. ..I I

"A Storm in the Atmosphere"

The 1804 Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail Adams

By

Brendan Lindsay

Senior Thesis in History

California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

3 Jline'.2002

<·:_; . ··A . Aqy{§or: Dr: Amanda Podany

·~ _;,_ '.-,."t- ' .I

In Memory of Charles Hill Lindsay (1937-1990)

I

I I' I I I

I Even in one of the freest and happiest governments in the world, restless I spirits will aim at disturbing it. Abigail Adams I,,

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that

I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but :1 better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the Atmosphere.

I Thomas Jefferson ,f

I { 6 /\ (.,

On May 20, 1804, Abigail Adams sat doVIII and wrote a letter to an old, albeit

estranged, friend, Thomas Jefferson. 1 Ostensibly, the briefletter was to be one of condolence

on the death of Jefferson's daughter, Mary Jefferson Eppes, who, as a child almost twenty

years before, she had loved and cared for as the girl had passed through England to join her

father in France. However, by the time Abigail Adams ascribed her name to letter, it was

much more than a note of sympathy. Under the veil of sorrow, she infused the letter with a

reticent indication of anger over the perceived injustices heaped on her husband, former

President John Adams, at the hands of the bereaved father, Thomas Jefferson, and his

Republican supporters. 2

This short letter was the beginning of an exchange of letters between the pair, four

from Abigail Adams and three from Jefferson, that became an expression of each writer's .I political ideology in a debate about Federalism versus Republicanism, and the direction that each party wanted the nascent republic to move toward. The words ofeach writer articulated .I several common themes: the perceived failings of the other's political dogma and the I strength of his or her OVIII political ideology; their views on partisan, party politics; their interpretations of the Constitution and governmental power; and discussions of the personal

injuries in a public forum that each felt had been at the hands of the opposition party.

1 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, May 20, 1804, Quincy, in Lester J. Cappon, ed., The Adams­ Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Benveen Thomas Jefferson andAbigail and John Adams (Williamsburg: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1988), 268. 2 The terms Republican and Federalist are used to describe the tv.ro growing factions in the late­ eighteenth and early-nineteenth century American political arena. Each ofthese groups, undoubtedly, was not a homogenous entity. The term Republican encompasses Anti-Federalists, Democrat-Republicans, Jeffersonian Republicans, and other names used to describe the supporters ofThomas Jefferson and/or the opponents ofthe Federalists. On the Federalist side, Hamiltonian Federalists and Adams Federalists are included under this rubric. By 1804, each term was used to describe the two competing interests. As Gordon S. Wood states in his Radicalism ofthe American Revolution, "The Federalists and the Republicans ... were not modem political I parties...Neither...accepted the legitimacy ofthe other, and neither was designed to be permanent. Both of them were formed by notables, who continued to decry the existence ofparty spirit. .. u See Gordon S. Wood, I The Radicalism ofthe American R

Abigail Adams had met Polly, and her teenage slave companion Sally Hemings, when

the pair landed in England in June of 1787. Jefferson's daughter, who she described as

intelligent and a "fine spirit", immediately enchanted her.4 She was soon dismayed by

Jefferson's plans to house the girl in a Catholic convent in France. 5 Indeed, when it came

time to send Polly onward to France after several weeks under her care, Mrs. Adams I protested to Jefferson in a letter, saying, "In short she is the favorite of every creature in the House, and I cannot but feel Sir, how many pleasures you must lose by committing her to a

convent."6 In her letter of July 10, 1787, Abigail Adams informed Jefferson that Polly was

on her way to Paris in the care of one ofJefferson's servants after a tearful goodbye from "so

lovely a child."7 This brief encounter with Jefferson's daughter, and her correspondence on

this and other matters with the widower Jefferson, were unusual by eighteenth century I standards ofcorrectness, yet routine in the friendship ofAbigail Adams and Jefferson. Abigail Adams and Thomas Jefferson had met in Boston in the summer of 1784, as

I each was preparing to embark on a sea voyage to France. Mrs. Adams was already well I acquainted with Jefferson through her husband, John Adams's, long correspondence and friendship with the Virginian, as was Jefferson with her by virtue ofthe same. Jefferson was

3 Abigail Adams to Lucy Crancb, July 16, 1787, London, in Charles Francis Adams, ed., Letters of Mrs. Adams, The Wife ofJohn Adams (St. Clair Shores: Scholarly Press, Inc., 1977), 377. 4 William Howard Adams, The Paris Years ofThomas Jefferson (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), 219-21. 5 Ibid., 220-21. 6 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July 6, 1787, London, C.F. Adams, ed., Letters of Mrs. Adams, 183. In all cases ofspelling, grammar, and capitalization, this author has remained true to these elements as portrayed in the quoted letters, diaries, and statements ofthe individuals in question. In cases where the spelling is near enough to the true spelling to suggest a possible typographical error, [sic] has been added.

2 I

to serve as a minister to France along with John Adams who was already overseas attending I to his diplomatic posting. 8 According to historian Edith B. Gelles, after the two arrived separately in Paris,

"Abigail and he immediately formed a warm friendship based not just upon alienation [from

home] and empathy, but upon compatibility of interests and the love of intelligent

conversation." 9 Jefferson, ever the Francophile, helped Abigail Adams adjust to the shock of

both being away from home for the first time and the dislocation of France and its foreign

ways. 10 For her part, Mrs. Adams proved a woman unlike any other that Jefferson had

known, even when compared with his own, now deceased, wife, Martha. Abigail Adams, as

I described by historian Joseph Ellis, impressed Jefferson with her marvelous intellect and "the

traditional virtues of a wife and mother," and as "a fully empowered accomplice in her

husband's career." 11

It was through this empowerment that Abigail Adams provided constant support to

her husband and a tonic for his weaknesses. . Self-doubt, low self-esteem, and lack of

confidence plagued him, but Mrs. Adams provided a surfeit of strength to him as she had an

abundance of these qualities. 12 She was thinking of her husband even in considering their

growing relationship with Jefferson when she wrote in 1785, "In Mr. Jefferson he [her

husband] has a firm and faithful friend, with whom he can consult and advise and, as each of

them has no object but the good of their country in view, they have an unlimited confidence

7 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July 10, 1787, London, ibid., 185. s W. H. Adams, Paris Years, 172. 9 Edith B. Gelles, Portia: The World ofAbigail Adams (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992), 86-87. 10 Ibid., 86. 11 Joseph J. Ellis, American Sphinx: The Character ofThomas Jefferson (New York: Vintage Books, 1998), 84-85. 12 Rosemary Skinner Keller, "Abigail Adams and the American Revolution: A Personal History" (Ph.D. diss., University ofIllinois at Chicago Circle, 1977), 62.

3 I

in each other."13 She understood the benefits of her husband's partnership with Jefferson,

already ten years in the making from their days in the First Continental Congress in 1774,

and she understood how this benefited her family as well.

Women with ambitions toward public service could only achieve these ambitions in

partnership with their husbands because of the limitations of women's rights in the

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in America. By devoting her considerable emotional and

intellectual strengths to his success, Abigail Adams' s life was eclipsed by her spouse's yet I was an integral part of their family's success. 14 During the Adamses' nine months together with Jefferson in France, during which time Jefferson was a fixture in their home, Abigail

I Adams and Jefferson became close :friends. 15 So close, in fact, that when the Adamses

moved to London in order for John Adams to take up his new posting as American

Ambassador to Great Britain, Mrs. Adams commented on the parting, saying, "I shall regret

to leave Mr. Jefferson. He is one of the choice ones of the earth."16 Soon after, Abigail

Adams began a correspondence with Jefferson, who remained behind as an ambassador to

France.

Acting on a remark by Jefferson at their parting, that he enjoyed hearing from :friends,

she wrote to him after arriving in London. 17 Knowing that married ladies did not write to

single gentlemen, she apologized for not making prior arrangements with him before writing,

telling him that she took his remark as an invitation to correspond. 18 She told of her journey

to London, the "wealth and grandeur" of the city, and of irksome remarks about her husband

13 Abigail Adams to Lucy Cranch, October 1, 1785, London, C.F. Adams, ed., Letters ofMrs. Adams, 321. 14 Keller, 62-63. 15 Ellis, American Sphinx, 84. 16 Janet Whitney, Abigail Adams (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1947), 196. 17 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 6, 1785, London, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 28-30.

4 in the English press. 19 In her conclusion, she timidly hinted that she would enjoy a reply.20

Jefferson did reply, delightedly. Hinting that he would not have been bold enough to have

taken up the correspondence himself, he wrote: "I have duly received the honor of your

letter, and am now to return to you thanks for your condescension in having taken the first

step for settling a correspondence which I so much desired; for now I consider it as settled

and proceed accordingly."21

He then proceeded to regale her with the lyrics to a song he had heard in Paris and I good-natured jibes at her aversion to the French and her magnanimous impressions of the English and London. 22 In a perspicacious line, he commented on her mention ofthe negative

remarks about Mr. Adams in the English press, saying, "It would be ill policy to attempt to

answer or refute them. But counter-squibs I think would be good policy."23 In truth, this

advice would have served the Adamses well, had they taken it, in their ordeals with the press

and party politics in the 1790s.

The letters between Mrs. Adams and Jefferson continued back and forth between

London and Paris. Despite Abigail Adams's lack of formal schooling, she and Jefferson

corresponded avidly and without limitation of topics.24 The correspondence touched on

politics (foreign and domestic), the doings of their children, European gossip, and mutual

requests to purchase goods for each other in their respective cities.25 During these amiable

letters, little passed between the two that caused any major disagreement, although one major

18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 21 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, June 21, 1785, Paris, ibid., 33. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid., 35. 24 W.R. Adams, Paris Years, 217. 25 Judith Pulley, "The Bittersweet Friendship ofThomas Jefferson and Abigail Adams," Essex Institute Historical Collections 108, no. 3 (1972): 197-198.

