In the publication of these essays, Adams was most unfortunate. He appears not to have presented his ideas concerning his political system with sufficient clearness to be understood. He was, indeed, greatly misunderstood, and was charged with advocating a monarchy and a hereditary senate and presidency; with the greatest inconsistency, because, in 1787, he had written and published in London an excellent “Defence of the American Constitution;” and with political heresy, if not actual apostasy, because of that inconsistency. Twenty years later, when speaking of these essays, Mr. Adams said: “This dull, heavy volume still excites the wonder of its author—first, that he could find, amid the constant scenes of business and dissipation in which he was enveloped, time to write it; secondly, that he had the courage to oppose and publish his own opinions to the universal opinion of America, and indeed of all mankind.” Others were no less astonished, for the same reasons.
These essays were published in 1790, and filled Jefferson with disgust. He already began to suspect Hamilton of anti-republican schemes, and he now cherished the idea that there was a conspiracy on foot, headed by Adams and Hamilton, to overthrow the republican institutions of the United States, and on their ruins to erect a mixed government like that of England, composed of a monarchy and aristocracy. To counteract these political heresies, Paine's Rights of Man, which he wrote in reply to Burke's pamphlet on the French Revolution (a performance which Adams held in “perfect detestation,” but which other patriots regarded as one of which any man might be proud), was reprinted and circulated in the United States, with a complimentary note from Mr. Jefferson at its head—“a note which Mr. Jefferson declared he neither desired nor expected to have printed;” not because he did not approve of Paine's doctrines, but because he did not wish to take such responsibility at that crisis and while in his official position. He rejoiced, however, at the reprint of Paine's essay.
“Paine's pamphlet,” he said in a letter to Mr. Short, the American chargé d'affaires at Paris, “has been published and read with general applause here;” and then he proceeds to charge “Adams, Jay, Hamilton, Knox, and many of the Cincinnati,” with endeavoring “to make way for a king, lords, and commons.” “The second” (Jay), he said, “says nothing; the third [Hamilton] is open. Both are dangerous. They pant after union with England, as the power which is to support their projects, and are most determined anti-Gallicans.” This, as time has demonstrated, was a most unjust and ungenerous charge. So thoroughly was Mr. Jefferson then imbued with the spirit of the French revolution, in its most democratic and destructive aspect—so bitter was his hatred of monarchy and aristocracy—that his judgment seemed entirely perverted, his usual charity utterly congealed; and every man who differed with him in opinion was regarded as a conspirator against the rights of mankind.
In after years, when the passions of the times had passed away, he reiterated his opinion that Adams and Hamilton were at that time seeking the subversion of republican institutions in the United States. “The one [Adams],” he said, “was for two hereditary branches, and an honest elective one; the other [Hamilton] for an hereditary king, with a house of lords and commons, corrupted to his will, and standing between him and the people. Hamilton was indeed a singular character. Of acute understanding, disinterested, honest, and honorable in all private transactions, amiable in society, and duly valuing virtue in private life, yet so bewitched and perverted by British example, as to be under thorough conviction that corruption was essential to the government of a nation. Mr. Adams had originally been a republican. The glare of royalty and nobility, during his mission to England, had made him believe their fascination a necessary ingredient in government.”
The best refutation of the opinion of Jefferson concerning Hamilton's views is contained in the whole tenor of that great man's life, and in the close private and political friendship that existed between the sagacious Washington and Hamilton until death separated them.
Paine's original pamphlet was dedicated “to the president of the United States,” and that dedication was retained in the reprint. That and Jefferson's note produced quite a stir. Because of certain language in the pamphlet, Paine had been prosecuted for libel by the British government, and had fled to France; and this apparent endorsement of his essay by the government of the United States, in the persons of the president and secretary of state, was offensive to that of Great Britain. Major Beckwith, the aid-de-camp of Governor Carleton already mentioned, expressed his surprise that the pamphlet should have been published under such auspices, because it seemed to imply unfriendliness toward his government. He was satisfied, however, when assured that the president knew nothing of the reprint of the pamphlet, and that the publication of the note by the secretary of state was unauthorized. The matter disturbed the friendly relations between Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson for a short time. Frank explanations healed the breach for a moment; but they differed too widely in their ideas concerning some of the exciting questions of the day to act together as political friends. Indeed, they soon became decided political antagonists, and Washington was greatly disturbed by party dissentions in his cabinet and in Congress.
FOOTNOTES:
[32] “I shall be,” he said, “on the eighth of April at Fredericksburg, the eleventh at Richmond, the fourteenth at Petersburg, the sixteenth at Halifax, the eighteenth at Tarborough, the twentieth at Newbern, the twenty-fifth at Wilmington, the twenty-ninth at Georgetown, South Carolina; on the second day of May at Charleston in South Carolina, halting there five days; on the eleventh at Savannah, halting there two days. Then leaving the line of mail, I shall proceed to Augusta; and according to the information I shall receive there, my return by an upper road will be regulated.”
[33] The following is the address of the Moravians to the president:—
“Happy in sharing the honor of a visit from the illustrious president of the Union to the southern states, the Brethren of Wachovia humbly beg leave, upon this joyful occasion, to express their highest esteem, duty, and affection, for the great patriot of this country.