The Project Gutenberg EBook of Memoir, Correspondence, And Miscellanies,
From The Papers Of Thomas Jefferson, by Thomas Jefferson

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net


Title: Memoir, Correspondence, And Miscellanies, From The Papers Of Thomas Jefferson

Author: Thomas Jefferson

Editor: Thomas Jefferson Randolph

Release Date: September 30, 2005 [EBook #16781]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON ***




Produced by David Widger





[Illustration: Book Spines, 1829 set of Jefferson Papers]

MEMOIR, CORRESPONDENCE, AND MISCELLANIES, FROM THE PAPERS OF THOMAS
JEFFERSON.

Edited by Thomas Jefferson Randolph.


[Illustration: Steel engraving by Longacre from painting of G. Stuart]

[Illustration: Titlepage of Volume One (of four)]



     EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, to wit:

     Be it remembered, that on the seventeenth day of January, in
     the fifty-third year of the Independence of the United
     States of America, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, of the said
     District, hath deposited in this office the title of a book,
     the right whereof he claims as proprietor, in the words
     following, to wit:

     "Memoir, Correspondence, and Miscellanies, from the Papers
     of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Thomas Jefferson Randolph."

     In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United
     States, entitled "An act for the encouragement of learning,
     by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the
     authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times
     therein mentioned."

     RD. JEFFRIES, Clerk of the Eastern District of Virginia.

     CAMBRIDGE: E. W. Metcalf & Company.




PREFACE.

The opinion universally entertained of the extraordinary abilities of
Thomas Jefferson, and the signal evidence given by his country, of a
profound sense of his patriotic services, and of veneration for his
memory, have induced the Editor, who is both his Executor and the
Legatee of his Manuscript Papers, to believe that an extensive
publication from them would be particularly acceptable to the American
people.

The Memoir, contained in the first volume, commences with circumstantial
notices of his earliest life; and is continued to his arrival in New
York, in March, 1790, when he entered on the duties of the Department of
State, of which he had been just appointed Secretary.

From the aspect of the Memoir, it may be presumed that parts of it, at
least, had been written for his own and his family's use only; and in a
style without the finish of his revising pen. There is, however, no part
of it, minute and personal as it may be, which the Reader would wish
to have been passed over by the Editor; whilst not a few parts of that
description will, by some, be regarded with a particular interest.

The contents of the Memoir, succeeding the biographical pages, may be
designated as follows:

I. General facts and anecdotes relating to the origin and early stages
of the contest with Great Britain.

II. Historical circumstances relating to the Confederation of the
States.

III. Facts and anecdotes, local and general, preliminary to the
Declaration of Independence.

IV. An exact account of the circumstances attending that memorable act,
in its preparation and its progress through Congress; with a copy
from the original draught, _in the hand-writing of the Author;_ and a
parallel column, in the same hand, showing the alterations made in the
draught by Congress.

The Memoir will be considered not a little enriched by the Debates in
Congress, on the great question of Independence, as they were taken down
by Mr. Jefferson at the time, and which, though in a compressed form,
present the substance of what passed on that memorable occasion.
This portion of the work derives peculiar value from its perfect
authenticity, being all in the hand-writing of that distinguished member
of the body; from the certainty that this is the first disclosure to the
world of those Debates; and from the probability, or rather certainty,
that a like knowledge of them is not to be expected from any other
source. The same remarks are applicable to the Debates in the same
Congress, preserved in the same manner, on two of the original Articles
of Confederation. The first is the Article fixing the rate of assessing
the quotas of supply to the common Treasury: the second is the Article
which declares, "that in determining questions, each Colony shall have
one vote." The Debates on both are not only interesting in themselves,
but curious, also, in relation to like discussions of the same subjects
on subsequent occasions.

V. Views of the connections and transactions of the United States with
foreign nations, at different periods; particularly, a narrative, with
many details, personal and political, of the causes and early course of
the French Revolution, as exhibited to the observation of the Author,
during his diplomatic residence at Paris. The narrative, with the
intermingled reflections on the character and consequences of that
Revolution, fills a considerable space in the Memoir, and forms a very
important part of it.

VI. Within the body of the Memoir, or referred to as an appendix, are
other papers which were thought well entitled to the place they occupy.
Among them, are, 1. A paper drawn up in the year 1774, as "Instructions
to our Delegates in Congress." Though heretofore in print, it will be
new to most readers; and will be regarded by all, as the most ample and
precise enumeration of British violations that had then appeared, or,
perhaps, that has since been presented in a form at once so compact
and so complete. 2. A Penal Code, being part of a Revised Code of Laws,
prepared by appointment of the Legislature of Virginia, in 1776, with
reference to the Republican form of Government, and to the principles of
humanity congenial therewith, and with the improving spirit of the age.
Annexed to the several articles, are explanatory and other remarks of
the Author, worthy of being preserved by the aid of the press. 3. A
historical and critical review of the repeal of the laws establishing
the Church in Virginia; which was followed by the "Act for establishing
religious freedom." This act, it is well known, was always held by Mr.
Jefferson to be one of his best efforts in the cause of liberty, to
which he was devoted: and it is certainly the strongest legal barrier
that could be erected against a connection between Church and State,
so fatal in its tendency to the purity of both. 4. An elaborate paper
concerning a Money Unit, prepared in the year 1784, and which laid the
foundation of the system adopted by Congress, for a coinage and money of
account. For other particulars, not here noted, the Reader is referred
to the volume itself.


The termination of the Memoir, at the date mentioned, by the Author, may
be explained by the laborious tasks assumed or not declined by him, on
his return to private life; which, with his great age, did not permit
him to reduce his materials into a state proper to be embodied in such a
work.

The other volumes contain, I. Letters from 1775, to his death, addressed
to a very great variety of individuals; and comprising a range of
information, and, in many instances, regular essays, on subjects of
History, Politics, Science, Morals, and Religion. The letters to him
are omitted, except in a very few instances, where it was supposed their
publication would be generally acceptable, from the important character
of the communication, or the general interest in the views of the
writer; or where the whole or a part of a letter had been filed for the
better understanding of the answer.

In these cases, such letters are inserted in the body of the work, or
in an appendix, as their importance, and connection with the subject
discussed by the author, rendered advisable. And where inferences from
the tenor of the answer, might in any way affect the correspondent,
his name does not appear in the copy filed. The historical parts of the
letters, and the entire publication, have the rare value of coming
from one of the chief actors himself, and of being written, not for the
public eye, but in the freedom and confidence of private friendship.

II. Notes of conversations, whilst Secretary of State, with President
Washington, and others high in office; and memoranda of Cabinet
Councils, committed to paper on the spot, and filed; the whole, with
the explanatory and miscellaneous additions, showing the views and
tendencies of parties, from the year 1789 to 1800.

Appended to the publication, is a 'Facsimile' of the rough draught of
the Declaration of Independence, in which will be seen the erasures,
interlineations, and additions of Dr. Franklin and Mr. Adams, two of the
appointed Committee, in the handwriting of each.

The Editor, though he cannot be insensible to the genius, the learning,
the philosophic inspiration, the generous devotion to virtue, and the
love of country, displayed in the writings now committed to the press,
is restrained, not less by his incompetency, than by his relation to the
Author, from dwelling on themes which belong to an eloquence that can do
justice to the names of illustrious benefactors to their country and to
their fellow men.

Albemarle, Va., January, 1829.


[Illustration: Page One of Jefferson's Memoir, page001]




MEMOIR.

January 6, 1821. At the age of 77, I begin to make some memoranda, and
state some recollections of dates and facts concerning myself, for my
own more ready reference, and for the information of my family.

The tradition in my father's family was, that their ancestor came to
this country from Wales, and from near the mountain of Snowden, the
highest in Great Britain. I noted once a case from Wales, in the law
reports, where a person of our name was either plaintiff or defendant;
and one of the same name was secretary to the Virginia Company. These
are the only instances in which I have met with the name in that
country. I have found it in our early records; but the first particular
information I have of any ancestor was of my grandfather, who lived
at the place in Chesterfield called Ozborne's, and owned the lands
afterwards the glebe of the parish. He had three sons; Thomas who died
young, Field who settled on the waters of Roanoke and left numerous
descendants, and Peter, my father, who settled on the lands I still own,
called Shadwell, adjoining my present residence. He was born February
29, 1707-8, and intermarried 1739, with Jane Randolph, of the age of
19, daughter of Isham Randolph, one of the seven sons of that name and
family settled at Dungeoness in Goochland. They trace their pedigree far
back in England and Scotland, to which let every one ascribe the faith
and merit he chooses.

My father's education had been quite neglected; but being of a strong
mind, sound judgment, and eager after information, he read much
and improved himself, insomuch that he was chosen, with Joshua Fry,
professor of Mathematics in William and Mary college, to continue the
boundary line between Virginia and North Carolina, which had been begun
by Colonel Byrd; and was afterwards employed with the same Mr. Fry, to
make the first map of Virginia which had ever been made, that of Captain
Smith being merely a conjectural sketch. They possessed excellent
materials for so much of the country as is below the Blue Ridge; little
being then known beyond that Ridge. He was the third or fourth settler,
about the year 1737, of the part of the country in which I live. He died
August 17th, 1757, leaving my mother a widow, who lived till 1776, with
six daughters and two sons, myself the elder. To my younger brother
he left his estate on James river, called Snowden, after the supposed
birth-place of the family: to myself, the lands on which I was born and
live. He placed me at the English school at five years of age; and at
the Latin at nine, where I continued until his death. My teacher, Mr.
Douglas, a clergyman from Scotland, with the rudiments of the Latin and
Greek languages, taught me the French; and on the death of my father, I
went to the Reverend Mr. Maury, a correct classical scholar, with whom
I continued two years; and then, to wit, in the spring of 1760, went to
William and Mary college, where I continued two years. It was my great
good fortune, and what probably fixed the destinies of my life, that
Dr. William Small of Scotland was then professor of Mathematics, a man
profound in most of the useful branches of science, with a happy talent
of communication, correct and gentlemanly manners, and an enlarged and
liberal mind. He, most happily for me, became soon attached to me, and
made me his daily companion when not engaged in the school; and from his
conversation I got my first views of the expansion of science, and
of the system of things in which we are placed. Fortunately, the
philosophical chair became vacant soon after my arrival at college, and
he was appointed to fill it per interim: and he was the first who ever
gave, in that college, regular lectures in Ethics, Rhetoric, and Belles
lettres. He returned to Europe in 1762, having previously filled up
the measure of his goodness to me, by procuring for me, from his most
intimate friend George Wythe, a reception as a student of Law, under his
direction, and introduced me to the acquaintance and familiar table of
Govenor Fauquier, the ablest man who had ever filled that office.
With him, and at his table, Dr. Small and Mr. Wythe, his _amici omnium
horarum,_ and myself, formed a _partie quarrée,_ and to the habitual
conversations on these occasions I owed much instruction. Mr. Wythe
continued to be my faithful and beloved Mentor in youth, and my most
affectionate friend through life. In 1767, he led me into the practice
of the law at the bar of the General Court, at which I continued until
the Revolution shut up the courts of justice.*

     * For a sketch of the life and character of Mr. Wythe, see
     my letter of August 31, 1820, to Mr. John Saunderson. [See
     Appendix, note A.]

In 1769, I became a member of the legislature by the choice of the
county in which I live, and so continued until it was closed by the
Revolution. I made one effort in that body for the permission of the
emancipation of slaves, which was rejected: and indeed, during the
regal government, nothing liberal could expect success. Our minds were
circumscribed within narrow limits, by an habitual belief that it was
our duty to be subordinate to the mother country in all matters of
government, to direct all our labors in subservience to her interests,
and even to observe a bigoted intolerance for all religions but hers.
The difficulties with our representatives were of habit and despair,
not of reflection and conviction. Experience soon proved that they could
bring their minds to rights, on the first summons of their attention.
But the King's Council, which acted as another house of legislature,
held their places at will, and were in most humble obedience to that
will: the Governor too, who had a negative on our laws, held by the same
tenure, and with still greater devotedness to it: and, last of all, the
Royal negative closed the last door to every hope of melioration.

