The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

This begins the eleventh week's reading in our Presidential Series group discussion. This is the next to the last week. We are on the home stretch.

The complete table of contents is as follows:

Prologue. Jefferson Surge: America, 1992-1993 p.3
1. Philadelphia:1775-76 p.27
2. Paris: 1784-89 p.75
3. Monticello: 1794-97 p.139
4. Washington, D.C.: 1801-1804 p.200
5. Monticello: 1816-1826 p.273
Epilogue. The Future of an Illusion p.349
Appendix. A Note on the Sally Hemings Scandals p.363

The assignment for this week includes the following segments/pages:

Week Eleven - April 12th - April 18th -> 5. Monticello: 1816-1826 p.300 - 334 - Retrospectives - Consolidation and Diffusion - Rebel Reactionary

We look forward to your participation; but remember this is a non spoiler thread.

We will open up threads for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers.

This book was kicked off on February 1st. This will be the eleventh week's assignment for this book.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, or on your Kindle.

A special welcome to those who will be newcomers to this discussion and thank you to those who have actively contributed on the previous Presidential Series selection. We are glad to have you all.

~Bentley

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

Here also is the syllabus:

http://www.africa-eu.com/topic/show/2...

Joseph J. Ellis

The Autobiography of Thomas Jefferson

In 1821, Thomas Jefferson spend six months working on his autobiography... He chose not to write anything at all about his presidency.

The autobiography was devoted to retelling two familiar stories in the way he wanted them to be remembered. The first was about the drafting and the subsequent debate in the Continental Congress over the Declaration of Independence. ...The second story was to answer Federalist critics about his contribution to the coming of the French Revolution.

Also, Ellis mentions, "...one of his most unequivocal condemnations of slavery was prominently placed in his autobiography." Ellis, quoting Jefferson's Autobiography, "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever, that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events. ...The Almighty has no attribute which can take sides with us in such a contest."

Ellis goes on in the next paragraph saying, "Moral pronouncements aside, Jefferson had also left a long and clear record of procrastination and denial on the slavery issue.

Autobiography of Thomas Jefferson



This can be read online here:

Yet another conflict in Jefferson's character was exhibited again in the congressional debates of 1819-20. Jefferson had worried out loud about the constitutional precedent he was setting with the acquisition of Louisiana in 1803. The entire congressional debate of 1819-20 over the Missouri Question turned on the question of federal versus state sovereignty, essentially a constitutional conflict in which Jefferson's longstanding opposition to federal power was clear and unequivocal, the Louisiana Purchase being the one exception that was now coming back to haunt him.

The outcome of these debates was the passage of The Missouri Compromise.

More info can be found on the Missouri Compromise here:


Again, Ellis quotes Jefferson talking about the slavery issue during the debates saying, "The march of events has not been able to render its completion practicable with the limits of time alloted to me," he admitted, "and I leave its accomplishment to the work of another generation." Or, in the same vein: "On the subject of emancipation I have ceased to think because it is not to be the work of my day."

Very interesting words indeed.

Another interesting point Ellis makes about the debates over the Missouri Compromise. At yet another level the debate over Missouri transformed the huge midwestern region that Jefferson had aquired in 1803 from a source of release and relief to a source of ongoing contention.

Now that's an understatement! I wonder if Jefferson was able to grasp the magnitude of the consequences of the failure of his generation in relation to answering the slavery question that would come to a head 40 years later.

Joe wrote: "The Autobiography of Thomas Jefferson

In 1821, Thomas Jefferson spend six months working on his autobiography... He chose not to write anything at all about his presidency.

The autobiography was ..."

Yes all of this is very true. I guess there is an old saying that actions speak louder than words. In Jefferson's case this was very true regarding the slavery issue in his own house. Odd how he could condemn slavery yet have slaves. I guess that is one reason he was such an enigma and a puzzle (sphinx)...nobody could really figure him out and discover what the real man was all about.

I actually think that John Adams had a better handle than most people regarding what Jefferson was all about.

For those of you interested, here is the transcript of the actual Missouri Compromise:

Transcript of Missouri Compromise (1820)

An Act to authorize the people of the Missouri territory to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union on an equal footing with the original states, and to prohibit slavery in certain territories.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the inhabitants of that portion of the Missouri territory included within the boundaries herein after designated, be, and they are hereby, authorized to form for themselves a constitution and state government, and to assume such name as they shall deem proper; and the said state, when formed, shall be admitted into the Union, upon an equal footing with the original states, in all respects whatsoever.

