 2 Jefferson similarly enlisted

other Republicans to write for the press, while he himself adhered
to his own proscription against writing anything for publication to
which he did not sign name.
his
Jefferson also gave aid and encouragement to newspaper editors
and writers suffering under the sedition act. Among them was
James Thomson Callender, whose abusive attacks on John Adams
Jefferson later said he had not intended to encourage. After the
election Jefferson said that "no man wished more to see his pen
stopped" but that he had considered him "a proper object of be-
nevolence." Justifying the two occasions on which he had given
Callender fifty dollars, he insisted that the gifts were "mere charities,
yielded under a strong conviction that he was injuring us by his
writings." This recollection is inconsistent with what Jefferson wrote
to Callender during the campaign. After Callender sent him some
proof sheets of his The Prospect Before Us, Jefferson responded by
telling the writer that "such papers cannot fail to produce the best
effect. They inform the thinking part of the nation; and those
again, supported by the taxgathers as their vouchers, set the people
to rights." Some of Jefferson's political friends tried to warn him
that Callender was not to be trusted, but no evidence has been
found that the candidate heeded their advice. 3
During the campaign of 1800 Jefferson personally took a hand in
the distribution of political pamphlets favorable to the Republican
cause. In sending a dozen such pamphlets to Monroe in February,
1799, he instructed him to give them to "the most influential char-
acters among our country-men" who were still open to conviction
and might have the most effect on their neighbors. "It would be
useless to give them to persons already sound," he wrote. "Do not
let my name be connected with the business." Throughout the cam-
paign Jefferson continued to direct the distribution of such mate-

rial. In the spring of 1800 he sent eight dozen copies of Thomas
Cooper's Political Arithmetic to the chairman of the recently created

state Republican committee, asking him to send one copy to each
county committee. "Tho' I know that this is not the immediate ob-
ject of your institution," he wrote, "yet I consider it as a most valu-
able object, to which the institution may most usefully be applied."
Trusting the Virginia party chairman with the secret that the pam-
phlets came from the vice-president, he explained: "You will read-
ily see what a handle would be made of my advocating their con-
THE ELECTION OF l8oO 2 23
tents. I must leave to yourself therefore to say how they come to

Cooper argued that the cost of building
you." In Political Arithmetic
and maintaining a navy to protect American commerce far ex-
ceeded the profit from shipping. The merchants did not assume
the burden of the added taxes but passed them on, he explained.
"The consumer, the farmer, the mechanic, the labourer, they and
they alone pay." Jefferson's agency in the circulation of such pam-
4
phlets shows how different his role was in the election of 1 800 from
that in 1796. In 1800, Jefferson was more actively engaged in the
presidential campaign than any previous presidential candidate
had ever been.
Jefferson's greatest contribution to the campaign of 1800 was in
defining the issues before the voters and developing the Republi-
can platform, though that term was not then in use. In letters to
friends and party leaders throughout the country Jefferson spelled
out his own political principles and what he believed the Republi-
can party stood for. Writing to Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts
early in 1799, the candidate summarized those beliefs, which he af-
firmed were "unquestionably the principles of the great body of
our fellow citizens." He began by declaring his commitment to pre-
serving the Constitution "according to the true sense in which it
was adopted by the States" and preventing the "monarchising" of
its features. He was "for preserving to the States the powers not
yielded by them to the Union" and "not for transferring all the
powers of the States to the general government, and all those of
that government to the Executive branch." He stressed that he was
"for a government rigorously frugal and simple, applying all the
possible savings of the public revenue to the discharge of the na-
tional debt." Addressing the military buildup following the XYZ af-
fair, he said he opposed a standing army in time of peace and
would rely solely on the militia for internal defense until an actual
invasion. He favored only such naval force as necessary to protect
the coasts and harbors, fearing the expenses of a larger navy and
"the eternal wars in which it will implicate us, grind us with public
burthens, and sink us under them."
Jefferson emphasized that the United States should stay out of
the quarrels of Europe. "I am for free commerce with all nations;
political connection with none," he wrote, "and or no diplo-
little
matic establishment." Responding to recent challenges to the First

Amendment, the Republican leader affirmed his support for free-
dom of religion and freedom of the press. No one could have failed
to recognize that he had the sedition act in mind when he said that
he was "against all violations of the constitution to silence by force

and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our
citizens against the conduct of their agents." Always more than
politician, he added that he was "for encouraging the progress of
science in all it's branches; and not for raising a hue and cry against
the sacred name of philosophy." 5
The Republican candidate expected the views that he expressed

in this and other letters to circulate beyond the persons to whom
they were addressed, and there is ample evidence that they did so.
The principles and issues that he stressed appeared repeatedly in
Republican newspapers, broadsides, and party leaflets throughout
the campaign. The Republican party took a clear stand on the
issues in 1800, and it was Jefferson more than anyone else who ar-
ticulated the positions that his supporters readily embraced. Jeffer-
son's leadership in directing opposition to the principles and poli-
cies of the Federalist administration rather than to the character of
President Adams was widely followed but not entirely accepted.
Adams again was accused of being a monarchist, though the issue
played far less a role in the 1800 campaign than it had in 1796.
Adams' policies provided more ample grounds for Republican as-
saults. Still, some Republicans were less concerned than Jefferson
about emphasizing principle. One Virginia Republican argued that
there was too much talk of principle and that Republicans should
bring their arguments home to the voters' feelings. The Phila-
delphia Aurora, the nation's leading Republican newspaper, de-
clared that under a Federalist president there would be war, but
with Jefferson there would be peace. "Therefore the friends of
peace will vote for Jefferson —
the friends of war will vote for Adams or
for Pinckney" 6
Federalists employed similar tactics. Fisher Ames of Massachu-
setts advised Federalists to "sound the tocsin about Jefferson" in a
series of papers designed "to prove the dreadful evils to be ap-
prehended from a Jacobin President." Among such consequences,
he listed war with Great Britain, an alliance with France, plunder,
and anarchy. "Surely we have enough to fear from Jefferson," he
reasoned. Jefferson's opponents depicted him as a threat to the sta-
bility of the government and as one who would undermine the
morals of the people. "Can serious and reflecting men look about
them and doubt, that if Jefferson is elected, and the Jacobins get
into authority, that those morals which protect our lives from the
knife of the assassin —
which guard the chastity of our wives and
—
daughters from seduction and violence defend our property from
plunder and devastation, and shield our religion from contempt

and profanation, will not be trampled upon and exploded?" ex-
claimed "A Christian Federalist." The Federalist Gazette of the United
States posed the key question of the election, "to be asked by every
American, laying his hand on his heart," as: "Shall I continue in al-
legiance to God — and a Religious President; Or impiously declare
for Jefferson — and No God!!!" 7
Federalist attacks on Jefferson on religious grounds caused Re-

publicans more discomfort than any other charge. Though reared
in the Anglican church, Jefferson was a man of the Enlightenment
who accepted deism as the natural religion that the application of
reason to society dictated. Seeking to exploit the religious issue,
Federalists cited passages in his Notes on Virginia to prove his "dis-
belief of the Holy Scriptures; or, in other words, his rejection of the
Christian Religion and open profession of Deism," as the Reverend
William Linn, a New York clergyman, proclaimed. Linn insisted
that "the election of any man avowing the principles of Mr. Jeffer-
son would . destroy religion, introduce immorality, and loosen
. .
all the bonds of society," and he warned that "the voice of the na-
tion in calling a deist to the first office must be construed into no

8
less than a rebellion against God."
Republican defenders of Jefferson responded by also quoting
from his Notes on Virginia, which showed, one claimed, "that there is
not a single passage in the Notes on Virginia, or any of Mr. Jeffer-
son's writings, repugnant to Christianity; but on the contrary, in
every respect, favourable to it." Republicans further charged that
Jefferson was being attacked "because he is not a fanatic, nor will-
ing that the Quaker, the Baptist, the Methodist, or any other denomi-
nations of Christians, should pay the pastors of other sects; because
he does not think that a Catholic should be banished for believing
in transubstantiation, or a Jew, for believing in the God of Abra-
ham, Isaac, and Jacob." What stood highest in Jefferson's favor was
his clear record of opposition to state-supported churches and his
defense of religious freedom. It was Jefferson's opposition to a reli-
gious establishment that made such an important churchman as Is-
aac Backus an admirer of Jefferson, and it was a stand that could be
widely appreciated throughout the growing Baptist movement
stimulated by the Second Great Awakening. 9
As they had in 1796, Federalists tried to arouse suspicions against
Jefferson as a radical philosopher. A North Carolina planter warned
against "the dangerous principle of Mr. Jefferson's philosophy,"
linking it to the "horrid government" of France and praying, "From
the government of such philosophers, may the beneficent father of

the universe protect us." Republicans often countered with ex-
travagant praise of their candidate. One lauded him as a man of
"an enlightened mind and superior wisdom; the adorer of our
God; the patriot of his country; and the friend and benefactor of
the whole human race." Republicans repeatedly reminded voters
that Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence,
and one writer urged support for the man "whose whole life has
been a comment on its precepts, and an uniform pursuit of the
great blessings of his country which it was first intended to estab-
lish." In more restrained language the state Republican committee
of Virginia in its address to the voters affirmed, "As a friend
official
to liberty, we believe Jefferson second to no man, and the experi-
ence of no man has afforded better lessons for its preservation." 10
Enjoying the advantages of the party in power, the Federalists
in their campaign literature attributed the prosperous situation of
the country to "the sage maxims of administration established by
the immortal Washington, and steadily pursued by his virtuous
successor." Federalist spokesmen saw no reason to change course.
The Federalist state committee in Virginia reminded voters that
the country had remained free, independent, and at peace. Why
embark with Jefferson on "the tempestuous sea of liberty? . . .
Let us be content to take a lesson, on this head, from the French

11
Republic."
As the party out of power, the Republicans sought to overcome
their disadvantage by giving attention to party organization, elec-
tion laws and procedures, campaign methods, and getting out the
voters. Federalists commonly followed Republican examples, but
Republicans tended to be the innovators in creating party ma-
chinery and in implementing new campaign techniques. Jefferson
recognized the value of these activities but was not directly involved
in their management, which was largely in the hands of state and
local party leaders with the aid and sometimes the prodding of
members of Congress. In Virginia the Republican-controlled legis-
lature changed the election law from a district system of electing
presidential electors to a general ticket. Four years earlier Jeffer-
son had lost one district in his home state. Under a general-ticket
system, he would be assured of the entire electoral vote of the na-
tion's largest state. Virginia Federalists protested the Republican
action, but elsewhere Federalists used the same tactic when it was to
their advantage. In John Adams' home of Massachusetts, the
state
Federalist-controlled legislature transferred the election of electors
from popular election by districts to the state legislature. 12
After the changes in election laws had been completed, presi-

all
dential electors were popularly chosen in 1800 in only five of the

sixteen states: Rhode Island, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina,
and Kentucky. Thus, as Thomas Boylston Adams, the president's
youngest son, observed, "the trial of strength between the two Can-
didates for the chief magistracy of the Union is to be seen, not in
the choice of electors by the people, but in the complexion and
13
character of the individual legislatures." Because elections for
state legislatures came at different times, the presidential contest
would extend through most of the year.
The first trial of strength between Jefferson and Adams was in
New York City, but the principal contenders were Aaron Burr, who
managed the Republican campaign, and Alexander Hamilton, who
led the Federalists. The objective was to win control of the state leg-
islature, which would choose the presidential electors. Jefferson
himself believed that New York, which Adams had carried in 1 796,
was critical to Republican success. In the heated contest in New
York City, Burr skillfully put together a Republican slate that in-
cluded a number of prominent Republicans as candidates for the
state assembly. The strategy succeeded decisively. The victory in
New York City tipped the balance in the legislature to the Republi-
can side, and the newly elected Assembly could be counted upon to
choose presidential electors pledged to Jefferson. Hamilton, how-
ever, saw one way to avoid such an unwelcome result. Writing
promptly to Governor John Jay, he urged him to call a special ses-
sion of the old assembly before the terms of the Federalist majority
expired on July 1. The purpose would be to change the state's
method of electing presidential electors, substituting popular elec-
tion by districts in place of selection by the legislature. "In times like
these in which we live, it will not do to be overscrupulous," Hamil-
ton wrote the governor. "It is easy to sacrifice the substantial inter-
ests of society by a strict adherence to ordinary rules. . They
. .
ought not to hinder the taking of a legal and constitutional step, to

prevent an Atheist in Religion and a Fanatic in politics from getting
possession of the helm of the State." 14 Jay, who had resigned as
chief justice of the United States to become governor of New York,
refused to be a party to the scheme, thus assuring that the Republi-
can legislature would select Republican electors.
Coming at the end of April, the New York election gave the Re-
publicans an important early campaign victory that they hoped
would influence elections in other states. It gave a great psychologi-
cal boost to Republicans, and enthusiastic Republicans widely cred-
ited Burr with the success. "He deserves anything and everything
from his country," one New York admirer exclaimed. 15 Burr's re-
ward came quickly. A week after news of the New York results
reached Philadelphia, Republican members of Congress caucused
and nominated Burr for vice-president. Jefferson by consensus was
already the Republican candidate for president, and the caucus did
not place his name in nomination. But the absence of a similar con-
sensus regarding the second place prompted the Republican mem-
bers of Congress to assume a nominating role. In doing so, they set
the precedent for presidential nominations that would be followed
by the Republican party until 1824.
The New York election also had its effect on the Federalists in Con-
gress. Caucusing immediately after the New York returns reached
Philadelphia, they recommended that John Adams and Charles
Cotesworth Pinckney be supported equally as the Federalist candi-
dates. With presidential electors not permitted to distinguish be-
tween presidential and vice-presidential candidates in casting their
votes, the strategy was designed to give the Federalists two chances
to win the presidency. It depended on the possibility that electors in
some states might cast their votes for Jefferson and one of the Fed-
eralist nominees. "To support Adams and Pinckney, equally, is the
only thing that can possibly save us from the fangs of Jefferson"
Hamilton wrote privately after the New York election. 16 While this
was the proclaimed rationale, the caucus decision masked a deeper
strategy— the design to promote the election of Pinckney over
Adams. This scheme, of which Hamilton was the principal archi-
tect, rested primarily on the prospect that in South Carolina the
presidential electors might cast their votes for Jefferson and Charles
Cotesworth Pinckney, a native son, in the same way they had voted
for Jefferson and Thomas Pinckney in 1796. In May, 1800, Hamil-
ton was not prepared to oppose openly the incumbent Federalist
president, but he was already saying privately that he would "never
—
more be responsible for him by my direct support even though
the consequence should be the election of Jefferson. If we must have
an enemy at the head of the Government, let it be one whom we can
oppose." 17 This division in the Federalist ranks would be exacer-
bated when Hamilton came out publicly in opposition to Adams in
October. The split was less important in the outcome of the elec-
tion, however, than might appear, because Hamilton's open attack
came after many contests had already been decided and because
Hamilton's own influence was considerably weakened by his failure
to carry New York for any Federalist candidate.
The presidential contest throughout the nation was close enough
that the finaloutcome of the election could not be determined until

the returns from the last state to choose its presidential electors had
been reported. Throughout the long months from April to early
December, as national attention shifted from one state to another
and as returns drifted in, Jefferson waited anxiously, keeping a
running tally on results and prospects. During these months the
Republican candidate was extremely cautious about writing letters,
fearful that something that he wrote in a private letter might get
into the newspapers and be used against him as the Mazzei letter
had been. On the eve of the election year, in fact, he had said that
he was ceasing to write political letters, "knowing that a campaign
of slander is now to open upon me, and believing that the post-
masters will lend their inquisitorial aid to fish out any new matter of
slander they can gratify the powers that be." I8 But he found that he
could not adhere rigidly to the rule and resorted to sending letters
by private conveyance and leaving letters to Madison, Monroe, and
other friends unsigned.
As party leaders on both sides tallied results and calculated pros-
pects, they came to similar conclusions that the election was very
close and the outcome uncertain. When Jefferson analyzed the
results as he knew them at the end of November, he found the
outcome still in doubt in three states: Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
and South Carolina. In Pennsylvania a Republican House of Rep-
resentatives and a Federalist Senate remained deadlocked over the
method to be used to choose presidential electors, and it appeared
that the state would not cast a vote. A few days later Jefferson
learned that the Federalists had carried Rhode Island, and he now
accurately calculated the electoral vote as standing at fifty-eight for
Adams and fifty-seven for Jefferson.
19
If Pennsylvania did not vote,
the eight electoral votes of South Carolina would decide the election.
With South Carolina being the South's most strongly Federalist state,
where Charles Cotesworth Pinckney was being aggressively pushed,
many Federalists were now more optimistic about the final outcome
of the election than Jefferson had reason to be.
All the details will never be known about what happened in Co-
lumbia, South Carolina, when the legislature met at the end of No-
vember to choose the state's presidential electors on December 2.
There is, however, ample evidence to show that Charles Pinckney,
who managed the Republican effort, played a crucial role. Pinckney,
a United States senator from South Carolina and cousin of the Fed-
eralist candidate, outmaneuvered the Federalists, even with Charles
Cotesworth Pinckney himself on the ground, and carried the day
for the Republicans. Pinckney was soon writing to Jefferson urging

him not to make any arrangements about appointments in South
Carolina before he had a chance to talk with him, strongly implying
that he may have made some commitments about appointments
that were critical to the Republican success. 20
By the time the South Carolina result became known, the two
houses of the Pennsylvania legislature had reached a compromise
to divide that state's electoral vote, eight votes going to Jefferson
and seven to Adams. Thus the effect of the South Carolina vote in
deciding the election remained unaltered. First reports from South
Carolina indicated that the vote there would be eight for Jefferson,
seven for Burr, and one for George Clinton. The coeditor of the
Charleston City Gazette had reliable sources for reporting from Co-
lumbia to his partner in Charleston that one vote was to be with-
held from Burr because "it is not the wish to risque any person
being higher than Jefferson." 21 But his report turned out to be in-
accurate. When the South Carolina electors met to cast their votes,
no vote was withheld. All eight electors voted for Jefferson and Burr.
With all states accounted for, the Federalists carried all of New
England, New Jersey, and Delaware. The Republicans won the en-
tire electoral vote of New York, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia,
Kentucky, and Tennessee. The two parties divided the vote in Penn-
sylvania, Maryland, and North Carolina. The Federalists would
have denied Jefferson the presidency had they carried New York,
but to emphasize that point can be misleading. It ignores the im-
pressive Republican victory in the congressional elections, which
gave the Republicans 67 out of the 106 seats in the House of Repre-
sentatives. It also ignores the strength that Jefferson had in Penn-
sylvania that was not reflected in the compromise electoral vote
from that state.
To many Federalists, some of whom had prematurely celebrated
"the non-election of (Citizen) Jefferson," the final returns from
South Carolina came as a jolt. "I have never heard bad tidings on
anything which gave me such a shock," the Reverend Thomas Rob-
bins recorded in his diary upon hearing the news. To this staunch
Massachusetts Federalist, who had earlier declared that he did "not
believe that the Most High will permit a howling atheist to sit at the
head of this nation," the election of Jefferson was unthinkable. 22
But before Federalists sank too deeply into despair, the results of
the elections in all the states became known and revived a glimmer
of Federalist hope. Jefferson had not won after all. He had tied with
Aaron Burr. The final count was Jefferson 73, Burr 73, Adams 65,
—
Pinckney 64, and Jay 1. The contest was not over. Under the provi-
sions of the Constitution, the election would go to the House of
Representatives for final resolution.
This news that revived Federalist spirits deprived Republicans of
savoring the joys of victory. "The Feds in the legislature have ex-
pressed dispositions to make all they can of the embarrassment,"
Jefferson wrote of the upcoming contest in the House of Repre-

sentatives, "so that after the most energetic efforts, crowned with
success, we remain in the hands of our enemies by the want of fore-
sight in the original arrangement." The lack of foresight that Jeffer-
son bemoaned was the Republican failure to prevent a tie by making
provisions to withhold one vote from Burr, in the same manner
that Adams' supporters had given one vote to Jay. Republicans had
certainly been aware of the possible problem. Withholding a vote
from Burr had been considered in the Virginia college of electors,
where Madison, one of the electors, told his colleagues that he had
received assurances from a confidential friend of Burr that in "a
certain quarter" votes would be thrown away from Burr to assure
a majority for Jefferson. Only this assurance overcame the anxi-
ety of George Wythe, also an elector, "whose devoted regard for
Mr. Jefferson made him nearly inflexible," Madison later recalled.
Jefferson himself accepted some of the responsibility for Virginia's
not withholding a vote from Burr. He he had taken
later said that
some measures to procure the unanimous vote of Virginia for Burr
because he thought any failure there might be imputed to him. 23
The special concern that Burr receive the full Virginia vote is ex-
plained by the electoral vote in 1796, when Virginia electors gave
the New Yorker but one vote. In 1800 Burr privately warned his
Virginia allies that "after what happened at the last election ... it is
most obvious that I should not choose to be trifled with." Just what
assurance Madison received from Burr's confidential friend has
never been established, but there were rumors of votes being with-
held from Burr in other states, including South Carolina, where
one elector later reported that such a move had been proposed but
could not be agreed to. What Republican leaders did not suffi-
ciently appreciate was that loyalty to party —
to be demonstrated by
carrying out the recommendations of the congressional caucus
was stronger than anyone realized. In state after state, electors
demonstrated their party loyalty, apparently confident that in some
other state party regularity would not be so strong. Federalist Sena-
tor Uriah Tracy expressed it another way, reporting that Republi-
cans were now indicating that "if they had not had full confidence
in the treachery of the others, they would have been treacherous

themselves and not acted as they promised to act at Philadelphia
24
last winter, viz., all vote for Jefferson and Burr."
What made the Republican predicament so serious was that the
election was be decided not by the newly elected House of Rep-
to
resentatives, in which the Republicans would have a majority, but
by the Federalist House elected two years earlier in the wake of the
XYZ affair. One provision of the Constitution saved the Repub-
licans from having their fate immediately determined by their
—
opponents the requirement that voting in the House in such cir-
cumstances be by states, with each state casting one vote. Despite
their majority the Federalists controlled only six of the sixteen
states. Republicans controlled eight states, and two delegations
were equally divided.
In his final months as vice-president, Jefferson was in Washing-
ton presiding over the Senate when the news from South Carolina
reached the new capital, to which the government had moved dur-
ing the summer. Accepting the initial reports that a vote had been
withheld from Burr, he wrote immediately to his running mate to
congratulate him on his election to the vice-presidency. By the time
Burr received Jefferson's letter, later reports indicated that the
situation was not so clear as Jefferson had assumed, but Burr re-
plied that he did not apprehend any embarrassment even if their
votes came out alike. "My personal friends are perfectly informed
of my Wishes on the subject and can never think of diverting a
single Vote from you," he wrote. "On the Contrary, they will be
found among your most zealous adherents. I see no reason to
doubt of your having at least nine States if the business shall come
before the House of Representatives." 25
Meanwhile, upon hearing the early reports from South Carolina,
Burr had written to Samuel Smith of Maryland, a leading Republi-
can in the House of Representatives, constituting him his proxy in
case of a tie (which he at that time thought improbable) to declare
that he would "utterly disclaim all competition" with Jefferson. The
New Yorker indicated that the Federalists should expect nothing
from him and that his friends would dishonor him if they even sus-
pected that he might be an instrument in counteracting the wishes
and expectations of the nation. Once Burr learned that he had ac-
tually tied with Jefferson, he professed to stand by this statement,
but he refused to promise that he would not accept election by the
House. He told Smith at the end of December that he had declined
to answer whether he would resign if chosen president. "The ques-
THE ELECTION OF l8oO 233
tion was unnecessary, unreasonable and impertinent, and I have

therefore made no reply," he wrote. "If I had made any I should
26
have told that as at present advised, I should not."
Burr's position placed the election in an entirely different light
and gave encouragement to those who sought to elect Burr rather
than Jefferson. Even though the Federalists did not have enough
votes in the Houseto carry the election, many Federalists hoped
that by supporting Burr and preventing a choice, some Republi-
cans might be persuaded to switch their support to Burr in order to
decide the contest. A few Federalists even harbored hope that some
Republicans secretly favored Burr over Jefferson. Recognizing
their power to prevent an election by the House, other Federalists
began thinking in terms of an interim government and another
27
election. Republicans regarded all such schemes as usurpation.
One Federalist who favored neither usurpation nor the election
of Burr was Alexander Hamilton, who believed that anyone would
make a better president than Burr, even Jefferson. "There is no
doubt that upon every virtuous and prudent calculation Jefferson
is to be preferred," Hamilton declared immediately upon learning
of the probability of the electoral tie. "He is by far not so dangerous

a man and he has pretensions to character. As to Burr there is
nothing in his favor. His private character is not defended by his
most partial friends. .His public principles have no other spring
. .
or aim than his own aggrandisement." 28 As weeks passed and Hamil-

ton recognized the strong Federalist inclination to support Burr, he
wrote letter after letter to Federalist leaders, detailing the lack of
private character and absence of political principles that he saw in
Burr. 29 Oneof the Federalists with whom Hamilton pleaded not to
support Burr was James A. Bayard, the sole representative from
Delaware. From the beginning of the election in the House, Bayard
would have it within his power to decide the election by casting his
state's vote for Jefferson. Hamilton argued for Jefferson as the
lesser of two evils. He still thought Jefferson's politics were tinctured

with fanaticism and that he was "too much in earnest in his democ-
racy." Jefferson was "crafty and persevering in his objects," not very
mindful of the truth, and "a contemptible hypocrite." But Hamil-
ton did not believe that Jefferson was an enemy of executive power
or favored an all-powerful House of Representatives. He assured
Bayard that, while working with him in Washington's administra-
tion, he had observed that Jefferson "was generally for a large con-
struction of the Executive authority, and not backward to act upon
it in cases which coincided with his views." Aware of the picture of
the Republican candidate that Federalists had painted during the

campaign, Hamilton suggested that Jefferson was not likely to
overthrow existing systems but could be expected to follow "a tem-
porizing rather than violent system." 30 Hamilton spent more time
arguing his case against Burr than justifying Jefferson, but he
failed to win over Bayard. That assured a contest in the House of
Representatives.
From the outset Republicans feared the worst. Jefferson thought
the Federalists were determined to prevent an election and sus-
pected they might pass a bill giving the government to the chief jus-
tice or the secretary of state or let it devolve on the president pro
tempore of the Senate. By the fourth week of January, with the
election in the House three weeks away, Albert Gallatin, the Repub-
lican congressional leader, still had not fathomed the Federalists'
plans, but he believed that they would attempt prevent an election
to
under the pretense of voting for Burr. Gallatin was certain that Re-
publicans would stand firm and not vote for Burr and equally sure
that if all Federalists voted for Burr there could be no decision. "In
that case what will be the plans of the Federalists, having, as they
have, a majority in both Houses? Will they usurp at once the Presi-
dential powers?" he asked. "An attempt of that kind will most cer-
tainly be resisted. Will they only pass a law providing for a new elec-
tion?" If they adopted the which seemed the most
latter course,
plausible, Gallatin reasoned by preventing an election in four
that,
states where neither party controlled both houses of the legislature,
they could annul the last election while appearing not to have vio-
51
lated the Constitution. As Gallatin's speculations indicate, the
young republic faced a major constitutional crisis in the first test of
transferring political power in the national government from one
political party to another.
On February 9 the House agreed that in the event of a tie in the
electoral vote when the ballots were counted, the House would
go into continuous session until a president was chosen. Republi-
cans were prepared to eat and sleep in the Capitol for the last
three weeks of the session if necessary. If no choice were made by
—
March 4, there would be no government no president and no
funds to run the government. By transacting no other business un-
til the election was decided, Congress would be prevented from
52
passing the annu?l appropriations bill.
There were no surprises when the electoral returns were opened
and counted on Wednesday, February 1 1 As expected, the electoral
.
count showed Jefferson and Burr with seventy-three votes each.

The House went immediately into continuous session and began

balloting shortly after one o'clock in the afternoon. On the first bal-
lotJefferson had the votes of eight states, Burr had six states, and
33
the delegations of Maryland and Vermont were divided. By mid-
night nineteen ballots had been taken, each with the same result.
As balloting continued hourly throughout the night, a bed was set
up in a committee room for the ailing Joseph H. Nicholson, a
Maryland Republican whose vote was critical. By eight o'clock the
next morning, when the exhausted members agreed to suspend
balloting until noon, twenty-seven ballots had failed to produce a
decision. After one more ballot with the same result in the after-
noon, the House suspended voting, without adjourning, until the
following day. Two ballots that day and three the next moved nei-
ther Jefferson nor Burr closer to the nine states required for elec-
tion. After thirty-three ballots, the vote still stood: Jefferson eight,
Burr six, and two states divided. It was then three o'clock on Satur-
day afternoon, and the members had been balloting since Wednes-
day. Without adjourning, the House decided to suspend balloting
until noon Monday. 34
After a weekend of caucusing, some members expected the bal-
loting to end on Monday. There were rumors that Congressman
Bayard of Delaware would break the deadlock by voting for Jeffer-
son. But when balloting resumed on Monday, February 16, there
was no change. The rumors, however, were not without founda-
tion, for on that very day Bayard was writing to his father-in-law,
Richard Bassett, that the Federalists would meet in the evening "to
agree upon the mode of surrendering." He said the decision had
already been made to give up the contest the next day. Bayard him-
self had forced that decision on his Federalist colleagues by indicat-
ing that he intended to switch his vote to Jefferson. Tension was
high when the thirty-sixth ballot was taken on February 17. In a
few minutes it was over. Jefferson received the votes of ten states
and was elected president of the United States. Bayard had not
voted for Jefferson but had put in a blank ballot, while the Feder-
alist members from Vermont and Maryland had either absented
themselves or cast blank ballots, giving those two states to Jeffer-

son. On the final ballot the Federalist-controlled delegation from
South Carolina also cast a blank ballot, leaving Burr with only four
states, all in New England.
35
Thus, no Federalist state ever voted for
Jefferson.
Why did the Federalists give in and permit Jefferson's election?
Jefferson thought it was because they saw the impossibility of elect-
ing Burr and "the certainty that a legislative usurpation would be

resisted by arms, and a recourse to a convention to re-organize and
amend the government." He said that "the very word convention
gives them the horrors, as in the present democratical spirit of
America, they fear they should lose some of the favorite morsels of
the constitution." Bayard's private letters lend support to Jefferson's
view. "Our opposition was continued till it was demonstrated that
the New England Gentlemen meant to go without a Constitution
and take the risk of a Civil War," he confided. 36 Bayard also blamed
Burr for the outcome. "Burr has acted a miserable paultry part," he
wrote angrily on the day he decided to throw his support to Jeffer-
son. "The election was in his power, but he was determined to come
in as a Democrat, and in that event would have been the most dan-
gerous man in the community. We have been counteracted in the
whole business by letters he has written to this place." Most of those
letters have not survived, and it is unlikely that it will ever be entirely
clear what Burr was doing. If Bayard's suspicions were correct,
Burr's strategy seems to have escaped him. Burr already had the
—
support of the Federalists what he needed was Republican votes. 37
Less than a week after the final ballot, Burr wrote that the Feder-
alists were boasting aloud that they had compromised with Jeffer-
son "particularly as to the retaining certain persons in office." Bay-

ard also hinted that the Federalists had received assurances from
Jefferson that he would not sweep out all Federalist officeholders. 38
Five years later Bayard testified that Samuel Smith of Maryland
had given him assurances from Jefferson on certain points of policy
and persons. When presented with this testimony, Smith confirmed
that he had given Bayard assurances but that he had not done so on
Jefferson's authority. Later Smith insisted that he had conferred
with Jefferson "without his having the remotest idea of my ob-
39
ject." Jefferson himself declared that Smith had never made any
proposition to him and was never authorized to speak for him. He
did recall that Gouverneur Morris had sought to get assurances
from him but that he had told him that he would "never go into the
office of President by capitulation, nor with my hands tied by any
conditions." This conforms to what Jefferson told Monroe while
the balloting was in progress, when he wrote: "Many attempts have
been made to obtain terms and promises from me. I have declared
to them unequivocally, that I would not receive the government on
capitulation, that I would not go into it with my hands tied." There
is no evidence that Jefferson struck a deal. At the same time, Jeffer-
son's supporters may have given certain Federalists promises that

appeared to come from Jefferson. What was most decisive, how-

ever, was that the Republicans stood firm in support of Jefferson.
"The federal side of the house was so vain as to think they could
force the republicans to give up the will of the people as well as
their own," wrote one Republican member determined to stand
firm. Many Federalists came to sense that the Republicans would
not yield, and when the extremists indicated their intention to pre-
vent Jefferson's election by continuing the deadlock, moderate Fed-
40
eralists like Bayard were unwilling to risk a civil war.
The capitulation of the Federalists in the House of Represen-
tatives permitted the implementation of the voters' decision in the
election of 1800 and allowed the transfer of the political power of
the national government from the Federalists to the Republicans to
take place peacefully. In demonstrating the young republic's capac-
ity to effect such a change, the election of 1800 was a momentous
event. Jefferson later would look back and speak of "the revolution
of 1800," declaring that the election was "as real a revolution in the
principles of our government as that of 1776 was in its form; not
effected indeed by the sword, as that, but by the rational and peace-
able instrument of reform, the suffrage of the people." The elec-
tion strengthened anew Jefferson's confidence in the American
people and his faith in the pursuit of reason. 41
XVII
A President in Command
At noon on March 4, 1801, President-elect Jefferson, escorted by a

detachment of Alexandria militia officers, marshals of the District
of Columbia, and a delegation of congressmen, walked from Con-
rad and McMunn's boardinghouse on New Jersey Avenue at C
Street to the nearby Capitol. When he arrived at the entrance to the
—
Senate chamber the only finished part of the new Capitol the —
Alexandria rifle company posted outside the door opened ranks
and, as the president-elect entered, they presented arms. The
scene offered a remarkable contrast to the inaugurations of his two
predecessors, who rode in impressive carriages to their inaugurals.
But even the military guard was more pomp than Jefferson de-
sired, and by his dress he showed his aversion to ceremony in a re-
public. While both Washington and Adams had dressed elegantly
and worn swords to their inaugurations, Jefferson wore neither
fancy outfit nor sword. "His dress was, as usual, that of a plain
citizen," one reporter noticed, "without any badge of
distinctive
office." Jefferson's actions reflected the simplicity
' he had promised
in government. They were also in harmony with the unpreten-
tiousness of the new capital village, where mud streets, scattered
houses, and unfinished buildings contrasted sharply with the urban
settings ofNew York and Philadelphia, where the previous inaugu-
rals had been held.
Only a few weeks earlier Albert Gallatin said that the new federal
city was "hated by every member of Congress without exception of
persons or parties." He
could not have included the new president
in that assessment, for the Virginian who had envisioned his own
home rising on an uncleared mountaintop near the Blue Ridge
shared with L'Enfant a vision of a grand capital on the banks of the
Potomac. It was fitting that Jefferson should have been the first
president inaugurated in Washington, and it was symbolic of the
A PRESIDENT IN COMMAND 239
old order's bitterness over the change of administration that Presi-

dent Adams departed the capital at four o'clock in the morning to
avoid witnessing the transition of power. If Adams and other Fed-
Republicans were exuberant in wel-
eralists left the city in despair,
coming the new order. Mrs. Samuel Harrison Smith, wife of the
editor of the National Intelligencer, the infant capital's major news-
paper, described the inauguration as "one of the most interesting
scenes, a free people can ever witness. The changes of administra-
tion, which in every government and in every age have most gener-
ally been epochs of confusion, villainy and bloodshed," she wrote
perceptively, "in this our happy country take place without any spe-
2
cies of distraction, or disorder."
Mrs. Smith was one of the visitors who crowded into the Senate
chamber to watch Chief Justice John Marshall administer the oath
of office to Jefferson and to listen intently as the fifty-seven-year-
old president delivered his carefully prepared address. Reading
from a text that he had compressed on two sheets of paper
to fit
written on both make his weak voice

sides, the president failed to
audible in many parts of the chamber. However, early that morn-
ing he had sent a copy of his address to editor Smith, who had it
printed and ready for distribution as members of Congress and
visitors left the ceremonies. 3
In one of the memorable inaugural addresses in American his-
tory, thenew president began with an appeal for national unity
after a divisive election, calling upon his fellow citizens to unite in
accepting the voice of the nation. Then he reminded of
his hearers
"this sacred principle that though the of the majority is in all
will
cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that
the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must pro-
tect, and to violate would be oppression." Looking back at the re-
cent election campaign, he said that every difference of opinion

was not a difference of principle, and he called for the uniting of
political parties. "We have called by different names brethren of the
same principle. We are all republicans: we are all federalists. If
there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to
change it's republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monu-
ments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated,
where reason is left free to combat it." Jefferson's listeners did not
know that, in appealing for party reconciliation, he discriminated
between Federalist leaders and the mass of their supporters. Three
days after the inaugural, he told Monroe that it was impracticable
to conciliate the Federalist leaders, "whom I abandon as incurables,
and will never turn an inch out of my way to reconcile them. But
with the main body of the federalists, I believe it very practicable." 4
What Jefferson had in mind was converting Federalists to Republi-
canism. When Republicans understood this, it lessened their con-
cerns. When Federalists realized what he meant, they found little
inducement in his appeal.

Jefferson devoted a major section of his address to "the essential
principles of our government, and consequently those which ought
to shape it's Here he reiterated his basic political
administration."
principles and the leading policies that he had professed as a candi-
date,which he now restated as the guiding principles of his admin-
He began by affirming "equal and exact justice to all men,
istration.
of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political." Next, com-
pressing the warning of Washington's farewell address into a ring-
ing phrase, Jefferson proclaimed "Peace, commerce, and honest
friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." He
then went on to affirm his commitment to the rights of the states
and the preservation of the general government, to popular elec-
tion, and to an "absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the major-
ity, the vital principles of republics, from which is no appeal but to
force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism." Con-

tinuing to intermingle general principles and specific policies, the
new president declared that he favored reliance for defense on a
well-disciplined militia, the supremacy of civil over military au-
thority, economy in public expenditures, the payment of debts, and
the encouragement of agriculture and of commerce as its hand-
maid. He did not mention the alien and sedition acts, but he em-
phasized "the diffusion of information, and arraignment of all
abuses at the bar of public reason: —
freedom of religion; freedom
of the press; and freedom of person, under the protection of
—
Habeas corpus: and trial by juries impartially selected." "These
principles" he concluded, "form the bright constellation, which has
gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution
and reformation. They should be the creed of our political
. . .
faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which we try

the services of those we trust." 5
Virginia Congressman William Branch Giles praised the presi-
dent's speech as "the only American language I ever heard from
the Presidential chair," but like many other Republicans he ex-
pressed apprehension about its moderate tone regarding the Fed-
eralists. Telling the president that he spoke for many of his firmest
supporters, he said that "a pretty general purgation of office, has
A PRESIDENT IN COMMAND 24 1
been one of the benefits expected by the friends of the new order
of things." What Giles wrote privately to the president, other Re-
publicans expressed openly. "It is rational to suppose that those
who removed John Adams from office would naturally expect
. . .
the removal of the lesser culprits in office," declared the New York
American Citizen. "If this should not be the case, for what, in the
name of God, have we been contending? Merely for the removal of
John Adams, that Mr. Jefferson might occupy the place which he
shamefully left?" Another Republican newspaper declared that the
"unequivocal wish" of Republicans was "that the board should be
swept" and claimed that "it was as well understood previous to the
elections, that men who had advocated the baleful measures of sev-
eral years past . were to be removed and the offices filled by men
. .
of republican principles, if they succeeded in their candidates, as if

6
it had been reduced to a written contract." These comments and
similar ones that came to the president's attention during the early
weeks of his administration defined the issue that would pose for
the new executive one of the most burdensome problems of his
presidency. It was an issue that had to be faced immediately and
without the benefit of precedent, for in succeeding Washington,
Adams had left all officers in place, including all members of Wash-
ington's cabinet.
Although Jefferson moved promptly to form his administration
as soon as the House decided the election, it took some weeks to
assemble all of his official family in Washington. There were no sur-
prises in the key posts in his administration. As widely expected, he
named Madison to be secretary of state and Gallatin, the leading
fiscal expert in Republican ranks, to be secretary of the treasury.
With no equally obvious candidates for other positions, Jefferson
recruited two New Englanders to provide geographical representa-
tion among his advisers, choosing Henry Dearborn as secretary of
—
war and Levi Lincoln as attorney general moves also designed to
win support in the section of the country where Republicans were
weakest. By inauguration day Jefferson had received three refusals
of the secretaryship of the navy. By the time he assembled the rest
of his cabinet, he was masking his concern about finding a qualified
Republican to fill the post by jesting that he might have to advertise
the opening. It was not until July, when he offered the position
to Robert Smith of Baltimore, brother of Gongressman Samuel
Smith, that Jefferson finally received an acceptance and completed
his five-member cabinet. 7
Four days after taking office, while still lodging at Gonrad and
McMunn's, the new president held his first cabinet meeting, with
Gallatin,Dearborn, and Lincoln in attendance. His notes on the
meeting show that they devoted their attention entirely to matters
of appointments and removals. At a second meeting of the same
members the next day, the cabinet agreed to halt all prosecutions
pending under the sedition law and to remit the fines of those al-
ready convicted. Jefferson moved promptly to pardon all those still
suffering under the law. 8 There was a break in regular meetings of
the cabinet while Madison was detained in Virginia by the death of
his father and Gallatin left for Pennsylvania to move his family to
Washington. Meanwhile, Jefferson made his annual spring trip
to Monticello.
On May 15 Jefferson held his first full cabinet meeting, with
Madison, Gallatin, Dearborn, Lincoln, and Samuel Smith (who was
acting as secretary of the navy) attending. Appointments and re-
movals were not on the agenda. The subject was the first critical
question of foreign policy to face the new administration. Reports
that Tripoli had sent cruisers to attack American shipping in the
Mediterranean had prompted Jefferson to assemble a squadron at
Norfolk prepared to sail for the Mediterranean. "But as this might
lead to war, I wished to have the approbation of the new admin-
istration," the president explained as he posed the question to
his advisers. "Shall the squadron now at Norfolk be ordered to
cruise in the Mediterranean?" If so, "what shall be the object of the
9
cruise?" At issue was the key question of how far the president's
power extended to take military action on his own authority.
All members of the cabinet agreed that the squadron should be
sent to the Mediterranean to protect American commerce, but they
expressed varying opinions on the extent of the presidents power
under such circumstances. Gallatin and Smith took the broadest
view— that if the United States were attacked by another nation,
the president had the authority to employ military force to defend
the country. Attorney General Lincoln held the narrowest posi-
tion— that "our men of war may repel an attack on individual ves-
sels, but after the repulse, may not proceed to destroy the enemy's
vessels generally." His view was rejected by a majority of the cabi-

net, who agreed that if war existed, naval captains should be autho-
10
rized to destroy the enemy's vessels wherever they found them.
This decision at the outset of Jefferson's presidency to use force
against the pirates in the Mediterranean reflected the position that
Jefferson had favored since his years as minister to France. Al-
though he was prepared to proceed with the payment of tribute al-
ready authorized by Congress, he was convinced that the money

paid by his predecessors had been thrown away. "There is no end to
the demand of these powers, nor any security in their promises," he
argued. "The real alternative before us is whether to abandon the
Mediterranean or to keep up a cruise in it, perhaps in rotation with
other powers." This was for Congress ultimately to decide, but
11
Jefferson left no doubt that he favored the latter course.
Throughout his presidency Jefferson continued to consult his en-
tire cabinet on foreign affairs. He worked out many other matters
with the particular department head most directly involved, but he
never considered foreign policy something to be decided by the
president and the secretary of state alone. Nor did he believe that
the responsibility should be delegated to the secretary of state. As
president, Jefferson took charge of foreign affairs and included all
of his cabinet in the decision-making process. 12
The Seventh Congress would not convene until early December,
1801, permitting Jefferson time to devote the opening months of
his presidency to organizing his administration, establishing its
operating procedures, and formulating the policies and proposals
to be presented to the legislature when it assembled. The most
pressing task was making appointments and removals. After three
months in office, Jefferson confessed that "it is the business of re-
moval and appointment which presents the serious difficulties. All
others compared with these, are as nothing." He would leave the
presidency still feeling that this was the most dreadful burden of
13
that office.
Responding to Republican concerns that his inaugural address
implied that Federalists would be left undisturbed in office, Jeffer-
son explained privately that he did not mean there would be no re-
movals. He condemned Adams' "indecent conduct in crowding
nominations after he knew they were not for himself, till 9 o'clock
of the night, at 12 o'clock of which he was to go out of office," and
said he would dismiss all such officials, serving at the president's
pleasure, appointed after Adams learned the outcome of the elec-
tion on December 12, 1800. Adams had filled the courts with Fed-
eralist —
judges many appointed under the Judiciary Act of 1801,
passed during the waning weeks of his presidency. Because judges
were not removable by the president, Jefferson decided to replace
all Federalist marshals and district attorneys with Republicans "as a
shield to the republican part of our fellow citizens," which he con-

sidered the main body of the people. In addition, he intended to
remove all officers guilty of official misconduct. But otherwise, he
explained in the early weeks of his presidency, "good men, to

whom there is no objection but a difference of political principle,
practised on only as far as the right of a private citizen will justify,
are not proper subjects of removal." New appointments, however,
would go only to Republicans until something like an equilibrium
in office was restored. 14
These guidelines under which Jefferson began to make the first
appointments and removals of his administration did not go far
enough to satisfy many of his supporters. Despite wide approval of
the idea of refraining from the political intolerance of the Feder-
alists, Republicans tended to expect political tolerance to be applied
in states other than their own. "Even if it should be judged good

policy in all other States, to retain the federalists in office," a group
of Connecticut Republicans wrote, "yet in this State, we could con-
template, in such policy only the certain ruin of republicanism." 15
Similar pressures came from Republicans elsewhere. In June, 1801,
Representative Giles reported to the president from Virginia that
"the soundest republicans in this place and throughout the country
are rising considerably in the tone which they think ought to be as-
sumed by the administration." 16
The president reacted to these mounting pressures by issuing a
new public statement on his patronage policy in July, 1801. Using
the occasion of a memorial from a group of New Haven merchants
protesting the removal of the Federalist collector of New Haven,
one of Adams' midnight appointments, he insisted that his inaugu-
ral address had been misinterpreted and that he had never sug-
gested that tenure of offices was to be undisturbed. Was it to be
imagined that the Federalist monopoly of offices was to be con-
tinued? he asked. "Is it political intolerance to claim a proportionate
share in the direction of the public affairs? ... If a due participa-
tion of office is a matter of right, how are vacancies to be obtained?
Those by death are few; by resignation, none. Can any other mode
than that of removal be proposed? This is a painful office; but it is
made my duty, and I meet it as such." Had he found

moderate a
participation in offices in Republican hands when he took office, he
would have left it to time and accident to raise the Republicans
to their just share, but their total exclusion required prompter
17
correctives.
Four months in office had brought a new tone and a different
meaning to Jefferson's declarations and showed that the pressures
from his own party and the fading prospects of reconciling Feder-
alists to his administration had produced a modification of his ini-
tial While most Republicans applauded the president's

position.
words, Federalists called them a recantation of his inaugural speech
and "an expiatory sacrifice" to his supporters who resented its tol-
erant tone. In concluding his new statement, Jefferson promised

that as soon as the Republicans had their proportionate share of
offices, he would "return with joy to that state of things, when the
only questions concerning a candidate shall be, is he honest? Is he
capable? Is he faithful to the Constitution?" 18 During eight years in
office, Jefferson would never reach the point where these were the
only questions asked. He came to define the Republican share
as being between two-thirds and three-fourths, and Republicans
never gained that proportion of federal offices. Still, his practices
never became so sweeping as his response to the New Haven mer-
chants suggested.
Early in his presidency Jefferson said that the difficult task was
deciding where to draw the line between removing all Federalists
and none and suggested that the administration might follow a pol-
icy of "balancing our measures according to the impression we
perceive them to make." 19 To a large degree that described the pa-
tronage policy Jefferson followed. On numerous occasions he re-
sponded to party pressures by making removals, but he never
wanted to be accused of the political intolerance with which he had
charged Adams. Thus, at other times he resisted local demands for
changes. A record made by Jefferson of the 316 offices subject to
appointment and removal by the president showed that in 1803
Republicans held 158 offices, Federalists had 132, and 26 were in
neutral hands. Closer analysis indicates that Republicans were in
the most influential posts in the various states, where they could be
expected to be most useful to the Republican party. Nonetheless,
Jefferson's actions never became sweeping enough to satisfy many
of his followers, most of whom would have supported far more re-
movals, including the dismissal of Federalist clerks from govern-
ment offices, a practice that Jefferson's department heads never
employed. 20
Jefferson began planning early for the convening of the Seventh

Congress in December, 1801. From the election returns he knew
that the Republican party would have majorities in both houses,
and he anticipated a good working relationship with them. Seeing
the outcome of the election of 1800 as a mandate for changing the
nation's course, he sought to put the ship of state on a more republi-
can tack. Despite the fears of executive power that Republicans had
often expressed, Jefferson believed that the president should pro-

vide leadership not only for the executive branch but also for the
legislature. He respected the principle of separation of powers, but
he did not think that it should prevent the cooperation of the presi-
dent and the Congress.
Nearly a month before Congress was to assemble, Jefferson be-
gan circulating a draft of his annual message among members of
his cabinet. Having already collected information from them about
the affairs of their departments, he now sought their advice about
the proposed text. The president urged them to be candid in their
criticisms and suggestions, and most of them were. Secretary of
the Treasury Gallatin sent him nine pages of detailed notes; Navy
Secretary Robert Smith supplied six pages. After all cabinet offi-
cers had a chance to review the document, Jefferson revised his
draft, making the final decisions as to which suggestions to accept
21
or reject.
Perhaps his most significant alteration was to strike out a passage
in which he had invoked presidential authority to declare the sedi-
tion law unconstitutional. Claiming an executive right to exercise
his free and independent judgment in interpreting the Constitu-
tion, he was prepared to announce: "I took that act into considera-
tion, compared it with the constitution, viewed it under every as-
pect of which I thought it susceptible, and gave it all the attention
which the magnitude of the case demanded. On mature delibera-
tion, in the presence of the nation, and under the tie of the solemn
oath which binds me to them and to my duty, I do declare that I
hold that act to be in palpable and unqualified contradiction to the
constitution." Both Gallatin and Smith questioned the propriety of
this extraordinary declaration, and Smith said that the prevailing
opinion among constitutional lawyers would be opposed to the
principles advanced. Predicting that the declaration would divide
Republicans, Smith warned that the claim to such an executive pre-
rogative would not be easily assented to. 22 In accepting his advisers'
recommendations, Jefferson never agreed to their constitutional
arguments, but he deleted the offensive paragraph in order to
avoid furnishing an issue to the opposition. 23
The procedure of circulating the draft of his annual message
among the members of his cabinet and revising it in light of their
suggestions would be employed by Jefferson in every year of his
presidency. Recognizing the message as a major tool of presidential
leadership, Jefferson used it to report the state of the Union, to di-
rect Congress' attention to specific issues, and to offer recommen-
dations for legislation.He also knew it would have a wide audience,

and he gave careful attention to its content and tone.
At the outset of his administration Jefferson decided to let the
words of his annual message speak for themselves, and instead of
appearing before Congress to deliver his address as Washington
and Adams had done, he sent a written message. Some thought he
made the change because he had a poor speaking voice. The presi-
dent himself said he did it for the convenience of Congress. But the
basic reason was more fundamental and sprang from Republican
fears that the president's address and the formal reply from Con-
gress resembled too closely the ceremonies of British monarchy. It
was a concern shared by many Republicans, among them Nathaniel
Macon of North Carolina, who was elected Speaker of the House of
Representatives the day before Jefferson sent his first message to
Congress. Months earlier, just after Jefferson took office, Macon
had written to the new president offering a list of changes that he
said "the people expect." High among them was that "the commu-
nication to the next Congress will be by letter not a speech." Repub-
lican expectations rather than Jefferson's public speaking ability
best explain his departure from the tradition of his predecessors.
One Republican congressman applauded Jefferson for dispensing
with "all the pomp and pageantry, which once dishonored our re-
publican institutions," and rejoiced that the public was to be spared
a president "drawn to the Capitol by six horses, and followed by the
creatures of his nostrils, and gaped at by a wondering multitude." 24
In sending his private secretary to carry his message to the Capitol,
Jefferson established a new tradition that would not be challenged
until President Woodrow Wilson appeared before Congress in De-
cember, 1913.
When members of Congress in December, 1801, turned their
attention from the form of Jefferson's message to its content, they
found an agenda for legislative action. The president recom-
mended the repeal of all internal taxes and reductions in the army,
the navy, and the civil establishment. He also suggested that Con-
gress reexamine the judiciary act passed by the preceding Congress
and urged a revision of the naturalization law. In the course of the
session Congress followed the president's recommendation on all of
these matters, repealing all internal taxes dating back to Hamilton's
excise on whiskey, abolishing the internal revenue service em-
ployed to collect them, cutting military appropriations, and re-
ducing the residence requirement for naturalization back to five
years, from the fourteen-year requirement imposed by the Fed-
eralists. The elimination of the internal revenue service cut five

hundred employees from the Treasury Department, reducing its
work force outside Washington by 40 percent. Congress also en-
acted the plan prepared by Treasury Secretary Gallatin to pay off
the entire national debt within sixteen years by annual appropria-
25
tions of $7,3oo,ooo.
The most controversial issue that Congress confronted during
the five-month session that adjourned on May 3, 1802, was the pro-
posal to repeal the Judiciary Act of February, 1801, passed during
the final weeks of Adams' presidency. That act reduced the number
of Supreme Court justices from six to five and relieved them of
their circuit-court duties, while adding sixteen new circuit judges
and additional marshals, district attorneys, and clerks. Many per-
sons had recognized the need for some judicial reform, but the
haste of President Adams in filling the new judgeships with Feder-
alists gave the measure a partisan character never forgotten nor
forgiven by Republicans. Some Republicans wanted to go further
than simply repealing the Federalist measure and favored constitu-
tional changes to make the judiciary more subject to popular will.
Jefferson gave no encouragement to such moves and in his annual
message suggested only that Congress reconsider the measure. In
supplying information on the workload of the federal courts, show-
ing that the expanded court system was unnecessary, he provided
the most effective argument used to justify repeal of the measure,
though the data were hastily prepared and inaccurate. The Feder-
alist claim that the move was an attack on the independence of the
judiciary concerned many Republicans, who, while resenting the

blatant partisanship of the Federalists in implementing the act,
questioned the efficacy of its repeal. After spending more time de-
bating the repeal of the act than any other subject before it, Con-
gress decided the issue less on its merits than by a party vote. A few
Republicans did not go along with their party, but the repeal passed
26
the Senate, 16 to 15, and the House, 59 to 32.
The pending case of Marbury v. Madison, a by-product of the Ju-
diciary Act of 1801, increased the partisan conflict in Congress over
the judiciary. William Marbury, appointed a justice of the peace in
the District of Columbia under the provisions of that act, did not
receive his commission, which President Adams had signed in the
waning hours of his presidency. In accordance with Jefferson's deci-
sion to nullify those of Adams' last-minute appointments that he
could legally undo, the administration halted the delivery of un-
delivered commissions. Marbury and three other justices of the
peace whose commissions had been withheld petitioned the Su-

preme Court for writs of mandamus requiring Secretary of State
Madison to deliver their commissions. Their motion was presented
to the court on December 17, 1801, only nine days after the open-
ing of the Seventh Congress. When Chief Justice Marshall agreed
to hear arguments in the case at its next term, Jefferson protested
that the Federalists "have retired into the judiciary as a stronghold
. .and from that battery all the works of republicanism are to be
.
beaten down and erased." Many Republicans in Congress shared

these fears, and they played an important role in uniting the party
behind the repeal of the Judiciary Act of 1801. 27
When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in February,
1803, Marshall lectured the administration for not delivering the
commissions, but he said that it was not within the court's jurisdic-
tion to issue a writ of mandamus, because the law giving it that au-
thority was unconstitutional. While resenting Marshall's criticism of
the president, Republicans were relieved that the court had not as-
sumed the requested prerogative, and there was little criticism that
in deciding the case the court had held an act of Congress uncon-
stitutional. Neither Jefferson nor most Republicans were prepared
to deny the right of the Supreme Court to review for itself an act of
Congress, but they claimed an equal and independent right in the
other two branches of the government. In the mind of Jefferson
and most of his contemporaries, Marshall's decision in Marbury v.
Madison did not establish the exclusive and superior power of judi-
28
cial review, and, in fact, Marshall did not assert that claim. Jeffer-
son's hostility toward the court would become more manifest as
time passed. At this time his opposition to Marshall was more on
political than constitutional grounds.
Most Federalists thought that Jefferson's influence had deter-
mined not only the agenda but also the outcome of the first legis-
lative session of his presidency. Connecticut's Senator James Hill-
house insisted that "never were a set of men more blindly devoted
to the will of a prime Mover or Minister than the Majority of both
houses to the will and wishes of the Chief Magistrate." Similar com-
plaints would be voiced throughout Jefferson's presidency. At the
next session, North Carolina Federalist Archibald Henderson, a
member of the House, declared: "The President has only to act and
the Majority will approve. I do not believe that in any Country
there ever was more implicit obedience paid to an administration
than in this. I do not mean to say that Mr. Jefferson has this uncon-
trolled authority, but that when the Cabinet determines on mea-
—
25O IN PURSUIT OF REASON
sures they will be passed." In 1806 Senator Timothy Pickering, a