On the 1st of January, 1772, I was married to Martha Skelton, widow of
Bathurst Skelton, and daughter of John Wayles, then twenty-three
years old. Mr. Wayles was a lawyer of much practice, to which he
was introduced more by his great industry, punctuality and practical
readiness, than by eminence in the science of his profession. He was
a most agreeable companion, full of pleasantry and good humor, and
welcomed in every society. He acquired a handsome fortune, and died in
May, 1773, leaving three daughters: the portion which came on that
event to Mrs. Jefferson, after the debts should be paid, which were
very considerable, was about equal to my own patrimony, and consequently
doubled the ease of our circumstances.

When the famous Resolutions of 1765, against the Stamp-act, were
proposed, I was yet a student of law in Williamsburg. I attended the
debate, however, at the door of the lobby of the House of Burgesses, and
heard the splendid display of Mr. Henry's talents as a popular orator.
They were great indeed; such as I have never heard from any other man.
He appeared to me, to speak as Homer wrote. Mr. Johnson, a lawyer, and
member from the Northern Neck, seconded the resolutions, and by him the
learning and logic of the case were chiefly maintained. My recollections
of these transactions may be seen page 60 of the "Life of Patrick
Henry," by Wirt, to whom I furnished them.

In May, 1769, a meeting of the General Assembly was called by the
Governor, Lord Botetourt. I had then become a member; and to that
meeting became known the joint resolutions and address of the Lords
and Commons of 1768-9, on the proceedings in Massachusetts.
Counter-resolutions, and an address to the King by the House of
Burgesses, were agreed to with little opposition, and a spirit
manifestly displayed itself of considering the cause of Massachusetts as
a common one. The Governor dissolved us: but we met the next day in
the Apollo* of the Raleigh tavern, formed ourselves into a voluntary
convention, drew up articles of association against the use of any
merchandise imported from Great Britain, signed and recommended them
to the people, repaired to our several counties, and were re-elected
without any other exception than of the very few who had declined assent
to our proceedings.

     * The name of a public room in the Raleigh.

Nothing of particular excitement occurring for a considerable time,
our countrymen seemed to fall into a state of insensibility to our
situation; the duty on tea, not yet repealed, and the declaratory act of
a right in the British Parliament, to bind us by their laws in all cases
whatsoever, still suspended over us. But a court of inquiry held in
Rhode Island in 1762, with a power to send persons to England to be
tried for offences committed here, was considered, at our session of the
spring of 1773, as demanding attention. Not thinking our old and
leading members up to the point of forwardness and zeal which the times
required, Mr. Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Francis L. Lee, Mr. Carr, and
myself agreed to meet in the evening, in a private room of the Raleigh,
to consult on the state of things. There may have been a member or two
more whom I do not recollect. We were all sensible that the most urgent
of all measures was that of coming to an understanding with all the
other colonies, to consider the British claims as a common cause to all,
and to produce a unity of action: and for this purpose that a committee
of correspondence in each colony would be the best instrument for
intercommunication: and that their first measure would probably be, to
propose a meeting of deputies from every colony, at some central place,
who should be charged with the direction of the measures which should be
taken by all. We therefore drew up the resolutions which may be seen in
Wirt, page 87. The consulting members proposed to me to move them, but I
urged that it should be done by Mr. Carr, my friend and brother-in-law,
then a new member, to whom I wished an opportunity should be given of
making known to the house his great worth and talents. It was so agreed;
he moved them, they were agreed to _nem. con._ and a committee of
correspondence appointed, of whom Peyton Randolph, the speaker, was
chairman.

The Governor (then Lord Dunmore) dissolved us, but the committee met
the next day, prepared a circular letter to the speakers, of the other
colonies, inclosing to each a copy of the resolutions, and left it in
charge with their chairman to forward them by expresses.

The origination of these committees of correspondence between the
colonies, has been since claimed for Massachusetts, and Marshall * has
given in to this error, although the very note of his appendix to which
he refers, shows that their establishment was confined to their own
towns. This matter will be seen clearly stated in a letter of Samuel
Adams Wells to me of April 2nd, 1819, and my answer of May 12th. I was
corrected by the letter of Mr. Wells in the information I had given
Mr. Wirt, as stated in his note, page 87, that the messengers of
Massachusetts and Virginia crossed each other on the way, bearing
similar propositions; for Mr. Wells shows that Massachusetts did not
adopt the measure, but on the receipt of our proposition, delivered at
their next session. Their message, therefore, which passed ours, must
have related to something else, for I well remember Peyton Randolph's
informing me of the crossing of our messengers. **

     * Life of Washington, vol. ii. p. 151.
     ** See Appendix, note B.

The next event which excited our sympathies for Massachusetts, was the
Boston port bill, by which that port was to be shut up on the 1st of
June, 1774. This arrived while we were in session in the spring of that
year. The lead in the House, on these subjects, being no longer left to
the old members, Mr. Henry, R. H. Lee, Fr. L. Lee, three or four other
members, whom I do not recollect, and myself, agreeing that we must
boldly take an unequivocal stand in the line with Massachusetts,
determined to meet and consult on the proper measures, in the council
chamber, for the benefit of the library in that room. We were under
conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from the lethargy
into which they had fallen, as to passing events; and thought that the
appointment of a day of general fasting and prayer, would be most likely
to call up and alarm their attention. No example of such a solemnity had
existed since the days of our distress in the war of '55, since which
a new generation had grown up. With the help, therefore, of Rushworth,
whom we rummaged over for the revolutionary precedents and forms of
the Puritans of that day, preserved by him, we cooked up a resolution,
somewhat modernizing their phrases, for appointing the 1st day of
June, on which the port bill was to commence, for a day of fasting,
humiliation, and prayer, to implore Heaven to avert from us the evils of
civil war, to inspire us with firmness in support of our rights, and to
turn the hearts of the King and Parliament to moderation and justice.
To give greater emphasis to our proposition, we agreed to wait the next
morning on Mr. Nicholas, whose grave and religious character was more in
unison with the tone of our resolution, and to solicit him to move it.
We accordingly went to him in the morning. He moved it the same day; the
1st of June was proposed; and it passed without opposition. The Governor
dissolved us, as usual. We retired to the Apollo, as before, agreed
to an association, and instructed the committee of correspondence
to propose to the corresponding committees of the other colonies, to
appoint deputies to meet in Congress at such place, annually, as should
be convenient, to direct, from time to time, the measures required by
the general interest: and we declared that an attack on any one colony
should be considered as an attack on the whole. This was in May. We
further recommended to the several counties to elect deputies to meet
at Williamsburg, the 1st of August ensuing, to consider the state of
the colony, and particularly to appoint delegates to a general Congress,
should that measure be acceded to by the committees of correspondence
generally. It was acceded to; Philadelphia was appointed for the place,
and the 5th of September for the time of meeting. We returned home, and
in our several counties invited the clergy to meet assemblies of the
people on the 1st of June, to perform the ceremonies of the day, and
to address to them discourses suited to the occasion. The people met
generally, with anxiety and alarm in their countenances, and the effect
of the day, through the whole colony, was like a shock of electricity,
arousing every man and placing him erect and solidly on his centre. They
chose, universally, delegates for the convention. Being elected one for
my own county, I prepared a draught of instructions to be given to the
delegates whom we should send to the Congress, which I meant to propose
at our meeting. [See Appendix, note C.] In this I took the ground that,
from the beginning, I had thought the only one orthodox or tenable,
which was, that the relation between Great Britain and these colonies
was exactly the same as that of England and Scotland, after the
accession of James and until the union, and the same as her present
relations with Hanover, having the same executive chief, but no other
necessary political connection; and that our emigration from England to
this country gave her no more rights over us, than the emigrations
of the Danes and Saxons gave to the present authorities of the mother
country, over England. In this doctrine, however, I had never been able
to get any one to agree with me but Mr. Wythe. He concurred in it from
the first dawn of the question, What was the political relation between
us and England? Our other patriots, Randolph, the Lees, Nicholas,
Pendleton, stopped at the half-way house of John Dickinson, who admitted
that England had a right to regulate our commerce, and to lay duties on
it for the purposes of regulation, but not of raising revenue. But for
this ground there was no foundation in compact, in any acknowledged
principles of colonization, nor in reason: expatriation being a natural
right, and acted on as such, by all nations, in all ages. I set out for
Williamsburg some days before that appointed for the meeting, but taken
ill of a dysentery on the road, and was unable to proceed, I sent on,
therefore, to Williamsburg two copies of my draught, the one under cover
to Peyton Randolph, who I knew would be in the of the convention, the
other to Patrick Henry. Whether Mr. Henry disapproved the ground taken,
or was too lazy to read it (for he was the laziest man in reading I ever
knew) I never learned: but he communicated it to nobody. Peyton Randolph
informed the convention he had received such a paper from a member,
prevented by sickness from offering it in his place, and he laid it on
the table for perusal. It was read generally by the members, approved by
many, though thought too bold for the present state of things; but they
printed it in pamphlet form, under the title of 'A Summary View of the
Rights of British America.' It found its way to England, was taken up
by the opposition, interpolated a little by Mr. Burke so as to make it
answer opposition purposes, and in that form ran rapidly through several
editions. This information I had from Parson Hurt, who happened at the
time to be in London, whither he had gone to receive clerical orders;
and I was informed afterwards by Peyton Randolph, that it had procured
me the honor of having my name inserted in a long list of proscriptions,
enrolled in a bill of attainder commenced in one of the Houses of
Parliament, but suppressed in embryo by the hasty step of events, which
warned them to be a little cautious. Montague, agent of the House of
Burgesses in England, made extracts from the bill, copied the names, and
sent them to Peyton Randolph. The names I think were about twenty,
which he repeated to me, but I recollect those only of Hancock, the
two Adamses, Peyton Randolph himself, Patrick Henry, and myself.*
The convention met on the 1st of August, renewed their association,
appointed delegates to the Congress, gave them instructions very
temperately and properly expressed, both as to style and matter; **
and they repaired to Philadelphia at the time appointed. The splendid
proceedings of that Congress, at their first session, belong to general
history, are known to every one, and need not therefore be noted here.
They terminated their session on the 26th of October, to meet again on
the 10th of May ensuing. The convention, at their ensuing session
of March '75, approved of the proceedings of Congress, thanked their
delegates, and reappointed the same persons to represent the colony
at the meeting to be held in May: and foreseeing the probability that
Peyton Randolph, their president, and speaker also of the House of
Burgesses, might be called off, they added me, in that event, to the
delegation.

     * See Girardin's History of Virginia, Appendix No. 12. note.
     ** See Appendix, note D.