SEC.2. And be it further enacted, That the said state shall consist of all the territory included within the following boundaries, to wit: Beginning in the middle of the Mississippi river, on the parallel of thirty-six degrees of north latitude; thence west, along that parallel of latitude, to the St. Francois river; thence up, and following the course of that river, in the middle of the main channel thereof, to the parallel of latitude of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes; thence west, along the same, to a point where the said parallel is intersected by a meridian line passing through the middle of the mouth of the Kansas river, where the same empties into the Missouri river, thence, from the point aforesaid north, along the said meridian line, to the intersection of the parallel of latitude which passes through the rapids of the river Des Moines, making the said line to correspond with the Indian boundary line; thence east, from the point of intersection last aforesaid, along the said parallel of latitude, to the middle of the channel of the main fork of the said river Des Moines ; thence down arid along the middle of the main channel of the said river Des Moines, to the mouth of the same, where it empties into the Mississippi river; thence, due east, to the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi river; thence down, and following the course of the Mississippi river, in the middle of the main channel thereof, to the place of beginning : Provided, The said state shall ratify the boundaries aforesaid . And provided also, That the said state shall have concurrent jurisdiction on the river Mississippi, and every other river bordering on the said state so far as the said rivers shall form a common boundary to the said state; and any other state or states, now or hereafter to be formed and bounded by the same, such rivers to be common to both; and that the river Mississippi, and the navigable rivers and waters leading into the same, shall be common highways, and for ever free, as well to the inhabitants of the said state as to other citizens of the United States, without any tax, duty impost, or toll, therefor, imposed by the said state.

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That all free white male citizens of the United States, who shall have arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and have resided in said territory: three months previous to the day of election, and all other persons qualified to vote for representatives to the general assembly of the said territory, shall be qualified to be elected and they are hereby qualified and authorized to vote, and choose representatives to form a convention, who shall be apportioned amongst the several counties as follows :
From the county of Howard, five representatives. From the county of Cooper, three representatives. From the county of Montgomery, two representatives. From the county of Pike, one representative. From the county of Lincoln, one representative. From the county of St. Charles, three representatives. From the county of Franklin, one representative. From the county of St. Louis, eight representatives. From the county of Jefferson, one representative. From the county of Washington, three representatives. From the county of St. Genevieve, four representatives. From the county of Madison, one representative. From the county of Cape Girardeau, five representatives. From the county of New Madrid, two representatives. From the county of Wayne, and that portion of the county of Lawrence which falls within the boundaries herein designated, one representative.

And the election for the representatives aforesaid shall be holden on the first Monday, and two succeeding days of May next, throughout the several counties aforesaid in the said territory, and shall be, in every respect, held and conducted in the same manner, and under the same regulations as is prescribed by the laws of the said territory regulating elections therein for members of the general assembly, except that the returns of the election in that portion of Lawrence county included in the boundaries aforesaid, shall be made to the county of Wayne, as is provided in other cases under the laws of said territory.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That the members of the conven tion thus duly elected, shall be, and they are hereby authorized to meet at the seat of government of said territory on the second Monday of the month of June next; and the said convention, when so assembled, shall have power and authority to adjourn to any other place in the said territory, which to them shall seem best for the convenient transaction of their business; and which convention, when so met, shall first determine by a majority of the whole number elected, whether it be, or be not, expedient at that time to form a constitution and state government for the people within the said territory, as included within the boundaries above designated; and if it be deemed expedient, the convention shall be, and hereby is, authorized to form a constitution and state government; or, if it be deemed more expedient, the said convention shall provide by ordinance for electing representatives to form a constitution or frame of government; which said representatives shall be chosen in such manner, and in such proportion as they shall designate; and shall meet at such time and place as shall be prescribed by the said ordinance; and shall then form for the people of said territory, within the boundaries aforesaid, a constitution and state government: Provided, That the same, whenever formed, shall be republican, and not repugnant to the constitution of the United States; and that the legislature of said state shall never interfere with the primary disposal of the soil by the United States, nor with any regulations Congress may find necessary for securing the title in such soil to the bona fide purchasers ; and that no tax shall be imposed on lands the property of the United States ; and in no case shall non-resident proprietors be taxed higher than residents.

SEC. 5. And be it further enacted, That until the next general census shall be taken, the said state shall be entitled to one representative in the House of Representatives of the United States.

