Adams Papers
Documents filtered by: Author="Adams, Thomas Boylston" AND Recipient="Adams, John"
sorted by: editorial placement
Permanent link for this document:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/04-15-02-0141

Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams, 18 January 1803

Thomas Boylston Adams to John Adams

Philadelphia 18th: January 1803.

My dear Sir.

I lately enclosed you a prospectus of the Revd Doctor Smith’s works accompanied by a print of the Author, which I sent rather as a specimen of good American Engraving, than on any other account; although as a subscriber to the work, which will ere long be published, you might wish to posses so striking a likeness of the Author. I sent the print and prospectus without any knowledge of Mr: Smith, but on being informed of it, by his printer, he expressed much gratification, and then gave the information of your being a Subscriber, of which I was before ignorant.1 If I can procure you a print of another eminent personage here, with whom you have been long acquainted, I will send it as a curiosity, merely. It is taken from a portrait of our Governor Thomas Mc:Kean, painted by Stewart, and in addition to its being a correct likeness, it is so profusely decorated with the symbols of nobility and the emblems badges of Royalty, that I think every genuine Democrat in the Country, should take it as a model for his own resemblance. There is the enamelled Eagle pendent at the button-hole, which rivals any Star at the breast of a King, and at the foot of the print is an Escutcheon designating family arms whether of the McKean’s or not I am unable to say. The motto is “Mens sana in corpore sano.” How apt the interpretation of this motto may be, I leave others to judge, having long since made up my own opinion respecting its nonapplication to the Governor of Pennsylvania. The Crest presents the figures of a Dove & a Serpent, emblematic of harmlessness and wisdom, I presume; a Crescent in the middle of two Stars, on Cross, crosslets, but what this can mean I must confess is beyond my depth in Heraldry. Whether the interpretation would be best effected, “Militia aut domi,” I need not enquire.2

I have within a few days gained a cause of considerable importance, which I have twice once argued, in Bank, before the judges of our Supreme Court, and once before the high Court of Errors and appeals, of which Mr: Chew is Chief Justice. The Cause has been depending nearly five years, and was one of the first, in which my old Master associated me as his Co-adjutor. Upwards of a twelvemonth ago, we obtained judgment on argument before the Supreme Court, and the Cause was removed by writ of Error, so that we had the whole ground to travel over again, but had the good fortune, eventually to succeed completely.3 Your old friend Jonathan Williams, who was a voluntary Guardian to three young ladies of this City, finding his pretty wards in distressed circumstances, in consequence of the sudden death of their father who left but little property for their support, bethought himself of a Will, which had been made by a person, who was betrothed to one of the daughters of his friend, and died before marriage, in which a pecuniary legacy of £500 was bequeathed to his intended wife, and in case of her death, to be equally divided among her three Sisters. The lady, who was the object of the Testator’s affections and intended bounty, died not long after him, and the legacy became vested in the three surviving Sisters. There was a preliminary clause in the will, ordering testator’s debts and funeral expences to be paid, but silent as to legacies. All the personal estate was exhausted in the payment of debts, and no assetts were found in the hands of the Executors, to pay the legacies. There was however a sweeping clause, whereby testator bequeathed and devised all the Rest and Residue of his estate, real & personal to his brothers and Sisters, as tenants in common, with a proviso that one of his Sisters should keep the whole, in her possession during her widowhood or until her death. The suit, for the pecuniary legacy was brought against the residuary devisees, and the question which was made in favor of the latter, was whether the residuary fund, consisting altogether of real estate, should not be exonerated from the payment of the monied legacies? And if the Court should be of opinion that they were a lien upon the lands, whether the Sister of testator had not a life estate in the premises or during her widohood?

The first argument of this Cause consumed two days in the Supreme Court, and the whole law of legacies and devises was amply discussed. When the Court however, came to give judgment, it was expressed in four words. “Judgment for the Plffs.” The second argument took up nearly as much time as the first, and in consequence of Mr: Chew’s infirm health, Court was held at his chambers, in his own house, and the same brevity prevailed in the judgment rendered here, as in the first instance. The judgment of the Court below was unanimously affirmed, which gave our fair Clients the opinion of eight learned and grave judges in favor of their claim.

I have entered into this detail, which you may think tediously minute, for the purpose of informing you that I am doing something, in my profession, and that successfully, in some instances at least, though this may not be so material. I have however, never lost a cause, where property was concerned, since I have been in practice, but I claim no merit on this score, because it may be looked upon as accident or good fortune. Yet, one would think, it might be a recommendation to more business, than I have hitherto been employed in. I may flatter myself, that my business has increased considerably, within three or four months, but so imperceptibly as to leave me still in a state of uncertainty as to its yielding a comfortable livelihood. A seven year’s probation seems to be the only possible introduction for a young man, at this bar; for a Stranger, unassuming and wan[ting] brazin lungs as well as features, it requires more; but notwithstanding [these] considerations, I am fully persuaded, that time will operate an ameliorating] condition here. It will never be heard of abroad until I feel it myself, and […] further out of my power to calculate when it will arrive.

I have now gone through every grade of Courts from the lowest to the highest, and though I felt very ill at ease in speaking before a private audience, where my own voice terrified me, by its novelty of sound in such a confined apartment, I find, that no peculiarity or novelty of situation, has been able to awe me into silence, though I have been always confused at the outset, in the arrangement of my thoughts and sometimes hesitating in expression.

