Details
ADAMS, John Quincy. Autograph letter signed ("J.Q. Adams") as Massachusetts Congressman, to Solomon Lincoln of Hingham, Mass., Washington, 4 April 1836. 4 pages, 4to, in very fine condition.
ADAMS DEFENDS THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO PETITION CONGRESS AND POSTULATES THAT WHEN A STATE OF REBELLION EXISTS, CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO EMANCIPATE THE SLAVES IN THAT STATE
A outspoken and eloquent letter written at the very outset of the impassioned abolitionist crusade that brought glory and luster to the former President's late political career, voicing a critical doctrine bearing on the right to abolish slavery. In the 1830s, reflecting an increasing militancy within the abolitionist movement, anti-slavery petitions began to flood Congress. A sizeable number originated in New England and were sent directly to Adams, who "found his mail bulging with them" (Nagel, John Quincy Adams, p.355). The powerful slave-holding bloc in Congress reacted vehemently in defense of what they saw as an essential right guaranteed by the Constitution. Adams entrenched upon his own Constitutional high ground and argued vociferously for what he believed was the First Amendment right of his constituents and all Americans to petition their elected representatives in Congress. The conflict on the floor of the Capitol reached a peak in the Spring of 1836, when southern representatives endeavored to create an obstacle that would prevent all anti-slavery petitions from ever being read in Congress. Adams's undaunted efforts on behalf of the right to petition and against this so-called Gag Rule "made him the most famous - or notorious - combatant on the floor of Congress during the next decade" (Nagel, p. 354), and his obstinate congressional defense of the Constitution and the rights that it guaranteed constituted the philosophical foundation for his late life crusade against the institution of slavery.
Adams wrote Lincoln principally to salute the town of Hingham on its centennial celebration, and in this connection, offers interesting observations on the significance of their Pilgrim heritage, but clearly, the rancorous tone of the last session of Congress was much on his mind and he writes extensively to Lincoln on the debate, reiterating the critical importance of the Constitutional right to petition. He opens with a theoretical discussion of the freedom of speech and its limits: "The right to speak our mind is in point of form secured to us by the Constitution of the United States, and by all our State Constitutions. But in the exercise of that right there are considerations of prudence, of Justice and of benevolence, all of which might operate with a well constituted heart and mind as restraints and limitations upon it." But, perhaps expressing his distaste for the violent and inflammatory rhetoric recently employed by some of his radical pro-slavery opponents in Congress, he observes that "There is in our Country perhaps not enough restraint of law upon the Freedom of Speech. There is sometimes more, and sometimes less than enough restraint upon it in popular opinion ... I have the right to speak my mind. But if in speaking my mind, I do wrong to another man in his person, his property or his reputation, I abuse the right of Speech while exercising it ... I expose myself to at least retaliation in kind, and what is far more formidable, to the reproaches of my own Conscience." Unswerving in his conviction that slavery constituted a gross affront to morals and ethics, Adams had recently become increasingly indignant at the tone and tactics of the Southern bloc. According to Nagel, he was infuriated that they forced the nation to listen to what he termed "a torrent of moral depravity." (Nagle, p. 355). He was also mindful, that many of the same southern politicians had irresponsibly slandered him in the campaign and election of 1828. He notes that his own judgement about the proper limits of freedom of speech had been severely tested in recent days; "[I have never] in the course of my Life undergone severer trials of temper and of principles than upon the occasions on which I have exercised it during the present Session of Congress."
Discussing the debate, Adams is grateful that Lincoln supports his stance, and confesses that initially he had not intended to actively enter the slavery debate: "I had flattered myself that I should have been sheltered from the necessity of taking any part in the debates concerning it." However, he admits, avoidance was impossible considering the number of petitions "addressed to me with requests that I would present them." And the bold militancy of the southern representatives had left him no choice: "The new pretensions of the Slave representation in Congress, of a right to refuse to receive Petitions, and that Congress have no Constitutional power to abolish Slavery or the Slave trade in the District of Columbia forced upon me so much of the discussion as I did take upon me." Adams suggests that his opposition to these measures was actually relatively restrained, in that he deliberately avoided raising the central moral issue of slavery: "I did not and could not speak a tenth part of my mind. I did not for example start the question whether by the Law of God and of nature man can hold property, hereditary property, in man."
Then, in one of the most remarkable passage of his letter, Adams discusses his conviction that even the complete abolition of slavery would be, under certain conditions like the existence of a rebellion, within the power of Congress (It was precisely this argument of Adams by which President Lincoln justified the issuance in 1862 of his Emancipation Proclamation. See notes to lot 116). Adams writes "I did not start the question whether in the event of a servile insurrection and war, Congress would not have complete unlimited control over the whole subject of Slavery even to the emancipation of all Slaves, in the State where such insurrection should break out, and for the suppression of which the freemen of Plymouth and Norfolk Counties Massachusetts should be called by Acts of Congress to pour out their treasures and to shed their blood. Had I spoken my mind on those two points, the sturdiest of the abolitionists would have disavowed the sentiments of their champion." Alluding to the strength of the pro-slavery faction in the present Congress, Adams explains that to avoid taking what might be seen as a radical stance, he had even backed a motion of a southerner, "which would have been rejected if moved by me," requring all petitions to be sent to a committee to study and report upon. That plan, he states, was "obstinately resisted by the violent portion of the Slave representation, but prevailed, and there is a truce in the servile war for the remainder of the session as I hope."
