LETTER XXXV.

JUNE 9, 1833.

THE two points on which Mr. Jefferson appears to rely most, to prove the design of establishing a monarchy, and a corrupt one too, are the funding system, and the national bank. He considers, whenever he mentions the former, that the object was to create, in the two branches of the legislature, "treasury votes" enough to carry all the measures of the administration; and that these must always be measures which ought not to be carried. He considers, too, that every federalist who came into either branch, must have been corrupted by the funding system or bank, although not members when either was established. This is a very comprehensive denunciation; and not worth answering at this day, if it were not to show the true character of Mr. Jefferson's credulity, or something worse.

The best refutation may be, to mention the names of the majorities in both branches, who voted to provide for the public debt. If they were the corrupt men alluded to, they were not so avaricious as may be supposed; and not so wise, as wicked, since no one was afterwards known to have changed his condition for the better, in consequence of his

votes.

The funding system was finally established in July, 1790. Those who voted for it in the Senate were:

Pierce Buller, S. C.
Tristram Dalton, Mass.
Elmer, N. J.
Henry, Md.
Johnson, Conn.

Ralph Izard, S. C.
John Langdon, N. H.

Robert Morris, Penn.
William Patterson, N. J.
Schuyler, N. Y.
Caleb Strong, Mass.

Walker, Va.

Rufus King, N. Y

The following are among many similar notices of the provision for the payment of the public debt, found in Mr. Jefferson's volumes. In page 446 of 4th volume: " Hamilton's "financial system had then passed. It had two objects: "1st. As a puzzle to exclude popular understanding and "inquiry. 2d. As a machine for the corruption of the

legislature; for he avowed the opinion, that man could be "governed by one of two motives only, force or interest. "Force, he observed, in this country, was out of the ques"tion; and the interest, therefore, of the members, must be "laid hold of, to keep the legislature in unison with the "executive. And with grief and shame it must be acknow"ledged, that his machine was not without effect."

Almost all the members of both houses of Congress, who voted for the "funding system," were then sufficiently distinguished to be known throughout the United States.

Every one who can remember as far back as thirty years, and who was attentive to public affairs, must have been informed, (as to those in his own state, if not more extensively,) of the reputation of these men. Who among them may be selected as a corrupt speculator? Who among them may be supposed to have advocated a great political measure, perfectly reconcilable with honor, justice, and duty in itself, for the purpose of enriching himself? Mr. Jefferson was among these men, from the 22d of March, 1790, to the 31st of December, 1793. He had Beckly and Freneau, and many other skilful inquirers, and faithful reporters. Who would Mr. Jefferson have selected as a corrupt monarchist, if in that space of time he had been called on to do so? there nothing in the future days of these men, and in the repeated marks of confidence, which were afterwards conferred, where they were best known, which might have corrected Mr. Jefferson's opinions, in the long lapse of time through which he lived? No, nothing. Among the last acts of his life, he carefully prepared his charges to go down to posterity, with his certificate that they were true.

Was

The same sort of record is made by Mr. Jefferson concerning the National Bank, which was created by the votes of nearly the same men. On the 2d of March, (vol. iv. p. 481,) Mr. Jefferson thus describes the majority of the House of Representatives: "1. Bank directors. 2. Holders "of bank stock. 3. Stock-jobbers. 4. Blind devotees. 5. Ignorant persons who did not comprehend them; (meaning Giles's resolutions, criminating Hamilton.) 6. Lazy, good-humored persons, who comprehended and acknow"ledged them, yet were too lazy to examine, or unwilling to pronounce censure. The three first descriptions, making one third of the house, and the three latter one half of "the residue."

66

66

66

Now, did Mr. Jefferson really believe this, his own record? or did he record that which he believed to be untrue,

to answer some purpose of his own? If he really believed all that he states to be true, what must be thought of his understanding? If he knew that he was stating that which was untrue, what must be thought of his heart?

LETTER XXXVI.

JUNE 12, 1833.

On the subject of monarchy, as charged against the federalists as a party, it is one on which Mr. Jefferson delights to dwell. The following are samples of the multitude of remarks to be found in his volumes:

In vol. iii. p. 402: "The X, Y, Z, fever has considerably "abated through the country, as I am informed, and the "alien and sedition laws are working hard. For my own

part, I consider those laws merely an experiment on the "American mind, to see how far it will bear an avowed "violation of the constitution. If this goes down, we shall "immediately see another act of Congress attempted, de"claring that the President shall continue in office during

life, reserving to another occasion the transfer of the suc"cession to his heirs, and the establishment of the Senate "for life."

In vol. iv. p. 84: "The government which they (federal"ists) wished to have established here, and only accepted "and held fast, at first, to the present constitution, as a "stepping-stone to the final establishment of their favorite "model. This party has, therefore, always clung to Eng"land, as their prototype and great auxiliary, in promoting "and effecting this change. A weighty minority of these "leaders, considering the voluntary conversion of our government into a monarchy, as too distant, if not desperate, wish to break off from our Union its eastern fragment,

66

"as being, in fact, the hot-bed of American monarchism, "with a view to the commencement of their favorite govern

ment; from whence the other states may gangrene by degrees, and the whole be thus finally brought to the desired "point."

66

"At the head of this minority, is what is called the Essex Junto of Massachusetts. But the majority of these "leaders do not aim at separation. In this they adhere to "the known principles of General Hamilton, never under "any views, to break the Union. Anglomany, monarchy, "and separation, then, are the principles of the Essex fede"ralists; anglomany and monarchy, of the Hamiltonians; "and anglomany alone, that of the portion of people who "call themselves federalists." (Letter to Mr. Mellish, mapmaker, January 19, 1813.)

These are only some, of many similar remarks scattered through Mr. Jefferson's third and fourth volumes.

The foregoing extracts, assume that almost immediately after the adoption of the national government, there was a party in New England, who designed to subvert that government, and dissolve the Union, or to convert that government into a monarchy. No persons are named.* It is a general denunciation of the federal party. There is no mode of meeting and refuting Mr. Jefferson, but by stating facts which cannot be denied; and if these be utterly incompatible with the supposed design, the design itself must be regarded as a mere calumny, chargeable on the perverted state of Mr. Jefferson's mind, or on his own want of integrity.

These are historical facts: The federal party labored, with all their might, to establish the national constitution. King, Gore, Strong, Lowell, Parsons, Hamilton, Jay, Pick

* This is the often repeated opinion of Mr. Jefferson, who says, in his Mazzei letter, "we must break these lilliputian ties, with which they have bound us," &c.