Mr. Randolph was according to expectation obliged the chair of Congress,
to attend the General Assembly summoned by Lord Dunmore, to meet on the
1st day of June,1775. Lord North's conciliatory propositions, as they
were called received by the Governor, and furnished the subject for
which this assembly was convened. Mr. Randolph accordingly attended, and
the tenor of these propositions being generally known, as having been
addressed to all the governors, he was anxious that the answer of our
Assembly, likely to be the first, should harmonise with what he knew to
be the sentiments and wishes of the body he had recently left. He feared
that Mr. Nicholas, whose mind was not yet up to the mark of the times,
would undertake the answer, and therefore pressed me to prepare it. I
did so, and, with his aid, carried it through the House, with long and
doubtful scruples from Mr. Nicholas and James Mercer, and a dash of cold
water on it here and there, enfeebling it somewhat, but finally with
unanimity, or a vote approaching it. This being passed, I repaired
immediately to Philadelphia, and conveyed to Congress the first notice
they had of it. It was entirely approved there. I took my seat with them
on the 21st of June. On the 24th, a committee which had been appointed
to prepare a declaration of the causes of taking up arms, brought in
their report (drawn, I believe, by J. Rutledge) which, not being liked,
the House recommitted it, on the 26th, and added Mr. Dickinson and
myself to the committee. On the rising of the House, the committee
having not yet met, I happened to find myself near Governor W.
Livingston, and proposed to him to draw the paper. He excused himself
and proposed that I should draw it. On my pressing him with urgency, 'We
are as yet but new acquaintances, sir,' said he, 'why are you so earnest
for my doing it?' 'Because,' said I, 'I have been informed that you drew
the Address to the people of Great Britain, a production, certainly, of
the finest pen in America.' 'On that,' says he, 'perhaps, sir, you may
not have been correctly informed.' I had received the information in
Virginia from Colonel Harrison on his return from that Congress. Lee,
Livingston, and Jay had been the committee for the draught. The first,
prepared by Lee, had been disapproved and recommitted. The second
was drawn by Jay, but being presented by Governor Livingston, had led
Colonel Harrison into the error. The next morning, walking in the hall
of Congress, many members being assembled, but the House formed, I
observed Mr. Jay speaking to R. H. Lee, and leading him by the button of
his coat to me. 'I understand, sir,' said he to me, 'that this gentleman
informed you, that Governor Livingston drew the Address to the people
of Great Britain.' I assured him at once that I had not received that
information from Mr. Lee and that not a word had ever passed on the
subject between Mr. Lee and myself; and after some explanations the
subject was dropped. These gentlemen had had some sparrings in debate
before, and continued ever very hostile to each other.

I prepared a draught of the declaration committed to us. It was too
strong for Mr. Dickinson. He still retained the hope of reconciliation
with the mother country, and was unwilling it should be lessened by
offensive statements. He was so honest a man, and so able a one, that he
was greatly indulged even by those who could not feel his scruples. We
therefore requested him to take the paper, and put it into a form
he could approve. He did so, preparing an entire new statement, and
preserving of the former only the last four paragraphs and half of the
preceding one. We approved and reported it to Congress, who accepted it.
Congress gave a signal proof of their indulgence to Mr. Dickinson, and
of their great desire not to go too fast for any respectable part of
our body, in permitting him to draw their second petition to the King
according to his own ideas, and passing it with scarcely any amendment.
The disgust against its humility was general; and Mr. Dickinson's
delight at its passage was the only circumstance which reconciled them
to it. The vote being passed, although further observation on it was
out of order, he could not refrain from rising and expressing his
satisfaction, and concluded by saying, 'There is but one word, Mr.
President, in the paper which I disapprove, and that is the word
Congress;' on which Ben Harrison rose and said, 'There is but one word
in the paper, Mr. President, of which I approve, and that is the word
Congress?'

On the 22nd of July, Dr. Franklin, Mr. Adams, R. H. Lee, and myself
were appointed a committee to consider and report on Lord North's
conciliatory resolution. The answer of the Virginia Assembly on that
subject having been approved, I was requested by the committee to
prepare this report, which will account for the similarity of feature in
the two instruments.

On the 15th of May, 1776, the convention of Virginia instructed their
delegates in Congress, to propose to that body to declare the colonies
independent of Great Britain, and appointed a committee to prepare a
declaration of rights and plan of government.

     Here, in the original manuscript, commence the 'two
     preceding sheets' referred to by Mr. Jefferson, page 21, as
     containing 'notes' taken by him 'whilst these things were
     going on.' They are easily distinguished from the body of
     the MS. in which they were inserted by him, being of a paper
     very different in size, quality, and color, from that on
     which the latter is written:

In Congress, Friday, June 7, 1776. The delegates from Virginia moved,
in obedience to instructions from their constituents, that the Congress
should declare that these United Colonies and of right ought to be, free
and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to
the British crown, and that all political connection between them and
the state of Great Britain is and ought to be, totally dissolved; that
measures should be immediately taken for procuring the assistance of
foreign powers and a confederation be formed to bind the colonial more
closely together.

The House being obliged to attend at that time to some other business,
the proposition was referred to the next day, when the members were
ordered to attend punctually at ten o'clock.

Saturday, June 8. They proceeded to take it into consideration, and
referred it to a committee of the whole, into which they immediately
resolved themselves, and passed that day and Monday the 10th in debating
on the subject.

It was argued by Wilson, Robert R. Livingston, E. Rutledge, Dickinson,
and others--

That, though they were friends to the measures themselves, and saw the
impossibility that we should ever again be united with Great Britain,
yet they were against adopting them at this time:

That the conduct we had formerly observed was wise and proper now, of
deferring to take any capital step till the voice of the people drove us
into it:

That they were our power, and without them our declarations could not be
carried into effect:

That the people of the middle colonies (Maryland, Delaware,
Pennsylvania, the Jerseys, and New York) were not yet ripe for bidding
adieu to British connection, but that they were fast ripening, and, in a
short time, would join in the general voice of America:

That the resolution, entered into by this House on the 15th of May,
for suppressing the exercise of all powers derived from the crown, had
shown, by the ferment into which it had thrown these middle colonies,
that they had not yet accommodated their minds to a separation from the
mother country:

That some of them had expressly forbidden their delegates to consent
to such a declaration, and others had given no instructions, and
consequently no powers to give such consent:

That if the delegates of any particular colony had no power to declare
such colony independent, certain they were, the others could not declare
it for them; the colonies being as yet perfectly independent of each
other:

That the assembly of Pennsylvania was now sitting above stairs, their
convention would sit within a few days, the convention of New York was
now sitting, and those of the Jerseys and Delaware counties would meet
on the Monday following, and it was probable these bodies would take up
the question of Independence, and would declare to their delegates the
voice of their state:

That if such a declaration should now be agreed to, these delegates must
retire, and possibly their colonies might secede from the Union:

That such a secession would weaken us more than could be compensated by
any foreign alliance:

That in the event of such a division, foreign powers would either refuse
to join themselves to our fortunes, or, having us so much in their power
as that desperate declaration would place us, they would insist on terms
proportionably more hard and prejudicial:

That we had little reason to expect an alliance with those to whom
alone, as yet, we had cast our eyes:

That France and Spain had reason to be jealous of that rising power,
which would one day certainly strip them of all their American
possessions:

That it was more likely they should form a connection with the British
Court, who, if they should find themselves unable otherwise to extricate
themselves from their difficulties, would agree to a partition of our
territories, restoring Canada to France, and the Floridas to Spain, to
accomplish for themselves a recovery of these colonies:

That it would not be long before we should receive certain information
of the disposition of the French court, from the agent whom we had sent
to Paris for that purpose:

That if this disposition should be favorable, by waiting the event of
the present campaign, which we all hoped would be successful, we should
have reason to expect an alliance on better terms:

That this would in fact work no delay of any effectual aid from such
ally, as, from the advance of the season and distance of our situation,
it was impossible we could receive any assistance during this campaign:

That it was prudent to fix among ourselves the terms on which we would
form alliance, before we declared we would form one at all events:

And that if these were agreed on, and our Declaration of Independence
ready by the time our Ambassador should be prepared to sail, it would be
as well, as to go into that Declaration at this day.

On the other side, it was urged by J. Adams, Lee, Wythe and others, that
no gentleman had argued against the policy or the right of separation
from Britain, nor had supposed it possible we should ever renew our
connection; that they had only opposed its being now declared:

That the question was not whether, by a Declaration of Independence, we
should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a
fact which already exists:

That, as to the people or parliament of England, we had always been
independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy
from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of
imposing them, and that so far, our connection had been federal only,
and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:

That, as to the King, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that
this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of parliament,
by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on
us, a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection; it
being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are
reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:

That James the II. never declared the people of England out of his
protection, yet his actions proved it and the parliament declared it:

No delegates then can be denied, or ever want, a power of declaring an
existent truth:

That the delegates from the Delaware counties having declared their
constituents ready to join, there are only two colonies, Pennsylvania
and Maryland, whose delegates are absolutely tied up, and that these
had, by their instructions, only reserved a right of confirming or
rejecting the measure:

That the instructions from Pennsylvania might be accounted for from the
times in which they were drawn, near a twelvemonth ago, since which the
face of affairs has totally changed:

That within that time, it had become apparent that Britain was
determined to accept nothing less than a _carte-blanche,_ and that the
King's answer to the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of London,
which had come to hand four days ago, must have satisfied every one of
this point:

That the people wait for us to lead the way:

That they are in favor of the measure, though the instructions given by
some of their representatives are not:

That the voice of the representatives is not always consonant with
the voice of the people, and that this is remarkably the case in these
middle colonies:

That the effect of the resolution of the 15th of May has proved this,
which, raising the murmurs of some in the colonies of Pennsylvania
and Maryland, called forth the opposing voice of the freer part of the
people, and proved them to be the majority even in these colonies:

That the backwardness of these two colonies might be ascribed, partly to
the influence of proprietary power and connections, and partly, to their
having not yet been attacked by the enemy:

That these causes were not likely to be soon removed, as there seemed no
probability that the enemy would make either of these the seat of this
summer's war:

That it would be vain to wait either weeks or months for perfect
unanimity, since it was impossible that all men should ever become of
one sentiment on any question:

That the conduct of some colonies, from the beginning of this contest,
had given reason to suspect it was their settled policy to keep in the
rear of the confederacy, that their particular prospect might be better,
even in the worst event:

That, therefore, it was necessary for those colonies who had thrown
themselves forward and hazarded all from the beginning, to come forward
now also, and put all again to their own hazard:

That the history of the Dutch revolution, of whom three states only
confederated at first, proved that a secession of some colonies would
not be so dangerous as some apprehended:

That a declaration of Independence alone could render it consistent
with European delicacy, for European powers to treat with us, or even to
receive an Ambassador from us:

That till this, they would not receive our vessels into their ports,
nor acknowledge the adjudications of our courts of admiralty to be
legitimate, in cases of capture of British vessels:

That though France and Spain may be jealous of our rising power, they
must think it will be much more formidable with the addition of
Great Britain; and will therefore see it their interest to prevent a
coalition; but should they refuse, we shall be but where we are; whereas
without trying, we shall never know whether they will aid us or not:

That the present campaign may be unsuccessful, and therefore we had
better propose an alliance while our affairs wear a hopeful aspect:

That to wait the event of this campaign will certainly work delay,
because, during this summer, France may assist us effectually, by
cutting off those supplies of provisions from England and Ireland, on
which the enemy's armies here are to depend; or by setting in motion
the great power they have collected in the West Indies, and calling our
enemy to the defence of the possessions they have there:

That it would be idle to lose time in settling the terms of alliance,
till we had first determined we would enter into alliance:

That it is necessary to lose no time in opening a trade for our people,
who will want clothes, and will want money too, for the payment of
taxes:

And that the only misfortune is, that we did not enter into alliance
with France six months sooner, as, besides opening her ports for the
vent of our last year's produce, she might have marched an army into
Germany, and prevented the petty princes there, from selling their
unhappy subjects to subdue us.


