.jpg?w=1)
THE PROPERTY OF A GENTLEMAN
JEFFERSON, Thomas. Autograph letter signed ("Th:Jefferson") to James Maury Esq., in Liverpool, England; Monticello, 16 June 1815. 3½ pages, 4to, closely written, recipient's docket on p.4, tiny hole at centerfold neatly mended.
Details
JEFFERSON, Thomas. Autograph letter signed ("Th:Jefferson") to James Maury Esq., in Liverpool, England; Monticello, 16 June 1815. 3½ pages, 4to, closely written, recipient's docket on p.4, tiny hole at centerfold neatly mended.
PEACE AT LAST: JEFFERSON DEFENDS HIS NATION'S REASONS FOR GOING TO WAR WITH BRITAIN: "WE DETERMINED...TO DEFEND OURSELVES AND TO OPPOSE FURTHER HOSTILITIES BY WAR"
A forceful letter to one of his oldest friends. The former President eloquently endorses his nation's declaration of war on Britain--in light of impressment and the restrictive Orders in Council--and dismisses recent specious statements in Parliament and by the Duke of Wellington. Maury had been a classmate of Jefferson's in the rural log schoolhouse of the Reverend James Maury Sr., in Fredericksville Parish, 12 miles from Jefferson's childhood home in Shadwell. While attending Maury's school 1758-1760 (from ages 14 to 16) the young Jefferson boarded with Maury's family and became a fast friend of James Maury Jr., three years his junior, with whom he would carry on an intermittent but candid and affectionate correspondence for the rest of his life, even after Maury took up permanent residence in Liverpool.
Jefferson had written to Maury the day before, but has just received another letter from Maury, enclosing recent British newspapers with debates in Parliament regarding the Treaty of Ghent (ratified in February) and the end of the war of 1812. Jefferson is outraged by certain speeches in parliament--especially remarks by the Duke of Wellington--and indignantly refutes them: "...I am glad to see in them [the papers] the expression of regard for our friendship and intercourse from one side of the Houses of Parliament...But, what is incomprehensible to me is that the Marquis of Wellesley [the Duke of Wellington]...says that 'the aggression which led to the war, was from the United States, not from England.' Is there a person in the world who, knowing the circumstances, thinks this? The acts which produced the war were, 1st, the impressment of our citizens by their ships of war, and 2nd, the orders of council forbidding our vessels to trade with any country but England, without going to England to obtain a special license."
Britain, he points out, was intractable: "...the British minister declared...that this practice...would not be discontinued...and the Prince Regent...declared in effect solemnly that he would not revoke the orders of council as to us; that...we should continue under them until Bonaparte should revoke as to all the world." These tactics, Jefferson contends, "put an end to negotiation, and were a declaration of a continuance of the war in which they had already taken from us [1,000] ships and [6,000] seamen. We determined then to defend ourselves and to oppose further hostilities by war....Now, had we taken [1,000] British ships and [6,000] of her seamen without any declaration of war, would the Marquis of Wellesley have considered a declaration of war by Great Britain as an aggression on her part?"
"They say we denied their maritime rights. We never denied a single one. It was their taking our citizens, native as well as naturalized, for which we went into war, and because they forbade us to trade with any nation without entering and paying duties in their ports on both the outward and inward cargo...." He illustrates the ludicrous effects of the decree: "...to carry a cargo of cotton from Savannah to St. Mary's, and take returns in fruits, for example, our vessel was to go to England, enter and pay a duty on her cotton there, return to St. Mary's, then go back to England to enter and pay a duty on her fruits, then return to Savannah, after crossing the Atlantic four times, and paying a tribute on both cargoes to England, instead of the direct passage of a few hours. And the taking ships for not doing this, the Marquis says, is no aggression."
His indignation subsides a bit: "However, it is now all over, and I hope forever over," but, he marvels, some in Parliament and the Ministry are disappointed at the end of hostilities, as "they expected to give us an exemplary scourging, to separate from us the States east of the Hudson, take for their Indian allies those west of the Ohio, placing [300,000] American citizens under the government of the savages..." His anger rekindled, he comments bitterly, "I cannot conceive what is the use of your Bedlam when such men are out of it....Even now they insinuate the peace in Europe has not suspended the practices which produced the war. I trust, however, they are speaking a different language to our ministers, and join in the hope you express that the provocations which occasioned the late rupture will not be repeated."
But, he is gratified to report, the suspension of trade with Britain has had a salutary effect on domestic manufactures in the U.S.: "The interruption of our intercourse with England" has established "radically and firmly, coarse manufactures among us. I make in my family [2,000] yards of cloth a year, which I formerly bought from England, and it only employs a few women, children and invalids, who could do little on the farm....The finer fabrics perhaps...will be sought again in Europe, except broadcloth [wool], which the vast multiplication of merinos among us will enable us to make much cheaper than can be done in Europe."
He comments on Maury's "cold bath thrice a week during the winter" at age 70, "which I should not, a priori, have pronounced salutory. But all theory must yield to experience, and every constitution has its own laws. I have for fifty years bathed my feet in cold water every morning,...and having been remarkably exempted from colds...I have supposed it might be ascribed to this practice. When we see two facts accompanying one another for a long time, we are apt to suppose them related as cause and effect." He adds that "our tobacco trade is strangely changed" since "the British orders of council had obliged us to abandon the culture generally; we are now, however, returning to it...." He closes with the affectionate wish "that you may continue...as long as you shall think the continuance of life itself is desirable...."
