James Madison Papers
Documents filtered by: Recipient="Madison, James" AND Period="Confederation Period"
sorted by: date (ascending)

To James Madison from Thomas Jefferson, 20 February 1784

From Thomas Jefferson

RC (LC: Madison Papers). Unsigned but in Jefferson’s hand. Docketed by JM, “Thos. Jefferson. Feb 20th. 1784.” The italicized words are those written in the JM-Jefferson Code No. 2.

Annapolis Feb. 20. 1784:

Dear Sir

Your favour of the 11th. inst.1 came to hand this day. I had prepared a multitude of mem[orandu]ms of subjects whereon to write you, but I will first answer those arising from your letter. by the time my order got to Philadelphia every copy of Smith’s history of New York was sold.2 I shall take care to get Blair’s Lectures for you as soon as published,3 and will attend to your presumed wishes whenever I meet with any thing rare & of worth. I wish I knew better what things of this kind you have collected for yourself, as I may often doubt whether you have or have not a thing. I know of no objections to the printing the revisal; on the contrary I think good will result from it.4 should this be decided I must make a short trip to Virginia, as from the loss of originals I beleive my copies must often be wanting. I had never met with the particular fact relative to the grinders of the incognitum found in Brasil & Lima & deposited in the British museum which you mention from Dr. Hunter.5 I know it has been said that in a very few instances such bones have been found in S. America. you will find a collection of these in 2. Buff. Epoq. de la nature 187.6 but they have been so illy attested, so loosely & ignorantly described, and so seldom even pretended to have been seen, that I have supposed their identity with the Northern bones, & perhaps their existence at all not sufficiently established. the authority of Hunter is respectable: but if this be the only well attested instance of those bones brought from S. Amera., they may still be beleived to have been first carried there either previous to the emigration of the Spaniards when there was doubtless a communication between the Indns. of the two continents, or after that emigration when an intercourse between the Spaniards of N. & S. Amera. took place. it would be unsafe to deny the fact; but I think it may well be doubted. I wish you had a thermometer. mr. Madison of the college & myself are keeping observations for a comparison of climate. we observe at Sunrise & at 4. o’clock P.M. which are the coldest & warmest points of the day. if you could observe at the same time it should shew the difference between going North & Northwest on this continent.7 I suspect it to be colder in Orange or Albemarle than here.

I think I informed you in my last8 that an attempt had been made to ratify the Definitive treaty by seven states only, and to impose this under the sanction of our seal (without letting our actual state appear) on the British court.9 Reade, Williamson & Lee were violent for this, and gave notice that when the question should be put they would call the yeas & nays, and shew by whose fault the ratification of this important instrument should fail, if it should fail.10 I prepared the inclosed resolution by way of protest & informed them I would place that also on the journals with the yeas & nays, as a justification of those who opposed the proposition. I beleive this put a stop to it.11 they suffered the question to rest undecided till the 14th. of Jan. when 9. states appeared & ratified.12 Colo Harmer & Colo Franks were immediately dispatched to take passages to Europe with copies of the ratification.13 but by the extraordinary severity of the season we know they had not sailed on the 7th. inst. the ratification will not therefore arrive in time.14 being persuaded I shall be misrepresented within my own state, if any difficulties should arise, I inclose you a copy of the protest containing my reasons. had the question been put there were but two states who would have voted for a ratification by seven. the others would have been in the negative or divided.15 I find Congress every moment stopped by questions whether the most trifling money propositions are not above the powers of seven states as being appropriations of money. my idea is that the estimate for the year & requisition grounded on that, whereon the sums to be allowed to each department are stated, is the general appropriation which requires 9. states, & that the detailing it out provided they do not go beyond these sums may be done by the subordinate officers of the federal government or by a Congress of 7: states. I wish you to think of this & give me your thoughts on the subject.16 we have as yet no Secy. of Foreign affairs. Lee avows himself a candidate.17 the plan of Foreign affairs likely to take place is to commission Adams, Franklin & Jay to conclude treaties with the several European powers, and then to return, leaving the feild to subordinate characters.18 messrs. Adams & Jay have paid a visit to the court of London unordered & uninvited. their reception has been forbidding.19 Luzern[e] leaves us in August, whether recalled or on his own request is not known. this information comes from himself tho’ is not as yet spok[e]n of publicly.20 Lee finding no faction among the men here, entered into that among the women which rages to a very high degree. a bal[l] being appointed by the one party on a certain night he undertook to give one and fixed it precisely on the same night. this of course has placed him in the midst of the mud. he is courting Miss Sprig a young girl of seventeen and of thirty thousand pound[s] expectation.21 I have no doubt from some conversations with him that there is a design agitating to sever the Northern Nec[k] and add it to this state. he supported in conversation with me the propriety & necessity of such a general measure, to wit of enlarging the small states to interest them in the union. he deserves to be well watched in our state. he is extremely soured with it and is not cautious in betraying his hostility against it.22 we cannot make up a Congress at all. there are 8. states in town, 6 of which are represented by two members only. of these two members of different states are confined by the gout so that we cannot make a house. we have not sit above 3. days I beleive in as many weeks. admonition after admonition has been sent to the states, to no effect. we have sent one to day. if it fails, it seems as well we should all retire. there have never been 9 states on the floor but for the ratification of the treaty and a day or two after.23 Georgetown languishes. the smile is hardly covered now when the federal towns are spoken of. I fear that our chance is at this time desperate. our object therefore must be if we fail in an effort to remove to Georgetown, to endeavor then to get to some place off the waters of the Chesapeak where we may be ensured against Congress considering themselves as fixed.24 my present expectations are, that as soon as we get a Congress, to do business, we shall attend to nothing but the most pressing matters, get through them & adjourn, not to meet again till November, leaving a Commee. of the states. that Commee will be obliged to go immediately to Philadelphia to examine the offices & of course they will set there till the meeting in November. whether that meeting will be in Philada. or Trenton will be the question and will in my opinion depend on the vote of New York.25 did not you once suppose in conversation with me that Congress had no authority to decide any cases between two differing states, except those of disputed territory? I think you did. If I am not mistaken in this I should wish to know your sense of the words which describe those cases which may be submitted to a federal court. they seem to me to comprehend every cause of difference.26