It appearing in the course of these debates, that the colonies of New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and South Carolina
were not yet matured for falling from the parent stem, but that they
were fast advancing to that state, it was thought most prudent to wait
awhile for them, and to postpone the final decision to July 1st: but,
that this might occasion as little delay as possible, a committee was
appointed to prepare a Declaration of Independence. The committee were
John Adams, Dr. Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert R. Livingston, and
myself. Committees were also appointed, at the same time, to prepare a
plan of confederation for the colonies, and to state the terms proper
to be proposed for foreign alliance. The committee for drawing the
Declaration of Independence, desired me to do it. It was accordingly
done, and being approved by them, I reported it to the House on Friday,
the 28th of June, when it was read and ordered to lie on the table. On
Monday, the 1st of July, the House resolved itself into a committee of
the whole, and resumed the consideration of the original motion made by
the delegates of Virginia, which, being again debated through the
day, was carried in the affirmative by the votes of New Hampshire,
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland,
Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia. South Carolina and Pennsylvania
voted against it. Delaware had but two members present, and they
were divided. The delegates from New York declared they were for it
themselves, and were assured their constituents were for it; but that
their instructions having been drawn near a twelvemonth before, when
reconciliation was still the general object, they were enjoined by them
to do nothing which should impede that object. They therefore thought
themselves not justifiable in voting on either side, and asked leave to
withdraw from the question; which was given them. The committee rose and
reported their resolution to the House. Mr. Edward Rutledge, of South
Carolina, then requested the determination might be put off to the
next day, as he believed his colleagues, though they disapproved of
the resolution, would then join in it for the sake of unanimity. The
ultimate question, whether the House would agree to the resolution of
the committee, was accordingly postponed to the next day, when it was
again moved, and South Carolina concurred in voting for it. In the
mean time, a third member had come post from the Delaware counties, and
turned the vote of that colony in favor of the resolution. Members of a
different sentiment attending that morning from Pennsylvania also, her
vote was changed, so that the whole twelve colonies, who were authorized
to vote at all, gave their voices for it; and, within a few days, [July
9.] the convention of New York approved of it, and thus supplied the
void occasioned by the withdrawing of her delegates from the vote.

Congress proceeded the same day to consider the Declaration of
Independence, which had been reported and laid on the table the Friday
preceding, and on Monday referred to a committee of the whole. The
pusillanimous idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms
with, still haunted the minds of many. For this reason, those passages
which conveyed censures on the people of England were struck out, lest
they should give them offence. The clause too, reprobating the enslaving
the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South
Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the
importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to
continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe, felt a little
tender under those censures; for though their people had very few slaves
themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to
others. The debates having taken up the greater parts of the 2nd, 3rd,
and 4th days of July, were, on the evening of the last, closed; the
Declaration was reported by the committee, agreed to by the House, and
signed by every member present, except Mr. Dickinson. As the sentiments
of men are known, not only by what they receive, but what they reject
also, I will state the form of the Declaration as originally reported.
The parts struck out by Congress shall be distinguished by a black line
drawn under them; * and those inserted by them shall be placed in the
margin, or in a concurrent column.


[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page016]

[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page017]

[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page018]

[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page019]

[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page020]

[Illustration: Draft of Declaration of Independence, page021]


     * In this publication, the parts struck out are printed in
     Italics and inclosed in brackets--and those inserted are
     inclosed in parenthesis.


A DECLARATION BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN
_GENERAL_ CONGRESS ASSEMBLED.

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,
and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal
station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them,
a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should
declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal;
that they are endowed by their creator with [_inherent and_] (certain)
inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends,
it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute
new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing
its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect
their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that
governments long established should not be changed for light and
transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind
are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right
themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But
when a long train of abuses and usurpations [_begun at a distinguished
period and_] pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to
reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their
duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their
future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies;
and such is now the necessity which constrains them to [_expunge_]
(alter) their former systems of government. The history of the present
king of Great Britain is a history of [_unremitting_] (repeated)
injuries and usurpations, [_among which appears no solitary act to
contradict the uniform tenor of the rest, but all have_] (all having)
in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these
states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world [_for
the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood._]

He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for
the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing
importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should
be obtained; and, when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend
to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large
districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right
of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them, and
formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual,
uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records,
for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his
measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly [_and continually_]
for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the
people.

He has refused for a long time after such dissolutions to cause
others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of
annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise,
the state remaining, in the mean time, exposed to all the dangers of
invasion from without and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that
purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners, refusing
to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the
conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has [_suffered_] (obstructed) the administration of justice [_totally
to cease in some of these states_] (by) refusing his assent to laws for
establishing judiciary powers.

He has made [_our_] judges dependant on his will alone for the tenure of
their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, [_by a self-assumed power_]
and sent hither swarms of new officers to harass our people and eat out
their substance.

He has kept among us in times of peace standing armies [_and ships of
war_] without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the military independent of, and superior to,
the civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to
our constitutions and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to
their acts of pretended legislation for quartering large bodies of armed
troops among us; for protecting them by a mock trial from punishment for
any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states;
for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world; for imposing
taxes on us without our consent; for depriving us [ ] in many cases of
the benefits of trial by jury; for transporting us beyond seas to be
tried for pretended offences; for abolishing the free system of English
laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary
government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an
example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into
these [_states_] (colonies); for taking away our charters, abolishing
our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of
our governments; for suspending our own legislatures, and declaring
themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases
whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here [_withdrawing his governors, and
declaring us out of his allegiance and protection._] (by declaring us
out of his protection and waging war against us.)

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and
destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to
complete the works of death, desolation, and tyranny already begun with
circumstances of cruelty and perfidy [ ] (scarcely paralleled in the
most barbarous ages and totally) unworthy the head of a civilized
nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas
to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their
friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has [ ] (excited domestic insurrections amoungst us and has)
endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless
Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished
destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions [_of existence._]

[_He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens, with
the allurements of forfeiture and confiscation of our property.

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most
sacred rights of life and, liberty in the persons of a distant people
who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in
another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation
thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of INFIDEL powers, is
the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. Determined to keep
open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted
his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or
to restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors
might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very
people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which
he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he also obtruded
them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of
one people with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives
of another._]

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in
the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by
repeated injuries.

A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a
tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a [ ] (free) people [_who mean to be
free. Future ages will scarcely believe that the hardiness of one man
adventured, within the short compass of twelve years only, to lay
a foundation so broad and so undisguised for tyranny over a people
fostered and fixed in principles of freedom._]

Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have
warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend
[_a_] (an unwarrantable) jurisdiction over [_these our states_] (us). We
have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement
here, [_no one of which could warrant so strange a pretension: that
these were effected at the expense of our own blood and treasure,
unassisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain: that in
constituting indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted one
common king, thereby laying a foundation for perpetual league and amity
with them: but that submission to their parliament was no part of our
constitution, nor ever in idea, if history may be credited: and,_] we [
] (have) appealed to their native justice and magnanimity [_as well as
to_] (and we have conjured them by) the ties of our common kindred to
disavow these usurpations which [_were likely to_] (would inevitably)
interrupt our connection and correspondence. They too have been deaf
to the voice of justice and of consanguinity, [_and when occasions have
been given them, by the regular course of their laws, of removing from
their councils the disturbers of our harmony, they have, by their free
election, re-established, them in power. At this very time too, they are
permitting their chief magistrate to send over not only soldiers of our
common blood, but Scotch and foreign mercenaries to invade and destroy
us. These facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection, and
manly spirit bids us to renounce for ever these unfeeling brethren. We
must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and hold them as we
hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. We might
have been a free and a great people together; but a communication of
grandeur and of freedom, it seems, is below their dignity. Be it so,
since they will have it. The road to happiness and to glory is open
to us too. We will tread it apart from them, and_] (We must therefore)
acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our [eternal] separation [ ]!
(and hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace
friends.)

[_We therefore the representatives of the United States of America in
General Congress assembled, do in the name, and by the authority of
the good people of these states reject and renounce all allegiance
and subjection to the kings of Great Britain and all others who may
hereafter claim by, through, or under them; we utterly dissolve all
political connection which may heretofore have subsisted between us and,
the people or parliament of Great Britain: and finally we do assert and
declare these colonies to be free and independent states, and that as
free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude
peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts
and things which independent states may of right do.

And for the support of this declaration, we mutually pledge to each
other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor._]

(We therefore the representatives of the United States of America in
General Congress assembled, appealing to the supreme judge of the
world for the rectitude of our intentions, do in the name, and by the
authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and
declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free
and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to
the British crown, and that all political connection between them and
the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and
that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war,
conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all
other acts and things which independent states may of right do.

And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the
protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our
lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.)


The declaration thus signed on the 4th, on paper, was engrossed on
parchment, and signed again on the 2nd of August.

[* Some erroneous statements of the proceedings on the Declaration of
Independence having got before the public in latter times, Mr. Samuel A.
Wells asked explanations of me, which are given in my letter to him of
May 12, '19, before and now again referred to. (See Appendix, note B.)
I took notes in my place while these things were going on, and at their
close wrote them out in form and with correctness, and from 1 to 7 of
the two preceding sheets, are the originals then written; as the two
following are of the earlier debates on the Confederation, which I took
in like manner.]

     * The above note of the author is on a slip of paper, pasted
     in at the end of the Declaration. Here is also sewed into
     the MS. a slip of newspaper containing, under the head
     'Declaration of Independence,' a letter from Thomas Mc'Kean
     to Messrs. William M'Corkle & Son, dated 'Philadelphia,
     June 16 1817.' This letter is to be found in the Port Folio,
     Sept. 1817, p. 249.



[Illustration: Facsimile of Declaration in Jefferson's Handwriting--p1]

[Illustration: Facsimile of Declaration in Jefferson's Handwriting--p2]

[Illustration: Facsimile of Declaration in Jefferson's Handwriting--p3]

[Illustration: Facsimile of Declaration in Jefferson's Handwriting--p4]


On Friday, July 12, the committee appointed to draw the articles
of Confederation reported them, and on the 22nd, the House resolved
themselves into a committee to take them into consideration. On the
30th and 31st of that month, and 1st of the ensuing, those articles were
debated which determined the proportion, or quota, of money which each
state should furnish to the common treasury, and the manner of voting
in Congress. The first of these articles was expressed in the original
draught in these words. 'Art. XI. All charges of war and all other
expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence, or general
welfare, and allowed by the United States assembled, shall be defrayed
out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several
colonies in proportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex,
and quality, except Indians not paying taxes, in each colony, a true
account-of which, distinguishing the white inhabitants, shall be
triennially taken and transmitted to the Assembly of the United States.'

Mr. Chase moved that the quotas should be fixed, not by the number of
inhabitants of every condition, but by that of the 'white inhabitants.'
He admitted that taxation should be always in proportion to property;
that this was, in theory, the true rule; but that, from a variety of
difficulties, it was a rule which could never be adopted in practice.
The value of the property in every state, could never be estimated
justly and equally. Some other measures for the wealth of the state must
therefore be devised, some standard referred to, which would be more
simple. He considered the number of inhabitants as a tolerably good
criterion of property, and that this might always be obtained. He
therefore thought it the best mode which we could adopt, with one
exception only: he observed that negroes are property, and as such,
cannot be distinguished from the lands or personalities held in those
states where there are few slaves; that the surplus of profit which a
Northern farmer is able to lay by, he invests in cattle, horses, &c.
whereas a Southern farmer lays out the same surplus in slaves. There is
no more reason therefore for taxing the Southern states on the farmer's
head, and on his slave's head, than the Northern ones on their farmers'
heads and the heads of their cattle: that the method proposed would,
therefore, tax the Southern states according to their numbers and their
wealth conjunctly, while the Northern would be taxed on numbers only;
that negroes, in fact, should not be considered as members of the state,
more than cattle, and that they have no more interest in it.