Jefferson's letter to Maury of 15 June was sold in these rooms (18 December 2003, lot 279, $85,000). Maury's letter of 29 April and a press copy of Jefferson's reply are in the Jefferson Papers at the Library of Congress.
PEACE AT LAST: JEFFERSON DEFENDS HIS NATION'S REASONS FOR GOING TO WAR WITH BRITAIN: "WE DETERMINED...TO DEFEND OURSELVES AND TO OPPOSE FURTHER HOSTILITIES BY WAR"
A forceful letter to one of his oldest friends. The former President eloquently endorses his nation's declaration of war on Britain--in light of impressment and the restrictive Orders in Council--and dismisses recent specious statements in Parliament and by the Duke of Wellington. Maury had been a classmate of Jefferson's in the rural log schoolhouse of the Reverend James Maury Sr., in Fredericksville Parish, 12 miles from Jefferson's childhood home in Shadwell. While attending Maury's school 1758-1760 (from ages 14 to 16) the young Jefferson boarded with Maury's family and became a fast friend of James Maury Jr., three years his junior, with whom he would carry on an intermittent but candid and affectionate correspondence for the rest of his life, even after Maury took up permanent residence in Liverpool.
Jefferson had written to Maury the day before, but has just received another letter from Maury, enclosing recent British newspapers with debates in Parliament regarding the Treaty of Ghent (ratified in February) and the end of the war of 1812. Jefferson is outraged by certain speeches in parliament--especially remarks by the Duke of Wellington--and indignantly refutes them: "...I am glad to see in them [the papers] the expression of regard for our friendship and intercourse from one side of the Houses of Parliament...But, what is incomprehensible to me is that the Marquis of Wellesley [the Duke of Wellington]...says that 'the aggression which led to the war, was from the United States, not from England.' Is there a person in the world who, knowing the circumstances, thinks this? The acts which produced the war were, 1st, the impressment of our citizens by their ships of war, and 2nd, the orders of council forbidding our vessels to trade with any country but England, without going to England to obtain a special license."
Britain, he points out, was intractable: "...the British minister declared...that this practice...would not be discontinued...and the Prince Regent...declared in effect solemnly that he would not revoke the orders of council as to us; that...we should continue under them until Bonaparte should revoke as to all the world." These tactics, Jefferson contends, "put an end to negotiation, and were a declaration of a continuance of the war in which they had already taken from us [1,000] ships and [6,000] seamen. We determined then to defend ourselves and to oppose further hostilities by war....Now, had we taken [1,000] British ships and [6,000] of her seamen without any declaration of war, would the Marquis of Wellesley have considered a declaration of war by Great Britain as an aggression on her part?"
"They say we denied their maritime rights. We never denied a single one. It was their taking our citizens, native as well as naturalized, for which we went into war, and because they forbade us to trade with any nation without entering and paying duties in their ports on both the outward and inward cargo...." He illustrates the ludicrous effects of the decree: "...to carry a cargo of cotton from Savannah to St. Mary's, and take returns in fruits, for example, our vessel was to go to England, enter and pay a duty on her cotton there, return to St. Mary's, then go back to England to enter and pay a duty on her fruits, then return to Savannah, after crossing the Atlantic four times, and paying a tribute on both cargoes to England, instead of the direct passage of a few hours. And the taking ships for not doing this, the Marquis says, is no aggression."
His indignation subsides a bit: "However, it is now all over, and I hope forever over," but, he marvels, some in Parliament and the Ministry are disappointed at the end of hostilities, as "they expected to give us an exemplary scourging, to separate from us the States east of the Hudson, take for their Indian allies those west of the Ohio, placing [300,000] American citizens under the government of the savages..." His anger rekindled, he comments bitterly, "I cannot conceive what is the use of your Bedlam when such men are out of it....Even now they insinuate the peace in Europe has not suspended the practices which produced the war. I trust, however, they are speaking a different language to our ministers, and join in the hope you express that the provocations which occasioned the late rupture will not be repeated."
But, he is gratified to report, the suspension of trade with Britain has had a salutary effect on domestic manufactures in the U.S.: "The interruption of our intercourse with England" has established "radically and firmly, coarse manufactures among us. I make in my family [2,000] yards of cloth a year, which I formerly bought from England, and it only employs a few women, children and invalids, who could do little on the farm....The finer fabrics perhaps...will be sought again in Europe, except broadcloth [wool], which the vast multiplication of merinos among us will enable us to make much cheaper than can be done in Europe."
He comments on Maury's "cold bath thrice a week during the winter" at age 70, "which I should not, a priori, have pronounced salutory. But all theory must yield to experience, and every constitution has its own laws. I have for fifty years bathed my feet in cold water every morning,...and having been remarkably exempted from colds...I have supposed it might be ascribed to this practice. When we see two facts accompanying one another for a long time, we are apt to suppose them related as cause and effect." He adds that "our tobacco trade is strangely changed" since "the British orders of council had obliged us to abandon the culture generally; we are now, however, returning to it...." He closes with the affectionate wish "that you may continue...as long as you shall think the continuance of life itself is desirable...."
Jefferson's letter to Maury of 15 June was sold in these rooms (18 December 2003, lot 279, $85,000). Maury's letter of 29 April and a press copy of Jefferson's reply are in the Jefferson Papers at the Library of Congress.