We have received the act of our assembly ceding the lands North of Ohio & are about executing a deed for it.27 I think the territory will be laid out by passing a meridian through the Western cape of the Mouth of the Gr. Kanhaway from the Ohio to L. Erie, and another through the rapids of Ohio from the same river to Michigan & crossing these by the parallels of latitude 37°. 39°. 41°. &c. allowing to each state an extent of 2°. from N. to South. on the Eastern side of the meridn. of Kanhaway will still be one new state, to wit, the territory lying between that meridian, Pennsylva. the Ohio & L. Erie.28 we hope N. Carola. will cede all beyond the same meridian of Kanhaway, & Virga. also.29 for god’s sake push this at the next session of assembly.30 we have transmitted a copy of a petition from the people of Kentucky to Congress praying to be separated from Virginia. Congress took no notice of it. we sent the copy to the Governor desiring it to be laid before the assembly.31 our view was to bring on the question. it is for the interest of Virginia to cede so far immediately because the people beyond that will separate themselves, because they will be joined by all our settlements beyond the Alleghaney if they are the first movers. whereas if we draw the line those at Kentucky having their end will not interest themselves for the people of Indiana, Greenbriar &c. who will of course be left to our management,32 and I can with certainty almost say that Congress would approve of the meridian of the mouth of Kanhaway and consider it as the ultimate point to be desired from Virginia. I form this opinion from conversation with many members. should we not be the first movers, and the Indianians & Kentuckians take themselves off and claim to the Alleghaney I am afraid Congress would secretly wish them well. Virginia is extremely interested to retain to that meridian: 1. because the gr. Kanhaway runs from North to South across our whole country forming by its waters a belt of fine land which will be thickly settled & will form a strong barrier for us. 2. because the country for 180 miles beyond that is an absolute desart, barren & mountainous which can never be inhabited, & will therefore be a fine separation between us & the next state.33 3. because the government of Virginia is more convenient to the people on all the upper parts of Kanhaway than any other which will be laid out. 4. because our lead mines are in that country.34 5. because the Kanhaway is capable of being made navigable, and therefore gives entrance into the Western waters to every part of our latitude. 6. because it is not now navigable & can only be made so by expensive works which require that we should own the soil on both sides. 7. because the Ohio and it’s branches which head up against the Patowmac affords the shortest water communication by 500. miles of any which can ever be got between the Western waters & Atlantic,35 & of course promises us almost a monopoly of the Western & Indian trade. I think the opening this navigation is an object on which no time is to be lost. Pennsylva. is attending to the Western commerce. she has had surveys made of the river Susquehanna and of the grounds thro’ which a canal must pass to go directly to Philadelphia. it is reported practicable at an expence of £200,000 and they have determined to open it.36 what an example this is! if we do not push this matter immediately they will be beforehand with us & get possession of the commerce. and it is difficult to turn it from a channel in which it is once established. could not our assembly be induced to lay a particular tax which should bring in 5. or 10,000 £ a year to be applied till the navigation of the Ohio & Patowmac is opened, then James river & so on through the whole successively.37 Genl. Washington has that of the Patowmac much at heart. the superintendance of it would be a noble amusement in his retirement & leave a monument of him as long as the waters should flow. I am of opinion he would accept of the direction as long as the money should be to be emploied on the Patowmac, & the popularity of his name would carry it thro’ the assembly.38 the portage between Yohogania & the N. branch of Patowmac is of 40 or 50 miles. Cheat river is navigable far up. it’s head is within 10 miles of the head of the North branch of Patowmac & I am informed offers the shortest & best portage.39 I wish in the next election of delegates for Congress, Short could be sent. his talents are great & his weight in our state must ere long become principal.40 I see the best effects produced by sending our young statesmen here. they see the affairs of the Confederacy from a high ground; they learn the importance of the Union & befriend federal measures when they return. those who never come here, see our affairs insulated, pursue a system of jealousy & self interest, and distract the Union as much as they can.41 Genl. Gates would Supply Short’s place in the council very well, and would act. he is now here.42 what will you do with the council? they are expensive, and not constantly nor often necessary: yet to drop them would be wrong. I think you had better require their attendance twice a year to examine the Executive department & see that it be going on rightly; advise on that subject the Governor or inform the legislature as they shall see occasion. give them 50. guineas for each trip, fill up only 5 of the places, and let them be always subject to summons on great emergencies by the Governor, on which occasions their expences only should be paid. at an expence of 500 guineas you will thus preserve this member of the constitution always fit for use. young & ambitious men will leave it & go into the assembly, but the elderly & able who have retired from the legislative feild as too turbulent will accept of the offices.43 among other legislative subjects our distresses ask notice. I had been from home four months & had expended 1200 Dollars before I received one farthing. by the last post we received about seven weeks allowance. in the mean time some of us had had the mortification to have our horses turned out of the livery stable for want of money. there is really no standing this. the supply gives us no relief because it was mortgaged. we are trying to get something more effectual from the treasury, having sent an express to inform them of our predicament.44 I shall endeavour to place as much in the Philadelphia bank as will repay your kindness unless you should alter your mind & chuse to take it in the Virginia treasury.45 I have hunted out Chatlux journal & had a reading of it. I had never so falsely estimated the character of a book. there are about six sentences of offensive bagatelles which are all of them publicly known, because having respected individual characters they were like carrion for the buzzard curiosity. all the rest of the book (and it is a 4to. of 186 pages) is either entertaining, or instructive & would be highly flattering to the Americans. he has visited all the principal feilds of battle, enquired minutely into the detail of the actions, & has given what are probably the best accounts extant of them. he often finds occasion to criticize & to deny the British accounts from an inspection of the ground. I think to write to him, recommend the expunging the few exceptionable passages & publication of the rest.46 I have had an opportunity here of examining Bynkershoek’s works. there are about a fourth part of them which you would like to have. they are the following tracts. Questiones juris publici, de lege Rhodiâ, de dominio maris, du Juge competent des Ambassadeurs, for this last if not the rest has been translated into French with notes by Barbeyrac.47 I have had from Boinod & Gaillard a copy of Mussenbroeck’s cours de Physique.48 it is certainly the most comprehensive & most accurate body of Natl. Philosophy which has been ever published. I would recommend to you to get it, or I will get that and any other books you want from Boinod or elsewhere. I hope you have found access to my library. I beg you to make free use of it. Key, the steward is living there now & of course will be always in the way.49 Monroe is buying land almost adjoining me.50 Short will do the same.51 what would I not give you could fall into the circle. with such a society I could once more venture home & lay myself up for the residue of life, quitting all it’s contentions which grow daily more & more insupportable. think of it. to render it practicable only requires you to think it so. life is of no value but as it brings us gratifications. among the most valuable of these is rational society. it informs the mind, sweetens the temper, cheers our spirits, and promotes health. there is a little farm of 140 as. adjoining me & within two miles, all of good land, tho’ old, with a small indifferent house on it, the whole worth not more than £250. such a one might be a farm of experiment & support a little table & household. it is on the road to Orange & so much nearer than I am. it is convenient enough for supplementary supplies from thence.52 once more think of it, and Adieu