bitter Massachusetts Federalist, went even further and proclaimed
that Jefferson "behind the curtain, directs the measures he wishes to
have adopted; while in each house a majority of puppets move as
he touches the wires." Even John Quincy Adams, a moderate Fed-
eralist, recorded in his diary that the president's "whole system
of administration seems founded upon this principle of carrying
through the legislature measures by his personal or official influ-
ence" and noted that some members of both houses had no other
question than what was the president's wish. 29
How are we to evaluate these contemporary charges? The record
indicates that the Federalists exaggerated the degree of Jefferson's
influence over Congress, but it also shows that there was a basis for
the Federalists' accusations. Jefferson did seek to lead Congress, to
get the measures that he proposed enacted, and to work with his
party in Congress to implement Republican promises to the voters.
From the outset of his presidency Jefferson tried with varying de-
grees of success to maintain a congressional spokesman with whom
he could share his views and confidential information. Explaining
what he expected of such an administration leader in trying to re-
cruit Barnabas Bidwell, a Massachusetts representative, he said: "I
do not mean that any gentleman relinquishing his own judgment,
should implicitly support all the measures of the administration,
but that, where he does not disapprove of them he should not suf-
fer them to go off in sleep, but bring them to the attention of the
house and give them a fair chance." Jefferson tried to develop such
a relationship with John Randolph after Speaker Macon named the
Virginia congressman as chairman of the Ways and Means Com-
mittee, but the independent Randolph was uncomfortable in such
a role and ultimately broke with the president. On the floor of the
House in 1806, Randolph denounced the "back-stairs influence
of men who bring messages to this House, which, although they
do not appear on the Journals, govern its decisions." An offended
president mused that "we never heard this while the declaimer was
himself a backstairs man as he called it, but in the confidence and
views of the administration as may more properly and respectfully
be said." He insisted that if the members of Congress were "to
know nothing but what is important enough to be put into a public
message, and indifferent enough to be made known to all the
world, if the Executive is to keep all other information to himself,
and the house to plunge on in the dark, it becomes a government
of chance and not of design." 30
A PRESIDENT IN COMMAND 25 1
Although Jefferson was never successful in establishing a con-

tinuing working relationship with one chief congressional leader,
he did have close contacts with a number of Republican members
in both houses and supplied them with information and legislative
proposals. Indeed, in an era when presidents were not expected to
draft legislation, Jefferson personally prepared a number of bills
and sent them to friendly members to introduce. He often re-
quested the return of his original draft because, as he told Senator
John Breckinridge, "you know with what bloody teeth and fangs
the federalists will attack any sentiment or principle known to come
from me." 31 In sending his proposals to members, Jefferson was
also careful to point out that his drafts were only suggestions for
Congress to consider and that he was not attempting to interfere in
legislative business. But as a president whose wide popular support
gave him immense power, his proposals obviously carried great
weight. 32
Members of Jefferson's cabinet also drafted
bills for Congress,
supplied congressional committees with matter of information,

all
testified before committees, and informally influenced the legis-

lative process. Indeed, the structure of the government was such
that the executive branch inevitably exerted considerable influence
on legislation. Aside from the clerk's office, Congress had no staff.
Neither did members, who did not even have offices only a desk —
on the floor of their legislative chamber. Thus, all gathering of in-
formation and other staff work had to be done by department
offices. When congressional committees called on department heads
for information, they commonly also asked for recommendations.
The legislators did not always follow the advice of the executive
officers, but the administration was in a position to wield consider-
able influence and, under Jefferson, did so. Congressmen felt other
pressures besides those coming from the administration, and few
fitted the Federalist picture of men bending to the president's every
wish, but Jefferson exerted strong presidential leadership through
most of his presidency, faltering only as he approached the end of
33
his second term.
Jefferson was a working administrator as well as a political leader.
Throughout his presidency he spent long hours at his desk and
kept a close watch on the operation of the executive branch. Describ-
ing his administrative routine as "a steady and uniform course,"
he said, "It keeps me from 10 to 12 and 13 hours a day at my writ-
ing table, giving me an interval of 4 hours for riding, dining and
a little unbending." 34 It also kept him in Washington except for a
visit to Monticello for two or three weeks in the spring after Con-
gress adjourned and a regular summer recess, when he moved the
presidential office to Monticello during August and September of
each year.
Convinced that the coastal lowlands in late summer were a threat
to health,he encouraged his officers also to take those months for
their own affairs. When important matters were pending, at least
one cabinet official remained in the capital, but the administration
of department offices was left largely in the hands of the chief
clerks. The postmaster general arranged a special mail service by
which the president could get information from Washington in two
days and have an answer back within a week, and Jefferson carried
on correspondence with his department heads wherever they might
be. With Madison thirty miles away at Montpelier, he had his clos-
est adviser nearby. When Federalists criticized the absence of so
many members of the administration from the capital during his
first summer recess, Jefferson reacted indignantly. "I consider it as
a trying experiment for a person from the mountains to pass the

two bilious months on the tide-water," he declared. "I have not
done it these forty years, and nothing should induce me to do it. As
it is not possible but that the Administration must take some por-
tion of time for their own affairs, I think it best they should select
that season for absence. General Washington set the example of
those two months; Mr. Adams extended them to eight months. I
should not suppose our bringing it back to two months a ground
for grumbling, but, grumble who will, I will never pass those months
on tide-water." 35 Throughout eight years in office, Jefferson never
wavered from this resolve.
As president, Jefferson made it clear that he intended to be in
charge of his administration and to take the responsibility for its
actions. To do so he stayed remarkably well informed about depart-
mental business and was able to respond knowledgeably to depart-
ment heads when they brought matters to him. The notion that
Jefferson was a philosopher who had no interest in the mundane
tasks of administering the government derives from images cre-
ated by his partisan opponents, not from the historical record.
Early in his presidency in a memorandum to all department heads
Jefferson asked them to send him a daily packet of letters received,
together with drafts of their answers. This did not apply to routine
matters, but to all subjects requiring a judgmental response. He
said that he expected to be "always in accurate possession of all
facts and proceedings in every part of the Union, and to whatsoever
department they related." 36 Such procedures required steady appli-

cation and considerable presidential paperwork.
Part of Jefferson's time-consuming labor resulted from his prac-
tice of writing all his own letters and drafting his own state papers,
while employing his private secretary more as an aide than as a
scribe. In appointing young army lieutenant Meriwether Lewis as
his first private secretary, Jefferson told him that he would be "one
of my family." Lewis and the secretaries who succeeded him were
primarily employed in greeting visitors to the President's House,
carrying messages to Congress, communicating occasional confi-
dential communications to members, reporting on congressional
proceedings, and in other ways serving as an aide-de-camp. Jeffer-
son's secretary did transcribe his annual messages to Congress from
his revised drafts and sometimes copied other papers, but Jefferson
did the bulk of his own writing and made copies of his letters and
other papers in a letterpress. After the invention of the polygraph,
he enthusiastically adopted that device, leaving for historians a
record fuller than that of any other early president. 37
Jefferson employed no speech writers. He systematically circu-
lated the draft of his annual messages to Congress to all members
of his cabinet for their suggestions for revisions, but he never asked
an adviser to prepare the first draft. Although President Washing-
ton had on occasion sent a bundle of papers to Hamilton asking
him to draft a message to Congress and called on both Madison
and Hamilton in drafting the farewell address, Jefferson did noth-
ing similar while president.
Jefferson made the cabinet the principal policy-making mecha-
nism of his presidency. "The ordinary business of every day is done
by consultation between the President and the Head of the depart-
ment alone to which it belongs," he explained in describing his ad-
ministrative system. "For measures of importance or difficulty, a
consultation is held with the Heads of departments, either as-
sembled, or by taking their opinions separately in conversation or
in writing." The practice that Jefferson most commonly followed
—
was to assemble his advisers in a cabinet meeting not on a regu-
larly scheduled basis but whenever needed. The government was
small; departmental offices were all located close to the President's
House, and the president could quickly assemble his cabinet. He
resorted to separate consultations primarily when he anticipated
"disagreeable collisions." 38
There were, in fact, few frictions within Jefferson's cabinet; he
looked back at his administration as "an example of harmony in a
cabinet of six persons, to which perhaps history has furnished no

parallel." This may put too heavy a gloss over the clashes between
Treasury Secretary Gallatin and Navy Secretary Smith, but Jeffer-
son kept their differences under control. Jefferson's system aimed
at developing a consensus within his cabinet. "We sometimes met
under differences of opinion," he said, "but scarcely ever failed, by
conversing and reasoning, so to modify each other's ideas, as to
produce an unanimous result." 39 This was not always the case, for
Jefferson recorded some divided votes in his notes on cabinet meet-
ings. But in contrast to the cabinets of his predecessors, it was a har-
monious group that shared the same political outlook. As a former
member of the first president's cabinet, Jefferson was well aware
how deep the divisions had been in Washington's administration,
and as vice-president he had watched his predecessor face a cabinet
more loyal to Hamilton than to the president. Thus, he had reason
to remark on the unity of his own administration. Jefferson never
had to worry about loyalty and rarely about turnover in his cabinet.
His four principal department heads stayed with him throughout
his eight years in office; the only changes were in the office of at-
torney general.
Jefferson's strong popular support was an important factor in
making the cabinet system work, was his own clear sense of being
as
in command in his administration. While he spoke of his vote
counting as one in the cabinet, he knew that was only technically
true and doubted that the unanimity in the cabinet would have
been the same had each member possessed equal and independent
powers. He admitted that "the power of decision in the President
40
left no object for internal dissension." Yet his style of leadership
was one of persuasion rather than dictation, and there is ample evi-
dence to show that his advisers felt free to speak their own minds
without fear of retribution. They also knew that the president re-
lied on their advice and had no advisers outside the cabinet whom
he regularly consulted.
Attention to administrative demands led Jefferson to organize
his time carefully. He rose regularly at five in the morning and
worked on his paperwork until nine, when he began receiving cabi-
who had business to discuss with the presi-
net officers or others
dent. Members of Congress were free to drop in without appoint-
ments. He commonly scheduled cabinet meetings for noon. At one
in the afternoon, Jefferson normally went for a ride on horse-
back — his principal form of exercise. At three-thirty he had din-
ner, and sometimes invited a guest to arrive a half hour earlier for
41
a private consultation before dinner.
President Jefferson used the dinner hour as his main social ac-
tivity and as an important tool of governing. While Congress was in
session he held dinner parties three times a week, inviting members

in small groups (generally about twelve), seating them around an
oval table with no place of command or honor, offering them good
cuisine and fine wines, and engaging them in conversation. When
one member implied this was improper executive influence, Jeffer-
son responded, "I cultivate personal intercourse with the members
of the legislature that we may know one another and have oppor-
tunities of little explanations of circumstances, which, not under-
stood might produce jealousies and suspicions injurious to the pub-
lic interest." He also said that he depended heavily on members of
Congress to provide him with information from throughout the

country and help him to sense public opinion. Early in his admin-
istration when he still had hopes of reconciling parties, he did not
consider party affiliation in issuing invitations. But as time passed,
he tended to invite Federalists and Republicans on different days.
A number of guest lists among the me-
for these dinners survive
ticulous records that Jefferson maintained, and they show that he
invited Republican congressional leaders more frequently than
others, but most members received at least one invitation during a
session. In keeping with his republican informality, Jefferson used
for his invitations a printed form that contained no emblems of the
presidential office and began "Th: Jefferson requests" rather than
"The President requests." 42
New York Congressman Samuel L. Mitchill, describing a dinner
party in 1802 as "easy and sociable," commented that no toasts were
drunk and thought the president's French cook "understands the
art of preparing and serving up food, to a nicety." Mitchill was par-
ticularly impressed by ice-cream balls enclosed in warm pastry. As
a scientist, he also enjoyed the after-dinner conversation, in the
course of which Jefferson showed his guests a piece of homemade
silk cloth from silk produced in Virginia. Talking about a process of
waterproofing cloth developed in Europe, the president brought

out a treated coat made in England, gathered a pocket of cloth, and
poured water into it to prove that no water seeped through. In late
1804 both Mitchill and Senator William Plumer, dining with the
president on different evenings, reported that their host treated his
guests to water from the Mississippi River and the famous "mam-
moth cheese." That giant round of cheese, weighing 1,200 pounds,
had been presented to him as a gift from a Baptist congregation in
Cheshire, Massachusetts, on his first New Year's Day as president in
1802. In accordance with his rule of accepting no gifts, he paid two
hundred dollars for it and was still trying to give it away more than
two years later. Plumer judged it "very far from being good." 43
The hospitable president kept careful records of the cost of his
entertaining, of which he paid out of his salary of $25,000. Dur-
all
ing his first office, his wine bill alone was nearly $2,800, and
year in
all of his household and office expenses totaled over $16,000.
When the year was over, he had to borrow $4,000 to balance his
personal budget. 44 These expenditures did not cause him to curtail
his entertaining, however, because he regarded it as essential to the
governmental process.
After dining, guests were free to linger for awhile, and some-
times other members of Congress dropped by to join in the hos-
pitality. But the president expected everyone to be gone by six
o'clock, when he then returned to his writing desk. He usually
stayed busy with his paperwork until ten, and let it be known that
he would accept no evening social invitations. 45

It was during such after-dinner work sessions that Jefferson,
toward the end of his first term, spent several evenings clipping
passages from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and
pasting them onto blank pages to produce, for his own use, "The
Philosophy of Jesus." "It was the work of 2 or 3 nights only at Wash-
ington, after getting thro' the evening task of reading the letters
and papers of the day," he later recalled, though he surely must
have spent hours previously deciding what passages to select. 46 It
was, in fact, a subject of great interest to him and one to which he
would later return to compile a similar but more extensive work en-
47
titled "The Life and Morals of Jesus." Though the actual prepara-
tion of "The Philosophy of Jesus" was completed in a remarkably
short time in February or early March, 1804, Jefferson's thoughts
had repeatedly turned to religion since the attacks made upon him
in the election of 1800. These attacks continued in Federalist pub-
48
lications after he became president. The charges that he was an
irreligious enemy of Christianity concerned him, and in 1803, after
reading Joseph Priestley's Socrates and Jesus Compared, he composed
a brief, two-page summary of his religious faith that he titled "Syl-
labus of an Estimate of the merit of the doctrines of Jesus, com-

pared with those of others." He sent copies to Benjamin Rush, to
his two daughters, and to at least two members of his cabinet. Influ-
enced by Joseph Priestley's An History of the Corruptions of Christian-
ity, he continued his quest to define his religious beliefs and became
convinced that the early Christians held a Unitarian concept of God

that was compatible with his own views. He thus sought to identify
—
the authentic teachings of Jesus, the result of which was his com-
49
pilation of "The Philosophy of Jesus." Excising from the Gospels
the supernaturalism that he was convinced was added by later cor-
rupters of the simple moral teachings of Jesus, he left what he re-
garded as Jesus' authentic words. "There will be found remaining,"
he told John Adams, "the most sublime and benevolent code of
morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this
operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the
printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and
which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill. The
result is an 8vo. of 46 pages of pure and unsophisticated doctrines,
such as professed and acted on by the unlettered apostles, the Apos-
50
tolic fathers, and the Christians of the 1st century."
Most of President Jefferson's evenings were devoted to less philo-

sophical enterprises. Though this project had been forming in his
mind since the issue of his religion was raised in the campaign of
1800, it had to wait until 1804, while he spent long evenings poring
over letters of recommendation for office, drafts of congressional
bills, foreign dispatches, and all matter of problems brought to him
by his department heads. Yet, even during such busy times of his
presidency, Jefferson continued a wide correspondence that kept
alive his many intellectual interests and allowed him momentary es-
capes from the pressures of political life. The duties of the presi-
dency, however, always commanded his prime attention, and there
were few during his eight years in office.
lulls
Jefferson brought to the presidency an informality that reduced

the ceremonial role of the presidency initiated by Washington and
—
continued by Adams. He ended the levees formal receptions
that Washington and Adams had presided over, and much to the
discomfort of foreign diplomats, he abandoned the formal rules of
diplomatic etiquette. "When brought together in society, all are
perfectly equal, whether foreign or domestic, titled or untitled, in
or out of office," he wrote in a memorandum for the members of
his administration.
51
Some foreign diplomats were dismayed at the
president's style. When Anthony Merry arrived at the executive
mansion uniform to present his credentials as
in full diplomatic
British minister to the United States, he considered himself in-
sulted when Jefferson received him in casual dress, wearing slip-
pers without heels. When invited to dine with the president, Merry
was offended when Jefferson offered his arm to Mrs. Madison in-
stead of Mrs. Merry to escort to the dinner table and followed his
usual practice of allowing his guests to find seats at the table pell-
—
mell— a practice that Jefferson also recommended to the members

of his cabinet. 52 Merry nearly made an international incident out of
what he saw as an affront to his nation, but more perceptive diplo-
mats would find that the republican president was very accessible to
foreign ministers, who could call informally at his residence and
converse directly with the head of state.
Foreign diplomats were not the only persons shocked at the dress
of the president. Senator Plumer, on his first call upon the presi-
dent, was surprised to find that "he was drest, or rather undrest,
with an old brown coat, red waistcoat, old corduroy small clothes,
— —
much soiled woolen hose and slippers without heels." But when
Plumer was invited to dinner, he found the president "well dressed
— — —
A new suit of black silk hose shoes clean linnen, and his hair
highly powdered." Plumer judged the dinner elegant, the eight
kinds of wine very good, and the president, though in low spirits
53
that day, "naturally very social and communicative." From all re-
ports Jefferson dressed for comfort while working in the large,
drafty, and still-unfinished President's House, and he considered
his personal appearance of less importance than the affairs of state
or his hospitality to his guests. Many Federalists thought he was
playing a role in trying to appear a man of the people, but his re-
publicanism was far deeper than the manner of his dress.
XVIII
Presidential Zenith
The most serious problem and the major triumph of Jefferson's

first term as president resulted from the crisis over Louisiana. In
his first message to Congress in December, 1 80 1 Jefferson hardly

,
referred to foreign affairs except to report the naval actions against

the Tripolitan cruisers. By that time, however, the president had
received reliable, though stillunconfirmed, reports of the secret
treaty between Spain and France for the retrocession of Louisiana
to France. After learning of the rumored agreement from Rufus
King in London in May, 1801, the president and the secretary of
state had promptly launched a diplomatic campaign against the
retrocession. Madison told Charles Pinckney in Madrid to stress
1
America's preference for Spain over France in Louisiana and in-

structed Robert R. Livingston in Paris to determine what agree-
ment had actually been made and to try to dissuade the French from
carrying it through if they had not already done so. Livingston was
to impress upon them how drastically such a transfer would imperil
relations between the two countries. If the cession had irrevocably
taken place, he was to inquire into the possibility of their ceding the
Floridas, especially West Florida, to the United States, provided
those areas had been included in the transfer. 2 None of these diplo-
matic efforts, of course, could be publicly reported to Congress.
By the spring of 1802 the administration was convinced that, de-
spite French denials, the transfer of Louisiana was to take place,
and it stepped up its diplomatic campaign. In a private letter to
Livingston, the president reviewed the past friendship between
France and the United States, which he now saw threatened. "There
is on the globe one single spot, the possessor of which is our natural
and habitual enemy," he wrote. "It is New Orleans. . France plac-

. .
ing herself in that door assumes to us the attitude of defiance."

While a feeble Spain might have retained New Orleans quietly for
years, was "impossible that France and the U.S. can continue long
it
friends when
they meet in so irritable a position." The day that
France took possession of New Orleans would seal the union be-
tween the United States and Great Britain. "From that moment we
must marry ourselves to the British fleet and nation. We must turn
all our attentions to a maritime force." Lest this tactic of diplomacy
be confused with a statement of policy, it should be noted that

Jefferson sent this letter to France by du Pont de Nemours and left
it open for him to read, telling him, "I wishyou to be possessed of
the subject, because you may be able to impress on the government
of France the inevitable consequences of their taking possession of
Louisiana." 3
Before the United States was able to determine France's inten-
tions in regard to Louisiana, a startling eventturned the slowly de-
veloping issue into a crisis of unpredictable dimensions. In April,
1802, Jefferson may have been guilty of hyperbole when he wrote:
"Every eye in the U.S. is now fixed on this affair of Louisiana. Per-
haps nothing since the revolutionary war has produced more un-
easy sensations through the body of the nation." But by November
all eyes did focus on New Orleans, not because of French actions,
but because of an unexpected move by the city's Spanish intendant.

On October 18, 1802, in violation of the treaty of 1795 with the
United States, the Spanish official suspended the right of deposit at
New Orleans without providing, as the treaty required, an alternate
place for American goods coming down the Mississippi River to be
deposited while awaiting ocean transport. Jefferson learned of this
in late November and was led to believe by the Spanish minister in
Washington and statements from the governor of Louisiana that
the intendant at New Orleans had acted without authority, though
it is known today that orders had come from Madrid. Secretary
of State Madison promptly dispatched instructions to Pinckney in

Madrid to inform the Spanish government that "from whatever
source the measure may have proceeded the President expects that
the Spanish Government will neither lose a moment in counter-
manding it, nor hesitate to repair every damage which may result
from it." Madison went on to indicate his conviction that the alarm
of westerners was justified. "The Mississippi is to them everything.
It is the Hudson, the Delaware, the Potomac and all the navigable
rivers of the Atlantic States formed into one stream." A few weeks
later Madison sounded even more belligerent when he wrote to
Livingston in Paris, where he expected the real decisions to be
made, that there were, or soon would be, "200,00 militia on the
1
PRESIDENTIAL ZENITH 26
waters of the Mississippi, every man of whom would march at a mo-

ment's warning to remove obstructions from that outlet to the sea,
every man of whom regards the free use of that river as a natural
and indefeasible right and is conscious of the physical force that
4
can at any time give effect to it."
Jefferson reported none of these diplomatic moves in his second

annual message to Congress in December, 1802, a message in
which he proposed among other things to reduce naval expenses
by building a dry dock at the Washington naval yard. His novel plan
to preserve the life of naval vessels when not in use by getting them
out of the water and protected from the weather met more derision
than careful study, and he did not push it, though he saw it as a
means of maintaining a naval force for emergencies without the
burden of sustaining an active fleet. Federalists had a field day with
the "visionary scheme." "What a glorious thing to have for presi-
dent a visionary Philosopher, whose projects not even democratic
sycophants dare approve," chortled one Federalist member when
5
the House declined to pursue the proposal.
Members were waiting to hear not about plans for dry docks but
what the president planned to do about New Orleans. In regard to
the expected cession of Louisiana to France, Jefferson said only
that the event would produce "a change in the aspect of our foreign
relations," and he did not even mention the crisis over the with-
drawal of deposit at New Orleans. Disappointed members would
probably have agreed with Hamilton's description of the message as
a "lullaby." The House promptly passed a resolution calling upon
the president for documents relating to the closing of New Orleans. 6
While the Republican majority was inclined to follow the admin-
istration's cautious approach, the Federalists were voicing demands
for action, many seeing military measures against New Orleans as
the appropriate response. Jefferson opposed taking military action
before attempting negotiation. Aware that a renewal of the war
in Europe between France and England seemed likely and that
Napoleon's effort to regain control over the island of Santo Do-
mingo was faltering, he saw nothing to be gained by a precipitant
military response. At the same time, his administration had quietly
begun military preparations. Secretary of War Dearborn strength-
ened troops on the frontier, concentrating four infantry and three
artillery companies at Fort Adams on the Mississippi just north of
the Spanish border. The governor of the Mississippi Territory,
William C. C. Claiborne, reported that two thousand "pretty well
organized" militia were in readiness at Natchez and said that six
hundred of them could take New Orleans so long as it was de-

7
fended only by Spanish troops. Jefferson, however, was unwilling
to let the Federalists push him into war.
Compounding the closure of New Orleans with the expected ces-
sion to France —issues that the administration was endeavoring to
—
keep separate Federalist Roger Griswold, a representative from
Connecticut, on January 4, 1803, introduced a resolution calling on
the president for documents relating to the cession of Louisiana to
France and for a report "explaining the stipulations, circumstances,
and conditions under which that province is to be delivered up."
The Republicans rallied to defeat this motion and also a series of
resolutions moved by Griswold vigorously affirming the right of
free navigation of the Mississippi and the necessity of maintaining
that right. After a closed-door debate, the House adopted a resolu-
tion supportive of the president's policy in regard to the suspension
of deposit at New Orleans. The resolution followed the president
in conceding the benefit of the doubt to Spain that the closing of
New Orleans was an unauthorized act of the intendant and not the
breach of the treaty by the Spanish monarch. Giving the president
a vote of confidence, the House promised to await the issue of
presidential measures and at the same time reaffirmed its strong
commitment to the rights of navigation and commerce through the
Mississippi River."
A few days later, on January 1 1 , 1803, Jefferson answered his Fed-
eralist critics and calmed Republican supporters by sending to
his
the Senate the nomination of James Monroe as a special emissary to
France and Spain to negotiate on the explosive issues. Jefferson was
concerned about the way the Federalists were using the Louisiana
crisis. "The fever into which the western mind is thrown by the
affair at New Orleans stimulated by the mercantile, and generally

the federal interest threatens to overbear our peace," he wrote to
Monroe in telling him it was impossible to decline the mission for
which he had nominated him without prior consultation. After the
Senate speedily confirmed Monroes nomination over Federalist op-
position by a party vote of 15 to 12, Jefferson wrote to him again
that the Federalists' object was "to force us into war if possible, in
order to derange our finances, or if this cannot be done, to attach
the western country to them, as their best friends, and thus get
again into power." In the president's view some effort more visible
than normal diplomacy was necessary to satisfy public concern, and
Monroe, admired in the West and sharing the confidence of Re-
publicans everywhere, was the man for the task. Jefferson left his
9
friend no avenue to decline the mission, and Monroe made imme-

diate preparations to depart for Paris.
Although Jefferson told Monroe that his nomination had si-
lenced the Federalists in Congress, they did not vote for his confir-
mation, and nowhere did Federalists remain quiet for long. Writing
as "Pericles" in the New York EveningHamilton argued that
Post,
the United States should immediately seize the Floridas and New
Orleans and then negotiate. There was ample justification for hos-
tilities, he insisted, and "not the most remote probability" that
Napoleon would sell the land. Now was the time, before Monroe
left for France, for the United States to occupy the territories and
expand its army to hold them. "Such measures would astonish and
disconcert Bonaparte himself; our envoy would be enabled to speak
and treat with effect; and all Europe would be taught to respect
us. . . If the President would adopt this course," he concluded,
.
"he might yet retrieve his character; induce the best part of the
community to look favorably on his political career, exalt himself in
the eyes of Europe, save the country, and secure a permanent fame.
But for this, alas! Jefferson is not destined!" 10
Jefferson indeed was not destined to achieve fame by making war
on France and Spain, but the course that he was pursuing would
bring a fame that Hamilton could not have imagined. What Hamil-
ton did not know was that Jefferson had already received indica-
tions that France was willing to negotiate. Du Pont, who had carried
Jefferson's strident letter of April 18, 1802, to Livingston, had re-
plied immediately to its threatening tone by suggesting that the
United States should attempt to buy New Orleans and West Florida
by offering Napoleon enough money to tempt him before he took
possession of Louisiana. Du Pont also recommended that the United
States renounce any desire for territory west of the Mississippi.
Jefferson and Madison, of course, had already thought of attempt-
ing to buy West Florida and had instructed Livingston to explore
the matter, though not by offering to renounce all land west of the
river. After six months in France, du Pont repeated his proposal
and suggested a specific figure of six million dollars as the possible
selling price for New Orleans and all the other territory east of the
Mississippi. Du Pont, like others, was incorrectly assuming that the
Floridas were to be included in the transfer, but his specificity sug-
gested that he may have had some contact with high French offi-
cials. Du Pont even enclosed a brief draft of a proposed treaty.
11
Jefferson received du Pont's letter on December 3 1 1802, just ten

,
days before he decided to send Monroe to France; in the legislation

accompanying the approval of Monroe's mission, Congress appro-

priated two million dollars "to defray any expenses which may be
incurred in relation to the intercourse between the United States
and foreign nations." 12 That the purpose of this appropriation was
to begin negotiations to purchase New Orleans and the Floridas
was revealed only in secret session. When Monroe departed from
New York on March 8, he carried instructions authorizing the pay-
ment of up to fifty million livres —
a little over nine million dol-
lars — for NewOrleans and the Floridas. 13 Meanwhile in Paris,
Livingston had been trying without success to open negotiations
for the purchase of both territories. In one proposal he went fur-
ther and suggested that France might also sell to the United States
the area of Louisiana north of the Arkansas River, arguing that this
would place an American buffer between the French in Louisiana
and the English in Canada. 14
Before learning the outcome of Monroe's mission, Jefferson
would receive word that the Spanish government had restored de-
posit at New Orleans and affirmed that the right was preserved in
the treaty of cession to France. At this time Jefferson was not count-
ing on being able to buy New Orleans from France, but he was con-
fident that his policy of not seizing New Orleans "as our federal ma-
niacs wished" had been wise. "We have obtained by a peaceful
appeal to justice, in four months, what we should not have obtained
under seven years of war," he said. Time was on the side of the
United States, whose advantage it was to delay confrontation "till
we have planted a population on the Mississippi itself sufficient to
do its own work without marching men fifteen hundred miles from
15
the Atlantic shores."
When Monroe arrived in Paris on April 12, events in France were
moving more rapidly than the State Department had ever imag-
ined possible. After suffering rebuff after rebuff in his efforts,
Livingston seemed suddenly on the verge of accomplishing the
purposes of his mission. On April 11, while Monroe was en route
from Le Havre to Paris, Livingston was summoned to Talleyrand's
office, where the foreign minister startled the hard-of-hearing
American by asking if the United States was interested in purchas-
ing the whole of Louisiana. Earlier that morning Napoleon had
summoned his finance minister, Barbe-Marbois, and told him that
he had decided to sell all of Louisiana to the United States. Having
abandoned the idea of a new French empire in America after fail-
ing to reclaim Santo Domingo, and expecting shortly to be at war
again with Great Britain, Napoleon regarded Louisiana as vulner-
16
able to conquest. Besides, his treasury was depleted. Although
Livingston resented the arrival of Monroe just when there was
movement in the negotiations, the two men successfully concluded
the negotiations that produced the treaty for the purchase of Loui-
siana. On April 30 they initialed the agreement ceding Louisiana to
the United States in return for sixty million francs and the assump-
tion by the United States of twenty million francs in claims of
—
Americans against France a total price of fifteen million dollars.
The treaty was signed on May 2. 17 The territory was to be trans-
ferred to the United States with the boundaries that it had when
conveyed from Spain to France. The Floridas were not included,
but otherwise the limits were left so vague by the new treaty that
there was reason to suspect that Napoleon hoped to promote a
clash between the United States and Spain.
Whatever the boundaries, President Jefferson could not but be
elated over a territory so vast as to more than double the size of the
United States and bring the entire Missouri and Mississippi rivers
within its borders. By a coincidence that again tied Jefferson to the
Fourth of July, the news of the signing of the treaty reached Wash-
ington on July 3, 1803, enabling the National Intelligencer to an-
nounce the feat the next day and later report that the Fourth of
July was "a proud day for the President," the recipient of "the wide-
spread joy of millions at an event which history will record among
the most splendid in our annals." Despite the wide popular acclaim,
the president resented that the Federalists were reluctant to give
him or any Republican credit for the accomplishment. They de-
nied credit to Monroe and to Livingston, and "these grumblers too
are very uneasy least the administration should share some little
credit for the acquisition, the whole of which they ascribe to the ac-
cident of war," he complained. "They would be cruelly mortified
could they see our files. . They would see that tho' we could not
. .
say when war would arise, yet we said with energy what would take
place when it should arise. We did not, by our intrigues, produce
the war: but we availed ourselves of it when it happened." He could
not resist noting that there was a war in Europe while the Feder-
alists were in power and asked what the Federalists had got out of it
for their country. 18

Such frustrations were expressed only in private letters. Jefferson
devoted his main energies to getting the Louisiana treaty rati-
fied and implemented. As he saw it, there was one major obstacle
to Senate ratification: "The general government has no powers
but such as the constitution has given it; and it has not given it a
power of holding foreign territory, and still less of incorporating it

True to his convictions, he believed that a constitu-
into the Union."
tional amendment was required for the annexation of Louisiana to
the United States, and he drew up an amendment for that pur-
pose. Still, the constitutional issue posed a dilemma for the strict-
The adoption of an amendment would
constructionist president.
take time,and Monroe and Livingston were urging prompt action,
warning that the French should not be given the least opening for
withdrawing from the agreement. Jefferson also feared that the
constitutional issue might be used by his enemies as a tactic for de-
laying or defeating the ratification of the treaty. He thus convinced
himself that the extraordinary circumstances of the moment re-
quired that Congress act without waiting for an amendment. "The
Executive in seizing the fugitive occurrence which so much ad-
vances the good of their country, have done an act beyond the Con-
stitution," he admitted privately. "The Legislature in casting be-
hind them metaphysical subtleties, and risking themselves like
faithful servants, must ratify and pay for it, and throw themselves
on their country for doing for them unauthorized what we know
they would have done for themselves had they been in a situation to
do it." He considered it important, however, to set an example
against broad construction by subsequently appealing to the people
for a constitutional amendment approving what had been done.
Nonetheless, he said that if his Republican friends thought differ-
ently, he would acquiesce, "confiding, that the good sense of our
country will correct the evil of construction when it shall produce ill
effects."
19
When most of his fellow Republicans recognized the
treaty-making power as ample to cover the Louisiana Purchase,
Jefferson did not press the matter. In his message at the opening of
the Eighth Congress on October 17, 1803, called into early session
to ratifyand implement the Louisiana agreement, he devoted most
of his attention to foreign affairs and the resolution of the Louisi-
ana crisis but did not mention the constitutional issue.
There was little doubt that the Senate would follow the presi-
dent's recommendation and ratify the Louisiana treaty and that the
House of Representatives would appropriate the money to pay for
it. Republican majorities had increased in both houses following
the midterm elections of 1802. After the new apportionment under

the census of 1800 and the admission of Ohio, there were 103 Re-
publicans and 39 Federalists in the House, and the Senate division
was 25 Republicans and 9 Federalists. The treaty and conventions
relating to Louisiana presented to the Senate on October 17 were
ratified three days later by a vote of 24 to 7. Only 1 Federalist joined

23 Republicans in voting for the treaty; all negative votes came
from Federalist senators. William Plumer of New Hampshire, one
of the minority, complained that the Senate had "taken less time to
deliberate on this important treaty, than they allowed themselves
on the most trivial Indian contract." He believed that had not Sen-
ate rules required three readings on separate days, the treaty would
have been ratified after the first reading. 20
In his annual message the president alerted the legislators to be
prepared to implement the treaty and to take all measures neces-
sary for the immediate occupation and temporary government of
Louisiana and for its incorporation into the Union. 21 Immediately
after Senate ratification, theexchange of ratifications with the
French minister took place on October 20, 1803, and the next day
the president asked Congress for the necessary enabling legisla-
tion. On December 20, 1803, in a ceremony in New Orleans,
22
France formally transferred Louisiana to the United States. Jeffer-

son referred to the new territory as enlarging "the empire of lib-
erty," and he told Congress that the acquisition offered "an ample
provision for our posterity, and a widespread field for the blessings
of freedom and equal laws." Obviously, the president was speaking
only of white Americans, for the new territory also offered a wide
area for the expansion of slavery. That institution already existed
in the settled areas of New Orleans and lower Louisiana, and the
treaty guaranteed the inhabitants of Louisiana all the rights and
immunities of citizens of the United States. When Senator James
Hillhouse of Connecticut in 1804 offered an amendment to the bill
organizing the territory of Louisiana to prohibit slavery in the en-
tire purchase, Jefferson refrained from supporting it. Neither Con-
gress nor the president went any further than the prohibition of
the importation of slaves into Louisiana from abroad. 23
The annexation of Louisiana to the United States required not
only enabling legislation but also considerable administrative ac-
tivity. In taking control of New Orleans, a city of eight thousand,
the United States had to absorb an alien population and an admin-

istrative structure created by the French and the Spanish. The in-
corporation of Louisiana into the United States was a test unlike
any previous demand on the national government. Jefferson's ad-
ministration met the challenge. Immediately upon receiving the
news of the Louisiana Purchase, the president said, "We shall cer-
tainly endeavour to introduce the American laws there and that
cannot be done but by amalgamating the people with such a body
of Americans as may take the lead in legislation and government."

But as time passed, the administration more and more came to rec-
ognize and respect the wishes, rights, and traditions of the non-
American population and in 1 808 accepted the Digest of the Civil
Laws Now which incorporated the
in Force in the Territory of Orleans,
traditions of French and Spanish civil law into Louisiana law. This
compromise brought the acceptance by the settled population of
lower Louisiana of permanent American rule and elevated the level
of American tolerance of foreign peoples within its borders. 24
If the boundaries of Louisiana were vague, much of the land
within those borders was unknown. By coincidence or an optimistic
vision of the destiny of the United States, Jefferson, months before
the purchase, initiated a project that for the first time would open
up to the consciousness of Americans the vast areas of the upper
reaches of the Missouri River and the Rocky Mountains. In late No-
vember 1802 the president inquired of the Marques de Casa Yrujo,
the Spanish minister in Washington, whether his government would
object if Congress authorized an expedition to explore the course
of the Missouri River, having as the main object the advancement
of knowledge of geography. As the Spanish minister reported the
conversation to the minister of foreign affairs in Madrid, Jefferson
confided that the nominal object would be the investigation of
everything that might contribute to the progress of commerce in
order to get funding from Congress, which had no constitutional
authority to appropriate money for "a purely literary expedition."
Yrujo told the president that such an expedition "could not fail to
give umbrage" to his government, but Jefferson continued to argue
that Spain had no reason to fear the undertaking. In his report to
Madrid, Yrujo acknowledged that Jefferson was a man of letters,
but he also speculated that the American president might hope "to
discover the way by which the Americans may some day extend
25
their population and their influence" to the coast of the Pacific.
Despite the lack of Spanish approval and the pending transfer of
Louisiana to France, Jefferson pressed ahead with his plan. In a
confidential message to Congress on January 18, 1803, the presi-
dent asked for an appropriation of $2,500 to fund a small expedi-
tion to explore the Missouri River to its source and search for a
river flowing to the Pacific within portage of the Missouri. His mes-
sage emphasized expansion of trade with the Indians and recom-
mended that to keep the measure from attracting notice Congress
designate the appropriation as being "for the purpose of extending
the external commerce of the U.S." Reminding the legislators that
the interests of commerce formed the principal object within their

constitutional powers, he added that the prospect that the expedi-
tion might "incidently advance the geographical knowledge of our
own continent can not but be an additional gratification." Congress
quietly passed the requested legislation, which the president signed
on February 28, 1803. 26
Before sending the request to Congress, Jefferson had discussed
the project with his private secretary, Meriwether Lewis, and he
promptly named the twenty-eight-year-old army captain to com-
mand the expedition. Jefferson had chosen Lewis as his secretary
partly because of his personal acquaintance as an Albemarle neigh-
bor and partly because of Lewis' knowledge of the western country.
That the president and his secretary must often have talked about
the West during the many hours they spent together in the Presi-
dent's House seems beyond question, but that Jefferson had de-
cided to send Lewis on a western expedition when he appointed
him as his secretary in 1801 is not documented in the record. 27
Immediately after Congress' approval, Lewis began preparations
for the expedition, assembling supplies and equipment for the
journey and asking William Clark to join him as coleader, promis-
ing him equality of command, as the president had authorized him
to do. Jefferson himself, who had long been interested in a trans-
continental expedition, prepared the detailed instructions, which
he signed on June 20, 1803. By this time he knew that Talleyrand
had offered to sell Louisiana, but he had not yet received the news
of the signing of the treaty. 28 It would be the following spring be-
fore Lewis and Clark began their ascent of the Missouri River and
another year before Jefferson, in the summer of 1805, received his
first direct reports of their progress.
The widespread public approval of the transfer of Louisiana to

the United States and the private satisfaction that Jefferson had in
sending Lewis and Clark to explore a vast unknown territory gave
an aura of success to an administration approaching a review of its
record in the election of 1804. The president's great popularity,
however, did not mean that Federalist opposition had disappeared
or that attacks on him in the press had ceased. Indeed, Timothy
Pickering and a small group of embittered Federalists convinced
themselves that there was a Jeffersonian conspiracy to perpetuate
the Republicans in power. After the purchase of Louisiana, they
carried their opposition to the extreme of plotting the secession of
New England from the Union. When Aaron Burr ran for governor
ofNew York in 1804, they endeavored to bring him into the plot,
but his defeat destroyed that prospect. From the outset the absence
of support for disunion impeded their plans. In the end Jefferson's
overwhelming victory in the election of 1 804 exposed the total un-
reality of their secessionist scheme. 29
If Jefferson ever heard any rumors of Pickering's plotting, he did
not pay them any notice. But he could not bring himself to ignore
all of the newspaper attacks on himself and his administration, and
he departed so far from his devotion to freedom of the press as to

lend his support to state actions for libel against anti-Republican
editors. In February, 1803, Governor Thomas McKean of Pennsyl-
vania wrote to the president complaining about the "infamous and
seditious libels, published almost daily in our newspapers" and sug-
gested that they might be greatly reduced by a few prosecutions.
"But as the President, Congress, and several of the principal offi-
cers of the U.S. have been frequently implicated," McKean ex-
plained, "I have declined it until I should obtain your advice and
consent." The coming from one who had pro-
president's reply,
tested the sedition law and aided writers suffering under it, is sur-
prising to read today. He reasoned that having failed to destroy the
freedom of the press by the sedition law, the Federalists were as-
saulting it from the opposite side "by pushing it's licentiousness and
it's lying to such a degree as to depriveit of all credit." He thought
this was a dangerous trend and that the credibility of the press
ought to be restored. "The restraints provided by the laws of the
states are sufficient for this if applied. And I have therefore long
thought that a few prosecutions of the most prominent offenders
would have a wholesome effect in restoring the integrity of the
presses. Not a general prosecution, for that would look like per-
secution: but a selected one."
30
He even
enclosed a paper as an ex-
ample of a case that might be pursued. That paper has not survived
and the case that McKean chose to prosecute was based on writings
published after Jefferson's letter was written, but Joseph Dennie,
editor of the Port Folio, was cited for seditious libel and brought to
trial, with Jefferson's apparent blessing. 31
Jefferson cited attacks by the Federalists as the principal reason
for seeking reelection in 1804. It had been his hope to retire to a
lifeof tranquillity after one term, he said, but "the unbounded cal-
umnies of the federal party have obliged me to throw myself on the
verdict of my country for trial." Yet, it surely was not only the Fed-
eralist opposition that persuaded him to run but also his Republi-
can supporters, who knew he was an unbeatable candidate. A week
before Jefferson wrote the above letter, 108 Republican members
PRESIDENTIAL ZENITH 27 1
of Congress met in a nominating caucus and unanimously renomi-

nated him for president. With equal unanimity they dropped the
incumbent vice-president from the party ticket. Though they voted
for six different candidates for the vice-presidential slot, New York's
George Clinton had a clear majority. "Mr. Burr had not one single
vote, and not a word was lisped in his favor at the meeting," one
32
participant observed.
In his year in office Jefferson made it clear that his vice-
first
president did not share his confidence by openly rejecting Burr's

patronage recommendations for New York, and Burr was soon
read out of the Republican party by national leaders. 33 By 1804 his
support in New York had so eroded that he failed to win the Repub-
lican nomination for governor. Though he ran anyway, hoping to
divide the Republican vote and attract Federalist votes, he suffered
another blow to his declining political fortunes. In the aftermath of
that defeat, he challenged Hamilton to a duel and fatally wounded
his longtime foe, alienating even Republican enemies of that Feder-
alist giant. Burr had been so completely abandoned by Republicans
by 1804 that his renomination was never at issue. Clinton was a

popular choice for those who wanted New York represented on the
ticket and for those who saw him as too old to block a Virginia suc-
cessor to Jefferson in 1808.
Jefferson did little save stand on his record to win reelection in
1804, but that record, capped by the purchase of Louisiana, was an
enviable one. At the beginning of the election year Jefferson thought
the Republicans could count but four states. 34 As it
on carrying all
turned out, Republicans carried all but two states, Connecticut and
Delaware. In Maryland, Federalists won two of the state's eleven dis-
tricts, but elsewhere Jefferson had the unanimous electoral vote of
the remaining fourteen states. The total electoral vote was 162 for
Jefferson to 14 for Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, the Federalist
candidate.
Politically the year 1804 marked the zenith of Jefferson's presi-
dency; privately it brought him great personal sorrow. In April his
daughter Maria, not yet twenty-six, died in the aftermath of child-
of events that must have brought back the ago-
birth, in a repetition
nizing memories of his
wife's death twenty-two years earlier. Maria's
death also was a poignant reminder to him that he had not carried
out the small request that she had made earlier in the year that he
have his portrait drawn by Saint-Memin when the artist visited
Washington to make his popular drawings and engravings. "If you
did but know what a source of pleasure it would be to us while so
much separated from you to have so excellent a likeness of you,"

Maria had written her father, "you would not I think refuse us. It is
what we have allways most wanted all our lives and the certainty
with which he takes the likenesses makes this request I think not
unreasonable." Maria died before he could fulfill her request, but
when the artist next set up his physiognotrace in Washington in No-
vember, 1804, Jefferson arranged a sitting. Saint-Memin provided
him with a life-size profile portrait, an engraved copperplate in re-
—
duced size, and twelve impressions the artist's usual $25 package.
Jefferson also paid $4.50 for an additional thirty-six impressions
and was soon sending copies to relatives and distant friends. The
artist himself engraved another plate for his own use and offered
copies of the print for sale in Washington on the eve of Jefferson's
second inauguration. 35
The final months of Jefferson's first term prompted less exuber-
ance than might have been expected in the aftermath of his ex-
traordinary reelection victory. What dominated the newspapers in
the months preceding his March 4 inaugural was not the anticipa-
tion of that event but the impeachment trial of Supreme Court Jus-
tice Samuel Chase. That climactic event, nearly two years in the
making, was the most sensational display yet of Republican frustra-
tion over the persisting Federalist domination of the judiciary.
Though he neither directed not controlled the course of events, it
was Jefferson who initially set them into motion. In May, 1803, Jus-
tice Chase, whose political harangues to grand juries and his con-
duct of trials of Republican editors prosecuted under the sedition
law in 1800 had enraged Republicans, again stirred their anger by
a political tirade to a federal grand jury in Baltimore. After an irate
Maryland Republican clipped Chase's charge from a Baltimore
paper and sent it to the president, Jefferson reacted promptly. "You
must have heard of the extraordinary charge of Chase to the Grand
Jury at Baltimore," he wrote to Maryland Congressman Joseph H.
Nicholson. "Ought this seditious and official attack on the prin-
ciplesof our Constitution, and on the proceedings of a State, to go
unpunished?" Nicholson conferred with House Speaker Macon,
who questioned pursuing the matter. But at the next session of
Congress, John Randolph moved that the House appoint a com-
mittee to investigate Chase's conduct, and he was named to head
the seven-man committee that promptly began gathering evidence.
"You can scarcely conceive the mass of testimony procured against
Chase," a member of the House reported a month later, estimating
36
that it fill as many as five hundred pages.
might In addition to the
charge to the Baltimore jury, the investigation focused on the trea-

son trial of John Fries in Philadelphia and the libel trial of James
Thomson Callender in Richmond, both in 1800.
The atmosphere of the expanding investigation was highly
charged because of the impeachment proceedings then in progress
against John Pickering, federal district judge of New Hampshire.
Although the cases were different, Federalists depicted both as as-
saults on the independence of the judiciary. Judge Pickering's mis-
conduct on the bench was the result of his insanity, but having
failed in all efforts to get him to resign, Jefferson had presented the
case to Congress for impeachment as the only available recourse
for removal. On the same day that Pickering was convicted by the
Senate and ordered removed, March 12, 1804, the House voted 73
to 32 to impeach Justice Chase. "You may conclude he will be con-
demned," exclaimed Senator Timothy Pickering. "If a considerable
majority of the House were to impeach any man in the United
States, he would by the Senate be found guilty." Senator Plumer
charged that impeachment and removal had become synonymous
terms and that the independence of the judiciary was gone. "The
process of impeachment is to be considered in effect as a mode of
removal" he declared, "and not as a charge and conviction of high
crimes and misdemeanors." 37
Republicans resented such criticisms, believing that had the Fed-
eralists cooperated, Judge Pickering's friends could have persuaded
him to resign. Yet, many were uneasy over whether Chase's actions,
improper as they clearly were, constituted the "high crimes and
misdemeanors" required by the Constitution for removal from
office. Republican senators had ample time to contemplate their di-
lemma after Chase's trial was put off until the next session of Con-
gress. When Congress reconvened, William Branch Giles, the Re-
publican leader in the Senate, argued that impeachment was a
means of removal and judges could be removed for errors in judg-
ment. Senator John Quincy Adams reported that Giles told the
Senate that "impeachment is nothing more than an enquiry, by the
two Houses of Congress, whether the office of any public man
might not be better filled by another." 38 Not all Republicans shared
this view, and widening internal Republican divisions made the out-
come of the trial increasingly doubtful.
Scheduled to begin on January 2, 1805, Chase's trial did not get
under way until February 4. In his last major act in office, Vice-
President Burr presided over a scene he had carefully arranged.
Empowered to make the necessary arrangements for the proceed-
ings, he transformed the Senate chamber into a setting "beyond

anything which has ever appeared in this country," one senator ob-
served. 39 The senators' desks and chairs were removed and two rows
of seats covered with red baize were built on each side of the vice-
president's chair. Seats covered with green cloth were arranged
for the members of the House of Representatives, together with
special seats for officials and an elegant gallery for ladies. The
chamber, a member of the House observed, had "more the appear-
ance of a play house than a Court." With the galleries packed, John
Randolph heading the House managers, and Justice Chase at-
tended by a battery of prominent lawyers, the scene was set for
high drama. The spectators were not disappointed. But as the trial
proceeded and the legislative business of Congress came to a halt,
Senator Plumer observed that "all parties appear to wish it had
never been commenced —
I believe we shall not hear of another
very soon." 40
Jefferson, who had started it all with his letter to Nicholson nearly
two years earlier, told the congressman at that time that "it is better
that I should not interfere," and there is no evidence that, after his
initial act, he did. Through the long months preceding the trial, he
appears not to have commented on the proceedings nor to have

used his office to influence the outcome, leading one scholar to con-
clude that the president's unwillingness to become involved was one
of the decisive factors in the final verdict. 41 Jefferson, who had ear-
lier admitted that removing judges by impeachment was a bungling
way, may have wished that he had never called attention to Chase's
misconduct. But we know he followed Chase's trial closely, because
he left in his papers a tally sheet on which he recorded the votes of
every senator on each of the eight articles of impeachment. That
vote was taken on March 1, 1805. A majority of senators found
Chase guilty on three of the eight articles, but no article received
the two-thirds vote required for conviction. The highest vote, 19 to
15, for conviction was cast on the article relating to Chase's charge
to the grand jury in Baltimore, but it was 4 votes short of the consti-
42
tutional requirement.
The trialwas an unpropitious ending to an auspicious first term.
Three days later Jefferson would stand before Chief Justice Mar-
shall to take the presidential oath of office for the second time.
XIX
Trials of a Second Term
On Saturday March 2, 1805, in the Senate chamber, where Justice

Samuel Chase had been acquitted the day before, Vice-President
Aaron Burr delivered a moving farewell address to a hushed Sen-
ate. As he walked slowly from the room and closed the door behind
him, he left many of the senators in tears. Washington was still
buzzing with talk of Chase's acquittal and Burr's valedictory as Con-
gress closed its harried session on Sunday. Before noon on Monday,
March 4, when Jefferson rose in the same Senate chamber to repeat
the oath of office as president, many members of Congress were
already on their way home. No air of anticipation surrounded the
event, and there was even less ceremony than marked his first inau-
gural. Instead of walking to the Capitol, as he had four years ear-
lier, Jefferson came by carriage from the President's House, accom-
panied only by his private secretary and a groom. There was no

pageantry. One British diplomat remembered that Jefferson was
dressed in black and even wore black silk stockings, but neither the
president's dress nor the ceremony attracted much attention in
1
the press.
In words that echoed comments on Jefferson's first inaugural,
Senator John Quincy Adams recorded that the president delivered
his address "in so low a voice that not half of it was heard by any
part of the crowded auditory." The speech, however, was widely
published. When Senator William Plumer, who took the mail stage
from Washington the night before the inauguration, reached Balti-
more on the afternoon of March 4, he found the president's in-
augural address on the streets within an hour of his arrival and
deduced that it had come on the same stage. He faulted editor
Samuel Harrison Smith, to whom Jefferson had supplied an ad-
vance copy, for describing the speech as being delivered to both
houses of Congress when there was not a quorum of either House
left inWashington. But he welcomed the early printing and read it

closely enough to find that the Republican president took a more
generous view of the preceding four years than the Federalist
senator. 2
After thanking his countrymen for their new proof of confi-
dence in him, Jefferson began his address by saying that his con-
science told him that he had lived up to the principles he had de-
clared four years before. In support of this claim he reviewed the
major accomplishments of his first term. In domestic policies he
emphasized the elimination of unnecessary offices and expenses,
the abolition of internal taxes, and the progress in paying off the
debt. He proudly pointed out that the government was supported
by revenue from taxes on the consumption of foreign goods, paid
by those who could afford to buy luxuries. "It may be the pleasure
and pride of an American to ask," he said, "what farmer, what me-
chanic, what laborer, ever sees a tax gatherer of the United States?"
In regard to foreign affairs he did not gloat over the acquisition of
Louisiana. Instead he acknowledged that it had been disapproved
by some from an apprehension that the additional territory would
endanger the union. "But who can limit the extent to which the
federative principle may operate effectively?" he asked. "The larger
our association, the less will it be shaken by local passions." 3
One of the longest and most philosophical passages of his address
dealt with "the aboriginal inhabitants," whom he saw as "endowed
with the faculties and the rights of men, breathing an ardent love of
liberty and independence," but now being overwhelmed by a re-
lentless stream of overflowing white population. "Humanity en-
joins us to teach them agriculture and the domestic arts," he said,
"to encourage them to that industry which alone can enable them
to maintain their place in existence, and to prepare them in time
for that state of society, which to bodily comforts adds the improve-
ment of mind and morals." His administration had liberally fur-
nished them with the implements of husbandry and household use
and sent instructors to teach them the needed skills, he indicated,
while acknowledging that all "endeavours to enlighten them on the
fate which awaits their present course of life" and persuade them to
change their ways encountered powerful obstacles. 4 Jefferson here
was struggling with a dilemma that he never resolved. The Indians
could be saved from extinction only by destroying their culture, for
he had no doubt that their culture must ultimately bend to the rule
of reason. He admitted in his own notes on his speech that he ex-
panded upon the obstruction to change among the Indians in
TRIALS OF A SECOND TERM 277
order to speak to a broader audience. He was not speaking only of