Mr. John Adams observed, that the numbers of people were taken by this
article, as an index of the wealth of the state, and not as subjects of
taxation; that, as to this matter, it was of no consequence by what name
you called your people, whether by that of freemen or of slaves; that
in some countries the laboring poor were called freemen, in others
they were called slaves; but that the difference as to the state
was imaginary only. What matters it whether a landlord employing ten
laborers on his farm, give them annually as much money as will buy them
the necessaries of life, or gives them those necessaries at short hand?
The ten laborers add as much wealth annually to the state, increase its
exports as much, in the one case as the other. Certainly five hundred
freemen produce no more profits, no greater surplus for the payment of
taxes, than five hundred slaves. Therefore the state in which are the
laborers called freemen, should be taxed no more than that in which are
those called slaves. Suppose, by an extraordinary operation of nature
or of law, one half the laborers of a state could in the course of one
night be transformed into slaves; would the state be made the poorer or
the less able to pay taxes? That the condition of the laboring poor
in most countries, that of the fishermen particularly of the Northern
states, is as abject as that of slaves. It is the number of laborers
which produces the surplus for taxation, and numbers, therefore,
indiscriminately, are the fair index of wealth; that it is the use of
the word 'property' here, and its application to some of the people
of the state, which produces the fallacy. How does the Southern farmer
procure slaves? Either by importation or by purchase from his neighbor.
If he imports a slave, he adds one to the number of laborers in his
country, and proportionably to its profits and abilities to pay-taxes;
if he buys from his neighbor, it is only a transfer of a laborer from
one farm to another, which does not change the annual produce of the
state, and therefore should not change its tax: that if a Northern
farmer works ten laborers on his farm, he can, it is true, invest the
surplus of ten men's labor in cattle; but so may the Southern farmer,
working ten slaves; that a state of one hundred thousand freemen can
maintain no more cattle, than one of one hundred thousand slaves.
Therefore, they have no more of that kind of property; that a slave may,
indeed, from the custom of speech, be more properly called the wealth
of his master, than the free laborer might be called the wealth of his
employer: but as to the state, both were equally its wealth, and should
therefore equally add to the quota of its tax.

Mr. Harrison proposed, as a compromise, that two slaves should be
counted as one freeman. He affirmed that slaves did not do as much work
as freemen, and doubted if two effected more than one; that this was
proved by the price of labor; the hire of a laborer in the Southern
colonies being from £8 to £12, while in the Northern it was generally
£24.

Mr. Wilson said, that if this amendment should take place, the Southern
colonies would have all the benefit of slaves, whilst the Northern ones
would bear the burthen: that slaves increase the profits of a state,
which the Southern states mean to take to themselves; that they also
increase the burthen of defence, which would of course fall so much the
heavier on the Northern: that slaves occupy the places of freemen and
eat their food. Dismiss your slaves, and freemen will take their places.
It is our duty to lay every discouragement on the importation of slaves;
but this amendment would give the _jus trium liberorum_ to him who
would import slaves: that other kinds of property were pretty equally
distributed through all the colonies: there were as many cattle, horses,
and sheep, in the North as the South, and South as the North; but not so
as to slaves: that experience has shown that those colonies have, been
always able to pay most, which have the most inhabitants, whether they
be black or white: and the practice of the Southern colonies has always
been to make every farmer pay poll taxes upon all his laborers, whether
they be black or white. He acknowledges indeed, that freemen work the
most; but they consume the most also. They do not produce a greater
surplus for taxation. The slave is neither fed nor clothed so
expensively as a freeman. Again, white women are exempted from labor
generally, but negro women are not. In this then the Southern states
have an advantage as the article now stands. It has sometimes been said
that slavery is necessary, because the commodities they raise would be
too dear for market if cultivated by freemen: but now it is said that
the labor of the slave is the dearest.

Mr. Payne urged the original resolution of Congress, to proportion the
quotas of the states to the number of souls.

Dr. Witherspoon was of opinion, that the value of lands and houses was
the best estimate of the wealth of a nation, and that it was practicable
to obtain such a valuation. This is the true barometer of wealth. The
one now proposed is imperfect in itself, and unequal between the states.
It has been objected that negroes eat the food of freemen, and therefore
should be taxed; horses also eat the food of freemen; therefore they
also should be taxed. It has been said too, that in carrying slaves into
the estimate of the taxes the state is to pay, we do no more than those
states themselves do, who always take slaves into the estimate of the
taxes the individual is to pay. But the cases are not parallel. In
the Southern colonies slaves pervade the whole colony; but they do
not pervade the whole continent. That as to the original resolution
of Congress, to proportion the quotas according to the souls, it was
temporary only, and related to the monies heretofore emitted; whereas
we are now entering into a new compact, and therefore stand on original
ground.

August 1. The question being put, the amendment proposed was rejected
by the votes of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, against those of Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina. Georgia was divided.

The other article was in these words. 'Art. XVII. In determining
questions, each colony shall have one vote.'

July 30, 31, August 1. Present forty-one members. Mr. Chase observed
that this article was the most likely to divide us, of any one proposed
in the draught then under consideration: that the larger colonies
had threatened they would not confederate at all, if their weight in
Congress should not be equal to the numbers of people they added to the
confederacy; while the smaller ones declared against a union, if they
did not retain an equal vote for the protection of their rights. That it
was of the utmost consequence to bring the parties together, as, should
we sever from each other, either no foreign power will ally with us at
all, or the different states will form different alliances, and thus
increase the horrors of those scenes of civil war and bloodshed, which
in such a state of separation and independence, would render us a
miserable people. That our importance, our interests, our peace required
that we should confederate, and that mutual sacrifices should be made to
effect a compromise of this difficult question. He was of opinion,
the smaller colonies would lose their rights, if they were not in some
instances allowed an equal vote; and, therefore, that a discrimination
should take place among the questions which would come before Congress.
That the smaller states should be secured in all questions concerning
life or liberty, and the greater ones, in all respecting property. He
therefore proposed, that in votes relating to money, the voice of each
colony should be proportioned to the number of its inhabitants.

Dr. Franklin thought, that the votes should be so proportioned in all
cases. He took notice that the Delaware counties had bound up
their delegates to disagree to this article. He thought it a very
extraordinary language to be held by any state, that they would not
confederate with us, unless we would let them dispose of our money.
Certainly, if we vote equally, we ought to pay equally; but the smaller
states will hardly purchase the privilege at this price. That had he
lived in a state where the representation, originally equal, had become
unequal by time and accident, he might have submitted rather than
disturb government: but that we should be very wrong to set out in this
practice, when it is in our power to establish what is right. That at
the time of the Union between England and Scotland, the latter had made
the objection which the smaller states now do; but experience had proved
that no unfairness had ever been shown them: that their advocates had
prognosticated that it would again happen, as in times of old, that the
whale would swallow Jonas, but he thought the prediction reversed in
event, and that Jonas had swallowed the whale; for the Scotch had in
fact got possession of the government, and gave laws to the English. He
reprobated the original agreement of Congress to vote by colonies, and,
therefore, was for their voting, in all cases, according to the number
of taxables.

Dr. Witherspoon opposed every alteration of the article. All men admit
that a confederacy is necessary. Should the idea get abroad that there
is likely to be no union among us, it will damp the minds of the people,
diminish the glory of our struggle, and lessen its importance; because
it will open to our view future prospects of war and dissension among
ourselves. If an equal vote be refused, the smaller states will become
vassals to the larger; and all experience has shown that the vassals and
subjects of free states are the most enslaved. He instanced the Helots
of Sparta, and the provinces of Rome. He observed that foreign powers,
discovering this blemish, would make it a handle for disengaging the
smaller states from so unequal a confederacy. That the colonies
should in fact be considered as individuals; and that, as such, in all
disputes, they should have an equal vote; that they are now collected
as individuals making a bargain with each other, and, of course, had a
right to vote as individuals. That in the East India Company they
voted by persons, and not by their proportion of stock. That the Belgic
confederacy voted by provinces. That in questions of war the smaller
states were as much interested as the larger, and therefore, should vote
equally; and indeed, that the larger states were more likely to bring
war on the confederacy, in proportion as their frontier was more
extensive. He admitted that equality of representation was an excellent
principle, but then it must be of things which are co-ordinate; that
is of things similar, and of the same nature: that nothing relating
to individuals could ever come before Congress; nothing but what would
respect colonies. He distinguished between an incorporating and a
federal union. The union of England was an incorporating one; yet
Scotland had suffered by that union; for that its inhabitants were drawn
from it by the hopes of places and employments; nor was it an instance
of equality of representation; because, while Scotland was allowed
nearly a thirteenth of representation, they were to pay only one
fortieth of the land tax. He expressed his hopes, that in the present
enlightened state of men's minds, we might expect a lasting confederacy,
if it was founded on fair principles.

John Adams advocated the voting in proportion to numbers. He said, that
we stand here as the representatives of the people; that in some states
the people are many, in others they are few; that therefore their vote
here should be proportioned to the numbers from whom it comes. Reason,
justice, and equity never had weight enough on the face of the earth, to
govern the councils of men. It is interest alone which does it, and it
is interest alone which can be trusted; that therefore the interests,
within doors, should be the mathematical representatives of the
interests without doors; that the individuality of the colonies is a
mere sound. Does the individuality of a colony increase its wealth or
numbers? If it does, pay equally. If it does not add weight in the
scale of the confederacy, it cannot add to their rights, nor weigh in
argument. A. has £50, B. £500, C. £1000, in partnership. Is it just they
should equally dispose of the monies of the partnership? It has been
said, we are independent individuals, making a bargain together. The
question is not, what we are now, but what we ought to be, when our
bargain shall be made. The confederacy is to make us one individual
only; it is to form us, like separate parcels of metal, into one common
mass. We shall no longer retain our separate individuality, but become
a single individual as to all questions submitted to the confederacy.
Therefore all those reasons, which prove the justice and expediency of
equal representation in other assemblies, hold good here. It has been
objected, that a proportional vote will endanger the smaller states.
We answer, that an equal vote will endanger the larger. Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, are the three greater colonies.
Consider their distance, their difference of produce, of interests,
and of manners, and it is apparent they can never have an interest
or inclination to combine for the oppression of the smaller; that the
smaller will naturally divide on all questions with the larger. Rhode
Island, from its relation, similarity, and intercourse, will generally
pursue the same objects with Massachusetts; Jersey, Delaware, and
Maryland, with Pennsylvania.

Dr. Rush took notice, that the decay of the liberties of the Dutch
republic proceeded from three causes. 1. The perfect unanimity requisite
on all occasions. 2. Their obligation to consult their constituents.
3. Their voting by provinces. This last destroyed the equality of
representation, and the liberties of Great Britain also are sinking from
the same defect. That a part of our rights is deposited in the hands of
our legislatures. There, it was admitted, there should be an equality of
representation. Another part of our rights is deposited in the hands
of Congress; why is it not equally necessary, there should be an equal
representation there? Were it possible to collect the whole body of the
people together, they would determine the questions submitted to them
by their majority. Why should not the same majority decide, when
voting here, by their representatives? The larger colonies are so
providentially divided in situation, as to render every fear of
their combining visionary. Their interests are different, and their
circumstances dissimilar. It is more probable they will become rivals,
and leave it in the power of the smaller states to give preponderance
to any scale they please. The voting by the number of free inhabitants,
will have one excellent effect, that of inducing the colonies to
discourage slavery, and to encourage the increase of their free
inhabitants.

Mr. Hopkins observed, there were four larger, four smaller, and four
middle-sized colonies. That the four largest would contain more than
half the inhabitants of the confederating states, and therefore would
govern the others as they should please. That history affords no
instance of such a thing as equal representation. The Germanic body
votes by states. The Helvetic body does the same; and so does the Belgic
confederacy. That too little is known of the ancient confederations, to
say what was their practice.