5 event in America, Shays's Rebellion, proved a harbinger of the political dissent looming in

the pair's future, and illustrated an already discemable rift in the political outlook between

them.

The 1786 rebellion hit the Adamses hard. Both from Massachusetts, the couple was

outraged at the uprising. Abigail Adams described the rebels as, "Ignorant, restless

desperadoes, without conscience or principals, have led a deluded multitude ... crying out for a

paper currency, some for an equal distribution of property, some were for annihilating all

debts ... By this list you will see the materials which compose this rebellion, and the necessity

there is...to quell and suppress it."26 She continued by warning that Jefferson's own well-

I known opinions on the right of a people to guard their freedoms should not include those that

attacked the "foundation" of these liberties.27

Jefferson, however, was not swayed by Mrs. Adams's arguments or discouraged from

I restating his thoughts on the matter, writing, "I hope they pardoned them. The spirit of

resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept

alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all."28

In advance of some of his more famous aphorisms on the subject, he concluded, "I like a

little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the Atmosphere."29

When Abigail Adams replied to Jefferson on June 26, 1787, it was not to take up the

debate but to report the arrival of Polly from America.30 Apparently, approbation for

Jefferson's offspring outweighed disapproval of his ideology so that, until 1788 when the

Adamses were posted back to the United States, Jefferson and Mrs. Adams corresponded

26 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, January 29, 1787, London, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 168. 27 Ibid. 2 ' Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787, Paris, ibid., 173.

6 without returning to any mention of their brief disagreement. Jefferson, hearing of the

Adamses' scheduled return home, wrote to Abigail Adams, "Polly does not cease to speak of

you with warmth and gratitude. Heaven send you, madam, a pleasant and safe passage, and a

happy meeting with all your friends."31

In the same letter, Jefferson invited her to continue the correspondence that he had

enjoyed so much over the past three years. "It will lighten them to me [his loneliness and

removal from home in Paris] if you will continue to honour me with your correspondence."32

Abigail responded later in the month, accepting his offer to continue the correspondence,

replying that it was an offer "much too flattering, not to be gratefully accepted."33 Yet

Abigail Adams did not write to Jefferson again until Polly died, over sixteen years later.

During these intervening years, Jefferson and the Adamses, along with the United States,

underwent a bitter transition from the magnanimity of the Washington administration to a

fragmented and factional political landscape in 1804.

The reason why Abigail Adams did not continue to write is lost. One might

conjecture that the perception of impropriety of correspondence between a married woman

I and a single man in the light of contemporary etiquette in the United States changed her

mind. Certainly, Mrs. Adams and Jefferson spoke to each other in person during the 1790s,

when Jefferson served, along with John Adams, in the Washington Administration as

Secretary of State and as vice-president, under John Adams, in the Adams Administration

from 1797 to 1801. These conversations, too, are lost. However, the events from 1788 to

1804 are not lost, nor are the sentiments of Thomas Jefferson and Abigail Adams about these

29 Ibid., 173. 30 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 26, 1787, London, ibid., 178. 31 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, February 2, 1788, ibid., 222. 32 Ibid.

7 I

years. The death of Mary "Polly" Jefferson Eppes led Abigail Adams to take the first step in

resurrecting a past as mournful to her as the death of the fondly remembered child, a step that

would recover these sixteen lost years in seven letters.

Abigail Adams's condolence letter of May 20, 1804 was an extraordinary one for

three reasons. It was a letter from a private citizen to the sitting president of the United

States concerning a private family matter. This was especially surprising since the Adamses

had not seen or heard from Jefferson since the day before his inauguration in March of

1801.34 Given the possibility that she had not written Jefferson after returning from Europe

out of concern for convention, it was ironic that she flouted the standards of decorum in the

eighteenth and nineteenth century that prohibited one from broaching topics other than

sympathy in a condolence letter.35 Above all, her condolence letter was astonishing because

it attacked the bereaved father; something incredible irrespective of time or title. Why she

I chose to do so, and why Jefferson chose to ignore the insult and press on with his own

concerns, is best explained by an examination of the discourse contained in the seven letters

the pair exchanged in 1804.

I Mary "Polly" Jefferson Eppes died on April 17, 1804 from complications due to

childbirth.36 Abigail Adams read of her death in a newspaper and deCided to write Jefferson

on May 20, 1804.37 Her letter contained reminiscences of her days with Polly and of her own

parental losses that she described as having been the taste of a "bitter cup."38 Yet, it also

contained three reticent hints of some canker gnawing at her; she noted in the beginning,

33 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, February 21, 1788, London, ibid., 226. 34 Gelles, Portia, 86. 35 Ibid., 87. 36 Dumas Malone, Jefferson the President: First Term 1801-1805, vol. 4, Jefferson and His Time (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970), 411-416. 37 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, May 20, 1804, Quincy, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 268-69.

8 body, and end of the letter that she had some reasons for not having written sooner or with

less reserve.

She opened her letter: "Had you been no other than the private inhabitant of

Monticello, I should e'er this time have addrest you, with that sympathy, which a recent

event has awakend in my Bosom. But reasons of various kinds withheld my pen... "39

Undoubtedly, these lines convey a sentiment quite different from compassion, as they are

tantamount to her saying that had anyone else suffered such a loss, she would have written

sooner. What these "reasons of various kinds" may be she leaves for Jefferson to decide,

though she hints at them, again, in the body of the text with another taciturn turn of phrase:

"It has been some time since that I conceived of any event in this Life, which could call forth,

feelings of mutual sympathy. "40

Mrs. Adams concluded her letter with a line more akin to a prayer for a sinner than a

bereaved father:

That you may derive comfort and consolation in this day of your sorrow and affliction, from that only source calculated to heal the wounded heart - a firm belief in the Being: perfections and attributes of God, is the sincere and ardent wish ofher, who once took pleasure in subscribing Herself your Friend.41

Whether or not she was adding an additional barb, given the well-known, but untrue, gibe that Jefferson was an atheist by relating to him that one might only find comfort through

God, is unclear but is an additional possibility. However, her last words describing herself as

a former friend are unmistakable, and leave no doubt that her purpose in writing was more than sympathy.

38 Ibid., 269. 39 Ibid., 268. 40 Ibid., 269. 41 Ibid.

9 Jefferson's reply of June 13, 1804 confirms that he read the letter and discerned a

similar conclusion. In his response, he chose to be the paradigm of clarity and candor, in sharp contrast to Mrs. Adams's innuendos. After opening with appreciation for the genuine sentiments she had expressed for Polly and her regrets on his daughter's death, Jefferson undertook the task of putting matters in the open. He expressed his "regret- that circumstances should have arisen which have seemed to draw a line of separation between us."42 He continued that while past events had been "trying to some minds" that he had always believed that this excluded both himself and the Adamses.43

These events were those of the political arena. Jefferson described his own feelings on his relationship with John Adams over the course oftheir lives as:

The different conclusions we had drawn from our political reading and reflections were not permitted to lessen mutual esteem, each party being conscious they were the result of an honest conviction in the other. Like differences of opinion existing among our fellow citizens attached them to the one or the other of us, and produced a rivalship in their minds which did not . . 44 exist m ours.

Simply put, popular opinion had created a conflict between Jefferson and John Adams, based on their predominance in each of their factions, which did not exist otherwise, outside of objections he or the Adamses held incommunicado. In a spirit of candor absent from Abigail

AdanJs's letter, Jefferson related his own singular objection, the "one act of Mr. Adams's life, and only one, ever gave me a moment's personal displeasure. I did consider his last appointments to office as personally unkind."45

42 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, June 13, 1804, Washington, ibid., 270. 43 Ibid. 44 lbid. 45 Ibid.

10 Thomas Jefferson was referring to appointments John Adams had made in the wake

of Jefferson's election as president in 1801 during Adams's last days in office. In this time,

Adams filled vacancies created by the Judiciary Act of 1801 with Federalists. The Election

of 1800 had ended with a Republican victory in the executive and legislative branches, and

so the Federalists focused on the judiciary to retain some control of the government. The

lame-duck Federalist-controlled Congress and President Adams hastily passed the Judiciary

Act in order to expand the federal judiciary. The act became a law on February 13, 1801.46

In conjunction with Mr. Adams' s appointment of Federalist John Marshall as chief justice of

the Supreme Court on January 27, 1801, the act's provision for a permanent reduction of

Supreme Court justices from six to five upon the opening of the next vacancy ensured that

two vacancies would have to open before the Republicans could appoint a member to the

court.47 Jefferson viewed the shift of power from the Federalists to the Republicans in the

Election of 1800 as a repudiation of Federalist aims by the electorate, and the meddling of I Adams and the Federalists in securing the judiciary for their own purposes as contrary to the electorate's mandate, and as an effort to stymie his administration and his political aims.48

At the same time, John Adams' s appointments were acts of patronage in many cases.

He named his son-in-law a government surveyor and John Quincy Adams's father-in-law a

postmaster, the former being a speculator and a failed get-rich-quick artist and the latter

being a fugitive from creditors.49 That such appointments appeared as such was clear even to

Mrs. Adams. Writing to her sister, Mary Cranch, in January of 1801, Abigail Adams

informed her that President Adams had appointed her son (and Abigail Adams's nephew),

46 Kathryn Turner, "The Appointment of Chief Justice Marshall," William and Mary Quarterly 17, no. 2 (April 1960): 160. 47 Ibid. 48 Ellis, Sphinx, 264.