Indians when he criticized persons who "inculcate a sanctimonious
reverence for the customs of their ancestors; that whatsoever they
did, must be done through all time; that reason is a false guide, and
to advance under its counsel, in their physical, moral, or political
condition, is perilous innovation." This passage was addressed
broadly to all those responsible for "the hue and cry raised against
philosophy and the rights of man," he wrote in his notes. "I have
thought it best to say what is directly applied to Indians only, but
admits by inference a more general extention." 5 Without mention-
ing the Federalist extremists, he could expect his audience to make
the connection.
In light of Jefferson's encouragement of Governor McKean of
Pennsylvania to check the licentiousness of the press through se-
lected prosecutions, the eloquent disquisition on the freedom of
the press that he included toward the close of his speech seems
somewhat contrived. He took pride that his reelection had demon-
strated that a government conducting itself within the true spirit of
the Constitution could not be written down by falsehood and defa-
mation. He said that he did not mean to infer that state laws against
false and defamatory publications should not be enforced, but he
indicated that his administration had left offenders to find their
punishment in public indignation. "Since truth and reason have
maintained their ground against false opinions in league with false
facts, the press, confined to truth, needs no other legal restraint,"
he affirmed. 6 This he unquestionably believed, but he was having
some trouble with the problem of confining the press to truth.
After the inaugural ceremonies, Jefferson held an open house
similar to those he customarily hosted on New Year's Day and on the
Fourth of July. One British diplomat reported "a very mixed com-
pany . .some lolling about on couches and in dirty shoes." He also
.
described "a collection of people on the road" as "composed of low

persons, for the most part Irish labourers." What this aristocratic
observer did not know was that the procession in the street, which
had been formed by mechanics in the Naval Yard, had presented
the president with a congratulatory address signed by more than
one hundred, expressing gratitude for being able to live in "a land
of equal rights and liberties, where the honest industry of the me-
chanic is equally supported with the splendor of the wealthy." 7
Not long after his second inaugural, the president agreed to sit
for America's most famous portrait painter, Gilbert Stuart. He had
sat for Stuart in 1800 and liked the result, but he never received the
portrait. What happened to that effort is not known. When Stuart

requested Jefferson to sit again in 1805, the artist indicated that he
was not satisfied with the 1800 portrait, but the real reason was that
he had received a commission from James Bowdoin III for a por-
trait of the president and needed a new sitting. Jefferson yielded to
the request, and Stuart drew his portrait from life, painted a rep-
lica for Bowdoin, and did another one for Madison. Madison re-
ceived his portrait by 1806, Bowdoin got his canvas in 1807, but
Jefferson did not get Stuart to relinquish the original portrait until
1821. Meanwhile, B owdoin's Jefferson was copied and engraved bv
Robert Field and published Boston in 1807 in an exceptionally
in
fine print offered to the public forone dollar. Stuart's image soon
surpassed in popularity Rembrandt Peale's portrait of 1800, which
had been the major source of images of the president during his
first term, and it became the preeminent icon of Jefferson for over
8
a century.
When he accepted the presidency for a second time, Jefferson
had decided to follow the precedent of President Washington and
retire at the end of his second term. But at the urging of his closest
advisers, he refrained from announcing that intention at his inau-
guration. Because he had already revealed his intent privately,
however, maneuvering in regard to his successor began almost im-
mediately. A year had barely passed before John Randolph de-
clared on the floor of the House of Representatives that in every
action all eyes were fixed on the Presidents House. In a debate on
nonimportation he said that "the question was not what we should
do with France, or Spain, or England, but who should be the next
President. And at this moment, every motion that is made ... is
made with a view to the occupation of that House." 9 This factor,
with which Jefferson had not had to contend during his first four
vears, would contribute to the difficulties that beset his second term.
From the beginning of that term, Jefferson was increasingly
occupied with European affairs. At the time of his inaugural Mon-
roe was in Madrid trying to negotiate with Spain on the disputed
boundaries of the Louisiana Purchase. Enraged by Frances trans-
fer of Louisiana to the United States, Spain had refused to carry
through with the convention of 1802 settling spoliation claims, and
the Spanish government took further umbrage at the United States'
claim to the Perdido River (the present boundary between Alabama
and Florida) as the eastern boundary of Louisiana. Buoyed by the
Louisiana triumph, Jefferson moved pugnaciously to deal with
Spain. "We scarcely expect any liberal or just settlement with Spain,
and are perfectly determined to obtain or to take our just limits,"
Jefferson wrote to Monroe shortly after the transfer of Louisiana to

the United States, while predicting that the inhabitants on the east
bank of the Mississippi River would soon ask to come under Ameri-
can jurisdiction. At first France seemed to promise support for
American efforts to obtain West Florida and persuaded Monroe to
delay his mission to Madrid until Spanish tempers cooled. After
being appointed to succeed Rufus King as minister to Great Brit-
ain, Monroe took up his post in London and did not set out for
Madrid end of 1804. Meanwhile, as he discovered in a stop
until the
in Paris, the French had decided against aiding the American ef-
forts, and Spain had been further alienated by Jefferson's establish-
ing a revenue district in West Florida. So dominant was Napoleon's
influence over his weak neighbor that Monroe's mission to Madrid
had little chance of success. After nearly five frustrating months
Monroe and Pinckney terminated the negotiations. Convinced that
Spain would make no concessions without compulsion, they recom-
mended to the secretary of state that the United States take posses-
10
sion of both of the Floridas.
Jefferson learned of the failure of Monroe's mission in early Au-
gust, 1805, while at Monticello, and it overshadowed the recent
good news from the Mediterranean that a treaty had been signed
with Tripoli bringing to an end the naval action he had launched at
the outset of his presidency. He blamed Napoleon for the futile ne-
gotiations with Spain, writing Madison that he was convinced of the
"hostile and treacherous intentions against us on the part of France,
and that we should lose no time in securing something more than a
mutual friendship with England." Spain now became the presi-
dent's principal object of concern. As he sought to deal with the
question of Spanish territory bordering the United States while the
war in Europe was still in progress, he began thinking in terms of
some kind of alliance with England to put pressure on France. "A
procrastination till peace in Europe shall leave us without an ally,"
he told the secretary of state. 11
By the time he had returned to Washington in October he had
changed his mind on the need for even a temporary alliance with
England. He now believed that the war in Europe would go on for
at least another year, with probably an additional one for peace ne-
gotiations. "This gives us our great disideratum, time," he confided
to Madison. There was time to make another effort at a peaceful
settlement, but negotiations should not be held at Madrid. Paris
—
was the place to negotiate with "France as the mediator, the price
of the Floridas as the means. We need not care who gets that: and
an enlargement of the sum we had thought of may be the bait to
France." The cabinet agreed to such a policy at a meeting on No-
vember 14 and set five million dollars as the amount the United
States would be willing to pay for East and West Florida. 12 A few
days later Jefferson received a letter from John Armstrong, who
had replaced Livingston as minister to France, containing an un-
official proposition from Talleyrand in which the French minister
had suggested a plan similar to his own. "He advises that we alarm
the fears of Spain by a vigorous language and conduct, in order to
induce her to join us in appealing to the interference of the Em-
peror," Jefferson noted in recording that Talleyrand's proposal was
in accord with the cabinet's decision except as to the sum of money,
which Talleyrand placed at seven million dollars. 13
In his fifth annual message to Congress on December 3, 1805,
the president offered a bleak picture of deteriorating relations with
Spain, informed Congress that he had given orders to the troops
on the American citizens and
frontier to be in readiness to protect
repel any aggressions, and promised a special message on Spanish
14
relations. In a confidential message three days later Jefferson re-
viewed Monroe's fruitless endeavor to reach some agreement in re-
gard to American spoliation claims and the Louisiana boundary
and concluded that "our injured citizens were thus left without any
prospect of retribution from the wrongdoer; and as to the bound-
ary each party was to take its own course." In addition to denying
all American claims east of the Mississippi, Spain pressed for a
western boundary that, Jefferson said, "would have left us but a

string of land" on the west bank of the Mississippi. He indicated
that the documents accompanying his message showed that the
Spanish intended "to advance on our possessions until they shall be
repressed by an opposing force. Considering that Congress alone is
constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition
from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their au-
thority for using force in any degree which could be avoided." The
crisis in Europe offered a favorable time to press for a settlement,
he believed. Formal war was not necessary, "but the protection of

our citizens, the spirit and honor of our country, require that force
should be interposed to a certain degree. It will probably contrib-
15
ute to advance the object of peace."
The president included a brief analysis of France's attitude and
indicated his opinion that France was disposed to effect a settle-
ment, but he offered no details except to say that "the course to be
TRIALS OF A SECOND TERM 28 1
pursued will require the command of means which it belongs to

Congress exclusively to yield or to deny." Gallatin had urged Jeffer-
son to be more specific in his message, complaining after reading
the draft that it did not explicitly declare its object. He suggested
that Jefferson's failure to mention Florida by name or to indicate
that a large sum of money would be required might give Congress a
mistaken view of his object. But Jefferson preferred to work behind
the scenes and privately conveyed to Republican congressional
leaders his recommendation for an immediate two-million-dollar
appropriation. After the success that a similar appropriation for
the Louisiana negotiations had produced, he did not anticipate any
difficulty in obtaining the allocation. Here he miscalculated. When
John Randolph, who had been named to head the House commit-
tee to which Jefferson's confidential message was referred, was
briefed by the president and learned that he sought two million
dollars for the negotiations, he announced that he would not agree
to such a measure not requested in the message. Randolph accused
the president of trying to shift responsibility to the House but de-
clared that even if Jefferson had asked for the money, he would still
have opposed it as a bribe to France. "After the total failure of every
attempt at negotiation, such a step would disgrace us forever," he
16
protested.
Jefferson may have been astonished that Randolph chose this
issue upon which to oppose him, but he could hardly have been
surprised that the independent Virginian was moving to an open
break. The distance between Randolph and the president began
widening over the Yazoo land controversy, the settlement of which
Randolph had succeeded in blocking during the two previous ses-
sions. That issue went back to the agreement that a commission
composed of Secretary of State Madison, Secretary of the Treasury
Gallatin, and Attorney General Lincoln had negotiated with Geor-
gia in 1802 for the cession of its western lands to the United States.
In accepting Georgia's lands, the United States set aside five million
acres to settle unresolved claims. Most of those claims grew out of
the sale of thirty-five million acres of the Yazoo lands to four land
companies by the Georgia legislature in 1795. In the following year
the legislature rescinded the sale on the clear grounds of bribery of
members of the previous assembly. Meanwhile, much of the land
had been sold, leaving titles in dispute and new purchasers pressing
their claims. Notable among them was the New England Mississippi
Land Company, which had purchased eleven million acres on the
very day the act had been repealed. The federal commissioners de-
nied the claimants' title but proposed a compromise compensation

on the ground that many were innocent parties unaware of the cor-
ruption of the legislature. By accusing anyone who was willing to
approve the compromise as sanctioning corruption, Randolph
blocked congressional action in 1804 and 1805 and came close to
breaking with the administration over the issue. 17 Randolph's posi-
tion as the Republican leader in the House was further weakened
by his unsuccessful conduct of the proceedings against Justice
Chase. His clash with the president over foreign policy brought an
irreparable break with the administration in 1806, and Jefferson
soon moved to isolate Randolph and other "Old Republicans" who
followed his lead. Not only policies but also presidential politics
widened the breach between Randolph and the president. Madison's
name, which was being prominently mentioned as Jefferson's suc-
cessor, was anathema to Randolph, who favored Monroe, whom he
saw as a Republican still true to the principles of the old Republi-
can party.
Randolph's opposition did not block Jefferson's request for the se-
cret appropriation of two million dollars, which passed the House
on January 16, 1806, by a vote of 76 to 54 and was concurred with
by the Senate three weeks later. But the break in Republican ranks
encouraged Federalists to join in calling the plan a disgraceful
scheme to purchase peace by employing money as bribes at the
French court and buying land in West Florida already paid for.
Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., the president's son-in-law and a
member of the House, defended the administration against such
charges in a letter to his constituents after Congress lifted the ban
of secrecy. He said that the majority in the House "saw no humilia-
tion to their country in offering to France and Spain combined, the
alternative of assured peace and a generous price for Florida, or
the manifest risk, from inevitable collisions, of war, with its certain
consequences the invasion of Mexico and Cuba." 18
After all the controversy at a high cost to Republican party unity,
the diplomatic effort met with failure. The Spanish could not be
lured to the negotiating table, and after the safeguards the admin-
istration imposed to prevent French jobbery, Talleyrand lost inter-
est.Conditions in Europe had also changed dramatically. At the
time Jefferson sent his Spanish message to Congress, he knew
nothing of either Trafalgar or Austerlitz, both of which battles had
already been decided. As the administration assessed those momen-
tous events when the news did reach America, Jefferson's concern
with obtaining West Florida gave way to more pressing matters.
Nelson's victory at Trafalgar broke the naval power of France and

made the British master of the seas. Napoleon's victory at Austerlitz
forced Austria to sue for peace and put the Russian armies into re-
treat. "What an awful spectacle does the world exhibit at this in-
stant," Jefferson wrote in January, 1806, "one man bestriding the
continent of Europe like a Colossus, and another roaming un-
bridled on the ocean. But even this is better than that one should
19
rule both elements."
Although Senator John Quincy Adams would shortly accuse the
president of "unqualified submission to France and unqualified de-
fiance of Great Britain," Jefferson regarded a balance of power in
Europe as in the interest of the United But he also saw Great
States.
Britain as the greater menace. He had not mentioned Britain by
name in his annual message, but he protested armed vessels hover-
ing off the coasts and harbors of the United States and the new
principles "interpolated into the law of nations" to curtail neutral
trade. The latter was a reference to the Essex decision, issued in the
spring of 1805, by which the British sought to end the prevailing
practice allowing American merchants to import goods into the
United States and reexport them as neutral cargo. The British had
followed the Essex decision with the seizure of numerous unsuspect-
ing American vessels. In response Jefferson recommended that
Congress increase the number of gunboats to protect American
seaports and informed the legislators that his government had as-
sembled materials to build warships if Congress saw fit to authorize
their construction. The day after the House passed the two-million-
dollar act, which put the Spanish business out of the way for the
moment, Jefferson sent Congress a special message on neutral
commerce, enclosing memorials from American merchants and
other papers documenting the British interference with American
neutral trade and the impressment of American seamen. 20
On the preceding day, January 16, each senator had found on his
desk in the Senate a 204-page pamphlet entitled An Examination of
the British Doctrine, Which Subjects to Capture a Neutral Trade, not Open
in Time of Peace. Although the author's name did not appear on the
work, there was no secret that it came from the pen of the Secretary
of State. In a learned but prolix dissertation, Madison argued that
there was no basis in international law for the British "Rule of
1756," which denied to neutrals in time of war a trade not open to
them in time of peace. Jefferson thought Madison's pamphlet "pul-
verized" the rule by "a logic not to be controverted." 21 But no argu-
ment of logic would dissuade the British from trying to prevent all
trade between the West Indies and France, for the British were con-
vinced that their survival depended on maintaining control of the
seas and strangling Napoleon by tightening their blockade of the
Continent.
The section of the president's annual message relating to the con-
duct of belligerent powers toward the United States had been re-
ferred to the House Committee of Ways and Means with instructions
and recommend coun-
to inquire into the violations of neutral rights
teracting measures. 22
Chairman John Randolph had already asked
Madison for information on "what new principles, or constructions,
of the laws of nations have been adopted by belligerent powers of
Europe, to the prejudice of neutral rights?" But Randolph delayed
bringing the matter before the House, and after Jefferson's special
message of January 17, 1806, the House transferred the matter to
the Committee of the Whole for consideration. 23
In his special message of January 17, Jefferson did not recom-
mend a specific course of action. Although he had taken the lead in
formulating Spanish policy, he now held back in regard to Great
Britain. With no administration direction and the alienated Ran-
dolph deriding the president and his cabinet, Congress floundered
in often tiresome wrangling. The House began by debating resolu-
tions introduced by Representative Andrew Gregg of Pennsylvania
to ban all British imports until a satisfactory understanding was
reached with Great Britain on neutral commerce and impressment.
Two months later it ended up passing an act to prohibit the impor-
tation of a list of specified British goods beginning at the distant
date of November 15, 1806. 24
Although he remained more aloof from Congress' deliberations
than usual, the president let it be known that he favored the course
adopted. Senator Adams clearly sensed that preference in conver-
sation at the president's dinner table. Yet Jefferson did not assert
the same degree of leadership that had previously characterized his
presidency. Whether because of Republican divisions in Congress
or his own lack of urgency, he did not press for action. While Con-
gress debated what to do, the president optimistically wrote to
Thomas Paine that he expected the difficulties with England to "be
dissipated by the disasters of her allies, the change of her ministry,
and the measures which Congress are likely to adopt to furnish mo-
tives for her becoming just to us." With Napoleon still expanding
his control of the Continent, Jefferson had no sound basis for such
optimism. Randolph in the course of the debates protested that "it
is not for the master and mate ... in bad weather, to go below, and
leave the management of the ship to the cook and cabin boy." He
denounced the measure finally adopted as "a milk-and-water bill, a
dose of chicken broth to be taken nine months hence." 25 Jefferson
was able to isolate Randolph politically, but Randolph sensed the
beginning of a decline of the confident leadership that had charac-
terized Jefferson's previous years at the helm of state.
Besides the nonimportation act, Congress also gave the president
support for negotiations with Great Britain. Though Jefferson had
favored leaving the negotiations in the hands of Monroe, he yielded
to congressional pressure to name a special commission, and follow-
ing the passage of the nonimportation act, he nominated William
Pinkney, a Baltimore lawyer, to join Monroe as a joint commis-
26
sioner. While Jefferson awaited the outcome of the negotiations in
London, reports reached him of a new threat to the nation in the
—
West not from a foreign power but from within. At the center of
the suspected intrigue was his former vice-president, Aaron Burr.
Jefferson had received his first warning against Burr in December,

1805. Shortly after he entertained the ex-vice-president at dinner,
an anonymous hand-printed letter arrived from Philadelphia warn-
ing of Burr's intrigues. "You admit him at your table ... at the very
moment he is meditating the overthrow of your Administration
and what is more is conspiring against the State," the writer de-
clared. "His aberrations through the Western States had no other
object." He advised the president to watch Burr's connections with
Anthony Merry, the British minister, "and you will find him a Brit-
ish Pensioner and Agent." A few days later a second letter arrived
from the same writer, who described himself as a friend of Jef-
ferson and a lover of his country and warned further of Burr's
27
intrigues.
There is no evidence any more attention to
that Jefferson gave
these letters than to other anonymous reached his desk,
letters that
though he retained them in his files, as he did all letters addressed
to the president. He could not have known, as historians do today,
that a month after killing Alexander Hamilton in the duel that
ended Burr's political career and seven months before the end of
his vice-presidential term, Burr had met secretly with the British
minister. Merry reported London an offer from Burr "to lend
to
his assistance to His Majesty's Government in any Manner in which
they may think fit to employ him, particularly in endeavouring
to effect a Separation of the Western Part of the United States
from that which lies between the Atlantick and the Mountains."
Nor would Jefferson have known that, soon after leaving the vice-
presidential office,Burr had talked with Merry about plans to pro-
mote the independence of Louisiana. Nor would Jefferson have
been aware that Burr indirectly had also been in contact with the
Spanish government. 28 But Jefferson knew of Burr's trip through
the West after leaving office, and he would not have failed to read
an article entitled "Queries," which had been widely published in
the newspapers, questioning the motives behind Burr's journey.
Originally published in the Federalist United States Gazette in July,
1805, the unsigned communication suggested as possible motives
the formation of a separate government in the West, the seizure
and and the invasion and despoiling
distribution of public lands,
of Mexico. Because "Queries" had appeared in a rabidly Federal-
ist paper and had been dismissed by the Republican Philadelphia
Aurora as "imaginery" and "absurd," Jefferson probably subscribed

to editor William Duane's assessment that the questions raised were
unworthy of serious consideration. He certainly shared Duane's
confidence in the loyalty of westerners to the Union. Before he re-
ceived the warning from the anonymous "friend" in Philadelphia,
the president had also read Governor William C. C. Claiborne's re-
port that during a visit to New Orleans Burr had associated inti-
mately with critics of the territorial government and with Juan Ven-
tura Morales, the former Spanish intendant. 29 If these reports
aroused Jefferson's suspicions, he left no record of it.
Jefferson gave more attention to a private letter that came to him
early in February, 1806, from Joseph H. Daveiss, the United States
district attorney for Kentucky. In a confidential report that did not
mention Burr, Daveiss warned the president about Spanish in-
trigues and a plot against the Union. "We have traitors among us,"
he wrote. "A separation of the union in favour of Spain, is the ob-
ject." He said that, though he did not know by what means this was
to be attempted, the plot was laid wider than Jefferson could imag-
ine. "Mention the subject to no man from the western country how-
ever high in office he may be: —some of them are deeply tainted
with this Treason." Daveiss particularly cautioned the president
James Wilkinson, commanding general of the
against General
army and governor of upper Louisiana, whom he suspected of
30
being in the pay of the Spanish government.
Jefferson shared the letter with Madison, Gallatin, and Dear-
born, none of whom apparently took alarm. Though we know
today that General Wilkinson was in Spanish pay, even such a
hard-nosed realist as Gallatin could not believe that Wilkinson was
capable of betraying his country. Nonetheless, Jefferson replied

promptly to Daveiss, requesting a full communication of every-
thing known by him, including the names of all persons involved in
the combination and witnesses to any part of it. When Daveiss, a
Federalist, supplied names, he listed not only Wilkinson and Burr
but also a number of prominent Republicans, including Jefferson's
Attorney General John Breckinridge, William Henry Harrison,
and Henry Clay. 31 Daveiss later struck Breckinridge and Clay from
his list, but he had already destroyed his credibility with the presi-
dent, who was now disposed to doubt the reports of a Federalist
appointee of John Adams. Daveiss' rambling letters also meshed
Spanish intrigues of the 1790s with more recent events, and Jeffer-
son stopped replying to his letters until Daveiss pressed him to ac-
knowledge their receipts, which Jefferson did in September, 1806. 32
About this time Jefferson also received reports of Burr's activities
from other sources. Colonel George Morgan wrote from western
Pennsylvania that Burr had tried to enlist his sons in a military
expedition and had talked about the independence of the West.
Jefferson later said that Morgan's letter was "the very first intima-
tion I had of this plot." But it was not until after he received a letter
from Gideon Granger, his postmaster general, that the president

moved into action. 33 Granger reported from Massachusetts in a
letter received by Jefferson on October 20, 1806, the information
that in the previous winter Burr had offered General William
Eaton the second in command, under Wilkinson, of an expedition
designed to separate the western states from the Union. Granger
had confirmed this with General Eaton himself before transmitting
the report to the president. 34
Two days later Jefferson assembled his cabinet and relayed this
and earlier reports that bothhe and Madison had received regard-
ing Burr's actions. In meetings over several days the cabinet de-
cided to send John Graham, secretary of the Orleans Territory, who
was then in Washington, on Burr's trail with discretionary powers to
consult confidentially with western governors and to arrest Burr if
he committed any overt act. Letters were dispatched to the gover-

nors of the Orleans and Mississippi territories to be on their guard.
Orders also were prepared to dispatch Captains Edward Preble
and Stephen Decatur to New Orleans but rescinded when mail ar-
rived from the West containing no word of any movements of Burr.
Jefferson reasoned that the total silence of the officers of govern-
ment and the newspapers indicated that Burr was committing no
overt act against the law. The cabinet also discussed what should be
done in regard to General Wilkinson. Jefferson acknowledged that

suspicions of his infidelity had become widespread, but the cabinet
postponed action, awaiting further information. 35
At nearly the same time that the administration was trying to de-
cide what to do in regard to Burr and Wilkinson, the general was
deciding to abandon Burr, expose his coconspirator, and present
himself as the savior of his country. Because Burr presented differ-
ent plans to different parties, it is impossible to say with certainty
what he intended to do, but the records are convincing that he was
engaged in some conspiracy and that Wilkinson, whom one leading
scholar called "the most skillful and unscrupulous plotter this coun-
36
try has ever produced," was a party to the plotting.
On October 8, 1806, Samuel Swartwout, a Burr aide, arrived in
Wilkinson's headquarters at Natchitoches to deliver an unsigned
cipher letter, written in late July, 1806, indicating that funds had
been obtained, naval aid from England was expected, and opera-
tions were beginning. Burr was proceeding westward as of August
1. Forces would rendezvous on the Ohio on November 1 and the ,
first five hundred to one thousand men would move rapidly from
the falls at Louisville on November 15, anticipating arriving at

Natchez between December 5 and 15, where they would expect
to meet Wilkinson. "Wilkinson shall be second to Burr only and
Wilkinson shall dictate the rank and promotion of his officers," said
the letter. 37 Wilkinson identified this letter as coming from Burr, an
assumption generally accepted until challenged in 1983 by the edi-
tors of Burr's papers, who posited Jonathan Dayton, another of the
38
conspirators, as the real author of the letter. While the authorship
of this major piece of evidence is critical to the interpretation of
Burr's role in the events, it does not lessen its importance as evi-
dence of a conspiracy nor make any clearer the ultimate aims of the
plotters.
Wilkinson waited nearly two weeks after deciphering the letter
before acting. He then dispatched Lieutenant Thomas A. Smith to
Washington with a packet of confidential communications for the
president. First was a paper that the general identified as having
fallen into his hands but that was obviously written by Wilkinson
himself (and later so acknowledged). Dated October 20, 1806, the
memorandum reported "a numerous and powerful association,"
extending from New York to the Mississippi, designed to assemble
eight thousand to ten thousand men at New Orleans for an expedi-
tion against Vera Cruz. The first rendezvous would be near the
rapids of the Ohio on or before November 20. The leaders of the
enterprise and their source of support were unknown, the report

claimed, as were their intentions in regard to the Orleans Territory.
Wilkinson accompanied this communication with a confidential
letterof October 2 1 expressing his dismay at the disclosure, which
he described as perplexing, and adding, "I am not only unin-
formed of the prime mover and ultimate objects of this daring en-
terprize, but am ignorant of the foundation on which it rests." He
went on to offer his opinion that a revolt of the Orleans Territory
was an auxiliary step in the main design of attacking Mexico. 39
When Lieutenant Smith arrived at the President's House on No-
vember 25 with the dispatches from Wilkinson, Jefferson could no
longer afford to wait until Burr committed some overt act before
issuing a public warning. He assembled his cabinet the same day,
and they agreed on a presidential proclamation and orders to be
sent to various military posts and civil officials to stop the enterprise
wherever it might be in progress. The president issued his procla-
mation two days later, warning all citizens against the conspiracy.
He ordered all officers of the government, civil and military, to
search out and bring to justice all persons involved, and to seize all
vessels, arms, and military stores employed. 40 Nowhere in the proc-

lamation was Burr named, but there was no doubt that it was di-
rected against him. Senator Plumer indicated that "reports have for
some time circulated from one end of the United States to the
other, that Aaron Burr, late Vice President, with others, in the
western States are preparing gun boats, provisions, money, men,
etc. to make war upon the Spaniards." Plumer believed their inten-
tion was to establish a new empire in the west, combining Spanish
41
territory with the western states.
Jefferson was confident that Burr's project would collapse with
the issuance of his proclamation, believing that Burr's strength
rested on men who thought the government was a party to the en-
terprise. Referring only briefly to his proclamation in his annual
message in December, 1806, the president did not report further
on the matter until requested to do so by the House of Represen-
42
tatives in mid-January. In a special message to both houses on
January 22, 1807, he then exposed "an illegal combination of pri-
vate individuals against the peace and safety of the Union, and a
military expedition planned by them against the territories of a
power in amity with the United States." He named Aaron Burr as
the prime mover and, in an extraordinary statement for the presi-
dent to make, announced that Burr's "guilt is placed beyond ques-
tion." By beginning his review of events in late September and ig-
noring the early warnings from Daveiss, he presented the record of

a prompt, but not precipitate, executive response. He also gave
more credit than due to Wilkinson and capped his presentation by
communicating to Congress a copy of the sensational cipher letter
that Wilkinson had recently forwarded to him at his request. 43 It
was published in the National Intelligencer the next day.
At the time the president made public the revelations in the
cipher letter, Burr had already surrendered to civil authorities in
the Mississippi Territory, though this news had not yet reached
Washington. Near the end of December, Burr had rendezvoused
with Harman Blennerhassett, a major Ohio backer, at the mouth of
the Cumberland River, and they had proceeded toward Natchez
with a small flotilla often boats and some sixty men. At a stop some
thirty miles above Natchez, on January 10, Burr learned for the
first time that Wilkinson had betrayed him, that the president had
issued a proclamation, and that the acting governor of the Mis-

sissippi Territory had ordered his arrest. A week later he sur-
rendered. A grand jury, however, failed to indict Burr, and the
territorial supreme court divided over whether Burr should be dis-
charged from his recognizance. At this point Burr disappeared
from the town of Washington and was declared a fugitive from
justice. Attempting to escape from the Mississippi Territory, he
headed southeast but was recognized, arrested, and made a mili-
tary prisoner at Fort Stoddert on February 19, 1807. In March, he
was brought under guard to Richmond for trial. 44
On March 30, 1807, in a secluded room in Richmond's Eagle Tav-
ern, Burr stood before Chief Justice Marshall, who presided over
the federal circuit court in Richmond, for a preliminary hearing.
District Attorney George Hay presented a motion that the former
vice-president be committed on a charge of high misdemeanor for
setting on foot an expedition against the dominions of Spain and a
charge of treason for assembling an armed force for the purpose of
seizing New Orleans, revolutionizing the Orleans Territory, and
separating the western states from the Atlantic states. Also present
were Caesar A. Rodney, the attorney general of the United States,
and two leading Richmond attorneys, John Wickham and Edmund
Randolph, whom Burr had retained as counsel. In view of the ex-
pected length of discussion on the motion, Marshall adjourned the
hearing until the next day in the chamber of the House of Dele-
gates in the nearby Capitol. At that time Hay opened the govern-
ment's argument, and Rodney presented the closing summation in
an unusual demonstration of the administration's interest in the
case. Ruling that no proof had been offered to show that Burr as-
1
sembled troops for a treasonable purpose, Marshall on April 1 re-

fused to include a charge of treason in the commitment, though
leaving the attorney general free to obtain such an indictment later.
He then released Burr on bail of ten thousand dollars on the
charge of misdemeanor to be answered at the next term of the cir-
45
cuit court in Richmond on May 2 2.
Jefferson was enraged by Marshall's action and denounced "the
tricksof the judges to force trials before it is possible to collect the
evidence, dispersed through a line of 2000 milesfrom Maine to Or-
leans." He charged the Federalists with aiding Burr and found it
ironic that those who had complained of "the supine inattention of
the administration to a treason stalking through the land in open
day" now protested that it had been crushed before overt acts could
be produced. And he lashed out at the federal courts for "their new
born zeal for the liberty of those whom we would not permit to
overthrow the liberties of their country." 46
When the court convened with the chief justice presiding on
May 22, 1807, a panel of leading citizens of the state had been
summoned for grand jury service, and witnesses and visitors had
crowded into the city from throughout the country. After sixteen
juors were approved, Marshall named John Randolph, the leading
Republican critic of the president, as foreman of the grand jury.
Soon after the jury was impaneled, District Attorney Hay moved
that Burr be committed for treason, which would have denied his
continuing on bail. But Marshall was reluctant to rule on the mo-
tion before the grand jury acted, and he accepted the defense's
offer for increased bail, raising the total to twenty thousand dollars.
Further proceedings were delayed because the government's prin-
cipal witness, General Wilkinson, had not appeared. The court ad-
journed from day to day until he arrived in Richmond on June 13. 47
While the proceedings were at a standstill awaiting the arrival of
Wilkinson, Burr asked the court on June 9 to issue a subpoena
duces tecum to President Jefferson requiring him to appear before
the court and produce the letter that Wilkinson had addressed to
him on October 2 1 and his reply to it, together with the orders that
he had issued to the army and navy for Burr's apprehension. Burr
argued that these papers were material to his defense. After an ac-
rimonious debate between the opposing counsel, Marshall on June
13 ordered that such a subpoena be issued to summon the presi-
dent or such of the secretaries of the departments that may have
the papers. But when the writ was issued, it contained an endorse-
ment signed by Burr specifying that the transmission of the original
letter of General Wilkinson and duly authenticated copies of the
other papers requested would be sufficient observance of the pro-

cess,without the personal attendance of any of the persons named. 48
As soon as Hay had informed the president of Burr's request and
before Marshall had made his ruling, Jefferson volunteered to send
the papers. Writing to Hay on June 12, he said, "Reserving the nec-
essary right of the President of the U.S. 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 readiness under that restriction, voluntarily to furnish
on all occasions, whatever the purposes of justice may require." He
said that he had already turned over all of his papers relating to the
case to the attorney general, and if Rodney had not left them in
Hay's possession, he would immediately instruct him to forward the
papers to Richmond. He indicated that more specific requests
would be needed for papers from the War and Navy departments,
but he made clear to Hay his willingness to provide all material per-
49
tinent to the defense.
By the time Jefferson had received the subpoena, he believed that
he had taken all necessary steps to supply the papers requested, and
he authorized Hay to give his consent to the taking of depositions
in Washington of himself or heads of the departments if the court
requested. As to his personal appearance in Richmond, or that of
his department heads, he indicated that "paramount duties to the
nation at large control the obligation of compliance with their sum-
mons." To agree to appear in Richmond might subsequently com-
pel attendance at trials in Ohio or the Mississippi Territory and
leave the nation without an executive. Jefferson's readiness to give a
deposition in Washington suggests a willingness to testify in court
had the trial been in Washington, but should Marshall require him
to appear in Richmond, he was prepared to exercise the indepen-
dent prerogative of the executive to refuse. Though Marshall did
not actually summon the president, Jefferson resented his argu-
ments that indicated his authority to do so. "Would the executive be
independent of the judiciary, if he were subject to the commands of
the latter, and to imprisonment for disobedience," he asked, "if the
several courts could bandy him from pillar to post, keep him con-
stantly trudging from north to south and east to west, and with-
draw him entirely from his constitutional duties?" Jefferson was
convinced that such judicial compulsion would be contrary to the
intention of the Constitution that each branch should be indepen-
dent of the others. 50
General Wilkinson finally made his appearance before the grand
jury on June 15 and during fours days of testimony made several
damaging admissions but escaped being indicted for misprision of

treason by a vote of 7 to 9. Randolph deplored that "the mammoth
of iniquity escaped" and said that "Wilkinson is the only man that I
ever saw who was from the bark to the very core a villain." Jeffer-
son, on the other hand, wrote to the general that "your enemies
have filled the public ear with slanders" and assured him that "no
one is more sensible than myself of the injustice which has been
aimed at you." 51
After examining some fifty witnesses, the grand jury on June 24
indicted Burr for treason and misdemeanor. He was held for trial
that began on August 3 and dragged on through the remainder of
52
a hot Richmond August. The crucial point in the trial came on
August 20 after the prosecution had presented its testimony re-
garding events on Blennerhassett's Island. Throughout the pro-
ceedings the prosecution had been guided by the opinion of the
Supreme Court ordering the release of Erich Bollman and Samuel
Swartwout, arrested by Wilkinson as Burr's agents and sent to
Washington for trial. In that decision Marshall had written that "if
a body of men be actually assembled, for the purpose of effecting
by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part,
however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and
who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be con-
sidered as traitors. But there must be an actual assembling of men,
for treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war." The indict-
ment of Burr for treason had been based on the assembling of a
force on December 10, 1806, on Blennerhassett's Island in the Ohio
River, where Burr admittedly was not present. The prosecution
sought to prove the treasonable purpose of the assemblage and the
involvement of Burr as the prime mover in procuring the assem-
blage. As the prosecution moved beyond the events on Blenner-
hassett's Island to connect Burr with them, the defense objected to
the presentation of collateral evidence not relating directly to the
overt which the defense claimed had not been demonstrated.
act,
The was then diverted from the taking of testimony to a de-
trial
bate on the defense's motion to arrest the evidence. 53

On August 31 the chief justice read his lengthy decision on the
defense motion and concluded, "No testimony relative to the con-
duct or declarations of the prisoner elsewhere and subsequent to
the transaction on Blennerhassett's island can be admitted; because
such testimony, being in its nature merely corroborative and in-
competent to prove the overt act itself, is irrelevant until there be
proof of the overt act by two witnesses." Marshall's ruling halted the
taking of evidence, and he instructed the jury that they had now
heard the opinion of the court on the law of the case. The next
morning Hay announced that the prosecution had no further ar-
guments to present. The jury then retired for twenty-five minutes
and returned to report that "Aaron Burr is not proved to be guilty
under this indictment by any evidence submitted to us. We there-
fore find him not guilty." When Burr's counsel objected to the
wording of the verdict, Marshall allowed it to stand but ordered
that "not guilty" be entered on the record. On the same day, a frus-
trated George Hay wrote to the president: "The opinion of the
Chief Justice is too voluminous to be generally read, and on the
great question about the overt act of levying war too obscure and
perplexed to be understood. The explanation of the opinion of
the Supreme Court in the Case of Bollman and Swartwout ren-
ders it very difficult to comprehend what was before perfectly
54
intelligible."
Earlier in the summer Jefferson had written to du Pont that
"Burr's conspiracy has been one of the most flagitious of which his-
tory will very furnish an example. . . . Yet altho' there is not a man
in the U.S. who is not satisfied of the depth of his guilt, such are the
jealous provisions of our laws in favor of the accused, and against
the accuser, that I question if he can be convicted." Still, the presi-
dent professed that the whole affair confirmed the innate strength
of the American republic in demonstrating the loyalty of the people
to their government. Once the verdict was in, however, he was not
so generous. "The scenes which have been acted at Richmond are
such as have never before been exhibited in any country where all
regard to public character has not yet been thrown off," he wrote to
Wilkinson. "They are equivalent to a proclamation of impunity to
every traitorous combination which may be formed to destroy the
Union." He predicted that they would produce an amendment to
the Constitution that while "keeping the judges independent of the
55
Executive, will not leave them so, of the nation." Jefferson viewed
Marshall's rulings at the trial as politically motivated. Never care-
fullyweighing Marshall's arguments, he offered no objective opin-
ion of the rigid definition of treason that Marshall applied to the
Constitution — a definition that would make treason trials rare in
American history. More pressing matters occupied the president by
the time Burr's trial ended. The nation had escaped from the in-
trigues of Aaron Burr, but a new crisis of greater proportions had
erupted. The United States and Great Britain again faced each
other in menacing postures that threatened the peace.
—
XX
Closing a Political Career
In the same week that Burr was indicted for treason in Richmond,
the United States frigate Chesapeake was fired upon by the British
ship Leopard off the Virginia capes. Jefferson learned the news on
June 25, 1807, three days after the incident had
flame to the
set
long-smoldering controversy over the British practice of impress-
ment. That issue had been the critical one in the negotiations that
Monroe and Pinkney had begun in London the previous year. Ini-
tially Jefferson had been sufficiently encouraged by the prospects
of their success to ask Congress to suspend the effective date of the

nonimportation act against England, and Congress extended it to
July 1, 1807.
1
But the president's early optimism was unjustified.
When the text of the Monroe-Pinkney treaty reached him on the
eve of the adjournment of the Ninth Congress, Jefferson was so
displeased with it that he did not submit it to the Senate for consid-
eration. Having decided in advance in the cabinet that the treaty
would be unacceptable if it contained no agreement regarding im-
pressment, the president saw no reason to seek the advice of the

Senate after Monroe and Pinkney failed to get the British to yield
on that key issue. 2
With Napoleon at the height of his power, the year 1807 was an
inopportune moment to expect the British to give up a practice
that they regarded as essential to maintaining supremacy on the
seas. To the British, who recognized no right of expatriation, the
ability to impress British subjects into military service was essential
to man the Royal Navy. To Americans the British claim to a right to
decide who were British citizens and to impress them into service
even if found on board American ships on the high seas was an —
intolerable insult to American sovereignty. Neither side was with-
out blame in the intensifying controversy. American citizens were
recklesly impressed into the British navy, while deserters from Brit-
ish ships could easily obtain false papers in American ports and en-
list aboard American ships.
In London, Monroe and Pinkney sensed the depth of the British
struggle with Napoleon, which was not well understood across the
Atlantic, and believed that they had won all the concessions the
British would make. In a separate note accompanying the treaty,
the British promised to take the strictest care to safeguard American
citizens, and the American envoys were hopeful that the United
States would win in practice what the British were not willing to
concede in principle. If the American diplomats in London had a
better understanding of British priorities than their superiors in
Washington, the British minister in Washington, David Erskine
(who had replaced Anthony Merry), likewise had a clearer under-
standing of the American position than his superiors in London.
Reporting to the foreign secretary after a conversation with Madi-
son in February, 1807, Erskine said that "all the parties in this coun-
try take a warm interest on the point of non-impressment of sailors
(claimed as British) out of American ships on the high seas, and . . .
I am persuaded that no cordiality can be expected from this country
whilst it is deemed necessary to His Majesty to enforce that right."

3
That Erskine was correct about American feelings in regard to

impressment was demonstrated after the crippled Chesapeake re-
turned to Hampton Roads with shattered masts, tattered sails, and
its battered hull filling with water. When the story of the attack by
the Leopard was told and it was learned that the unprepared Chesa-
peake had been bombarded into striking its flag and allowing a Brit-
ish boarding party to carry off four sailors, the public outcry was
intense. Whether the sailors taken were deserters from the Royal
—
Navy was not the issue the Chesapeake was a ship of the United
States Navy, leaving its own shores for duty in the Mediterranean.
American honor and sovereignty had been rudely violated. When
three dead and eighteen wounded sailors were carried from the
Chesapeake, emotions ran high in Hampton, where a mob destroyed
two hundred water casks ready for transfer to the British squadron
anchored in Lynnhaven Bay. As the news spread, angry citizens at
public meetings in towns and cities throughout the land expressed
their anger in spirited resolutions. "Such an assemblage of people I
never saw," reported former Congressman Michael Leib in describ-
ing a gathering in Philadelphia, where resolutions were adopted
with unaccustomed unanimity. Everywhere party divisions seemed
to be forgotten. "There is no distinction permitted but between En-
glishman and American," exclaimed a Virginian who participated
CLOSING A POLITICAL CAREER 297
in the adoption of resolutions in Staunton after a meeting "full of

indignation at the outrage." Attorney General Caesar A. Rodney,
waiting for the cabinet to assemble to decide the course of action,
said that the attack on the Chesapeake "has excited the spirit of 76
and the whole country is literally in arms." 4
President Jefferson was calmer than most of his fellow citizens
when he received the unexpected report of the attack. In the ab-
sence of Treasury Secretary Gallatin and Secretary of War Dear-
born, he delayed responding until he could assemble his advisers.
Summoning them to return to Washington immediately, he began
working with Madison on drafting a presidential proclamation to
5
lay before the cabinet as soon as possible. "Whether the outrage is
a proper cause of war," he thought, was for Congress to decide. It
was the administration's duty not to commit the legislature by doing
anything that would have to be retracted. However, the executive
could exercise its powers to prevent future insults in American har-
bors and to claim satisfaction for past acts. "This will leave Congress
free to decide whether war is the most efficacious mode of redress
in our case, or whether, having taught so many other useful lessons
to Europe, we may not add that of showing them that there are
peaceable means of repressing injustice, by making it the interest of
6
the aggressor to do what is just, and abstain from future wrong."
The implication of this private communication to the governor of
Virginia, whose state faced the most serious threat of further Brit-
ish assault, was that the president favored pursuing peaceful means
of obtaining redress. 7
Assembling on July 2, the cabinet approved a presidential proc-
lamation ordering all armed English vessels out of American ports
and decided to send the schooner Revenge to England immediately
with instructions for Monroe to demand satisfaction for the attack.
The American minister was to demand a disavowal of the act and
of the principle of searching public armed vessels, the restoration
of the men taken, and the recall of Vice- Admiral Sir George Berke-
ley, who had issued the orders for the action. Secretary of the Navy
8
Smith, arguing that the British had already begun a de facto war
against the United States, urged that Congress be called into ses-
sion immediately. He got support from Gallatin and continued
to press it upon the president, who was also under pressure from
outside his cabinet to summon the Congress. Meeting four times
within the week, the cabinet rejected an immediate call of Congress
but agreed to an early call for October 26, unless events dictated
more urgent action. Meanwhile the cabinet requested the gover-
nors to have their respective quotas of one hundred thousand mili-

tia in readiness and asked the governor of Virginia to order into
active service such portion of that state's militia as necessary to de-

fend Norfolk and the surrounding area. 9
Jefferson considered these measures sufficient to put the country
in a state of preparedness and allow American merchants time to
call in their ships and seamen before hostilities might begin. While
giving England a chance to redress the wrong before Congress

made the decision for peace or war, he also wanted to keep the war
fever alive in the United States until satisfaction had been obtained.
"Altho' we demand of England what is merely of right, reparation
for the past, security for the future, yet as their pride will possibly,
nay probably, prevent their yielding them to the extent we shall re-
quire, my opinion is, that the public mind, which I believe is made
up for war, should maintain itself at that point. They have often
enough, God knows, given us cause of war before, but it has been
on points which would not have united the nation. But now they
have touched a chord which vibrates in every heart. Now then is the
time to settle the old and the new." I0 Jefferson correctly judged the
popular support for war in July, 1807, but he misjudged the like-
lihood of public feeling maintaining itself at the same bellicose level
for months.
By the end of July, Jefferson was convinced that the British
squadron in the Chesapeake was not going to attack Norfolk or
commit further hostilities other than remaining in American waters
in defiance of his proclamation, until orders arrived from England.
He thus authorized the discharge of the militia that had been called
into service at Norfolk, and after being satisfied that the necessary
measures were under way for the defense of New York and other
vulnerable coastal points, he set out for Monticello on August 1 to
escape the sickly season that he so much feared. The postmaster
general set up a special express mail, and the president spent much
of August and September in correspondence with Secretary of War
Dearborn, who remained in Washington through most of August,
and with other members of his cabinet who had made their escape
from Washington. After issuing a call for Congress to convene on
October 26, he resisted pressures for an earlier date on the ground
that the legislature would be unable to act until an answer was re-
ceived from England. "In the meanwhile," he said, "we are making
"
every preparation which could be made were they in session."
Jefferson's reference to "reparation for the past, security for the
future" and to settling old and new grievances against England
must be understood in relation to the instructions to Monroe pre-

pared by the secretary of state with the president's collaboration
and completed on July 6, 1807. Those instructions went further
than Jefferson indicated in his notes on the cabinet meeting of July
2 and tied the settlement of the Chesapeake crisis to the settlement of
the impressment issue. Besides being instructed to demand dis-
avowal of British actions in the Chesapeake incident, Monroe was ad-
vised that "as a security for the future, an entire abolition of im-
pressments from vessels under the flag of the United States, if not
already arranged, is also to make an indispensable part of the satis-
faction." The Revenge, carrying these instructions to Monroe, did
not sail until mid-July. Meanwhile, learning of the attack before re-
ceiving his orders, Monroe made a premature and ill-advised pro-
test that allowed Foreign Secretary George Canning to take the of-
fensive. Jefferson received Monroe's report on these developments
in late September while still at Monticello. Writing before the Re-
venge had reached England, Monroe enclosed copies of his ex-
change with Canning in which the foreign secretary said that "His
Majesty neither does nor has it at any time maintained the preten-
sion of a right to search ships of war, in the national service of any
12
State, for deserters." While this appeared to offer satisfaction for
the Chesapeake attack, Madison observed to the president that "the
British government renounces the pretension to search ships of
war for deserters; but employs words which may possibly be meant
to qualify the renunciation, or at least to quibble away the proposed
atonement." Monroe pointed to the harsh tone of Canning's letter
and reported a strong party in England composed of shipowners,
the navy, East and West India merchants, and certain powerful
political characters who favored war with the United States. "So
powerful is this combination," Monroe concluded, "that it is most
certain that nothing can be obtained on any point but what may be
extorted by necessity." 13
As Jefferson in the isolation of Monticello reflected on the situa-
tion of the United States in late summer of 1807, he too came to the
conclusion that Britain was not likely to meet American demands.
Resigning himself to the probability of war, he began to speculate
on how such a war might be used to gain his goal of acquiring the
Floridas. He suggested to Madison that the United States might de-
mand the payment of spoliation claims from Spain and seize the
Floridas if they were not paid. "I had rather have war against Spain
than not, if we go to war against England," he told the secretary of
state. "Our southern defensive force can take the Floridas, volun-
teers for aMexican army will flock to our standard, and a rich
pabulum will be offered to our privateers in the plunder of their
commerce and coasts. Probably Cuba would add itself to our con-
federation." This was hardly the language of a pacifist. And as he
reflected on public sentiment, which he felt had never been more
excited since the battle of Lexington, his anti-British feelings rose.
"I never expected to be under the necessity of wishing success to
Buonaparte," he wrote privately. "But the English being equally ty-
rannical at sea as he is on land, and that tyranny bearing on us in
every point of either honor or interest, I say 'down with England'
and as what Buonaparte is then to do to us, let us trust to the chap-
ter of accidents. I cannot, with Anglomen, prefer a certain present
14
evil to a future hypothetical one."
With such speculations running through mind
he walked
his as
the grounds at Monticello, he received Monroe's unpromising
first
report from London and the more discouraging news from Halifax
that court martial proceedings had been held against the four al-
leged deserters removed from the Chesapeake and that one of them,
Jenkin Ratford, had been hanged. Though even Madison acknowl-
edged that Ratford was probably a British subject, both the presi-
dent and the secretary of state regarded the British action as insult-
ing, and it rendered impossible one of the unnegotiable American
15
demands for satisfaction.
The response increased the pessimism of the presi-
initial British
dent and of state as they returned to the capital in Oc-

his secretary
tober to find a letter from David Humphreys, a former diplomat
recently returned from London, who gave his opinion of the En-
glish state of mind as being determined "to maintain the naval su-
premacy or perish as a nation." He believed the British would sat-
isfy American demands to refrain from searching ships of war, but
he saw no hope that they would consent to the American insistence
16
that the American flag protected merchant ships from searches.
That was precisely what Jefferson and Madison were demanding.
Whether because of discouraging reports, his own rising Anglo-
phobia, or his belief that a war spirit must be maintained in the
United States until Britain gave satisfaction, Jefferson's draft of his
annual message for the opening of Congress was far more bellig-
erent in tone than anything that he had said publicly since the crisis
began. When Gallatin read it, he said that it seemed to be "rather in
the shape of a manifesto issued against Great Britain on the eve of
a war, than such as the existing undecided state of affairs seems to
require." In a similar vein, Navy Secretary Smith told the president,
*
with hem . at half afar thtee>
or at whatever later hour the ftoa<s6 7>iau %ue.
tMj^&Pjp <î£.f^/£rO~*2
J he favour of an altdwer i<s aakeo*
Invitation to dinner at the President's House. Jefferson's invitation to

Representative Ebenezer Mattoon of Massachusetts, February 1, 1802.
Broadsides Collection, Rare Book Division, Library of Congress
NOTES
STATE of VIRGINIA.
Appendix.
By THOMAS JEFFERSON.
SIXTH AMERICAN KDIT10!f.
MW
Title page and frontispiece of the 1802 edition of Jefferson's Notes on the
State of Virginia
Courtesy Virginia State Library, Richmond
Profile of Jefferson by Charles-Balthazar-Julien Fevret de Saint-Memin.
Drawn from life using a physiognotrace, Washington, 1804.
Courtesy Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, Massachusetts
Engraving of Jefferson by David Edwin, 1809. From a drawing by William

Russell Birch of the medallion profile of Jefferson painted by Gilbert
Stuart in 1805. Jefferson himself said that this profile was the best that
had ever been taken of him.
Courtesy Manuscripts Department, University of Virginia Library
Engraving by Saint-Memin of his drawing of Jefferson taken in 1804
(opposite page). Saint-Memin offered this small print for sale to the
public on the eve of Jefferson's second inaugural.
Courtesy Rare Book Room, Princeton University Library
Jefferson as president. Painted by Gilbert Stuart for James Madison from
a sitting in 1805. Madison had the portrait in his possession by 1806.
Courtesy Colonial Williamsburg Faandation
//
M
Jefferson's drawings for the Rotunda of the University of Virginia, from
about 1821
Thomas Jefferson Papers, University of Virginia Library
* ,
Jefferson's study for Pavilion VII, University of Virginia, drawn in 1817

Thomas Jefferson Papers, University of Virginia Library
r • g
s-s *
.S S
2
5 ^^
="> .£
CO ^ |
^8-2
ri«
> " 5
1-1
C#vML fn*^cia*uji j[**JLa*tuA *>^£»Y4Jbi **, t&mu
C-*€usm~±„ trr%„lAvL*A^ &^Pm*%& , ItufykX £*- C*^*«*J£» t**^ l&*AM***dL
9u± — s
Jefferson's design and inscription for his tombstone

Thomas Jefferson Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress
Jefferson at age seventy-eight. Painted from life by Thomas Sully, 182
Courtesy American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia
"As peace is our favorite object, as it is not intended to excite Con-

gress to a declaration of war ... I could wish the Message had less
17
of the air of a Manifesto against the British government." Even
Secretary of War Dearborn, who was always the most reserved
member of the cabinet in proposing alterations in the president's
annual messages, thought the message contained some expressions
stronger than necessary, indicating the intention of offensive opera-
tions. Gallatin, who regularly provided the most detailed critiques
of the drafts of Jefferson's messages, told the president that he be-
lieved that Great Britain would go to war with the United States
rather than meet American demands, and he thought it important
to maintain the support of world and national opinion by not rush-

ing into war before England had a chance to give satisfaction for
the outrage on the Chesapeake.™
No notes by Madison on this message have been found, but it
may be assumed that Jefferson and the secretary of state collabo-
rated on the draft before it was circulated among the other mem-
bers of the cabinet, for Madison was always the first officer to re-
view the drafts of the president's messages. If this was the case, the
chief foreign-policy makers were out of step with the rest of the
cabinet and the country. Jefferson clearly sensed this and modified
the tone and content of his message. Gallatin, who took the major
credit for the alterations, confided to his wife that "the President's
speech was originally more warlike than was necessary, but I suc-
ceeded in getting it neutralized; this between us; but it was lucky;
for Congress is certainly peaceably disposed." 19
who had tried to restrain war fever in July, returned
If Jefferson,
to Washington convinced that war was the only course for the na-
tion, he now found that the mood of the country had changed and
that he must adjust his policies to the new conditions. Shortly after
reaching Washington in October, he wrote Thomas Paine that "all
the little circumstances coming to our knowledge are unfavorable
to our wishes for peace." Reflecting on the withdrawal of Russia
and Prussia from the war against Napoleon, he offered his opinion
that the United States might "never again have so favorable a con-
junction of circumstances" to settle the issue of impressment. But
before a month had passed, Jefferson wrote several correspondents
that "we are all pacifically inclined here, if anything comes from
thence which will permit us to follow our inclinations." 20
At the end of November, while the president was still awaiting
the return of the Revenge from England, Erskine received dis-
patches from London reporting Canning's response to Monroe's
demands, and he showed Jefferson and Madison copies of the

letters exchanged. Jefferson judged Canning's response to be "un-
friendly, proud, and harsh" and felt that it offered little more than
a disavowal of having ordered the attack on the Chesapeake. A piece
published in the National Intelligencer that could have come only
from the administration declared, "The letter is in a style more
haughty than conciliatory, and calculated rather to increase than
lessen the sentiment of indignation so generally excited by the un-
principled conduct of Great Britain towards neutrals generally,
and particularly towards the United States." A few days later Jeffer-
son received a duplicate set of the dispatches from Monroe, the
which were aboard the Revenge, and he sent them to be
originals of
read behind closed doors in both houses of Congress. 21 These
papers, which did not include the instructions to Monroe that
would be withheld from Congress for several more months, showed
that the negotiations in London had broken down and that the
clever Canning had managed to transfer them to America. Can-
ning, in replying to Monroe's demands for satisfaction, had admit-
ted that British naval officers had committed an unauthorized hos-
tile act and that the United States was entitled to reparation. But
claiming that the United States also was guilty of hostile acts, he ar-
gued that these must be considered before the reparation could be
determined. He specifically named the president's proclamation as
one such act and implied that the enlistment of British deserters
was another. While indicating his willingness to give further con-
sideration to matters relating to the Chesapeake incident, he denied
that impressment was one of them. Because Monroe had been in-
structed not to separate the two issues, their negotiations were thus
terminated. But seizing upon Monroe's suggestion — made as in-
structed — that a special envoy carry the British apology and repa-
ration to America, Canning announced that a special envoy would
be sent to enter into negotiations relating to the Chesapeake} 2 The
administration's effort to tie the impressment issue with the Chesa-
peake affair had failed and with it the effort to obtain prompt satis-
faction for the outrage.