Missouri Compromise Continued: (too long for one message block)

SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That the following propositions be, and the same are hereby, offered to the convention of the said territory of Missouri, when formed, for their free acceptance or rejection, which, if accepted by the convention, shall be obligatory upon the United States:
First. That section numbered sixteen in every township, and when such section has been sold, or otherwise disposed of, other lands equivalent thereto, and as contiguous as may be, shall be granted to the state for the use of the inhabitants of such township, for the use of schools.
Second. That all salt springs, not exceeding twelve in number, with six sections of land adjoining to each, shall be granted to the said state for the use of said state, the same to be selected by the legislature of the said state, on or before the first day of January, in the year one thousand eight hundred and twenty-five ; and the same, when so selected, to be used under such terms, conditions, and regulations, as the legislature of said state shall direct: Provided, That no salt spring, the right whereof now is, or hereafter shall be, confirmed or adjudged to any individual or individuals, shall, by this section, be granted to the said state: And provided also, That the legislature shall never sell or lease the same, at anyone time, for a longer period than ten years, without the consent of Congress.
Third. That five per cent. of the net proceeds of the sale of lands lying within the said territory or state, and which shall be sold by Congress, from and after the first day of January next, after deducting all expenses incident to the same, shall be reserved for making public roads and canals, of which three fifths shall be applied to those objects within the state, under the direction of the legislature thereof; and the other two fifths in defraying, under the direction of Congress, the expenses to be incurred in making of a road or roads, canal or canals, leading to the said state.
Fourth. That four entire sections of land be, and the same are hereby, granted to the said state, for the purpose of fixing their seat of government thereon; which said sections shall, under the direction of the legislature of said state, be located, as near as may be, in one body, at any time, in such townships and ranges as the legislature aforesaid may select, on any of the public lands of the United States: Provided, That such locations shall be made prior to the public sale of the lands of the United States surrounding such location.
Fifth. That thirty-six sections, or one entire township, which shall be designated by the President of the United States, together with the other lands heretofore reserved for that purpose, shall be reserved for the use of a seminary of learning, and vested in the legislature of said state, to be appropriated solely to the use of such seminary by the said legislature: Provided, That the five foregoing propositions herein offered, are on the condition that the convention of the said state shall provide, by an ordinance, irrevocable without the consent or the United States, that every and each tract of land sold by the United States, from and after the firsl day of January next, shall remain exempt from any tax laid by order or under the authority of the state, whether for state, county, or township, or any other purpose whatever, for the term of five years from and after the day of sale; And further, That the bounty lands granted, or hereafter to be granted, for military services during the late war, shall, while they continue to be held by the patentees, or their heirs remain exempt as aforesaid from taxation for the term of three year; from and after the date of the patents respectively.

SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That in case a constitution and state government shall be formed for the people of the said territory of Missouri, the said convention or representatives, as soon thereafter as may be, shall cause a true and attested copy of such constitution or frame of state government, as shall be formed or provided, to be transmitted to Congress.

SEC. 8. And be it further enacted. That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the state, contemplated by this act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labour or service is lawfully claimed, in any state or territory of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labour or service as aforesaid.

APPROVED, March 6, 1820.

Did anyone else find Ellis' discussion of TJ's "Anas" interesting? I always thought this work was a strange enigma. I didn't cite it often for researchers, and I remember only one scholar examining it. It is a work that no one knows about.

Now I am beginning to understand why. Really reliable? Um, no. It was written in his old age and as Ellis states, "took the form of a melodramatic plot populated by schemers, conspirators and corrupt connivers..." (p. 255). It is good that Ellis bring this to light, because to me it fits into a common motivation for those who look back on their important years: placing yourself in a good position in history. And Adams and TJ certainly knew that they had a place in history.

Yes, I agree with you Bryan..everything Adams did showed he was preparing himself for history and to a large extent, I believe that Thomas Jefferson knew this too.

So why this book which is about schemers, conspirators and corrupt connivers. What was this a comment on? The people around him, was he examining some of his own motivations. Not being familiar with the book I am very interested in hearing your take on this.

On one level, the Anas is his record of what happened during the Washington administration and what people around him in government were thinking. I think through conversations and letters, he puts together people's "thoughts" on the matters at hand. TJ also would take discussions that happened over months and string them together like a dialogue or montage. As Ellis states, he is responding to Marshall's biography on Washington.

The other level is that I think he is reflecting on a time where he thought the Federalist were scheming around George Washington. He was "in the den" of the Federalists by being a Cabinet officer. Maybe that is why it is so negative. He is infusing his idealism into the history; he has a cause to pursue.

Yes that is really interesting considering that George Washington had a falling out with Jefferson (a permanent one) because Washington felt that Jefferson was the schemer and was trying to make false accusations about George Washington himself.