11 William Crarich, as a commissioner in Washington.50 She admitted, "tho this will be sit (sic] down by the Antis (Anti-Federalists], as a promotion on account of Relationship, we care not now what they say ...I think Mr. Cranch is rising fast and will be one of the first Men in the city in a short time."51 In fact, John Adams, apparently undeterred by the threat of charges of nepotism, appointed William Cranch yet again. On February 27, 1801, President Adams made William Cranch a Circuit Court judge in Washington.52

In almost every case, and the Adams family tree notwithstanding, the appointee was a

Federalist in his sentiments.53 Jefferson described these appointees to Abigail Adams as drawn "from among my most ardent political enemies, from whom no faithful cooperation could ever be expected."54 The timing of the appointments similarly outraged Jefferson, as he saw the deluge of judicial appointments made in the lower federal courts from February

20 to February 24, 1804. The election had been disputed for weeks and only decided in

Jefferson's favor on February 17 after thirty-six ballots in the House broke the tie between

Jefferson and Burr in the disputed election, and the post-electoral whirlwind of appointments caught Jefferson off guard. "It seemed," wrote Jefferson to Mrs. Adams, "but common justice to leave a successor free to act by instruments of his own choice."55

Jefferson chose to conclude his letter quite differently from Abigail Adarns's first letter. In summing up his thoughts on John Adams's appointments, he declared that the disappointment over Mr. Adams's actions "left something for friendship to forgive, and after

49 David McCullough, John Adams (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001), 481-82, 562-63. '°Abigail Adams to Mary Cran ch, January 15, 1801, Washington, Stewart Mitchell, ed., New Letters ofAbigail Adams 1788-1801 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1947), 262. 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid. 53 McCullough, 481-82. 54 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, June 13, 1804, Washington, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 270. 55 Ibid.

12 brooding over it for some little time, and not always resisting expression of it, I forgave it

cordially, and returned to the same state of esteem and respect for him which had so long

subsisted."56 He invited her to reveal her own grievances by his own letter's example, saying that he had "opened himself' to her "without reserve," and concluded with the thought that

such grievances had been coupled with political troubles and had regrettably affected his friendships. 57 He signed off with his prayers and best wishes for the Adamses.

In her July 1, 1804 response, Abigail Adams did take up her pen in the spirit of revelation exhibited by Jefferson, though her tone was something apart from his tenor of understanding and reconciliation. Her second letter opened with a statement that ignored her allusion to problems between Jefferson and the Adamses in her first letter, saying that his reply had touched on subjects outside of the scope of her condolence letter and that he had

"been pleased to enter upon some subjects which call for a reply."58

Mrs. Adams leapt immediately to the defense of her husband's actions in making judicial appointments in his final days in office. She prefaced her defense with the qualification that she was aware of her husband's intentions at the time and, therefore, could give an account of his mind. 59 This was likely the case because Abigail Adams was intimately aware of her husband's political mind and even privy to official letters of state during his presidency, with President Adams going so far as to let her reply to official letters sent to him. 60 Meanwhile, Jefferson was well aware of the validity of such an assertion of familiarity, as he had the benefit of witnessing the Adamses' partnership firsthand over the years. Mrs. Adams' s shrewd political sense and will to participate in politics were well

56 Ibid., 270-71. 57 Ibid., 2 71. 58 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July I, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 271. 59 lbid.

13 known to a private, inner circle of friends and relations, a circle that had once included

Jefferson. 61 Consequently, when she added that she was certain that no "personal pain or

offence" to Jefferson was intended, she did so with the conviction that Jefferson should

accept her assurances at face value.62

Her explanation centered on the privilege of the president to fill vacant offices by

executive appointments, something for which the, then, recently passed Judiciary Act of

1801 had provided ample opportunities. John Adams's actions, accordingly, were in keeping

with the constitutional powers afforded to the president and in line with the precedent set by

George Washington throughout his administration.63 As Mrs. Adams observed, Washington

had seen fit to appoint men to fill any vacancies before leaving office and "No offence was

given by it, and no personal unkindness thought of."64 However, this was not the case and

Mrs. Adams was portraying magnanimity that Mr. Adams had not felt, despite her pretensions otherwise.

John Adams's presidency had been hamstrung by George Washington's appointments

and by his endorsement of Alexander Hamilton over Adams.65 Washington's support of

Hamilton, combined with Adams's very slim margin of victory over Jefferson in the Election of 1796 (only three votes separated them), started the Adams Administration off on the

66 shakiest of foundations. John Adams found himself the inheritor; of a cabinet largely loyal to Alexander Hamilton, who was the policy leader of the Federalists and Adams's bitterest

60 Linda K. Kerber, Women ofthe Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America (Williamsburg: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1980), 82-83. 61 Ibid., 277. 62 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July 1, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 271. 63 Ibid., 271-72. 64 Ibid., 272. 65 Jean S. Holder, "The Sources of Presidential Power: John Adams and the Challenge to Executive Primacy," Political Science Quarterly 101, no. 4 (1986): 603. 66 Whitney, 265.

14 rival. So bitter, that in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, close friend and fellow Founder, John

Adams described Hamilton's character as the consequence of "a superabundance of

secretions which he could not find whores enough to draw off."67

Unable to purge these men from his cabinet out of his respect for Washington, despite

his presidential prerogative to do so, John Adams struggled through his presidency with

many of these men in place and with few other men loyal to him in his cabinet.68 Indeed,

these cabinet members worked against President Adams by confounding his efforts and

promoting Hamiltonian designs. 69 The cabinet also leaked information constantly, which

further handicapped Adams's attempts to govern effectively.70 Abigail Adams's assertion

that Washington had intended no offense of a personal manner might well have been true, but

that John Adams did not take offense was certainly not true.

John Adams was indignant over Washington's appointments and his support of

Hamilton.71 Washington, while serving as commanding general of the United States Army

following his retirement from the presidency, chose Hamilton to act as his second-in­

command, despite constitutional stipulations that the president determined ranks and

promotions for the armed services.72 As John Adams had done in accepting Washington's

cabinet choices, so too did he accept this choice as well, and according to author David I McCullough, he had to "face the obvious truth" that these had both been mistakes. 73 John Adams found himself assaulted by party sentiments from within by his cabinet and from

67 McCullough, 593. 68 Holder, 603. 69 Ibid. 70 Whitney, 283-84. 71 McCullough, 512. n Ibid. 73 Ibid., 518.

15 without by Republicans and Federalists alike, and so Mrs. Adams's claims were both self-

deceiving, ifindeed she believed them, and hollow, as Jefferson was well aware ofreality.

In a further departure from reality, Mrs. Adams claimed that, whatever the

explanation for the appointments, "there was not any certainty that the presidency would

devolve upon you" and therefore no "personal unkindness" was intended toward him. 74

However, the House of Representatives had decided the disputed Election of 1800 on

February 17, 1801, while John Adams made his appointments between the 20th and 24th of

February; therefore Mrs. Adams's statements were counterfactual.75 Jefferson was certainly aware ofthis, but Mrs. Adams had still more implausible proclamations:

No person was ever selected by him [John Adams] from such a motive - and so far was Mr. Adams from indulging such a sentiment, that he had no Idea of the intollerance of party spirit at that time, and I know it was his opinion that if the presidency devolved upon you, except in the appointment of Secretaries, no material Changes would be made.76

Since Thomas Jefferson wrote that John Adams's appointments were not pleasing to him in his June 13, 1804 letter to her, it should have been obvious that Jefferson had fully intended to make changes, and that Mrs. Adams would maintain otherwise in a subsequent letter was both incredible and insincere. Similarly, her pronouncements that John Adams was unaware of party sentiment at the time were also inconceivable and dishonest. Indeed,

Mr. Adams was bedeviled by party sentiments, including those of his own Federalist party, during his presidency, as evidenced in the aforementioned cabinet debacles of his own administration. Despite the implausibility of these statements, Mrs. Adams closed her

74 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July I, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 272. 75 Ibid. 76 lbid.

16 I

defense of Mr. Adams's actions with them, and then embarked on the details of the

Adamses' objections to Jefferson's actions based, ironically, on party sentiments.77

Mrs. Adams opened with her thoughts on the Election of 1800, saying that the

"instruments made use of, and the means which were practised to effect a change, have my

utter abhorrence and detestation, for they were the blackest calumny, and foulest

falsehoods."78 The Election of 1800 had eclipsed, in terms of political dissension, the party

politics demonstrated in the Elections of 1792 and 1796. Moreover, the Adamses'

experiences in all three had become increasingly negative, largely due to attacks on John

Adams in newspapers and pamphlets.

John Adams's first taste of election politics had been in the Election of 1792. George

Washington was the consensus choice for president and Adams's participation in the election

was for the office of vice-president. During the buildup to the election, the Adarnses were

upset by Anti-Federalist representations of John Adams as a monarchist.79 This was

particularly disturbing to the Adamses given the fact that the Revolution had been conducted

to throw off the English monarchy and install republican government. The attacks on John

Adams were largely ones of convenience: Washington was the unassailable hero of the

Revolution and could not be criticized openly for his support of Federalist policies created by

Alexander Hamilton, like state debt assumption and banking issues, and so the Anti-

Federalist opposition focused itself on seating their candidate as vice-president. John Adams

was criticized in place of Washington in order to pursue this strategy.80

n Ibid. 78 Ibid. 79 John Murray Allison, Adams and Jefferson: The Story ofa Friendship (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966) 223-24. 80 Ibid.