1Q.v.

4Ibid., and n. 7.

5Ibid., and n. 10.

6Jefferson may have used the edition of George Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, Époques de la nature, the supplement of the Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière … (Paris, 1778). Buffon stressed Canada and the Ohio River valley rather than South America as the areas in the Western Hemisphere where ossements d’éléphant had been found.

7The Reverend James Madison, president of the College of William and Mary. See Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 420, 507–8; VII, 31.

9That is, affixing the “seal” of “the United States in Congress Assembled” to the copy of an act of ratification to be sent to the peace commissioners in Paris, without revealing to the British that the ordinance had been approved by the delegations of seven states only rather than by the nine or more required by Article IX of the Articles of Confederation (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XIX, 220).

10Jacob Read, Hugh Williamson, and Arthur Lee. In the much fuller treatment of the ratification issue in his autobiography, Jefferson also mentioned Jeremiah Townley Chase (Md.) (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 399, n. 3, 407, n. 3). See also ibid., VII, 403–4, 405, 406–8.

11For the purpose stated in the present letter, Jefferson on 27 December 1783 drafted a “resolution” comprising a brief preamble and eight numbered paragraphs devoted to presenting as many different reasons why the delegates of “seven states only” were not competent, in view of “the usage of modern nations,” the stipulation of the Articles of Confederation, and the “commission and instructions” of the American peace commissioners, to enact a valid ratification of the definitive treaty of peace. The “inclosed” copy in Jefferson’s hand is among the Rives Collection of Madison Papers in the Library of Congress. Also in that depository is a “corrected” copy. This is reproduced in Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 424–25, 425 n. Although the two versions are identical in argument, they vary occasionally in punctuation, and the corrected copy includes several additional sentences, clauses, and phrases. For JM’s lengthy comment on the issue, see his letter of 16 March 1784 to Jefferson (LC: Madison Papers).

12JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 22–29. On 14 January New York and Georgia were not represented in Congress, and New Hampshire and New Jersey each had only one delegate in attendance. Following a unanimous vote, Congress adopted a proclamation announcing the ratification and calling upon the states to enforce the provisions of the treaty. To give added stress to this admonition of “observance,” the delegates also agreed to a resolution “earnestly” recommending that, by revising or repealing all legislation adverse to “real British subjects” or to Loyalists “who have not borne arms against” the United States, the state legislatures should subscribe fully to the pledges in the treaty, “so as to render the said laws or acts perfectly consistent, not only with justice and equity, but with that spirit of conciliation, which, on the return of the blessings of peace, should universally prevail” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 29–31; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 439–41).