Jefferson told his son-in-law Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., after
learning of the failure of Monroe's negotiations, that Congress
would have to decide between "War, Embargo or Nothing," but he
gave Congress no guidance when he submitted the dispatches from
Monroe on December 8. By closing his brief message of transmittal
with a reference to continuing negotiations, the president left the
legislators with the impression that there was no urgent need for
CLOSING A POLITICAL CAREER 3 1 1
23
action. But ten days later the president came back to Congress
with additional communications that showed, he said, "the great
and increasing dangers with which our vessels, our seamen, and
merchandise, are threatened on the high seas and elsewhere, from
the belligerent powers of Europe." He now proposed action by rec-
ommending an embargo on the departure of all American vessels
from the ports of the United States. 24
The change in administration policy can be explained by several
major developments that swallowed up the Chesapeake issue in the
broader question of neutral trade. Suddenly, as the documents
Jefferson sent to Congress showed, American commerce was faced
with new threats from both England and France. On October 16,
1807, King George III issued a proclamation requiring all British
naval officers to enforce impressment rigorously over neutral mer-
chant vessels. Along with a copy of this proclamation, the president
supplied Congress with documents providing evidence that Napo-
leon's Berlin decree of November, 1806, proclaiming a blockade
of Great Britain, was now being applied to vessels of the United
States. By this time he had also heard of the British response to
French actions: the new orders-in-council of November 11, 1807,
prohibiting trade with all continental ports from which the British
flag was excluded and declaring that all vessels bound for open
ports on the Continent must pass through British ports, pay taxes,
and secure clearance. Jefferson did not include these orders with
his message of December 18, but the news of them had been re-
ported in the Philadelphia Aurora on December 17, and all evi-
dence indicates that he knew of this latest British action at the time
of the cabinet deliberations on December 17. 25
Unfortunately, no notes such as Jefferson kept on many cabinet
meetings at critical moments survive to record the deliberations
that preceded the recommendation of the embargo to Congress.
The few extant papers show that the subject had been under dis-
cussion for several weeks in connection with the twice-postponed
nonimportation act of 1806, which became effective on December
14, 1807, but the final decision for an embargo was hastily made on
December 17. All the cabinet was present and unanimously con-
curred in the recommendation to Congress. 26 Gallatin soon had
second thoughts, however, and sent the president a memorandum
the first thing the next morning recommending changes before the
proposal was sent to Congress. "An embargo for a limited time will
at this moment be preferable in itself, and less objectionable in
Congress," he told the president. "In every point of view, priva-
tions, sufferings, revenue, effect on the enemy, politics at home,

etc., Iprefer war to a permanent embargo." He went on to argue
that "government prohibitions do always more mischief than had
been calculated" and concluded that "the measure being a doubtful
policy, and hastily adopted on the first view of our foreign intelli-
gence, I think we had better recommend it with modifications." Im-
mediately upon receiving Gallatin's note, Jefferson called him to his
could discuss his message before it left his hands. 27
office so that they
But no change was made in the recommendation to Congress,
which had been drafted by Madison as a substitute for a less specific
28
text prepared by Jefferson.
Madison's drafting of the message, brief though it was, and Gal-
latin's questioning the decision after the cabinet had acted suggest
that the president had not provided the cabinet with the clear sense
of direction he normally gave and that Madison, who pushed for
immediate action, was the embargo's strongest advocate. This is not
surprising. Since his days in Congress, Madison had been a strong
proponent of commercial retaliation. Jefferson, too, had favored
such tactics, and at the beginning of the Chesapeake crisis he seemed
inclined toward some type of peaceful coercion rather than war.
But the early draft of his message for the opening of Congress
pointed more toward war than economic retaliation. There is noth-
ing in the record to suggest that Jefferson seized the opportunity to
try an experiment in economic coercion. Indeed, he appears to
have regarded the embargo, at least at the outset, as more precau-
tionary than coercive. 29 Nothing in Jefferson's public or private
papers indicates that he initially expected the embargo to coerce
England into meeting American demands.
Just what Congress expected the embargo to accomplish is not
much clearer than the administration's aims, but both houses acted
with unaccustomed alacrity. Senator John Quincy Adams recorded
that Senator Samuel Smith, who headed the committee on the
president's address, said that the president wanted the measure to
aid in the negotiations with George Rose, the British envoy being
sent over for the Chesapeake talks. Smith also suggested that it might
lead to the repeal of the nonimportation act. Adams suspected
there were other reasons not revealed by Smith, but he supported
the measure as did the entire committee. On the same day that the
president's message was read, the Senate suspended its rules and
passed a billfor a general embargo by a vote of 22 to 6. Senator
Samuel L. Mitchill, who voted with the majority, said that "in a
—
choice of evils an Embargo was the least." 30 Three days later the
House passed the measure by a vote of 82 to 44. When he signed
the bill the next day, Jefferson observed that half of the opposition
vote came from the Federalists, one-fourth from the dissident Ran-
dolph Republicans ("the little band," he called them), and the other
fourth from Republicans "happening to take up mistaken views of
the subject." The president was too quick in discounting opposi-
31
tion to the embargo, and such early doubts about the wisdom of the
measure would grow to haunt him in the months ahead.
Initially some members of Congress held high hopes for the
success of the embargo. Congressman George W. Campbell told
his Tennessee constituents that though it would be felt severely
by Americans, it would work greater hardships on England and
France. "We may complain because we cannot sell for a good price
our surplus provisions and other productions; they will suffer be-
cause they cannot procure a sufficient quantity of those articles to
subsist upon to support life." He predicted that the United States
would win recognition of its rights if the American people showed

32
their determination to support the embargo policy. In a similar
vein Joseph Desha wrote his Kentucky constituents that the em-
bargo "will not only have the effect of securing our resources but of
coercing our enemies to change that nefarious policy, which has
driven our commerce from the seas." But from the outset of the
embargo a Federalist minority protested that it would only help
Napoleon. 33
The over neutral rights came at an unfortunate time in the
crisis
cycle of —
American politics the eve of a presidential election. Be-
ginning in November, 1806, a wave of Republican party meetings
throughout the country began passing resolutions and sending ad-
dresses to the president pleading that he not retire from office at
the end of his second term. 34 State legislatures joined in the pleas,
and in time nine states and one territory urged the president to serve
four more years. 35 Although the appeals began before Jefferson
issued his proclamation against the Burr conspiracy, they acceler-
ated in the months immediately following. As the crisis with En-
gland intensified, new calls rose for him to remain in office. Divi-
sions in Republican ranks more than national crises provided the
initial inspiration for the petitions, but the appeals took on in-
creased momentum and broader support as threats to the Union
and to peace unfolded. Thomas Leiper, a leading Pennsylvania Re-
publican, wrote Jefferson during the Chesapeake crisis: "As matters
and things now stand you cannot by any means refuse serving
again as President. The voice of the people were never so
. . .
strong in your favour as at present." 36

Not until December, 1807, when new movements were develop-
ing to pressure him to seek a third term, did Jefferson publicly
reply to the addresses that had reached him during the preceding
year. Hethen limited his replies to those from state legislatures,
writing to each that he considered it as much his duty to lay down
his charge at a proper time as to have borne it faithfully. If neither
the Constitution nor practice fixed the term of the presidency, he
feared the office would become one for life. "I should unwillingly
be the person who, disregarding the sound precedent set by an il-
lustrious predecessor, should furnish the first example of prolon-
gation beyond the second term of office." Applauding the presi-
dent's statement, editor Thomas Ritchie wrote in the Richmond
Enquirer that had Jefferson consented to serve because of the emer-
gency, a "less virtuous and more ambitious" successor might find it
easy "to seize upon any lowering speck in the distant horizon, per-
haps to conjure up an imaginary danger, that he might shield his
ambition under a similar excuse. Mr. Jefferson's retirement wrests
this plausible pretext from the hands of his successors. They will
see from his example, that no crisis, however fruitful in danger or
57
in war can justify the prolongation of their term of office."
In taking himself irrevocably out of the contest, Jefferson re-
moved the last restraints on the competition that was already well
under way to succeed him. While Congress marked time waiting
for the news from England in November, 1807, Madison was busy
giving dinners and, in Senator Mitchill's view, making "generous
displays" to the members. With an attractive wife to support his
pretensions, Madison, in Mitchill's judgment, was well ahead of
Vice-President Clinton in pursuit of the caucus nomination. 38 Busy
promoting Monroe, then on his way home from England, was John
Randolph, who was meeting with some success in gathering sup-
port for his candidate in Virginia. In describing the maneuvering
for the presidency, Mitchill observed that Jefferson was already be-
—
ginning to move his belongings to Virginia an observation that
may help to explain Jefferson's hesitant leadership in putting for-
ward the embargo.
The embargo began with substantial public support, and the ever
optimistic president even hoped that if the United States bought
more time, events in Europe might still rescue the nation from its
dilemma. Assuming as usual that time was on the side of the United
States, he thought the wisest policy was for the United States to iso-
late itself from "the present paroxysm of the insanity of Europe." 39
If he hoped that the embargo would aid Madison in his negotiations
with George Rose, he was disappointed. By the end of February,
1808, those negotiations had broken down without accomplishing
anything. Continuing to regard the embargo as a temporary policy,
Jefferson told Madison in March that he took the universal opinion
to be that "war will become preferable to continuance of the em-
bargo after a certain time." He thought that Congress at its next
session would have to decide between the embargo and war. Mean-
while, he proposed that both Britain and France be asked to lift all
their decrees and orders as applied to neutrals and be given to
understand that if one did and the other did not, the United States
would declare war on the refuser. By June, Jefferson was saying
that if the embargo was abandoned before the repeal of the orders-
in-council, "we must abandon it only for a state of war. The day is
not distant, when that will be preferable to a longer continuance of
the embargo." 40
The problem of the embargo dominated Jefferson's last year in
office like no other issue of his presidency. While it is not necessary
to follow Jefferson month by month through this travail, it is im-
portant to recognize its effects on the president and his leadership.
The embargo increasingly claimed his attention in matters of ad-
ministration and enforcement and him
adopt policies of gov-
led to
ernment control inconsistent with philosophy of govern-
his basic
ment. Yet, surprisingly, Jefferson never presented the case for the
embargo either to the Congress or to the American people. As he
became more and more committed to the policy, it became less a
measure of precaution and more a system of coercion. Problems of
enforcing the hastily drawn embargo act became obvious almost
immediately, and Congress responded to the administration's re-
quests to strengthen its enforcement by giving the president un-
precedented powers to exercise control over the economic affairs

of individual Americans. Dumas Malone saw Jefferson as "so ob-
sessed with the immediate problem of making the embargo work as
to be unmindful of republican theory and also of certain basic facts
of human nature." 41
As difficulties in enforcing the embargo mounted, Gallatin, whose
department bore the principal responsibility of implementing the
act, wrote the president from New York at the end of July that if the
embargo was to be continued, more stringent enforcement would
be required. He recommended that not a single vessel be permitted
to move without special permission of the executive and that collec-

tors be empowered to seize property and prevent the departure of
vessels without being liable to personal suits. "I am sensible that
such arbitrary powers are equally dangerous and odious," Gallatin
wrote. "But a restrictive measure of the nature of the embargo ap-
plied to a nation under such circumstances as the United States
cannot be enforced without the assistance of means as strong as the
measure itself." His conclusion was that "Congress must either in-
vest the Executive with the most arbitrary powers and sufficient
force to carry the embargo into effect, or give it up altogether." 42
Though Jefferson did not specifically endorse the treasury secre-
tary's proposals, he supported the main thrust of Gallatin's argu-
ment. "This embargo law is certainly the most embarrassing one we
have ever had to execute," he replied from Monticello. "I did not
expect a crop of so sudden and rank growth of fraud and open op-
position by force could have grown up in the U.S. I am satisfied
with you that if orders and decrees are not repealed, and a contin-
uance of the embargo is preferred to war (which sentiment is uni-
versal here) Congress must legalize all means which may be neces-
sary to obtain it's end." a
Still, up hope that the embargo would
Jefferson did not give
produce and eagerly seized upon a report from Pinkney in
results
London of a pending conference with Canning as a hopeful sign.
In fact, he went so far as to alert the war and navy secretaries to
keep an eye of the Floridas in stationing
to the possible invasion
troops and vessels, explaining, "Should England make up with us,
while Bonaparte continues at war with Spain, a moment may occur
when we may without danger of commitment with either France or
England seize to our own limits of Louisiana as of right, and the
residue of the Floridas as reprisal for spoliations." 44 This was wish-
ful thinking inspired by his Florida obsession, not a likely develop-
ment. Instead of favorable dispatches from London, Jefferson
found himself inundated with petitions from his fellow citizens
seeking repeal of the embargo. In a two-week period in late August
and early September, he replied to petitions from thirty-eight
towns and sent off instructions to Samuel Harrison Smith in Wash-
ington to prepare printed form letters so that he could keep up
with the task of replying. 45 As counterpetitions also began to arrive,
he had another form printed to respond to them. By December,
the president would record the receipt of 199 petitions against the
embargo and 46 counterpetitions."
When Jefferson sent his eighth and last annual message to Con-
gress on November 8, 1808, he reviewed the lack of success in get-
ting the belligerent powers of Europe modify or withdraw their

to
orders and decrees. In searching for something favorable to say
about the embargo, he pointed out that it had saved American
seamen and property from loss and given the United States time to
prepare its defenses, but he declined to express any opinion on the
continuance of the controversial measure, indicating that it rested
47
with the wisdom of Congress to decide what course to follow.
Although not all presidential electors had been chosen by the
time Jefferson sent his message to Congress, the unofficial returns
tallied by Republican congressmen returning to Washington showed
that Madison would be the next president of the United States.
Madison had been Jefferson's choice as his successor, but the presi-
dent had carefully refrained from participating in the campaign.
While Madison received the nomination of the Republican con-
gressional caucus, some supporters of both George Clinton and
James Monroe refused to give up their candidates. Without Jeffer-
son heading the Republican ticket and with the embargo as a di-
visive issue, Republican party unity was severely tested, but in the
end Madison won a respectable victory with 122 electoral votes to
48
47 for Federalist Charles C. Pinckney and 6 for George Clinton.
This was not as impressive as Jefferson's trouncing of Pinckney, 162
to 14, in 1804, but it enabled Jefferson to leave the presidency with
the Republican party still in control of the government and his clos-
est political collaborator as president.
With the presidential from Jefferson to his secre-
office passing
power should hardly have been ex-
tary of state, the transition of
pected to cause problems. Even though the nation was divided over
the embargo and uncertain as to its future course, the longtime co-
operation of Jefferson and Madison might be expected to continue
to provide the leadership that had characterized Jefferson's admin-
istration.This was not the case. Before Congress assembled, Jeffer-
son had determined that he would not recommend to Congress the
choice between the embargo, war, or submission, which he said
were the only alternatives. "On this occasion, I think it is fair to
leave to those who are to act on them, the decisions they prefer,
being to be myself but a spectator," he explained. "I should not feel
justified in directing measures which those who are to execute
them would disapprove." This left Congress in confusion. "The
President gives no opinion as to the measures that ought to be
adopted," Nathaniel Macon protested. "It is not known whether he
be for war or peace." The cabinet also was rudderless and appealed
to the president to give Congress direction. "Both Mr. Madison and
myself concur in opinion," Gallatin wrote the president, "that, con-
sidering the temper of the Legislature, or rather of its members, it
would be out to them some precise and distinct

eligible to point
course." Gallatin confessed that they might not all agree on that
course and that he himself was still undecided between enforcing
the embargo and war. "But I think that we must (or rather you
must) decide the question absolutely, so that we may point out a de-
49
cisive course either way to our friends."
Jefferson, however, continued to resist making the decision. "I
think it fair that my successor should now originate those measures
which he will be charged with the execution and responsibility, and
that it is my duty to clothe them with the forms of authority," he
told Monroe in late January, 1809, by which time Congress had
passed an embargo enforcement act but was already considering a
change of course. 50 A few days later the House took the first steps
toward repealing the embargo, which act Jefferson would sign be-
fore leaving office.
Jefferson's abdication of leadership during his last months as
president can be explained in part by his resentment of President
Adams, who at the end of his presidency filled offices and signed
bills that would inhibit his successor. Jefferson himself in Decem-
ber, 1808, ceased filling any vacancies that could be put off until
51
March 4. But this was inadequate justification for his premature
retirement from leadership in a government that was to remain
under the control of many of the same people and the same politi-
cal party, and it detracts from the record of his presidency. But it
cannot deny to Jefferson the credit for providing strong executive
leadership for Congress and the nation during most of his years in
office. Addressing his constituents in Tennessee on the eve of Jeffer-
son's retirement, Congressman John Rhea must have expressed the
sentiments of many of the president's admirers.
On the third day of next March the administration of Thomas

Jefferson, president of the United States, after a duration of eight
years, will terminate. During that term of time the United States (cer-
occurrences arising from exterior relations notwith-
tain disagreeable
standing) have been in possession of national happiness and pros-
perity, unexampled in the annals of nations. In that term of time,
more than in any of the same duration, it hath been manifested that a
government can be administered agreeably to, and consistent with the
principles of moral rectitude. In that term of time, if there had been
no hindrance arising from relations of the United States with foreign
powers, and from the conduct of foreign powers, (particularly Great
Britain) a fair experiment, so long desired, might have been made,
how near to perfection a government founded on reason could be
made to approximate. To make the people of the United States re-

spectable, happy, great and independent as possible, was the object of
52
the administration of Mr. Jefferson.
As Jefferson's political career came to an end, he could take pride

that there were those like John Rhea who understood his commit-
ment to "a government founded on reason." The pursuit of reason
that had guided his life did not always provide answers to every spe-
cific problem, but on fundamental questions it served him well, and
he would leave government with his faith in reason undiminished.
Ever since publicly announcing his determination to retire at the

end of his second term, Jefferson had been looking forward to that
day. Over a year before he would finish his term, he confided to
Monroe, "My longings for retirement are so strong, that I with
difficulty encounter the daily drudgeries of my duty." As the final
day approached, he repeatedly expressed his growing feeling of re-
lief. "Five weeks more will relieve me from a drudgery to which I
am no longer equal, and restore me to a scene of tranquillity, amidst

my family and friends, more congenial to my age and natural in-
clinations." Finally, on next to his last full day in office, he could
write: "Within a few days I retire to my family, my books and
farms. . .Never did a prisoner, released from his chains, feel such
.
53
relief as I shall on shaking off the shackles of power." The agony
of the embargo increased Jefferson's discontent during his final
year in office, and the pull of Monticello, which had always been
great, was never stronger.
On March 4, 1809, Jefferson rode up Pennsylvania Avenue with
his grandson Thomas Jefferson Randolph to the Capitol to witness
the inauguration of his successor. Sitting beside Madison on the dais
of the newly completed hall of the House of Representatives, he
looked out over a crowded audience in which, Mrs. Samuel Harrison
Smith observed, "the high and low were promiscuously blended on
the floor and in the galleries." Frances Few, the nineteen-year-old
niece of Mrs. Albert Gallatin, visiting from New York, said it was
the most numerous assembly she had ever seen and noted that
"Mr. Jefferson appeared one of the most happy among this con-
course of people." 54
As he watched Chief Justice Marshall administer the oath of
office to his successor, the retiring president must have thought
back to his own first inaugural and reflected on the events and the
changes that had since transpired. He could feel satisfied that he
had been largely successful in carrying out the promises of his in-
augural address in giving a new direction to domestic affairs and

putting the Republic on a more republican tack, but he could only
regret that he had not ensured "peace, commerce, and honest
friendship with all nations." He could lift his head with pride if he
thought of his young aide Meriwether Lewis, who had carried his
first annual message to the Congress and had gone on to lead the
most remarkable and successful expedition in the history of North

America, exploring the Missouri River to its distant source, cross-
ing the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific, and retraversing the conti-
nent to St. Louis. In retirement the intellectually curious president
would have time to assimilate the vast amount of geographical, sci-
entific, and other information that Lewis and Clark had brought
back. He had learned of their arrival in St. Louis in late October,
1806, a month after they reached the banks of the Mississippi. But
before Lewis reached Washington in late December, Jefferson was
so distracted by the unfolding Burr conspiracy that he could not
fully revel in the triumph. Now he could anticipate a more careful
study of their findings, as he carried back to Monticello some of the
specimens they had brought him. If thoughts of Lewis and Clark
flashed through his mind with visions of the vast expanse of land
that they had revealed, he could rest confident that the sparsely
settled nation of seven million would have room for expansion for
generations that stretched far beyond his ability to imagine. The
Louisiana Purchase had assured the continuance of the "empire
for liberty."
The retiring president'scountenance must have fallen if he re-
flected on how the events Europe, which had worked to such ad-
in
vantage for his country during his first years in office, had had the
opposite effect during his second term. How rewarding it would
have been to be leaving office having demonstrated that patience
and economic coercion might be successfully substituted for war.
He must have had second thoughts about how far his administra-
tion had gone in enforcing the embargo and pondered the un-
happy ending the embargo's failure had given to his long public ca-
reer. If he reflected on things not done, he must have regretted
that the foreign difficulties of the past two years had prevented him
from ending his presidential term by implementing the forward-
looking program that he had outlined in his annual message of
—
1806 a message soon overshadowed by the uncertainties of the
Burr conspiracy. In the message of 1806 he had pointed to the re-
duction of the national debt and a growing surplus of revenues and
encouraged Congress to consider how future revenues (all from
custom duties) might be employed. He suggested their application,
CLOSING A POLITICAL CAREER 32 1
after the appropriate constitutional amendment, "to the great pur-

poses of the public education, roads, rivers, canals, and such other
objects of public improvement as it may be thought proper to add
to the constitutionalenumeration of federal powers." 55 But that
prospect had been shattered by "the insanity of Europe," and he
was leaving office still unsure whether there would be peace
or war.
If he thought about the crowds along Pennsylvania Avenue that
he had seen on his ride to the Capitol, he may not have estimated
them as "thousands and thousands of people," as did Mrs. Smith,
but he could not but have been pleased with the steady growth of
the new city and could now be satisfied that it would remain the
capital of the Republic. Indeed, earlier that day in drafting a reply
to an address from the citizens of Washington —
one of the many
messages of appreciation he received upon his retirement he had —
used the term "national metropolis." And in words that harkened
back to his address to his Albemarle neighbors nearly two decades
earlier upon leaving to join the new government under the Consti-
tution, Jefferson reminded his Washington neighbors of the des-
tiny of "this solitary republic of the world, the only monument of
human rights, and the sole depository of the sacred fire of freedom
and self-government, from hence it is to be lighted up in other re-
gions of the earth, if other regions of the earth shall ever become
susceptible of its benign influence." 56
After the inauguration, the retiring president wasamong the
largenumber of well-wishers who went to call at the Madisons'
home. Then he returned to the President's House to accept fare-
wells. In the evening he attended Madison's inaugural where ball,
Mrs. Smith, whose heart sank at the thought that Jefferson was
leaving Washington, described him as being in high spirits and
beaming with joy. But it was a joy dampened by the regret, as he
had recently told the General Assembly of Virginia, that he had not
57
left the nation assured of continued peace. Ending a political ca-
reer that had spanned forty years, Jefferson mused: "Nature in-
tended me for the tranquil pursuits of science, by rendering them
my supreme delight. But the enormities of the times in which I
have lived have forced me to take a part in resisting them, and to
commit myself on the boisterous ocean of political passions." 58 Now
that tempestuous voyage was over, and he would happily return to
his Virginia mountaintop, never again to leave his native state and
never to venture far from his beloved Monticello.
—'
XXI
The Sage of Monticello
Jefferson's Albemarle County neighbors wanted to meet the ex-

president on the road home and him into Charlottesville
escort
"Not only the militia companies but the body of the people," his
daughter Martha informed him. "They wish it as the last oppor-
tunity they can have of giving you a public testimony of their respect
and affection." Having never liked ceremonies or military escorts,
Jefferson declined the tribute, explaining that the task of gathering
his papers and belongings and vacating the President's House made
it fix the date of his return. "It is a sufficient happiness
impossible to
to me to know that my fellow citizens of the county generally enter-
tain for me the kind sentiments which have prompted this proposi-
tion, without giving to so many the trouble of leaving their homes
to meet a single individual. ... I can say with truth that my return
to them will make me happier than I have been since I left them."
While clearing up his paper work and packing his belongings,
Jefferson paid his bills, settled his accounts, sold a carriage, and on
his last day in Washington deposited in the Bank of the United
States a warrant for $1,148, the balance due him on his account
while minister to France, from which he had returned twenty years
earlier. After sending ahead wagons loaded with his possessions, he
left Washington on March 1 1 and arrived at Monticello on March
15, after a very fatiguing journey. Finding the roads excessively
bad — —
though he said he had seen them worse he rode the last
three days on horseback and "travelled eight hours through as
disagreeable a snow storm as I was ever in." But his rapid recovery
from the fatigue of the trip renewed his confidence in the state of
his health. A few months earlier, when he had been confined in-
2
doors for six weeks because of an abscessed tooth and burdened by

the pressures of office, the sixty-five-year-old president had been
concerned about his vigor. He saw a decline in his power of walking
THE SAGE OF MONTICELLO 323
and thought his so faithful as it used to be." Now,

"memory not
after suffering no ill from his travel he felt "more confi-
effects
dence in my vis vitae than I had before entertained." 3
Jefferson expected his farms, gardens, and orchards to constitute
his principal occupation in his retirement. Before leaving Washing-
ton, he had ordered Hope's Philadelphia Price-Current, and in the
first letter he wrote to Madison after reaching Monticello, he talked
about the late-spring damage to his wheat and the price of flour in
Richmond before he mentioned public affairs. 4 It was not his inter-
est in agricultureand horticulture alone that inspired his attention
to his lands; it his need of money. He told one correspon-
was also
dent that he had added nothing to his private fortune during his
public service and was leaving office "with hands as clean as they
are empty." To his daughter he confided that he had contracted
debts of ten thousand dollars while president and hoped to sell off
detached tracts of land to pay them off and then live within the in-
come of his Albemarle possessions. He confessed that this would
require close management, but he wanted to reserve the income
from his lands in Bedford County to assist his grandchildren as
they grew up and needed to establish themselves. "My own per-
sonal wants will be almost nothing beyond those of a chum of the
family," he told Martha, who was planning to resume management
of his household at Monticello. While agreeing with her father
on the necessity of retrenchment, Martha insisted that his needs
should come before those of the children, who were young and
healthy. "I can bear any thing but the idea of seeing you harrassed
in your old age by debts or deprived of those comforts which long
habit has rendered necessary to you," the devoted daughter wrote
her father. "The possession of millions would not compensate for
one year's sadness and discomfort to you." 5
Ever since Martha and her husband, Thomas Mann Randolph,
Jr., had built their home at Edgehill, only a few miles east of Mon-
ticello on the north side of the Rivanna River, Martha had moved
easily back and forth between Edgehill and Monticello, always try-
ing to be at Monticello when her father was home for visits. She was
there with her children when her father returned from Washing-
ton to stay and immediately took over the direction of his house-
hold. Her husband apparently followed, while still maintaining
Edgehill and managing his farm there. As long as her father lived,
Martha remained at Monticello with a growing family of children
and grandchildren, while Randolph came and went, drawn away
by war and politics and by his own moods of resentment and de-
pression. Randolph served briefly as a colonel on the Canadian

front during the War of 1812 and was governor of Virginia from
1819 to i822. 6 Toa large extent he abdicated the responsibilities of
providing a fatherly presence in his children's lives, a vacuum that
their grandfather readily filled.
When Martha took up residence at Monticello in March, 1809,
she had eight children, ranging in ages from eight months to eigh-
teen years. The oldest child, Anne Cary, had married Charles
Bankhead six months earlier, and Martha's oldest son, Thomas
Jefferson Randolph, was studying in Philadelphia under arrange-
ments made by his grandfather. The sixty-six-year-old former
president, who had talked about retiring to the tranquillity of Mon-
ticello,found himself surrounded by six children under the age of
7
thirteen. But he delighted in his situation and wrote proudly to
John Adams in 1812, "I live in the midst of my grandchildren, one
of whom has lately promoted me to be a great grandfather." Eight
years later, counting "about half a dozen" great-grandchildren,
he wrote Maria Cosway, who had renewed their long-lapsed cor-
respondence, that he lived "like a patriarch of old" among his
grandchildren and great-grandchildren. 8
The memories that his grandchildren had of growing up at Mon-
ticello indicate that they regarded their grandfather warmly and
that he had an important presence in their lives. Less rigid with them
than he had been with his own children, he was generous in his
affection and support and respected them as individuals as they ma-
tured. He was also prone to spoil them with gifts, sometimes when
the state of his finances could ill afford the costs. But he left indelible
memories in the young minds of his adoring granddaughters who
enjoyed the closest contacts with him in the early years of his retire-
ment. Ellen, who was twelve when Jefferson retired, remembered,
"My Bible came from him, my Shakespeare, my first writing table,
my first handsome writing-desk, my first Leghorn hat, my first silk
dress." And she recalled that her sisters were equally provided for.
"Our grandfather seemed to read our hearts, to see our invisible
wishes," said Ellen, who was married in the drawing room at Mon-
ticello in 1825 to Joseph Coolidge, Jr., of Boston —
a young Harvard
graduate she met when he made a pilgrimage to Monticello to see
Jefferson. Virginia, who also remembered her grandfather buying
9
her and her sisters their first silk dresses, remembered their walks in
the gardens, the games he taught them to play, and the footraces he
conducted on the terraces and around the lawn. Positioning each
child at a starting point appropriate for his or her age, he gave the
starting signal by dropping his handkerchief and awarded prizes of

dried fruit at the finish line. Virginia, who was nine when Jefferson
returned to Monticello in 1809, recalled these details thirty years
later, testifying that the loving grandfather had applied his charac-
10
teristicsystem to whatever he did.
With his eldest grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, who was
sixteen when Jefferson retired, Jefferson also enjoyed a close rela-
tionship, and when he saw that his grandson's interests were close to
the land, he gave him increasing responsibilities at Monticello. In
1815, when he was seventy-two, Jefferson turned over to Jeff the
management of Monticello and all his farms in Albemarle, and he
came increasingly to rely upon this dependable namesake. 11
A common image of Jefferson etched in the memories of his
grandchildren was of him with a book in hand sitting in a chair
reading. In the early years of his retirement the Sage of Monticello
also shared his large library with students who sought his guidance.
"A part of my occupation, and by no means the least pleasing," he
said in 1810, "is the direction of studies of such young men as ask
it." They found lodging nearby, and he counseled them on their
reading and gave them free use of his library. In advising them on
the course of their readings, he said he tried to keep their attention
focused on the object of all learning: the freedom and happiness of
man. Thus, if they went into government, they would understand
the sole object of all legitimate governments. 12
Even with his love of Monticello and the contentment he found
among his grandchildren, Jefferson still liked to escape periodically
from his usual environment and routine and sometimes also from
the strain of visitors to Monticello. After leaving the presidency, he
increased the frequency of his visits to his lands in Bedford County.
That ninety-mile journey became more attractive after he started
building a house there in 1806. He was able to stay in it for the first
time in 1809. His love of building drew him back more often after
that, and by 1812 he was making three trips a year there. But it was
— —
1816 seven years after he left office before he apparently con-
sidered the house, which he named Poplar Forest, livable enough
to invite his daughter and two granddaughters to accompany him,
though his grandson Jeff had accompanied him earlier. There-
after, a couple of his granddaughters usually made the journey
with him. 13
Poplar Forest was an architectural gem, one of Jefferson's most
remarkable architectural achievements. He had originally drawn
the plans for his daughter Maria and her husband, John Wayles
Eppes, to be built at Pantops near Monticello, but when Maria died

in 1804 before the plans were implemented, he decided to use the
design for Poplar Forest. Employing an octagonal scheme, Jefferson
achieved near perfection in geometric form. Within an octagonal
exterior, octagonal rooms opened off a square dining room, lighted
by a skylight, in the center of the house. Octagonal terraces and
gardens, and even octagonal "necessaries," completed the setting.
Jefferson would never tire of visiting his country retreat, making
his last visit there at age eighty, not long after turning the property
over to his grandson Francis Eppes, Maria's only surviving child,
14
and his bride as a wedding gift.
Jefferson's return to farming

1809 got off to an abysmal start.
in
Writing his grandson Jeff June, he told of a dis-
in Philadelphia in
tressing drought in April and May and said that wheat and corn
had scarcely vegetated and no seeds in the garden had come up.
Rains but very cold weather followed, "so that prospects are dis-
heartening for the farmer and little better to the gardener." But it
would take more than bad weather to drive this man of the soil
from the land, and farming soon took precedence over other pur-
suits. "From sunrise till breakfast only I allot for all my pen and ink
work," he said. "From breakfast till dinner I am in my garden,
shops, or on horse back in the farms, and after dinner I devote en-
,5
tirely to relaxation or light reading."
By the time Jefferson retired, wheat had replaced tobacco as the
main money crop on his farms in Albemarle County, though to-
bacco continued to be the money crop on his Bedford County
lands. Though the soil in Albemarle was better suited to wheat than
to tobacco, his fields were never very productive, despite his appli-
cation of scientific methods of agriculture. Edmund Bacon, Jeffer-
son's overseer at Monticello during most of his retirement years, re-
was not a profitable estate; it was too uneven and hard to
called, "It
work." In addition to poor soil and droughts, such constant ene-
mies as Hessian flies and wheat rusts made the yearly yield highly
uncertain. The quantity of flour, into which Jefferson converted his
wheat before sending it to market, ranged from a high of five to six
hundred barrels to a low of two hundred, and the prices he re-
ceived fluctuated widely between three dollars and fifteen dollars
per barrel. Low water in the Rivanna River in times of drought and
ice in winter increased the uncertainties of transporting the flour to
market Richmond. Jefferson's income from this money crop was
in
16
always uncertain and generally inadequate to pay his creditors.
Jefferson had long experimented with other ventures to supple-

ment his income. His nailery was still in operation when he re-
turned to Monticello, but never proved too successful. His con-
it
tinuing difficulties in collecting accounts caused him temporarily to

suspend operations in 1811 after failing to recover enough money
due him from sales to buy new nailrod. Though he resumed pro-
duction for a time in 1812, the war with Great Britain cut off
his supply of iron from Philadelphia, and he was forced to close
down until 1815. After that, the shop operated only intermittently
17
until 1823.
Jefferson was little more successful in the milling business. In
1803 he rebuilt the gristmill on the Rivanna River constructed by
his father and destroyed by the freshet of 1771. This he operated
only for his own use, and in 1806 he constructed a large manufac-
turing mill that ground grain for all comers. With two independent
waterwheels, it was, he said, "finished in the best manner with every
modern convenience." He invested over ten thousand dollars in the
operation, which he leased out from the outset. Whether because
of the poor management of the lessees, controversies with them, or
the high cost of maintenance, the mill never proved profitable. 18
In another nonfarming enterprise at Monticello, Jefferson ex-
panded the domestic manufacture of cloth more from patriotism
and necessity induced by the embargo and nonimportation acts
than as a means to improve his fortunes. In 1811 he purchased a
spinning jenny and a loom with a flying shuttle, and during the War
of 1812 he increased production. Writing to Thaddeus Kosciusko
at the beginning of the war, he said that his household manufac-
tures were just getting into operation with a carding machine, a
spinning machine carrying six spindles for wool, another with
twelve spindles for cotton, and a loom, with a flying shuttle, weav-
ing twenty yards a day. This machinery, worked by two women and
two girls, could produce the two thousand yards of linen, cotton,
and woolen cloth that he needed yearly to clothe his family in —
which he included his slaves. By 1814 he had four spinning jennies
running, three of them with twenty-four spindles and one with
forty. These machines doubled the output of a common loom, al-
though according to Jefferson they did "not perform the miracles
ascribed to them." 19
Jefferson's experience in the household manufacture of cloth at
Monticello influenced his thinking on political economy, which had
been changing since the last years of his presidency. After a year of
the embargo he was convinced that household manufactures had
increased so rapidly in his native state that Virginia would never

again import one-half of the coarse goods it had imported prior to
the various British and French edicts. As early as 1809 he spoke out
against the growing jealousy of commercial men toward manufac-
turing. "My idea iswe should encourage home manufactures
that
to the extent of our own consumption of everything of which we
raise the raw material. I do not think it fair in the ship-owners to
say we ought not to make our own axes, nails, etc., here, that they
may have the benefit of carrying the iron to Europe, and bringing
back the axes, nails, etc. Our agriculture will still afford surplus
produce enough employ a due proportion of navigation." 20
to
His model included no place for a carrying trade engaged in ex-
changing the goods of the world. In declaring in 1809 that "an
equilibrium of agriculture, manufactures, and commerce is cer-
tainly become essential to our independence," he had not aban-
doned his model of an agrarian republic. "Manufactures, sufficient
for our own consumption, of what we raise the raw material (and
no more). Commerce sufficient to carry the surplus produce of ag-
riculture, beyond our own consumption, to a market for exchang-
ing it for articles we cannot raise (and no more). These are the true
21
limits of manufactures and commerce."
The War of 1812 modified his thinking. He took pride not only
in the spread of household manufactures but also in the establish-
ments rising in larger cities for the production of finer goods. The
war had hardly begun when he expressed the view that "nothing is
more certain than that, come peace when it will, we shall never
again go to England for a shilling where we have gone for a dollar's
worth." As the war continued, he was glad to see commercial capital
going into manufactures; when it was over, he supported the tariff
of 1816, which gave protection to infant manufacturing industries.
He now found himself having to refute things that he had written
in his Notes on Virginia. When he learned that he was being quoted
"by those who wish to continue our dependence on England for
manufactures," he said: "There was a time when I might have been
so quoted with more candor, but within thirty years which have
since elapsed, how are circumstances changed! We have experi- . . .
enced what we did not then believe, that there exists both prof-
ligacy and power enough to exclude us from the field of inter-
change with other nations: that to be independent for the comforts
of life we must fabricate them ourselves. We must place the manu-
facturer by the side of the agriculturist. Experience has taught
. . .
me that manufactures are now as necessary to our independence as

22
to our comfort."
When Jefferson spoke of placing the manufacturer beside the

agriculturist, —
he meant precisely that not placing the manufac-
turer ahead of the farmer. He saw American commerce as pri-
still
marily exchanging surplus agricultural commodities for other

needs. It was still his view that "the agricultural capacities of our
country constitute its distinguishing feature; and the adapting our
policyand pursuits to that, is more likely to make us a numerous
and happy people, than the mimicry of an Amsterdam, a Ham-
burgh, or a city of London." 23
One of the most satisfying moments of Jefferson's years of retire-

ment from politics was the renewal of his once close friendship with
John Adams. Strained by the political divisions of the 1790s, the
friendship between the two patriots of the Revolution seemed
ended forever by the election of 1800. Adams, humiliated by his
defeat, returned embittered to Massachusetts, while Jefferson,
angered by Adams' "midnight appointments," began his presi-
dency convinced that his predecessor's actions were vengefully de-
signed to impede his administration. Toward the end of Jefferson's
first term, Mrs. Adams was moved by the death of his daughter Ma-
ria to write to the grieving father to share her affection for Maria,
which reached back to Jefferson's ministership in France. Jefferson
responded with warmth and took advantage of Abigail's letter of
condolence to move to restore the severed bonds of friendship. He
said that the only act of John Adams' life that had caused him pain
was his making his last appointments to office, which he considered
as personally unkind. After unbosoming himself of his resentment
of that action, he said that he had forgiven Adams and would carry
into private life "an uniform and high measure of respect and good
will" for him and a "sincere attachment" for Mrs. Adams. There
followed an exchange of letters over the next several months in
which Jefferson and Mrs. Adams aired their grievances but failed
to reach a common ground of understanding before she closed the
correspondence. Only then did she inform her husband of the
exchange. 24
Not until after Jefferson left the presidency did another oppor-
tunity for rapprochement arise, when Dr. Benjamin Rush of Phila-
delphia cast himself in the role of mediator. A fellow signer of the
Declaration of Independence and friend of both men, he had long
been distressed by the estrangement of the two presidents. After
Jefferson left office, he wrote to Adams hinting that Jefferson's re-
tirement offered an occasion for the reopening of their correspon-
dence. But Adams rebuffed the overture, and Rush waited over
33° IN PURSUIT OF REASON
a year before he tried again. He

then wrote to Jefferson remind-
ing him of "your Adams, and his to you"
early attachment to Mr.
and expressing his hope that they might renew their friendship
through correspondence. Jefferson responded by sending Rush his
exchange of letters with Mrs. Adams to demonstrate that he had
"not been wanting either in the desire, or the endeavor to remove
this misunderstanding." Declaring that he had "the same good
opinion of Mr. Adams which I ever had" and leaving to Rush to
decide whether the correspondence with Mrs. Adams warranted
his continued efforts, he made it clear that the next move was up
to Adams. 25
While Rush contemplated his failure, an unexpected occurrence
gave new life to his efforts. During the summer of 1811 two of
Jefferson's Albemarle neighbors, Edward Coles (President Madison's
private secretary) and his brother John, were traveling in New En-
gland and had an interview with John Adams. In the course of their
conversations Adams talked about the politics of his presidency
and his differences with Jefferson and added at one point, "I always
loved Jefferson, and still love him." When Jefferson learned of
Adams' remarks, he wrote to Rush to say, "This is enough for me. I
only needed this knowledge to revive towards him all the affections
of the most cordial moments of our lives." Jefferson hoped for
some occasion that would provide the opportunity to overcome the
awkwardness of resuming their correspondence. Rush wrote im-
mediately to Adams, quoting warm passages from Jefferson's letter
and urging him to "receive the olive branch which has thus been
offered to you by the hand of a man who still loves you. Fellow la-
borers in erecting the great fabric of American independence! . . .
—
Embrace embrace each other!" Adams resisted no longer. He
teased Rush by telling him that he perceived plainly that Rush
had been writing Jefferson just as he had been writing him and
asked, "Of what use can it be for Jefferson and me to exchange
letters?" But he revealed his true intent by suggesting, "Time and
chance, however, or possibly design, may produce ere long a letter
26
between us."
Adams wrote to Rush on Christmas Day, 1811, and on New Year's
Day he took up his pen to wish Jefferson "many happy New Years"
in a short letter signed, "with a long and sincere Esteem your
Friend and Servant John Adams." He told Jefferson that he was
sending him by post a package containing two pieces of homespun
that he thought Jefferson as a friend of domestic manufactures
would appreciate. 27 When Adams' letter arrived in Virginia without
the accompanying packet, Jefferson was so pleased to receive the
THE SAGE OF MONTICELLO 33 1
letter that he did not wait for the pieces of homespun to arrive be-
fore writing Adams a long and warm letter, which he began with a
brief essay on domestic manufactures in Virginia. He then went on
to reflect on the time when they were "fellow laborers in the same
cause" and on the difficulties the nation had faced in the years since
independence. "In your day French depredations: in mine English,
and the Berlin and Milan decrees: now the English orders of coun-
cil." But before he got carried away, he reminded himself that he
had taken leave of politics and told Adams that he had given up
newspapers for Tacitus and Thucydides, for Newton and Euclid,
and found himself much happier. He concluded by commenting
on his health, his daily routine, and his grandchildren and solicited
similar "egotisms" from Adams. When he sent his letter to the post
office, he received in return the laggard parcel. When he tore open
the wrappings, he found not pieces of cloth but two volumes of Lec-
tures on Rhetoric and Oratory, written by John Quincy Adams while a
professor at Harvard College. The delighted Virginian imme-
diately sent off a note to Adams saying that "a little more sagacity of
conjecture" on his part would have saved Adams from reading a
dissertation on real homespun but it gave him another opportunity
to assure him of his friendship and respect. 28
The long-broken ties of friendship were restored. The exchange
marked the beginning of one of the most remarkable literary ex-

changes in American history, as the two former presidents reflected
on their past experiences, their political views, their presidencies,
and their wide interests. They debated political theory and philoso-
phy, discussed their reading, past and present, and ranged widely
over the whole of human experience. Their speculations in politi-
cal theory and on the nature of man and society left for posterity
such fascinating exchanges as their discussion of aristocracy, which
drew from Jefferson an essay on natural and artificial aristocracy
and the form of government that best provided for the elevation of
the "good and wise" into office. 29 The elder statesmen could not
free themselves from the realm of politics that had engrossed their
lives, but they seemed to derive the most pleasure from discussing
historical, scientific, and religious subjects. They exchanged infor-

mation and opinions on the American Indians and on their own
regions. And they bombarded each other with ideas that provoked
response. Through the last year of their lives, letters continued to
pass between Quincy and Monticello. 30
In 1814 after the British set fire to the Capitol during the War of
1812, destroying the Library of Congress, Jefferson offered his li-
brary of nearly 6,500 books to Congress. Condemning the British

action as one of the "acts of barbarism which do not belong to a
civilized age," he assumed that Congress would wish to rebuild the
collection. Indicating that he had planned for Congress to have
first refusal of his library, at their own price, upon his death, he
said he was moved by the recent loss to offer it now. In assembling

his collection over a period of fifty years, he had "spared no pains,
opportunity or expense, to make it what it is," he explained in
sending along a catalog to show that "while it includes what is
chiefly valuable in science and literature generally, [it] extends
more particularly to whatever belongs to the American statesman.
In the diplomatic and parliamentary branches, it is particularly
strong." He made it clear that he wanted his collection to be taken
as a whole. "I do not know that it contains any branch of science
which Congress would wish to exclude from their collection," he
wrote, employing the word science to embrace all knowledge. "There
is, in fact no subject to which a member of Congress may not have
occasion to refer." He would leave it to Congress to set the price

and method of payment. 31
Visitors to Monticello had never failed to be impressed by Jeffer-
son's library. Francis Calley Gray, a well-educated Bostonian who
visited there a few months after Jefferson offered his library to
Congress, observed that the collection was strongest in books relat-
ing to North and South America. "The collection on this subject is
without a question the most valuable in the world." But most mem-
bers of Congress had never seen his library, and though they could
examine his catalog, they had an inadequate idea of its immense
value. Federalist partisanship also still lingered. "The grand library
of Mr. Jefferson will undoubtedly be purchased with all its finery
and philosophical nonsense," the Washington correspondent for the
Boston Gazette reported. After escaping several crippling amend-
ments and several motions to postpone action, a bill passed to pay
Jefferson $23,950 for his 6,487 volumes. A motion was made by
Representative Cyrus King to select from the collection "all books of
an atheistical, irreligious, and immoral tendency" and return them
32
to Jefferson, but the Massachusetts Federalist withdrew his motion.
The ex-president personally supervised the packing of the books,
which were left in the pine bookcases in which they were shelved,
and ten wagons were required to transport them to Washington. As
he bid his cherished volumes farewell, he mused that they consti-
tuted "unquestionably the choicest collection of books in the U.S.
and I hope it will not be without some general effect on the litera-
33
ture of our country." His wish would not go unfulfilled. Upon this
foundation would be built one of the great libraries of the world.
The sale of his books left an emptiness in Jefferson as great as
that of the rooms that had housed them. The last wagon of his trea-
sures was hardly down the hill at Monticello before he was starting
to build another collection. "I can not live without books," he wrote
to John Adams, while entering in his account book a payment of
$187 to his grandson Jeff for books and commissioning George
Ticknor, a young Boston scholar who had recently visited him and
was on his way to Europe, to buy certain editions of the classics for
him in Europe. Before his death, he would have collected another
34
library of some one thousand volumes.
The record of Jefferson's last months in the presidential office

made it clear that he would not seek to dictate policy to his suc-
cessor. At the same time, he did not isolate himself from political
affairs asmuch as he had tried to do earlier when he retired as sec-
retary of state. President Madison was one of the first persons to
whom he wrote after reaching Monticello, and he continued to ex-
change letters with him throughout his presidency. He generally
approved of his successor's conduct of foreign affairs and was sup-
portive of his course as he moved the nation toward war with Great
Britain. On the eve of the final decision for war he reported to
Madison the volunteer companies forming in Virginia and said of
the Albemarle cavalry: "The only inquiry they make is whether
they are to go to Canada or Florida? Not a man, as far as I have
learned, entertains any of those doubts which puzzle the lawyers
of Congress and astonish common sense, whether it is lawful for
them to pursue a retreating enemy across the boundary line of
the Union." A week before the declaration of war in 1812, in a
letter to John Adams, Jefferson expressed confidence in the con-
quest of Canada. 35
While professing a preference for occupying his mind with sub-
jects other than politics, he admitted that "although I do not often
permit myself to think of that subject, it sometimes obtrudes itself,
and suggests ideas which I am tempted to pursue." 36 At no time did
he yield more completely to the temptation than when he turned
his thoughts to the problems of financing the War of 1812. Writing
to his son-in-law John W. Eppes, who was chairman of the House
Ways and Means Committee, he outlined a plan for taxation and
government borrowing in the summer of 1813, when government
finances were in a critical state because of both the war and the ex-
piration of the charter of the Bank of the United States. Drawing

on his long-held view that the earth belongs to the living, his op-
position to a permanent national debt, and his distrust of banks,
the former president proposed a system for the suppression of
bank paper and its replacement with treasury notes tied to a spe-
cific schedule of redemption provided by taxation. When Eppes re-
quested him to develop his ideas, Jefferson did so with diligence,

providing the congressman with an elaborate proposal. 37 He shared
these ideas with Monroe, who was now secretary of state, and a few
others, thus assuring that they would reach the president, to whom
he later expanded on his plan. While he encouraged his correspon-
dents to use his ideas, he also cautioned them not to connect his
name with them. "I am too desirous of tranquillity to bring such a
nest of hornets on me as the fraternities of banking companies," he
said, "and this infatuation of banks is a torrent which it would be a
folly for me to get into theway of. I see that it must take its course,
until actual ruin shall awaken us from its delusions." 38
Monroe was the chief supporter of Jefferson's plan within the ad-
ministration and thought it represented the only alternative to a
national bank. But the current in favor of reviving the bank was
growing, as Jefferson himself realized, and before leaving office,
Madison signed the bill to charter the second Bank of the United
39
States. Jefferson did not press his objections upon his longtime
friend who had been his partner in opposing Hamilton's first bank,
but he did not abandon his own constitutional objections to a na-
tional bank. Marshall's decision upholding its constitutionality in
McCulloch Maryland (1819) increased his hostility to Marshall,
v.
who borrowed arguments and even language from Hamilton to

sanction the bank. The court's verdict also deepened his concern
about national consolidation. He privately applauded the series
of articles by Virginia Judge Spencer Roane, published under
the name "Hampden" in the Richmond Enquirer, condemning
Marshall's sweeping assertion of the supremacy of the national gov-
ernment and broad construction of implied powers. "We find the
judiciaryon every occasion still driving us into consolidation," he
wrote to Roane, telling him that he subscribed to "every tittle" of
his essays as containing "the true principles of the revolution of
1800." But he declined to allow his opinions to be made public, not
wishing to become embroiled in public controversy that might en-
danger the principal object of his life at that moment, the establish-
40
ment of a university in his native state.
While only an inveterate optimist would have launched the effort
that he did to get a state university established in Virginia, Jeffer-

son's fears of national consolidation began to undermine his habit-
ual optimism. The controversy over the admission of Missouri into
the Union quickened his concern, and though he welcomed the
compromise, it left him disturbed. "This momentous question, like
a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror," he
wrote. "I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. It is
hushed, indeed, for the moment. But this is a reprieve only, not a
final sentence." The optimist who once was certain that the next
generation would abolish the evil of slavery was no longer con-
fident of that happening, and he feared for the survival of the
Union. "I regret that I am now to die in the belief, that the useless
sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776, to acquire self-
government and happiness to their country, is to be thrown away by
the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only
consolation is to be, that I live not to weep over it." 41 Jefferson was
seventy-seven years of age when he wrote these words in 1820, and
he did not overcome his pessimism about the course of the nation
in his declining years. Six months before his death, with John
Quincy Adams in theWhite House, he wrote that he saw "with the
deepest affliction, the rapid strides with which the federal branch
of our government is advancing towards the usurpation of all the
rights reserved to the States, and the consolidation in itself of all
powers, foreign and domestic; and that, too, by constructions which,
42
if legitimate, leave no limits to their power."
If Jefferson's last years were darkened by his concerns about the

rights of states and the future of the Union, they were also bright-
ened by the outcome of the most important enterprise that he at-
tempted after he left the presidency. It was a project that claimed
his most intense interest, effort, and devotion and one that in its
fruition left to him his greatest monument: the establishment of
the University of Virginia.
XXII
A Final Legacy
Despite the rejection of his plan for general education in Virginia

of independence, Jefferson's interest in the estab-
in the early years
lishment of a state system of education from elementary school
through college never waned. He continued to insist that no re-
public could maintain itself in strength without the broad educa-
tion of its people, and he favored beginning at the bottom with ele-
mentary schools. But when renewed attempts to get the Virginia

1
legislature to create a comprehensive educational system failed,

Jefferson directed his major energies to establishing a state univer-
sity, convinced that attention to lower schools would eventually
have to follow. Even this more limited goal turned out to be more
difficult to accomplish than he envisioned, and probably no one
without his stature could have pushed ahead as he did to overcome
the obstacles and ultimately achieve his objective.
Jefferson had been developing his ideas about a university in Vir-
ginia for years. As early as 1800, when some movement toward
establishing a state university seemed to be emerging, he began
collecting ideas about what a university should be from Joseph
Priestly, du Pont de Nemours, and others, though he already had
rather firm notions of the kind of university he wanted to see estab-
lished. He wanted a university "on a plan so broad and liberal and
modern, as to be worth patronizing with the public support, and be
a temptation to the youth of other States to come and drink of
the cup of knowledge and fraternize with us." He did not want
to attempt to revitalize and expand the College of William and
Mary, which in his opinion was "just well enough endowed to draw
out the miserable existence to which a miserable constitution has
doomed it." He also regarded Williamsburg as too isolated and its
climate too unhealthy; he favored a university more centrally lo-
cated in the healthy upper country — a site description that fit his
own neighborhood around Charlottesville. 2
A FINAL LEGACY 337
Midway through his presidency, Jefferson outlined a plan for es-

tablishing a university to Littleton W. Tazewell, who sought his
counsel at a time when he thought interest in a university was de-
veloping in the Virginia General Assembly. By then Jefferson had
collected plans of studyfrom institutions in Edinburgh and the Na-
tional Institute of France, and he was expecting a response from
Geneva. He regarded Oxford, Cambridge, and the Sorbonne as "a
century or two behind the science of the age" and recommended
that in establishing a new university its object be defined solely in
general terms of "teaching the useful branches of science" (i.e.,
knowledge), leaving specific subjects to be determined by the needs
of the time. "What was useful two centuries ago is now become
useless," he thought. "What is now deemed useful will in some of
it's parts become useless in another century." He recommended a
small board of visitors qualified "to keep their institution up in even

pace with the science of the times." By 1805 Jefferson had already
developed his main concept of the physical plan of the university. It
—
should not be one large building but a village a few years later he
—
would call it "an academical village" with houses containing class-
rooms for professors, lodgings for students between the professo-
rial houses, and all structures connected by covered walkways. Ad-
3
ditional units could be built as the university grew.
Although a proposal to create a university was introduced in the
General Assembly in 1806, nothing came of it, and interest in the
project did not revive until after Jefferson left the presidency. Then
it was the ex-president who was the principal mover behind the re-
newed effort. Named in 1814 as a trustee of the Albemarle Acad-

emy, chartered a decade earlier but never instituted, he imme-
diately began to use this position as a base to advance his more
ambitious plans. When the board of the academy, chaired by his
nephew Peter Carr, asked him to prepare a plan for the institution,
he could not resist including a design for a state system of education
at all levels. He was not yet ready to settle for providing only for
higher education, but he indicated that he had "long entertained the
hope that this, our native State, would take up the subject of educa-
tion and make an establishment . where every branch of science,
. .
deemed useful at this day, should be taught in its highest degree." 4

Along with his proposal, he prepared a petition to the legislature to
change the name of Albemarle Academy to Central College.
Jefferson drafted his plan during one of the darkest periods of
—
the War of 1812 just after the burning of Washington when —
only a person of his optimism, determination, and intellectual disci-
pline would have been able to devote himself to such a task. It
would be January, 1816, a year war was over, before the

after the
legislature would act, passing a drafted by Jefferson, creating
bill,
Central College. In accordance with his views the act provided for a
Board of Visitors of only six members. Following Jefferson's recom-
mendations, his friend Governor Wilson Cary Nicholas named
Madison and Monroe to the board, along with Jefferson, David
Watson, John H. Cocke, and Joseph C. Cabell, the latter being the
leading proponent of Jefferson's ideas in the Virginia Senate. If a
state university were to be established, Jefferson was positioning
Central College to receive the mission. When the first regular meet-
ing of the Board of Visitors convened on May 5, 1817, with Presi-
dent Monroe and the two ex-presidents in attendance, it attracted
the public attention that the Sage of Monticello wanted. The board
authorized the purchase of two hundred acres of land, approved
Jefferson's plan for an academical village, authorized the construc-
tion of the first professorial pavilion, and began a subscription
drive for funds. Each of the visitors present at the first meeting
subscribed one thousand dollars, and Jefferson was soon busy so-
5
liciting friends throughout the state.
Jefferson had already assumed the role of architect, having pre-
sented the Board of Visitors with a drawing of his plan, and he now
assumed the role of builder. On July 18, 1817, he surveyed the site,
adjusted his plan to the lay of the land, staked out three terraces,
and decided the locations of six pavilions. The idea of the academi-
cal village, with dormitories for students adjoining professorial pa-
vilions, was, as Benjamin Henry Latrobe observed, "entirely novel."
But in developing its architectural design, the seventy-four-year-
old architect and builder, who had been absorbing ideas for a life-
time, must have recalled to mind the chateau of Louis XIV at
Marly, which he had visited years before. There the Sun King had
situated his pavilion at the head of a quadrangle along the two sides
of which rows of six pavilions (one for each of the months) faced
each other across a broad expanse of grass. 6 When Latrobe re-
viewed Jefferson's plan, he suggested a large building in the center
of one side of the opened-ended quadrangle that Jefferson had
sketched for him, and he sent along a drawing of a building with a
dome. In his pocket notebook in which he sketched the plan that he
laidout on July 18, Jefferson had noted a place for "some principal
building" and replied promptly to Latrobe that the north end of
the quadrangle would be left open and might be filled with "some-
thing of the grand kind" should the legislature decide to establish a
university. Thus, a larger vision was already in Jefferson's mind
7
when he staked out the first buildings for Central College.