17 This strategy led to the nse of factional strife between Federalists and Anti-

Federalists. These political skirmishes were denoted by campaigning on each side, including falsehoods, slanders, and libels being exchanged.81 Despite the attacks directed at John

Adams, he easily defeated his closest competitor for vice-president, governor of New York and Anti-Federalist George Clinton. 82 He did so because the majority of voters held Mr.

Adams in high regard, and attacks against him based on monarchical sentiments were insufficient in dispelling the high esteem the electorate held for his impeccable revolutionary eredentia. 1s. 83

The 1796 election proved to be somewhat more difficult for the Adamses and the

American political scene because political tactics had evolved in the intervening four years.

Tactics, like negative press attacks and hostile pamphleteering, that were once anathema were becoming more commonplace. As in 1792, John Adams was assailed in the Republican press as a monarchist. 84 However, this time, the press had Mr. Adams' s words as vice- president and the activities ofthe Federalist-controlled government to use against him.

John Adams, while fulfilling his vice-presidential role as president of the Senate, participated in a debate over how President George Washington should be addressed. Adams suggested that he be addressed as "His Majesty the President."85 Combined with his use of the phrase "the natural aristocracy" in describing the leadership of the United States, this seemed like apostasy to many of the revolutionary generation. 86 This "natural aristocracy" was central to John Adams's view of the executive branch in the national government as the disinterested gentleman executive balancing the interests of the society that he presided over,

Sl \Vhitney, 253. 82 McCullough, 439. 83 Whitney, 253-54. 84 McCullough, 462-63.

18 something that sounded like a republican-shrouded vision of monarchy.87 Both Federalists and Republicans, including some of his most ardent supporters, heavily criticized him for these views, especially as he insisted on repeating them in the Senate. 88 The results of John

Adams's mistakes were best summed up by the suggestion of Senator Ralph Izard of South

Carolina that perhaps Vice-President Adams should be called "His Rotundity," a suggestion that became a popular joke.89

While John Adams was being held up as a monarchist, Thomas Jefferson was receiving similar negative treatment in the Federalist press. The press attacked him as a

Jacobin for his support of the French, a coward for having fled from advancing British troops when he was governor of Virginia in 1781, and an atheist for his views on religion.90 At the time, Abigail Adams noted the slanders directed at both her husband and Jefferson, describing an abundance of disparagements emanating from both the Federalist and

Republican camps alike. 91 In spite of the character attacks on Jefferson, she remained convinced ofhis admirable character.92 Much ofthe electorate remained convinced as well.

The outcome of the Election of 1796 saw John Adams defeat Thomas Jefferson for the presidency by only three electoral votes. Both men had remained at their respective homes during the election furor and did not take an active part in campaigning for themselves.93 Indeed, the two remained on good terms, despite any reservations about the other's political affiliations, as evidenced in a letter Jefferson posted to John Adams while

85 Ibid., 406. 86 Ibid. 87 Wood, 267. 88 Ibid., 407-408. 89 Ibid., 408. 0 ' Ibid., 462-63. 91 Whitney, 265. 92 Ibid. 93 McCullough, 463.

19 the election results yet hung in the balance. Jefferson, writing from Monticello in late

December of 1796, characterized the situations as:

The public and the public papers have been much occupied lately in placing us in a point of opposition to each other. I trust with confidence that less of it has been felt by ourselves personally ... [as] various little incidents have happened or been contrived to separate us ... 94

This letter to John Adams was not simple sportsmanship or some political ruse by

Jefferson. Writing to his close friend and confidant James Madison several weeks later, on

January 22, 1797, Jefferson acknowledged that John Adams's politics were "changed, but

conscientiously changed" since they had met. 95 Eight days later, he expanded his thoughts in

I another letter, telling Madison,

Since our return from Europe some little incidents have happened which were capable of affecting a jealous mind like his. The deviation from that line of politics on which we had been united has not made me less sensible of the rectitude of his heart; and I wished him to know this ... and have not a wish which he stands in the way of. 96

That John Adams "should be convinced of these truths" was a key to the continued success

of both the public and private lives of Jefferson and Adams.97 Thomas Jefferson, convinced

ofJohn Adams's worth and character, had extended his hand, if not an olive branch.

Abigail Adams, although not as magnanimous as Jefferson had been in his praise of I her husband, continued to value Jefferson's character. She described Jefferson in February of 1797, saying, "tho I cannot accord with him in politics, I believe him to be a man of strict

honor and of rare integrity of heart. The most reprehensible part of his conduct was

94 Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, December 28, 1796, Monticello, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 262-63. 95 Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, January 22, 1797, Monticello, Barbara B. Oberg, ed., The Papers ofThomas Jefferson, vol. 29, 1 March 1796 - 31 December 1797 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), 271. 96 Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, January 30, 1797, Monticello, ibid., 280-81.

20 countenancing Frenner [Philip Freneau, editor of the National Gazette] when he was I continually libelling the government. "98 Indeed, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson remained friends as the pair entered their

respective offices in March of 1797.99 Unfortunately, this arrangement was short-lived.

President Adams entertained a break from party sentiments early in his administration by

attempting to appoint Republican Jam es Madison to a treaty deputation to France. The

president approached Jefferson in hopes of gauging Madison's potential interest in the

assigmnent, only to have Jefferson warn him that Madison would likely refuse, as he had

refused George Washington in the past. 100 Wben Jefferson did approach Madison, he refused

the appointment as expected. 101 Jefferson speculated about the president's intentions, saying

that the president "forgot party sentiments, and as he had never acted on any system, but was

always governed by the feeling of the moment," and so he had tried to circumvent party

politics. 102 At the same time, Mr. Adams met with his cabinet, where the Hamiltonian

Federalist holdovers from the Washington Administration also reminded him of party

sentiments. After these sharp lessons in "party sentiments," Jefferson described Mr.

I Adams' s reaction as returning "to his former party views" and noted that President Adams

"never after. .. ever consulted me [Jefferson] as to any measures of the govemment."103 I Abigail Adams viewed Jefferson's performance as vice-president with a gimlet eye. After a year in office together, her husband no longer trusted Thomas Jefferson. Abigail

Adams viewed her husband's distrust as the result of Jefferson's association with the

97 Ibid. 98 Whitney, 265. 99 Ibid., 271. 100 Notes on a conversation \Vith John Adams and George Washington, Oberg, ed., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, 552. IOI Ibid. 102 Ibid.

21 I

Republican opposition, his support of French interests, and his support of libelous

JOurn. al"1sts. 104

By the time the Election of 1800 was held, Jefferson and John Adams were no longer

I on good terms. In addition to Jefferson's non-participation in the Adams Administration,

throughout the 1790s the Federalists had used appointments to establish a system of

patronage to secure support for them that, according to historian Gordon S. Wood, looked in

the "eyes of their Jeffersonian Republican opponents ... to be taking Americans back to the I monarchy."105 As a result, Republican opposition formed itself into a proto-political party structure with the primary goal of suppressing monarchical designs of the Federalists. 106

This action was reminiscent of when opponents of the federal Constitution in 1787 had

formed themselves into the Anti-Federalists to better represent their objections. Meanwhile,

the Federalists remained committed to the idea of themselves as what John Adams had called

the nation's "natural aristocracy." I However, the Federalists in 1800 were not of one mind, despite their shared visions of themselves as the natural leaders of the land. Abigail Adams, writing to her son Thomas B.

Adams on November 13, 1800, described the situation surrounding the intra-Federalist

intrigues ofthe election:

What must be the thoughts and reflections of those, who calling themselves Federalists, have placed their country in a situation full of dangers and perils; who have wantonly thrown away the blessings Heaven seemed to have in reserve for them? The defection of New York has been the source. The defection was produced by the intrigues of two men... One of them sowed the seeds of discontent division amongst the Federalists, and the other seized the lucky moment of mounting into power upon the shoulders ofJefferson. 107

103 Ibid. 104 Whi1ney, 277. 105 Wood, 263. l06 Ibid., 298. 107 Abigail Adams to Thomas B. Adams, November 13, 1800, Washington, C.F. Adams, ed., The Letters ofMrs. Adams, 431-32.

22 Mrs. Adains was referring to the machinations of Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton had "sowed the seeds of discontent" within Federalist ranks by criticizing President

Adams and drawing off support for his reelection bid in 1800. 108 Burr had been afforded an

identical number of electoral votes to those received by Thomas Jefferson, although Jefferson

had been clearly intended to be the presidential candidate and Burr the vice-presidential

selection. The vagaries of the electoral system, however, required that each member of the I Electoral College cast two votes, with only one vote per candidate being allowed. The members cast one vote for Jefferson and one vote for Burr uniformly, giving each the same

electoral vote and producing a tie. Burr, rather than simply conceding the election in favor of

Jefferson, used the situation as Mrs. Adams described, to seize on a "lucky moment." In the

end, the House of Representatives set matters to right after thirty-six rounds of ballots were

cast to decide the election in favor of Jefferson. I The defeat in the Election of 1800 weighed heavily on the Adamses. John Adams had only been defeated by eight electoral votes, which was, therefore, by no means an utter

I refutation ofhim, personally, or the Federalists in general.109 In the words ofhistorian Lynne

Withey, the Adamses, "typically, did not see it that way. To them the election meant a

repudiation ofJohn's principles, a slap in the face by an ungrateful public."110

For Abigail Adams, the incidents of political chicanery, press libels, and open

slanders in public debate that "were practised to effect a change," were the devices that had

removed her husband from the presidency and.created an atmosphere in American politics

103 Roger G. Kennedy, Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 140. 109 Lynne Withey, Dearest Friend: A Life ofAbigail Adams (New York: Touchstone, 2001), 278. 110 Ibid.