13For this mission the journal of Congress for 14 January notes only the appointment of brevet Colonel Josiah Harmar (1753–1813) of Philadelphia (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 29). President Thomas Mifflin, for whom Harmar had been acting as private secretary, directed him to proceed as expeditiously as possible to the American peace commissioners in Paris (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 411, and first n. 2, 412). Lieutenant Colonel David Salisbury Franks (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , IV, 450, n. 14; VI, 180, n. 6; 236) was instructed on 15 January to carry another copy of the ratification to Europe (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 34–35). Congress also consigned to Robert Morris, agent of marine, a third copy, “to be forwarded by any good opportunity” (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 411, and first n. 2, 416, 422, 454).

As an officer of the Pennsylvania continental line from October 1776 until 30 November 1783, Harmar served with distinction both with the main army and in the southern department. Shortly after his a rival in Philadelphia from France on 7 August 1784, Congress appointed him the Indian agent in the Northwest Territory and commanding officer of the “1st. Amer. Regt.,” then encamped near Fort Pitt. Harmar was brevetted brigadier general in 1787, and became general-in-chief of the army in the autumn of 1789. In that capacity he was in command on 22 October 1790 during an unsuccessful engagement with the Miami Indians in the Ohio country. In 1793, the year after he resigned his commission in the regular army, he became adjutant general of Pennsylvania and continued to hold that office until 1799.

14The unusually cold weather had blocked New York Harbor with ice (David M. Ludlum, Early American Winters, 1604–1820 [Boston, 1966], pp. 151–53). This, as well as other untoward circumstances, delayed both Harmar and Franks from sailing until 17 February. Obviously neither of them could reach his destination by 3 March, the latest date stipulated by Article 10 of the definitive peace treaty for an exchange of ratifications by Great Britain and the United States. Harmar sailed for Lorient in the packet “Le Courier de l’Amérique” and delivered the copy of the act of ratification in his custody to Franklin at Passy on the evening of 29 March. Franks, aboard the American ship “Edward,” reached London the next day (NA: PCC, No. 163, fols. 377, 385; Pa. Packet, 14 Feb. and 2 Mar. 1784; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 438–39, 454, 457, 460; Richard B. Morris, The Peacemakers, p. 448). Two days earlier, David Hartley, the British peace commissioner, had informed Henry Laurens that “it is not thought necessary, on the part of Great Britain, to enter into any formal convention for the prolongation of the term in which the ratifications of the definitive treaty were to be exchanged.” The exchange took place at Paris on 12 May 1784 (Wharton, Revol. Dipl. Corr description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends ., VI, 789, 790, 805, 806, 811–13).

15Jefferson reverted to the draft of his “resolution,” already mentioned. One of the “two states” would have been Massachusetts; probably the other would have been either Maryland or South Carolina (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 426; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 400–401 n.).

16Article IX of the Articles of Confederation unequivocally provides that an appropriation of money requires the assent of the congressional delegations of at least nine states (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XIX, 220). In a letter of 16 March 1784, JM replied to Jefferson’s comments (LC: Madison Papers).

17Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , VI, 224, n. 7; JM Notes, 4 June, n. 3; Jones to JM, 14 July 1783, and n. 8.

18On 7 May 1784, besides amending the instructions of 29 October 1783 to the American peace commissioners to negotiate “treaties of amity and commerce with the Commercial powers of Europe,” Congress elected Jefferson as a minister plenipotentiary to join Adams and Franklin “in concerting drafts or propositions” for that purpose. Although Laurens and Jay also had been bound by the original instructions, they were soon to return to the United States, since Congress, even before October 1783, had acquiesced with their wish to resign (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIV, 226; XXV, 753–57; XXVI, 356, 357–62; Wharton, Revol. Dipl. Corr description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends ., VI, 410–11, 554, 575; JM to Jefferson, 10 June 1783, nn. 8, 21).

19Jay and Adams went separately from Paris to London late in October 1783. To transact financial business for Congress, Adams regretfully left England for The Hague on 5 January 1784. In a letter of 14 November 1783 to Charles Thomson, secretary of Congress, Jay wrote that the Tories in the cabinet “persuade themselves that we shall not be able to act as a nation, that our government is too feeble to command respect and our credit too much abased to recover its reputation or merit confidence. I hope better things. We are not without friends in this country, but they have more inclination than power to be friendly” (Wharton, Revol. Dipl. Corr description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends ., VI, 683–84, 693, 721, 733, 740; L. H. Butterfield et al., eds., Diary and Autobiography of John Adams, III, 146, 149, 152–53). This letter, along with Adams’ of 13 November 1783 concerning “English politics,” was probably received by Congress on 21 January 1784 (NA: PCC, No. 185, III, 92).

20On both 21 April and 13 May the Chevalier de La Luzerne informed President Mifflin that King Louis XVI had granted his request of “last summer” to return temporarily to France (Wharton, Revol. Dipl. Corr description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends ., VI, 794–95, 805–6). As reasons for seeking a furlough, La Luzerne mentioned “poor health and the necessity of regulating his private affairs.” He embarked at Philadelphia for France on 21 June 1784 and never returned to the United States (William E. O’Donnell, Chevalier de La Luzerne, pp. 247–49; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 484).

