John Jay Papers
Documents filtered by: Recipient="Jay, John" AND Period="Madison Presidency"
sorted by: recipient
Permanent link for this document:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jay/01-07-02-0174

To John Jay from Richard Peters, 14 April 1811

From Richard Peters

Belmont 14. Apl 1811.

Dear Sir

Since my Acknowledgment of the Reciept of your Letter1 I have perused it with Care & great Satisfaction. I see in it the strong Mind & clear Conception of my old & valued Friend, unaffected by any Decline which afflicts our mortal Frame. The Arguments on the Subject, independent of the Proof of the Fact happily known to you, are sufficient to convince candid Men. But alas! these do not compose the Bulk of Society.

Our W. Lewis,2 from an overweening Desire to accumulate Praise on our Friend Hamilton, which he, if living, would have too much Honour to court at the Expence of another, continues occasionally to circulate the Story. His Principles are as sound as any who venerate the Character of our great Friend Washington; whose Fame should be preserved for our Country, as well as for the Justice it merits. But this is overlooked in private Considerations. It seems that either a Dr Mason3 himself, or some of the Friends of Col. H’s Family, discovered the Papers which gave Rise to this unfortunate Development. Lewis has been heard to say—that there are Notes in Col. Hamilton’s Writing containing the great leading Sentiments, besides the whole Copy, of the Address. So that “he can shew, that strip the Address of those Sentiments, & it is a mere caput mortuum”—or Words to this Effect. A long time ago I beg’d him, for the sake of his Country, to cease from diffusing such Observations. I understood that Dr M. had intended to publish the Papers or an Account of them in ^his biographical Account^ of Hamilton’s Life— I was uneasy; & requested that it might not be done, most earnestly, in a Conversation with L. But whether it was really so intended, or is yet thought of, I know not.

I have written a Letter to Lewis with a Hope that it may prevent further Mischief. It contains general Observations on the Tendency of such impolitic & painful Conversations, which, if the Fact would bear them ought out, are unnecessary & mischievous. I have it under Advisement as to sending it; but fear his Imprudence will force it from me. I have stated your Information without your Name; which shall not be mentioned but in some greater Extremity. I have made the Statement in these Words.—

“My Motive for renewing my Observations grows out of my Conviction & Knowledge, that the Appearances shewn by the Notes & Copy of the Address among Col. Hamilton’s Papers are entirely fallacious. I pledge myself to prove it, when I shall be satisfied that the Occasion calls for it. That my Assertion may not depend on any Knowledge supposed merely personal— I have a Document deposited with me by one of the most eminent & worthy Men of our Country (who was privy to & shared in the whole Transaction) which will, if I am compelled by important Circumstances, be produced. It unquestionably (and, for our Country, as well as the Reputation of our deceased Patriot & Sage, most fortunately) proves, by Testimony positive & clear, that the Notes taken by Col. H. of the Heads of the Farewell Address, were not his Thoughts;— but extracted from Gen. W.’s Draft in his own Hand Writing. That these Extracts were made for the Purpose of considering in what Parts the Phraseology might be changed for the better; & some Changes of Diction were made, but the Sentiments preserved;— & “no Alterations of Importance” introduced. A Copy was made by Col. H; because it was thought most decorous not to interline or strike out, so as to deface Gen W’s original Draft. Whatever Alterations were made had no material Effect on the original Sentiments, which are those of Genl W. & by no Means to be ascribed to Col. H. who merely held the Pen for the Purpose stated. The Revision of the Address was made in Consequence of a Letter from Genl W. requesting it; & accompanied by his original Draft”.

On comparing this Statement with yours, it seems as if I had stated (undesignedly) that you made no or few substantial Alterations in Genl W’s Draft, more strongly than your Account of it seems to warrant. Your Words may be applied, by those who wish them so to be, to the Paper Col. H brought to you, when you met by Appointment to consider it. If I have misconcieved what you have written, set me right as far as you think necessary. The Point will be (if it should ever come to Scrutiny) whether you mean that “no Alteration of Importance” was made in Col. H’s, or Genl. W’s Draft? I shall seal up your Letter & put a Note on the Envelope what is to be done with it— in Case of Accident to me. I have heard an excellent Character of Dr Mason. But his Zeal for Disclosure of any thing relating to Hamilton’s Fame, eats up his Discretion. I am not acquainted with him. He & our Mr L. move together. Could any prudent Steps be taken by you to set him right? Could it not be done thro’ Mr King? who, I believe & have heard, has shewn the complete Copy in Col. H’s Writing? I will delay taking any Steps as long as I can— He ^(Mr King)^ shewed the Draft to Col Pickering, as I heard. Col. P. is writing; & sometimes too warmly. If he should, in contrasting Hamilton’s Character with Adams’s, mention any thing of this, it will be unfortunate. I have had (in the Winter) Correspondence with him which I hope will put him on his Guard. But I had not then the Proof positive. Yours very affectionately,

Richard Peters

General Washington shewed the Address, in his own Hand Writing, to Col Pickering— who returned it without any Correction exactly as it is printed. No one admires Gen W’s Character more than Col. P. but this Story of our W.L. seemed to make a strong Impression upon him; which I endeavoured to remove by Reasoning much in the Train you have written. What Success I had, I cannot tell. If Doubts are raised in such Minds so well disposed— what Mischief must ensue from these Papers when taken up by those inclined to think & do the worst?

I confess, I do not see why any Delicacy about Confidence placed in You should restrain your putting a Stop to this Story in every Way. The Circumstances now require what could not have been foreseen at the Time. You are the only one living acquainted with the true State of the Facts. Hamilton, if alive, would clear up all Doubts, or rather none could arise. If Gen. W. were alive he would wish you to declare what you know.

J. Jay Esqr

ALS, NNC (EJ: 09569). Addressed: “John Jay Esqr / Bedford / State of New York”. Stamped. For JJ’s reply, see his letter to RP of 23 Apr. 1811, below.

2William Lewis (1751–1819), Federalist attorney who had served as a judge of the Federal District for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (1791–92).

3John Mitchell Mason (1770–1829), minister, theologian, and trustee and Provost of Columbia College. Mason would take on the project of writing AH’s biography, but was relieved of the job by Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton because of health issues. See JJ to RK, 8 Oct. 1818, below.

Index Entries