23 that she had trouble tolerating. Despite the "blackest calumny" and "foulest falsehoods" of

these activities, she noted to Jefferson in her July 1, 1804 letter, "I have never felt any enmity

towards you Sir for being elected president of the United States."111 Indeed, Mrs. Adams's

enmity emanated from an altogether different source.

Once again ignoring her own trespasses outside of conventional decorum, she

entreated Jefferson to:

excuse the freedom of this discussion to which you have led with unreserve, which has taken off the Shackles I should have otherways have found myself embarrassed with. And now Sir I will freely disclose to you what has severed I the bonds of former Friendship, and placed you in a light very different from what I once viewd [sic] you in. One of the first acts of your administration was to liberate a wretch... 112

This "wretch" was James Thomson Callender, a notorious political pamphleteer and

journalist who had fixed his ire on John Adams and the Federalists in the late 1790s. Mrs.

Adams charged Jefferson with the support of Callender's libels by pardoning him after

assnming the presidency. She noted that in freeing him from the punishment meted out by

his conviction under the Sedition Law of 1798 and in remission of the Scottish immigrant's

I (whom she called a "Calumniator") punitive fine, Jefferson exhibited "public approbation for

the man's conduct. 113 Jefferson's support, she decried, was also ignorant of the law and the

negative influence a president could have on his constituency. 114 Worst of all, Jefferson had

supported personal attacks on his friend, John Adams, by financing the man's activities with I monetary gifts and letters of encouragement. 115 This was "considerd [sic] as a personal

111 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July I, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 272. 112 Ibid., 273. 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid. I 115 Ibid. 24 injury" and "the Sword that cut assunder the Gordian knot, which could not be untied by all

the efforts ofparty Spirit, by rivalship by Jealousy or any other malignant fiend." 116

Abigail Adams's assertions about the Sedition Law and Jefferson's activities were

largely on target, although her claims that he had supported personal attacks on her husband

were tenuous. Indeed, Jefferson's motivation for ignoring the Sedition Law was based

mainly on his anti-Federalist goals and his pro-Republican agenda rather than any grudge

against John Adams, whom he knew to be an honest man of good character, albeit given to I distrust and jealousy at times. 117 That these character flaws had been played upon in the hostile Republican press was true, but Jefferson's support of these press attacks were quite

separate from having anything to do with a desire to expose John Adams's foibles.

The rampant political dissensions of the late-l 790s had led to the ratification of the

Sedition Law of 1798. Ostensibly designed as a complementary law to the Alien Acts and in

anticipation ofwar with France, the Sedition Law was used by Federalist officials to suppress

press attacks on themselves. 118 Thomas Jefferson and his Republican supporters wanted an

end to Federalist efforts via the Alien and Sedition Laws to suppress free speech and quell

opposition to their programs and policies. 119 Jefferson, especially given his strict

interpretation of the Constitution, opposed the Federalist's loose interpretation of the I Constitution that they felt empowered them to regulate free speech, and caused him to support measures to disrupt popular support of these, in Jefferson's view, unconstitutional

polices.

6 " Jbid., 273-74. 117 Dumas Malone, The Sage ofMonticello, vol. 6, Jefferson and His Time (Boston: Little, Brovm and Company, 1977), 94. 118 Whitney, 276. 119 Joyce Appleby, Inheriting the Revolution: The First Generation ofAmericans (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), 26.

25 A major component of the attacks on the Federalists came in the form of political

pamphlets, which had a long tradition of use in America extending back into its colonial

days. JE

efficacy of political pamphlets. Colonial Americans' objections were "ineffectual" and

disjointed, as the population was separated by the great distances and hampered by

pusillanimous loyalists and the tyrannical English. 120 As a result, opposition and discussion

of "public rights" were carried on in pamphlets and journals, and these discussions were later

echoed, in large part, in the natural rights philosophy of the Declaration of Independence. 121

Jefferson, like John Adams, had read such pamphlets and praised them in his halcyon days as

a revolutionary, as had other American patriots. Now, years later, the change in ownership I of America had apparently dampened many peoples' sentiments for pamphlets and political discussion in the press.

While John Adams underwent attacks by the Republican press, so too did Jefferson at

the hands of pro-Federalist journalists. Jefferson, in considering the alternatives to such

public hostilities in the press in 1797, surmised, "Political dissension is doubtless a less evil

than the lethargy of despotism."122 Jefferson was thus content to absorb these harassments I and concentrate his efforts on the "counter-squibs" that he had recommended to the Adamses years before when they had objected to attacks on John Adams in the English press.

Part of Jefferson's strategy was support of political pamphleteer James Thomson

Callender. Callender had fled Britain in 1793 when he was indicted for sedition based on his

120 Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, edited by William Peden (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1972), 178-79. 121 Ibid. 122 Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney, May 29, 1797, Philadelphia, Oberg, ed., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, 404-405.

26 publication of the pamphlet The Political Progress ofBritain. 123 The pamphlet, which had

found its way over to America, was lauded by many Americans for its critical views of the

British government, especially by Republicans opposed to the pro-British posture of the

Federalists. Once in America, Callender began writing pamphlets about American politics.

Working for pro-Republican newspapers, he published criticisms of the Federalists. 124 Mrs.

Adams reviled such criticisms and seemingly saw any discord by the nation's citizenry with

its leaders as akin to mutiny, saying, "even in the freest and happiest government in the .I world, restless spirits will at aim at disturbing it."125 Mrs. Adams concluded her thoughts on Callender by reminding Jefferson that not

:1 long after he had aided the "serpent," the snake turned on him by attacking him in the press

as well. 126 The bite of the "serpent" was in the form of charges in 1802 against Jefferson,

who had refused to continue to support Callender, that he had liaisons with his slave, Sally

Hemings, which were largely ignored at the time. 127 This, she judged, should be a lesson to

those who, like Jefferson, would let serpents roam freely, while ignoring the law and the

public will. 128 The lesson of those sentenced under the law, and the lesson Jefferson should

learn as well, was to maintain "that respect which is a necessary bond in the social union

which gives efficacy to laws, and teaches the subject to obey the Majestrate, and the child to

submit to the parent."129

In concluding her July 1, 1804 letter, Abigail Adams, again, dropped a reticent hint

that all that was to be said had yet to be voiced. She wrote: "There is one other act of your

123 Oberg, ed., The Papers ofThomas Jefferson, 537. 124 James Morton Smith, "Sedition in the Old Dominion: James T. Callender and the Prospect Before Us," The Journal ofSouthern History 20, no. 2 (May 1954): 158-59. 125 Whitney, 258. 126 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July 1, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 274. 127 Ellis, Sphinx, 7. 128 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, July I, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 274

27 admillistration which I considerd as personally unlcind, and which your own mind will

readily suggest to you, but as it neither affected character, or reputation, I forbear to state

it." 130 Apparently, the "Gordian knot" had been severed utterly, if not hacked into tiny bits.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Adams delivered an accompanying admonition about the nature of their

correspondence. Advising Jefferson that she had not shared their letters with anyone else,

she asked that this confidence be maintained and added her own assurance of confidentiality

for her part, writing, "Faithful are the wounds of a Friend."131

Jefferson's second letter, the fourth of the seven exchanged, was brief yet specific in

explaining his actions to Mrs. Adams. He opened his July 22, 1804 reply, stating, "I would

I not have again intruded on you but to rectify certain facts which seem not to have been

presented to you under their true aspect."132 Alternately stated, Jefferson objected to the false

attribution of motivations for his actions, not his actions thems.elves. Chief among these

falsely imputed motivations were those concerning his support ofJames Callender.

Jefferson explained that, like other Americans, he had become aware of Callender by

reading his criticisms of the British government contained in a book called The Political

Progress ofBritain, which had ultimately caused Callender to flee to America. 133 Jefferson

recounted to Mrs. Adams that he had "read and approved the book: I considered him as a

man of genius, unjustly persecuted."134 Jefferson's contributions of money and public

129 Ibid. 130 Ibid. 131 Ibid. 132 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, July 22, 1804, Washington, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 274. 133 Ibid. 134 Ibid., 274-75.

28 approbation for his work were founded on these anti-British publications, as was ills support

of Callender's early work in the American press.135

Callender's writings, which were Anti-Federalist in the late 1790s, contained, said

Jefferson, "some useful truths in his coarse way."136 These "useful truths" were Callender's

larger statements about the Federalists and their policies, including the Federalist

administration under President John Adams, rather than anything that Callender lodged

against the character of Mr. Adams himself. In the matter of Mr. Adams's character, no matter what Jefferson felt about the Adams Administration, he had "ever borne testimony to his [Mr. Adams's] personal worth," of which he was a ready and staunch defender. 137 That there should be any question of this seemed incredible to Jefferson, given his own

experiences with the press:

With respect to the calumnies and falsehoods which writers and printers at large published against Mr. Adams, I was as far from stooping to any concern or approbation of them as Mr. Adams was respecting those of Porcupine, Fenno, or Russell, who published volumes a~ainst me for every sentence vended by their opponents against Mr. Adams. 38 But I never supposed Mr. Adams had any participation in the atrocities of these editors or their wnters.. 139

That Jefferson chose to ignore personal attacks against him, and that the Adams es did not, was largely a function ofthe political outlook and personality of each.

John Adams was described by Alexander Hamilton as "excessively vain and jealous" and overly concerned with his station in life. 140 Jefferson's comments to James Madison in

1797 about Mr. Adams's ''.jealous mind" recall a similar sentiment. At the same time, John

135 Ibid., 275. 136 Ibid. 137 Ibid. 138 William Cobbett (a/k/a "Peter Porcupine"), John Fenno, and Benjamin Russell were Federalist editors and writers. 139 Ibid.