Interesting that Jefferson goes back to that period of time; was he trying to explain himself or somehow make excuses for what was happening by blaming the Federalists

Was it idealism or his view of the events. It seems very strange.

What was there about Marshall's biography on Washington that he was responding to? Did he agree or disagree with Marshall?

I think it is his view and his idealism. I haven't read Marshall's bio but if it is glowing and he is a Federalist, you can assume TJ was not amused.

We should wish TJ a happy 267 birthday today!

Happy 267th Birthday Thomas Jefferson.

I have to say our timing is right; First World War and Anzac Day, No Ordinary Time and Pearl Harbor Day, and of course Sphinx and TJ's birthday.

Bentley wrote: "


Happy 267th Birthday Thomas Jefferson.

I have to say our timing is right; First World War and Anzac Day, No Ordinary Time and Pearl Harbor Day, and of course Sphinx and TJ's birthday."

Bravo!

Bentley wrote: "Joe wrote: "The Autobiography of Thomas Jefferson

In 1821, Thomas Jefferson spend six months working on his autobiography... He chose not to write anything at all about his presidency.

The autobi..."

I'm reading this section now, and it is interesting that a visitor commented how obsessed he was about the MO compromise. I think this illustrates TJ's deep struggle with this issue. It is almost like he was developing an ulcer. He wanted to free his slaves, but no plan was in place to do so.

Ellis also brings up an interesting point about TJ being upset with the Northern leaders who did not leave it up to Southerners to take the lead as Adams suggests the plan was.

It does seem like he suffered from analysis paralysis regarding his slaves.

Jefferson had deep convictions, lacked follow through and I think did not free the slaves because without them his lifestyle would have changed. That is what I think was the probable reason.

Yes, I agree. He was trapped in a system, not just lifestyle, but prejudice. There was no way he could see freed slaves living side by side with whites. (He was worried about the Haitian revolution and Gabriel's 1800 revolt, too). Most didn't.

FYI on Gabriel:


I read a little further and I'm still thinking about Ellis' remarks on TJ's conspiracy theory that the Missouri question really wasn't about slavery at all, but another Federalist plot. Ellis hits TJ pretty hard in this section.

Yes, I am getting through it now and will comment later. But I do believe that Jefferson is not the icon that America has made him out to be nor the demon that the Federalists and others made him out to be either.

He should be remembered however as one of the most revered Founding Fathers and of course for the fabulous Declaration of Independence as well as his presidency. He did a great deal for this country and of course that makes him revered as he should be.

I am reading Sphinx on my Kindle so I am unsure of page numbers here but in the section titled Retrospectives Ellis makes mention of the fact that both Adams and Jefferson had begun to make copies early on of all of their letters - Adams since 1776 and Jefferson since 1782. And that both of them had a "keen sense of themselves". Now what did that mean?

Also cited on the same Kindle page, "Alfred North Whitehead once observed that there were only two instances in recorded history when the political leadership of an emerging empire performed as well as one could realistically expect: The first was Rome under Caesar Augustus and the second was the United States in the revolutionary era.

Ellis seems to feel that we were the ultimate audience for their performances. Were Adams and Jefferson performing for us?

Ellis seems to think yes. He thinks that Jefferson shifted because of age.

I also thought it very odd that both Adams and Jefferson disliked Patrick Henry...why was that? And that both of them got into an argument over it."

I loved this sentence by Ellis in describing what Jefferson would go all out for:

"Jefferson preferred to avoid such trivial arguments about specific events of personalities, except when the contested topic was the Declaration of Independence; there he was ready to defend his own version against all encroachments, sensing that it was the historical equivalent of the motherlode." (smile)

I also think that Jefferson wanted Madison to continue to do his bidding.

Ellis stated: "His major concern was the larger outline of the story that would get passed down to posterity about the meaning of the American Revolution. Madison's retirement from the presidency in 1817 raised expectations that his old partner in the political wars would devote his energies to writing a Jeffersonian version of American history. He urged Madison to "apply your retirement to the best use possible, to a work which we have both wished to see well done..." He promised to place all his personal letters and notes "entirely at your command."

It was still Jefferson's style to have Madison stick his neck out and have Jefferson stay behind the scenes.

I really wonder if Jefferson tilted at windmills...worrying so much about posterity and about the Adams (father and son) and what they were going to write. He really got all wound up about the arguments of the Whigs versus the Tories, the Republicans versus the Federalists, pure republicans versus corrupted imposters. I really think that Jefferson made up half of the trouble he saw in his mind. A brilliant man but slightly paranoid I fear.

