66

"in the case of the President. Smaller objections are, the appeal in fact as well as law, and the binding all persons, legislative, executive, and judicial, by oath, to maintain that constitution. "I do not pretend to decide what would be the "best method of procuring the establishment of "the manifold good things in this constitution, "and of getting rid of the bad. Whether by adopting it in hopes of future. amendment, or, "after it has been duly weighed and canvassed by "the people, after seeing the parts they generally "dislike, and those they generally approve, to say "to them, "We see now what you wish: send "together your deputies again; let them frame a "constitution for you, omitting what you have con"demned, and establishing the powers you approved." "Even these will be a great addition to the energy "of your government. At all events, I hope you "will not be discouraged from other trials, if the 66 present one should fail of its full effects. The "late rebellion in Massachusetts, has given more "alarm than I think it should have done. Calculate, that one rebellion in thirteen states, in the course of eleven years, is but one for each state "in a century and a half: nor will any degree of power in the hands of government prevent insurrections. France, with all its despotism, " and two or three hundred thousand men in arms, "has had three insurrections in the three years I "have been here; in every one of which, greater "numbers were engaged than in Massachusetts, "and a great deal more blood spilt. Compare "again the ferocious depredations of their insur

66

gents, with the order, the moderation, and the "almost self-extinguishment of ours." In another letter, of the 6th of July, 1788, he says, "I am

66

glad to hear the new constitution is received "with favour: I sincerely wish, that the nine first "conventions

VÓL. XII.

Р

"conventions may receive, and the four last reject "it. The former will secure it finally, while the "latter will OBLIGE them to offer a declaration of rights, in order to COMPLETE THE UNION.' In another of the 31st same month, he says, "The

66

abandoning the principle of necessary rotation in "the Senate, has, I see, been disapproved by few-in the case of the President, by none. I readily, therefore, suppose my opinion wrong, "when opposed by the majority, as in the former "instance, and the totality, as in the latter."-In a letter of the 18th November, 1788, he says, "As to the bill of rights, however, I still think it "should be added; and I am glad to see, that "three states have at length considered the per"petual re-eligibility of the President, as an arti"cle which should be amended. I should depre"cate with you, indeed, the meeting of a new convention.'

"How far these extracts were altered or mutilated, is liable to question, from the manner of their appearance. It is observable, that the extract of the letter of the 6th July, though it was intended as part of the one which is mentioned in the debates of the Virginia convention, does not answer to the description given of it by Mr. Pendleton, who professes to have seen it; for he expressly states, with regard to that letter, that Mr. Jefferson, after having declared his wish respecting the issue of the deliberations upon the constitution, proceeds to enumerate the amendments which he wishes to be secured. The extract which was published, speaks only of a bill of rights, as the essential amendment to be obtained by the rejection of four states, which by no means agrees with the account given of it by Mr. Pendleton.

"Such nevertheless as they are, these extracts fully prove, that Mr. Jefferson advised the people

of

of Virginia to adopt the constitution, or not to adopt it upon a CONTINGENCY; and that he was OPPOSED to it in some of its most IMPORTANT features, so much so, as, at first, to DISCOUNTENANCE its ADOPTION altogether, without previous amendments. He GREATLY DISLIKED the abandonment of the principle of necessary rotation in every office, and most particularly in the case of President: he wished the principle of rotation to extend not only to the executive, but to the other branches of the government, to the senate, at least, as is explained in a subsequent letter. This objection goes to the VERY STRUCTURE of the government, in a very *IMPORTANT ARTICLE, and while it justifies the assertion that he was opposed to the constitution in some of its most important features, it is a specimen of the VISIONARY SYSTEM of politics of its author. Had it been confined to the office of chief magistrate, it might have pretended to some little plausibility; by being extended to other branches of the government, it assumes a different character, and evinces a mind prone to projects, which are incompatible with the principles of stable government, and disposed to multiply the outworks, while it leaves the citadel weak and tottering.

66

Any person acquainted with his manner, and with the force of terms, will not hesitate to pronounce that he wished to recommend a recurrence to a second convention. The pains which he takes, while recommending a second convention, to remove the alarm naturally inspired by the insurrection in Massachusetts, which had recently occurred, are a strong confirmation of this opinion.

"It is not easy to understand what other object his comments on that circumstance could have, but to obviate the anxiety which it was calculated to inspire in the people for an adoption of the constitution, without a previous attempt to amend it,

P 2

and

and to remove all apprehension of internal convul sions from the dangerous experiment of a second

convention.

"Thus it appears from the very documents produced in exculpation of Mr. Jefferson, that he in fact discountenanced in the first instance, the adoption of the constitution in its primitive form, favouring the idea of an attempt at previous amendments by a second convention; which was precisely the line of policy followed by all those who were at that time denominated ANTIFEDERAL, and who have generally since retained their original ENMITY against the constitution. As to those letters of Mr. Jefferson, which are subsequent to his knowledge of the ratification of the constitution by the requisite number of states, they prove nothing, but that he was willing to play the politician. They can at best only be received as expedient acts of submission to the opinion of the majority, which he professed to believe infallible, (resigning to it, with all possible humility, not only his conduct, but his judgment,) not as marks of approbation.

"It will be remarked that there was no want of versatility in his opinions; they kept pace tolerably well with the progress of the business, and were quite as accommodating as circumstances seemed to require. On the 31st July 1788, when the adoption of the constitution was known, the various and weighty objections of March 1787, had resolved themselves into the simple want of a bill of rights. In November following, on the strength of the authority of three states (over-ruling, in that instance, the maxim of implicit deference for the opinion of the majority) that lately solitary defect acquires a companion, in a revival of the objection to the re-eligibility of the President. And another convention, which had appeared no very alarming expedient, while the entire constitution was in jeopardy,

pardy, became an object to be deprecated, when partial amendments to an already established constitution were alone in question.'

"By those who attended to the opposition of Mr. Jefferson, while secretary of state, to the measures of the treasury department, it was made a question, whether that opposition flowed altogether from his hostility to the head of that department (whose competition might, at a future period, be apprehended, and whose destruction was therefore desirable) or from his entertaining principles respecting public credit and national faith, very different from those which have influenced all nations, who cherish those valuable pillars of national strength.

"As his conduct, while minister of the United States at Paris, in relation to this subject, may throw great light on his principles, I shall proceed to state the exact tenor of the advice which Mr. Jefferson gave to Congress, respecting the transfer of the debt due to France, to a company of Hollanders. After mentioning an offer which had been made by such a company for the purchase of the debt, he concludes with these extraordinary expressions" If there is a danger of the public payments not being punctual, I submit whether it may not be better, that the discontents which would then arise, should be transferred from a court, of whose good will we have so much need, to the breasts of a private company.

"The above is an extract which was made from the letter in February 1787. The date of it was not noted, but the original being on the files in the department of state, will ascertain that, and all other particulars, relating to its contents--The genuineness of the extract may be depended upon.

P 3

"This