Mr. Wilson thought, that taxation should be in proportion to wealth,
but that representation should accord with the number of freemen. That
government is a collection or result of the wills of all: that if any
government could speak the will of all, it would be perfect; and that,
so far as it departs from this, it becomes imperfect. It has been said,
that Congress is a representation of states, not of individuals. I say,
that the objects of its care are all the individuals of the states.
It is strange, that annexing the name of 'State' to ten thousand men,
should give them an equal right with forty thousand. This must be the
effect of magic, not of reason. As to those matters which are referred
to Congress, we are not so many states; we are one large state. We lay
aside our individuality, whenever we come here. The Germanic body is
a burlesque on government: and their practice on any point, is
a sufficient authority and proof that it is wrong. The greatest
imperfection in the constitution of the Belgic confederacy is their
voting by provinces. The interest of the whole is constantly sacrificed
to that of the small, states. The history of the war in the reign of
Queen Anne, sufficiently proves this. It is asked, shall nine colonies
put it into the power of four, to govern them as they please? I invert
the question, and ask, shall two millions of people put it into the
power of one million, to govern them as they please? It is pretended,
too, that the smaller colonies will be in danger from the greater. Speak
in honest language and say, the minority will be in danger from the
majority. And is there an assembly on earth, where this danger may not
be equally pretended? The truth is, that our proceedings will then be
consentaneous with the interests of the majority, and so they ought
to be. The probability is much greater, that the larger states will
disagree, than that they will combine. I defy the wit of man to invent a
possible case, or to suggest any one thing on earth, which shall be for
the interests of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, and which
will not also be for the interest of the other states.*

     * Here terminate the author's notes of the 'earlier debates
     on the confederation,' and recommences the MS. begun by him
     in 1821.

These articles, reported July 12, '76, were debated from day to day, and
time to time, for two years, were ratified July 9, '78, by ten states,
by New-Jersey on the 26th of November of the same year, and by Delaware
on the 23rd of February following. Maryland alone held off two years
more, acceding to them March 1, '81, and thus closing the obligation.

Our delegation had been renewed for the ensuing year, commencing
August 11; but the new government was now organized, a meeting of the
legislature was to be held in October, and I had been elected a member
by my county. I knew that our legislation, under the regal government,
had many very vicious points which urgently required reformation, and
I thought I could be of more use in forwarding that work. I therefore
retired from my seat in Congress on the 2nd of September, resigned it,
and took my place in the legislature of my state, on the 7th of October.

On the 11th, I moved for leave to bring in a bill for the establishment
of courts of justice, the organization of which was of importance. I
drew the bill; it was approved by the committee, reported and passed,
after going through its due course.

On the 12th, I obtained leave to bring in a bill declaring tenants in
tail to hold their lands in fee simple. In the earlier times of the
colony, when lands were to be obtained for little or nothing, some
provident individuals procured large grants; and, desirous of founding
great families for themselves, settled them on their descendants in fee
tail. The transmission of this property from generation to generation,
in the same name, raised up a distinct set of families, who, being
privileged by law in the perpetuation of their wealth, were thus formed
into a Patrician order, distinguished by the splendor and luxury of
their establishments. From this order, too, the king habitually selected
his Counsellors of state; the hope of which distinction devoted the
whole corps to the interests and will of the crown. To annul this
privilege, and instead of an aristocracy of wealth, of more harm and
danger, than benefit, to society, to make an opening for the aristocracy
of virtue and talent, which nature has wisely provided for the direction
of the interests of society, and scattered with equal hand through all
its conditions, was deemed essential to a well ordered republic. To
effect it, no violence was necessary, no deprivation of natural right,
but rather an enlargement of it by a repeal of the law. For this would
authorize the present holder to divide the property among his children
equally, as his affections were divided; and would place them, by
natural generation, on the level of their fellow citizens. But this
repeal was strongly opposed by Mr. Pendleton, who was zealously attached
to ancient establishments; and who, taken all in all, was the ablest man
in debate I have ever met with. He had not indeed the poetical fancy of
Mr. Henry, his sublime imagination, his lofty and overwhelming diction;
but he was cool, smooth, and persuasive; his language flowing, chaste,
and embellished; his conceptions quick, acute, and full of resource;
never vanquished; for if he lost the main battle, he returned upon
you, and regained so much of it as to make it a drawn one, by dexterous
manoeuvres, skirmishes in detail, and the recovery of small advantages
which, little singly, were important all together. You never knew when
you were clear of him, but were harassed by his perseverance, until the
patience was worn down of all who had less of it than himself. Add to
this, that he was one of the most virtuous and benevolent of men, the
kindest friend, the most amiable and pleasant of companions, which
ensured a favorable reception to whatever came from him. Finding that
the general principle of entails could not be maintained, he took
his stand on an amendment which he proposed, instead of an absolute
abolition, to permit the tenant in tail to convey in fee simple, if he
chose it: and he was within a few votes of saving so much of the old
law. But the bill passed finally for entire abolition.

In that one of the bills for organizing our judiciary system, which
proposed a court of Chancery, I had provided for a trial by jury of all
matters of fact, in that as well as in the courts of law. He defeated
it by the introduction of four words only, 'if either party choose?' The
consequence has been, that as no suitor will say to his judge, 'Sir, I
distrust you, give me a jury,' juries are rarely, I might say perhaps
never, seen in that court, but when called for by the Chancellor of his
own accord.

The first establishment in Virginia, which became permanent, was made in
1607. I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650.
The first brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship; after which the
English commenced the trade, and continued it until the revolutionary
war. That suspended, _ipso facto,_ their further importation for
the present, and the business of the war pressing constantly on the
legislature, this subject was not acted on finally until the year '78,
when I brought in a bill to prevent their further importation. This
passed without opposition, and stopped the increase of the evil by
importation, leaving to future efforts its final eradication.

The first settlers of this colony were Englishmen, loyal subjects to
their king and church; and the grant to Sir Walter Raleigh contained
an express proviso, that their laws should not be against the true
Christian faith, now professed in the church of England.' As soon as the
state of the colony admitted, it was divided into parishes, in each of
which was established a minister of the Anglican church, endowed with
a fixed salary, in tobacco, a glebe house and land, with the other
necessary appendages. To meet these expenses, all the inhabitants of
the parishes were assessed, whether they were or not members of the
established church. Towards Quakers, who came here, they were most
cruelly intolerant, driving them from the colony by the severest
penalties. In process of time, however, other sectarisms were
introduced, chiefly of the Presbyterian family; and the established
clergy, secure for life in their glebes and salaries, adding to these,
generally, the emoluments of a classical school, found employment enough
in their farms and school-rooms, for the rest of the week, and devoted
Sunday only to the edification of their flock, by service, and a sermon
at their parish church. Their other pastoral functions were little
attended to. Against this inactivity, the zeal and industry of sectarian
preachers had an open and undisputed field; and by the time of the
revolution, a majority of the inhabitants had become dissenters from
the established church, but were still obliged to pay contributions to
support the pastors of the minority. This unrighteous compulsion, to
maintain teachers of what they deemed religious errors, was grievously
felt during the regal government, and without a hope of relief. But
the first republican legislature, which met in '76, was crowded with
petitions to abolish, this spiritual tyranny. These brought on the
severest contests in which I have ever been engaged. Our great opponents
were Mr. Pendleton and Robert Carter Nicholas; honest men, but zealous
churchmen. The petitions were referred to the committee of the whole
House on the state of the country; and, after desperate contests in
that committee, almost daily, from the 11th of October to the 5th
of December, we prevailed so far only, as to repeal the laws, which
rendered criminal the maintenance of any religious opinions, the
forbearance of repairing to church, or the exercise of any mode of
worship: and further, to exempt dissenters from contributions to the
support of the established church; and to suspend, only until the next
session, levies on the members of the church for the salaries of
their own incumbents. For although the majority of our citizens were
dissenters, as has been observed, a majority of the legislature were
churchmen. Among these, however, were some reasonable and liberal men,
who enabled us, on some points, to obtain feeble majorities. But our
opponents carried, in the general resolutions of the committee of
November 19, a declaration, that religious assemblies ought to be
regulated, and that provision ought to be made for continuing the
succession of the clergy, and superintending their conduct. And in the
bill now passed, was inserted an express reservation of the question,
Whether a general assessment should not be established by law, on every
one, to the support of the pastor of his choice; or whether all should
be left to voluntary contributions: and on this question, debated at
every session from '76 to '79 (some of our dissenting allies, having
now secured their particular object, going over to the advocates of a
general assessment), we could only obtain a suspension from session to
session until '79, when the question against a general assessment was
finally carried, and the establishment of the Anglican church entirely
put down. In justice to the two honest but zealous opponents, who have
been named, I must add, that although, from their natural temperaments,
they were more disposed generally to acquiesce in things as they
are, than to risk innovations; yet, whenever the public will had once
decided, none were more faithful or exact in their obedience to it.

The seat of our government had been originally fixed in the peninsula
of Jamestown, the first settlement of the colonists; and had been
afterwards removed a few miles inland to Williamsburg. But this was at
a time when our settlements had not extended beyond the tide waters. Now
they had crossed the Allegany; and the centre of population was very far
removed from what it had been. Yet Williamsburg was still the depository
of our archives, the habitual residence of the Governor, and many other
of the public functionaries, the established place for the sessions
of the legislature, and the magazine of our military stores: and its
situation was so exposed, that it might be taken at any time in war,
and, at this time particularly, an enemy might in the night run up
either of the rivers, between which it lies, land a force above, and
take possession of the place, without the possibility of saving either
persons or things. I had proposed its removal so early as October, '76;
but it did not prevail until the session of May, '79.

Early in the session of May, '79, I prepared, and obtained leave to
bring in a bill, declaring who should be deemed citizens, asserting the
natural right of expatriation, and prescribing the mode of exercising
it. This, when I withdrew from the house on the 1st of June following, I
left in the hands of George Mason, and it was passed on the 26th of that
month.

In giving this account of the laws, of which I was myself the mover
and draughtsman, I by no means mean to claim to myself the merit of
obtaining their passage. I had many occasional and strenuous coadjutors
in debate, and one, most steadfast, able, and zealous; who was himself
a host. This was George Mason, a man of the first order of wisdom among
those who acted on the theatre of the revolution, of expansive mind,
profound judgment, cogent in argument, learned in the lore of our former
constitution, and earnest for the republican change, on democratic
principles. His elocution was neither flowing nor smooth; but his
language was strong, his manner most impressive, and strengthened by a
dash of biting cynicism, when provocation made it seasonable.

Mr. Wythe, while speaker in the two sessions of 1777, between his return
from Congress and his appointment to the Chancery, was an able and
constant associate in whatever was before a committee of the whole. His
pure integrity, judgment, and reasoning powers gave him great weight. Of
him, see more in some notes inclosed in my letter of August 31, 1821, to
Mr. John Saunderson. [See Appendix, note A.]

Mr. Madison came into the House in 1776, a new member, and young;
which circumstances, concurring with his extreme modesty, prevented his
venturing himself in debate before his removal to the Council of State,
in November, '77. From thence he went to Congress, then consisting of
few members. Trained in these successive schools, he acquired a habit of
self-possession, which placed at ready command the rich resources of his
luminous and discriminating mind, and of his extensive information, and
rendered him the first of every assembly afterwards, of which he became
a member. Never wandering from his subject into vain declamation, but
pursuing it closely, in language pure, classical, and copious, soothing
always the feelings of his adversaries by civilities and softness of
expression, he rose to the eminent station which he held in the great
National Convention of 1787; and in that of Virginia, which followed,
he sustained the new constitution in all its parts, bearing off the palm
against the logic of George Mason, and the fervid declamation of Mr.
Henry. With these consummate powers, was united a pure and spotless
virtue, which no calumny has ever attempted to sully. Of the powers
and polish of his pen, and of the wisdom of his administration in the
highest office of the nation, I need say nothing. They have spoken, and
will for ever speak for themselves.