21Jefferson referred to Arthur Lee and Sophia Sprigg (1766–1812), daughter of Richard Sprigg of Cedar Park, an estate in Anne Arundel County, Md. (John Martin Hammond, Colonial Mansions of Maryland and Delaware [Philadelphia, 1914], p. 147; Maryland Gazette [Annapolis], 1 Oct. 1812). The “certain night” was that of 17 February (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 443, 498). Lee remained a bachelor. Miss Sprigg married John Francis Mercer in the spring of 1785 and thus became the wife of a future governor of Maryland. Her father was a friend and correspondent of Washington (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VIII, 79, 134; Fitzpatrick, Writings of Washington description begins John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington, from the Original Sources, 1745–1799 (39 vols.; Washington, 1931–44). description ends , XXVIII, 374, 470, 471; XXIX, 193, 281, 378; XXXII, 32; XXXIII, 290, 388). For the social gaiety of Annapolis during Congress’ residence there, see Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 389, n. 2, 398, n. 8, 439, 451, 472, 498, 565.

22Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , IV, 144, n. 2; VI, 12, n. 3; Thomas P. Abernethy, Western Lands and the American Revolution, pp. 8, 154; Cazenove Gardner Lee, Jr., Lee Chronicle: Studies of the Early Generations of the Lees of Virginia, ed. Dorothy Mills Parker (New York, 1957), pp. 313–24. In his reply on 16 March 1784, JM commented upon Jefferson’s word of caution (LC: Madison Papers).

23The delegations from nine states, which had enabled Congress to ratify the definitive treaty of peace on 14 January, continued to attend during the next two days. Thereafter through 20 February Congress convened on twenty-seven days. Of these sessions, eight states were effectively represented at four, seven states at eight, six states at eight, five states at five, and three states at two (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 22–88, passim). For the first time since 16 January, effective delegations from nine states attended Congress on 1 March (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 109).

The two delegates absent because of gout appear to have been Edward Lloyd (Md.) and Richard Dobbs Spaight (N.C.) (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 53, 88; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 444, n. 2, 445). In his letter of 20 February 1784 to the executives of the seven states without effective delegations in Congress (N.H., N.Y., N.J., Del., Md., N.C., and Ga.), President Mifflin stressed that “matters of the highest importance to the safety, honour and happiness of the United States” required “immediate Attention” and added “that the members present are dissatisfied with attending to no purpose and are very impatient under their situation” (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 444, and n. 2). See also ibid., VII, 427, 438, 443, 446.

24For Georgetown as one of the two places at which Congress would assemble annually, see Notes on Place of Residence, 14 Oct., and nn. 2, 17; Jones to JM, 30 Oct., n. 5; Delegates to Harrison, 1 Nov. 1783 (1st letter), and n. 1. In a letter of 2 February, Samuel Osgood, a member of Congress from Massachusetts, commented: “the delegates from the eastward cannot live so far southward as Georgetown. The summers there will either destroy or debilitate our best constitutions” (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 431). Several of the congressional colleagues of David Howell apparently agreed with his comment that a “perambulatory Congress favors republicanism—a permanent one tends to concentrate power, Aristocracy and Monarchy” (ibid., VII, 397, 414–15, 421–22, 430–32).

25Ibid., VII, 408, 415, 418, 420, 423. Between 1 March and 3 June attendance in Congress was sufficiently large to permit decisions to be reached on “the most pressing matters.” On 3 June Congress adjourned, after agreeing to reconvene in Trenton on 30 October. As provided by Articles IX and X of the Articles of Confederation, Congress had elected a Committee of the States, composed of one delegate from each state. If at least nine members of this committee were present, it could exercise whatever powers Congress entrusted to it, provided that these powers did not embrace subjects which Congress itself could not legislate about unless nine or more state delegations concurred (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XIX, 219, 220, 221; XXVI, 287–96; XXVII, 529, 555–56).

Jefferson was chairman of the committee appointed on 23 January to define the powers to be entrusted to a Committee of the States. The report, drafted by him and submitted a week later, occasioned much debate before being adopted in amended form by Congress on 29 May (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 516–29; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVII, 561–64). From 4 June to 13 August, whenever a quorum could be mustered, the Committee of the States held its sessions in Annapolis (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVII, 561–638, passim). During that entire period the committee’s member from New York failed to attend; nor did any delegate from that state appear in Congress until a month after it assembled in Trenton on 1 November 1784 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVII, 641, 656).

26In his reply to Jefferson on 16 March 1784, JM acknowledged that, having “detected the error a few days ago,” he was “utterly at a loss to account” for being so mistaken in what he had told his friend (LC: Madison Papers). As Jefferson remarked, the ninth of the Articles of Confederation constituted Congress, acting through “a federal court,” as “the last resort on appeals” not only “in all disputes and differences” arising “between two or more states,” but also on the petition of either party to the Congress in all “controversies concerning the private right of soil claimed under different grants of two or more states” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XIX, 217–19).

Jefferson probably asked the question because he knew that Colonel George Morgan, “agent for the State of New Jersey,” was soon to petition Congress “for a hearing, and to prosecute the said hearing to issue, in the mode pointed out by the Articles of Confederation,” to decide whether Virginia should not abandon its claim to land “lying on the river Ohio” owned by Morgan and “the other proprietors” organized as “the Indiana Company.” This petition, dated 26 February, was read in Congress on 1 March 1784. After much debate, Congress tabled the petition and adopted a motion to have the delegates of Virginia deliver “the deed,” drawn by them in conformance with the act passed by the Virginia General Assembly at its session of October 1783, conveying to Congress “all the right of that Commonwealth, to the territory northwestward of the river Ohio” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 110–17; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 468). The Virginia General Assembly at its session of October 1783 had deleted from the original act of cession of 2 January 1781 the proviso that Congress, upon accepting the cession, must acknowledge “as absolutely void and of no effect” any “purchases and deeds” to land within the ceded area if they had been derived solely from Indians or from “royal grants” which were “inconsistent with the chartered rights, laws and customs of Virginia” (JHDV description begins (1828 ed.). Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia, Anno Domini, 1776 (Richmond, 1828). description ends , Oct. 1780, p. 80; JM to Jefferson, 20 Sept. 1783, n. 3). For the Indiana Company and George Morgan, see Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , II, 176–77; 178, nn. 1–6; 188; III, 47, n. 2; 210, n. 4; 287; 288, n. 5; 290–91; 295, and n. 6; 304, and n. 1; IV, 15, n. 16; 33; 215, n. 2; V, 26, and n. 7; 277, n. 5; George E. Lewis, The Indiana Company, 1763–1798: A Study in Eighteenth Century Frontier Land Speculation and Business Venture (Glendale, Calif., 1941).