29 Adams' s own feelings of superiority showed in his conception of the common man within

the republic, who he saw as ignorant rustics that were slaves to their passions and whom he

called the "common Herd of Mankind." 141 This view of the American people manifested

itself in Federalist policies, which discouraged active participation by the common man in the

American political scene. 142 Analogous to discouraging the participation of the people was

the Federalist opposition to the free press and its coverage of Federalist policy vis-a-vis the

Sedition Law. I Jefferson, meanwhile, was described by Alexander Hamilton as not "mindful of truth... a contemptible hypocrit." 143 John Adams described Jefferson as a "shadow man" of

elusive character and mysterious beliefs. 144 The source of this apparently enigmatic I personality was perhaps best described by Jefferson biographer Dumas Malone when he noted that Jefferson was "tactful" at all times and "restrained in expressing his likes and

dislikes." 145 The use of tact and guile had apparently been successful even in John Adams's I mind, as he noted to Benjamin Rush, "Jefferson has succeeded, and multitudes are made to believe that he is pure benevolence ... But you and I know him to be an intriguer."146 In

attempting to apply this persona to his political outlook, the elusive character makes solid

conclusions difficult.

However, in examining Jefferson's views on religion, one can anticipate his feelings

' on the role of the press in his vision of government:

14 °Kennedy, 140. 141 Wood, 27. 142 Appleby, 27. 143 Kennedy, 140. 144 Joseph J. Ellis, Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy ofJohn Adams (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), 115. 145 Malone~ 97. 146 McCullough, 594.

30 The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. Ifit be said, his testimony in a court ofjustice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him ... Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion, by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test oftheir investigation. 147

Read as an overarching statement of tolerance of divergent views, aside from one of simple

religious forbearance, Jefferson's statement demonstrated that his views did not preclude

those of others nor did they demand any greater inquiry into the validity of claims aside from

"Reason and free enquiry." Such an inclusive worldview was a key to befuddling those 'I attempting to label him. It was also a foundation for the active role in government for the public and the press, which the Republicans encouraged. 148 In reexamining his comments

that Callender' s writings contained "some useful truths" in this light, one can gather that

Jefferson felt that those statements not germane to the Federalists as a whole, such as the

attacks on Mr. Adams, were to be discarded. For Jefferson, at least, this was enough to

I excuse his monetary contributions to Callender, which he viewed as charitable donations and

something quite apart from financing attacks on President Adams. ,, This financial support, which he described as "relief' and "charity" for the poor Callender, was founded on the man's earliest efforts, but, he wrote Mrs. Adams, " ... no body

sooner disapproved of his writings than I did, or wished more that he would be silent."149

Indeed, one may examine a letter from Callender to Jefferson and see that no promise of

negative content was exchanged for money, nor was Jefferson's characterization of

Callender' s financial condition off target.

147 Jefferson, 159. 148 Appleby, 27. 149 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, July 22, 1804, Washington, ibid., 275.

31 Callender, writing to Jefferson in 1797, requested an advance of money based on

Jefferson's willingness to support his writing of the multi-volume History of1796, of which

he had recently delivered to Jefferson another volurne. 15° Callender complained of I continuing poor health, compounded by his need to support his small family, and asked for

an advance of"5 or IO dollars." 151 Jefferson advanced Callender twenty dollars on October

8, 1797, which included contributions by his Virginia "neighbors" and hirnself. 152 Certainly,

this particular incident supports at least a portion ofJefferson's explanation.

However truthful that explanation may have been, Callender's The Prospect Before

Us, a pamphlet published in January of 1800 and undoubtedly aided by Jefferson's financial

I contributions, did indeed include attacks on President John Adams's character. 153 In the

pamphlet, Callender described Adams as a "hoary headed incendiary" and accused him of

being an apostate to the revolutionary ideals of the Founding. 154 At the same time, the

pamphlet advocated the election of Jefferson in the upcoming Election of 1800, praising I Jefferso~ as effusively as it had condemned Adams. 155 In response to pamphlets like this and other public press attacks, the Federalists had

passed the Sedition Law in 1798, which made it illegal to slander the government. In 1800, I Callender was tried, convicted, fined two hundred dollars, and imprisoned until March 3, 1801, when the act expired. 156 Mrs. Adams's contention that Jefferson had "liberated"

150 James T. Callender to Thomas Jefferson, September 28, 1797, Philadelphia, Oberg, ed., The Papers ofThomas Jefferson, 536. 151 Ibid. 152 Thomas Jefferson to John Barnes, October 8, 1797, Monticello, Oberg, ed., ibid., 544. 153 Smith, 160-61. 154 Ibid., 161. 155 Ibid., 161-62. 156 Oberg, ed., The Papers a/Thomas Jefferson, 537.

32 I

Callender was only partially correct. Callender was to have gone free in any case, as the act

had expired, but Jefferson had remitted the man's fine and issued him a pardon. 157

Indeed, Jefferson noted to Mrs. Adams in his second letter,

I discharged every person under punishment or prosecution under the Sedition law, because I considered and now consider that law to be a nullity as absolute and as palpable as if Congress had ordered us to fall down and worship a golden image; and that it was as much my duty to arrest it's [sic] execution in every stage, as it would have been to have rescued from the fiery furnace I those who should have been cast into it for refusing to worship their image. 158

In other words, Jefferson felt that the Federalists were rmsmg themselves above

reproach by the people, and that such a measure was contrary to his individual outlook and

that of the nation's ideals. One can clearly draw parallels between Jefferson's commentary

on religious tolerance and these comments on the Federalists regulating free speech,

especially as his words were reminiscent of Moses throwing down the golden calf in the Old

Testament. How he responded to the hypersensitive Admnses' views of his actions entailed a

more subtle approach.

In addressing Mrs. Admns's view of his pardon as support for Callender's attacks on

her husband, Jefferson maintained that he had freed all without questioning what they had I said or done in opposition to the law and, therefore, not necessarily in support of anything I these men had said. 159 That she could interpret such actions as approbation oftheir conducts, he said, was understandable, but so too should she consider the possibility that it was simply

in response to a law he felt unconstitutional. 160 Which of these it was, he said, "must be

decided by the general tenor of my life. On this I mn not afraid to appeal to the nation at

157 Ibid. 158 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, July 22, 1804, Washington, ibid., 275. 159 Ibid. 160 Ibid 275-76.

33 large...who will judge us from his own knolege [sicJ of them, and not on the testimony of a

Porcupine or Fenno."161 Jefferson's "Reason and free enquiry" were his chosen agents of

salvation.

Jefferson, in concluding his second letter, turned to Mrs. Adams's taciturn closing

remark about "one other act" of his administration that she "considerd as personally unkind,

and which your own mind will readily suggest to you." He responded that no act did, indeed,

present itself to him, and without asking that she reveal it, he assured her that no act was ever

directed at her with "an unkind intention."162

In her August 18, 1804 letter, her third to Jefferson, Abigail Adams dealt with both

the Callender incident and the veiled insult yet to be revealed. She admitted that bis

explanation of bis motivations in releasing Callender were different from those she had

previously considered. 163 Without commenting further on his motivations or his explanation,

she set about immediately attacking Jefferson's actions in ignoring the Sedition Law in bis

role as president.

Imitating Jefferson's own logic about forbearance of diverse opinions, Mrs. Adams, fI nonetheless, concluded that such a position was in no way an excuse for ignoring the laws of I the United States. 164 According to the law, she deemed, it "devolved upon the supreem Judges of the Nation" to decide what was and was not constitutional. 165 Furthermore, even if

the law was in need of repeal, constitutional as it may be, only "the power which makes a

Law, is alone competent to the repeal."166 Her judgment of his actions, then, was that by

161 Ibid., 276. 162 Ibid. 163 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, August 18, 1804, Quincy, Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 276. 164 Ibid. 165 Ibid. 166 Ibid.

34 I

ignoring the law, he was no better than a despot. 167 In Mrs. Adams's estimation, Jefferson

had not only operated outside of his purview as defined by the Constitution, he had acted

contrary to the ideals that he had espoused in the Declaration oflndependence.

At the same time, his contention that each person must decide for himself what is and

is not true, and accept or reject it for themselves, put truth in limbo. Mrs. Adams asked him,

"If there are no checks to be resorted to in the Laws of the Land, and no reparation to be

made to the injured, will not Man become the judge and avenger of his own wrongs, and as

in a late instance [the Burr-Hamilton duel], the sword and pistol decide the contest?"168 Such

an arrangement, she argued, would unleash man's "savage" nature against his fellows. 169

Free speech for Mrs. Adams needed an arbiter of truth. In fact, free speech needed a judge

for most Federalists.

Free speech issues for Federalists rested on an idea of universal truth that existed for

men to discover by application of reason and scholarship. 170 These truths were black and

white issues that could be permanently established. Moreover, they were Classical truths

long since established in the republican traditions of Greece and Rome. Consequently, the

Republican ideal of an evolving truth based on the consensus of contemporary public opinion I was a concept diametrically opposed to theirs. 171 According to historian Gordon S. Wood, Republicans believed that all opinions, even those that were ultimately incorrect or

unpopular, were worthy of being heard. 172 Thomas Jefferson, writing on the subject, noted

pointedly that these incorrect or unpopular opinions should be left to "stand undisturbed as

monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left

167 Ibid. 168 Ibid., 277. 169 Ibid. 170 Wood, 362-63.

35 I

free to combat it."173 In retrospect, Jefferson and his Republican supporters have been

mainly vindicated by the modem character of American public opinion with its foundation of

perception as reality. Such an arrangement has led to what Gordon S. Wood called "the

democratization of truth. " 174

Returning to Jefferson's explanation of his activities, Mrs. Adams acknowledged that

a public figure might have motivations assigned to his actions apart from what they were,

especially in light of "Party hatred."175 Such ascriptions were the outcome of party

sentiments being assigned to the titular heads of these groups and, certainly, Jefferson and

her husband qualified for such treatment. Nevertheless, she noted, Jefferson was attempting

I to "exculpate yourself from any intentional act of unkindness towards any one."176 Mrs.