It is really odd that Jefferson tried to bring down Washington behind his back when in fact Washington did not want to be a king; according to Jefferson there had been an unraveling of the country as a republic while he was out of the country in France. Is this entirely true or is he embellishing the seriousness of the situation. Is it Jefferson himself who is paranoid? Washington as I mentioned previously had such a falling out with Jefferson that he never wanted to speak to him again. Washington cared very much about his reputation.

I wonder what Jefferson's views were on women. It seemed that the French Revolution was a sensitive spot for Jefferson.

Jefferson stated: "The French Revolution would have been a bloodless and wholly peaceful transition, but for the cowardice and indecision of Louis Capet. And the king's failure to side with the future rather than the past was, he claimed, largely the result of his wife's influence over him. I have ever believed that had there been no queen, there would have been no revolution." The entire tragedy was due not to long-standing historical forces that proved unmanageable but to the ill-timed meddling of one woman.

This seems rather bizarre. The French public did not like Maria Antoinette because she was Austrian and the French had an alliance with Austria which had led them in the Seven Years War and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the British. The French public really loved him at first. She became viewed as the unwelcome foreigner and then because of Louis himself the couple did not consummate their marriage for quite some time. In fact, the wikipedia article attributes this to both of their blunderings.

Eventually they had four children. But with the "mob rule" that took over France at this time..I doubt that Marie Antoinette was that much at fault and it seems that Louis was a very indecisive king. I am surprised that Jefferson tries to explain away the French Revolution this way. The French simply hated Marie Antoinette; she wasn't French.

Louis XVI of France




[image error]

These were some of the causes of the French Revolution:





Among the causes were :

a) Famine (Inflation and high bread prices)
b) Large National Debt
c) The Feudal System
d) Unfair Taxation of the Third Estate
e) Unfair Economic Structure

Bentley wrote: "I am reading Sphinx on my Kindle so I am unsure of page numbers here but in the section titled Retrospectives Ellis makes mention of the fact that both Adams and Jefferson had begun to make copies ..."

Yeah, I think the keen awareness is knowing what they left behind, and it seems TJ was doing what many famous men do: write their memoir to get on the record. I think because he was so behind the scenes guy, he never got a biographer to write his a book on him during his lifetime. So, he got his letters in order to have someone do it after his death.

Bentley wrote: "I wonder what Jefferson's views were on women. It seemed that the French Revolution was a sensitive spot for Jefferson.

Jefferson stated: "The French Revolution would have been a bloodless and ..."

Yeah it was weird statement; I remember it. I think he had a standard period outlook on women: educate them to run the house. He fostered reading and love of knowledge, though.

There is a book on the subject which I have not read:

Jon Kukla

This Marie statement only confirms that he didn't have a strong clue what was going on in France.

It is hard to fathom that Jefferson believed that America should remain a predominantly agricultural economy and society. Ellis stated: "Domestic manufacturing was permissible, but large factories should be resisted. Most important, the English model of a thoroughly commercial and industrial society in which the economy was dominated by merchants, bankers and industrialists should be avoided at all costs. "We may exclude them from our territory," he warned, "as we do persons afflicted with disease," going so far as to recommend that if one region of the United States should ever become thoroughly commercialized, the remaining agrarian region should secede in order to remain immune to the attendant corruptions. He conceded that his insistence on an agrarian character "may be the dreams of an old man, or that the occasions of realizing them may have passed away without return." But the goal of all statesmen dedicated to the values he cherished most should be to preserve as much of the agrarian character of America as possible. If that turned out to mean merely delaying the inevitable, so be it."

What would our founding father Jefferson have to say about a Supreme Court decision that calls a corporation a person and gives them the ability to funnel money into our elections. Jefferson wanted to avoid these entities at all costs. He would exclude them from the territory like folks who had a strange communicable disease! He actually viewed these folks including the bankers as corrupt. He may have had a point considering what we have gone through lately. And despite what our leaders stated during the Civil War about preserving the Union, the Southern States were told by the Founding Fathers that they could secede if things did not work out. It seems to me that Jefferson was the epitome of the Southern gentleman farmer and plantation owner who wanted to preserve his culture and his way of life. In many respects you cannot blame him; the one problem was freeing the slaves. And of course, that one issue was at the root of all of the problems. Even Jefferson who was tormented in part by the concept of slavery; could not free his own. I really believe that Jefferson wanted to be thought of as a good and spiritual man.

