William Cranch to John Quincy Adams, 1 October 1789
William Cranch to John Quincy Adams
Boston Oct. 1. 1789. thursday.
My Good friend—
Altho I have written you before, I know you have no objection to recieving another letter before you answer my last—1 My greatest motive for writing now is to know the truth of a Report which has been industriously spread here within this week past, “that there is so great a Coolness between the P——t & V-P——t that they do not speak to each other.” I know that there are some people, (I hope but few) who wish to cherish a jealously in the minds of the good people of Massachusetts, towards the Vice President— I have some reason to think that Dr. Demigog is one—2 And I doubt a little whether your father’s quondam pupil, (with a flat nose) may not be another.3 He seems to be crazy after the phantom popularity. The aforesaid Dr. and he are very intimate, of late— It is said too that the Vice President’s influence is much diminished. And as a proof, it is said that judge Tudor has lost the Office of Attorney to this district in the federal Court—4 All these things are said by a certain set of people in this town, with a view to detract from the Character of a man who has done more for his Country than any other man, now in it— I have attended but very little to politics lately—but this has caught my Ear as I passed— I know not but that the distinction of Southern & Northern may have an Influence even upon the greatest Man, But I cannot believe it. The people of the new England States are crazy. They are divided among themselves. They can not see their own Interest—blind as Beetles—
I was at Exhibition Tuesday last— Your Brother was well— Dr Tufts was in town to day—[. . .] [. . .]erting—
I wish you would give the [enclosed?] letter, to Charles— He will be so kind as to deliver it— [. . .] you have recd your Coat— Our friends at Braintree were well this Morning—
Your sincere friend
Wm. Cranch
RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “Mr John Quincy Adams / New York”; docketed: “Wm Cranch / October 1st 1789.” Some loss of text where the seal was removed.
1. Not found.
2. Perhaps Dr. Charles Jarvis (1748–1807), Harvard 1766, who had a long history of service to the city of Boston and had recently been elected to the Mass. General Court. In his Autobiography, JA wrote of Jarvis’ “virulence against me,” possibly connected to the animosity between JA and Edward Church, who was Jarvis’ cousin (, 16:376–383; , 3:384–385; AA to Mary Smith Cranch, 1 Sept., and note 5, above).
3. Probably Jonathan Mason Jr.
4. Judge William Tudor, JA’s former law student, wrote to JA on 27 July (Adams Papers) about the maneuvering for judicial appointments going on in Massachusetts. Tudor noted to JA that “to no Person but to yourself . . . have I ever hinted a Wish to be noticed in the Places that must soon be disposed of. But you will now give me leave to say that I should be pleased with an appointment to some Office (the advocateship is now out of the Question) which my Education might enable me to discharge the Duties of.” JA replied on 18 Sept. (MHi: Tudor-Adams Papers) counseling patience: “how the President will decide, on the judiciary Appointments I know not.— There is no System nor Harmony among the Men from Massachusetts—one recommends one, and another another. Dont you be chagrin’d, mortified humiliated nor vexed let it go as it will.” Tudor did not receive any appointment but was eventually admitted to practice law before the district and circuit courts in 1796 (, 17:261).