27On 16 January 1784 the Virginia delegation in Congress may have received Governor Harrison’s letter, written about three weeks before, enclosing a copy of the Virginia General Assembly’s act of cession, mentioned in n. 26 (NA: PCC, No. 75, fols. 88–90; JHDV description begins (1828 ed.). Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia, Anno Domini, 1776 (Richmond, 1828). description ends , Oct. 1783, pp. 79, 83; JCSV description begins H. R. McIlwaine et al., eds., Journals of the Council of the State of Virginia (4 vols. to date; Richmond, 1931——). description ends , III, 320; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 427; Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 468–69, 551). As authorized by the act, Jefferson, on behalf of his fellow delegates from Virginia, drafted a deed conveying title to, and right of jurisdiction over, the ceded land to Congress. On 13 February Congress referred that draft, together with a copy of the cession act, to a committee, Roger Sherman (Conn.), chairman (NA: PCC, No. 186, fol. 149; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 446, 451). Following the refusal of Congress ten days later to approve the committee’s report, Jefferson prepared a lengthier deed, incorporating a copy of the act of cession. On 1 March 1784, by the acquiescence of a bare minimum of seven states, with New Jersey and South Carolina in opposition, Congress accepted the cession and the deed of conveyance. Thereupon the deed, in the presence of Congress, was “Sign’d, Sealed, and Delivered” by the Virginia delegates and ordered to be engrossed (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 89–90, 112–17; Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 571–80; VII, 4–5; Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VII, 457, 463).

28On 3 February Congress appointed a committee—Jefferson, chairman, Jeremiah T. Chase, and David Howell—to recommend a “temporary governmt. of western territory” (NA: PCC, No. 186, fol. 147). The report of the committee, first submitted on 1 March and later amended, was adopted by Congress on 23 April 1784 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 118–20, 247, 248–52, 255–60, 274–79, 279, n. 1; Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 581–615). For charts depicting the boundaries “of each state,” see ibid., VI, 588–93. The “Western cape” at the confluence of the Great Kanawha and Ohio rivers is opposite the town of Point Pleasant, W. Va. A meridian drawn northward from that cape would intersect the southern shore of Lake Erie at the approximate site of present-day Lorain, Ohio. A meridian similarly drawn from the rapids of the Ohio River at Louisville, Ky., would converge with the eastern shore at Lake Michigan at approximately the future site of Leland, Mich. The line of 37° north latitude would cross south central Kentucky to approximately the confluence of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. Huttonsville, W. Va., New Bethel, Ohio, Bloomfield, Ind., and Troy, Mo., are approximately in 39° north latitude. Findlay, Ohio, Star City, Ind., Chebanse, Ill., and Mediapolis, Iowa, are approximately in 41° north latitude. The proposed state last mentioned by Jefferson would embrace about the eastern third of the present state of Ohio.

29Jefferson not only expressed the hope that North Carolina would cede Congress the territory south of the Great Smoky Mountains and west of Asheville, and the lands to become the state of Tennessee, but that Virginia would yield her claims to Kentucky and approximately the western third of the future state of West Virginia. For the discontent of settlers in the mountains of North Carolina and its short-lived offer of cession in 1784, see JM Notes, 19 June 1783, and n. 2.

30Although JM had been urged to seek election as a delegate from Orange County in the Virginia General Assembly, Jefferson’s plea is the first certain evidence that JM intended to be, or already was, a candidate for that position (Jones to JM, 28 July, and n. 4; Pendleton to JM, 20 Oct. 1783, and n. 3; Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 429). For JM’s brief response to Jefferson on the issue of a further cession of land by Virginia to Congress, see JM to Jefferson, 16 Mar. 1784 (LC: Madison Papers).

31The petition, signed by about 150 “Inhabitants of Kentuckey Settlement, westeward of the Cumberland Mountains, on the waters empting into the Ohio River,” was submitted to Congress on 2 January and apparently tabled (NA: PCC, No. 185, III, 90; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVI, 3, n. 2). The petitioners, of whom many had their names written for them by others among the signatories, listed numerous grievances. Among these the most stressed were insufficient opportunity to acquire a preemptive right to land improved by, and defended, at a “great loss of their Blood and treasure,” against “a barbarous savage enemy”; inadequate help in resisting that foe; engrossment of land, including indispensable “Salt Springs,” by absentee owners or a few “affluent” residents; inequable and exorbitant taxes; and the failure of a distant legislature at Richmond, which they could not afford to attend, to enact laws suited to frontier life and its needs. For these reasons, the signers prayed Congress to enable them to “enjoy the Freedom and Blessings of our fellow Citizens” by creating Kentucky “as a free Independent State” (NA: PCC, No. 41, V, 101–2). The Virginia delegates in their letter of 20 February 1784 to Governor Harrison enclosed a copy of the petition and expressed the hope that he would submit it to the General Assembly (Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VI, 446, and n. 2). Harrison replied that he would do “agreeably to your request” (Executive Letter Book, 1783–1786, p. 279, MS in Va. State Library).

32Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VI, 451–52. Besides this prudential consideration, Jefferson probably also agreed with the principle expressed by the Kentucky petitioners: “It is a well known truth that the riches and strenth of a free country does not consist in property being Vested in a few individuals, but the more generaly it is distributed the more it promotes Industry, Population and frugality, and even morality.” The “people of Indiana Greenbriar &c.” were those settled in areas claimed by the Indiana Company and the Greenbriar Company. Most of that region is now within the state of West Virginia (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , I, map facing p. 212; Thomas P. Abernethy, Western Lands and the American Revolution, pp. 7, 8, 37, 39 [chart], 90, 144, 190, 259, 305).

33The distance Jefferson mentioned would extend approximately from Charleston, on the Great Kanawha River in West Virginia, to Danville, Ky. Obviously “never” was much too long a time for that expanse to remain an uninhabited “absolute desart.”

34The principal lead mines were along the New River in Montgomery County. Others of lesser importance were in Bedford, Chesterfield, and Washington counties (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , II, 154, first n. 2; V, 355; 356, n. 5; JCSV description begins H. R. McIlwaine et al., eds., Journals of the Council of the State of Virginia (4 vols. to date; Richmond, 1931——). description ends , I, 6, 9, 65; II, 74; Cal. of Va. State Papers description begins William P. Palmer et al., eds., Calendar of Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts (11 vols.; Richmond, 1875–93). description ends , I, 503; McIlwaine, Official Letters description begins H. R. McIlwaine, ed., Official Letters of the Governors of the State of Virginia (3 vols.; Richmond, 1926–29). description ends , I, 8, 235; Hening, Statutes description begins William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619 (13 vols.; Richmond and Philadelphia, 1819–23). description ends , IX, 237; Thomas P. Abernethy, Western Lands and the American Revolution, p. 79).

35Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , I, map facing p. 212. The advantage of “500. miles” enjoyed by Virginia and Maryland over Pennsylvania, for example, appears true only when the measure of miles begins at Cumberland, Md., on the Potomac River. If “water communication” is interpreted as “commerce,” a fairer comparison with Pennsylvania would be between Philadelphia and Alexandria on the Potomac. Using that town as the starting point and bearing in mind the falls near there and farther northwestward in the Potomac, the “500. miles” is an exaggeration.

36In September 1783 the Pennsylvania General Assembly provided for the appointment of six commissioners to report methods and probable cost of improving the navigation of the Schuylkill River from Philadelphia to Reading and “of opening a communication” between the Schuylkill at Reading and an advantageous place on the Susquehanna River. The commissioners were also instructed to examine the west branch of the Susquehanna for the purpose of ascertaining its navigability (Pa. Archives description begins Samuel Hazard et al., eds., Pennsylvania Archives (9 ser.; 138 vols.; Philadelphia and Harrisburg, 1852–1949). description ends , 1st ser., X, 128–30, 312, 334–35; Solon J. Buck and Elizabeth H. Buck, Planting of Civilization in Western Pennsylvania, pp. 231–41).

37These remarks foreshadow the chartering of the James River Company and the Potowmack Company by the Virginia General Assembly at its session of October 1784 (JHDV description begins (1828 ed.). Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia, Anno Domini, 1776 (Richmond, 1828). description ends , Oct. 1784, pp. 109, 110; Hening, Statutes description begins William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619 (13 vols.; Richmond and Philadelphia, 1819–23). description ends , XI, 450–62, 510–25).

38The Virginia General Assembly at its session of October 1784 “vested in George Washington, esq. his heirs and assigns, forever,” fifty shares in the Potowmack Company and one hundred shares in the James River Company (JHDV description begins (1828 ed.). Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia, Anno Domini, 1776 (Richmond, 1828). description ends , Oct. 1784, p. 110; Hening, Statutes description begins William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619 (13 vols.; Richmond and Philadelphia, 1819–23). description ends , XI, 525–26). Washington indeed had the navigation of the “Patowmac much at heart” (Fitzpatrick, Writings of Washington description begins John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington, from the Original Sources, 1745–1799 (39 vols.; Washington, 1931–44). description ends , indexes of XXVII and XXVIII under Potomac Navigation Company, and esp. XXVII, 471–80, 480, n. 56).

39From Cumberland, Md., on the North Branch of the Potomac River, west-northwest in a straight line to the present Youghiogheny Dam in Pennsylvania is about twenty-eight miles. The Cheat River flows north and northwest through West Virginia to its confluence with the Monongahela River at Point Marion in southwestern Pennsylvania. By “head,” Jefferson meant the confluence of Horseshoe Run and Clover Run, which form the Cheat in Tucker County, W. Va. From Port Marion it would be little farther than fifteen miles to present Kempton Junction on the North Branch of the Potomac. The above distances in straight lines do not, of course, allow for the natural obstacles that would increase the distances of portage.