Adams while seemingly close to accepting Jefferson's specific explanation was further apart

from accepting the glibness of it. To this, she applied her last grievance: Thomas Jefferson

had removed her son from his federal posting at his first opportunity. ·I Early in Jefferson's first term in 1801, Congress had transferred the appointment of federal judges to the executive branch from the judicial branch. While this transition was

taking place, Mrs. Adams's son, future president John Quincy Adams, was servmg as a I bankruptcy commissioner under a federal district judge in Massachusetts. 177 At the same time, Jefferson was dealing with the ramifications of the patronage system of past Federalist

administrations, which left a government larger than Jefferson preferred and one stocked

with Federalist cronies. In response, Jefferson began a housecleaning effort that involved a

171 Ibid. 172 Ibid. 173 Ibid 363 174 Ibid:: 362: 175 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, August 18, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 277. 176 Ibid. 177 Whitney, 306.

36 downsizing of the government, including the military, and the dismissal oftemporary federal postings.

Jefferson downsized the military by reducing the size of its officer corps, which was largely occupied by Federalist appointees. 178 Similarly, civil servants were let go in services he considered as nonessential. In the case of federal judges, Federalist appointments in the judicial branch had resulted in a highly politically active and Federalist judiciary.179

Undeniably, the reason the new Republican-controlled Congress had transferred the appointments to the executive was to legally be able to reappoint lower court judges, as appointments under the judiciary had been temporary offices. 180 In his race to reapportion power in the judiciary between Federalists and Republicans, and in his larger .tasks of balancing Federalist representation and cutting the size of the government, Jefferson had cut

John Quincy Adams as well.

Abigail Adams charged that Jefferson, acting as "Judge" for those to be appointed, had intentionally dismissed John Quincy Adams despite it being for an office "into which no political concern enterd, [and he being] personally known to you, and possessing all the qualifications."181 She noted that "some of your best Friends in Boston, at that time exprest

[sicJtheir regret that you had done so," even though John Quincy Adams had not expressed any negative sentiments himself in the aftermath. 182 Mrs. Adams completed the fifth letter of the exchange by noting that she "would gladly return" to him as a friend if she could be

178 Appleby, 3 l. 179 Wood, 324-25. 180 Pulley, 21 l. 181 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, August 18, 1804, Quincy, ibid., 277. 182 lbid., 277-78.

37 persuaded that only "mere differences of opinion," rather than any malicious intent toward

her husband, had caused the strife between them. 183

Jefferson responded from Monticello on September 11, 1804 in his third and final

letter of the 1804 correspondence. Opening with a line reminiscent of his views on free I speech, Jefferson wrote, "With those who wish to think amiss of me, I have learnt to be perfectly indifferent: but where I know a mind to be ingenuous, and to need only truth to set

it to rights, I cannot be as passive."184 Thus stated, he explained his part in the dismissal of

John Quincy Adams.

Jefferson, noting that Mrs. Adams had not actually named John Quincy Adams's post

as that of bankruptcy commissioner, deduced as much from how the dismissals and new

appointments had been conducted three years earlier. 185 He explained that John Quincy

Adams had been the appointee of an appointee, and that, as such, he was out of the level of

consideration that he attended to in the reappointments. 186 Her son's posting had been a

temporary one in any case, ostensibly on a one-case basis by law, and by this arrangement,

he considered all commissioners' posts vacant. 187 Jefferson also confirmed the legislature's

motivation in transferring the appointments: to balance out the overrepresentation by

Federalists in a judiciary. Jefferson, perhaps reacting to Mrs. Adams's contention that her

son's posting was non-political, lectured her, "The judges you well know have been

considered as highly federal; and it was noted that they [the Federalists] confined their

nominations exclusively to federalists." 188

183 Ibid 278 iu Ibid:' . 185 Ibid. 186 Ibid. 187 Ibid. 188 Ibid.

38 In order to balance representation, Jefferson appointed Republicans and Federalists in

numbers that were in the "proportion they bear in numbers through the union generally."189

Mr. Jefferson explained that had he known that John Quincy was serving as one of these

commissioners that it "would have been a real pleasure" to have awarded the post to him

permanently rather than the Federalist from Boston that he did appoint. 190 After years of

acquaintance with John Quincy Adams, which had begun back in France during both

families' overseas postings, Jefferson assured Mrs. Adams that he was well aware of her

son's worth. 191 Ironically, Jefferson failed to offer a further proof of that dismissal was

unintentional and not intended to be a personal slight to the Adamses. President Jefferson, in

I his bipartisan appointments designed to balance party representation, had promoted Abigail

Adams's nephew, William Cranch, to Chief Justice of the Circuit Court in Washington. 192

Judge William Cranch was, indeed, the same man that John Adams had appointed to two

posts while president, and had been predicted to soon "be one ofthe fust Men in the city" by

Mrs. Adams in 1801. That Thomas Jefferson had delivered him to such standing would have

served him well in proving that he bore no ill will to the Adamses.

Jefferson also let Mrs. Adams know that he opposed her views on his role as chief

executive within the government. He disagreed with her description of the role of each

branch of government where determination of constitutionality was concerned. Mrs. Adams

had described the presidential role as that of executor of the laws, which should be carried

out irrespective ofpersonal views. Jefferson countered, saying

You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the constitution has given them a right to decide

189 Ibid., 279. 190 Ibid. 191 Ibid. 192 Stewart, ed., New Letters, 263.

39 for the executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistracies are independant in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence of fine and imprisonment, because that power was placed in their hands by the constitution. But the Executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, was bound to remit the execution of it; because that power has been confided to him by the constitution. 193

I Jefferson explained that should the judiciary be allowed to determine the

constitutionality of laws, that it would become a "despotic branch."194 In the scheme

of American government since 1804, Mrs. Adams's explanation of the coordinate

powers of government has been vindicated, while Jefferson's seems, in hindsight, I some chaotic recipe for governmental gridlock. Nonetheless, Jefferson pressed on with his description of the roles of governmental branches, using these to revisit his

reasoning in opposing the Sedition Law.

The branches of federal government, according to Jefferson, whether they

were checks on one another or not, were in any case secondary to one overriding

factor for him: the powers reserved to the individual states. In deciding to legislate

free speech, the Congress had infringed on a power reserved to the states. 195 He

reminded Mrs. Adams that the states could and did regulate free speech, and in

"general the state laws appear to have made the presses responsible for slander as far

as it consistent with their useful freedom."196 That such state regulation had failed to

stop the slanders was undoubtedly true, yet so was the failure ofthe federal law to do

the same. For Mr. Jefferson, given his views on free speech, such failures were not

the telling blows that they were to the Adamses. Knowing that such would be the

193 Ibid. 194 Ibid. 195 Ibid.

40 case with Mrs. Adams's reading of his reasons, Jefferson concluded his third and

final letter in the 1804 correspondence with an attempt to ascribe their falling out to a

difference of opinions:

Both of our political parties, at least the honest portion of them, agree conscientiously in the same object, the public good: but they differ essentially in what they deem the means of promoting that good. One side believes it is best done by one composition of the governing powers, the other by a different one. One fears most the ignorance of the people [the Federalists]: the other the selfishness of rulers independant of them. Which is right, time and experience will prove. We think that one side ofthis experiment has been long enough tried; and that the other has not been fairly and sufficiently tried. Our opponents think the reverse. With whichever opinion the body of the nation concurs, that must prevai!. 197

I He noted that he was aware that such differences had caused a parting with some of

his friends and he had "ever kept myself open to a return of their justice."198 With

best wishes to the Adams family, Jefferson signed off and awaited the return of Mrs.

Adams' s justice, should she decide to reply. 199

Mrs. Adams did reply on October 25, 1804. Writing from her home in

Quincy, Abigail Adams penned her fourth and final letter of the 1804 correspondence

of seven letters. Maintaining her running theme of Jefferson as the progenitor of their

exchange of letters, she stated, "When I first addrest [sic] you, I little thought of

entering into a correspondence with you upon political topicks [sic]. I will not

however regret it, since it has led to some elucidations and brought on some

196 Ibid. I 197 Ibid., 280. 198 Ibid. 199 Ibid.

41 explanations, which place in a more favourable light occurrences which had wounded

me."200 Apparently, Mrs. Adams was willing to forgive Mr. Jefferson.

She accepted Jefferson's explanation of John Quincy Adams's dismissal,

which she described as being "withdrawn" from her grievances.201 Additionally, Mrs.

Adams felt that in his "ardent zeal, and desire to rectify the mistakes ... of former

administrations" that he had turned to measures outside of those conferred on him by

the Constitution.202 She went on to describe their discordant views on the role of

government as a matter of opinion. In this, she expressed the Federalist opinion that

the federal government did have the right to regulate free speech in order to defend

I itself and punish the "licentiousness of it."203 In concluding her thoughts on these

differences, she echoed Jefferson's words on the final arbiter of whose ideology was

right, saying, "Time Sir must determine, and posterity will judge with more candour,

and impartiality, I hope than the conflicting parties of our day, what measures have

best promoted the happiness of the people ... "204 Abigail Adams, by returning the

disagreements to matters of political opinion, had cleared the personal element from

her feud with Jefferson.