On Yale, Harvard and Andover -

Jefferson had a way with words calling these places "seminaries of despotism". I wonder why he felt that way about these institutions.

He saw in 1800, the "takeover by the Republicans" as a mini revolution - one that freed America from political oppression. What he felt he had done in 1800 was to restore the democratic impulse of the American Revolution after its betrayal by the Federalists. I think that Jefferson felt that while he was out of the country that the country had strayed from its original principles and that he was bringing it back around. Was he really or had the country just grown and developed?

He hated the Federal courts so he would not have liked the Roberts Court, he did not care for the Senate and distrusted the Presidency feeling that the House of Representatives was the one branch of government closer to the people and that the communities of the people really spoke for the people themselves. It is funny but I doubt nowadays that folks feel that close to their local government.

I do agree with Jefferson about lobbyists. He opposed "efforts to organize discrete interest groups to represent segments of the popular will to the federal government, what we would now call lobbyists. He regarded these as dangerous machines and I would have to agree with him on this.

Bentley wrote: "I am reading Sphinx on my Kindle so I am unsure of page numbers here but in the section titled Retrospectives Ellis makes mention of the fact that both Adams and Jefferson had begun to make copies ..."

I think that Ellis meant that both Adams and Jefferson both knew how they ought to be portrayed in history; but did they? My philosophy is that how others perceive you is more likely to be true to your character than how you perceive yourself.

I also believe from other historical biographies and other reads regarding that time period, that these men understood the historical significance of their journey. And, although they came together to do what was right for the nation, they were still egostical in that outcome, except for Washington I believe. However, some of the others, such as Jefferson and Adams, wanted to ensure their place as well.

Over the course of my reading, I've really come to respect George Washington as a man and as a leader. Washington had the opportunity to seize power as the first President of America. He might have held that position for a very long time had he not refused to continue to hold office. For someone to have so much respect, I have to believe that he was truly a unique and great man, which makes him a likely target for criticism. Perhaps Jefferson was jealous of Washington. I don't know, but there had to be a reason that he attacked Washington. I just don't believe that it was anything that based upon Washington the man himself, simply because I really haven't found any negative record of him thus far.

Bentley wrote: "These were some of the causes of the French Revolution:



..."

Great info, Bentley. These characteristics are very similar to those, in my opinion, that were the cause of the Russian Revolution, but interestingly, not the American Revolution.

Yes Sera..I ask the same question. Although someone as secretive as Jefferson has probably yet to be figured out.

I also agree with you regarding the point of protecting or organizing how you will be perceived. Adams and Jefferson were well on their way to preparing much of their historical perspective themselves.

I think that Washington must have been the strongest man of the three. He did not need power nor did he desire it and I think that was the true mark of his character. And Washington was the type of man who was very final with Jefferson when he discovered his responsibility and his hand in attacking him and he was unforgiving. I too think that Jefferson was jealous of Washington.

Maybe with Jefferson it was nothing personal but political and with Washington everything was personal and he valued his integrity and good name more than anything else.

Agreed, Bentley. It must have difficult to follow Washington, knowing that he would leave an untarnished legacy. Today he is still known as "The Father" of our country. In addition, Washington did not appear to be conflicted about his role in the new America, whereas Jefferson's beliefs in some ways were inconsistent with his behavior as we had discussed previously. Thus, I didn't get the impression that Jefferson actually knew himself as well as he had thought.

I think that Jefferson may have had a difficult time with his image and what others perceived him to be. It must have been difficult being in the shadow of a man like Washington or others of that period.

I think in some ways Jefferson was tormented and that the tormenting was pretty much inflicted upon himself by his own thoughts. I am beginning to think that the others were not the enemies that Jefferson thought they were. Of course, he could have worsened the relationships that he had. Yet folks seemed to gravitate to him and wanted his company..a real paradox. A person folks liked yet at some level..he was conflicted.

Bryan wrote: "Bentley wrote: "I wonder what Jefferson's views were on women. It seemed that the French Revolution was a sensitive spot for Jefferson.

Jefferson stated: "The French Revolution would have been ..."

I agree with you Bryan..he must have been too busy shopping (smile) for fine wines and furniture and wagons to send home.

I really felt that this thought about the Revolution was truly off the mark considering he had lived in France and should have been familiar with some of the inequities.

Bryan wrote: "I think it is his view and his idealism. I haven't read Marshall's bio but if it is glowing and he is a Federalist, you can assume TJ was not amused.



It doesn't sound like Jefferson was amused and probably felt that the tome would live on. It is odd that he did not have the ability to write one himself. Supposedly such a great writer and so after others to do his bidding..why didn't he have the follow through to get the job done himself?