So far we were proceeding in the details of reformation only; selecting
points of legislation, prominent in character and principle, urgent, and
indicative of the strength of the general pulse of reformation. When I
left Congress in '76, it was in the persuasion, that our whole code must
be reviewed, adapted to our republican form of government, and, now that
we had no negatives of Councils, Governors, and Kings to restrain us
from doing right, that it should be corrected, in all its parts, with a
single eye to reason, and the good of those for whose government it was
framed. Early, therefore, in the session of '76, to which I returned,
I moved and presented a bill for the revision of the laws; which
was passed on the 24th of October, and on the 5th of November, Mr.
Pendleton, Mr. Wythe, George Mason, Thomas L. Lee, and myself, were
appointed a committee to execute the work. We agreed to meet at
Fredericksburg to settle the plan of operation, and to distribute the
work. We met there accordingly, on the 13th of January, 1777. The first
question was, whether we should propose to abolish the whole existing
system of laws, and prepare a new and complete Institute, or preserve
the general system, and only modify it to the present state of things.
Mr. Pendleton, contrary to his usual disposition in favor of ancient
things, was for the former proposition, in which he was joined by Mr.
Lee. To this it was objected, that to abrogate our whole system would
be a bold measure, and probably far beyond the views of the legislature;
that they had been in the practice of revising, from time to time,
the laws of the colony, omitting the expired, the repealed, and the
obsolete, amending only those retained, and probably meant we should
now do the same, only including the British statutes as well as our own:
that to compose a new Institute, like those of Justinian and Bracton, or
that of Blackstone, which was the model proposed by Mr. Pendleton, would
be an arduous undertaking, of vast research, of great consideration and
judgment; and when reduced to a text, every word of that text, from
the imperfection of human language, and its incompetence to express
distinctly every shade of idea, would become a subject of question and
chicanery, until settled by repeated adjudications; that this would
involve us for ages in litigation, and render property uncertain, until,
like the statutes of old, every word had been tried and settled by
numerous decisions, and by new volumes of reports and commentaries; and
that no one of us, probably, would undertake such a work, which, to be
systematical, must be the work of one hand. This last was the opinion of
Mr. Wythe, Mr. Mason, and myself. When we proceeded to the distribution
of the work, Mr. Mason excused himself, as, being no lawyer, he felt
himself unqualified for the work, and he resigned soon after. Mr. Lee
excused himself on the same ground, and died indeed in a short time. The
other two gentlemen, therefore, and myself, divided the work among
us. The common law and statutes to the 4 James I. (when our separate
legislature was established) were assigned to me; the British statutes,
from that period to the present day, to Mr. Wythe; and the Virginia laws
to Mr. Pendleton. As the law of Descents, and the Criminal law, fell of
course within my portion, I wished the committee to settle the leading
principles of these, as a guide for me in framing them; and, with
respect to the first, I proposed to abolish the law of primogeniture,
and to make real estate descendible in parcenery to the next of kin,
as personal property is, by the statute of distribution. Mr. Pendleton
wished to preserve the right of primogeniture; but seeing at once
that that could not prevail, he proposed we should adopt the Hebrew
principle, and give a double portion to the elder son. I observed, that
if the elder son could eat twice as much, or do double work, it might be
a natural evidence of his right to a double portion; but being on a par,
in his powers and wants, with his brothers and sisters, he should be on
a par also in the partition of the patrimony; and such was the decision
of the other members.

On the subject of the Criminal law, all were agreed, that the punishment
of death should be abolished, except for treason and murder; and that,
for other felonies, should be substituted hard labor in the public
works, and, in some cases, the _Lex talionis_. How this last revolting
principle came to obtain our approbation, I do not remember. There
remained, indeed, in our laws, a vestige of it in a single case of a
slave; it was the English law, in the time of the Anglo-Saxons, copied
probably from the Hebrew law of an 'eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth,' and it was the law of several ancient people; but the modern
mind had left it far in the rear of its advances. These points, however,
being settled, we repaired to our respective homes for the preparation
of the work.

In the execution of my part, I thought it material not to vary the
diction of the ancient statutes by modernizing it, nor to give rise to
new questions by new expressions. The text of these statutes had been so
fully explained and defined, by numerous adjudications, as scarcely ever
now to produce a question in our courts. I thought it would be useful,
also, in all new draughts, to reform the style of the later British
statutes, and of our own acts of Assembly; which, from their verbosity,
their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case,
and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at
certainty, by saids and afore-saids, by ors and by ands, to make them
more plain, are really rendered more perplexed and incomprehensible, not
only to common readers, but to the lawyers themselves. We were
employed in this work from that time to February, 1779, when we met at
Williamsburg; that is to say, Mr. Pendleton, Mr. Wythe, and myself; and
meeting day by day, we examined critically our several parts, sentence
by sentence, scrutinizing and amending, until we had agreed on the
whole. We then returned home, had fair copies made of our several parts,
which were reported to the General Assembly, June 18, 1779, by Mr.
Wythe and myself, Mr. Pendleton's residence being distant, and he having
authorized us by letter to declare his approbation. We had, in this
work, brought so much of the Common law as it was thought necessary to
alter, all the British statutes from _Magna Charta_ to the present day,
and all the laws of Virginia, from the establishment of our legislature
in the 4th Jac. I. to the present time, which we thought should be
retained, within the compass of one hundred and twenty-six bills,
making a printed folio of ninety pages only. Some bills were taken out,
occasionally, from time to time, and passed; but the main body of the
work was not entered on by the legislature, until after the general
peace, in 1785, when, by the unwearied exertions of Mr. Madison, in
opposition to the endless quibbles, chicaneries, perversions, vexations,
and delays of lawyers and demi-lawyers, most of the bills were passed by
the legislature, with little alteration.

The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which
had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the
latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with
some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular
proposition proved, that its protection of opinion was meant to be
universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from
the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed,
by inserting the words 'Jesus Christ,' so that it should read, 'a
departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our
religion;' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that
they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew
and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of
every denomination.

Beccaria, and other writers on crimes and punishments, had satisfied the
reasonable world of the unrightfulness and inefficacy of the punishment
of crimes by death; and hard labor on roads, canals, and other public
works, had been suggested as a proper substitute. The Revisors had
adopted these opinions; but the general idea of our country had not yet
advanced to that point. The bill, therefore, for proportioning crimes
and punishments, was lost in the House of Delegates by a majority of a
single vote. I learned afterwards, that the substitute of hard labor in
public, was tried (I believe it was in Pennsylvania) without success.
Exhibited as a public spectacle, with shaved heads, and mean clothing,
working on the high roads, produced in the criminals such a prostration
of character, such an abandonment of self-respect, as, instead of
reforming, plunged them into the most desperate and hardened depravity
of morals and character. To pursue the subject of this law.--I was
written to in 1785 (being then in Paris) by Directors appointed to
superintend the building of a Capitol in Richmond, to advise them as
to a plan, and to add to it one of a Prison. Thinking it a favorable
opportunity of introducing into the state an example of architecture, in
the classic style of antiquity, and the _Maison Quarrée_ of Nismes,
an ancient Roman temple, being considered as the most perfect model
existing of what may be called Cubic architecture, I applied to M.
Clerissault, who had published drawings of the antiquities of Nismes, to
have me a model of the building made in stucco, only changing the order
from Corinthian to Ionic, on account of the difficulty of the Corinthian
capitals. I yielded, with reluctance, to the taste of Clerissault,
in his preference of the modern capital of Scamozzi to the more noble
capital of antiquity. This was executed by the artist whom Choiseul
Gouffier had carried with him to Constantinople, and employed, while
Ambassador there, in making those beautiful models of the remains
of Grecian architecture, which are to be seen at Paris. To adapt the
exterior to our use, I drew a plan for the interior, with the apartments
necessary for legislative, executive, and judiciary purposes; and
accommodated in their size and distribution to the form and dimensions
of the building. These were forwarded to the Directors, in 1786, and
were carried into execution, with some variations, not for the better,
the most important of which, however, admit of future correction. With
respect to the plan of a Prison, requested at the same time, I had heard
of a benevolent society, in England, which had been indulged by the
government, in an experiment of the effect of labor, in solitary
confinement, on some of their criminals; which experiment had succeeded
beyond expectation. The same idea had been suggested in France, and an
Architect of Lyons had proposed a plan of a well contrived edifice, on
the principle of solitary confinement. I procured a copy, and as it was
too large for our purposes, I drew one on a scale less extensive, but
susceptible of additions as they should be wanting. This I sent to the
Directors, instead of a plan of a common prison, in the hope that it
would suggest the idea of labor in solitary confinement, instead of
that on the public works, which we had adopted in our Revised Code. Its
principle, accordingly, but not its exact form, was adopted by Latrobe
in carrying the plan into execution, by the erection of what is now
called the Penitentiary, built under his direction. In the mean while,
the public opinion was ripening, by time, by reflection, and by the
example of Pennsylvania, where labor on the highways had been tried,
without approbation, from 1786 to '89, and had been followed by their
Penitentiary system on the principle of confinement and labor, which was
proceeding auspiciously. In 1796, our legislature resumed the subject,
and passed the law for amending the Penal laws of the commonwealth. They
adopted solitary, instead of public, labor, established a gradation in
the duration of the confinement, approximated the style of the law more
to the modern usage, and, instead of the settled distinctions of murder
and manslaughter, preserved in my bill, they introduced the new terms of
murder in the first and second degree. Whether these have produced more
or fewer questions of definition, I am not sufficiently informed of our
judiciary transactions, to say. I will here, however, insert the text of
my bill, with the notes I made in the course of my researches into the
subject. [See Appendix, Note E.]

The acts of Assembly concerning the College of William and Mary, were
properly within Mr. Pendleton's portion of the work; but these related
chiefly to its revenue, while its constitution, organization, and scope
of science, were derived from its charter. We thought that on this
subject, a systematical plan of general education should be proposed,
and I was requested to undertake it. I accordingly prepared three bills
for the Revisal, proposing three distinct grades of education, reaching
all classes. 1st. Elementary schools, for all children generally, rich
and poor. 2nd. Colleges, for a middle degree of instruction, calculated
for the common purposes of life, and such as would be desirable for
all who were in easy circumstances. And, 3rd., an ultimate grade for
teaching the sciences generally, and in their highest degree. The first
bill proposed to lay off every county into Hundreds, or Wards, of a
proper size and population for a school, in which reading, writing, and
common arithmetic should be taught; and that the whole state should be
divided into twenty-four districts, in each of which should be a school
for classical learning, grammar, geography, and the higher branches of
numerical arithmetic. The second bill proposed to amend the constitution
of William and Mary college, to enlarge its sphere of science, and to
make it in fact a University. The third was for the establishment of
a library. These bills were not acted on until the same year, '96, and
then only so much of the first as provided for elementary schools. The
College of William and Mary was an establishment purely of the Church
of England; the Visitors were required to be all of that Church; the
Professors to subscribe its Thirty-nine Articles; its Students to learn
its Catechism; and one of its fundamental objects was declared to be, to
raise up Ministers for that Church. The religious jealousies, therefore,
of all the dissenters, took alarm lest this might give an ascendancy
to the Anglican sect, and refused acting on that bill. Its local
eccentricity, too, and unhealthy autumnal climate, lessened the general
inclination towards it. And in the Elementary bill, they inserted a
provision which completely defeated it; for they left it to the court
of each county to determine for itself, when this act should be carried
into execution, within their county. One provision of the bill was, that
the expenses of these schools should be borne by the inhabitants of
the county, every one in proportion to his general tax rate. This would
throw on wealth the education of the poor; and the justices, being
generally of the more wealthy class, were unwilling to incur that
burthen, and I believe it was not suffered to commence in a single
county. I shall recur again to this subject, towards the close of my
story, if I should have life and resolution enough to reach that term;
for I am already tired of talking about myself.