But Adams' hope for a truce would prove futile. As the Session continued, Adams crusade for the right to petition led to passionate speeches on the floor of Congress: "He argued impressively that a citizen's right to have a petition received and heard was so essential for free government that it took on religious sanctity." (Nagel, p. 356). The opposition, though, was determined to silence the anti-slavery crusade and adopted a resolution that "all petitions, memorials, resolutions or papers, relating in any way ... to the subject of slavery or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed or referred, be laid upon the table, and that no further action whatever shall be had thereon." When the vote was taken upon this "Gag Rule" on May 18, Adams responded unequivocally.
Adams' remarks on Hingham's centennial celebration expresses his regard for the strong moral and religious principles of the Pilgrim fathers, which helped propel the nation "to that greatness and power unparalled in the History of the World." He speaks of their "filial and parental duty" to honor and observe "those incidents in the History of our forefathers, and those principles professed by them which had a tendency to produce and to maintain the progressive improvement of the condition of man." The Pilgrim legacy, he goes on, was substantial: "The Plymouth Colony...was founded upon the combination of two principles - the Spirit of Martyrdom and the Spirit of Patriotism - the most elevated and the most inflexible of moral agents upon human conduct. Their tenacity to their religious opinions had made them voluntary exiles from their native Land - and their tenacity to the name of Englismen made them again exiles from a populous, civilized and hospitable region, to a frost-bound, rock-bound barren wilderness - where they laid the moral and political foundations of an Empire, of physical, moral and political dimensions, never witnessed and never to be surpassed upon this globe."
The bitterness and partisan diatribe continued unabated in Congress, and the gag rule was not rescinded until 1844, but in the interim Adams overcame the infirmities of advancing age to present remarkable numbers of anti-slavery petitions: in January 1839, 95 petitions, in March 1840, 511 petitions. And, as previously noted, "he was the first to declare the doctrine, that the abolition of slavery could be lawfully accomplished under the war powers of the Government." According to one biographer "the earliest expression of this principle is found in a speech made by him in May 1836" (Morse, p.261), a month after this remarkable letter was written.
ADAMS DEFENDS THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO PETITION CONGRESS AND POSTULATES THAT WHEN A STATE OF REBELLION EXISTS, CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO EMANCIPATE THE SLAVES IN THAT STATE
A outspoken and eloquent letter written at the very outset of the impassioned abolitionist crusade that brought glory and luster to the former President's late political career, voicing a critical doctrine bearing on the right to abolish slavery. In the 1830s, reflecting an increasing militancy within the abolitionist movement, anti-slavery petitions began to flood Congress. A sizeable number originated in New England and were sent directly to Adams, who "found his mail bulging with them" (Nagel, John Quincy Adams, p.355). The powerful slave-holding bloc in Congress reacted vehemently in defense of what they saw as an essential right guaranteed by the Constitution. Adams entrenched upon his own Constitutional high ground and argued vociferously for what he believed was the First Amendment right of his constituents and all Americans to petition their elected representatives in Congress. The conflict on the floor of the Capitol reached a peak in the Spring of 1836, when southern representatives endeavored to create an obstacle that would prevent all anti-slavery petitions from ever being read in Congress. Adams's undaunted efforts on behalf of the right to petition and against this so-called Gag Rule "made him the most famous - or notorious - combatant on the floor of Congress during the next decade" (Nagel, p. 354), and his obstinate congressional defense of the Constitution and the rights that it guaranteed constituted the philosophical foundation for his late life crusade against the institution of slavery.
Adams wrote Lincoln principally to salute the town of Hingham on its centennial celebration, and in this connection, offers interesting observations on the significance of their Pilgrim heritage, but clearly, the rancorous tone of the last session of Congress was much on his mind and he writes extensively to Lincoln on the debate, reiterating the critical importance of the Constitutional right to petition. He opens with a theoretical discussion of the freedom of speech and its limits: "The right to speak our mind is in point of form secured to us by the Constitution of the United States, and by all our State Constitutions. But in the exercise of that right there are considerations of prudence, of Justice and of benevolence, all of which might operate with a well constituted heart and mind as restraints and limitations upon it." But, perhaps expressing his distaste for the violent and inflammatory rhetoric recently employed by some of his radical pro-slavery opponents in Congress, he observes that "There is in our Country perhaps not enough restraint of law upon the Freedom of Speech. There is sometimes more, and sometimes less than enough restraint upon it in popular opinion ... I have the right to speak my mind. But if in speaking my mind, I do wrong to another man in his person, his property or his reputation, I abuse the right of Speech while exercising it ... I expose myself to at least retaliation in kind, and what is far more formidable, to the reproaches of my own Conscience." Unswerving in his conviction that slavery constituted a gross affront to morals and ethics, Adams had recently become increasingly indignant at the tone and tactics of the Southern bloc. According to Nagel, he was infuriated that they forced the nation to listen to what he termed "a torrent of moral depravity." (Nagle, p. 355). He was also mindful, that many of the same southern politicians had irresponsibly slandered him in the campaign and election of 1828. He notes that his own judgement about the proper limits of freedom of speech had been severely tested in recent days; "[I have never] in the course of my Life undergone severer trials of temper and of principles than upon the occasions on which I have exercised it during the present Session of Congress."