Bryan wrote: "Yes, I agree. He was trapped in a system, not just lifestyle, but prejudice. There was no way he could see freed slaves living side by side with whites. (He was worried about the Haitian revolut..."

You know Bryan..he should have been worried about these things...when you keep men as slaves and deny them their rights (simply because you took them from their rightful home - continents away) - why should you expect that every one of them would remain loyal. There was such a distrust of the concept of freed slaves and they really did not view them as being full fledged human beings either. A travesty but a sort of caste system existed. It could be that they deluded themselves into believing that the black man was inferior to allow themselves the right to keep them as slaves (because they would not know what to do to take care of themselves). It was this prejudice that also kept him from freeing his slaves as well as his self interest. And it was that prejudice and the desire to maintain their culture, standard of living and economy which made the South forsake everything else to maintain them.

Bryan wrote: "Bentley wrote: "I am reading Sphinx on my Kindle so I am unsure of page numbers here but in the section titled Retrospectives Ellis makes mention of the fact that both Adams and Jefferson had begun..."

A bit lazy too..it does not look like he was an orderly guy like Adams was or John Quincy...a bit haphazard and he certainly liked to get another fellow to get done what he should have done himself.

Moving on to Consolidation and Diffusion:

Jefferson for all of his pomp regarding freeing the slaves never feed them himself and as Ellis stated: "Silence had become his official policy."

I have to ask why?

We know he did not want to be remembered as harboring slaves or owning slaves yet for years that is exactly what he did.

Ellis states that what "broke the silence and thrust his reputation squarely into the middle of the national spotlight, and in a way he would have preferred to avoid at almost any cost, was the debate over slavery in the Missouri Territory. It began in 1819 when a congressman from New York, James Tallmadge, Jr., proposed an amendment to the bill admitting Missouri into the Union that was designed to prohibit slavery in the new state."

At first Jefferson seemed calm and then he went over the top. Visitors stated that he was a man obsessed and was warning of imminent civil war and that there would be a "war of extermination toward the African in our land." Does this sound like a man who has a firm grip?

But then he stated in a letter to John Holmes that nobody wanted an end to slavery more than he did (I think this line was written for his history)...then he states "if, in that way a general emancipation and expatriation could be affected". There was no way that Jefferson felt freeing the slaves meant that he would be living among them. So odd considering the circumstances of Jefferson's own personal life.

Here is a copy of the original letter Jefferson wrote to Holmes....note how he underlined the word "expatriation".



[image error]

Also here is the entire letter typed out for legibility:

Here are quite a few letters from the Library of Congress which might be worth pursuing:

Probably some folks might be wondering who was John Holmes that Jefferson was writing to:

John Holmes (March 14, 1773 – July 7, 1843) was an American politician. Holmes, a National Republican, served as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts and was one of the first two U.S. Senators from Maine. Holmes was noted for his involvement in the Treaty of Ghent.

The letter referred to is the letter in message 37

Holmes was born in Kingston, Massachusetts. He attended public schools in Kingston and in 1796 graduated from the College of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (the former name of Brown University) in Providence, Rhode Island. Later, Holmes studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1799, opening a law practice in Alfred, Maine — then a district of Massachusetts. At this time, he was also engaged in literary pursuits.

The political career of Holmes began when he was elected to the Massachusetts General Court in 1802, 1803, and 1812, and was subsequently elected to the Massachusetts State Senate in 1813 and 1814. In 1816, Holmes was one of the commissioners under the Treaty of Ghent to divide the islands of Passamaquoddy Bay between the United States and Great Britain. He was also appointed by the legislature to organize state prisons and revise the Massachusetts criminal code.

Holmes was elected as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts in 1816, serving from March 4, 1817, to his resignation on March 15, 1820. During the 16th Congress, Holmes served as chairman of the Committee on Expenditures in the Department of State. Holmes was a backer of William H. Crawford (a "Crawford Republican") and John Quincy Adams, and was opposed to Andrew Jackson (an "Anti-Jackson").

Holmes had resigned on March 15th, 1820 as US Representative from Massachusetts because Maine had become its own state on that date.

Missouri compromise - Here I think he did Jefferson's bidding.

Holmes supported the Missouri Compromise, and was thanked for this by Thomas Jefferson.

In the letter, Jefferson thanks Holmes for a copy of his pamphlet, Mr. Holmes's Letter to the People of Maine.