Magnanimously, Mrs. Adams closed her letter, writing, "Be assured Sir that

no one will more rejoice in your success."205 Given her agreement with Jefferson,

that the good of the people was the object of government, this sentiment was one that

crossed party lines and encompassed both Federalist and Republican. Several weeks

after writing her last letter, Abigail Adams showed her husband the seven letters she

200 Ibid. 201 Ibid., 281. 202 Ibid. 203 Ibid., 281-82.

42 and President Jefferson had exchanged.206 Mr. Adams made a marginal note in her

letter book that the correspondence had been unknown to him during its course and

that he had no comments on it at the time, at least in writing.207

Thomas Jefferson and Abigail Adams did not write again until Jefferson wrote

to her in August of 1813.208 The reasons for the lapse of nine years were twofold.

First, Jefferson and John Adams did not reconcile their differences until 1812, when

Adams renewed his correspondence with Jefferson, which produced a storied

fourteen-year correspondence between the two aging Founders.209 Second, Abigail

Adams and Jefferson had not been corresponding regularly since Mrs. Adams's t;;.~(a~ departure from FTanee, due both to proximity and convention, and so a

rapprochement between the pair did not necessarily mean that regular letters would be

exchanged. In replying to Jefferson's letter of August 1813, Abigail Adams

I confirmed to him their friendship, acknowledging, "But altho, time has changed the

outward form, and political 'Back wounding calumny' for a period interrupted the

Friendly intercourse and harmony which subsisted, it is again renewed, purified from

the dross."210

Yet, despite this friendship, the pair never returned to political topics in their

remaining correspondence, which was confined to the doings of their families or

requests of a personal nature. This is not surprising given their mutual contention that

only time could judge whether Federalist or Republican views wm1~d be confirmed or

204 Ibid., 282. 205 Ibid. 206 Ibid. 207 Ibid. 208 Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, August 22, 1813, Monticello, ibid., 366. 209 John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, January 1, 1812, Quincy, ibid., 290. 210 Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, September 20, 1813, Quincy, ibid., 377.

43 denied by history. In examining these views now, one can draw the conclusion that

each party was successful in inculcating some of their vision into the American

political scene, as well as unsuccessful in various ways.

Jefferson and the Republicans were largely successful m advancing their

v1s10n of the representative character of the American government. Its inclusive

nature allowed for a larger proportion of the population to participate in politics than

their Federalist counterparts would have liked. Similarly, their idea of truth in the

public domain has also been fundamentally vindicated, as truth has become

"democratized" and a function of public perception. The result, as described by

historian Gordon S. Wood, was "the creation of many voices and many words, no one

of which was more important than another and each of which made its own separate

and equally significant contribution to the whole."211 This multitude of voices

resulted in a severance of ties between political and social power, and resulted in a

democratization ofthe republican government that few had envisioned.212

Meanwhile, Jefferson and his Republican supporters were repudiated in their

I views on the checks and balances contained in the Constitution, specifically their

v1s10n of the judiciary being uninvolved in interpreting the Constitution. The

judiciary surfaced as the arbiter of constitutionality and as an effective check on the

I legislature's lawmaking powers. Jefferson's vision of the cross-coi;nected powers of

each branch, which could stymie the efforts of each branch without hope of an

authoritative decision, never materialized. Similarly, the focus on a minimalist

national government was eventually overshadowed in the late-nineteenth and early­

211 Wood, 362-363. m Appleby, 6.

44 twentieth centuries as Progressivism and social democratic programs enlarged the national government in order to meet societal needs.

The Adamses and the Federalists achieved a number of successes that were incorporated into the governmental character of the United States as it matured. The federal judiciary was molded by John Adams's choice of John Marshall, who in tum had shaped the Supreme Court into a professional and independent body. In addition, the Federalist conception ofthe checks and balances inherent in the Constitution were affirmed. Despite the move away from a Classical definition of truth, the Federalist desire to regulate free speech did not disappear from the American political scene.

Throughout the nineteenth century and into the twentieth, various alien and sedition laws were passed from time to time to quell criticisms of the national government or limit the influx of immigrants. Lastly, the primacy of the national government was established over the states, the Civil War notwithstanding, in determining the course the United States would take in its maturity.

The Federalist vision for the republic met with some failures as well. The largest repudiation of Federalist goals was the eventual character of modem politics in the United States. The sensitive Adamses would likely have quailed at the mass media attacks conducted in the modem, interest-ridden United States. Their vision of a "disinterested gentlemanly elite" in control of society faded in the face of social mobility, public education, and interest group politics.21 3 In attempting to subdue state governments to the federal will, Federalist hopes to concentrate power at the national level were retarded by a consistent opposition by the states, whose efforts were bolstered by a Jeffersonian ideological rhetoric advocating states' rights.

45 Moreover, states retained control of domestic affairs in the United States to a large

degree, including maintenance of individual rights not expressly designated in the

Constitution.

In examining the seven letters debating the personal grievances of Thomas

Jefferson and Abigail Adams, one can obtain a clearer view of the overall national

trial between Federalism and Republicanism from the issues revealed in the

correspondence. Abigail Adams was in concert with her husband's vision for the

'United States: founded on Classical republican virtues and represented by a "natural

aristocracy" drawn from the "disinterested gentlemanly elite," the nation would go

forward led firmly by its chosen elite and their loose interpretation of the •• Constitution. Jefferson, conversely, espoused an alternate vision for the nation: founded on natural rights and an aversion to government, the national government •• would be limited by a strict reading of the Constitution and checked by the constant vigilance of its citizenry. Neither view, as with Federalism and Republicanism,

emerged from the contest as a clear winner or an obvious loser.

Ultimately, the 1804 correspondence served as a window on the aspirations of

the Federalists and the Republicans for the United States. Abigail Adams and

Thomas Jefferson both represented these particular party ideologies and ambitions,

yet both also proposed that the primary object of government was the welfare of the

people, and this vision has continued to be the struggle and the challenge for modem

political parties, irrespective of their policy differences. That these differences had

led to a contentious debate between two friends was but "a storm in the Atmosphere."

213 Wood, 255.

46 Bibliography

Primary Sources

Adams, Charles Francis, ed. Letters ofMrs. Adams, The Wife ofJohn Adams, with an Introductory Memoir by Her Grandson, Charles Francis Adams. Edited with an introduction by Charles Francis Adams. Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1840. Reprint, St. Clair Shores: Scholarly Press, Inc., 1977.

Butterfield, L.H., Mare Friedlaender, !illd Mary-Jo Kline, eds. The Book ofAbigail and John: Selected Letters ofthe Adams Family, 1762-1784. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975.

Cappon, Lester J., ed. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1959. Reprint, Chapel Hill: The University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1987.

Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State a/Virginia. Edited by William Peden. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1972.

Mitchell, Stewart, ed. New Letters ofAbigail Adams 1788-1801. Edited with an introduction by Stewart Mitchell. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 194 7.

Oberg, Barbara B., ed. The Papers ofThomas Jefferson, Vol. 29 (1 March 1796 - 31 December 1797). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.

Secondary Sources

Adams, William Howard. The Paris Years a/Thomas Jefferson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.

Allison, John Murray. Adams and Jefferson: The Story ofa Friendship. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966.

Appleby, Joyce. Inheriting.the Revolution: The First Generation ofAmericans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000. Reprint, Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001.

Bailyn, Bernard. "Butterfield's Adams: Notes for a Sketch." William and Mary Quarterly 19, no. 2 (April 1962): 238-256.

47 Brodie, Fawn M. Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc:, 1974.

Brookhiser, Richard. Alexander Hamilton, American. New York: The Free Press, 1999. Reprint, New York: Touchstone, 2000.

Charles, Joseph. "Adams and Jefferson: The Origins ofthe American Party System." William and Mary Quarterly 12, no. 3 (July 1955): 410-446.

Elkins, Stanley, and Eric McKitrick. The Age ofFederalism: The Early American Republic, 1788-1800. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Reprint, New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Ellis, Joseph J. American Sphinx: The Character ofThomas Jefferson. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997. Reprint, New York: Vintage Books, 1998.

____. Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2001.

____. Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy ofJohn Adams. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1994. Reprint, New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2001.

Gelles, Edith B. Portia: The World ofAbigail Adams. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992. Reprint, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.

____. "First Thoughts": Life and Letters ofAbigail Adams. Edited by Pattie Cowell. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1998.

Holder, Jean S. "The Sources of Presidential Power: John Adams and the Challenge to I Executive Primacy." Political Science Quarterly IOI, no. 4 (1986): 601-616. Kennedy. Roger G. Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Kerber, Linda K. Women ofthe Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America. Chapel Hill: The University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1980.

Malone, Dumas. Jefferson the President: First Term 1801-1805. Vol. 4, Jefferson and His Time. Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970 .

----. The Sage ofMonticello. Vol. 6, Jefferson and His Time. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1977.

McCullough, David. John Adams. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001.

48 Pulley, Judith. "The Bittersweet Friendship of Thomas Jefferson and Abigail Adams." Essex Institute Historical Collections 108, no. 3 (1972): 193-216.

Smith, James Morton. "Sedition in the Old Dominion: James T. Callender and the Prospect Before Us." The Journal ofSouthern History 20, no. 2 (May 1954): 157-182.

Turner, Kathryn. "The Appointment of Chief Justice Marshall." William and Mary Quarterly 17, no. 2 (April 1960): 143-163.

Whitney, Janet. Abigail Adams. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1947.

Withey, Lynne. Dearest Friend: A Life ofAbigail Adams. New York: The Free Press, 1981. I Reprint, New York: Touchstone, 2001.

Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism ofthe American Revolution. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992. Reprint, New York: Vintage Books, 1993.

I I

49