The bill on the subject of slaves, was a mere digest of the existing
laws respecting them, without any intimation of a plan for a future and
general emancipation. It was thought better that this should be kept
back, and attempted only by way of amendment, whenever the bill should
be brought on. The principles of the amendment, however, were agreed
on, that is to say, the freedom of all born after a certain day, and
deportation at a proper age. But it was found that the public mind would
not yet bear the proposition, nor will it bear it even at this day. Yet
the day is not distant when it must bear and adopt it, or worse will
follow. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that
these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two
races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit,
opinion, have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them. It
is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation and
deportation, peaceably, and in such slow degree, as that the evil will
wear off insensibly, and their place be, _pari passu_, filled up by
free white laborers. If, on the contrary, it is left to force itself
on, human nature must shudder at the prospect held up. We should in vain
look for an example in the Spanish deportation or deletion of the Moors.
This precedent would fall far short of our case.

I considered four of these bills, passed or reported, as forming a
system by which every fibre would be eradicated of ancient or future
aristocracy; and a foundation laid for a government truly republican.
The repeal of the laws of entail would prevent the accumulation and
perpetuation of wealth, in select families, and preserve the soil of
the country from being daily more and more absorbed in mortmain. The
abolition of primogeniture, and equal partition of inheritances, removed
the feudal and unnatural distinctions which made one member of every
family rich, and all the rest poor, substituting equal partition, the
best of all Agrarian laws. The restoration of the rights of conscience
relieved the people from taxation for the support of a religion not
theirs; for the establishment was truly of the religion of the rich, the
dissenting sects being entirely composed of the less wealthy people;
and these, by the bill for a general education, would be qualified
to understand their rights, to maintain them, and to exercise with
intelligence their parts in self-government: and all this would be
effected, without the violation of a single natural right of any
one individual citizen. To these, too, might be added, as a further
security, the introduction of the trial by jury into the Chancery
courts, which have already ingulphed, and continue to ingulph, so great
a proportion of the jurisdiction over our property.

On the 1st of June, 1779, I was appointed Governor of the Commonwealth,
and retired from the legislature. Being elected, also, one of the
Visitors of William and Mary college, a self-electing body, I effected,
during my residence in Williamsburg that year, a change in the
organization of that institution, by abolishing the Grammar school,
and the two professorships of Divinity and Oriental languages, and
substituting a professorship of Law and Police, one of Anatomy,
Medicine, and Chemistry, and one of Modern Languages; and the charter
confining us to six professorships, We added the Law of Nature and
Nations, and the Fine Arts, to the duties of the Moral professor, and
Natural History to those of the professor of Mathematics and Natural
Philosophy.

Being now, as it were, identified with the Commonwealth itself, to write
my own history, during the two years of my administration, would be to
write the public history of that portion of the revolution within this
state. This has been done by others, and particularly by Mr. Girardin,
who wrote his Continuation of Burke's History of Virginia, while at
Milton in this neighborhood, had free access to all my papers while
composing it, and has given as faithful an account as I could myself.
For this portion, therefore, of my own life, I refer altogether to his
history. From a belief that, under the pressure of the invasion under
which we were then laboring, the public would have more confidence in a
military chief, and that the military commander, being invested with the
civil power also, both might be wielded with more energy, promptitude,
and effect for the defence of the state, I resigned the administration
at the end of my second year, and General Nelson was appointed to
succeed me.

Soon after my leaving Congress, in September, '76, to wit, on the last
day of that month, I had been appointed, with Dr. Franklin, to go to
France, as a Commissioner to negotiate treaties of alliance and commerce
with that government. Silas Deane, then in France, acting as agent for
procuring military stores,* was joined with us in commission. But such
was the state of my family that I could not leave it, nor could I expose
it to the dangers of the sea, and of capture by the British ships, then
covering the ocean. I saw, too, that the laboring oar was really at
home, where much was to be done, of the most permanent interest,
in new-modelling our governments, and much to defend our fanes and
fire-sides from the desolations of an invading enemy, pressing on our
country in every point. I declined, therefore, and Dr. Lee was appointed
in my place. On the 15th of June, 1781, I had been appointed, with
Mr. Adams, Dr. Franklin, Mr. Jay, and Mr. Laurens, a Minister
Plenipotentiary for negotiating peace, then expected to be effected
through the mediation of the Empress of Russia. The same reasons obliged
me still to decline; and the negotiation was in fact never entered on.
But, in the autumn of the next year, 1782, Congress receiving assurances
that a general peace would be concluded in the winter and spring, they
renewed my appointment on the 13th of November of that year. I had, two
months before that, lost the cherished companion of my life, in whose
affections, unabated on both sides, I had lived the last ten years in
unchequered happiness. With the public interests, the state of my mind
concurred in recommending the change of scene proposed; and I accepted
the appointment, and left Monticello on the 19th of December, 1782,
for Philadelphia, where I arrived on the 27th. The Minister of France,
Luzerne, offered me a passage in the Romulus frigate, which I accepted;
but she was then lying a few miles below Baltimore, blocked up in the
ice. I remained, therefore, a month in Philadelphia, looking over the
papers in the office of State, in order to possess myself of the general
state of our foreign relations, and then went to Baltimore, to await
the liberation of the frigate from the ice. After waiting there nearly
a month, we received information that a Provisional treaty of peace
had been signed by our Commissioners on the 3rd of September, 1782, to
become absolute, on the conclusion of peace between France and Great
Britain. Considering my proceeding to Europe as now of no utility to the
public, I returned immediately to Philadelphia, to take the orders of
Congress, and was excused by them from further proceeding. I therefore
returned home, where I arrived on the 15th of May, 1783.

     * His ostensible character was to be that of a merchant, his
     real one that of agent for military supplies, and also for
     sounding the dispositions of the government of France, and
     seeing how far they would favor us, either secretly or
     openly. His appointment had been by the Committee of Foreign
     Correspondence, March, 1776.

On the 6th of the following month, I was appointed by the legislature
a delegate to Congress, the appointment to take place on the 1st of
November ensuing, when that of the existing delegation would expire. I
accordingly left home on the 16th of October, arrived at Trenton, where
Congress was sitting, on the 3rd of November, and took my seat on the
4th, on which day Congress adjourned, to meet at Annapolis on the 26th.

Congress had now become a very small body, and the members very remiss
in their attendance on its duties, insomuch that a majority of the
states, necessary by the Confederation to constitute a House, even for
minor business, did not assemble until the 13th of December.

They, as early as January 7, 1782, had turned their attention to the
monies current in the several states, and had directed the Financier,
Robert Morris, to report to them a table of rates, at which the foreign
coins should be received at the treasury. That officer, or rather his
assistant, Gouverneur Morris, answered them on the 15th, in an able and
elaborate statement of the denominations of money current in the several
states, and of the comparative value of the foreign coins chiefly in
circulation with us, He went into the consideration of the necessity of
establishing a standard of value with us, and of the adoption of a money
unit. He proposed for that unit, such a fraction of pure silver as
would be a common measure of the penny of every state, without leaving
a fraction. This common divisor he found to be 1/1440 of a dollar, or
1/1600 the crown sterling. The value of a dollar was, therefore, to be
expressed by 1440 units, and of a crown by 1600; each unit containing
a quarter of a grain of fine silver. Congress turning again their
attention to this subject the following year, the Financier, by a letter
of April 30,1783, further explained and urged the unit he had proposed:
but nothing more was done on it until the ensuing year, when it was
again taken up, and referred to a committee, of which I was a member.
The general views of the Financier were sound, and the principle was
ingenious, on which he proposed to found his unit; but it was too minute
for ordinary use, too laborious for computation, either by the head or
in figures. The price of a loaf of bread, 1/20 of a dollar, would be
72 units. A pound of butter, 1/5 of a dollar, 288 units. A horse, or
bullock, of eighty dollars' value, would require a notation of six
figures, to wit, 115,200, and the public debt, suppose of eighty
millions, would require twelve figures, to wit, 115,200,000,000 units.
Such a system of money-arithmetic would be entirely unmanageable for the
common purposes of society. I proposed, therefore, instead of this,
to adopt the Dollar as our unit of account and payment, and that its
divisions and subdivisions should be in the decimal ratio. I wrote some
Notes on the subject, which I submitted to the consideration of the
Financier. I received his answer and adherence to his general system,
only agreeing to take for his unit one hundred of those he first
proposed, so that a Dollar should be 14 40/100 and a crown 16 units. I
replied to this, and printed my Notes and Reply on a flying sheet, which
I put into the hands of the members of Congress for consideration, and
the Committee agreed to report on my principle. This was adopted the
ensuing year, and is the system which now prevails. I insert, here, the
Notes and Reply, as showing the different views on which the adoption of
our money system hung. [See Appendix, note F.]The divisions into dismes,
cents, and mills is now so well understood, that it would be easy of
introduction into the kindred branches of weights and measures. I use,
when I travel, an Odometer of Clarke's invention, which divides the mile
into cents, and I find every one comprehends a distance readily, when
stated to him in miles and cents; so he would in feet and cents, pounds
and cents, &c.

The remissness of Congress, and their permanent session began to be a
subject of uneasiness; and even some of the legislatures had recommended
to them intermissions, and periodical sessions. As the Confederation had
made no provision for a visible head of the government, during vacations
of Congress, and such a one was necessary to superintend the executive
business, to receive and communicate with foreign ministers and nations,
and to assemble Congress on sudden and extraordinary emergencies, I
proposed, early in April, the appointment of a committee, to be called
the 'Committee of the States,' to consist of a member from each state,
who should remain in session during the recess of Congress: that the
functions of Congress should be divided into executive and legislative,
the latter to be reserved, and the former, by a general resolution, to
be delegated to that Committee. This proposition was afterwards
agreed to; a Committee appointed who entered on duty on the subsequent
adjournment of Congress, quarrelled very soon, split into two parties,
abandoned their post, and left the government without any visible head,
until the next meeting of Congress. We have since seen the same thing
take place, in the Directory of France; and I believe it will for ever
take place in any Executive consisting of a plurality. Our plan, best, I
believe, combines wisdom and practicability, by providing a plurality of
Counsellors, but a single Arbiter for ultimate decision. I was in France
when we heard of this schism and separation of our Committee, and,
speaking with Dr. Franklin of this singular disposition of men to
quarrel, and divide into parties, he gave his sentiments, as usual, by
way of Apologue. He mentioned the Eddystone light-house, in the
British channel, as being built on a rock, in the mid-channel, totally
inaccessible in winter, from the boisterous character of that sea, in
that season; that, therefore, for the two keepers employed to keep up
the lights, all provisions for the winter were necessarily carried to
them in autumn, as they could never be visited again till the return of
the milder season; that, on the first practicable day in the spring, a
boat put off to them with fresh supplies. The boatmen met at the door
one of the keepers, and accosted him with a 'How goes it, friend?' 'Very
well.' 'How is your companion?' 'I do not know.' 'Don't know? Is not he
here?' 'I can't tell.' 'Have not you seen him to-day?' 'No.' 'When did
you see him?' 'Not since last fall.' 'You have killed him?' 'Not
I, indeed.' They were about to lay hold of him, as having certainly
murdered his companion; but he desired them to go up stairs and examine
for themselves. They went up, and there found the other keeper. They had
quarrelled, it seems, soon after being left there, had divided into two
parties, assigned the cares below to one, and those above to the other,
and had never spoken to, or seen, one another since.

But to return to our Congress at Annapolis. The definitive treaty of
peace which had been signed at Paris on the 3rd of September, 1783, and
received here, could not be ratified without a House of nine states.
On the 23rd of December, therefore, we addressed letters to the several
Governors, stating the receipt of the definitive treaty; that seven
states only were in attendance, while nine were necessary to its
ratification; and urging them to press on their delegates the necessity
of their immediate attendance. And on the 26th, to save time, I moved
that the Agent of Marine (Robert Morris) should be instructed to have
ready a vessel at this place, at New York, and at some Eastern port,
to carry over the ratification of the treaty when agreed to. It met the
general sense of the House, but was opposed by Dr. Lee, on the ground