A FINAL LEGACY 339
Jefferson lost no time in getting construction under way. The day

after he staked out the site, he wrote to General John H. Cocke, one
of the Visitors not at the meeting in May, "Our squares are laid off,
the brick-yard begun, and the leveling will be begun in the course
of the week." 8 On October 6, 1817, the cornerstone of the first pa-
vilion was laid, with President Monroe officiating and all of the
other five Visitors in attendance.
As this project got under way, Jefferson was quietly working for it
to become part of a larger state system of education. In September
he sent Joseph C. Cabell the draft of a bill for the establishment of
elementary schools. When Cabell requested bills for academies and
a university also, Jefferson followed with a comprehensive plan for
a state system of elementary, secondary, and higher education. He
described the bill as essentially his plan of 1779 "accommodated to
the circumstances of this, instead of that day." 9From Poplar Forest,
Jefferson wrote to George Ticknor in late November that he was
"now endeavours to effect the establishment of
entirely absorbed in
a general system of education" in his native state but that he was not
very hopeful of success. He feared that the members of the Vir-
ginia legislature did not sufficiently understand "that knowledge
is power, that knowledge is safety, and that knowledge is happi-
ness." His concern about the legislators' response was not unjus-
tified. After a long controversy over public education, no plan was
adopted. Although Jefferson's bill was rejected, Cabell managed to

salvage something by proposing to add to a bill appropriating
funds for the education of the children of the poor an amendment
providing for the establishment of a university with an annual ap-
propriation of fifteen thousand dollars —
after the legislature de-
termined its location. The measure passed both houses in February,
1818. 10 It was a limited victory. The appropriation was embar-
rassingly inadequate, and the site was still undetermined. But Jef-
ferson would make the most of it and ultimately turn it into a
large triumph.
Named by Governor James P. Preston to the commission to recom-
mend the location of the university, Jefferson arrived well prepared
at the commission's meeting at Rockfish Gap in the Blue Ridge on
August 1, 1818. Indeed, he came with a draft of a proposed report
of the commission already written and carried the day with the
commission, which represented all the senatorial districts in the
state and included such well-disposed members as James Madison
and Judge Spencer Roane. The members unanimously elected
Jefferson president of the commission. Sixteen of the twenty-one
commissioners present voted for Central College over competing
34° IN PURSUIT OF REASON
proposals from Lexington and Staunton as the site of the univer-

sity, and after adding minor amendments, they unanimously ap-
proved the report that Jefferson had prepared. 11
The Rockfish Gap report contained Jefferson's final plan for the
University of Virginia, spelling out in detail the arrangement of the
buildings, the subjects of instruction, the composition of the faculty
and governance, the broad purposes of the institution, the spe-
its
cific justifications for its curriculum, and a set of bylaws for its
operation. He proposed a faculty of ten professors, and though
he grouped the fields of learning into ten categories, he recom-
mended that the fields for which each professor would be respon-
sible be left to the Board of Visitors. In conformity to the principles
of religious freedom, he proposed no professor of divinity. 12 This
remarkable document was the mature product of years of con-
templation on the subject of education in a republic.
Jefferson's ambitions for the university were lofty. He wanted an
"institution where science in all it's branches is taught, and in the
highest degree to which the human mind has carried it." He did
not want it to be a provincial. "The salaries of the first professors
should be very liberal, that we might draw the first names of Eu-
rope to our institution in order to give it a celebrity in the outset,
which will draw to it the youth of all the states, and make Virginia
their cherished and beloved Alma mater." The faculty was to be of
first rank. "We mean to accept for our institution no person of sec-
ondary grade in his science, if there be one of the first on either

side of the Atlantic who can be tempted to come to us." He wanted
13
the architecture of the university buildings to serve as "models in

architecture of the purest forms of antiquity, furnishing to the stu-
dents examples of the precepts he will be taught in that art." 14 The
professorial pavilions in his view should be "models of taste and
good architecture, and of a variety of appearance, no two alike, so
15
as to serve as specimens for the Architectural lecturer."
Realizing his dream would be filled with difficulties. The en-
lightened prospectus for a university of eminence offered in the
Rockfish Gap report was inadequately appreciated by the legis-
lators whose approval was required. For a time, sectional rivalries
over the location of the site threatened rejection of the recommen-
dations, but finally in January, 1819, both houses of the General As-
sembly voted their approval. 16 "Your college is made the University
of Virginia," Wilson Cary Nicholas wrote to him from Richmond.
"I call it yours, as you are its real founder, its commencement can
only be ascribed to you. To your exertions and influence its being
1
A FINAL LEGACY 34
adopted can only be attributed." Jefferson joined in the joy shared

by his friends at the passage of the bill, but he feared "it will be
a great measure on paper only with our present funds."
17
The
struggle in the legislature had been a foretaste of the obstacles to be
surmounted or finessed in the years ahead, but Jefferson would
never compromise his goal.
Jefferson was named to the Board of Visitors appointed by the
governor for the new University of Virginia, and at its first meeting
(March 29, 1819) the board elected him rector. The board also ap-
pointed Thomas Cooper, who had earlier been engaged for the
faculty of Central College, to a professorship of chemistry, miner-
alogy, and natural philosophy, and temporarily to a professorship
of law. Cooper was to begin his duties in April, 1820, but six months
later the board postponed his appointment for one year. Mean-
while, the news of Cooper's appointment raised such a storm of re-
ligious opposition that the controversial professor, whom Jefferson
regarded as first in America in the powers of intellect and informa-
18
tion, withdrew from the appointment. Despite his pushing for the
appointment of Cooper, to whom he felt an obligation after engag-
ing him for Central College, Jefferson believed that the buildings
for the university should be constructed before the faculty was
hired. He wanted to use all funds for construction and not open
the university "until we can do it with the degree of splendor neces-
19
sary to give it a prominent character."
By December, 1819, Jefferson reported to the governor that the
walls of seven pavilions and thirty-seven dormitories (to house two
students each) had been erected and that eighty thousand dollars
was needed to complete them. But times were hard in Virginia, and
the only help provided by the legislature was to authorize the
Board of Visitors to borrow sixty thousand dollars, which was ob-
tainedfrom the state's Literary Fund. The next year found the leg-
islature more inclined to appropriate funds for the university.
little
Reports from Richmond caused Jefferson to despair of living to see

the university opened. He had hoped for a remission of the loan
20
of the previous year and additional funds to complete the build-

ings, including forty thousand dollars for a library building. But
another loan of sixty thousand dollars from the Literary Fund was
as much as the legislature was willing to approve.
21
Building costs were running above his estimates, but Jefferson

did not consider the expenditures excessive. He optimistically pre-
dicted that the construction costs, excluding the library, would be
little more than $162,000 and said that no office building in Wash-
ington had cost less and Henrico County Courthouse in

that the
Richmond had much. But he was concerned about
cost nearly that
criticisms that the buildings were too ornate and the general plan
too extravagant. He urged Joseph Cabell to point out privately to
legislators how much more some other states were spending on
education and how far Virginia was falling behind. He also began
appealing not only to state pride but also to sectional prejudices. In
the wake of the Missouri controversy, as the legislature continued
to keep a tight grip on the purse strings, he suggested that there
must be five hundred Virginians studying at northern institutions
"imbibing opinions and principles in discord with those of their
own country." He understood that more than half of the students
at Princeton were Virginians, and he wondered how many were
at Harvard "learning the lessons of anti-Missourianism." He gri-
maced at the thought of the University of Virginia opening with
only six professors, "while Harvard will still prime it over us with
her twenty professors." 22
Still, despite growing frustrations, he was firm in his belief that
the university should not open until all the buildings, including the
library, were completed and paid for. Otherwise, it would never get
the funds for his primary goal, a distinguished faculty. He was un-
willing to compromise on either the building plans or on the fac-
ulty. "The great object of our aim from the beginning has been to
make this establishment the most eminent in the United States," he
wrote to Cabell in 1822. "We have proposed therefore to call to
it characters of the first order of science from Europe as well as
our own country; and ... by the distinguished scale of it's structure
and preparation, and the promise of future eminence which these
would hold up, to induce them to commit their reputation to it's
future fortunes. ... To stop where we are is to abandon our high
hopes, and become suitors to Yale and Harvard for their secondary
23
characters."
By 182 1 Jefferson had drawn the plans and secured the estimates
for a great domed building to house the library and serve as a uni-
fying focal point of his grand design. Using as his model Palladio's
drawings and descriptions of the Pantheon in Rome, he drew the
plans for the Rotunda, making its diameter one half that of the
Pantheon. Lack of funds, however, delayed beginning its construc-
tion until 1823, wnen tne legislature authorized another loan of
sixty thousand dollars to complete the buildings. Contracts were let
in March, 1823, and construction began immediately. By the fall of
1823 tne circular walls of the Rotunda had been completed. By that
time all the other buildings were ready for occupancy, and the leg-
A FINAL LEGACY 343
islature was more favorably disposed toward the project, since it was
receiving favorable reports from most of those who saw Jefferson's
unique creation. In 1824 tne Assembly relieved the university of its
debt, while maintaining the right to reimpose it, and promised fifty
thousand dollars for books and equipment. 24
Jefferson moved quickly to acquire a faculty. With the approval
of the Board of Visitors, Francis Walker Gilmer was dispatched on
a recruiting mission to England. Jefferson considered Gilmer, a
young lawyer who lived near Charlottesville, as the best-educated
Virginian of his generation and authorized him to engage pro-
fessors to fill six of the eight professorships under which the uni-
versity was expected to open, though pavilions were ready for ten.
The posts of law and moral philosophy were reserved for Ameri-
cans, and Gilmer was offered his choice of them. After failing ear-
lier to interest able Americans from other institutions, Jefferson
considered it necessary to turn to Europe to fill the other vacan-

25
cies. Overcoming early discouragements, Gilmer succeeded in at-
tracting five professors to join the new institution. "I could hear of
not a single man in all Great Britain at all fit for our purpose of
Natural history," he wrote, but he was successful in finding scholars
in mathematics (Thomas Key), ancient languages (George Long),
modern languages (George Blaettermann), anatomy and medicine
(Dr. Robley Dunglison), and natural philosophy (Charles Bonny-
castle). After Gilmer declined any position, the professorship of law
became the last to be filled. Meanwhile, Dr. John Patton Emmet, of
New York, was named professor of natural history, and George
Tucker of Virginia, then a member of Congress, was appointed to
the chair of moral philosophy. 26
Jefferson was busy drafting schedules of classes, rules for student
conduct, faculty bylaws, requirements for examinations and the
awarding of degrees, and numerous other details, all of which went
before the Board of Visitors for their approval. One basic stipula-
tion was that "every student shall be free to attend the schools of his
choice, and no other than he chooses." The board defined the sub-
jects tobe taught in each "school," which consisted of the classes
held by an individual professor. In assigning to the school of law
the instruction in the principles of government and political econ-
omy, the board, went so far as to mandate
at Jefferson's suggestion,
specific readings. Asserting a responsibility "to
pay especial atten-
tion to the principles of government which shall be inculcated
therein, and to provide that none shall be inculcated which are in-
compatible with those on which the Constitutions of this State, and
of the United States were genuinely based," the board required the
use of specific texts. These included specified writings of John

Locke and Algernon Sidney, The Federalist, the Virginia Resolutions
of 1799, and Washington's Farewell Address. 27 Jefferson had dis-
cussed this list with Madison and Cabell, but the idea was his and
poses a contradiction to his declaration five years earlier when he
said: "This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of
the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wher-
ever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left
free to combat it." 28 Despite this deviation, Jefferson could write
with just pride in the final year of his life that the university was
"now qualified to raise its youth to an order of science unequalled
in any other State; and this superiority will be the greater from the
free range of mind encouraged there, and the restraint imposed at
other seminaries by the shackles of a domineering hierachy, and a
bigoted adhesion to ancient habits." 29
As Jefferson was planning for the opening of the university, he
received word, in August, 1824, °f Lafayette's arrival in America,
for what would become a triumphal tour unparalleled in American
history. Along with an invitation from the town of Charlottesville to
a dinner in his honor, he sent his old friend a warm invitation to
stay with him at Monticello. After being in Yorktown in October for
the anniversary of the surrender of Cornwallis, Lafayette and his
party, which was soon joined by Frances and Camilla Wright, ar-
rived at Monticello in November and enjoyed his hospitality for ten
days. Upon his arrival in Albemarle County, Lafayette was accom-
panied to Monticello by a military escort and a large procession of
citizens. When the two old patriots embraced each other outside
the portico of Monticello, it was a moment of high drama for the
crowd had gathered on the grounds to witness the historic
that
event, andwas a moment of high emotion for the two men, who
it
had not seen each other since the opening months of the French
Revolution. 30
Another moving event took place the following day, inaugurat-
ing to public usage the unfinished Rotunda. In an occasion
still
of historic dimensions rarely again to be equaled there, Lafayette

was honored at a dinner held in the spacious circular room on
the upper floor beneath the dome. Seated between Lafayette and
Madison through a meal that lasted three hours, Jefferson not only
raised his glass to Lafayette but also heard himself toasted as the
"founder of the University of Virginia." In his own brief, prepared
remarks, which he asked to be read for him, pleading age and
a voice too weak to utter them, he praised Lafayette and thanked
his friends and neighbors for their kindnesses over many years.
A FINAL LEGACY 345
Concluding what would be his last public address, he expressed

his hopes for the future success of the institution where they were
then gathered and affirmed his love of country and its "indissol-
31
uble union."
On March 7, 1825, the University of Virginia opened without
fanfare and with about thirty students in attendance. Although the
interior of the Rotunda was not yet finished, one of the unoccupied
pavilions was available for use as a library. The university could be-
gin in the impressive surroundings that Jefferson had envisioned.
Visiting Jefferson at Monticello in the previous December, Pro-
fessor George Ticknor of Harvard described the buildings of the
university as "more beautiful than anything architectural in New
England, and more appropriate to an university than can be found,
perhaps, in the world." It was fortunate indeed that Jefferson had
been able to complete his basic plan, for at the next session of the
legislature the Assembly refused to grant the university any more
money. General John H. Cocke told fellow Visitor Joseph C. Cabell
temper of the House ought to be an
shortly thereafter that "the
admonition to the Old Sachem that the state has enough of his
buildings." 32
A few weeks after the opening of the university, Jefferson wrote
that he was "closing the last scenes of life by fashioning and foster-
ing an establishment for the instruction of those who are to come
after us. I hope its on their virtue, freedom, fame, and
influence
happiness, will be salutary and permanent." 33 He would remain ac-
tive in the affairs of the university until the end of his life, attend-
ing his last board meeting only three months before his death, and
he would regard his role in founding the university as one of the
greatest accomplishments of his life.
Jefferson never recovered from the burden of debt with which he

ended his public career. His daughter Martha's fervent wish that
her father not be harassed by debt in his old age was never realized.
On the contrary, nothing intruded more upon the tranquillity of
his declining years. Owing to circumstances not all of his own
making, the debts that he had hoped to pay off increased rather
than diminished. He gained some relief in 1815 when he sold his
library to Congress, using most of that money ($23,950) to reduce
his debts by more than one-half. But they were never so low again.
The vagaries of agriculture often left him short of cash. While he
had generously subscribed $1,000 to Central College in 1817, a
year later he borrowed $100 from a Charlottesville merchant to
make the trip to Rockfish Gap for the meeting of the commis-
sioners to recommend the site for the University of Virginia. 34 He

never expected to earn enough from farming or other enterprises
to pay off his debts but counted on selling part of his extensive
landholdings to do so. Here he was thwarted by conditions bevond
his control. The price of land in Virginia plummeted so low during
the depression of 1819 that this was no longer a viable option.
"Lands in this state cannot now be sold for a years rent," Jefferson
wrote to John Adams. That was not the only problem aggravated
by the financial crisis. The Bank of the United States, which had
overextended credit, began contracting it. When the bank an-
nounced a 1 2 V2 percent curtailment of all notes presented for re-
newal, Jefferson did not have the cash to meet the demand and had
to resort to more borrowing. By the summer of 1819, this foe of
banks had five loans from three banks in Richmond. Then came
what Jefferson called the coup de grace. Wilson Cary Nicholas, for
whom Jefferson had endorsed two notes for $10,000 each, went
bankrupt, leaving Jefferson with an obligation to pay $1,200 a year
35
in interest, which he could meet only by borrowing.
Jefferson's financial situation —
like his health —
continued to de-
teriorate with each passing year, and in the final year of his life it
was exacerbated by the bankruptcy of his son-in-law Thomas Mann
Randolph, Jr., which left him to provide for all the expenses of his
daughter and his unmarried grandchildren. 36 Early in 1826 Jeffer-
son hit upon the idea of a lottery as a means of selling enough of his
property to pay his debts. Such a scheme required the permission
of the legislature, which had granted such requests in the past for
various public and charitable purposes. At a time when land prices
were so low as to provide little relief and buyers were few, a lottery
offered a means of producing a fair return on the land offered as
the prize. It was expected that lottery tickets would be sold in small
denominations throughout the nation. To the aging patriarch, the
plan seemed the last chance to forestall disaster. If the legislature
would permit the lottery, "I can save the house of Monticello and a
farm adjoining to end my days in and bury my bones. If not I must
sell house and all here and carry my family to Bedford where I
have not even a log hut to put my head into." When his grandson
Francis Eppes heard of his application to the legislature, he offered
to return the property at Poplar Forest to his grandfather, for
whom he expressed his deepest affection and gratitude. 37 Jefferson
refused the offer, but could not but have appreciated the sincerity
with which it was made.
Jefferson was disappointed by the initial coolness of many mem-
bers of the legislature to his request, but in the end a measure au-
A FINAL LEGACY 347
thorizing the lottery passed by a large majority. Only then did

Jefferson learn that Monticello would have to be included in the
38
plan to pay his debts, which were now over $ioo,ooo. The shock
of this was relieved only by the stipulation that he could occupy the
house for as long as he lived and that his daughter Martha could
remain for two years after his death. Though tickets were printed
and preparations were made for the lottery, no tickets were sold be-
fore his death, which came less than four months after he made his
last will on March 16, 1826.
The state of his finances ruled out providing in his will for the
emancipation of his slaves had he been so inclined, but there is no
indication that such a step had ever been his intention. In his will
Jefferson went no further than to stipulate freedom for five of his
slaves, all of whom had trades that would enable them to support
themselves in a free society. He appealed to the legislature to allow
them to remain within the state, since Virginia law required all
manumitted slaves to leave the state within one year. In his last
years Jefferson stilladhered to his belief that slavery would some-
day be ended. He wrote to Frances Wright in 1825 tnat tne aboli-
tion of the evil is not impossible; it ought never therefore to be de-
spaired of. Every plan should be adopted, every experiment tried,
which may do something towards that ultimate object." It is clear
that Jefferson did not fully understand Wright's plan for Nashoba
when he wished her success, but in any case he refused to let her
use his name in support of the enterprise. 39 At eighty-two, Jeffer-
son pleaded old age as the reason for not participating in any new
enterprises, even for bettering the condition of man. Yet, even be-
fore age had taken its toll, he had already assigned to the next gen-
eration the task of dealing with slavery. He had continued to be-
lieve, as he had when he wrote his Notes on Virginia, in gradual
emancipation, but he had done nothing during his years of retire-
ment to advance that cause.
On the one occasion when he was approached by a member of
the younger generation, whom he counted on to end slavery, and
was asked to lend his public support to the antislavery cause, he re-
buffed the overture. That was in 1814, when he still had energy left
to devote to educational reform but no motivation to take up an
antislavery banner. Edward Coles, an Albemarle neighbor then
serving as private secretary to President Madison, wrote urging
him to take the lead in promoting emancipation. Coles, who had
already decided to free the slaves he had inherited from his father
and five years later would settle them in Illinois, suggested that it
would be easier for "the revered fathers of all our political and so-
cial blessings" than for succeeding statesmen to begin the work of

gradual emancipation. "And it is a duty, as I conceive, that devolves
particularly on you," he told Jefferson with suitable apologies for
his presumptuousness, "from your known philosophical and en-
larged view of subjects, and from the principles you have professed
and practiced through a long and useful life." He hoped that
no fear of failing would deter Jefferson from using his pen to
eradicate this remnant of British colonial policy so repugnant to
the principles of the Revolution and the free institutions of the
Republic. 40
In reply Jefferson commended Coles for his views and said that
he had read his letter with peculiar pleasure, but he insisted that
"this enterprize is who can follow it up,
for the young; for those
and bear it through toconsummation." In the lengthy letter he
its
reviewed his long opposition to slavery and restated his support for
gradual emancipation but refused to accept Coles's challenge to
provide public leadership. He also urged Coles to abandon his in-
tention of leaving Virginia and instead remain to work for gradual
emancipation within the state. 41 Jefferson would end his days with-
out risking his way of life or alienating himself from the mass of his
fellow Virginians by publicly planting an antislavery standard on
his Albemarle mountaintop.
In the codicil to his will Jefferson left Madison his gold-mounted
walking token of their long and affectionate friendship
stick as a
and 42
A few weeks earlier, de-
their years of political collaboration.
pressed by financial burdens and declining health, he had written
to Madison that "the friendship which has subsisted between us,
now half a century, and the harmony of our political principles and
pursuits, have been sources of constant happiness to me through
that long period. And if I remove beyond the reach of attentions to
the University, or beyond the bourne of life itself, as I soon must, it
is a comfort to leave that institution under your care, and an as-
surance that it will not be wanting." He closed the moving letter by

saying: "To myself you have been a pillar of support through life.
Take care of me when dead, and be assured that I shall leave with
you my last affections."
43
Jefferson had been through periods of illness and declining vigor

during his retirement, but now he seemed to sense
at earlier times
that his life was drawing to a close. He was able to attend the meet-
ing of the Board of Visitors of the university in early April, 1826,
and in May visited his cherished academical village to decide on
final instructions for the placement of the marble columns of the
A FINAL LEGACY 349
Rotunda. On June24 he wrote to decline, because of his health, an

invitation citizens of Washington to the celebration of the
from the
fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. In this the
last letter to come from his pen, he showed that his faith in the pur-
suit of reason that had guided his life sustained him in his final
days, as he counted among the blessings of self-government resting
on the Declaration "the free right to the unbounded exercise of
reason." 44
On the same day Jefferson summoned his physician, Dr. Robley
Dunglison, professor of anatomy and medicine at the university,
who, seeing little hope for his recovery, remained at Monticello to
be in attendance when needed. On July 2 Jefferson lapsed into un-
consciousness, but aroused on one or more occasions afterward to
inquire if it was the Fourth of July. He gained his wish that he
might live until that day, and at fifty minutes past noon on July 4
45
Thomas Jefferson died.
Six hundred miles away in Quincy, Massachusetts, John Adams
also lay on his deathbed. About noon he aroused enough to utter
"Thomas Jefferson survives," but before the sun set, Adams, who
had joined Jefferson in drafting the Declaration of Independence,
joined his Virginia colleague in death. "A strange and very striking
coincidence," President John Quincy Adams recorded in his diary
when he learned of Jefferson's death on the fiftieth anniversary of
American independence, unaware of his own father's death. When
he learned that his father, too, had died on the same day, he saw
"visible and palpable marks of Divine favor," a feeling that was
soon widely shared throughout the nation. 46
Jefferson was buried beside his wife in the cemetery on the slop-
ing hillside at Monticello. He had drawn the design and left the
instructions for a plain obelisk of coarse stone to mark his grave
and requested as his epitaph "the following inscription, and not a
word more":
Here was buried
Thomas Jefferson
Author of the Declaration of American Independence
of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom
and Father of the University of Virginia.
He explained that "because by these, as testimonials that I have

47
lived, I wish most to be remembered."
Notes
Preface
i. Samuel I. Rosenman The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roose-
(ed.),
velt, 1943 (New York, 1950), 162-64.

2. Merrill D. Peterson, The Jefferson Image in the American Mind (New York, 1962),
362-63, 377-78; Washington Post, April 30, 1962, p. B-5.
3. William Howard Adams (ed.), The Eye of Thomas Jefferson (Washington, D.C.,
1976)-
4. Jefferson to George Ticknor, November 25, 1817, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The
Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), XII, 77-78.
Chapter I
1. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson
(Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), I, 4.
2. Ibid.
3. Jefferson to John Harvie, January 14, 1760, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers
of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), I, 3.
4. Jefferson to Thomas Jefferson Randolph, November 24, 1808, in Edwin M.
Bettsand James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia,
Mo., 1966), 362-63.
5. On the other children of Peter and Jane Randolph Jefferson see Dumas Ma-
lone, Jeffersonand His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948—81), I, 430.
6. Fawn Brodie speculated that Jefferson's feelings toward his mother were deeply
hostile, but her use of two letters from Jefferson to John Adams, August 1, 1816,
and March 25, 1826, to judge Jefferson's childhood cannot sustain her interpreta-
tion. Fawn M. Brodie, Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York, 1974), 46;
Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The Adams-Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959), II, 483,
614.
7. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford,(ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 5.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Jefferson to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
II, 196; Eleanor D. Berman, Thomas Jefferson Among the Arts (New York, 1947), 172;
Malone, Jefferson, I, 47.
11. Jefferson to John Harvie, January 14, 1760 in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I,
3; Jefferson to Martha Jefferson, March 28 and May 5, 1787, in Betts and Bear
(eds.), Family Letters, 34, 40.
352 NOTES TO PAGES 5- 13
12. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 5—6. See also
Jefferson to L. H. Giradin, January 15, 1815, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E.
Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903), XIV,
231.
13. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 6; Malone, Jeffer-
son, 53; Jefferson to L. H. Giradin, January 15, 1815, in
I, Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XIV, 231.
14. Jefferson to Thomas McAuley, June 14, 1819, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
I, 32m
15. Jefferson to John Page, December 25, 1762, in ibid., 5.
16. Jefferson to Page, January 20, 1763, in ibid., 7.

17. Jefferson to Page, July 15, 1763, quoting Page's letter to Jefferson, May 30,
1763 (lost), in ibid., 9.
18. Brodie, Jefferson, 65; Jefferson to Page, February 12, 1763, in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, 1,8.
19. Jefferson to Page, July 15 and October 7, 1763, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJeffer-
son,9—11. See also Gilbert Chinard (ed.), The Literary Bible of Thomas Jefferson: His
Commonplace Book of Philosophers and Poets (Baltimore, 1928), 22; Douglas L. Wilson,
"Thomas Jefferson's Early Notebooks," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XLII
(1985), 441.
20. Jefferson to Thomas Turpin, February 5, 1769, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJeffer-
son, I, 24.
2 1 . Jefferson to Page, December 25, 1762, in ibid., 5; Jefferson to Madison, Febru-
ary 17, 1826, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII, 456; Merrill D. Peterson, Thomas
Jefferson and the New Nation: A Biography (New York, 1970), 16—17. See also Jefferson
to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings of
Jefferson, XIV, 120.

22. Gilbert Chinard (ed.), The Commonplace Book of Thomas Jefferson: A Repertory of
His Ideas on Government (Baltimore, 1926), 67-167. See also Edward Dumbauld,
Thomas Jefferson and the Law (Norman, 1978), 15, 171.
23. Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, I, 454m
24. Malone, Jefferson, I, 435-40; Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, Report
of the Curator, 1981 (Monticello, [1982]), 20-21.
25. Malone, Jefferson, I, 439— 41.
26. Hugh Jones, The Present State of Virginia, ed. Richard L. Morton (Chapel Hill,
1956), 70.
27. Jefferson to William Wirt, August 15, 1815, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
XI, 404, 407; Edmund S. Morgan (ed.), Prologue to Revolution: Sources and Documents
on the Stamp Act Crisis, 1764-1766 (Chapel Hill, 1959), 47; Robert D. Meade, Patrick
Henry: Patriot in the Making (Philadelphia, 1957), 169-79.
28. Jefferson to Page, May 25, 1766, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 19-20.
29. Edwin Morris Betts (ed.), Thomas Jefferson's Garden Book, 1766-1824 (Phila-
delphia, 1944), 1,6, 11, 12.
30. The entry is quoted in full in Dumbauld, Jefferson and the Law, 89.
31. Jefferson, memoranda books, 1767-1770, 1773, in Thomas Jefferson Papers,
Library of Congress; Henry S. Randall, The Life of Thomas Jefferson (3 vols.; New
York, 1858), I, 45-48; Dumbauld, Jefferson and the Law, 158m
32. Dumbauld, Jefferson and the Law, 89-90, 93; Malone, Jefferson, I, 122.
33. Edmund Randolph, History of Virginia, ed. Arthur H. Shaffer (Charlottesville,
1970), 182-83.
NOTES TO PAGES 1
3- 1 8 353
34. Howell v. Netherland, April, 1 770. Jefferson's argument is in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, I, 470-81.
35. Ibid., 480— 81 Dumbauld, Jefferson and the Law, 84.
;
36. Dumbauld, Jefferson and the Law, 89, i57n; Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, VI,
151-58.
Chapter II
1. Rind's Virginia Gazette, December 15, 1768; Charles S. Sydnor, Gentlemen Free-
holders: Political Practices in Washington's Virginia (Chapel Hill, 1952), 20-29; memo-
randum or account book, 1767-1770, entries for December 5, 1768, in Thomas
Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress (hereinafter cited LC).
2. Julian P. Boyd
The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), I, 26-27.
(ed.),
See also Jefferson to William Wirt, August 5, 1815, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of
Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), I, 466n.
3. Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1766—1769, ed. John P. Kennedy
(Richmond, 1906), 190-91.
4. Proceedings, May 17, 1769, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 27-31; Purdie
and Dixon's Virginia Gazette, May 18, 1769.
5. See Robert A. Rutland (ed.), The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792 (3 vols.;
Chapel Hill, 1970), I, 94-96, 112-13.
6. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 9; Journals of the
House of Burgesses, 1766—1769, pp. 221, 228, 229, 262, 296, 298, 308, 317; Journals of
the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1770-1772, ed.JohnP. Kennedy (Richmond, 1906),
63, 105.
7. Other titles included William Petyt, Jus Parliamentarium; or, the Ancient Power,
Jurisdiction, Rights and Liberties, of the Most High Court of Parliament, Revived and As-
serted; William Hakewill, Modus tenendi Parliamentum; or the Old Manner of Holding
Parliaments in England; and Ferdinando Warner, The History of the Rebellion and Civil-
War in Ireland. Invoice enclosed in Perkins, Buchanan & Brown to Jefferson, Oc-
tober 2, 1769, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 34; E. Millicent Sowerby (ed.), Cata-
logue of the Library of Thomas Jefferson (5 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1952 — 59), I, 192 —
93, II, 70, III, 2, 12, 20-21, 123, 177, 182, 237-38.
8. Garry Wills, Inventing America: Jefferson's Declaration of Independence (New York,
1978), 174; Frank L. Dewey, "Thomas Jefferson's Notes on Divorce," William and
Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXXIX (1982), 214-15, 217, 220.
9.Sowerby (ed.), Catalogue, III, 12. It was also included in Locke's Works sold to
Congress. Douglas L. Wilson, "Sowerby Revisited: The Unfinished Catalogue of
Thomas Jefferson's Library," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XLI (1984), 628.
10. It is estimated that two-thirds of Jefferson's library was destroyed by fire in
1851. Sowerby (ed.), Catalogue, I, x.

11. This invoice, not published in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, is in the Virginia
Historical Society, Richmond.
12. Account book, August 4, 1773, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
13. Jefferson to John Page, February 21, 1770, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I,
34-35-
14. Jefferson to James Ogilvie, February 20, 1771, in ibid., 63; Jefferson's account
book, 1767-1770, quoted in Edwin Morris Betts (ed.), Thomas Jefferson's Garden
Book, 1764-1824 (Philadelphia, 1944), 12, 16-18, 20.
15. Frederick D. Nichols, "Jefferson: The Making of an Architect," in William
Howard Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts: An Extended View (Washington, D.C.,
354 NOTES TO PAGES 18-24
1976), 163; Frederick D. Nichols, Thomas Jefferson's Architectural Drawings (3rd ed.;
Charlottesville, 1961), 34-38.
16. Thomas Peden (Chapel
Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, ed. William
Hill, 1954), 152-53; Jefferson to Page, May 25, 1766, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJeffer-
son, I, 20; Edmund Randolph, History of Virginia, ed. Arthur H. Shaffer (Charlottes-
ville, 1970), 181.
17. Marie Kimball, Jefferson: The Road to Glory, 1743 to 1776 (New York, 1943),
147; James Gibbs, A Book of Architecture, Containing Designs of Buildings and Ornaments
(London, 1728); Gibbs, Rules for Drawing the Several Parts of Architecture (London,
1732); Robert Morris, Select Architecture: Being Regular Designs of Plans and Elevations
Well Suited to Both Town and Country (London, 1755); Nichols, Jefferson Architectural 's
Drawings, 34—35; William B. O'Neal, Jefferson's Fine Arts Library: His Selections for the
University of Virginia Together with His Own Architectural Books (Charlottesville, 1976),
136-42, 231.
18. Nichols, "Jefferson: The Making of an Architect," 164-66; Nichols, Jefferson 's
Architectural Drawings, 3, 34—35.
19. Nichols, Jefferson's Architectural Drawings, 3; Fiske Kimball, Thomas Jefferson,
Architect (Boston, 1916), 24-26 and fig. 23; Marquis de Chastellux, Travels in North
America in the Years 1780, 1781 and 1782, ed. Howard C. Rice, Jr. (2 vols.; Chapel
Hill, 1963), 11,391,575.
20. Marquis de Chastellux, Travels in North America, II, 391.
21. Jefferson to Maria Cosway, October 12, 1786, and Jefferson to George Gil-
mer, August 12, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, X, 447, XII, 26.
22. Jefferson to Thomas Adams, June 1, 1771, and Jefferson to Robert Skipwith,
August 3, 1771, in ibid., I, 71, 78; Kimball, Jefferson: Road to Glory, 173-74.
23. It was years after the incident that Walker charged Jefferson with the indiscre-
tion and not until Jefferson became president that the story found its way into the
press. Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948—81), I, 447—51.
24. Ibid., I, 156-58, 432; Kimball, Jefferson: Road to Glory, 169, 176. Fawn Brodie
questioned the date of John Skelton's death, but the evidence is not conclusive.
Brodie, Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York, 1974), 86, 505.
25. Sarah N. Randolph, The Domestic Life of Thomas Jefferson ( 1 87 1 rpr. New York, ;
1958), 43-44; Skipwith to Jefferson, September 20, 1771, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, I, 84.
26. Jefferson to Thomas Adams, June 1, 1771, in Boyd (ed.). Papers ofJefferson, I,
72.
27. Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Garden Book, 33; Randolph, Domestic Life ofJefferson, 44.
28. Kimball, Jefferson: Road to Glory, 156. See also Malone, Jefferson, I, 150.
29. Journals of the House of Burgesses, 1770—1772, p. 143.
Chapter III
(Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), I, 9.
2. Ibid., 9- 10.
3. Journals of the House of Burgesses, 1773-1776, Including the Records of the Commit-
tee of Correspondence, ed. John P. Kennedy (Richmond, 1905), 28; Lawrence Henry
Gipson, The Coming of the Revolution, 1763- 1775 (New York, 1954), 209-10; Jeffer-
son, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 10- 1 1.
4. Dunmore to Lord Dartmouth, March 31, 1773, in Journals of the House of Bur-
gesses, 1773-1776, x.
;
NOTES TO PAGES 24- 30 355
5. Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), I, g8n;
Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), I, 431, 441-45.
6. Purdie and Dixon's Virginia Gazette reported the news May 19, 1774. Robert A.
Rutland (ed.), The Papers of George Mason, 1J25 — 1J92 (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1970), I,
19m.
7. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 11-12; Resolution,
May 24, 1774, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, 105-106, io6n.
8. Journals of the House of Burgesses, iyy^ — iyy6, p. 132; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJeffer-
son, I,io6n, io7n; George Washington to George William Fairfax, June 10, 1774,
in John C. Fitzpatrick (ed.), The Writings of George Washington (39 vols.; Washington,
D.C., 1931-44), III, 223.
9. Association, May
27, 1774, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 107-108.
House of Burgesses, iyyj-iyy6, p. 138; letter from Peyton Ran-
10. Journals of the
dolph and others, May 31,1 774, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 111-12; see also
1 ion.
1 1. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 117-19.
12. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 14-15; Boyd
(ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 669-73.
13. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 14.
14. Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America, in Boyd (ed.), Papers
ofJefferson, 121-25.
I,

16. Jefferson, A Summary View, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 121 — 35.
17. The resolutions are in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 137-40.
18. Ibid., I, 672.
19. Editorial work now in progress on Jefferson's notebooks by Douglas L. Wilson
will aid greatly in dating the entries. See Wilson, "Thomas Jefferson's Early Note-
books," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
433—52.
Ser., XLII (1985),
20. On Jefferson's reading of Montesquieu see David W. Carrithers, "Montes-
quieu, Jefferson and the Fundamentals of Eighteenth-Century Republican Theory,"
French-American Review, VI (1982), 160—88.
2 1 Gilbert Chinard (ed.), The Commonplace Book of Thomas Jefferson: A Repertory of
.
His Ideas on Government (Baltimore, 1926), 18—19, 99. For Jefferson's early reading
see H. Trevor Colbourn, The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Ori-
gins of the American Revolution (Chapel Hill, 1965), 158—60.
22. On the familiarity of Virginians with Locke see Richard Beale Davis, A Colo-
nial Southern Bookshelf: Reading in the Eighteenth Century (Athens, Ga., 1979), 49—50.
23. Jefferson to Mason Locke Weems, December 13, 1804, in Thomas Jefferson
Papers, Library of Congress; Gilbert Chinard (ed.), The Literary Bible of Thomas Jeffer-
son: HisCommonplace Book of Philosophers and Poets (Baltimore, 1928), 19-20, 40-7 1
Jefferson to Robert Skipwith, August 31, 1771, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I,
76-80. On Jefferson's later criticism of Montesquieu, see Joyce Appleby, "What Is

Still American in the Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson," William and Mary
Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXXIX (1982), 287-301.

24. Examples from both are given in Garry Wills, Inventing America: Jefferson's
Declaration of Independence (New York, 1978), 80—83.
25. Jefferson to William Wirt, August 5, 1815, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI,
4*3-
26. Chinard (ed.), Commonplace Book, 21-22, 172, 178, 181-82; Abraham Stan-
yan, Grecian History Down to the Death of Philip Macedon (2 vols.; London, 1739).
356 NOTES TO PAGES 3 1 -38
27. Charles Francis Adams (ed.), Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams, Comprising Portions
of His Diary from 1795 to 1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874-77), VIII, 279; Wills,
Inventing America, 84.
28. L. H. Butterfield (ed.), Diary and Autobiography of John Adams (4 vols.; Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1961), III, 335—36. Garry Wills argued that Adams was not referring
to A Summary View, but Julian Boyd concluded that he was. Wills, Inventing America,
78; Boyd Papers ofJefferson, I, 676.
(ed.),
29. A record of the vote is reproduced in Douglas Southall Freeman, George

Washington: A Biography (7 vols.; New York, 1948-57), III, 373.
30. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 672-73; Marie Kimball, Jefferson: The Road to
Glory, 1776 (New York, 1943), 242-43.

1743 to
31. Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, ed. Worthington C. Ford etal.
(34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904-37), I, 67—73.
32. Association, October 20, 1774, in ibid., 75-80; Jefferson, Autobiography, in
Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 16; M alone, Jefferson, I, 192; Kimball, Jefferson: Road
to Glory, 256.
33. Convention proceedings, in Peter Force (ed.), American Archives, Ser. 4, II
(1839), 165.
34. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 16; Edmund Ran-
dolph, History of Virginia, ed. Arthur H. Shaffer (Charlottesville, 1970), 213; Report,
[March 25, 1775], in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 160—62.
35. William Wirt, The Life of Patrick Henry, ed. Henry Ketcham (1817; rpr. New
York, 1903), 122; Jefferson to Small, May 7, 1775, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
I, 165.
36. Kimball, Jefferson: Road to Glory, 260—62.
37. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 17; Jefferson,
comments on Francois Soules' Histoire des troubles de LAmerique Anglaise, August 3,
1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, X, 371.
38. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 17; Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, I, 174m

39. Virginia Resolutions, June 10, 1775, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I,
170-74.
40. Jefferson, account book, June 17, 1775, transcript by James A. Bear, Jr., in
University of Virginia library, Charlottesville.
Chapter IV
1. Jefferson to Francis Eppes, 26, 1775, Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of
June
Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), I, 174.
2. Samuel Ward to Henry Ward, June 22, 1775, in Paul H. Smith (ed.), Letters of
Delegates to Congress, 1774-1789 (Washington, D.C., 1976-), I, 535; Adams to Timo-

thy Pickering, August 6, 1822, in Charles Francis Adams (ed.), The Works of John
Adams (10 vols.; Boston, 1856), II, 513-14; L. H. Butterfield (ed.), Diary and Autobi-
ography ofJohn Adams, (4 vols.; Cambridge, Mass., 1961), III, 335.
3. Adams to William Tudor, July 6, 1775, in Smith (ed.), Letters of Delegates, I, 587;
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 187—219.
Jefferson to Gilmer, [July 5, 1775], Gilmer to Jefferson, [July 26 or 27, 1775],
4.
in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 185-86, i86n, 236-38.
5. Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, ed. Worthington C. Ford et al.
(34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904-37), II, 127, 158; Jefferson, Autobiography, in
Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York,
NOTES TO PAGES 38-46 357
1904), I, 19; Virginia delegates to Peyton Randolph, July 11, 1775, in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, I 223—24.,
6. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 225-33.

7. Convention proceedings, in Peter Force (ed.), American Archives, Ser. 4, III
(1840), 377, 379, 383.

8. Jefferson to John Randolph, August 25, 1775, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
1,241.
9. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 66-67.
10. Jefferson to Randolph, August 25, 1775, in
ibid., 241-42.
Joseph Hewes to James Iredell, November 9, 1775, Richard Henry Lee to

11.
Washington, November 13, 1775, in Smith (ed.), Letters of Delegates, II, 322, 335,
337n; Marie Kimball, Jefferson: The Road to Glory (New York, 1943), 273; Jefferson to
Francis Eppes, October 24, 1775, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 249.
12. Jefferson to Randolph, November 29, 1775, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,
I, 269.
13. Jefferson to Eppes, November 7, 1775, in ibid., 252.
14. Boyd (ed.), 272-73, 274-75.
Papers ofJefferson, I,
15. Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, October 27, 1808, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and
Albert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C.,
1903), XII, 180; Jefferson to Dr. Vine Utley, March 21, 1819, in Sarah N. Randolph,
The Domestic Life of Thomas Jefferson (1871; rpr. New York, 1958), 371; Fawn M.
Brodie, Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York, 1974), 114—15; Edmund
Pendleton to Jefferson, May Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 296.
24, 1776, in
XVIII (London, 1813), 696; Adams to Hora-
16. Parliamentary History of England,
tio Gates, March 23, 1776, in Smith (ed.), Letters of Delegates, III, 431 John R. Alden, ;
The American Revolution, 1775- 1783 (New York, 1954), 62-67; Nelson to Jefferson,
February 4, 1776, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 286.
17. Page to Jefferson, April 6, 1776, James McClurg to Jefferson, April 6, 1776,
Jefferson to Thomas Nelson, Jr., May 16, 1776, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I,
287, 292.
18. Resolutions, May 15, 1776, in ibid., 290-91.
19. Jefferson to Nelson, May 16, 1776, Pendleton to Jefferson, May 24, 1776, in
ibid., 292, 296.
20. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 329-86; Robert A. Rutland (ed.), The Papers
of George Mason (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1970), I, 295—310.
21. Wythe to Jefferson, July 27, 1776, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 476-77.
22. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 345-46, 415-19.
23. Jefferson's drafts and the constitution as adopted are in ibid., 337-83.
24. Jefferson to Pendleton, August 26, 1776, in ibid., 503.
25. Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
XII, 4.
26. See Gordon S. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776- 1 787 (Chapel
Hill, 1969), 255.
27. Rutland (ed.), Papers of Mason, I, 289; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 363.
28. Wythe to Jefferson, July 27, 1776, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I, 477;
Pendleton to Jefferson, August 10, 1776, in David J. Mays (ed.), The Letters and Papers
of Edmund Pendleton (2 vols.; Charlottesville, 1967), I, 197.
29. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 298.
30. Jefferson, Notes on proceedings in Congress, in ibid., 313.
31. Silvio A. Bedini, Declaration of Independence Desk: Relic of Revolution (Washing-
ton, D.C., 1981), 5-6.
358 NOTES TO PAGES 47~55
32. Adams to Timothy Pickering, August 6, 1822, in Adams (ed.), Works of John
Adams, II, 514.
33. Jefferson to in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, 1,3 m.
Madison, August 30, 1823,
34. Boyd (ed.),Papers of Jefferson, I, 413-33. A detailed textual analysis is in
Julian P. Boyd, The Declaration of Independence: The Evolution of the Text (Princeton,
1945). See also Jefferson to Madison, August 30, 1823, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, I, 3m, and Butterfield (ed.), Diary and Autobiography ofJohn Adams, III, 335-37.
35. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 314-15, 426.
36. Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, July 8, 1776, Edmund Pendleton to Jeffer-
son, August 10, 1776, in ibid., 455-56, 488.
37. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 315, 414.
38. Jefferson to Madison, August 30, 1823, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 3 m;
Adams to Timothy Pickering, August 6, 1822, in Adams (ed.), Works of John Adams,
II, 514.
39. Jefferson to Henry Lee, May 8, 1825, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII, 409.
40. Rutland (ed.), Papers of Mason, I, 276, 283; Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I,
423-
41. Garry Wills, in Inventing America: Jeff ersons Declaration of Independence (New
York, 1978), denigrated the influence of Locke and argued for the dominant influ-
ence of Francis Hutcheson and the Scottish moral philosophers. Wills's use of evi-
dence and his conclusions have been challenged bv Ronald Hamovvy in 'Jefferson
and the Scottish Enlightenment: A Critique of Garry Wills's Inventing America: Jeffer-
son s Declaration of Independence," William and Mars Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXXVI (1979),
503-23-
42. See Boyd, Declaration of Independence, 22-24.
Boyd
43. (ed.),Papers of Jefferson, I, 423; Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr., "The Lost
Meaning of the 'Pursuit of Happiness,"' William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXI
(1964), 325-27-
44. See Chapter I.
45. Bartlett to John Langdon, July 1, 1776, in Smith (ed.), Letters of Delegates, IV,
35 1 -
46. Caesar Rodney to Thomas Rodney, July 4, 1776, Adams to Mary Palmer, July
5, 1776, Adams to Abigail Adams, July 3, 1776, in ibid., 388, 389, 376.
Chapter V
1. Edmund Randolph to Jefferson, June 23, 1776, William Fleming to Jefferson,
July 27, 1776, Jefferson to Edmund Pendleton, [ca. June 30, 1776], in Julian P. Boyd
(ed.), The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), I, 407, 474, 408.
2. Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, July 29, 1776, Pendleton to Jefferson, August
26, 1776, in 477, 508.
ibid.,
3. Jefferson to William Fleming, July 1, 1776, in ibid., 412.

4. Pendleton to Jefferson, July 22, and August 10, 1776, in ibid., 472, 489.
5. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 605.
6. Jefferson to Hancock, October 11, 1776, in ibid., 524.
7. Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I,On the evangelical move-
525-58, 605-52.
ment Rhys Isaac, The Transformation of Virginia, 1 740-1 790 (Chapel
in Virginia see
Hill, 1982), 200-203, 260-95.
(Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia
(Williamsburg, 1776), October 11, 14, 1776, in William S.Jenkins (ed.), Records of the
A Microfilm Compilation (Washington, D.C., 1949).
States of the United States of America:
9. Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, I, 525 — 28, 534; Jefferson, Autobiography in

Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 63.
10. The conflict over religion in Virginia summarized in Merrill D. Peterson,
is
Thomas Jefferson and the New Nation: A(New York, 1970), 133-44. See also
Biography
Thomas E. Buckley, Church and State in Revolutionary Virginia, 1776—1787 (Char-
lottesville, 1977), 17—62; Isaac, Transformation of Virginia, 278—95.
11. Jefferson to Adams, October 28, 1813, in Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The Adams-
Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959), II, 389. The importance of the abolition
of entail and primogeniture in bringing about a less aristocratic society has been
questioned by C. Ray Keim, "Primogeniture and Entail in Colonial Virginia," Wil-
liam and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXV (1968), 545-86.
12. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 58. Compare with
the reference to natural aristocracy in James Harrington's The Commonwealth of
Oceana (1656), quoted in Lance Banning, The Jeffersonian Persuasion: Evolution of a
Party Ideology (Ithaca, N.Y., 1978), 26.
13. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 66—67.
14. The act is in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, I, 562-63.
15. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 67-68; Robert A.
Rutland The Papers of George Mason, 1725 — 1792 (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1970), I,
(ed.),
327, 331; Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, ed. William Peden (Chapel
Hill, 1954), 137; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, II, 306.
16. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 70; Pendleton to
Jefferson, May 11, 1779 in David J. Mays (ed.), The Letters and Papers of Edmund
Pendleton (2 vols.; Charlottesville, 1967), I, 283; Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, II,
329—33, 492—95, 515, 526; Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 137.
17. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, II, 307, 322.

18. Ibid., 391—93, 535; Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 77.
19. Jefferson to George Wythe, August 13, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
X, 244.
20. Boyd (ed.), II, 526-33; Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 146.
Papers ofJefferson,
21. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 146-47.
22. "A Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge," in Boyd (ed.), Papers
of Jefferson, II, 526—27.
23. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, II, 535m
24. Ibid., 492—93; Peterson, Thomas Jefferson and the New Nation, 124—33. See a ^ so
Boyd Papers ofJefferson, II, 505m
(ed.),
25. Madison to Jefferson, February 15, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XI,
152.
26. Jefferson, Notes in Virginia, 137-38. On Jefferson's Notes on Virginia see Chap-
ter VII.
27. Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 77; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, II, 472-73;
Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 214, 297.
28. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 141-43; Ramsay to Jefferson, May 3, 1786 in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IX, 441.
29. John C. Miller, The Wolf by the Ears: Thomas Jefferson and Slavery (New York,
1977), 52, 57. For a detailed examination of Jefferson and slavery and race see
Winthrop D. Jordan, White over Black: American Attitudes Toward the Negro, /550-
1812 (Chapel Hill, 1968), 429-81.
1
30. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 162—63.

31. Madison to Samuel H. Smith, November 4, 1826, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, II, 313.
32. "A Bill for Establishing a Public Library," in ibid., 544.
Chapter VI
1. Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-),
II, 278;
Emory G. Evans, Thomas Nelson of Yorktown: Revolutionary Virginian (Williamsburg,

1975), 3, 82; David J. Mays (ed.), The Letters and Papers of Edmund Pendleton (2 vols.;
Charlottesville, 1967), I, 290.
2. Page to Jefferson, June
2, 1779, Jefferson to Page, June 3, 1779, Boyd (ed.), m
Papers ofJefferson, II, 278—79.
3. Jefferson to Baron von Riedesel, July 4, 1779, Jefferson to Lee, June 17, 1779,
in ibid., Ill, 24, II, 298.
Jefferson to Lee, September 13, 1780, in ibid., Ill, 643.
4.
5.Council to Jefferson, November 13, 1799, in ibid., 183-84; Jefferson to James

Barbour, January 22, 1812, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Fed-
eral Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), XI, 222-25; H. R. Mcllwaine and Wilmer L.
Hall (eds.), Journals of the Council of State of Virginia (3 vols.; Richmond, 1931—52), II,
271-75-
6. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, II, 364-65, 365^ 366-67, III, 399n.
7. 598, II, 271-72.
Ibid., I,
8. Marie Kimball, Jefferson: War and Peace, 1776 to 1784 (New York, 1947), 55-58.
9. Board of War to Jefferson, November 16, 1779, Jefferson to the Board of War,
November 18, 1779, Washington to Jefferson, December 11, 1779, in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, III, 191, 193-94, 217.

10. Madison to Jefferson, March 27, 1780, Washington to Jefferson, April 15,
1780, in ibid., 335, 352—53; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston,
1848-81), I, 322.
1 1. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, III, 403 n.
12. Jefferson to Samuel Huntington, June 9, 1780, Gates to Jefferson, July 19,
1780, in 426, 496.
ibid.,
13. Jefferson to Washington, October 22, 1780, Greene to Jefferson, December 6,

1780, in ibid., IV, 59-60, 183-84.
14. William Davies to Jefferson, February 1, 1781, in ibid., 493-94.
15. Boyd Papers ofJefferson, III, 318-19, 535, IV, 76.
(ed.),
16. On Jefferson's role in the war in the West see Kimball, Jefferson: War and Peace,
78-95-
17. Morgan to Jefferson, February 1, 1781, Jefferson to Lafayette, March 10,
1781, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, IV, 495-96, V, 113. On Virginians' attitudes
toward military service see Charles Royster, A Revolutionary People at War (Chapel
Hill, 1979), 322-25..
18. Greene to Jefferson, March 27, 1 78 1 Jefferson
,
to Greene, April 1, 1781, in
Boyd Papers ofJefferson, IV, 258, 312.
(ed.),
19. Jefferson's account of these events is in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, IV,
258-70.
20. Ibid., 263—64.
21. Jefferson to Lafayette, May 14, 1781, in ibid., V, 644; Evans, Thomas Nelson,
99-101; John R. Alden, The South in the Revolution, 1763- 1789 (Baton Rouge,
i957)> 293.
1
NOTES TO PAGES 7 1 - 79 36
22. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IV, 260-61; see also Jefferson, Autobiography,
in Ford Works ofJefferson, I, 79.
(ed.),
23. Jefferson's account is in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, IV, 260-61. See also
Madison to Philip Mazzei, July 7, 1781, in William T. Hutchinson, William M. E.
Rachal, and Robert A. Rutland (eds.), The Papers of James Madison (Chicago and
Charlottesville, 1962-), III, 178.
24. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IV, 265.
25. Resolution, in ibid., VI, 88.
26. Archibald Cary to Jefferson, June 19, 1781, in ibid., 96-97; Robert D. Meade,
Patrick Henry, Practical Revolutionary (Philadelphia, 1969), 245—48.
27. Jefferson to Nicholas, July 28, 1781, Nicholas to Jefferson, July 31, 1781, in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 104-106.
28. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IV, 261-62, VI, 134-35, 106-108.
29. Ibid., VI, 135-36.

30. See his letter to Isaac Zane, December 24, 1781, in ibid., 143.
31. See BoydPapers ofJefferson, IV, 271-77; Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The
(ed.),
Jeffersonian Republicans: The Formation of Party Organization, 1789— 1 801 (Chapel Hill,
1957), 100.
32. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 94-95.
Thomas McKean, August 4, 1781, in ibid., 113. See also Jefferson
33. Jefferson to
to Lafayette,August 4, 1781, in ibid., 112.
34. Randolph to Jefferson, September 7, 1 78 1 Jefferson to Randolph, Septem-
,
ber 15, 1781, in ibid., 116-17.

35. Madison to Edmund Randolph, June 11, 1782, in Hutchinson, Rachal, and
Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, IV, 333.
Chapter VII
1. Jefferson to the Chavalier D'Anmours, November 30, 1780, in Julian P. Boyd
(ed.), The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, (Princeton, 1950-), IV, 168.
2. Sullivan to Meshech Weare, December 25, 1780, quoted in ibid., 167m
3. Jefferson, Autobiography, Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Fed-
eral Edition; 12 vols.; New York,
I, 94; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IV, i67n;
1904),
Henry Steele Commager, and the Enlightenment," in Lally Weymouth
"Jefferson
(ed.), Thomas Jefferson: The Man, His World, His Influence (New York, 1973), 40-41;
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, ed. William Peden (Chapel Hill,
1954). xi -
4. Jefferson to Marbois, December 20, 1781, March 24, 1782, in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, VI, 141—42, 171 — 72.
5. Jefferson to Thomson, December 20, 1781, Thomson to Jefferson, Mar. 9,
1782, in ibid., 142, 163-64; Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, xv. See also Marie Kimball,
Jefferson: War and Peace, ijj6to 1784 (New York, 1947), 270-74.
6. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 10, 43—65, 103—107.
7. Ibid., 43-65; 268m See also Daniel J. Boorstin, The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson
(1948; rpr. Chicago, 1981) 100-105.
8. John C. Greene, American Science in the Age of Jefferson (Ames, Iowa, 1984),
31-33-
9. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1 18-20.
10. Ibid., 62.
11. See Chapter V
12. Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 164-65.
362 NOTES TO PAGES 79~88
13. Thomson to Jefferson, March 6, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII,
16. On the publication of the work see Chapter VIII.
14. Marquis de Chastellux, Travels in North America in the Years ij8o, ij8i, and
1782, ed. Howard C. Rice, Jr. (2 vols.; Chapel 391-92.
Hill, 1963), II,
15. Jefferson, account book, May 8, 1782, transcript by James A. Bear, Jr., in Uni-
versity of Virginia librarv, Charlottesville.
16. The record of the Jefferson children can be found in Dumas \ia\one, Jefferson
and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), 434. I,
17. Jefferson to Monroe, May 20, 1782, in Boyd (ed.), The Papers of Jefferson,
VI, 186.
18. Boyd (ed.), The Papers ofJefferson, VI, i96n.
19. Ibid., 196.
20. Sarah N. Randolph, The Domestic Life ofJefferson (1871; rpr. New York, 1958),
63; Boyd Papers ofJefferson. VI, i99n-20on.
(ed.),
21. Jefferson to Chastellux, November 26, 1782, in Bovd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
VI, 203.
22. The action was taken on November 12, 1782, in ibid., 202.
23. Jefferson to Chastellux, November 26, 1782, in ibid., 203.
25. Malone, 405; Jefferson to Monroe, November 18, 1783, in
Jefferson, I, Boyd
(ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 355.
26. Jefferson to Marbois, December 5, 1783, in ibid., 374.

27. Jefferson to Martha (Patsy) Jefferson, November 28, 1783, in Edwin M. Betts
and James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo.,
1966), 19-20.
28. Ibid.
29. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 404-406, 412.
30. Robert F. Berkhofer, Jr., "Jefferson, the Ordinance of 1784, and the Ameri-
can Territorial Svstem." William and Man Quarterh. 3rd Ser., XXIX (1972), 230—55;
William T. Hutchinson, M. E. Rachal, and Robert A. Rutland (eds.), The Papers of
James Madison (Chicago and Charlottesville. 1962-), II, 77, 138.
31. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 592, 604-605.
32. Ibid., 608, 614.
33. The report is in ibid., VII, 65-80.
34. Related documents and notes are in ibid., 150-202.