40William Short, a member of the Virginia Council of State from June 1783 until his resignation in August 1784 to become private secretary to Jefferson during his diplomatic mission to France (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , III, 269–70; Jefferson to JM, 7 May, and n. 15; Jones to JM, 8 June 1783. and n. 13; JCSV description begins H. R. McIlwaine et al., eds., Journals of the Council of the State of Virginia (4 vols. to date; Richmond, 1931——). description ends , III, 267, 374, 375).

41JM had viewed “new members” of Congress from a different standpoint (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , VI, 16; JM to Randolph, 27 May 1783, and n. 8).

42Major General Horatio Gates of Berkeley County, Va., may have stayed in Annapolis until early in April 1784 (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VII, 62). He was never a member of the Council of State or the Virginia General Assembly. Moving in 1790 to Rose Hill, an estate two or three miles north of New York City, Gates resided there during the last sixteen years of his life (Samuel White Patterson, Horatio Gates: Defender of American Liberties [New York, 1941], pp. 367–96).

43In his draft of a new Form of Government for Virginia, written in 1783, Jefferson proposed that “executive power” be centered in the governor, and that the status of the Council of State be correspondingly reduced (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 298–300). JM agreed that the Council was a “grave of useful talents” and its cost exceeded the worth of its services, but he accurately predicted that it probably would be left untouched by the Virginia General Assembly in the session of May 1784 (JM to Jefferson, 16 Mar. 1784, in LC: Madison Papers).

44Jefferson probably had five horses at Annapolis (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 355). In his correspondence between 23 December 1783 and 28 February 1784, the “disgraceful predicament in which the Gentlemen of the Delegation are placed for want of remittances from the State” is frequently mentioned (ibid., VI, 418, 427, 431, 512–13, 534, 538, 539, 540, 544, 565). On 14 February Jefferson received from the treasurer, Jacquelin Ambler, the bill of exchange of Benjamin Harrison on John Holker for 433⅓ dollars. Three days later he sold the bill to John Hopkins Stone and received $100 in part payment (Maryland Historical Magazine, XLI [1946], 119).

45JM replied that, although the place of repayment was “not material” to him, Jefferson should delay returning the loan until his own financial stringency at Annapolis had been eased (JM to Jefferson, 16 Mar. 1784, in LC: Madison Papers). For the origin of the debt, see Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 358; JM to Jefferson, 10 Dec., and n. 24; Settlement of Accounts, 31 Dec. 1783, n. 13; Jefferson to JM, 1 Jan. 1784.

46François Jean, Chevalier (later Marquis) de Chastellux, Voyage de Newport à Philadelphie, Albany, &c, published anonymously at Newport, R.I., in 1781 by the Imprimerie Royale de l’Escadre (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , V, 138; 139, n. 9; also ibid., II, 226, n. 7; III, 131, n. 4; IV, 83, nn. 6, 7; 338, n. 11; V, 18, n. 10; 327, and nn. 7, 8; 344, n. 7; Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VI, 550 n.). Not until 24 December 1784, when he was in Paris, did Jefferson write to Chastellux about the book (ibid., VII, 580–81).

47Cornelius van Bynkershoek (Bijnkershoek), Questionum juris publici libri duo, quorum primus est de rebus bellicus, secundus de rebus varii argumenti de lege Rhodia de jactu liber singularis, et de dominanio maris dissertatio (The Hague, 1703; 2d ed.; Leyden, 1737); [Liber singularis de foro legatorum] Traité du juge compétent des ambassadeurs, tant pour le civil, que pour le criminel. Traduit du Latin … par Jean Barbeyrac (The Hague, 1723; 3d ed.; 2 vols.; The Hague, 1746). See Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , VI, 69, entry No. 30.

48Daniel Boinod and Alexander Gaillard, “lately from Europe,” advertised in the Pennsylvania Packet of 3 February 1784 that their catalogue, selling for “¼ a dollar,” listed the books available for purchase at their store on Second Street near Vine Street in Philadelphia. Petrus van Musschenbroek (1692–1761), Cours de Physique expérimentale et mathematique, … traduit par M. Sigaud de la Fond (3 vols.; Paris, 1769). The Latin title of the author’s work is Physicae experimentales et geometricae … (Leyden, 1729).

49JM to Jefferson, 10 Dec. 1783, and n. 14; JM to Jefferson, 16 Mar. 1784 (LC: Madison Papers).

50Ibid. By “is buying” Jefferson meant “hopes to buy,” for on 20 July 1784 Monroe wrote that his negotiations with the owner of the land had been unsuccessful (Boyd, Papers of Jefferson description begins Julian P. Boyd et al., eds., The Papers of Thomas Jefferson (18 vols. to date; Princeton, N.J., 1950——). description ends , VII, 299–300; also VII, 381, 565; VIII, 150; X, 277). By 1786, still without land near Monticello, Monroe was practicing law in Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County.

51Thomas Jefferson, as attorney for William Short, bought the “Indian Camp plantation” in Albemarle County in 1795 from Champe Carter of Blenheim, paying $4,700 for 1,334 acres (Edgar Woods, Albemarle County in Virginia, pp. 24, 217; George Green Shackelford, “William Short and Albemarle,” Magazine of Albemarle County History, XV [1955–56], 21).

52The property mentioned by Jefferson has not been identified. Jefferson’s suggestion may have become less tempting to JM when on 19 August 1784 he was presented by his father, “in Consideration of paternal affection and of five Shillings,” with about 560 acres from the Montpelier estate (Orange County Court Records, MS in Va. State Library).

Index Entries