Discussing the debate, Adams is grateful that Lincoln supports his stance, and confesses that initially he had not intended to actively enter the slavery debate: "I had flattered myself that I should have been sheltered from the necessity of taking any part in the debates concerning it." However, he admits, avoidance was impossible considering the number of petitions "addressed to me with requests that I would present them." And the bold militancy of the southern representatives had left him no choice: "The new pretensions of the Slave representation in Congress, of a right to refuse to receive Petitions, and that Congress have no Constitutional power to abolish Slavery or the Slave trade in the District of Columbia forced upon me so much of the discussion as I did take upon me." Adams suggests that his opposition to these measures was actually relatively restrained, in that he deliberately avoided raising the central moral issue of slavery: "I did not and could not speak a tenth part of my mind. I did not for example start the question whether by the Law of God and of nature man can hold property, hereditary property, in man."
Then, in one of the most remarkable passage of his letter, Adams discusses his conviction that even the complete abolition of slavery would be, under certain conditions like the existence of a rebellion, within the power of Congress (It was precisely this argument of Adams by which President Lincoln justified the issuance in 1862 of his Emancipation Proclamation. See notes to lot 116). Adams writes "I did not start the question whether in the event of a servile insurrection and war, Congress would not have complete unlimited control over the whole subject of Slavery even to the emancipation of all Slaves, in the State where such insurrection should break out, and for the suppression of which the freemen of Plymouth and Norfolk Counties Massachusetts should be called by Acts of Congress to pour out their treasures and to shed their blood. Had I spoken my mind on those two points, the sturdiest of the abolitionists would have disavowed the sentiments of their champion." Alluding to the strength of the pro-slavery faction in the present Congress, Adams explains that to avoid taking what might be seen as a radical stance, he had even backed a motion of a southerner, "which would have been rejected if moved by me," requring all petitions to be sent to a committee to study and report upon. That plan, he states, was "obstinately resisted by the violent portion of the Slave representation, but prevailed, and there is a truce in the servile war for the remainder of the session as I hope."
But Adams' hope for a truce would prove futile. As the Session continued, Adams crusade for the right to petition led to passionate speeches on the floor of Congress: "He argued impressively that a citizen's right to have a petition received and heard was so essential for free government that it took on religious sanctity." (Nagel, p. 356). The opposition, though, was determined to silence the anti-slavery crusade and adopted a resolution that "all petitions, memorials, resolutions or papers, relating in any way ... to the subject of slavery or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed or referred, be laid upon the table, and that no further action whatever shall be had thereon." When the vote was taken upon this "Gag Rule" on May 18, Adams responded unequivocally.
Adams' remarks on Hingham's centennial celebration expresses his regard for the strong moral and religious principles of the Pilgrim fathers, which helped propel the nation "to that greatness and power unparalled in the History of the World." He speaks of their "filial and parental duty" to honor and observe "those incidents in the History of our forefathers, and those principles professed by them which had a tendency to produce and to maintain the progressive improvement of the condition of man." The Pilgrim legacy, he goes on, was substantial: "The Plymouth Colony...was founded upon the combination of two principles - the Spirit of Martyrdom and the Spirit of Patriotism - the most elevated and the most inflexible of moral agents upon human conduct. Their tenacity to their religious opinions had made them voluntary exiles from their native Land - and their tenacity to the name of Englismen made them again exiles from a populous, civilized and hospitable region, to a frost-bound, rock-bound barren wilderness - where they laid the moral and political foundations of an Empire, of physical, moral and political dimensions, never witnessed and never to be surpassed upon this globe."
The bitterness and partisan diatribe continued unabated in Congress, and the gag rule was not rescinded until 1844, but in the interim Adams overcame the infirmities of advancing age to present remarkable numbers of anti-slavery petitions: in January 1839, 95 petitions, in March 1840, 511 petitions. And, as previously noted, "he was the first to declare the doctrine, that the abolition of slavery could be lawfully accomplished under the war powers of the Government." According to one biographer "the earliest expression of this principle is found in a speech made by him in May 1836" (Morse, p.261), a month after this remarkable letter was written.