35. Ibid., 229, 239.
36. Jefferson to Edmund Pendleton, May 25, 1784, in ibid., 292.
37. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VII, 303.
38. Jefferson, account book, July 5, 1784, transcript by Bear, in U. Va. library;
Jefferson to David Humphreys, June 27, 1784, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,
VII, 321.
39. Francis Hopkinson to Jefferson, May 30, [1784], Jefferson to Samuel Henlev,
March 3, Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, VII, 295-96, VIII, 11; Kimball,
1785, in
Jefferson: War and Peace, 356.
40. Martha Jefferson to Eliza Trist, [1785], in Boyd (ed.), Papeis ofJefferson, VIII,
436; Jefferson, account book, July 5-24, 1784, transcript by Bear, in U. Va. librarv.
41. Jefferson, account book, July 26-30, 1784, in U. Va. library; Jefferson to
Monroe, November 1 1, 1784, Martha Jefferson to Eliza Trist, [1785], in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, VII, 508, VIII, 436-37.
NOTES TO PAGES 90 — 96 363
Chapter VIII
1. Martha Jefferson to Eliza Trist, [1785], Jefferson to James Monroe, November
li, 1784, in Julian P. Boyd
The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-),
(ed.),
VIII, 437, VII, 508; Jefferson, account book, August 6, 1784, transcript by James A.
Bear, Jr., in University of Virginia library, Charlottesville; William Howard Adams
(ed.), The Eye of Thomas Jefferson (Washington, D.C., 1976), 133.
2. Howard C. Rice, Jr., Thomas Jefferson's Paris (Princeton, 1976); 13; Jefferson,
account book, August 6, 8, 10, 11, 1784, transcript by Bear, in U. Va. library; Martha
Jefferson to Eliza Trist, [1785], Jefferson to Mary Jefferson Boiling, July 23, 1787, in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 437, XI, 612.
3. Rice, Jefferson's Paris, 8-9, 37-40, 51; Jefferson to John Jay, May 15, 1788, in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIII, 162; Marie Kimball, Jefferson: The Scene of Europe,
1784 to 1 J 89 (New York, 1950),
10-12.
4. Jefferson to Monroe, March 18, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 43.
5. Jefferson to Monroe, June 17, 1785, in ibid., 233.
6. Jefferson to Bellini, September 30, 1785, in ibid., 568-69; Helen Cripe, Thomas
Jefferson and Music (Charlottesville, 1974), 19-20.
7. Jefferson to Eliza Trist, August 18, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,
VIII, 404.
8. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VII, 463-93.
Jefferson to Monroe, June 17, 1785, in
9. ibid., VIII, 231. See also ibid., VII, 470,
478-79, VIII, 266-67.
10. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VII, 486— 87; Jefferson, Autobiography, in Paul
L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York,
1904), I, 96.
11. Jefferson to Chastellux, January 16, 1784, Jefferson to Madison, May 25,
1784, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VI, 467, VII, 288-89; Jefferson, Autobiogra-
phy, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 94.
12. Louis Guillaume Otto to Jefferson, May 28, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, VIII, 169-70. See also inscription in presentation copy to Richard Price, in
ibid., facing p. 246.
13. Jefferson to Monroe, June 17, 1785, in ibid., 229.
14. Jefferson to Chastellux, June 1, 1785, in ibid., 184.
15. Jefferson to Madison, May 11, 1785, Madison to Jefferson, November 15,
1785, Thomson to Jefferson, November 2, 1785, in ibid., VIII, 147—48, IX, 9, 38.
16. Jefferson to Madison, September 1, 1785, Jefferson to C. W. F. Dumas, Febru-
ary 2, 1 786, Jefferson to Madison, February 8, 1786, Jefferson to Edward Bancroft,

February 26, 1786, in ibid., VIII, 462, IX, 244, 265, 267n-68n, 299; Thomas Jeffer-
son, Notes on the State of Virginia, ed. William Peden (Chapel Hill, 1954), xviii.
17. Madison to Jefferson, May 12, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IX, 517;
Coolie Verner, "The Maps and Plates Appearing with the Several Editions of Mr.
Jefferson's 'Notes on the State of Virginia,'" Virginia Magazine of History and Biogra-
phy, LIX (1951), 21-25; Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, xix-xx; Coolie Verner, A Fur-
ther Checklist of the Separate Editions of Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia (Char-
lottesville, 1950), 8; E. Millicent Sowerby (ed.), Catalogue of the Library of Thomas
Jefferson (5 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1952-59), IV, 301-30.
18. Jefferson to Thomson, June 21, 1785, Jefferson to Stockdale, February 1,
1787, Adams to Jefferson, May 22, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 245,
364 NOTES TO PAGES 96-IO3
XI, 107, VIII, 160; Marquis de Chastellux, Travels in North America in the Years 1780,
1781, and 1782, ed. Howard C. Rice, Jr. (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1963), II, 606.
19. Quoted in Marie Kimball, Jefferson: War and Peace, 1776 to 1784 (New York,
!947)» 3 02 -3 3-
20. John Jay to Jefferson, March 15, 22, 1785, Jefferson to Jay, May 11, June 17,
1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 33, 54, 145-46, 226.
21. Adams to William Gordon, April 27, 1785, Adams to Richard Cranch, April
27, 1785, quoted in ibid., VII, 652m
22. Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, January 13, 1795, in ibid., 602-603.
23. Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 98-99; Lawrence S. Kaplan, Jefferson and
France (New Haven, 1967), 19—20.
24. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VII, 263; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time
(6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), II, 31.
25. Jefferson to Nathanael Greene, January 12, [1786], Jefferson to Monroe, No-
vember 11, 1784, Jefferson to John Page, August 20, 1785, Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, IX, 168, VII, 511-12, VIII, 419.
26. Jefferson to Adams, November 27, 1785, in ibid., IX, 64. See also documents
and editorial notes in ibid., X, 560-70.
27. Lafayette to Jefferson, [October 23, 1786], in ibid., 486.
28. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, X, 565.
29. Jefferson to Jay, March 12, 1786, in ibid., IX, 325-26; Jefferson, Autobiogra-
phy, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 97.
30. Alfred L. Bush, "The Life Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," in William Howard
Adams (ed.), Jefferson Extended View (Washington, D.C., 1976), 21-
and the Arts: An
22; Jefferson, account book, March 22, April 6, 9, 1786, transcript by Bear, in U. Va.
library.
31. Notes on a tour of English gardens, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, IX,
369-75. See also Edward Dumbauld, "Jefferson and Adams' English Garden Tour,"
in Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts, 137-57.
32. Boyd Papers ofJefferson, IX, 369—73, 445.
(ed.),
33. Jefferson to Page, May 4, 1786, in ibid., 445-46.

34. Jefferson to Jay, April 23, 1786, Jefferson to William Temple Franklin, May 7,
1786, in ibid., 402, 466—67.
Chapter IX
1. Theodore Sizer (ed.), The Autobiography of Colonel John Trumbull, Patriot -Artist,
1736-1843 (New Haven, 1953), 92-93.
2. Benjamin Harrison to Jefferson, July 20, 1784, Jefferson to Harrison, January
12, 1785, Jefferson to Washington, December 10, 1784, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The
Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), VII, 378-79, 600, 567.
3. Donald Jackson and Dorothy Twohig (eds.), The Diaries of George Washington (6
vols.; Charlottesville, 1976-79), IV, 200-204; Jefferson to William Temple Franklin,
May 7, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, IX, 466.

4. The paper is reproduced in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, X, opposite p. 179.
5. Alfred L. Bush, "Life Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," in William Howard

Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts: An
Extended View (Washington, D.C., 1976), 25;
Irma B. Jaffe, John Trumbull, Patriot-Artist of the American Revolution (Boston, 1975),
106-107.
6. Sizer (ed.), Autobiography of Trumbull, 93, 98—99.
7. Marie Kimball, Jefferson: The Scene of Europe, 1784- 1789 (New York, 1950),
NOTES TO PAGES IO3— lO 365
160; Helen Duprey Bullock, My Head and My Heart: A Little History of Thomas Jefferson
and Maria Cosway (New York, 1945), 13-16.
8. Maria Cosway 's relationship with her husband is examined in Fawn M. Brodie,
Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York, 1974), 200-203.

9. Sizer (ed.), Autobiography of Trumbull, 93, 98.
10. Howard C. Rice, Jr. Thomas Jefferson s Paris (Princeton, 1976), 18-21; Jeffer-
son to Maria Cosway, October 12, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, X, 444-
45, 446.
1 1. Sizer (ed.), Autobiograpy of Trumbull, 120; Jefferson to Maria Cosway, October
12, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, X, 445-46.

12. Jefferson to William S. Smith, October 22, 1786, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJeffer-
son, X, 478. The accident occurred on September 18, 1786. Ibid., 432m
13. Jefferson to Maria Cosway, October 12, 1786, in ibid., 443.
14. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, X, 450.
15. Ibid., 44°-49> 452-
16. Ibid., 453n; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948—81),
II. 77-
17. Jefferson to Maria Cosway, October 12, 1786, Jefferson to Maria Cosway, De-
cember 24, 1786, in Boyd Papers ofJefferson, X, 447, 627.
(ed.),
18. Maria Cosway to Jefferson, [October 30, November 17, November 27, 1786],
in ibid., 494-95, 53 8 ~39' 55 2 -
19. Jefferson to Maria Cosway, December 24, 1786, Maria Cosway to Jefferson,
February 15, 1787, in ibid., X, 627, XI, 150.
20. Maria Cosway to Jefferson, [November 17, 1786], Jefferson to Maria Cosway,
July 1, 1787, in ibid., X, 538-39, XI, 519-20.
21. Maria Cosway to Jefferson, July 9, 1787, Trumbull to Jefferson, August 28,
1787, Jefferson to Trumbull, August 30, 1787, inibid., XI, 568-69, XII, 60, 69.
Maria Cosway to Jefferson, [December 1, 1787], Jefferson to Trumbull, No-

22.
vember 13, 1787, Jefferson to Maria Cosway, April 24, 1788, in ibid., XII, 387, 358,
XIII, 104.
23. Kimball, Jefferson: Scene of Europe, 168; Brodie, Jefferson, 225.
24. Jefferson to Madison, January 30, 1787, Martha Jefferson to Jefferson, March
8, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XI, 203.
25. Jefferson's itinerary is in Edward Dumbauld, Thomas Jefferson, American Tourist
(Norman, 1946), 233-35.
26. Jefferson to William Short, March 15, 1787, Jefferson to Chastellux, April 4,
1787, in Boyd Papers ofJefferson, XI, 214-15, 261-62.
(ed.),
27. Jefferson to Short, March 15, 1787, in ibid., 214-15; Notes of a Tour, in
ibid., 419.
Madame de Tesse, March 20, 1787, in ibid., 226.
28. Jefferson to
29. Boyd
Papers ofJefferson, IX, xxvii, 220—21.
(ed.),
30. Jefferson to Short, March 27, and April 17, 1787, Jefferson to Lafayette, April
11, 1787, in ibid., XI, 247, 280-81, 283.
31. Jefferson to Short, April 7, 12, 1787, Jefferson to Jay, May 4, 1787, Jefferson
to Maria Cosway, July 1, 1787, in ibid., 280, 287, 338, 520.
32. Hints on European Travel, June 19, 1788, in ibid., XIII, 272; Notes of a Tour,
in ibid., XI, 432.
Wythe, September 16, 1787, in ibid., XII, 127; Notes of a Tour, in
33. Jefferson to
XI, 435-39.
ibid.,
34. Jefferson to John Jay, May 4, 1787; Jefferson to Edward Rutledge, July 14,
1787, in ibid., XI, 338-39, 587; Notes of a Tour, in ibid., XI, 435-38.
7
366 NOTES TO PAGES 1 1 1 -1
35. Notes of a Tour, in ibid., 437. Jefferson's Italian tour is described in George
Green Shackelford, "A Peep into Elysium," in Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts,
237-62.
36. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIII, 272.
37. Jefferson to Wythe, September 16, 1787, Jefferson to Maria Cosway, July 1,
1787, in ibid., XII, 127, XI, 519; Notes of a Tour, in ibid., XI, 441—42.
38. Jefferson to William S. Smith, September 13, 1786, in ibid., X, 362.
39. Notes of a Tour, in ibid., XI, 449—54.
40. Jefferson to Short, May 21, 1787, in ibid., 371-72.
41. Ibid., 372.
42. Jefferson to John Banister, Jr., June 19, 1787, in ibid., 477.
Chapter X
1. Abigail Adams to Jefferson, June 26, 1787, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of
Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950—), XI, 501—502.
2. Jefferson to Francis Eppes, [August 30, 1785], in ibid., VIII, 451.
3. Jefferson to Mary September 20, 1785, Mary Jefferson to

(Polly) Jefferson,
Jefferson, [ca. May 22, 1786], in Edwin M. Betts and James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The
Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo. 1966), 29-30, 31.
4. Jefferson to Francis Eppes, [August 30, 1785], Elizabeth Eppes to Jefferson,
[March 31, 1787], in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 451, XI, 260.
5. Elizabeth Eppes to Jefferson, [May 7, 1787], Abigail Adams to Jefferson, June
26, 1787, Jefferson to Francis Eppes, July 2, 1787, Andrew Ramsay to Jefferson, July
6, 1787, in ibid., XI, 356, 501—502, 524, 556; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time
(6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), II, 134-35.

6. Abigail Adams to Jefferson, September 10, 1787, Jefferson to Mary Jefferson
Boiling, July 23, 1787, Jefferson to Elizabeth Eppes, July 12, 1788, in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, XII, 112, XI, 612, XIII, 347.
7. Abigail Adams to Jefferson, June 26, 27, 1787, in ibid., XI, 502-503.
8. Fawn M. Brodie, Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York, 1974), 22g-
30, 234; review of Brodie, Jefferson, by Garry Wills in New York Review of Books, April
18, 1974, cited in Virginius Dabney, The Jefferson Scandals: A Rebuttal (New York,
1981), 127-28; Abigail Adams to Jefferson, July 6, 10, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, XI, 551, 574.
9. For a criticism of Brodie's methods and views of other scholars see Dabney, The
Evidence that Jefferson did not father the mulatto children later
Jefferson Scandals.
born to Sally Hemings is presented in Douglass Adair, Fame and the Founding Fathers,
ed. Trevor Colbourn (New York, 1974), 160-91.
io. Madison to Jefferson, April 23, 1787, Edward Carrington to Jefferson, April
24, 1787, John Jay to Jefferson, April 24, 1787, Jefferson to Carrington, August 4,
1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XI, 309- 10, 311-12, 313-14, 678.
11. Madison to Edmund Pendleton, February 24, 1787, Madison to Edmund
Randolph, February 25, 1787, in William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, and
Robert A. Rutland (eds.), The Papers of James Madison (Chicago and Charlottesville,
1962-), IX, 263, 295, 299.
12. Jefferson to William S. Smith, November 13, 1787, Jefferson to Carrington,
August 4, 1787, Jefferson to Monroe, June 17, 1785, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
XII, 356, XI, 678, VIII, 231.
13. Jefferson to Washington, August 14, 1787, Madison to Jefferson, September
6, 1787 (received December 13, 1787), Adams to Jefferson, November 10, 1787, in
ibid., XII, 36, 102-104, 335.
NOTES TO PAGES 1 17-24 367
14. Jefferson to Smith, November 13, 1787, in ibid., 356.

15. Jefferson to Madison, December 20, 1787, in ibid., 439-40.
16. Jefferson to Smith, February 2, 1788, Jefferson to Madison, December 20,
1787, in 558, 440-41.
ibid.,
17. Jefferson to Smith, February 2, 1788, Madison to Jefferson, July 24, 1778, in
ibid., XII, 558, XIII, 412; Malone, Jefferson, II, 173-74.
18. Jefferson to Carrington, May 27, 1788, Jefferson to Madison, July 31, 1788, in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIII, 208, 442.
19. Jefferson to Jay, January 9, February 23, June 21, August 6, 1787, Jefferson to
Adams, August 30, 1787, in ibid., XI, 31-32, 179-80, 489-90, 697-98, XII,
67-68.
20. For Jefferson's views on human nature see Adrienne Koch, The Philosophy of
Thomas Jefferson (New York, 1943), 1 13-23.
21. Jefferson to Madison, June 20, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XI, 482.
22. Jefferson to Adams, February 6, 1788, Willink and Van Staphorst to Jefferson,
January 31, 1788, Jefferson to Jay, March 16, 1788, Adams to Jefferson, February 12,
1788, in ibid., XII, 566, 443-48, 671, 581-82.
23. Jefferson to Madison, June 20, 1787, Jefferson to Adams, March 2, 1788,
Jefferson to William Short, March 10, 1788, Jefferson to Jay, March 16, 1788, in
ibid., XI, 482, XII, 637-38, 659, 671-72.
24. Edward Dumbauld, Thomas Jefferson, American Tourist (Norman, 1946), 114-
22, 236-37.
25. Jefferson to Anne Willing Bingham, May 11, 1788, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, XIII, 151; Jefferson, Autobiography, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of
Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), I, 127.
26. Jefferson to Jay, May 23, 1788, Jefferson to John B. Cutting, July 24, 1788,
Jefferson to Jay, August 3, September 3, 1788, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIII,
190, 406, 464, 564-65.
27. Jefferson to Jay,November 19, 1788, Jefferson to Madison, November 18,
1788, Jefferson to Washington, December 4, 1788, in ibid., XIV, 212-13, 188, 330.
28. Robert R. Palmer, "The Dubious Democrat: Thomas Jefferson in Bourbon
France," Political Science Quarterly, LXXII (1957), 396— 98; Jefferson to Jay, Novem-
ber 19, 1788, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIV, 215.
29. See documents in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIV, 66-180.
30. Jefferson to Elizabeth Eppes, December 14, 1788, in ibid., 355.
31. Dugnani to Carroll, July 5, 1787, quoted in Annabelle M. Melville, John
Carroll of Baltimore (New York, 1955), 102. See also Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,
XIV, 356m
January 11, 1789, Jefferson to Madison, January 12, 1789, in
32. Jefferson to Jay,
Boyd Papers ofJefferson, XIV, 429, 437.
(ed.),
33. Robert R. Palmer, The Age of Democratic Revolution: A Political History of Europe
and America, ij6o-i8oo (2 vols.; Princeton, 1959-64), I, 469-70; Palmer, "The
Dubious Democrat," 394-95; Louis Gottschalk and Margaret Maddox, Lafayette in
French Revolution: Through the October Days (Chicago, 1969), 14; Jefferson to Jay,
the
March 1, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIV, 604.

34. Jefferson to Trumbull, June 18, 1789, Jefferson to Lafayette, May 6, June 3,
1789, Lafayette to Jefferson, June 3, 1789, Jefferson to Rabaut de St. Etienne, June
3, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV, 199, 97, 165-66, 166-67; Gottschalk
and Maddox, Lafayette, 51-52, 55-57.
35. Jefferson to Jay, May 9, 1789, Jefferson to Lafayette, May 6, 1789, in Boyd
(ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV, 111, 97.
36. Jefferson to Madison, June 18, 1789, in ibid., 195-96.

37. Jefferson to Jay, June 29, 1789, in ibid., 222-23.
38. Jefferson to Paine, July 11, 1789, in ibid., 267-69.
39. Jefferson to Paine, July 13, 1789, in ibid., 273.

40. Jefferson to Jay, July 19, 1789, Jefferson to Madison, July 22, 1789, in ibid.,
287-90, 300; Gottschalk and Maddox, Lafayette, 124-29; Beatrix C. Davenport

(ed.), A Diary of the French Revolution by Gouverneur Morris (2 vols.; Boston, 1939), I,
152-53-
41. Jefferson to Jay, July 19, 1789, Jefferson to Madison, July 22, 1789, Jefferson
to Maria Cosway, July 25, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XV, 290, 299,
3 01 3°5-
>
42. Lafayette to Jefferson, July 6, 1789, Jefferson to Lafayette, July 6, 1789, La-
fayette to Jefferson, [July 9, 1789], in ibid., 249, 250, 255. Lafayette's draft is printed
in ibid., 230-33.
43. Gottschalk and Maddox, Lafayette, 90—98.
44. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 152; Lafayette to
Jefferson, [August 25, 1789], in Boyd
Papers ofJefferson, XV, 354.
(ed.),
45. Jefferson, Autobiography, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 153-55; B°yd

(ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV, 355n.
46. Jefferson to Gem, September 9, 1789, in Papers ofJefferson, XV, 398. Adrienne
Koch speculated that Gem showed the letter to Thomas Paine before the latter
wrote his Rights of Man. Koch, Jefferson and Madison: The Great Collaboration (New-
York, 1964), 84-88.
47. Jefferson to Madison, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV,
September 6,
392—97; see 384—91.

also editorial note, in ibid.,
48. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV, 394-97.

49. Koch, Jefferson and Madison, 63, 70—75; Madison to Jefferson, February 4,
1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 147—50.
50. Jefferson to Edward Bancroft, August 5, 1789, Jefferson to Jay, August 27,
September 19, 1789, Jefferson to Madison, August 28, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, XV, 333, 356, 366, 457-60.
51. Jefferson to Nathaniel Cutting, September 10, 1789, list of baggage, [ca. Sep-
tember 1, 1789], Jefferson to Henry Knox, September 12, 1789, in ibid., 375—77,
412, 422.
52. Jefferson to Trumbull, January 18, February 15, 1789, Trumbull to Jefferson,
February 5, 1789, in ibid., XIV, 467—68, 524—25, 561, XV, xxxv.
53. Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XV, xxxvi— xxxix; Alfred L. Bush, "The Life
Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," in William Howard Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the
Arts: An Extended View (Washington, D.C., 1976), 29-31.

54. Jefferson to Trumbull, September 16, 1789, Trumbull to Jefferson, Septem-
ber 22, 1 789, Jefferson to Trumbull, September 24, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
XV, 435, 467-68, 471.
Jefferson,
from the Diary of Nathaniel Cutting, in ibid., 491-96; Jefferson to
55. Extract
Short, October 4, 1789, Jefferson to Maria Cosway, October 14, 1789, in ibid., XV,
506, 521; Jefferson, account book, September 26, 28, October 8, 9, 22, 23, 1789,
transcript by James A. Bear, Jr., in University of Virginia library, Charlottesville.
Chapter XI
1. Jefferson to Nathaniel Cutting, November 21, 1789, Jefferson to William
Short, November 21, 1789, Jefferson to John Jay, November 23, 1789, Jefferson to
NOTES TO PAGES I3I-4 3^9
John Trumbull, November P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of Thomas

25, 1789, in Julian
Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), XV, 551-53, 559-60; Sarah N. Randolph, The Domestic
Life of Thomas Jefferson (1871; rpr. New York, 1958), 151-52.
2. Washington to Jefferson, October 13, 1789, and address of welcome and Jeffer-
son's reply, November 25, 1789, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XV, 519-20, 557-58.
3. Washington to Jefferson, October 13, 1789, Madison to Jefferson, October 8,
1789, in ibid., 519, 509-10.
4. Jefferson to Short, December 14, 1789, in ibid., XVI, 26.
5. Jefferson to Washington, December 34-35.

15, 1789, in ibid.,
6. Madison Washington, January 4, 1790, in William T. Hutchinson, William
to
M. E. Rachal, and Robert A. Rutland (eds.), The Papers of James Madison (Chicago
and Charlottesville, 1962-), XII, 467; Washington to Jefferson, January 21, 1790, in
Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 117.
7. Response, February 12, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 179. The
address, first published in a Richmond newspaper, can be found in the Gazette of the
United States (New York), March 24, 1790.
8.Jefferson to Washington, February 14, 1790, Diary of Nathaniel Cutting, Oc-
tober 1 2, 1789, Cutting to Martha Jefferson, March 30, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, XVI, 184, XV, 498, XVI, 207m
9. William H. Gaines, Jr., Thomas Mann Randolph: Jefferson's Son-in-Law (Baton
Rouge, 1966), 24n; Boyd (ed.),Papers ofJefferson, XIV, 367n-68n.
10. Jefferson to Madame de Corny, April 2, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
XVI, 290.
11. Jefferson to Randolph, February 4, 1790, in ibid., 154.
12. Boyd Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 189—91;
(ed.), Edwin Morris Betts (ed.), Thomas
Jefferson s Farm Book (Princeton, 1953), 32.
13. Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, April 4, 1790, Martha Jefferson
Randolph to Jefferson, April 25, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XVI,
300, 385.
14. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., March 28, 1790, Jefferson to
Short, April 6, 1790, with enclosure, in XVI, 278, 279, 321-24.
ibid.,
15. Jefferson to Lafayette, April 2, 1790, in ibid., 293; Leonard D. White, The Fed-
eralists: A Study of Administrative History (New York, 1948), 107— 109.
16. Jefferson to Charles Bellini, June 13, 1 790, Jefferson to Hamilton, June 17,
1790, in Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 485-86, 512-13.

17. White, Washington's administrative system is well revealed in
Federalists, 27.
Dorothy Twohig The Journal of the Proceedings of the President, 1793-1797

(ed.),
(Charlottesville, 1981), a volume in The Papers of George Washington, ed. W. W. Abbot.

18. Jefferson to Peter Carr, June 13, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,
XVI, 487.
19. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 602.
20. Final state of the report on weights and measures, [July 4, 1790], in ibid.,
653-54-
21. Ibid., 663-64.
22. Transcription from the original manuscript, in ibid., 38m.
23. Jefferson to Short, April 6, 1 790, Jefferson to Monroe, June 20, 1790, in ibid.,
3^, 537.
24. Jefferson's account
(in ibid., XVII, 205-207) is undated but was written no
earlier than 1791. Boyd suggested that it may have been written in 1792. Ibid., 207m
25. Jefferson to Monroe, June 20, 1790, in ibid., XVI, 537.
370 NOTES TO PAGES 140 — 49
26. Kenneth R. Bowling, "Politics in the First Congress, 1789-1791" (Ph.D. dis-
sertation, University of Wisconsin, 1968), chs. 6-7; Jacob E. Cooke, "The Compro-
mise of 1790," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXVII (1970), 523-45; Bowl-
ing, "Dinner at Jefferson's," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXVIII 1971), 629- (
40. See also Hutchinson, Rachal, and Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, XIII, 243-46.
27. Jefferson to Washington, September 9, 1792, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works
of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), VII, 137; Jefferson to
John Harvie, Jr., July 25, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 271.
28. The Journal of William Maclay, United States Senator from Pennsylvania, ij8g—
1791, introduction by Charles A. Beard (1890; rpr. New York, 1965), 296.
29. Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XVII, 216-31. The diplomatic establishment
did not include the consular service, which was also under Jefferson's direction.
30. Morris to Washington, May 29, 1790, in ibid., 64—65.
3 1 Donald Jackson and Dorothy Twohig (eds.), The Diaries of George Washington (6
.
vols.; Charlottesville, 1976-79), July 8, 1790, VI, 87-89; Harold C. Syrett et al.
(eds.), The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York, 1961—79), VI, 484-86.
32. Julian P. Boyd, X umber 7: Alexander Hamilton's Secret Attempts to Control Ameri-
can Foreign Policy (Princeton, 1964), xiii— xiv, 6-13, 37; Jerald A. Combs, The Jay
Treaty: Political Battleground of the Founding Fathers (Berkeley, 1970), 51—56.
33. Memorandum, July 12, 1790, enclosed in Jefferson to Washington, July 12,
1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 108-10.
34. Quoted in Boyd, X umber 7, p. 36.
35. Memorandum, July 12, 1790, enclosed in Jefferson to Washington, July 12,
1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 108-10.
36. Jackson and Twohig (eds.), Diaries of Washington, July 14, 1790, VI, 94—95.
37. Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, VI, 496m
38.Report of conversation, [July 15, 1790], in ibid., 497.
39. Jefferson to Morris, August 12, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII,
127-28.
40. Memorandum, August 27, 1790, in ibid., 128-29.
41. Jefferson to Washington, August 28, 1790, in ibid., 129-30.
42. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 134-61 Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Ham-
;
ilton, VII, 37-57-

43. Jefferson to Carmichael, August 2, 1790, Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII,
111-12.
44. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 277-78, 318-19, 338, 343-87.
45. Edward Dumbauld, Thomas Jefferson, American Tourist (Norman, 1946), 156-
58; Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, August 22, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers
of Jefferson, XVII, 402.
46. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 460-62.
47. Hutchinson, Rachal, and Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, XIII, 294-96.
48. Virginia appropriated $120,000, and Maryland $72,000. Constance Mc-
Laughlin Green, Washington, Village and Capital, 1800- 1878 (Princeton, 1962), 13.
49. Jefferson, account book, September 1-19, 1790, transcript by James A. Bear,
Jr., in University of Virginia library, Charlottesville; Irving Brant, James Madison (6
vols.; Indianapolis, 1941-61), III, 319-21; Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph,
Jr., June 20, July 25, 790, Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Sr.,
October 22, 1
July 25, October 22, 1790, Jefferson to Francis Eppes, October 8, 1 790, Jefferson to
Elizabeth Eppes, October 31, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XVI, 540,
XVII, 274, 581, 622, 623-24, 658; Gaines, Thomas Mann Randolph, 31-34.
NOTES TO PAGES I5O-64 37 1
Chapter XII
1. Ralph Ketcham, James Madison: A Biography (New York, 1971), 88; Jefferson to
Thomas Leiper, August 4, 1790, Jefferson to William Temple Franklin, July 25,
1790, Franklin to Jefferson, August 1, 1790, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers of
Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), XVII, 267-68, 293, 309-10.
2. Jefferson, account book, December 11, 19, 1790, January 8, 20, 1791, tran-
script by James A. Bear, Jr., University of Virginia library, Charlottesville.
3. Ibid., November 30, December 22, 29, 31, 1790; Jefferson to Madison, January
10, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVIII, 480.

4. The contents of the crates shipped from France can be found in Boyd (ed.),
Papers ofJefferson, XVIII, 33-39.
5. Jefferson to Samuel H. Smith, September 21, 1814, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The
Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), XI, 427-28;
Jefferson to William Short, March 12, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XVI,
229-30.
6. Jefferson to Short, January 24, 1791, in Papers ofJefferson, XVIII, 600; Jeffer-
son to Martha Jefferson Randolph, May 8, July 24, 1791, in Edwin M. Betts and
James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo., 1966),
81,88.
7. Jefferson to Short, March 12, 1790, January 24, 1791, Short to Jefferson, June
14, 1790, in Boyd Papers ofJefferson, XVI, 229, 500-501, XVIII, 600-601.
(ed.),
8. See Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948—81), III, 167.
9. Jefferson to William Temple Franklin, July 16, 25, 1790, Franklin to Jefferson,
July 20, 1790, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVII, 211, 236-37, 267, 378m
10. Washington to Jefferson, December 11, 1790, Jefferson to Washington, De-
cember 15, 1790, in ibid., XVIII, 283-84, 301-303.
1 1. Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIX, 218, 220. On Tench Coxe's contribution to
Jefferson's report see Jacob E. Cooke, Tench Coxe and the Early Republic (Chapel Hill,
1978), 221-24.
12. William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, and Robert A. Rutland (eds.),
The Papers of James Madison (Chicago and Charlottesville, 1962—), XIII, 259—60,
32 in; Jefferson to Short, March 15, 1791, Jefferson to Humphreys, March 15, 1791,
Jefferson to Carmichael, March 17, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XIX,
570-75-
13. Jefferson, Anas, March 11, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 210-11;
Jerald A. Combs, The Jay Treaty: Political Background of the Founding Fathers (Berkeley,
W 14.
)' 59> 100-104.
Donald Jackson and Dorothy Twohig (eds.), The Diaries of George Washington (6
vols.; Charlottesville, 1976-79), March 23, 1790, VI, 51; Linda Grant DePauw (ed.),
Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America, III House :
of Representatives Journal (Baltimore, 1977), 412; Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVIII,
403-408, 423-37; The Journal of William Maclay, United States Senator from Pennsyl-
vania, 1 789- 1 79 1, introduction by Charles A. Beard (New York, 1965), 353.
15. Boyd Papers ofJefferson, XVIII, 410, 413, 444; DePauw (ed.), Documen-
(ed.),
tary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America, II: Senate Execu-
tive Journal (Baltimore, 1974), 114-15.
16. Report, January 18, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XVIII, 570; Jeffer-
son to Washington, September 9, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VII, 140.
17. See Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans: The Formation of
Party Organization, 1789—1801 (Chapel Hill, 1957), 8-9.
!
18. Jefferson, opinion on constitutionality of a national bank, February 15, 1791,

in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIX, 275-77.
278-80.
19. Ibid.,
20. Reardon, Edmund Randolph: A Biography (New York, 1974), 197-98;
John J.
Washington to Hamilton, February 16, 1791, in Harold C. Syrett et al. (eds.), The
Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York, 1961—79), VIII, 50.
21. Hamilton, opinion on the constitutionality of a national bank, February 23,
1791, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, VIII, 97-98, 101-103, 10 7-
22. Jefferson to Mason, February 4, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XIX,
242.
23. Text in Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson, XX, following p. 384; Jefferson to
Madison, May 9, 1791, in ibid., 293.
24. Ibid., 293; see also editorial note in ibid., 268-90. On Adams' "Discourses on
Davila," see Peter Shaw, The Character ofJohn Adams (Chapel Hill, 1976), 230—37.
25. Jefferson to August 30, 1791, in Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The
Adams, July 17,
Adams-Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959),
I, 245-46, 250—51.
26. Edward Dumbauld, Thomas Jefferson, American Tourist (Norman, 1946), 172—
77; Jefferson, account book, May 17 -June 19, 1791, transcript by Bear, in U. Va.
library; Robert Troup to Hamilton, June 15, 1791, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of
Hamilton, VIII, 478.
27. Jefferson's notes, May 22-June 3, 1791, are in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson,
XX, 453-56; Madison's notes, May 31 -June 7, 1791, are in Hutchinson, Rachal,
and Rutland Papers of Madison, XIV, 25—29.
(eds.),
Martha Jefferson Randolph, May 31, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers

28. Jefferson to
of Jefferson, XX, 463-64.

29. On political contacts on the journey see editorial note in Boyd (ed.), Papers of
Jefferson, XX, 434~53-
30. Richard Hofstadter, The Idea of a Party System: The Rise of Legitimate Opposition
in the 1780-1840 (Berkeley, 1969), 24, 27, 29; Jefferson to Freneau,
United States,
February 28, 1791, Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, XIX, 351.
in
31. Cunningham, Jeffersonian Republicans, 13-17; Boyd (ed.), Papers of Jefferson,

XX, 718-36.
32. Jefferson to Madison, July 21, 1791, in James Madison Papers, Library of
Congress.
33. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., May 15, 1791, in Boyd (ed.), Papers
of Jefferson, XX, 416; JeffersonWashington, September 9, 1792, in Ford (ed.),
to
Works of Jefferson, VII, 145; Donald H. Stewart, The Opposition Press of the Federalist
Period (Albany, 1969), 42-43; Lewis Leary, That Rascal Freneau: A Study in Literary
Failure (New Brunswick, N.J., 1941), 197-246.
34. Gazette of the United States, July 25, 1792, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamil-
ton, XII, 107.
35. "An American," Gazette of the United States, August 4, 1792, in ibid., 159.
36. Hamilton's pieces and Freneau's replies are in ibid., 123-25, 157-64, 188-
94, 224.
37. Ibid., 125; see also Jacob Axelrad, Philip Freneau, Champion of Democracy (Aus-
tin, 1967), 236.
38. Jefferson to Washington, September
9, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
VII, 144-45; BoydPapers ofJefferson, XX, 733-53; Hutchinson, Rachal, and
(ed.),
Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, XIV, 1 10-12.

39. Jefferson, Anas, May 23, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 274.
40. Cunningham, Jeffersonian Republicans, 22, 31, 49, 256-58. See also John F.
Hoadley, "The Emergence of Political Parties in Congress, 1789-1803," American

Political Science Review, LXXIV (1980), 757-79.
41. Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, March 22, 1792, in Betts and Bear
(eds.), Family Letters, 96; Hamilton to Edward Carrington, May 26, 1792, in Syrett et
al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XI, 427-44.
42. Washington to Jefferson, April 23, 1792, Washington to Hamilton, August 26,
1792, in John C. Fitzpatrick (ed.), The Writings of George Washington (39 vols.; Wash-
ington, D.C., 1931-44), XXXII, 128-34.
43. Jefferson to Washington, September 9, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
VII, 137-38.
44. Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XII, 157, 188, 224; Jefferson to Wash-
ington, September 9, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 139-46.

45. Hamilton to Washington, September 9, 1792, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of
Hamilton, XII, 347-49.
46. Jefferson, Anas, October 1, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 235.
47. Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XII, 379-82; Madison to Edmund Ran-
dolph, September 13, 1792, in Hutchinson, Rachal, and Rutland (eds.), Papers of
Madison, XIV, 364-65; Malone, Jefferson, II, 469.
48. Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XII, 162-163, 379-85, 393-401,
498-506, 578-87, XIII, 229-31, 348-56.
49. Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity (New York, 1 97 1 ),
93—95; Madison to Monroe, September 18, 1792, in Hutchinson, Rachal, and
Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, XIV, 367, 368-70.
50. Hutchinson, Rachal, and Rutland (eds.), Papers of Madison, XIV, 299-304,
321 — 24; Irving Brant, James Madison (6 vols.; Indianapolis, 1941—61), III, 356.
51. Madison to Washington, June 20, 1792, in Hutchinson, Rachal, and Rutland
(eds.), Papers of Madison, XIV, 321; Jefferson to Washington, May 23, 1792, in Ford
(ed.), Works ofJefferson, VI, 487-95; Hamilton to Washington, July 30, 1792, in Sy-
rett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XII, 137—39.
52. Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., "John Beckley: An Early American Party Man-
ager," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XIII (1956), 40-46; Edmund Berkeley
and Dorothy Smith Berkeley, John Beckley: Zealous Partisan in a Nation Divided (Phila-
delphia, 1973), 72 — 73; Rush to Burr, September 24, 1792, in L. H. Butterfield (ed.),
Letters of Benjamin Rush (2 vols.; Princeton, 1951), I, 623; Cunningham, Jeffersonian
Republicans, 45-49.
53. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., November 16, 1792, Jefferson to
Thomas Pinckney, December 3, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 179, 191.
Chapter XIII
1. Jefferson to Thomas November 8, 1792, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The
Pinckney,
Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), VII, 177.
2. Jefferson, Anas, February 7, 1793, m
ibid., I, 240; Jefferson to Martha Jefferson
Randolph, January 26, 1793, in Edwin M. Betts and James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The
Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo., 1966), 1 10.
3. Jefferson, Anas, February 20, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 255.
4. Jefferson's and the resolutions moved by Giles are in Ford (ed.), Works of
draft
Jefferson, VII, 220-23. See also Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Bos-
ton, 1948-81), III, 14-36, and Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republi-
cans: The Formation of Party Organization, 1789—1801 (Chapel Hill, 1957), 51—54.
5. Jefferson to George Mason, February 4, 1791, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The Papers
of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), XIX, 241; Jefferson to Short, January 3,
1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 203.
6. Jefferson to Morris, November 7, 1792, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VII,
175-
7. Jefferson to Morris, December 30, 1792, in ibid., 198. That same day Jefferson
wrote similarly to Thomas Pinckney London. See Andrew A. Lipscomb and Al-
in
bert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C.,
1903), IX, 7-8.
8. Jefferson to Short, January 3, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VII,
203-204.
9. Jefferson to Washington, April 7, 1793, in ibid., 275.
10. Jefferson to C. W. Dumas, March 24, 1793, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.),
F.
Writings ofJefferson, IX, 56-57; Oliver Wolcott, Sr., to Oliver Wolcott, Jr., March 25,
1793, in George Gibbs (ed.), Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John
the Papers of Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury (2 vols.; New
Adams, Edited from
York, 1846), I, 91; Jefferson to Morris, April 20, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, VII, 281-82.

1 1. Washington to Jefferson, Hamilton, Knox, and Randolph, April 18, 1793, in
Harold C. Syrett et al. (eds.), The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York,
1961-79), XIV, 326-27; Dorothy Twohig (ed.), The Journal of the Proceedings of the
President, 1793— J 797, a volume in The Papers of George Washington, ed. W. W. Abbot
(Charlottesville, 1981), April 18, 1793, pp. 108, 1 13- 14; Jefferson, Anas, April 18,
1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 267.

12. Jefferson to Madison, June 23, 30, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VII,
407—408, 421. See also Madison to Jefferson, June 10, 13, 1793, in Gaillard Hunt
(ed.), The Writings of James Madison (9 vols.; New York, 1900—1910), VI, 127m
130-32.
13. Cabinet meeting, April 19, 1793, in Syrett etal. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XIV,
328.
14. Text of proclamation in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XIV, 308m
15. Jefferson, Anas, May 6, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 267-69.
16. This summary is based on Jefferson's account of the meeting provided to the
president, April 28, 1793, in ibid., VII, 284.
17. Ibid., 284-89, 300.
18. Jefferson, 18, 1793, Opinion on French treaties, April
Anas, March 30, April
28, 1793, in 263-64, 268-69, VII, 283. On Genet's reception by Washington
ibid., I,
see John A. Carroll and Mary W. Ashworth, George Washington: First in Peace (New
York, 1957), 73-75 (this book completes the biography by Douglas Southall
Freeman).
19. Jefferson to Madison, April 28, 1793, Jefferson to Monroe, May 5, 1793,
Jefferson to George Hammond, May 3, 15, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
VII, 301-302, 309, 306, 327.
20. Jefferson to Madison, May 19, 1793, Jefferson to Monroe, June 4, 1793, in
ibid., 337-38, 361.
August 16, 1793, Jefferson to Ternant, May 15, 1793, in
21. Jefferson to Morris,
481—82, 330—31' Harry Ammon, The Genet Mission (New York, 1973), 66;
ibid.,
Genet to Jefferson, May 27, 1793, in American State Papers: Documents, Legislative and
Executive of the United States (38 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1832-61), Foreign Relations,
I, 149-50.
22. Jefferson, Anas, May 20, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 271-73.
23. Jefferson, Opinion on French treaties, April 28, 1793, in ibid., VII, 289-90.
24. Jefferson to Genet, June 5, 1793, in ibid., 362-63.
25. Jefferson to Genet, June 17, 1793, Jefferson to Washington, April 28, 1793, in
ibid., 397—98, 290; Ammon, Genet Mission, 77.
26. Jefferson, 5, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 280—81.
Anas, July
Madison, June 23, 1793, ibid., VII, 408; see also Donald Jackson,
27. Jefferson to
Thomas Jefferson and the Stony Mountains: Exploring the West from Monticello (Urbana,
1981), 74-78; Lawrence S. Kaplan, Jefferson and France (New Haven, 1967), 56-57.
28. Jefferson to Morris, June 13, 1793, Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney, June 14,
1793, Jefferson to Madison, June 9, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 385,
3 88 374-
>
29. Madison to Jefferson, June 10, 1793, in Hunt (ed.), Writings of Madison, VI,
1
2 7n; Jefferson to Madison, June 23, 30, 1793, Jefferson to Monroe, May 5, 1793,
Jefferson to Madison, May 12, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 407—408,
421, 309, 324.
30. Jefferson to Monroe, May 5, June 4, 1793, Jefferson to Madison, June 29,
1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 309, 362, 420; Syrett etal. (eds.), Papers of
Hamilton, XV, 33—43; Broadus Mitchell, Alexander Hamilton (2 vols.; New York,
1957-62), II, 232-33.
31. Jefferson to Madison, June 30, 1793, Jefferson to Madison, July 7, 1793, in
Ford Works of Jefferson, VII, 420-22, 436; Madison to Jefferson, July 18, 22,
(ed.),
30, 1793, in Hunt (ed.), Writings of Madison, VI, 135, 137-39.

32. Hunt (ed.), Writings of Madison, VI, 138—88; Irving Brant, James Madison (6
vols.; Indianapolis, 1941-61), III, 377—79.
33. Jefferson to Madison, July 7, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 436.
34. Jefferson, Cabinet opinion on "Reasons for his
"Little Sarah," July 8, 1793,
Dissent," [July 9, 1793], Anas, July 10, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VII,
437-43, I, 282-88; Ammon, Genet Mission, 80, 86-90.
35. Jefferson, "Reasons for his Dissent, [July 9, 1793]," in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, VII, 441-42; Ammon, Genet Mission, 89-90; Hamilton, memorandum,
July 9, 1793, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XV, 76-77.
36. Ammon, Genet Mission, 90-92; Jefferson, Anas, July 10, 1793, in Ford (ed.),
Works of Jefferson, I, 288; Genet to Jefferson, July g, 1793, in American State Papers:
Foreign Relations, I, 163.
37. Twohig (ed.), Journal of the President, July 11, 1793, p. 191; Washington to
Jefferson, July 11, 1793, in John C. Fitzpatrick (ed.), The Writings of George Washing-
ton (39 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1931-44), XXXIII, 4.
38. Jefferson, Anas, July 13, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 290; Am-
mon, Genet Mission, 92; Draft, July 18, 1793, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton,
XV, 110-16.
Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VII, 460-62; Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of Hamil-
39.
ton,XV, 139-42, 168-69; Carroll and Ashworth, Washington: First in Peace, 111.
40. Jefferson, Anas, August 1, 2, 1793, Jefferson to Madison, August 3, 1793, m
Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 305, VII, 464; Twohig {ed.), Journal of the President,
August 1, 2, 1793, pp. 211-12.
41. Jefferson to Washington, July 31, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VII,
462—63; Ammon, Genet Mission, 101.
42. Jefferson, Anas, August 6, 1793, Jefferson to Washington, August 11, 1793, in
37^ NOTES TO PAGES 190-96
Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 310-12, VII, 471. Hamilton did not resign as ex-
pected but remained in the cabinet until January 31, 1795.

43. Jefferson to Morris, August 16, 1793, in ibid., 475-507; Syrett et al. (eds.),
Papers of Hamilton, XV, 145, 233, 239—41; Richard R. Beeman, The Old Dominion and
the New Nation, ij88-i8oi (Lexington, Ky., 1972), 126-34; Cunningham, Jefferson-
ian Republicans, 58—60.

44. Jefferson to Madison, August 11, 1793, Madison Papers, Library of Congress.
45. Jefferson to Madison, September 1, 1793, Jefferson to Thomas Mann Ran-
dolph, Jr., September 2, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 12-13, 17; J. H.
Powell, Bring Out Your Dead: The Great Plague of Yellow Fever in Philadelphia in 1793
(Philadelphia, 1949), 281-82.
46. Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, September 8, 1793, in Betts and
Bear (eds.). Family Letters, 124; Twohig {ed.), Journal of the President, September 10,
1793, p. 239; Washington to Hamilton, September 6, 1793, in Syrett et al. (eds.),
Papers of Hamilton, XV, 324-25; Jefferson to Washington, September 15, 1793, in
Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 45-46.
47. Jefferson, account book, September-October, 1793, transcript by James A.
Bear, Jr., in University of Virginia library, Charlottesville; Washington to Hamilton,
September XV, 343; Washington to
25, 1793, in Syrett etal. (eds.), Papers of Hamilton,
Jefferson, October 1793, in Fitzpatrick (ed.), Writings of Washington, XXXIII, 1 12;
7,
Jefferson to Washington, October 17, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 55.
48. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., November 2, 1793, Jefferson to
Washington, October 17, 1793, Jefferson to Madison, November 17, 1793, in Ford
(ed.), Works of Jefferson, 57, 55, 72; John J. Reardon, Edmund Randolph (New York,
1974), 241-42.
49. Jefferson, Anas, November 21, 23, 28, 1793, draft of president's message,
[November, 1793], Jefferson to Washington, December 2, 1793, in Ford (ed.), Works
of Jefferson, I, 328-34, VIII, 79-83, 85-88; Twohig (ed.), Journal of the President,
November 23, 1793, p. 257.
50. Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, December 1, 1793, in Betts and
Bear (eds.), Family Letters, 126; Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 98-119; Malone,
Jefferson, III, 154-55.
51. Ford Works ofJefferson, VIII, 111, 1 14, 1 15; Jacob E. Cooke, Tench Coxe
(ed.),
and (Chapel Hill, 1978), 252-53; Brant, Madison, III, 389.

the Early Republic
52. Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, December 22, 1793, in Betts and
Bear (eds.), Family Letters, 128; Jefferson to Angelica Church, November 27, 1793, in
Ford (ed.),Works ofJefferson, VIII, 79.
53. Jefferson to Mary (Maria) Jefferson, December 15, 1793, in Betts and Bear
(eds.), Family Letters, 127.
Chapter XIV
1. Jefferson to Madison, February 15, 1794, Jefferson to John Adams, April 25,
1794, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.;
New York, 1904), VIII, 139, 144-45; Jefferson to Philip Mazzei, May 30, 1795, in
Edwin Morris Betts (ed.), Thomas Jefferson's Garden Book, 1764-1824 (Philadelphia,
1944), 236.
2. Jefferson to Monroe, May Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 181;
26, 1795, in
Edwin Morris Farm Book (Princeton, 1953), 38; Thomas
Betts (ed.), Thomas Jefferson's
Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, ed. William Peden (Chapel Hill, 1954), 152.
3. Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Farm Book, 30, 32; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6
NOTES TO PAGES I96-2OO 377
vols.; Boston, 1948-81), III, 119; Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, Report
of the Curator, 1981 (Monticello, [1982]), 25.
4. Washington to Young, June 18-21, 1792, in John C. Fitzpatrick (ed.), The Writ-
ings of George Washington (39 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1931-44), XXXII, 71; Jeffer-
son, notes, [June 18, 1792], Jefferson to Washington, June 28, 1793, in Ford (ed.),
Works ofJefferson, VII, 113-21; Malone, Jefferson, III, 196; John C. Miller, The Wolf
by the Ears: Thomas Jefferson and Slavery (New York, 1977), 107; Thomas Jefferson Me-
morial Foundation, Report of the Curator, 1981, pp. 23-25, 28.
5. Jefferson to Jean Nicolas Demeunier, April 29, 1795, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, VIII, 174-75; Jefferson to Adams, May 27, 1795, in Lester J. Cappon (ed.),
The Adams-Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959), I, 258.

6. Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, January 3, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
VIII, 212-14.
7. Notes of a tour through Holland, April 19, 1788, in Julian P. Boyd (ed.), The
Papers of Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, 1950-), XIII, 26-27; Jefferson to Jonathan
Williams, July 3, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson VIII, 250-51.
8. Farm Book, "Commentary and Extracts," 50-57, 68-73;
Betts (ed.), Jefferson's
Malone, Jefferson to Washington, June 19, 1796, in Ford (ed.),
Jefferson, III, 216;
Works ofJefferson, VIII, 248-49.
9. B. L. Rayner, Sketches of the Life, Writings, and Opinions of Thomas Jefferson (New
York, 1832), 524; Frederick D. Nichols, "Jefferson: The Making of an Architect," in
William Howard Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts: An Extended View (Washington,
D.C., 1976), 163-64; Jefferson to Carlo Bellini, September 30, 1785, Jefferson to
Madame de Tesse, March 20, 1787, in Boyd (ed.), Papers ofJefferson, VIII, 569, XI,
226; Jefferson to John Brown, April 5, 1797, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of
Congress (hereinafter cited LC).
10. Isaac Weld, Jr., Travels Through the States of North America and the Provinces of
Upper and Lower Canada During the Years 1795, 1796, and 1797 (3rd ed.; 2 vols., Lon-
don, 1800), I, 207; Due de La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, Travels Through the United
States of North America, the Country of the Iroquois, and Upper Canada, in the Years 1795,
1796, and 1797 (2 vols.; London, 1799), II, 70; Jefferson to Volney, April 10, 1796,
Jefferson Papers, LC.
11. Jefferson to Madison, July 24, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 321;
Malone, Jefferson, III, 238; Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., May 3, 1798,
in Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Garden Book, 259; Jefferson to Mary Jefferson Eppes, March
8, 1799, Edwin M. Betts and James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas
Jefferson (Columbia, Mo., 1966), 176.

12. Malone, Jefferson, III, 240-42. William Howard Adams, Jefferson's Monticello
(New York, 1983) offers a richly illustrated history of Monticello.
13. Jefferson to Mazzei, May 30, 1795, in Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Garden Book, 236.
14. Jefferson to Washington, May 14, 1794, Jefferson to Randolph, September 7,
1794, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 150, 152.

15. Jefferson to Coxe, September 10, 1795, in ibid., 190; Noble E. Cunningham,
Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans: The Formation of Party Organization, 1 789-1 801
(Chapel Hill, 1957), 86-87; Madison to Jefferson, February 7, 1796, James Madison
Papers, LC.
16. Jefferson to Madison, December 28, 1794, Jefferson to Edward Rutledge, No-
vember 30, 1795, Jefferson to William B. Giles, December 31, 1795, Jefferson to
Monroe, March 2, 1 796, Jefferson to Madison, September 21, 1795, Jefferson to
Madison, April 27, 1795, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VIII, 156-58, 200, 201,
221, 192, 169-70.
378 NOTES TO PAGES 200-2o6
17. Madison to Monroe, February 26, 1796, in Letters and Other Writings of James
Madison (Congressional Edition; 4 vols.; Philadelphia, 1865), II, 83. No formal
mechanism for nominating presidential candidates existed in 1796, Jefferson's name
being brought forward largely by a consensus of Republican members of Congress.
18. Madison Monroe, September 29, 1796, in Madison Papers, LC; Jefferson
to
to Rutledge, December
27, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 257.
19. John Beckley to William Irvine, September 15, 1796, in William Irvine
Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Noble E. Cunningham, Jr.,
"John Beckley: An Early American Party Manager," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
Ser., XIII (1956), 47-50.
20. State Gazette of North Carolina (Edenton), September 29, 1796; Circular, Sep-
tember 25, 1796, signed by M. Leib, broadside, Historical Society of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia.
21. Handbill, signed "A Republican," October 3, 1796, broadside, and "Public
Notice," [1796], broadside, both in Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
22. Handbill, signed "A Republican," October 3, 1796, broadside, Historical So-
ciety of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; President II, Being Obsen>ations on the Late Official
Address of George Washington ([Newark, N.J.], 1796), 15; Cunningham, Jeffersonian Re-
publicans, 100.
23. Harper, circular letter, January 5, 1797, in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. (ed.),
Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, 1789— 1829 (3 vols.; Chapel Hill,
1978), I, 62-63.
24. Adet to Pickering, October 27, November 15, 1796, in American State Papers:
Documents, Legislative and Executive of the United States (38 vols.; Washington, D.C.,
1832-61), Foreign Relations, I, 576-77, 582-83; Stephen G. Kurtz, The Presidency of
John Adams: The Collapse of Federalism, 1795-1800 (Philadelphia, 1957), 114, 125-34.
25. Madison to Jefferson, December 5, 1796, in Madison Papers, LC; Oliver
Wolcott, Jr., to Oliver Wolcott, Sr., November 19, 1796, in George Gibbs (ed.), Mem-
oirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, Edited from the Papers of Oliver
Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury (2 vols.; New York, 1846), I, 397.

26. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (Washington, D.C.,
1975), 1 07 1 ; Jefferson to Madison, December 17, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, VIII, 255.
27. Jefferson to Rutledge, December 27, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
VIII, 257-58.
28. Madison to Jefferson, December 10, 1796, in Madison Papers, LC; Madison
to Jefferson, December 19, 1796, in Gaillard Hunt (ed.), The Writings ofJames Madison
(9 vols.; New York, 1900-1910), VI, 296-302; Jefferson to Madison, January 1,
1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 263.

29. Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, January 4, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson.
VIII, 267; Adams February 20, 1797, in Warren-Adams Letters,
to Elbridge Gerry,
Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, LXXIII (1925), 331; Benjamin Rush to
Jefferson, January 4, 1797, in L. H. Butterfield (ed.). Letters of Benjamin Rush (2 vols.;
Princeton, 1951), II, 785.
30. Jefferson to Madison, January 22, 1797, Jefferson to Wythe, January 22,
1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 271, 274.
Chapter XV
1. Jefferson to Madison, January 30, 1797, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of
Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), VIII, 280; Jefferson,
NOTES TO PAGES 2o6- 11 379
account book, February 20-March 2, 1797, transcript by James A. Bear, Jr., Univer-
sity of Virginia library, Charlottesville; Philadelphia Minerva, March 4, 1797.
2. Jefferson, Anas, March 2, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 334-35.
3. Page Smith, John Adams (2 vols.; New York, 1962), II, 917-19; Ralph Adams
Brown, The Presidency ofJohn Adams (Lawrence, Kan., 1975), 3-4; Jefferson, Anas,
March 2, 1797, Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, May 13, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works of
I, 335-36, VIII, 284.
Jefferson,
Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, January 22, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
4.
VIII, 278; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), III,
340-45-
5. Jefferson to Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours, March 2, 1809, in Dumas
Malone (ed.), Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Pierre Samuel du Pont de
Nemours, 1798-1817 (Boston, 1930), 122.
6. Jefferson to Mazzei, April 24, 1796, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VIII,
237-40.
7. Jefferson to Madison, August 3, 1797, in ibid., 332-33; Howard R. Marraro,
"The Four Versions of Jefferson's Letter to Mazzei," William and Mary Quarterly, 2nd
Ser., XXII (1942), 23-27.
8. Text from the Philadelphia Minerva, May 14, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, VIII, 238m

9. Jefferson to Martin Van Buren, June 29, 1824, m ^>id.,XII, 362, 366.
10. Jefferson to Thomas Bell, May 18, 1797, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert
E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903),
IX, 387; Jefferson to Peregrine Fitzhugh, June 4, 1797, Jefferson to Madison, Au-
gust 3, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 302, 332-33; Monroe to Jeffer-
son, July 12, 1797, in Stanislaus M. Hamilton (ed.), The Writings of James Monroe (7
vols.; New York,
1898-1903), III, 69-70.
11. Madison to Jefferson, August 5, 1797, in Letters and Other Writings of James
Madison (Congressional Edition; 4 vols.; Philadelphia, 1865), II, 1 18; Malone, Jeffer-
son, III, 302.
12. Jefferson to Burr, June 17, 1797, Burr to Jefferson, June 21, 1797, in Mary-Jo
Kline and Joanne Wood Ryan (eds.), Political Correspondence and Public Papers of
Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Princeton, 1983), I, 298-300, 301.
13. Gallatin to his wife, June Henry Adams, The Life of
28, 1797, June 30, 1797, in
Albert Gallatin (New York, 1879), 186-87; Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest
for National Identity (New York, 1971), 157.
14. Jefferson to Madison, August 3, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VIII,
331-34; Virginia Gazette (Richmond), May 24, 1797.
15. Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. (ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their Con-
stituents, 1789—1829 (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1978), I, xxxvii-xxxix, 67-71; Jefferson
to Fitzhugh, June 4, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 302.