Our judges are so superanuated, indolent or careless of reputation as men of profound research, that they give the go by, to every point in a cause, which is not essential to decide the question before them. This contributes very much to “the glorious uncertainty of the law,” and adds to the number of almost endless arguments, which obstruct the streams of justice, in this State.4

Asking pardon for this disquisition, and referring to the letters of Pliny Junr: as my precursor and model in this style of writing, I subscribe with filial duty / and affection / Your Son

Thomas B Adams.

RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “John Adams Esqr: / Quincy”; internal address: “John Adams Esqr:”; endorsed: “T. B. Adams / 18 Jan. Ansd 28. 1803.” Some loss of text where the seal was removed.

1TBA sent JA a 62-page prospectus titled The Works of William Smith, D.D., … with an Elegant Engraving of the Author’s Head, Phila., 1802, Shaw-Shoemaker description begins Ralph R. Shaw and Richard H. Shoemaker, American Bibliography: A Preliminary Checklist for 1801–1819, New York, 1958–1966; 22 vols.; supplemental edn., Early American Imprints, www.readex.com. description ends , No. 3086, advertising a forthcoming two-volume edition of the writings of Rev. William Smith (1727–1803), the first provost of the University of Pennsylvania. The prospectus included a rough print of a portrait of Smith engraved by David Edwin after Gilbert Stuart that was slated to be reproduced in high quality in The Works of William Smith, D.D., Late Provost of the College and Academy of Philadelphia, 2 vols., Phila., 1803, Shaw-Shoemaker description begins Ralph R. Shaw and Richard H. Shoemaker, American Bibliography: A Preliminary Checklist for 1801–1819, New York, 1958–1966; 22 vols.; supplemental edn., Early American Imprints, www.readex.com. description ends , No. 5074. Hugh Maxwell (1777–1860), an Irish immigrant, printed the prospectus and the 1803 edition, the second volume of which is in JA’s library at MB (JA, Papers description begins Papers of John Adams, ed. Robert J. Taylor, Gregg L. Lint, Sara Georgini, and others, Cambridge, 1977– . description ends , 3:56; J. I. Mombert, An Authentic History of Lancaster County, Lancaster, Penn., 1869, p. 399; Catalogue of JA’s Library description begins Catalogue of the John Adams Library in the Public Library of the City of Boston, Boston, 1917. description ends ).

2“In Peace or in War” (Cicero, Oration against Piso, transl. William Duncan, London, 1765, Oration XI, sect. i). For Edwin’s engraving of Thomas McKean, see Descriptive List of Illustrations, No. 2, above.

3TBA and Jared Ingersoll originally argued Tucker et al. v. Hassenclever et al. before the Penn. Supreme Court in Dec. 1801. The case involved the contested will of Isaac Melcher (1748–1790). Melcher had been engaged to Eleanor Clifton (d. 1791), a daughter of William Clifton (d. 1798), and had bequeathed her £500, to be paid to her sisters Elizabeth Clifton Tucker, Mary Clifton Wharton (d. 1813), and Frances Clifton (d. 1807) in the event of Eleanor’s death. Melcher left the residue of his estate to his siblings Adam Melcher (ca. 1755–1812), Jacob Melcher (1764–1790), and Elizabeth Melcher Shallus (ca. 1753–1818), with a proviso that his sister Maria Melcher Hassenclever (ca. 1751–1813) “keep the whole in her possession, during her widowhood.” TBA and Ingersoll represented the Clifton sisters, who after their father’s death were under the guardianship of JA’s friend Jonathan Williams Jr., arguing that “on the face of the will it appears that the testator intended the devisee of the residue should take nothing until the pecuniary legacies were paid.” The court ruled in favor of TBA’s clients, and in Jan. 1803 the Penn. High Court of Errors and Appeals under president Benjamin Chew Sr. affirmed the judgment (vol 13:515; Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 4 vols., Phila., 1817–1819, 3:294–300; Washington, Papers, Revolutionary War Series description begins The Papers of George Washington: Revolutionary War Series, ed. Philander D. Chase, Frank E. Grizzard Jr., Edward G. Lengel, David R. Hoth, Jennifer Stertzer, and others, Charlottesville, Va., 1985– . description ends , 3:392; Anne H. Wharton, “The Wharton Family,” PMHB description begins Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography. description ends , 2:55 [1878]; Philadelphia Gazette of the United States, 3 Dec. 1798; Philadelphia United States Gazette, 19 Feb. 1807; Marion F. Egge, ed., Pennsylvania German Roots across the Ocean, Phila., 2000, p. 45; Philadelphia American Daily Advertiser, 29 May 1812, 12 July 1813).

4TBA was quoting a 1756 toast made in support of legal reforms championed by William Murray, 1st Earl of Mansfield, in his capacity as Lord Chief Justice of England (E. Cobham Brewer, Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, Phila., 1898, p. 525; DNB description begins Leslie Stephen and Sidney Lee, eds., The Dictionary of National Biography, New York and London, 1885–1901; repr. Oxford, 1959–1960; 21 vols. plus supplements; rev. edn., www.oxforddnb.com. description ends ).

Index Entries