This pamphlet defends Holmes' position on supporting the Missouri Compromise–the admission of Maine as a free state with the admission of Missouri as a slave state, which was unpopular position in Maine.

This letter is also notable for being the first written attestation of the phrase "to have the wolf by the ear".

Constitutional convention

Holmes was later a delegate to the Maine Constitutional Convention. Upon separation from Massachusetts and the admission of the Maine as a state, he was elected to the U.S. Senate and served from June 13, 1820, to March 3, 1827.

Holmes was again elected to the Senate to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Albion K. Parris, serving from January 15, 1829, to March 3, 1833. During the 17th Congress, Holmes served as chairman of the Committee on Finance (1821–1822); during the 21st Congress, Holmes was chairman of the Committee on Pensions.

Law practice

After leaving the U.S. Senate, Holmes resumed his law practice. From 1836 to 1837, he was a member of the Maine House of Representatives. In 1841, Holmes was appointed as the United States Attorney for the District of Maine, a post he held until his death in Portland on July 7, 1843. Holmes was interred in a private tomb of Cotton Brooks, Eastern Cemetery.

Source: Wikipedia



There is no goodreads source for the publication mentioned above.

Simile of holding wolf by the ears to describe Americas position in relation to slavery was used by Jefferson several times. For example, the website referred below gives the following two quotations.

But as it is we have the wolf by the ears, we can neither hold him, nor let him safely go. Justice is in one scale, and self preservation in the other. - Thomas Jefferson to John Holmes, 1820.

We have the wolf by the ear and feel the danger of either holding or letting him loose. - Thomas Jefferson to Lydia Huntley Sigourney, 1824.

Clearly Jefferson was pointing to the fact that it is undesirable and very difficult for America to hold on to slavery because of the consideration of justice and equality, which were central to the concept of America as a nation.

Jefferson also felt that pressure of growing opposition to slavery within America. At the same time he felt that abolition of slavery will create other problems, which he likened to the problems of letting the wolf go. The wolf will not just go away.

Once released it will harm the person holding him by ears. By this Jefferson was pointing out to the economic problems that will be faced by doing away with the cheap labour available through the institution of slavery.

The above explanation was an excerpt from enotes:

Bentley wrote: "Bryan wrote: "I think it is his view and his idealism. I haven't read Marshall's bio but if it is glowing and he is a Federalist, you can assume TJ was not amused.
It doesn't sound like Jeffers..."

You know, TJ got burned with the Notes being printed before a final draft in Paris. Maybe he didn't trust the whole publishing thing to get his story out the right way, I don't know.

Sera wrote: "Agreed, Bentley. It must have difficult to follow Washington, knowing that he would leave an untarnished legacy. Today he is still known as "The Father" of our country. In addition, Washington d..."

Yeah, GW is coming out ahead here. I think TJ wanted to come out looking good and simply was quiet hoping no tarnish will come. In a way, he succeeded. TJ was on a pedestal for a 150 years.

Bryan wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Bryan wrote: "I think it is his view and his idealism. I haven't read Marshall's bio but if it is glowing and he is a Federalist, you can assume TJ was not amused.
It doesn't sound..."

It is difficult to try to figure out an enigmatic soul like Jefferson centuries later for sure.

Bryan wrote: "Sera wrote: "Agreed, Bentley. It must have difficult to follow Washington, knowing that he would leave an untarnished legacy. Today he is still known as "The Father" of our country. In addition,..."

Bryan, I think that Jefferson will always be on a pedestal by most of America. Some folks who dig deeper might be upset with some of his views and most of these center and/or are focused around slavery. You know maybe he loved his slaves as family and could not free them because of loneliness and attachment; it is hard to say what the reason or reasons were. Maybe he just wanted them to take care of him like he had been accustomed. Maybe he did not want to create havoc at home with his neighbors. Who is to know now?

It seems TJ "missed the boat" so to speak on some things: French Revolution, slavery, and his debt. It just interesting how the mind can be good at denial, and TJ is not unique.

Very true...he sometimes wanted to see things as he wanted them to be. And according to a recent news article George Washington as president didn't return library books - at least two anyways! (smile)

He probably couldn't find them; I sometimes have had the same issue (grin).

The last part of this section is also interesting about TJ really being a rebel in that he focused on "which was not to harness individual energies but to release them." Madison and Adams were about limits. I think Ellis makes an excellent comment. I always got a sense from TJ that one has to reach your ideal self and that government, especially tyranny, can really get in the way of that. Intellectually, TJ wanted a society to think for yourself and educate and explore the rational world and you need freedom for that.