16. Cunningham (ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, I,
xxxviii-xxxix; petition, [August, 1797], Jefferson to Madison, August 3, 1797, in
Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, VIII, 322-31, 333-34; Richard R. Beeman, The Old
Dominion and the New Nation, 1788-1801 (Lexington, Ky., 1972), 172.
17. Monroe to Jefferson, September 5, 1 797, in Hamilton (ed.), Writings of Monroe,

III, 85; Jefferson to Monroe, September 7, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
VIII, 339-40.
18. Jefferson to Monroe, October 25, 1797, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII,
344-46; Jefferson, account book, December 6, 1797, transcript by Bear, in U. Va.

library.
8 .
380 NOTES TO PAGES 2 1 2- 1
19. Jefferson to Madison, January 25, February 22, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
VIII, 358-59, 373; Jackson to John Donelson, January 18, 1798, in Sam B. Smith
and Harriet C. Owsley (eds.), The Papers of Andrew Jackson (Knoxville, 1980-), I, 167.
20. Annals of Congress, 5th Cong., 2nd Sess. (March 5, 1798), 1200-1202; Alexan-
der DeConde, The Quasi-War: The Politics and Diplomacy of the Undeclared War with
France, 1797— 1801 (New York, 1966), 66.
21. Annals of Congress, 5th Cong., 2nd Sess. (March 19, 1798), 1271 — 72; De-
Conde, Quasi-War, 68-70.
22. Anthony New, circular letter, March 20, 1798, in Cunningham (ed.), Circular
Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, I, 112; Jefferson to Madison, March 21,
1798, Jefferson to Monroe, Mar. 21, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 386,
389; DeConde, Quasi-War, 71-72.
23. Samuel J. Cabell, circular letter, April 6, 1798, Joseph McDowell, circular
letter, May 28, 1798, in Cunningham (ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their
Constituents, I, 119, 120; Jefferson to Carr, April 12, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, VIII, 405.
24. Annals of Congress, 5th Cong., 1st Sess. (May 16, 1797), 56; Jefferson to Madi-
son, April 6, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 403.
25. Jefferson to Madison, April 6, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 403;
Gerard H. Garfield, Timothy Pickering and American Diplomacy, 1795 — 1800 (Colum-
bia, Mo., 1969), 155.
26. Jefferson to Monroe, April 19, 1798, Jefferson to Madison, April 19, 26,
1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 407—408, 409, 413.
27. Annals of Congress, 5th Cong., 2nd Sess., 3722-29; DeConde, Quasi-War,
90— 91 Richard H. Kohn,
; Eagle and Sword: The Federalists and the Creation of the Mili-
tary Establishment in America, 1783-1802 (New York, 1975), 228—29; John Dawson,
circular letter, July 19, 1798, in Cunningham (ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to
Their Constituents, I, 125.

28. Jefferson to Madison, April 26, June 7, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
VIII, 411-12, 434.
29. Jefferson to Madison, June 21, 1798, in ibid., 439-40; DeConde, Quasi-War,
93-
30. Jefferson to John Taylor, June 1, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII,
432.
3 1 . James Morton Smith, Freedoms Fetters: The Alien and Sedition Laws and American
Civil Liberties (Ithaca, N.Y., 1956), 35, 50, 61, 438. Smith prints the texts of the acts
on pp. 435-42.
32. Ibid., 94-95' 130. 44!-42-
33. Jefferson to Stevens Thomson Mason, October 1 1, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works
ofJefferson, VIII, 450.
34. Nicholas to Jefferson, October 4, 1798, Jefferson to Nicholas, October 5,
1798, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress.
35. Jefferson to Madison, October 26, November 17, 1798, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, VIII, 456, 457. On and Madison on the Ken-
the collaboration of Jefferson
tucky and Virginia Resolutions see Adrienne Koch and Harry Ammon, "The Vir-
ginia and Kentucky Resolutions: An Episode in Jefferson's and Madison's Defense of
Civil Liberties," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., V (1948), 145-76, and Adri-
enne Koch, Jefferson and Madison: The Great Collaboration (New York, 1964), 1 78-2 1 1
36. Jefferson's "fair copy," in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, VIII, 458—61.
37. The resolutions as passed in Kentucky are reproduced along with Jefferson's
rough draft and fair copy in ibid., 458-79.
NOTES TO PAGES 2 1 8- 26 38 1
38. Ibid., 458-59> 476-77-

39. Jefferson to Taylor, November 26, 1798, Jefferson to Nicholas, November 29,
1798, in 458-59, 483; Koch, Jefferson and Madison, 190-91.
ibid.,
40. Malone, Jefferson, III, 413; Jefferson to Madison, August 23, 1799, in Koch,
Jefferson and Madison, 197-98; Jefferson to Nicholas, September 5, 1799, in Ford
(ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 79-81.
41. The Kentucky Resolutions are reprinted from the Journal of the House of
Representatives of Kentucky, November 14, 1799, in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr.
(ed.), The Early Republic, 1 789- 1828 (New York, 1968), 145-46.
42. Koch, Jefferson and Madison, 206.
Chapter XVI
1. Thomas Jefferson, A Manual of Parliamentary Practice for the Use of the United
States Senate (Washington, D.C., 1801). Jefferson's Manual is still published by Con-
gress today. See Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and Rules of the House of Representatives
of the United States, 97th Cong., 2nd Sess., House Document No. 97-271 (Washington,
D.C., 1983).
2. Jefferson to Madison, February 5, 1799, Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas
Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), IX, 34.
3. Jefferson to Monroe, July 15, 1803, Jefferson to Callender, October 5, 1799, in
ibid., 388-89, 84-85; John Taylor to Wilson Cary Nicholas, January 31, 1800, in
Wilson Cary Nicholas Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville; Noble E. Cun-
ningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans: The Formation of Party Organization, 1J89—
1801 (Chapel Hill, 1957), 171.
4. Jefferson to Monroe, February 11, 1 799, Jefferson to Philip Norborne Nich-
olas, April 7, 1800, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, IX, 36, 128; Thomas Cooper,
Political Arithmetic (N.p., 1798), 3—5.
5.Jefferson to Gerry, January 26, 1799, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 17—19.
See also George A. Billias, Elbridge Gerry: Founding Father and Republican Statesman
(New York, 1976), 300—301.
6. Cunningham, Jeffersonian Republicans, 212—14; Meriwether Jones to Creed
Taylor, April 9, 1799, in Creed Taylor Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville;

Aurora (Philadelphia), October 4, 1800.
7. Ames to Oliver Wolcott, June 12, 1800, George Gibbs (ed.), Memoirs of the Ad-
ministrations of Washington and John Adams, Edited from Papers of Oliver Wolcott, Secre-
the
tary of the Treasury (2 vols.; New York, 1846), II, 368—70; A Short Address to the Voters of
Delaware, September 21, 1800, pamphlet in Broadsides Collection, Library of Con-
gress (hereinafter cited LC); Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia), September 10,
1800.
8. [William Linn], Serious Considerations on the Election of a President: Addressed to the
Citizens of the United States (New York, 1800), 4-6, 16-17, 24, 28.
9. [Tunis Wortman], A Solemn Address, to Christians and Patriots, upon the Approach-
ing Election of a President of the United States: In Answer to a Pamphlet, Entitled, "Serious
Considerations" (New York, 1800), 4; Joseph Bloomfield, To the People of New Jersey,
September 30, 1800, broadside, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia;
William G. McLoughlin (ed.), Isaac Backus on Church, State, and Calvinism (Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1968), 16.
10. An Address to the Citizens of North Carolina on the Subject of the Approaching Elec-
tions,signed "A North Carolina Planter" (N.p., July 1800), 12; Americanus [John
Beckley], Address to the People of the United States; with an Epitome and Vindication of the
Public Life and Character of Thomas Jefferson (Philadelphia, 1800), 32; Joseph Bloom-
.
field,To the People of New Jersey, September 30, 1800, broadside, Historical Society of
Pennsylvania; Virginia Argus (Richmond), July 11, 1800.
1 1 William Austin, An Address, to the Voters for Electors of President and Vice-President
of the United States, in the State of Virginia, Richmond, May 26, 1800, in Broadside
Collection, LC.
12. Cunningham, Jeffersoruan Republicans, 145—46.
13. Thomas B. Adams to John Q. Adams, May 1 1, 1800, in Adams Family Papers
(microfilm edition), Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston.
14. Jefferson to Madison, March 8, 1800, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 123;
Burr to Jefferson, [May 3, 1800], in Mary-Jo Kline and Joanne Wood Ryan (eds.),
Political Correspondence and Public Papers of Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Princeton, 1983), I,
426; Hamilton to Jay, May 7, 1800, in Harold C. Syrett et al. (eds.), The Papers of
Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York, 1961—79), XXIV, 465.
15. James Nicholson to Albert Gallatin, May 6, 1800, in Henry Adams, The Life of
Albert Gallatin (New York, 1879), 241.
16. Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, May 4, 1800, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of
Hamilton, XXIV, 453.
17. Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., "Election of 1800," in Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.
(ed.), History of American Presidential Elections, 1789—1968 (4 vols.; New York, 1971),
I, 110-12; Hamilton to Sedgwick, May 10, 1800, in Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers of
Hamilton, XXIV, 475.

18. Jefferson to John Taylor, November 26, 1799, in Massachusetts Historical So-
ciety Collections, 7th Ser., I (1900), 67-68.
19. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., November 30, December 5, 1800,
in ibid., 78-79.
20. The election in South Carolina is treated in detail in Cunningham, Jeffersonian
Republicans,231-39.
21. Peter Freneau to Seth Paine, December 2, 1800, in Personal Papers, Miscella-
neous, LC.
22. Courier of New Hampshire (Concord), December 19, 1800; Increase N. Tarbox
(ed.). Diary of Thomas Robbins, D.D., 1796—1854 (2 vols.; Boston, 1886), I, 114,
127-28.
23. Jefferson to Monroe, December 20, 1800, in James Monroe Papers, LC;
Douglass Adair "James Madison's Autobiography," William and Mary Quarterly,
(ed.),
3rd Ser., II (1945), 206; Jefferson, Anas, January 26, 1804, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, I, 378.
24. Burr to John Taylor, October 23, 1800, in Kline and Ryan (eds.). Papers of Burr,
I, 451; John Hunter to Madison, April 16, 1801, in James Madison Papers, LC; Uriah
Tracy to James McHenry, December 30, 1800, in Bernard C. Steiner, The Life and Cor-
respondence ofJames McHenry (Cleveland, 1907), 483-84 (punctuation modernized).
25. Jefferson to Burr, December 15, 1800, Burr to Jefferson, December 23, 1800,
in Kline and Ryan (eds.). Papers of Burr, I, 469-70, 473-74-
26. Burr to Smith, December 16, 1800, December 29, 1800, in ibid., 471, 479.
27. Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of Burr, I, 481-85.
28. Hamilton to Oliver Wolcott, Jr., December 16, 1800, in Syrett et al. (eds.),
Papers of Hamilton, XXV, 257.
29. Syrett et al. (eds.), Papers oj Hamilton, 269-324.
30. Hamilton to in ibid., 319-20.
Bayard, January 16, 1801,
31. Jefferson to Madison, December 26, 1800, Jefferson to Tench Coxe, De-
cember 31, 1800, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, IX, 161-62; Gallatin to his wife,
January 22, 1801, in Adams, Gallatin, 255-56.
32. Annals of Congress, 6th Cong., 2nd Sess. (February 9, 1801), 1009- 11; Gallatin
to his wife, February 5, 1801, in Adams, Gallatin, 260.
33. Jefferson had the votes of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee; Burr received the votes of New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, and South
Carolina.
34. Bayard to Richard Bassett, February 12, 1801, in Elizabeth Donnan (ed.),
Papers ofJames A. Bayard, 1J96-1815, Vol. II of American Historical Association An-

nual Report, 1913 (Washington, D.C., 1915), 125; Gallatin to his wife, February 12,
14, 1801, inAdams, Gallatin, 260-62.
35. Bayard to Bassett, February 16, February 17, 1801, in Donnan (ed.), Papers of
Bayard, 126-27; Gallatin to James Nicholson, February 14, 16, 1801, Gallatin to his
wife, February 17, 1801, in Adams, Gallatin, 261-62.
36. Jefferson to Monroe, February 15, 1801, Jefferson to Madison, February 18,
1801, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 179, 182; Bayard to Allen McLane, Febru-
ary 17, 1801, in Donnan (ed.), Papers of Bayard, 127.
37. Bayard February 16, 1801, in Donnan (ed.), Papers of Bayard, 126;
to Bassett,
John S. Pancake, "Aaron Burr: Would-Be Usurper," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd
Ser., VIII (1951), 209.
38. Burr to Gallatin, February 25, 1801, in Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of Burr, I,
509; Bayard to McLane, February 17, 1801, in Donnan (ed.), Papers of Bayard,
128.
39. Deposition of James A. Bayard, April 3, 1806, deposition of Samuel Smith,
April 15, 1806, Samuel Smith to Richard H. and James A. Bayard, April 3, 1830, in
Matthew Memoirs of Aaron Burr, with Miscellaneous Selections from His Corre-
L. Davis,
spondence (2 vols.; New York, 1837), II, 107-109, 129-37. O n Smith's role see Frank
A. Cassell, Merchant Congressman in the Young Republic: Samuel Smith of Maryland,
1752 — 1839 (Madison, 1971), 98— 102; John S. Pancake, Samuel Smith and the Politics
of Business, 1J52-1839 (University, Ala., 1972), 52—58.
40. Jefferson, memorandum on a conversation with Burr, April 15, 1806, in
Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of Burr, II, 963; Jefferson to Monroe, February 15,
1801, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 179; Robert Williams to his North Carolina
constituents, February 26, 1801, in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. (ed.), Circular Letters of
Congressmen to Their Constituents, 1789—1829 (3 vols.; Chapel 241; Bay-
Hill, 1978), I,
ard to McLane, February 17, 1801, in Donnan (ed.), Papers of Bayard, 128-29.
41. Jefferson to Spencer Roane, September 6, 1819, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, XII, 136. On the election of 1800 see also Joyce Appleby, Capitalism and a New
Social Order: The Republican Vision of the 1790s (New York, 1984), 3—4, 79, 103—104.
Chapter XVII
1. Times (Alexandria), March 6, 1801; Examiner (Richmond), March 13, 1801.
2. Gallatin to his wife, January 15, 1801, in Henry Adams, The Life of Albert Gal-
latin (New York, 1879), 254; Mrs. Smith to Susan B. Smith, March 4, 1801, in Gail-
lard Hunt (ed.), The First Forty Years of Washington Society, Portrayed by the Family Letters
of Mrs. Samuel Harrison Smith (New York, 1906), 25.
3. Hunt (ed.), First Forty Years of Washington Society, 26.
4. Jefferson to Monroe, [March] 7, 1801 in Paul L. Ford

, (ed.), The Works of Thomas
Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New
York, 1904), IX, 203.
5. Text of Jefferson's inaugural address, March 4, 1801, transcribed from Jeffer-
son's final manuscript copy, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress (here-
384 NOTES TO PAGES 24O-48
inafter cited LC), in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. (ed.), The Early Republic, 1789-1828
(New York, 1968), 70-75.
6. Giles to Jefferson, March 16, 1801, in Jefferson Papers, LC; American Citizen
(New York), June 5, 1801; American Mercury (Hartford), July 30, 1801, reprinted
from Philadelphia Aurora.
7. Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, May 18, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
IX, 251 Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Process of Government Under Jefferson (Prince-
;
ton, 1978), 12-14.

8. Jefferson, Anas, March 8, 9, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, I, 363—65;
Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948—81), IV, 35.
9. Jefferson, Anas, May 15, 1801, Jefferson to Wilson Cary Nicholas, June 11,
1801, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 365, IX, 264.
10. Jefferson, Anas, May 15, 1801, in ibid., I, 365—66; Cunningham, Process of
Government Under Jefferson, 48—50.
11. Jefferson to Nicholas, June 11, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, IX,
264-65.
12. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 64.
13. Jefferson to John Dickinson, June 21, 1801, Jefferson to James Sullivan,
March 3, 1808, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
14. Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, March 24. 1801, Jefferson to Giles, March 23,
180 1 Jefferson to Monroe, [March]
, 7, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, IX,
230-31, 222-23, 204.
15. Pierpont Edwards and others to Levi Lincoln, June 4, 1801, enclosed in Lin-
coln to Jefferson, June 15, 1801, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
16. Giles to Jefferson, June 1, 1801, in ibid.
17. Jefferson to Elias Shipman and others, July 12, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, IX,272-73.
18. Harrison Gray Otis to John Rutledge, October 18, 1801, in John Rutledge
Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Jefferson to Shipman and others,
July 12, 1801, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 274.
19. Jefferson to Monroe, [March] 7, 1801, Jefferson to Giles, March 23, 1801, in
Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 204, 222.
20. Jefferson, memorandum, [1803], in Jefferson Papers, LC. A detailed break-
down of this memorandum is in Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson,
173-74; see a so Carl E. Prince, "The Passing of the Aristocracy: Jefferson's Re-
'
moval of Federalists, 1804— 1805," Journal of American History, LVII (1970), 563-75.
For an extended treatment of Jefferson's patronage practices see Noble E. Cun-
ningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans in Power: Party Operations, 1 801 -1809
(Chapel Hill, 1963), 12-70.
21. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 72-77.
22. Jefferson, draft of first annual message, December 8, 1801, Smith to Jeffer-
son, received November 21, 1801, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
23. Jefferson, marginal note on draft of first annual message, December 8, 1801,
in ibid.
24. Jefferson to the president of the Senate, December 8, 1801, in Ford (ed.),
Works of Jefferson, IX, 321; Macon to Jefferson, Apr. 20, 1801, in Jefferson Papers,
LC; Michael Leib to Lydia Leib, December 9, 1801, in Leib-Harrison Family Papers,
Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
25. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 98. The first session of the
Seventh Congress is reviewed in the circular letters of John Clopton, April 3, 1802.
William Dickson, April 5, 1802, and John Stratton, April 22, 1802, in Noble E. Cun-
ningham, Jr. (ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, 1789—1829 (3
vols.; Chapel Hill, 1978), I, 275-86.
26. Annals of Congress, 6th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1534-48; Richard E. Ellis, The Jeffer-
sonian Crisis: Courts and Politics in the Young Republic (New York, 1971), 41-50; John
Clopton, circular to his constituents, April 3, 1802, in Cunningham (ed.), Circular
Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, I, 276.
27. Jefferson to John Dickinson, December 19, 1801, Andrew A. Lipscomb and
Albert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C.,
1903), X, 302; Ellis, Jeffersonian Crisis, 43-44.
28. Ellis, Jeffersonian Crisis, 66.
29. Hillhouse to Simeon Baldwin, February 11, 1802, in Baldwin Family Papers,
Yale University Library, New Haven; Henderson to Samuel Johnston, December 16,
1802, in Hayes Collection, transcript, North Carolina Division of Archives and His-
tory, Raleigh; Pickering to his wife, January 31, 1806, quoted in Edward H. Phillips,
"Timothy Pickering's Portrait of Thomas Jefferson," Essex Institute Historical Collec-
XCIV (1958), 313; Charles Francis Adams (ed.), Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams,
tions,
Comprising Portions of His Diary from 1795 to 1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874—77),
February 7, 1806, I, 403-404.
30. Jefferson to Bidwell, July 5, 1806, in Jefferson Papers, LC; Annals of Congress,
9th Cong., 1st Sess., (March 5, 1806), 561.
3 1 . Jefferson to Breckinridge, November 24, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
X, 52. For examples of legislation drafted by Jefferson see Cunningham, Process of
Government Under Jefferson, 189—92.
32. Robert M. Johnstone, Jr., in Jefferson and the Presidency: Leadership in the Young
Republic (Ithaca, N.Y., 1978), 14, argues that Jefferson's presidency fits the bargain-
ing model of presidential leadership employed by modern presidents.
33. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 197-209.
34. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., November 16, 1801, in Jefferson
Papers, LC.
35. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 45-47; Jefferson to Gal-
latin, September 18, 1801, in Henry Adams (ed.), The Writings of Albert Gallatin (3
vols.; Philadelphia, 1879), I, 55.
36. Jefferson, circular to the heads of the departments, November 6, 1801, in
Jefferson Papers, LC.
37. Jefferson to Lewis, February 23, 1801, in ibid.; Cunningham, Process of Gov-
ernment Under Jefferson, 5-6, 36-38. See also Silvio Bedini, Thomas Jefferson and His
Copying Machines (Charlottesville, 1984).
38. Jefferson to Walter Jones, March 5, 1810, Jefferson to Joel Barlow, January 24,
1810, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 137, 132.
39. Jefferson to Comte Destutt de Tracy, January 26, 181 1, in ibid., 185.
40. Ibid.
41. Cunningham, Process of Government
Under Jefferson, 40.
42. Jefferson to David R. Williams, January 31, 1806, in Jefferson Papers, LC;
Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 41-44.
43. Mitchill to his wife, February 10, 1802, November 26, 1804, in Samuel Latham
Mitchill Papers, Museum of the City of New York; Everett S. Brown (ed.), William
Plumers Memorandum of Proceedings in the United States Senate, 1803-1807 (New York,
1923), 212-13. On the mammoth cheese, see M alone, Jefferson, IV, 106-108.
44. Jefferson, account book, March 8, 1802, photostatic copy, in LC.
45. Cunningham, Process of Government Under Jefferson, 40—41.

46. Jefferson to William Short, October 31, 1819, in Dickinson W. Adams (ed.),
Jefferson's Extracts from the Gospels (Princeton, 1983), 389, a volume in Series 2 of The
Papers of Thomas Jefferson.
47. In an excellent introduction to both works published in ibid., Eugene R. Sher-
idan explains the origins of the works and clarifies the confusion that has sur-
rounded the two compilations.
48. Constance B. Schulz, '"Of Bigotry in Politics and Religion; Jefferson's Reli-
gion, the Federalist Press, and the Syllabus," Virginia Magazine of History and Biogra-
phy,XCl (1983), 73-83.
49. Adams (ed.), Jefferson's Extracts from the Gospels, 12-16, 25, 331—34; Schulz,
"Jefferson's Religion," 88-89.
50. Jefferson to Adams, October 12, 1813, in Adams (ed.), Jefferson's Extracts from
the Gospels,352.
51. Rules of Etiquette, [1803], in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 47.
52. On the Merry incident see Henry Adams, History of the United States of America
During the Administration of Thomas Jefferson (4 vols.; New York, 1889), II, 365-76;
Malcolm Lester, Anthony Merry Redivivus: A Reappraisal of the British Minister to the
United States, 1803-6 (Charlottesville, 1978), 29-47.

53. Plumer to Jeremiah Smith, December 9, 1802, in William Plumer Papers, LC;
Brown (ed.), Plumer's Memorandum, 212-13.
Chapter XVIII
1. King to Madison, March 29, 1801, in American State Papers: Documents, Legis-
lative and Executive of the United States (38 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1832—61), Foreign
Relations, II, 509; Jefferson to Monroe, May 29, 1801, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works
of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), IX, 263. The secret
treaty of San Ildefonso was signed October 1, 1800.
2. Madison to Pinckney, June 9, 1801, Madison to Livingston, September 28,
1801 in American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 11,510-11; Dumas Malone,y^mon

,
and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), IV, 250.

3. Jefferson to Livingston, April 18, 1802, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, IX,
364-65; Jefferson to Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours, April 25, 1802, in An-
drew A. Lipscomb and Albert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20
vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903), X, 317.
4. Jefferson to Livingston, April 18, 1802, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 368;
Madison to Charles Pinckney, November 27, 1802, Gaillard Hunt (ed.), The Writings
of James Madison (9 vols.; New York, 1900-1910), VI, 462; Madison to Livingston,
December 16, 1802, quoted in Irving Brant, James Madison (6 vols.; Indianapolis,
1941-61), IV, 99.
5. John Stanly to Duncan Cameron, January 20, 1803, in Cameron Family Papers,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
6. Jefferson, second annual message, December 15, 1802, in Ford (ed.). Works of
Jefferson, IX, 409; Hamilton to Charles C. Pinckney, December 29, 1802, Harold C.
Syrett et al. (eds.), The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26 vols.; New York, 1961-79),
XXVI, 71; Annals of Congress, 7th Cong., 2nd Sess. (December 17, 1802), 281; Ameri-
can State Papers: Foreign Relations, II, 469-71.
7. Claiborne to Madison, January 3, 1803, in Dunbar Rowland (ed.), Official Letter
Books ofW. C. C. Claiborne, 1801-1816 (6 vols.; Jackson, Miss., 1917), I, 253; Mary P.
Adams, 'Jefferson's Reaction to the Treaty of San Ildefonso," Journal of Southern His-
tory, XXI (1955), 173-88; Alexander DeConde, This Affair of Louisiana (New York,
1976), 132.
8. Annals of Congress, 7th Cong., 2nd Sess. (January 4-1 1, 1803), 312-14, 326-
28, 339—42; American State Papers: Foreign Relations, II, 471.
9. Jefferson to Monroe, January 10, 1803, January 13, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works
of Jefferson, IX, 416, 418—19; Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate (Wash-
ington, D.C., 1828), Jauary 12, 1803, I, 436.
10. New York Evening Post, February 8, 1803, in Syrett etal. (eds.), Papers of Hamil-
ton, XXVI, 82-85.
11. Du Pont to Jefferson, April 30, 1802, October 4, 1802, in Dumas Malone
(ed.), Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours,
1798- 181 7 (Boston, 1930), 58-60, 68-70; Malone, Jefferson, IV, 257.
Annals of Congress, 7th Cong., 2nd Sess. (January 12, February 26, 1803),
12.
370-74, 602.
13. Madison to Livingston and Monroe, March 2, 1803, in Hunt (ed.), Writings of
Madison, VII, 19, 24—25. The State Department calculated the exchange rate at
$1.10 for every six livres tournois, or a total of $9,166,666.60. Ibid., 19.
14. Livingston to Talleyrand, January 10, 1803, in American State Papers: Foreign
Relations, II, 531; DeConde, Louisiana, 131.
15. Jefferson to Hugh Williamson, April 30, 1803, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.),
Writings ofJefferson, X, 386.

1 6. Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity (New York, 1971),
207 — 208; DeConde, Louisiana, 162—64, 172.
17. Monroe to Madison, April 15, 1803, memoranda, April 27 — May 3, 1803, in
Stanislaus M. Hamilton (ed.), The Writings ofJames Monroe (7 vols.; New York, 1898-
1903), IV, 9—19. See also George Dangerfield, Chancellor Robert R. Livingston of New
York, 1746-1813 (New York, i960), Part 5.
18. National Intelligencer 4, 8, 1 803; Jefferson to Horatio Gates,
(Washington), July
July ii, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 13. See also Jefferson, Anas, May 7,
1803, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 372-73.
19. Jefferson to John Dickinson, August 9, 1803, Jefferson to Wilson Cary Nich-
olas, September 7, 1803, Jefferson to John Breckinridge, August 12, 1803, in Ford
(ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 29, 10-1 1, 7.
20. Everett S. Brown (ed.), William Plumer's Memorandum of Proceedings in the

United States Senate, 1803- 1807 (New York, 1928), 13-14; Noble E. Cunningham,
Jr., The Process of Government Under Jefferson (Princeton, 1978), 273-75.
21. Jefferson, third annual message, October 17, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, X, 37.
22. Jefferson, special message to Congress, October 21, 1803, in ibid., 44; De-
Conde, Louisiana, 188.
23. Jefferson, third annual message, October 17, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works of
X, 37; Adrienne Koch, Power, Morals, and the Founding Fathers (Ithaca, N.Y,
Jefferson,
1961), 48; John C. Miller, The Wolf by the Ears: Thomas Jefferson and Slavery (New York,
1977), 142-43-
24. Jefferson to Horatio Gates, July 1 1, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X,
14; George Dargo, Jefferson s Louisiana: Politics and the Clash of Legal Traditions (Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1975), 107, 169—74.
25. Carlos Martinez de Yrujo to Pedro Cevallos, December 2, 1802, in Donald
Jackson (ed.), Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, with Related Documents, 1783 —
1854 (2nd ed.; 2 vols.; Urbana, 1978), I, 4-5.
26. Jefferson, message to Congress, January 18, 1803, in ibid., 11-13; Annals of
Congress, 7th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1565.
27. Jackson (ed.), Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, I, 8-9; Jefferson to
James Wilkinson, February 23, 1 80 1 Jefferson to Meriwether Lewis, February 23,
,
1801, in ibid., 1-2; Donald Jackson, Jefferson and the Stony Mountains: Exploring the
West from Monticello (Urbana, 1981), 117 — 20.
28. Jefferson's instructions to Lewis are in Jackson, Jefferson and the Stony Moun-
tains,139-44.
29. Gerard H. Clarfield, Timothy Pickering and the American Republic (Pittsburgh,
1980), 224-28; Mary-Jo Kline and Joanne Wood Ryan (eds.), Political Correspondence
and Public Papers of Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Princeton, 1983), II, 862—65; Syrett et al.
(eds.), Papers of Hamilton, XXVI, 310.
30. McKean February 7, 1803, quoted in Malone, Jefferson, IV, 229;
to Jefferson,
Jefferson to McKean, February 19, 1803, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, IX, 451-52.
3 1 See Leonard W. Levy, Legacy of Suppression: Freedom of Speech in Early American
.
History (Cambridge, Mass., i960), 300—301; Levy, Jefferson and Civil Liberties: The
Darker Side (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), 58-59; Malone, Jefferson, IV, 224-35.
32. Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, March 3, 1804, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X,
73; Jacob Crowninshield to Barnabas Bidwell, February 26, 1804, in Henry W. Taft
Collection, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston.
33. Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans in Power: Party Opera-
tions,1801 — 1809 (Chapel Hill, 1963), 38-43.
34. Jefferson to Monroe, January 8, 1804, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 61.
35. Mary Jefferson Eppes to Jefferson, February 10, [1804], in Edwin M. Betts
and James A. Bear, [Jr.] (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo.,
1966), 256-57; Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Image of Thomas Jefferson in the Public
Eye: Portraits for the People, 1800- 1809 (Charlottesville, 1981), 80-84.
36. Jefferson to Nicholson, May 13, 1803, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings
of Jefferson, X, 390; Richard E. Ellis, The JeffersonianCrisis: Courts and Politics in the
Young Republic (New York, 1971), 79-80; Nathaniel Macon to Nicholson, July 26,
August 6, 1803, in Joseph H. Nicholson Papers, Library of Congress (hereinafter
cited LC); Annals of Congress, 8th Cong., 1st Sess. (January 5, 7, 1804), 806, 876;
Caesar A. Rodney to George Read, February 7, 1804, in George Read Papers, His-
torical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
37. Annals of Congress, 8th Cong., 1st Sess. (March 12, 1804), 1180; Ellis, Jefferson-
ian Crisis, 69-76; Pickering to 14, 1804, in Timothy Pick-
Theodore Lyman, March
ering Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston; Plumer to Isaac Lyman,
March 17, 1804, in William Plumer Papers, LC.
38. Charles Francis Adams
(ed.), Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams, Comprising Portions
of His Diary from 7795 1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874-77), I» 3 21 See also
to -
Timothy Pickering to James McHenry, December 22, 1804, in Pickering Papers,

Massachusetts Historical Society, and William Plumer to Thomas W. Thompson, De-
cember 23, 1804, in Plumer Papers, LC.
39. Uriah Tracy, quoted in Ellis, Jeff ersonian Crisis, 96.
40. Joseph Hiester to John H. Hiester, February 10, 1805, in Joseph Hiester
Papers, Gregg Collection, LC; Brown (ed.), Plumer s Memorandum, January 2, 1805,
pp. 235-36; Ellis, Jeffersonian Crisis, 96; William Plumer to Daniel Plumer, February
25, 1805, in Plumer Papers, LC.
41. Jefferson to Joseph H. Nicholson, May 13, 1803, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, X, 390; Ellis, Jeffersonian Crisis, 104.
NOTES TO PAGES 274-8 1 389
42. Brown (ed.), Plumer's Memorandum, 101; Jefferson memorandum, [March,

1805], Jefferson Papers, LC; Adams (ed.), Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams, I, 362-63;
Ellis, Jeffersonian Crisis, 101.
Chapter XIX
1. Samuel L. Mitchill to his wife, March2, 1805, in Samuel Latham Mitchill
Papers, Museum of the City of New York; Mary-Jo Kline and Joanne Wood Ryan
(eds.), Political Correspondence and Public Papers of Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Princeton,
1983), 909—17; Augustus John Foster, Jeffersonian America: Notes on the United
II,
States of America, Collected in the Years 1805-6-j and 11-12, ed. Richard Beale Davis
(San Marino, 1954), 15; Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston,
1948-81), V, 3-4.
of His Diary from 1795 to 1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874-77), I, 373; Everett S.
Brown (ed.), William Plumer's Memorandum of Proceedings in the United States Senate
(New York, 1928), 315-16.
3. March 4, 1805, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The
Jefferson, second inaugural address,
Works of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), X, 127 — 31.
4. Ibid., 131-33- On Jefferson and the Indians see Bernard W. Sheehan, Seeds of
Extinction: Jeffersonian Philanthropy and the American Indian (Chapel Hill, 1973).
5. Jefferson, notes on a draft for second inaugural address, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, X, 127m
6. Ibid., 135.
7. Foster, Jeffersonian America, 15; Address dated March 4, 1805, (capitalization
and spelling modernized) in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress (here-
inafter cited LC); Malone, Jefferson, V, 4.
8. Alfred L. Bush, "The Life Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," in William Howard
Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts: An Extended View (Washington, D.C., 1976), 73-76;
Noble Cunningham, Jr., The Image of Thomas Jefferson in the Public Eye: Portraits for
E.
1800—1809 (Charlottesville, 1981), 87-92.
the People,
9. Jefferson to John Taylor, January 6, 1805, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X,
125; Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess. (March 13, 1806), 775.
10. Jefferson to Monroe, January 8, 1804, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 63;
Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity (New York, 1971),
233—42; Malone, Jefferson, IV, 342—47, V, 45—52.
11. Malone, Jefferson, V, 39-41; Jefferson to Madison, August 25, 1805, August 7,
1805, in Ford (ed.), Writings ofJefferson, X, 171, i6gn.

12. Jefferson to Madison, October 23, 1805, Jefferson, memorandum, [Novem-
ber 14, 1805], in Ford (ed.), Writings ofJefferson, i76n, i77n, 180.
13. Jefferson, Anas, November 19, 1805, in ibid., I, 387. See also Henry Adams,
History of the United States of America During the Administration of Thomas Jefferson (4
vols.; New
York, 1889), III, 103-107, and C. Edward Skeen, John Armstrong, Jr.,
1J58-1843: A Biography (Syracuse, New York, 1981), 76-77.

14. Jefferson, fifth annual message, December 3, 1805, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, X, 189—90.
15. Jefferson, confidential message, December 6, 1805, in ibid., 198-205.
16. Ibid., 205; Gallatin to Jefferson, [December 3, 1805], in Henry Adams (ed.),
The Writings of Albert Gallatin (3 vols.; Philadelphia, 1879), I, 276; John Randolph,
"Decius," Richmond Enquirer, August 15, 1806; Adams, History of the U.S. During the
Administration ofJefferson, III, 133; Norman K. Risjord, The Old Republicans: Southern
Conservatism in the Age ofJefferson (New York, 1965), 46—47.
17. C. Peter Magrath, Yazoo: Land and Politics in the New Republic (Providence,
1966), 5-19, 35-45; Irving Brant, James Madison (6 vols.; Indianapolis, 1941-61),
IV, 234-40.
18. Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess., 88, 1131—32, 1226—27; Randolph,
circular letter, April 27, 1806, in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. (ed.), Circular Letters of
Congressmen to Their Constituents, 1789—1829 (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1978), I, 475—76.
19. Jefferson to Thomas Lomax, January 11, 1806, quoted in Malone, Jefferson,
V,95-
20. John Quincy Adams to John Adams, February 11, 1806, in Worthington C.
Ford (ed.), Writings of John Quincy Adams (7 vols.; New York, 1913—17), III, 134;
Bradford Perkins, Prologue to War: England and the United States, 1805— 181 2 (Berke-
ley, 1968), 78—81; Jefferson, fifth annual message, December 3, 1805, Jefferson,
special message, January 17, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X, 187-92,
223-24; Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess. (January 17, 1806), 342-43.
2 1 Brown (ed.), Plumer's Memorandum, 388; Ralph Ketcham, James Madison: A Bi-
.
ography (New York, 1971), 442— 43; Jefferson to Comtede Volney, February 11, 1806,
in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 227.
22. Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess. (December 4, 1805), 262.
23. Randolph to Madison, December 1, 1805, in Original Reports of the Secre-
1
tary of State, House Records, Record Group 233, National Archives; Annals of Con-
gress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess. (January 29, 1806), 409-12.
24. Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st Sess., 412-13, 877. After approval by the
Senate on April 15, the act was signed by the president on April 18, 1806. Ibid., 240,
1259-62.
25. Adams (ed.), Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams, I, 415; Jefferson to Paine, March
25, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X, 248; Annals of Congress, 9th Cong., 1st
771-72, 851; William Plumer
Sess., to James Sheafe, March 14, 1806, in William
Plumer Papers, LC.
26. Malone, Jefferson, V, 1 13-14.
27. Undated letters received December 1, 5, 1805, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
28. Merry to Lord Harrowby, August 6, 1804, Merry to Harrowby, March 29,
1805, in Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of Burr, II, 291, 927-29; Adams, History of the
U.S. During the Administration ofJefferson, III, 233-38.
29. United States Gazette (Philadelphia), July 27, 1805; Malone, Jefferson, V, 231—32;
Aurora (Philadelphia), July 30, 1805; Claiborne to Madison, August 6, 1805, in Clar-
ence E. Carter (ed.), The Territorial Papers of the United States (26 vols.; Washington,
D.C., 1934-62), IX, 489.
30. Daveiss to Jefferson, January 10, 1806, received February 8, 1806, Jefferson
Papers, LC, printed in J. H. Daveiss, A View of the President's Conduct Concerning the
Conspiracy of 1806 (Frankfort, Ky., 1807), in Historical and Philosophical Society of
Ohio Quarterly Publications, XII (1917), 69-71.
31. Gallatin to Jefferson, February 12, 1806, Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin, I,
290; Jefferson to Daveiss, February 15, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X,
231-32; List enclosed in Daveiss to Jefferson, February 10, 1806, in Daveiss, View of
the President's Conduct, 74-75-
32. Daveiss to Jefferson, July 14, 1806, in Daveiss, View of the President's Conduct,
91 Jefferson to Daveiss, September 12, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 286.
;
1
33. Jefferson to Morgan, March 26, 1807, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E.
Bergh The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903), XI,
(eds.),
174. See also Jefferson to Morgan, September 19, 1806, Jefferson to John Nicholson,
September 19, 1806, in Ford (ed.) Works of Jefferson, X, 291-92; Malone, Jefferson,
V, 239.
34. Granger to Jefferson, October 16, 1806, in "Burr-Blennerhassett Docu-
ments," Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio Quarterly Publications, IX (1914),
10—13; Malone, Jefferson, V, 240—41.
35. Jefferson, Anas, October 22, 24, 25, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I,
401-403.
36. Thomas P. Abernethy, The Burr Conspiracy (New York, 1954), 15.
22-29, 1806], in Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of
37. Letter to Wilkinson, [July
986-87.
Burr, II,
38. Kline and Ryan (eds.), Papers of Burr, II, 973-86.
39. Excerpts from Wilkinson to Jefferson, October 21, 1806, and memorandum,
dated October 20, 1806, in Abernethy, Burr Conspiracy, 150-52.
40. Jefferson, Anas, November 25, 1806, Jefferson, proclamation, November 27,
1806, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, 403-404, X, 301-302.
I,
41. Brown (ed.), Plumers Memorandum, 515-16.

42. Jefferson to Caesar A. Rodney, December 5, 1806, Jefferson, sixth annual
message, December 2, 1806, in Ford, (ed.) Works ofJefferson, X, 322, 311.
43. Jefferson, special message, January 22, 1807, in ibid., 346-56; Annals of Con-
gress, 9th Cong., 2nd Sess. (January 22, 1807), 39-43, 1008-12; Malone, Jefferson,
V, 263-64; Abernethy, Burr Conspiracy, 193-94.

44. Abernethy, Burr Conspiracy, 113, 117-18, 209, 217-26.
45. Ibid., 230-32; Joseph P. Brady, The Trial of Aaron Burr (New York, 1913),
9-11.
46. Jefferson to William B. Giles, April 20, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
x, 383-84-
47. Abernethy, Burr Conspiracy, 234—39.
48. Ibid., 237-38; Malone, Jefferson, V, 321; American State Papers: Documents, Leg-
islative and Executive of the United States (38 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1832-61), Miscel-
laneous, I, 487.
49. Jefferson to George Hay, June 12, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, X,
398-99-
50. Jefferson to Hay, June 17, 1807, June 20, 1807, in ibid., 400-401, 404.
51. Randolph to Joseph H. Nicholson, June 25, 1807, quoted in Adams, History of
the U.S. During the Administration of Jefferson, III, 457-58; Jefferson to Wilkinson,
June Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 337m
21, 1807, in
52. Abernethy, Burr Conspiracy, 240, 244; American State Papers: Miscellaneous,
I, 488.
53. B. R. Curtis (ed.), Reports of Decisions in the Supreme Court of the United States
(6th ed.; Boston, 1881), II, 37; Malone, Jefferson, V, 336-37; Adams, History of the
U.S. During the Administration ofJefferson, III, 465—67; David Robertson (ed.), Reports
of the Trials of Colonel Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Philadelphia, 1808), I, 526, 532.
54. Robertson (ed.), Reports of the Trials of Burr, II, 445; Abernethy, Burr Conspir-
acy, 246-48; Hay to Jefferson, September 1, 1807, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
55. Jefferson to du Pont, July 14, 1807, Jefferson to Wilkinson, September 20,
1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 461-62, 499-500.
2
392 NOTES TO PAGES 295- 3OO
Chapter XX
1. Jefferson, special message, December 3, 1806, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works
of Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), X, 320—22; Annals of
Congress, 9th Cong., 2nd Sess., 16, 1250.
2. Jefferson, Anas, February
2, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 406-408.
Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity (New York, 1971),
3.
262-64; Erskine to Howick, February 2, 1807, quoted in Dumas Malone, Jefferson
and His Time (6 vols.; 1948—81), V, 405.
4. Bradford Perkins, Prologue to War: England and the United States, 1805— 181
(Berkeley, 1968), 141-43; Malone, Jefferson, V, 422; Michael Leib to Caesar A.
Rodney, July 2, 1807, in Simon Gratz Collection, Historical Society of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia; Beverley Tucker to St. George Tucker, July 11, 1807, in Tucker-
Coleman Collection, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Va.; C. A. Rodney
to Thomas Rodney, July 1, 1807, in H. F. Brown Collection, Historical Society of
Delaware, Wilmington.
5. Jefferson to Gallatin, June 25, 1807, text of proclamation, July 2, 1807, in Ford
(ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 432, 434-47, 447n.
6. Jefferson to William H. Cabell, June 29, 1807, in ibid., 433.
This statement makes it impossible to accept the conclusion in Burton Spivak,
7.
Jefferson's English Crisis: Commerce, Embargo, and the Republican Revolution (Charlottes-
ville, 1979), 72-73, that Jefferson's preferred policy from the beginning of the crisis
was war against England.

8. Jefferson, Anas, July 2, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, I, 410. Jefferson's
proclamation of July 2, 1807, is in American State Papers: Documents, Legislative and

Executive of the United States (38 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1832—61), Foreign Relations,
III, 23—24.
9. Robert Smith to Jefferson, July 17, 1807, in Robert and William Smith Papers,
Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore; Jefferson, Anas, July 4, 5, 7, 1807, in Ford
(ed.),Works ofJefferson, I, 41 1.
Jefferson to William Duane, July 20, 1807, in Ford
10. (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
I,47i-
1 1. Jefferson to William H. Cabell, July 27, 1807, Jefferson to William Tatham,
July 28, 1807, Jefferson to Samuel Smith, July 30, 1807, Jefferson to Cabell, July 31,
1807, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas
Jefferson (20 vols.;Washington, D.C., 1903), XI, 296-99, 301, 303.
12. Madison Monroe, July 6, 1807, in Gaillard Hunt (ed.), The Writings ofJames
to
Madison (9 vols.; New York, 1900—1910), VII, 455; Canning to Monroe, August 3,
1807, enclosed in Monroe to Madison, August 4, 1807, in American State Papers: For-
eign Relations, III, 186-88.
13. Madison to Jefferson, September 20, 1807, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Li-
brary of Congress (hereinafter cited LC); Monroe to Madison, August 4, 1807, in
American State Papers: Foreign Relations, 186-87.
III,
14. Jefferson to Madison, August 16, September 1, 1807, Jefferson to Lafayette,

July 14, 1807, Jefferson to Thomas Leiper, August 21, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, X, 476-77, 489, 465, 483-84; Jefferson to James Bowdoin, July 10, 1807,
in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XI, 269.
Madison to Monroe, October 21, 1807, in Hunt (ed.), Writings of Madison,
15.
VII, 466-68; Malone, Jefferson, V, 455.
16. Humphreys to Jefferson, September 25, 1807, received October 3, 1807, in
Jefferson Papers, LC; Malone, Jefferson, V, 457.

NOTES TO PAGES 309- 13 393
17. Gallatin to Jefferson, October 21, 1807, in Henry Adams (ed.), The Writings of
Albert Gallatin (3 vols.; Philadelphia, 1879), I» 358; Smith to Jefferson, received Oc-
tober 19, 1807, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
18. Dearborn to Jefferson, received October 17, 1807, in Jefferson Papers, LC;
Gallatin to Jefferson, October 21, 1807, in Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin, I, 359,
361.
19. Gallatin to his wife,October 30, 1807, in Henry Adams, The Life of Albert Gal-
latin (New York, 363-64.
1879),
20. Jefferson to Paine, October 9, 1807, Jefferson to Robert Williams, November
1, 1807, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings of Jefferson, XI, 378-79, 390; see
also Jefferson to William H. Cabell, November 1, 1807, in ibid., 389.

21. Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., November 30, 1807, in Jefferson
Papers, LC; National Intelligencer (Washington), December 2, 1807; Jefferson, confi-
dential message, December 7, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 528-29.
22. Canning to Monroe, September 23, 1807, in American State Papers: Foreign Re-
lations, III, 199-202; Malone, Jefferson, V, 464-65.
23. Jefferson to Randolph, November 30, 1807, in Jefferson Papers, LC; Jeffer-
son, confidential message, December 7, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X, 529.
24. Jefferson, special message, December 18, 1807, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jeffer-
son, X, 530—31.
25. American State Papers: Foreign Relations, III, 25-26; Aurora (Philadelphia), De-
cember 1807; Jefferson to Madison, July 14, 1824, in Lipscomb and Bergh
17,
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XVI, 69-71; Henry Adams, History of the United States of
America During the Administration of Thomas Jefferson (4 vols.; New York, 1889), IV, 103;
Malone, Jefferson, V, 481.
26. Gallatin to Jefferson, December 2, 1807, Jefferson to Gallatin, December 3,
1807, in Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin, I, 367; Jefferson to John G.Jackson, Oc-
tober 13, 1808, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
27. Gallatin to Jefferson, December 18, 1807, Jefferson to Gallatin, December 18,
1807, in Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin, I,
368, 369.
28. Jefferson's draft (30603) and Madison's draft (30612) are in the Jefferson
Papers, LC. See also Jefferson to Madison, July 14, 1824, Lipscomb and Berghm
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XVI, 69-70.
29. See Jefferson's discarded draft of message (30603), in Jefferson Papers, LC,
printed in Adams, History of the U.S. During the Administration ofJefferson, IV, 168-69.
of His Diary from 1795 to1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874—77), I, 491—92; Annals of
Congress, 10th Cong., 1st Sess. (December 18, 1807), 50-51; Mitchill to his wife, De-
cember 23, 1807, in Samuel Latham Mitchill Papers, Museum of the City of New
York.
31. Annals of Congress, 10th Cong., 1st Sess. (December 21, 1807), 1221—23,
2814-15; Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., December 22, 1807, in Jeffer-
son Papers, LC.
32. Campbell to his constituents, January 22, 1808, in Noble E. Cunningham, Jr.
(ed.), Circular Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, iy8g— 1829 (3 vols.; Chapel
Hill, 1978), II, 525-26.
33. Desha to his constituents, March 29, 1808, in ibid., 540; Timothy Pickering to
Timothy Williams, December 31, 1807, in Timothy Pickering Papers (microfilm edi-
tion), in Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston.
34. These addresses, dated November, 1806-January, 1808, are in the Jefferson
Papers, LC.
3
394 NOTES TO PAGES 3i _1 9
35. Vermont, November 5, 1806; Georgia, December 6, 1806; Maryland, January

3,1807; Michigan Territory, January 31, 1807; Rhode Island, February 27, 1807;
New York, March 12—13, 1807; Pennsylvania, April 13, 1807; New Jersey, December
4, 1807; South Carolina, December 10, 1807; North Carolina, December 11-12,
1807; Maryland, January 6—18, 1808. See Jefferson Papers, LC.
36. Leiper to Jefferson, August 28, 1807, in ibid.
37. Form letter from Jefferson to legislatures of Vermont, Rhode Island, New
York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, and New Jersey, December 10, 1807, in
ibid.; Enquirer (Richmond), December 24, 1807.
38. Samuel L. Mitchill to his wife, November 23, 25, 1807, in Mitchill Papers, Mu-
seum of the City of New York.
39. Jefferson to Charles Thomson, January 11, 1808, Jefferson to John Arm-
strong, May 2, 1808, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 7, 30.
40. Jefferson to Madison, March 11, 1808, Jefferson to Thomas Leib, June 23,
1808, in ibid., 12-18, 34.
41. Malone, Jefferson, V, 591. On the administration of the embargo see Leonard
D. White, The Jeffersonians: A Study in Administrative History, 1801 — 182*) (New York,
195 1 ), 423-73-
42. Gallatin to Jefferson, July 29, 1808, in Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin, I,
398-99. On and the embargo see Raymond Walters, Jr., Albert Gallatin:
Gallatin
Jeffersonian Financier and Diplomat (New York, 1957), 200—207.

43. Jefferson to Gallatin, August 1 1, 1808, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 41.
44. Jefferson to Dearborn, August 12, 1808, Jefferson to Madison, August 12,
1808, in ibid., 43, 44; Jefferson to Smith, August 12, 1808, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 124.
and list of towns, August 26, 1808, in Jefferson Papers, LC; Jefferson to
45. Letter
Smith, September 9, 1808, in Jonathan Bayard Smith Papers, LC.
46. Jefferson to Smith, September 13, 1808, and Jefferson, indexes to letters sent
and received in Jefferson Papers, LC.
47. Annual message, November 8, 1808, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, XI,
56-65; Jefferson to Gallatin, October 30, 1808, in Adams (ed.), Writings of Gallatin,
I, 420.
48. Brant, Madison, IV, 466; Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republi-
cans in Power: Party Operations, 1801— 1809 (Chapel Hill, 1963), 14-23. 1
49. Jefferson to Levi Lincoln, November 13. 1808, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
XI, 74-75; Macon to Joseph H. Nicholson, December 4, 1808, in Joseph H. Nich-
olson Papers, LC; Gallatin to Jefferson, November 15, 1808, in Adams (ed.), Writings
of Gallatin, I, 428.
50. Jefferson to George Logan, December 27, 1808, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 220; Jefferson to Monroe, January 28, 1809, in Ford
(ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 96.
George Tucker, December 25, 1808, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
51. Jefferson to St.
52. John Rhea to his constituents, February 13, 1809, in Cunningham (ed.), Cir-
cular Letters of Congressmen to Their Constituents, II, 616.
53. Jefferson to Monroe, February 18, 1808, January 28, 1809, in Ford (ed.),
Works ofJefferson, XI, 1 1, 96; Jefferson to du Pont, March 2, 1809, in Lipscomb and
Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 259-60.
54. Mrs. Smith to Susan B. Smith, March 1809, in Gaillard Hunt (ed.), The First
Forty Years of Washington Society, Portrayed by the Family Letters of Mrs. Samuel Harrison
Smith (New York, 1906), 59; Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., (ed.), "The Diary of Frances
Few, 1808- 1809," Journal of Southern History, XXIX (1963), 360.
55. Sixth annual message, December 2, 1806, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, X,
317-18.
56. Hunt (ed.), First Forty Years of Washington Society, 59; Jefferson to the Citizens
of Washington, March 4, 1809, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings of Jefferson,
XVI, 347.
57. Hunt (ed.), First Forty Years of Washington Society, 63; Jefferson to the General
Assembly of Virginia, February 16, 1809, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings of
Jefferson, XVI, 334.

58. Jefferson to du Pont, March 2, 1809, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings
ofJefferson, XII, 260.
Chapter XXI
Martha Jefferson Randolph to Jefferson, February 24, 1809, in Edwin M. Betts
1.
and James A. Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo.,
1966), 384; Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., February 28, 1809, in Thomas
Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress (hereinafter cited LC).
2. Jefferson, account book, March 2-11, 1809, transcript by James A. Bear, Jr., in
University of Virginia library, Charlottesville; Jefferson to Madison, March 17, 1809,
in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E. Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson
(20 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903), XII, 266.
3. Jefferson to Charles Thomson, December 25, 1808, Jefferson to Madison,
March Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 218, 266;
17, 1809, in
Dumas Malone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81), V, 625.
4. Jefferson to Robert R. Livingston, January 3, 1808, Jefferson to Madison,
March 17, 1809, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings of Jefferson, XI, 411, XII,
266-67; Jefferson to Thomas Jefferson Randolph, February 17, 1809, in Betts and
Bear (eds.), Family Letters, 382.
5. Jefferson to Comte Diodati, March 28, 1807, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.),
Writings ofJefferson, XI, 182; Jefferson to Martha Jefferson Randolph, February 27,
1809, Martha Jefferson Randolph to Jefferson, March 2, 1809, in Betts and Bear
(eds.), Family Letters, 386—87.
6. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 9; Betts and Bear (eds.), Family Letters, 384, n. 2; William
H. Gaines, Jr., Thomas Mann Randolph: Jefferson's Son-in-Law (Baton Rouge, 1966),
83-91, 115-39.
7. A list of Jefferson's grandchildren can be found in Malone, Jefferson, VI, Ap-
pendix I.
8. Jefferson to Adams, January 21, 1812, in Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The Adams-
Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959), II, 292; Jefferson to Maria Cosway, De-
cember 27, 1820, in Sarah N. Randolph, The Domestic Life of Thomas Jefferson (1871;
rpr. New York, 1958), 374.
9. W. Coolidge, ca. 1850,
Ellen in Randolph, Domestic Life of Jefferson, 345; Ma-
lone, Jefferson, VI, 456—58.
10. Virginia J. Trist, May Randolph, Domestic Life ofJefferson, 346-48;
26, 1839, in
see also recollections of Thomas Jefferson Randolph in Henry S. Randall, The Life of
Thomas Jefferson (3 vols.; New York, 1858), III, 671—76.
1 1. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 285. Thomas Jefferson Randolph married Jane Hollins
Nicholas, daughter of Wilson Cary Nicholas, on March 10, 1815. Ibid., 502.
12. Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, February 26, 1810, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 369-70.
13. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 15, 290-91.
14. Frederick D. Nichols, "Jefferson: The Making of an Architect," in William
Howard Adams (ed.), Jefferson and the Arts: An Extended View (Washington, D.C.,
1976), 177; Nichols, Thomas Jefferson s Architectural Drawings (3rd ed.; Charlottesville,
1961), 7-8; Adams (ed.), The Eye of Thomas Jefferson (Washington, D.C., 1976), 278-
79; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 390; Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas Jefferson (Fed-
eral Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), XII, xviii.
15. Jefferson to Thomas Jefferson Randolph, June 20, 1809, Jefferson to Thomas
Jefferson Randolph, December 30, 1809, in Betts and Bear (eds.), Family Letters, 393,
395-
16. James A. Bear, Jr. (ed.), Jefferson at Monticello (Charlottesville, 1967), 51;
Edwin Morris Betts (ed.), Thomas Jefferson's Farm Book (Princeton, 1953), 201-202.
17. Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Farm Book, 426—28, 448—53.
18. Ibid., 342, 343
19. Jefferson to Kosciusko, June 28, 1812, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, XI,
260-61; Jefferson to Richard Fitzhugh, May 27, 1813, Jefferson to William Thorn-
ton, June 9, 1814, in Betts (ed.), Jefferson's Farm Book, 465, 484, 486.
20. Jefferson to David Humphreys, January 20, 1809, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 235-36.
21. Jefferson to James Jay, April 7, 1809, in ibid., 271.

22. Jefferson to Kosciusko, June 28, 1 8 1 2 Jefferson to Philip Mazzei, December
,
29, 1813, Jefferson to Benjamin Austin, January 9, 1816, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, XI, 261, 366, 502-504.
23. Jefferson to William H. Crawford, June 20, 1816, in ibid., 537—38. See Joyce
Appleby, "Commercial Farming and the 'Agrarian Myth' in the Early Republic,"
Journal of American History, LXVIII (1982), 833-49; and Appleby, "What Is Still
American in the Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson?" William and Mary Quar-
terly, 3rd Ser., XXXIX (1982), 287-309. For a different view see Drew R. McCoy,
The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in Jeffersonian America (Chapel Hill, 1980),
227-31, 248-54.
24. Abigail Adams to Jefferson, May 20, 1804, October 24, 1804, Jefferson to
Abigail Adams, June 13, 1804, in Cappon (ed.), Adams-Jefferson Letters, I, 268-71,
280-82.
25. Rush to Adams, October 17, 1809, Rush to Jefferson, January 2, 1811, in
L. H. Butterfield (ed.), Letters of Benjamin Rush (2 vols.; Princeton, 1951), II, 1021-
22, 1075-76; Jefferson to Rush, January 16, 181 1, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson,
XI, 165-73.
26. Jefferson to Rush, December 5, 181 1, in ibid., i73n~75n; Rush to Adams, De-
cember 16, 181 1, in Butterfield (ed.), Letters of Rush, II, 1 1 10; Adams to Rush, De-
cember 25, 181 1, in Charles Francis Adams (ed.), The Works ofJohn Adams (10 vols.;
Boston, 1856), X, 10-12.

27. Adams to Jefferson, January 1, 1812, in Cappon (ed.), Adams-Jefferson Letters,
II, 290. In tracing the renewal of correspondence between Jefferson and Adams, I
have followed 283—89.
ibid.,
28. Jefferson to Adams, January 21, 1812, January 23, 1812, in ibid., 290-93.
29. Jefferson to Adams, October 28, 1813, Adams to Jefferson, November 15,
1813, in ibid., 387-92, 397-402.
30. Cappon (ed.), Adams-Jefferson Letters, 289. All of the letters are published in
ibid.
31. Jefferson to Samuel H. Smith, September 21, 1814, in Ford (ed.), Works of
Jefferson, XI, 427-30.
32. Francis Calley Gray, Thomas Jefferson in 1814: Being an Account of a Visit to Mon-
ticello (Boston, 1924), excerpt in Francis C. Rosenberger (ed.), Jefferson Reader (New
York, 1953), 80; Boston Gazette, October 27, 1814, quoted in William D.Johnston,
History of the Library of Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904), 78, 84-89; Annals of Con-
gress, 13th Cong., 3rd Sess. (January 26, 1815), 1105—1106.
33. Jefferson to Samuel H. Smith, May 8, 1815, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, LC.
34. Jefferson to Adams, June 19, 1815, in Cappon (ed.), Adams-Jefferson Letters, II,
443; Jefferson, account book, May 10, 1815, transcript by Bear, in U. Va. library;
William Peden, "Some Notes Concerning Thomas Jefferson's Libraries," William and
Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., I (1944), 268.
35. Jefferson to Madison, May 25, June 6, 1812, Jefferson to Adams, June 11,
1812, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 247, 249, 255. On Jefferson's support of the
war see Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, June 28, 1812, in ibid., 258-60.
36. Jefferson to John W. Eppes, June 24, 1813, in ibid., 297.
37. Jefferson to Eppes, June 24, September 1 1, November 6, 1813, in ibid., 297 —
306, 3o6n-22n; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 135-46.
38. Monroe October 1, 1813, in Stanislaus M. Hamilton (ed.), The
to Jefferson,
Writings of JamesMonroe (7 vols.; New York, 1898-1903), V, 273-74; Jefferson to
Madison, October 15, 1814, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 432-36; Jefferson to
Joseph C. Cabell, January 17, 1814, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJeffer-
son,XIV, 68.
39.Malone, Jefferson, VI, 145; Irving Brant, James Madison (6 vols.; Indianapolis,
1941-61), VI, 400-403; Bray Hammond, Banks and Politics in America from the Revo-
lution to the Civil War (Princeton, 1957), 238-40.
40. Jefferson to Roane, September 6, 1819, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII,
135-40.
41. Jefferson to John Holmes, April 22, 1820, in ibid., 158-60.
42. Jefferson to William B. Giles, December 26, 1825, in ibid., 424.
Chapter XXII
1. Jefferson to John Tyler,May 26, 1810, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Works of Thomas
Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904), XI, 143m
2. Jefferson to Priestley, January 18, 1800, in Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E.
Bergh (eds.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1903), X,
140-42.
3. Jefferson to Tazewell, January 5, 1805, in [Merrill D. Peterson (ed.)], Thomas
Jefferson: Writings, The (New York, 1984), 1149—52; Nora L.
Library of America
Peterson, Littleton Waller Tazewell (Charlottesville, 1983), 37 -39; Jefferson to Hugh L.
White and others, trustees for the lottery of East Tennessee College, May 6, 1810, in
Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XII, 387.
4. Dumas Malone, and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1848-81), VI, 234,
Jefferson
241-42; Jefferson to Peter Carr, September 7, 1814, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.),
Writings ofJefferson, XIX, 2 1 1 -20.
5. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 244-45, 2 5°> 2 55~~57*' Minutes of Board of Visitors, May
5, 1817, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XIX, 361-65.

6. Latrobe to Jefferson, June 17, 1817, in Fiske Kimball, Thomas Jefferson, Architect
(Boston, 1916), 188; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 257-58; Frederick D. Nichols, Thomas
Jefferson's Architectural Drawings (3rd ed.; Charlottesville, 1961), 8; William Howard
Adams (ed.), The Eye of Thomas Jefferson (Washington, D.C., 1976), 131.
7. Latrobe to Jefferson, July 24, 1817, Jefferson to Latiobe, August 3, 1817, in
Kimball, Jefferson, Architect, 189-91, and fig. 213; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 259, 261;
Roy J.
Honeywell, The Educational Work of Thomas Jefferson (Cambridge, Mass.,
1931), 80.
8. Jefferson to Cocke, July 19, 1817, in Thomas Jefferson Papers, Library of Con-
gress (hereinafter cited LC).
9. Jefferson to Correa de Serra, November 25, 1817, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson,XV, 156; Malone, Jefferson VI, 265-68. The bill is printed
in Honeywell, Educational Work ofJefferson, 233—43.
10. Jefferson to Ticknor. November 25, 1817, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII,
77-78; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 269-74.

1 1. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 269-74, 275-78; Honeywell, Educational Work ofJeffer-
son, 248-49, 260.
12. Report of the commissioners on the site of the university, August 4, 1818, in
Honeywell, Educational Work ofJefferson, 248-60.
13. Jefferson to Tazewell, January 5, 1805, in [Peterson (ed.)], Jefferson: Writings,
1149, 1152; Jefferson to William Short, June 22, 1819, in Lipscomb and Bergh
(eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XVIII, 304-305.
14. Jefferson to Wilson C. Nicholas, April 2, 1816, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.),
Writings ofJefferson, XIV, 453.
15. Jefferson to William Thornton, May 9, 1817, reproduced in ibid., XVII, fol-
lowing p. 396.
16. William C. Rives to Jefferson, January 20, 1819, in Jefferson Papers, LC; Ma-
lone, Jefferson, VI, 280-82.
17. Nicholas to Jefferson, January 25, 1819, Jefferson to Nicholas, January 28,
1819, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
18. Minutes of Board of Visitors, March 29, 1819, Jefferson to Robert Taylor,
May Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XIX, 373—79, XV,
16, 1820, in
254-56; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 368-69, 376-80. See also Dumas Malone, The Public
Life of Thomas Cooper, iy8^~i8^g (New Haven, 1926), 234-46.
19. Jefferson to Joseph C. Cabell, February 19, 1819, quoted in Malone, Jefferson,
VI, 366. See also Jefferson to James Breckenridge, April 9, 1822, in Lipscomb and
Bergh (eds.). Writings ofJefferson, XV, 363.
20. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 374-75; Jefferson to Cabell, January 31, 1821, in Lips-
comb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XV, 310.
21. Jefferson's estimates of expenditures and needs, enclosed in Jefferson to
Cabell, November 28, 1820, in Honeywell. Educational Work ofJefferson, 83-84; Ma-
lone, Jefferson, VI, 382-84.
22. Jefferson to Cabell, November Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII,
28, 1820, in
169-70; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 385; Honeywell. Educational Work of Jefferson. 84;
Jefferson to James Breckenridge, February 15, 182 1, Jefferson to Cabell, January 31,
1821, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.). Writings ofJefferson, XV, 315, 311.
23. Jefferson to Cabell, December 28, 1822, in Jefferson Papers, LC.
24. William B. O'Neal, Jefferson's Buildings at the Cniversity of Virginia: The Rotunda
(Charlottesville, i960), 2-3, 24-28; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 394-95.
25. Jefferson to Gilmer, December 3, 1823, in Richard Beale Davis (ed.), Corre-
spondence of Thomas Jefferson and Francis Walker Gilmer, 1814 — 1826 (Columbia, S.C.,
1946), 81-82; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 397-98.
26. Gilmer to Jefferson, November 12, 1824, in Davis (ed.), Jefferson-Gilmer Corre-
spondence, 1 13; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 400-402, 409-10; Robert C. McLean, George
Tucker, Moral Philosopher and Man of Letters (Chapel Hill, 1961), 25-28.
notes to pages 344-49 399
27. Minutes of Board of Visitors, October 4 and 5, 1824, March 4, 1825, m

Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XIX, 439—52, 455—56, 460—61.
28. Jefferson to Madison, February 1, 1825, Jefferson to Joseph C. Cabell, Febru-
ary 3, 1825, m Jefferson Papers, LC; Jefferson to William Roscoe, December 27,
1820, in Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XV, 303. For a fuller treat-
ment of the incident see Arthur Bestor, "Thomas Jefferson and the Freedom of
Books," in Three Presidents and Their Books (Urbana, 1955), 24-44; see also Leonard W.
Levy, Jefferson and Civil Liberties: The Darker Side (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), 151—57.
29. Jefferson, Thoughts on Lotteries, February 1826, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJeffer-
son, XII, 448.
30. Jefferson to Lafayette, September 3, 1824, in Gilbert Chinard (ed.), The Letters
of Lafayette and Jefferson (Baltimore, 1929), 420—21; Richmond Enquirer, November
16, 1824; Edgar E. Brandon (ed.), Lafayette, Guest of the Nation (3 vols.; Oxford,
Ohio, 1950-57), III, 126-31; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 402-408.
31. Richmond Enquirer, November 16, 1824.
32. Ticknor to William H. Prescott, December 16, 1824, in [George S. Hillard

(ed.)], Life, Letters, and Journals of George Ticknor (2 vols.; Boston, 1876), I, 348; Cocke
to Cabell, February 6, 1826, quoted in Malone, Jefferson, VI, 482.
33. Jefferson to Augustus B. Woodward, April 3, 1825, m Ford (ed.), Works of

Jefferson, XII, 408.
34. Jefferson, account book, April 29, 1815, July 28, 1818, transcript by James A.
Bear, Jr., in University of Virginia library, Charlottesville; Jefferson to Alexander K.
Dallas, April 18, 1815, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XI, 469-70; Malone, Jefferson,
VI, 301,302, 304.
35. Jefferson to Adams, November 7, 1819, in Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The Adams-
Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959), II, 547; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 303, 304,
309, 310; Jefferson to Madison, February 17, 1826, in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson,
XII, 457.
36. William H. Gaines, Jr., Thomas Mann Randolph: Jefferson's Son-in-Law (Baton
Rouge, 1966), 161-62; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 472-73.
37. Jefferson to Cabell, February 7, 1826, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, XII,
451; Francis Eppes to Jefferson, February 23, 1826, in Edwin M. Betts and James A.
Bear, Jr. (eds.), The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo., 1966), 470—71.
38. Plans called for selling 11,480 lottery tickets at ten dollars each. Jefferson's
debts on July 4, 1826, were calculated at $107,273.63. Malone, Jefferson, VI, 477,
479,488, 511.
39. Jefferson's will, March 16, 1826, and codicil, March 17, 1826, in Ford (ed.),
Works ofJefferson, XII, 478-83; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 488; Jefferson to Wright, Au-
gust 7, 1825, m
Lipscomb and Bergh (eds.), Writings ofJefferson, XVI, 1 19—20.
40. Edward Coles to Jefferson, July 31, 1814, Massachusetts Historical Society
Collections,7th Ser., I (1900), 200-202; David Brion Davis, The Problem of Slavery in
theAge of Revolution, 1770-1823 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1975), 180-81.
41. Jefferson to Coles, August 25, 1814, in Ford (ed.), Works of Jefferson, XI,
416-20.
42. Ibid., XII, 481.
43. Jefferson to Madison, February 17, 1826, in ibid., 458-59.
44.Malone, Jefferson, VI, 493-94; Jefferson to Roger Weightman, June 24, 1826,
in Ford (ed.), Works ofJefferson, XII, 476-77.
45. Sarah N. Randolph, The Domestic Life of Thomas Jefferson ( 1 87 1 rpr. New York, ;
400 NOTES TO PAGE 349
1958), 428-29; Malone, Jefferson, VI, 496-97; Samuel X. Radbill (ed.), "The Auto-
biographical Ana of Robley Dunglison, M.D.," American Philosophical Society
Transactions, n.s., LIU, Part 8 (1963), 32-33.
46. Page Smith, John Adams (2 vols.; New York, 1962), II, 1136-37; Charles
Francis Adams Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, Comprising Portions of His Diary
(ed.),
from 1795 to vols.; Philadelphia, 1874—77), VII, 122, 125.

1848 (12
47. Jefferson Papers, LC.
Bibliographical Note
"The lettersof a person, especially of one whose business has been

chiefly transacted by letters, form the only full and genuine journal
of his life," Jefferson wrote late in life. Viewing the letters of a per-
son as embracing all correspondence sent and received, Jefferson
systematically and diligently retained copies of his papers through-
out his life. As a result, Jefferson's papers form one of the largest
and most valuable collections of manuscripts relating to his time.
Indeed, one earlier biographer of Jefferson, Gilbert Chinard, called
the record left by Jefferson "the richest treasure house of historical
information ever left by a single man." The major collection of
Jefferson manuscripts is in the Library of Congress and has been
reproduced on microfilm in the presidential papers series. Other
important collections of Jefferson manuscripts are at the Massachu-
setts Historical Society, the University of Virginia, and the Missouri
Historical Society. The Library of Congress houses major collec-
tions of the papers of James Madison and James Monroe, two of
Jefferson's closest political associates; these also are available in
microfilm editions. Among other major collections of Jefferson's
close associates, the Papers of Albert Gallatin at the New- York His-
torical Society are indispensable. A microfilm edition of the Gal-
latin Papers, edited by Carl E. Prince, is invaluable. The extensive
collection of Adams Family Papers at the Massachusetts Historical
Society is also available on microfilm.
Printed editions of Jefferson's papers are widely available. The
definitive edition is Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas
Jefferson (Princeton,1950-), a continuing project in which Jeffer-
son's correspondence to August, 1791, has been published in the
first 20 volumes; Series 2 of The Papers of Thomas Jefferson includes
Dickinson W. Adams, ed., Jefferson's Extracts from the Gospels (Prince-

ton, 1983). The best earlier edition of Jefferson's writings, contain-
402 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
ing only his own letters and papers, is Paul L. Ford, ed., The Works of
Thomas Jefferson (Federal Edition; 12 vols.; New York, 1904). Major
supplements include Edwin M. Betts and James A. Bear Jr., eds.,
The Family Letters of Thomas Jefferson (Columbia, Mo., 1966); Lester
Cappon, ed., The Adams-Jefferson Letters (2 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1959);
Edwin Morris Betts, ed., Thomas Jefferson's Garden Book, 1766—1824
(Philadelphia, 1944) and Thomas Jefferson's Farm Book (Princeton,
1953). Still useful is Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert E. Bergh,
eds., The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (20 vols.; Washington, D.C.,
1903). The best one-volume edition of selections from Jefferson's
letters and other writings is [Merrill D. Peterson, ed.], Thomas Jeffer-
son: Writings, The Library of America (New York, 1984). The best
scholarly edition of Jefferson's only book is William Peden, ed.,
Notes on the State of Virginia (Chapel Hill, 1954).
In any study of Jefferson's life the papers of his contemporaries
are essential. Among the most important published collections are
Harold C. Syrett et ai, eds., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (26
vols.; New York, 1961-79); William THutchinson, William M. E.
Rachal, Robert A. Rutland et ai, eds., The Papers of James Madison
(Chicago and Charlottesville, 1962-); Gaillard Hunt, ed., The Writ-
ings ofJames Madison (9 vols.; New York, 1900- 1910); W. W. Abbot,
Dorothy Twohig et al., eds., The Papers of George Washington (Char-
lottesville, 198 1-); John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George
Washington (39 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1939-44); Mary -Jo Kline
and Joanne Wood Ryan, eds., Political Correspondence and Public
Papers of Aaron Burr (2 vols.; Princeton, 1983); Stanislaus M. Hamil-
ton, ed., The Writings of James Monroe (7 vols.; New York, 1898-
1903); Henry Adams, ed., The Writings of Albert Gallatin (3 vols.;
Philadelphia, 1879); and Robert A. Rutland, ed., The Papers of
George Mason (3 vols.; Chapel Hill, 1970). Important diaries and
journals include L. H. Butterfield, ed., Diary and Autobiography of
John Adams (4 vols.; Cambridge, Mass., 1961); Charles Francis
Adams, ed., Memoirs ofJohn Quincy Adams, Comprising Portions of His
Diary from 1795 to 1848 (12 vols.; Philadelphia, 1874-77); Donald
Jackson and Dorothy Twohig, eds., The Diaries of George Washington
(6 vols.; Charlottesville, 1976-79); and Everett S. Brown, ed.,
William PlumersMemorandum of Proceedings in the United States Sen-
ate,1803-1807 (New York, 1923).
The most extensive and definitive biography of Jefferson is
Dumas M alone, Jefferson and His Time (6 vols.; Boston, 1948-81);
Merrill D. Peterson, Thomas Jefferson and the New Nation: A Biography
(New York, 1970) is also a major study. Still useful for Jefferson's
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 403
youth and early career are the volumes by Marie Kimball: Jefferson:
The Road to Glory, 1743 to 1776 (New York, 1943); Jefferson: War and
Peace, 1776 to 1784 (New York, 1947); and Jefferson: The Scene of Eu-
rope, 1784 to 1789 (New York, 1950). Fawn M. Brodie's Thomas Jeffer-
son: An Intimate History (New York, 1974) has been seriously chal-
lenged by scholars; see Virginius Dabney, The Jefferson Scandals: A
Rebuttal (New York, 1981). Merrill D. Peterson, The Jefferson Image in
the American Mind (New York, i960) skillfully traces Jefferson's im-
age and influence through history after his death. Portraits and
other images of Jefferson are examined in Alfred L. Bush, The Life
Portraits of Thomas Jefferson (Charlottesville, 1962) and Noble E.
Cunningham, Jr., The Image of Thomas Jefferson in the Public Eye: Por-
traits for the People, 1800-1809 (Charlottesville, 1981).
Jefferson's many-faceted life has been explored in a number of
Works relating to Jefferson and the arts include
specialized studies.
William Howard Adams, ed., Jefferson and the Arts: An Extended View
(Washington, D.C., 1976) and The Eye of Thomas Jefferson (Washing-
ton, D.C., 1976); Eleanor D. Berman, Thomas Jefferson Among the
Arts (New York, 1947); Fiske Kimball, Thomas Jefferson, Architect
(Boston, 1916); Frederick D. Nichols, Thomas Jefferson's Architectural
Drawings (3rd ed.; Charlottesville, 1961); William B. O'Neal, Jef-
ferson's Fine Arts Library (Charlottesville, 1976); and Howard C.
Rice, Jr., Thomas Jefferson's Paris (Princeton, 1976). On Jefferson's li-
brary, the definitive work is E. Millicent Sowerby, ed., Catalogue of
the Library of Thomas Jefferson (5 vols.; Washington, D. C, 1952-59).
Works exploring other of Jefferson's interests include Helen Cripe,
Thomas Jefferson and Music (Charlottesville, 1974); Edward Dum-
bauld, Thomas Jefferson, American Tourist (Norman, 1946) and Thomas
Jefferson and the Law (Norman, 1978); and Roy J. Honeywell, The
Educational Work of Thomas Jefferson (Cambridge, Mass., 1931).
Considerable scholarly study has been given to Jefferson's
thought. Valuable studies include Adrienne Koch, The Philosophy of
Thomas Jefferson (New York, 1943) and Jefferson and Madison: The
Great Collaboration (New York, 1964); and Joyce Appleby, "What Is
Still American in the Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson,"
William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXXIX (1982), 287-309.

Garry Wills focused on ideas in Inventing America: Jefferson's Declara-
tion ofIndependence (New York, 1978). Daniel J. Boorstin explores
the mind-set of Jefferson's world in The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson
(1948; rpr. Chicago, 1981). Among important works that have fo-
cused on the ideology of republicanism are Lance Banning, Thejef-
fersonian Persuasion: Evolution of Party Ideology (Ithaca, N.Y, 1978);
404 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Richard Buel, Jr., Securing the Revolution: Ideology in American Poli-

tics, 1789- 1815 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1972); Joyce Appleby, Capitalism
and
a New Social Order: The Republican Vision of the 1 ygos (New York,
1984); and Drew R. McCoy, The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in
Jeffersonian America (Chapel Hill, 1980). For the scholarly debate
over the terms in which Jeffersonian ideology may best be un-
derstood, see Lance Banning, "Jeffersonian Ideology Revisited:
Liberal and Classical Ideas in the New American Republic," Wil-
liam and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XLIII (1986), 3-19, and Joyce
Appleby, "Republicanism in Old and New Contexts," William and
Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XLIII (1986), 20-34.
Jefferson as a party leader can be viewed in Noble E. Cunning-
ham, Jr., The Jeffersonian Republicans: The Formation of Party Organi-
zation, 1789-1801 (Chapel Hill, 1957) and The Jeffersonian Republi-
cans in Power: Party Operations, 1801-1809 (Chapel Hill, 1963); see
also Dumas Malone, Thomas Jefferson as Political Leader (Berkeley,
1963), and Joseph Charles, The Origins of the American Party System:
Three Essays (Williamsburg, 1956). Party opposition to Jefferson has
been examined in David Hackett Fischer, The Revolution of American
Conservatism: The Federalist Party in the Era of Jeffersonian Democ-
racy (New York, 1965). Jefferson as president has been studied in
Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., The Process of Government Under Jefferson
(Princeton, 1978) and Robert M. Johnstone, Jr., Jefferson and the
Presidency: Leadership in the Young Republic (Ithaca, N.Y., 1978); see
also Ralph Ketcham, Presidents Above Party: The American Presidency,
1789-1829 (Chapel Hill, 1984). On thejudiciary during Jefferson's
presidency see Richard E. Ellis, The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts and
Politics in the Young Republic (New York, 197 1). Henry Adams' classic
History of the United States of America During the Administration of

Thomas Jefferson (4 vols.; New York, 1889), while still valuable, has
been much revised by subsequent scholarship.
Among important biographies of Jefferson's contemporaries are
the following: Irving Brant, James Madison (6 vols.; Indianapolis,
1941-61); Ralph Ketcham, James Madison: A Biography (New York,
1971); Harry Ammon, James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity
(New York, 1971); Broadus Mitchell, Alexander Hamilton (2 vols.;
New York, 1957-62); Jacob Ernest Cooke, Alexander Hamilton (New
York, 1982); Raymond Walters, Jr., Albert Gallatin: Jeffersonian Fi-
nancier and Diplomat (New York, 1957); Page Smith, John Adams
(2 vols.; NewYork, 1962); William H. Gaines, Jr., Thomas Mann
Randolph: Jefferson's Son-in-Law (Baton Rouge, 1966); Jacob E.
Cooke, Tench Coxe and the Early Republic (Chapel Hill, 1978); Doug-
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 405
lasSouthhall Freeman, George Washington: A Biography (7 vols.; New

York, 1948-57); John R. Alden, George Washington: A Biography
(Baton Rouge, 1984); Lowell H. Harrison, John Breckinridge: Jeff er-
sonian Republican (Louisville, 1969); Gerard H. Clarfield, Timothy
Pickering and the American Republic (Pittsburgh, 1980); George A.
Billias, Elbridge Gerry: Founding Father and Republican Statesman (New
York, 1976); C. Edward Skeen, John Armstrong, Jr.: A Biography
(Syracuse, 1981); John J. Reardon, Edmund Randolph: A Biography
(New York, 1974); and George Dangerfield, Chancellor Robert R.
Livingston of New York (New York, i960).
Important studies relating to Jefferson and foreign affairs in-
clude Harry Ammon, The Genet Mission (New York, 1973); Law-
rence Kaplan, Jefferson and France: An Essay on Politics and Political
S.
Ideas (New Haven, 1967); Jerald A. Combs, The Jay Treaty: Political
Battleground of the Founding Fathers (Berkeley, 1970); Alexander De-
Conde, This Affair of Louisiana (New York, 1976); Bradford Perkins,
Prologue to War: England and the United States, 1805 — 181 2 (Berkeley,
1968); and Burton Spivak, Jefferson's English Crisis: Commerce, Em-
bargo, and the Republican Revolution (Charlottesville, 1979).
Other relevant specialized studies include Bernard W. Sheehan,
Seeds of Extinction: Jeffersonian Philanthropy and the American Indian
(Chapel Hill, 1973); James Morton Smith, Freedom's Fetters: The
Alien and Sedition Laws and American Civil Liberties (Ithaca, N.Y.,
1956); Leonard W. Levy, Jefferson and Civil Liberties: The Darker Side
(Cambridge, Mass., 1963); John C. Miller, The Wolf by the Ears:
Thomas Jefferson and Slavery (New York, 1977); Robert McColley,
Slavery and Jeffersonian Virginia (Urbana, 1964); George Dargo,
Jefferson's Louisiana: Politics and the Clash of Legal Traditions (Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1975); Donald Jackson, Thomas Jefferson and the Stony
Mountains: Exploring the West from Monticello (Urbana, 1981); Daniel
P. Jordan, Political Leadership in Jefferson's Virginia (Charlottesville,
1983); John C. Greene, American Science in the Age ofJefferson (Ames,

1984); and Richard Beale Davis, Intellectual Life in Jefferson's Vir-
ginia, 1790-1830 (Chapel Hill, 1964).
Comprehensive bibliographies of writings about Jefferson are
Eugene L. Huddleston, Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Guide (Boston,
1982) and Frank Shuffelton, Thomas Jefferson: A Comprehensive An-
notated Bibliography of Writings About Him, 1826— 1980 (New York,
1983)-
Index
Adams, Abigail, 113, 114, 329 Barbe-Marbois, Francois, Marquis de,

Adams, John: on TJ's Summary View, 31; 76, 77, 264
comments on TJ, 36-37, 96; in Con- Bartlett,Josiah, 51
tinental Congress, 36, 38, 42; and Bayard, James A., 223, 235-37
Declaration of Independence, Beccaria, Cesare Bonesana, Marquis,
46-48, 51; correspondence with TJ, 60
56, 117, 119, 257, 329-31; diplomat, Beckley, John, 73, 177, 199, 201
87, 88, 93, 98-99, 1 19-20; on TJ's Beckwith, George, 141-42, 143-45
Notes on Virginia, 96; vice-president, Berkeley, Sir George, 297
137, 177; criticized by TJ, 167-68, Bidwell, Barnabas, 250
318; and election of 1796, pp. 201, Blackstone, Sir William, 8
203-204; president, 206-207, Blaettermann, George, 343
212-14, 238, 248, 252; and election Bland, Richard, 30, 36, 39
of 1800, pp. 224, 227-28, 230; mid- Blennerhassett, Harmon, 290, 293
night appointments, 243, 248, 329; Bolingbroke, Henry St. John, Viscount,
death, 349 30
Adams, John Quincy, 31, 250, 275, 283, Bollman, Erich, 293, 294
312,331,335,349 Bonaparte, Napoleon. See Napoleon I
Adams, Samuel, 36 Bonnycastle, Charles, 343
Adet, Pierre, 202 Botetourt, Norborne Berkeley, Baron
Alien and sedition acts, 216-18, 246 de, 15
American Philosophical Society, 77, 82, Bowdoin, James III, 278
160, 207 Breckinridge, John, 217-19, 251
Ames, Fisher, 224 Buffon, George Louis Leclerc, Comte
Andrews, George, 8 de, 78, 88, 128
Architecture:TJ and, 18-20, 92, 99, Burlamaqui, Jean Jacques, 16, 29, 49
197-98, 325-26, 337-38, 341-43 Burr, Aaron: relations with TJ, 168,
Arnold, Benedict, 68, 70, 71, 73, 76 199, 209-10, 271, 285; and election
of 1792, p. 177; and election of 1800,
Bache, Benjamin Franklin, 209 pp. 227, 230-36; vice-president, 228,
Bacon, Edmund, 326 269, 271, 273-74, 275; duel with
Bacon, Francis, 129 Hamilton, 285; conspiracy, 285-90;
Bankhead, Anne Cary Randolph, 324 trial, 290-94
Bankhead, Charles, 324 Burwell, Rebecca, 6-7, 20
Barbary states, 97-98, 162-63, Byrd, William, 12
242-43
408 INDEX
Cabell, Joseph C, 338, 339, 340, 344, Deane, Silas, 54

345 Dearborn, Henry, 241-42, 261, 286,
Cabell, Samuel J., 210-11, 213 298, 309
Callender, James Thomson, 115, 222, Declaration of Independence, 43,
273 46-51,349
Campbell, George, 313 Dennie, Joseph, 270
Canning, George, 299, 310, 316 Desha, Joseph, 313
Carmichael, William, 146, 161 Dickinson, John, 37-38
Carr, Dabney, 23, 24 Dorchester, Lord (Sir Guy Carleton),
Carr, Martha Jefferson, 24, 81 141, 143, 145
Carr, Peter, 213, 337 Douglas, William, 4
Carrington. Edward, 118 Dunglison, Robley, 343, 349
Carroll, John, 122 Dunmore, John Murray, Earl of, 23, 24,
Carter, Edward, 14 25, 33-35
Central College, 337-38, 341, 345 Du Pont de Nemours, Pierre Samuel,
Chase, Samuel, 272-75, 282 260, 263, 294
Chastellux, Francois-Jean, Chevalier de,
20, 22, 79-80, 96 Eaton, William, 287
295-97
Chesapeake, U.S.S., Election of 1792, pp. 176-77
Claiborne, William C. C, 261, 286 Election of 1796, pp. 200-204, 228
Clark, George Rogers, 69 Election of 1800: campaign, 221-28;
Clark, William, 269, 320 issues, 223-26; electoral vote,
Clinton, George, 177, 230, 314, 317 230-31; contest in House of Repre-
Clinton, Sir Henry, 67, 68 sentatives, 232-37; seen as revolu-
Cocke, John H., 338, 339, 345 tion by TJ, 237
Coke, Sir Edward, 6, 8-9 Election of 1808, pp. 313, 314, 317
Coles, Edward, 330, 347-48 Ellys, Anthony, 16
Colley, Nathaniel, 131 Embargo of 1807, pp. 311-18
Constitution (U.S.): drafting of, 96, Emmet, John Patton, 343
116-17; TJ and, 117, 164-66, 176, Enlightenment, xv, 5, 50, 60, 76
217-20, 246, 249, 265-66, 292, 294, Eppes, Elizabeth Wayles, 82, 113, 114,
334; interpretations of, 164-67, 115, 122
248-49; Twelfth Amendment, 204 Eppes, Francis, 41, 87, 113
Continental Congress: First, 27, 31-33, Eppes, Francis Wayles, 326, 346
49; Second, 31, 33, 36-38, 41-43, Eppes, John Wayles, 198, 325-26,
46-51; and war effort, 66-67, 69; 333-34
under Articles of Confederation, Erskine, David, 296
82-87
Jr., 324
Coolidge, Joseph, Fauquier, Francis, 6, 10
Cooper, Thomas, 222-23, 341 Federalist, The, 172, 187, 344
Cornwallis, Charles, Lord, 65, 73 Federalist party: in election of 1796,
Cosway, Maria, 102-107, 112, 324 pp.200-203; image of TJ projected
Cosway, Richard, 102, 103, 104 by,201-202; in election of 1800, pp.
Coxe, Tench, 193, 199 224-28, 230-37; criticism of TJ,
Cutting, Nathaniel, 134 249-50; and Louisiana Purchase,
265, 269-70
Dalrymple, Sir John, 8 Fenno,John, 169-70, 173, 174
Daveiss, Joseph H., 286-87, 290 Ferguson, Adam, 16
David, Jacques-Louis, 102 Few, Frances, 319
Dayton, Jonathan, 288 Field, Robert, 278
INDEX 409
Floridas: fear of British in, 142, 145; U.S. relations with, 141-46, 161-62,
TJ's interest in obtaining, 259, 283-85,295-300,309-11
263-65, 278-82, 299-300, 316 Greene, Nathanael, 68, 70
France: TJ on society and culture in, Gregg, Andrew, 284
91-92; U.S. relations with, 142-43, Griswold, Roger, 262
163-64, 180-91, 206-207, 212-15,
280-82, 311; XYZ crisis, 212-15; Hale, Bernard, 8
and Louisiana, 259-60, 262-65, Hamilton, Alexander: relations with
266 TJ, 139-40, 142-45, 162-63,
Franklin, Benjamin: in Continental 172-75, 178, 193, 204, 263; report
Congress, 36, 38; and Declaration of on public credit, 137, 139-40; and
Independence, 46-47; diplomat, 54, Nootka Sound crisis, 141-46; and
74, 87, 88, 93, 96; TJ's last visit to, George Beckwith, 141-42, 143-45;
136; and American Philosophical So- opinion on national bank, 164,
ciety, 207; mentioned, 78, 113, 129 166-67; attacks opposition in press,
Frederick II (the Great), 94 170-71, 174-75, 187; and emer-
French Revolution: TJ and, 96, gence of political parties, 171-75;
118-19, 121-29, 179 opposed by Madison, 172, 176, 187,
Freneau, Philip, 169-71 199; investigation of, by Congress,
Fries, John, 273 178-79; and Genet, 181-84,
Fry, Joshua, 1 186-89; contracts yellow fever, 192;
adviser to Washington, 199, 253; and
Gallatin, Albert: congressional leader, election of 1800, pp. 227, 228,
210, 234; on Washington, D.C., 238; 233-34; killedby Burr, 285
secretary of the treasury, 241-42; Hammond, George, 161
adviser to TJ, 246, 254, 281, 286; Hancock, John, 36, 54
and Chesapeake crisis, 309; and em- Harper, Robert Goodloe, 201
bargo, 311, 315-18 Harrison, Benjamin, 36, 39
Gates, Horatio, 68 Hay, George, 290, 292
Gazette of the United States, 169-70, 173, Hemings, James, 87, 90
174, 175, 187 Hemings, Sally, 114, 115, 116
Gem, Richard, 127 Henderson, Archibald, 249
Genet, Edmond Charles, 180, 183-90 Henry, Patrick, 10, 12, 23, 25, 32-33,
George III: charges against, in Declara- 36,39,64,66,73, 118
tion of Independence, 44-45, 47, Hillhouse, James, 249
50; mentioned, 8, 28, 38, 40, 42, 99, Hopkinson, Francis, 83
311 Hopkinson, Mrs. Thomas, 83
Gerry, Elbridge, 212, 223 Houdon, Jean-Antoine, 101-102, 129
Gibbs, James, 19 Humphreys, David, 91, 146, 161, 300
Giles, William Branch, 144, 178-79, Hutcheson, Francis, 49
199,240-41,273
Gilmer, Francis Walker, 343 Impressment, 295-96, 299
Gilmer, George, 37-38 Indians, 78-79, 276-77
Graham, John, 287 Iredell, James, 210
Granger, Gideon, 287
Gray, Francis Calley, 332 Jay,John, 74, 98, 100, 137, 227, 231
Great Britain: and coming of American Jay Treaty, 199,201,207
Revolution, 15, 23, 25-26, 39-42; Jefferson, Jane Randolph, 2, 3, 9, 41-42
military campaigns in the South, Jefferson, Lucy Elizabeth, 80, 87, 91
67-73; TJ's impressions of, 99- 100; Jefferson, Martha (Patsy): birth, 22; re-
NDEX
Clarions with father, 80-81, 135, 149, 324-26; renewal of friendship with
322-24, 345; education, 83-84, 122; John Adams, 329-31; and founding
accompanies TJ to France, 87-88, of University of Virginia, 336—45;
90; marriage, 134-35 Lafayette visits, in 1824, p. 344; will,
Jefferson, Martha Wayles, 21-22, 41,

'
347, 348; death, 349
52,54,66,75,80-81 — public life: first election, 14; in House
Mary (Polly, Maria):
Jefferson, relations of Burgesses, 15-16, 34; and com-
with father, 84, 135-36, 160; joins ing of Revolution, 23-35, 39-41;
TJ in Paris, 87, 1 13-14; education, author of Summary View, 27-31, 36,
114, 122; marriage, 198; death, 271, 37; in Continental Congress, 35—39,
326, 329 41-48; on George III, 40-41, 99;
Jefferson, Peter, 1-2,9, 135 and Virginia constitution, 43-46, 53;
Jefferson, Randolph, 9 and Declaration of Independence,
Jefferson, Thomas 46—51; attitude toward Confedera-
— private life: birth and ancestry, 1—2; tion, 53, 93, 116; and revisal of laws
relations with father, 1-3; child- of Virginia, 53-63; in Virginia
hood, 2-4; relations with mother, 3, House of Delegates, 54-58; author
7; early schooling, 3-4; at William of statute for religious freedom,
and Mary, 5-6; reads law with 55-56, 58, 349; governor of Vir-
George Wythe, 6-9; romance with ginia, 65-75; and conduct of war in
Rebecca Burwell, 6-7; commonplace Virginia, 67-71; in Congress under
books, 9, 29, 30; lands owned, 9, 24; Confederation, 82-87; Land Ordi-
slaves owned, 9, 24, 196, 327; travels nance of 1784, pp. 85-86; minister
in U.S., 11, 87-88, 147, 168-69; to negotiate commercial treaties, 87;
practices law, 12-13, 17, 24; library, concerns of, as minister to France,
16-17, 159-60, 331-33; build-
19, 97-98, 1 10, 1 19-20; and Barbary
ing Monticello, 17-20, 22, 197-98; states, 97-98, 162-63, 242-43; on
marriage, 21 ; descriptions of, 22, adoption of Constitution, 117-18;

138-39; as public speaker, 32-33, on French Revolution, 118-19,
239, 275; headaches, 41-42, 127, 121-29, 179; and Lafayette, 119,
138; friendship with Madison, 55, 65, 123, 124, 126; appointed secretary of
82, 97, 149, 192, 199-200, 348; au- state, 131-33; report on weights and
thor of Notes on Virginia, 76-79, measures, 138; and residence-
94-96; member of American Philo- assumption bargain, 139-40; rela-
sophical Society, 77, 82, 160, 207; tions with Hamilton, 139-40, 144-
and agriculture, 79, 108, 1 10, 167, 45, 162, 174-75, 178, 199-200; ad-
195-97, 323, 326; death of wife, 81; ministration of State Department,
and education of his children, 140-41, 147, 161; and Nootka
82-84, 15-16; relations with his
1 Sound crisis, 142-47; and site of fed-
children, 83-84, 113-14, 134-36, eral capital, 147-48; opinion on na-
271-72, 323; travels in Europe, 88, tional bank, 164-67; and Freneau,
90,98-100, 107-12, 120-21; ro- 169-71; and Republican party,
mance with Maria Cosway, 102- 107, 172-75, 189-91, 199-201,209-10;
112; returns from France, 129-31; and neutrality proclamation,
belongings shipped from France, 181-82, 186; relations with Genet,
150, 159-60; and yellow fever in 182-86, 187-88; resigns as secretary
Philadelphia, 191-92; death of of state, 190, 194; on Jay Treaty, 199;
daughter Mary, 27 1 ; retires to Mon- on Whiskey Rebellion, 199; in elec-
ticello, 322; debts of, 323, 345-47; tion of 1796, pp. 200-203; vice-
relations with his grandchildren, president, 204-205, 206-15, 221;
INDEX 411
letter to Mazzei, 207-209; and Ken- 59-60, 83, 336-37; punishment of

tucky and Virginia Resolutions, 211, crimes, 60-61; Notes on Virginia,
217-20; and XYZ crisis,212-15; op- 61-63, 76-79, 225; attitudes on
position to alien and sedition acts, race, 61-62; natural history, 78; In-
215-20; in campaign of 1800, pp. dians, 78-79, 276-77; agrarianism,
221-29; attack on religion of, 79, 167, 240, 328-29; manufactures,
224-25; tie vote with Burr, 231-36; 79, 194, 327-29; advantages of
election of, by House of Represen- America, 91, 92; commerce, 93,
tatives, 231-37; inaugurated presi- 161-62, 193-94, 223, 240, 328-29;
dent, 238; patronage policy, 241-45; argument that earth belongs to
relations with cabinet, 242-43; prin- living, 127-28; political principles
ciples of administration, 243, expounded, 133-34,217-19,

245-46, 250-55; annual messages, 223-24, 239-40; interpreting Con-
246-48; shuns ceremony, 247, stitution, 165-66, 217-20, 246, 249,
257-58; leadership as president, 265-66, 334; election of 1800 as

248-51, 317, 328; relations with revolution, 237; freedom of press,
Congress, 249-51; working habits as 223, 240, 277; religion, 256-57
president, 251-55; presidential din- — comments on: by Franklin D. Roose-
ners, 255—56; and crisis over New velt, xiii; F. Kennedy, xiv; by
by John
Orleans, 259-62; and Louisiana Pur- Edmund Randolph, 19; by John
chase, 259-67, 276; efforts to obtain Adams, 36-37, 90; by Chastellux,
Florida, 259, 263-65, 278-82, 79-80; by Ezra Stiles, 87; by William
299-300, 316; proposal for dry Maclay, 138-39; by Robert G.
docks, 261; plans Lewis and Clark Harper, 201-202; by Alexander
expedition, 268—69; supports state li- Hamilton, 233-34
bel actions, 270; breaks with Burr, — portraitsof: by Mather Brown, 99;
271; and impeachment of Justice by Houdon, 101; by John Trumbull,
Chase, 272-74; second inaugural, 102; by Saint-Memin, 271-72; by
275-77; record of first term, 276; re- Gilbert Stuart, 277-78; by Rem-
sponse to attack on the Chesapeake, brandt Peale, 278
297-99; and Burr conspiracy, Jones, Hugh, 10
285-90, 313; and Burr trial, 290-94; Jones, John Paul, 98, 129
and embargo, 311-18; and third- Jones, Joseph, 76, 85
term movement, 313-14; assessment Jouett, Jack, 72
of administration of, 318-19; retire- Judiciary Act of 1801, pp. 243, 248
ment from presidency, 319, 321; and
War of 1812, pp. 327-28, 333-34; Karnes, Henry Home, Lord, 8, 29, 49
on Missouri Compromise, 335; last Kentucky Resolutions, 211, 217-20
public address, 345 King, Cyrus, 332
-thought and ideology: natural law, 13, King, Rufus, 279
28, 29,48-50, 56; on slavery, 13, 24, Knox, Henry, 137, 146, 184, 188-89
45, 50,61-63, 79, 86, 94-95, 135,
335, 347-48; reading, 16, 29-30; on Lafayette, Marie Joseph, Marquis de: in
American colonial rights, 27-29; American Revolution, 7 1 ; association
sources of early political thought, of, with Jefferson in France, 91, 1 19,
29-30; republicanism in the Revolu- 123, 124, 126; and French Revolu-
tion, 45, 58, 78; philosophy of Decla- tion, 1 19, 123-26; visit to America in
ration of Independence, 48-51; aims 1824, pp. 344-45; mentioned, 98,
of the Revolution, 53, 55; religious 129
freedom, 54-55, 58; education, Land Ordinance of 1784, pp. 85-86
412 INDEX
La Rochefoucauld-Laincourt, Francois of 1792, p. 177; opposes neutrality

Alexandre, Due de, 198 proclamation, 186; favored by TJ for
Latrobe, Benjamin Henry, 338 president in 1796,p. 200; and Ken-
Laurens, Henry, 74 tucky and Virginia Resolutions,
Lee, Francis Lightfoot, 23, 25 217-20; and election of 1800, pp.
Lee, Henry, 169 221, 229, 231; secretary of state,
Lee, Richard Henry, 23, 25, 36, 38, 39, 241-42, 249, 260-61, 283-84, 286,
43, 46-48, 52, 64 297-300, 309-10, 312, 315, 317-18;
Lee, Thomas Ludwell, 57 and Chesapeake crisis, 297, 300,
Leib, Michael, 296 309-10; and embargo, 312, 315,
Leiper, Thomas, 150,313 317—18; presidential candidate, 314,
Lewis, Meriwether, 253, 269, 320 317; inauguration of, as president,
Lewis, Nicholas, 87 319, 321; and founding of University
Lewis and Clark expedition, 268—69, of Virginia, 338, 339, 344, 348
320 Marbois, Francois. See Barbe-Marbois
Library of Congress, 16, 331-32 Marbury, William, 248
Lincoln, Benjamin, 68 Marshall, John: opinion in McCulloch v.
Linn, William, 225 Maryland, 166, 334; and XYZ crisis,
Livingston, Robert R., 46, 168, 215, 212, 215; opinion in Marbury v.
258, 263-65 Madison, 248-49; presides at Burr

Locke, John, 16, 29-30, 48-49, 129, trial,290-94; issues subpoena to TJ,
138, 344 291-92; mentioned, 191, 239, 319
Long, George, 343 Mason, George, 43, 45, 48-49, 57
Louis XVI, 118, 124-25, 180 Maury, James, 4, 24
Louisiana: TJ's policy on, as secretary Mazzei, Philip, 207-208, 229
of 142-43, 145-46; feared
state, Merry, Anthony, 257, 285, 296
British invasion of,142-45; Genet's Mitchill, Samuel Latham, 255, 312, 314
intrigues in, 185-86; retrocession of, Monroe, James: defends TJ, 176; as
to France, 259; U.S. purchase of, 259, party leader, 177, 191, 209; Louisi-
262-67, 278; annexation of, to U.S., ana mission to France, 262-65; mis-
267-69 sion to Spain, 278-79; and election
of 1808, pp. 282, 314; minister to
McKean, Thomas, 270, 277 England, 279, 295, 296; and Chesa-
Maclay, William, 139, 140, 163 peake crisis, 299, 309-10; and Uni-
Macon, Nathaniel, 250, 317 versity of Virginia, 338-39;
Madison, Dolley, 257, 314 mentioned, 91,210, 211,334
Madison James: in Virginia House of Montesquieu, Charles Louis de Scon-
Delegates, 55; friendship with TJ, 55, dat, Baron de, 16, 29-30
65, 75, 82, 97, 149, 199-200, 348; Monticello: lands at, 9, 195-96; TJ's
and the West, 85, 260-61; advises building of, 17-20,22, 197-98; TJ's
TJ, 95, 132-33, 209, 286; and Con- attachment to, 20, 319, 321; British
stitution, 116-18; debates ideas with raid on, 71-72; descriptions of,
TJ, 128; in Congress, 139, 161-62; 79-80, 198; slaves at, 196, 327;
and residence-assumption bargain, household manufactures at, 317;
140; and site of federal capital, 148; nailery at, 317; TJ's fear of loss of,
travels with TJ, 149, 150, 168-69; 346-47
favors commercial discrimination, Morellet, Abbe, 95, 96
161, 164, 194; and national bank, Morgan, Daniel, 70
164, 334; and Freneau, 169-71; as Morgan, George, 287
party leader, 171-72, 191; defends Morris, Gouverneur, 141, 144, 145,
TJ in press, 176, 186, 199; in election 161, 179, 188, 191,236

INDEX 413
Morris, Robert (American financier), bank, 164, 166; drafts neutrality pro-
160 clamation, 181; and Genet, 182, 189;
Morris, Robert (English architect), 19 secretary of state, 199; at Burr trial,
290; mentioned, 12, 13, 74, 175

Napoleon I, 263-65, 279, 284, 295, Randolph, Ellen, 324
300, 311 Randolph, Isham, 2
National Gazette, 169-71, 173 Randolph, John, 39-40
Nelson, Thomas, 39, 42, 64, 71, 72 Randolph, John (of Roanoke): as
Newton, Isaac, 6, 129, 138 House leader, 250, 274, 284; and
Nicholas, George, 73 election of 1808, pp. 278, 314; op-
Nicholas, Robert Carter, 25, 34 poses TJ, 281-82
Nicholas, Wilson Cary, 217, 338, 340, Randolph, Peyton, 10, 15, 24, 26-27,
346 32-34, 36, 39, 40
Nicholson, Joseph H., 235, 272, 274 Randolph, Thomas Jefferson, 319, 324,
North, Frederick, Lord, 23, 34, 37, 325
38-39 Randolph, Thomas Mann, Jr., 134—35,
Northwest Ordinance, 85, 86 148-49, 282, 310, 323-24, 346
Notes on the State of Virginia: TJ's writing Randolph, Thomas Mann, Sr., 3, 135,
of, 76-79; publication of, 94-96; 148-49
John Adams on, 96; Chastellux on, Randolph, Virginia, 324
96; quoted in 1800 campaign, 225 Randolph, William, 2, 3, 135
Raymond, Robert, 8
Otis, James, 48 Republican party: beginnings of,
171-74; in election of 1792, pp.
Page, John, 6-7, 17,42,64 176-77; and Genet, 190-91; in elec-
Paine, Thomas, 42, 125, 167, 284 tion of 1796, pp. 200-203; TJ's
Palladio, Andrea, 19, 20, 197 leadership of, 209-11, 221-23, 245,
Peale, Rembrandt, 278 249-51; in election of 1800, pp. 221,
Pendleton, Edmund, 10, 36, 44, 46, 53, 226-28
57-58 Rhea, John, 318
Petit, Adrien, 160 Ritchie, Thomas, 314
Phillips, William, 70-71 Rittenhouse, David, 78, 83, 207
Pickering, John, 273 Roane, Spencer, 334, 339
Pickering, Timothy, 212, 214, 250, 269, Rodney, Caesar A., 290, 292, 297
273 Rose, George, 312
Pinckney, Charles, 229-30, 259, 260 Rush, Benjamin, 177, 329-30
Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth, 207, Rushworth, John, 25
212,229,231,271,317 Rutledge, Edward, 110
Pinckney, Thomas, 197, 204, 228
Pinkney, William, 295, 296, 316 Saint-Memin, Charles-Balthazar-Julien
Pitt, William, 141 Fevretde, 271-72
Plumer, William, 255, 258, 274, Salkeld, William, 8
275-76, 289 Shadwell, 1,2,9, 16-18, 196
Poplar Forest, 73, 325-26, 346 Shays's Rebellion, 116
Preston,JamesP.,339 Sherman, Roger, 46
Priestley, Joseph, 207, 256 Short, William: private secretary to TJ,
87, 91, 109, 112; diplomatic se-vice
Rabaut de St. Etienne, Jean Paul, 123 of, 161; mentioned, 135, 179
Ramsay, Andrew, 114, 115 Sidney, Algernon, 30, 344
Randolph, Edmund: on TJ, 19, 32; at- Skelton, Bathhurst, 21
torney general, 137; on national Skelton, Martha Wayles, 20-21
414 INDEX
Skipwith, Robert, 21, 29-30 Virginia, University of: TJ's role in

Slavery: TJ and, 61-63,
13, 24, 45, 50, founding, 336-45; TJ's academic
86, 94-95, 135, 327, 335, 347-48; plan for, 340-41, 377; TJ's building
slave trade, 45, 47—48; and Declara- of, 337-39, 341-43; faculty of, 343
tion of Independence, 47-48, 50; in Virginia Resolutions, 211,218-20
territories, 86; in Notes on Virginia, Volney, Constantin Francois, Comte de,
94-96; slaves owned by TJ, 9, 24, 207
196
Small, William, 5, 6, 10, 33, 49
Walker, Betsy, 20
Smith, Margaret Bayard (Mrs. Samuel Walker, John, 20, 26
Harrison), 239, 321

Walker, Thomas, 14, 32
Smith, Robert, 241, 246, 254, 297, 300

Ward, Samuel, 36
Smith, Samuel, 232, 235, 241-42, 312 War of 1812, pp. 327, 328, 331, 337
Smith, Samuel Harrison, 239, 275, 316 Washington, George: in House of Bur-
gesses, 15; in Revolution, 36, 37, 67,
Smith, Thomas A., 288
Spain: U.S. relations with, 143-46, 69, 84-85; Jefferson on, 78, 137,
278-82, 299-300; and Louisiana, 171, 176,208; portraits of, 88,
259-63 101-102, 129; at Constitutional Con-

vention, 116; practices of, as presi-
Stanyan, Abraham, 30
dent, 136-37, 252, 253; and Nootka
Stewart, James, 30
Stiles, Ezra, 87
Sound crisis, 141-46; visits Rhode
Stockdale, John, 95 Island, 147; and national bank, 164,
Stuart, Gilbert, 277-78 166; and cabinet divisions, 173, 175,
Sullivan, John, 76
193; and second term, 176; neu-
trality proclamation of, 181-82, 186;
Summary View of the Rights of British
America, 27-31,35,36,37 and Genet, 181-83, 188-90; fare-
well address, 200, 344
Swartwout, Samuel, 288, 293, 294
Watson, David, 338
Talleyrand-Perigord, Charles Maurice Wayles,John, 20, 24
de, 213, 264, 269, 280, 282 Webster, Noah, 208
Tarleton, Banastre, 71 Weld, Isaac, Jr., 198

Taylor,John,217,218 Whately, Thomas, 99
Tazewell, Littleton, 337 Wickham, John, 290

Wilkinson, James, 286-94
Thomson, Charles, 77, 79, 95
Ticknor, George, 333, 339, 345 William and Mary, College of, 5-6, 10,
18, 19,59,94-95,336
Tripoli, 97, 98, 242-43, 259
Trumbull, John, 101, 102. 106, 129, Williamson, Hugh, 86
130 Wilson, James, 31

Wolcott, Oliver, 180
Trumbull, Jonathan, 101
Wolcott, Oliver, Jr., 180, 203
Tucker, George, 343
Turpin, Thomas, 66 Wright, Camilla, 344
Wright, Francis, 344, 347
Vergennes, Charles Gravier, Comte de, Wright, Joseph, 88
98 Wythe, George, 6-9, 10, 12, 27, 39, 44,

Virginia: conduct of elections in, 14; 45,57-58,95, 191,205,231
and coming of Revolution, 15,
XYZ crisis, 212-15, 223. 232
23-26, 31-35, 43; constitution of
1776, pp. 43-46 78, 94; revisal Yazoo lands, 281-82
of laws of, 53-63; British invasion Young, Arthur, 196
of. 68-73; ratification of Constitu- Yrujo, Carlos Martinez, Marques de
tion in, 118 Casa, 268
one of the most significant and complex elec-
tions in American history, marked the first real
change in American government, as Jefferson's
Republican party drove the Federalists from
power. Cunningham presents a straightfor-
ward and sensible account of Jefferson's two
terms as president, which were highlighted
by such triumphs as the Louisiana Purchase
and the Lewis and Clark expedition but which
were marred, especially in the second term, by
problems in Europe and by the Aaron Burr
conspiracy.
Throughout the biography Cunningham is
careful to merge the public Jefferson with the
private in a fashion that conveys Jefferson's in-
credible vitality and range. He paints revealing
portraits of Jefferson as husband and father, as
a successfuland innovative planter, as the tal-
ented architect and builder of Monticello, and
as the founder of the University of Virginia.
Cunningham finds the most helpful key to
understanding Jefferson in his commitment
to the application of reason to society. From
Jefferson's faith in reason flowed his devotion to
natural law and the rights of man, his faith in
majority rule, his dedication to learning and
education, his belief in progress, and the opti-
mism that pervaded his life — beneficial legacies
that persist to the present.
Bringing to this project long years of re-
search and writing on the Jeffersonian era,
Noble Cunningham has given us a biography
of Thomas Jefferson that will stand proudly
with the best works on this remarkable man.
Noble E. Cunningham, Jr., Middlebush Pro-

fessor of History at the University of Missouri
at Columbia, is the author of many books, in-
cluding The Image of Thomas Jefferson in the Pub-
lic Eye: Portraits for the People, 1800 -1809 and
The Process of Government I ndtr Jefferson. In
r
1979, he received the Thomas Jefferson Award

from the curators of the University of Missouri.
Southern Biography Series
William J.
Cooper, Jr., Editor
A Main Selection of the History Book Club

Baton Rouge 70893
Jacket illustration courtesy Independence National Historical

Park Collection
I
A Virginia Library

Baton Rouge 708
ISU\ 0-8071-1

In Pursuit of Reason - The Life - Cunningham, Noble E., 1926

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Pursuit of Reason - The Life - Cunningham, Noble E., 1926

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Pursuit of Reason - The Life - Cunningham, Noble E., 1926

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NOBLE E. CUNNINGHAM, JR.

that imbalance by presenting a concise vet com-

the Age of Reason.

GAYLORD PRINTED IN USA

© THE BAKER a TAYLOR CO.

Louisiana State University Press

Copyright © 1987 by Louisiana State University Press

Designer: Laura Roubique

(Southern biography series)

and government — Revolution, 1775-1783. United 4.

E332C95 1987 9734'6'o924 [B] 86-27626

concord the blessings of self-government, so long denied

Preface and Acknowledgments xiii

I The Formative Years 1

II Public Life and Private World 14

following page 150

Bust of Jefferson by Houdon

following page 300

Invitation to dinner at the President's House

Profile of Jefferson by Saint-Memin

Preface and Acknowledgments

every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

merits. Less than two decades after Roosevelt extolled Jefferson

Jefferson in the second half of the twentieth century lay a renais-

The present volume designed to bridge the gap between public

interest in Jefferson and the world of scholarship that has widened

complex thought, and many interests, I have been selective. But I

Despite Jefferson's diverse interests and accomplishments, certain

"the sufficiency of reason for the care of human affairs." As a man

versity for encouraging me to undertake the task of putting into a

editing of the manuscript for publication, I am greatly indebted to

Shadwell, a modest frame house built in a red-clay clearing, stood

Jefferson's earliestmemories were not of Shadwell and its wilder-

The records relating to Jefferson's adult years are voluminous,

the Latin school of the Reverend William Douglas, a Scottish cler-

unhappiest years of Jefferson's childhood, distant from home for

and inquiring pupil was the world of the Enlightenment. Jefferson

of them, except Small, Anglican clergymen. The student body,

lettres. "It is eminent biographer

Jefferson devoted five years to reading law with George Wythe.

and seems not tohave spent much time serving in an appren-

monplace book, as he had earlier done while reading in literature

had ambitions beyond being a planter. His experiences in Williams-

seat of power in England's largest colony. Its major buildings, ob-

political education. He was standing at the lobby door of the House

THE FORMATIVE YEARS 1 1

on May 30, 1765, when Patrick Henry spoke in support of the

impressions of Philadelphia and New York, but it is known that his

Soon he recorded the preparations for the

THE FORMATIVE YEARS 1

In December, 1768, Jefferson stood for election as a delegate from

played a part in Jefferson's becoming a candidate. When the poll

PUBLIC LIFE AND PRIVATE WORLD 15

Jefferson's direct contact with Locke's work at this important period

several times in legal notes on divorce. 8 Although Locke's Two

voice that his order of books was being shipped to Virginia on

life, that support a leading architectural historian's assessment of

Jefferson as America's "first great native-born architect." The first