THE WRITINGS OF

THOMAS JEFFERSON



Definitive Edition

CONTAININ G HIS AUTOBIOGRAPHY, NOTES ON VIRGINIA, PARLIAMENTARY MANUAL,
OFFICIAL PAPERS, MESSAGES AND ADDRESSES , AND OTHER WRITINGS, OFFICIAL AND
PRIVATE, NOW COLLECTED AND 



PUBLISHED IN THEIR ENTIRETY FOR THE FIRST TIME 



INCLUDING



ALL OF THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIP TS, DEPOSITED IN THE DEPARTME NT OF STATE AND
PUBLISHED 1N 1853 BY ORDER OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS WITH NUMEROUS
ILLUSTRAT IONS AND



A COMPREHE NSIVE ANALYTICA L INDEX



ALBERT ELLERY BERGH 



EDITOR



VOL. III.



ISSUED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF



THE THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL 

ASSOCIATI ON OF THE UNITED STATES



WASHINGTO N, D. C. 1907





I THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE.



The Louisiana Purchase was, by common consent, the supreme act of the
administrat ion of Thomas Jefferson as President, though he makes no reference
to it in citing the features of his career which he chose to have perpetuate d
in his epitaph. For that commemora tion he chose principles rather than acts.
There have been others who have framed or founded universitie s. There have
been others who have framed statutes of religious liberty. But there was only
one Louisiana Purchase.



I venture to think that there are three great master facts upon which the
enduring fame of Jefferson will rest: First, he was the author of the
Declaration of Independe nce; second, he was the founder and leader of a great
party, of a school of political thought which, under varying names, has divided
the republic from the beginning to the present time; third, he made the
Louisiana Purchase. In its historical importance this great act ranks with half
a dozen of the most momentous and epochal events in our national annals, with
his own Declaration of Independe nce, with the adoption of the Constitutio n,
with the molding of national power through constitutio nal constructio n by
Chief Justice



ii The Louisiana Purchase



Marshall, with the abolition of slavery, with the overthrow of secession and
the complete triumph of an indissolubl e union, and with the Spanish war and
all its far-reachin g consequenc es. The Louisiana Purchase nearly doubled the
boundaries of the republic. It added to her territory a little less than a
million square miles of territory. It broadened the domain of our country by an
extension which was larger in itself than Great Britain, France, Germany,
Spain, Portugal and Italy combined. It gave us what has become one of the most
fertile and opulent sections of the nation and the home of nearly fifteen
millions of happy and contented Americans. It was an indispensa ble preliminary
. to the later acquisition of that vast domain which extends from the Gulf to
Vancouver, embracing Texas, California, Oregon and Washington , and which added
more than a million square miles to our territory, now the home of six millions
more of thrifty and happy Americans who live and move and have their being
within its domain. It was the first great expansion of the republic, and the
manifesto of its continued extension with the advance of the world.



The honor which belongs to Jefferson is not simply that of being President when
the purchase was made. He was the father of the vital policy which brought that
splendid culmination . The crucial necessity which led up to the acquisition of
Louisiana was the free navigation of the Mississippi River. The great Father of
Waters was our western boundary and the



The Louisiana Purchase iii



territory which rested on its hither shore demanded an unchecked outlet to the
sea. Jefferson was the first of our statesmen to appreciate the importance of
free and untrammell ed communicat ion from the Ohio to the Gulf. Spain held New
Orleans and commanded the mouth of the Mississippi. If she was to remain there
she must grant unrestricte d privileges. As early as 1790, when Jefferson was
Secretary of State under Washington , he demanded unhampered transit. He saw as
no other man so clearly saw at that time, the tremendous significanc e of that
question. Through his efforts the free use of the port of New Orleans was
granted. After that all went well until a few years later the right of deposit
on the wharves and in the warehouses at New Orleans was withdrawn. Then the
West was instantly aflame and it became apparent that there could be no sure
and lasting peace until the control of the Mississippi was so fixed that the
United States would not be dependent upon any foreign power for its absolutely
free navigation.



Meanwhile Spain retroceded Louisiana to France and Jefferson became President.
He had, all through his previous career, been in affiliation with France and
his antipathy was England; but so strong was his conviction that there was an
inevitable antagonism between the United States and any alien power holding New
Orleans that he looked to an alliance with England, unless that foreign power
could be removed. He instructed Livingston, already



iv The Louisiana Purchase



in France, to negotiate for the purchase of New Orleans and he sent Monroe to
Paris to help him. Propitious circumstan ces unexpected ly served his end. The
peace of Amiens was broken and Napoleon faced a gigantic conflict with England
and with Europe. He wanted means and he knew that in such a conflict he could
not hold Louisiana. He proposed to sell the entire territory, and so Jefferson,
who had set out only to purchase New Orleans and the territory called West
Florida, found himself suddenly the master of that magnificent realm beyond the
Mississippi which enlarged our republic so immensely, which carried our flag
over the great domain extending from the Gulf to Canada, a domain almost equal
in extent to the original thirteen States of the Union.



It has often been urged that in this great act, the greatest act of our history
between the adoption of the Constitutio n and the Civil War, Jefferson was
inconsisten t with his principles and his professions . He was the leader of
the strict constructio nists and this act was outside of the strict letter of
the Constitutio n. But that charge of inconsisten cy can be made with equal
force against every great party and almost every conspicuou s statesman in our
history. Webster was a free trader, substantial ly, and fought Calhoun as a
protectioni st when the interests of Massachuse tts were commercial, and he was
a protectioni st when Massachuse tts wanted to foster manufactur es. Calhoun
was a protectioni st



The Louisiana Purchase v



and fought Webster as a free trader before the South had developed its great
cotton growth, and he was a free trader after that developmen t when the South
wanted to exchange raw cotton for cotton products. Madison believed that the
United States Bank was unconstitut ional and refused in 1811 to recharter it;
but in 1816 Madison signed its second charter. In 1794 the Federalists passed
an embargo and the Republican s denounced it as unconstitut ional; and in 1807
the Republican s passed an embargo and the Federalists denounced it as
unconstitut ional. The Republican s affirmed the right of nullificatio n
against the alien and sedition acts of 1798 and the Federalists denounced it;
but a few years later the Federalists asserted that right of nullificatio n
against the force act of 1809 while the other party denounced it. Virginia
recanted and repudiated the famous Virginia resolutions at the very time that
Pennsylvan ia and Ohio shifted to the other side and affirmed the same
doctrine. If it be a question of inconsisten cies, the chapter is absolutely
unlimited.



It would be, indeed, easy to find inconsisten cies between the principles of
the Declaration of Independe nce and the practice of the Louisiana Purchase.
What of it? When it comes to an issue between an abstract doctrine and vital
practical statesmans hip what masterful man, with great destinies in his hand,
does not turn from the theoretical dogma to the living and commandin g act?
What true statesman permits a general and vague conception to paralyze a
distinct,



vi The Louisiana Purchase



definite and unmistakab le good? As a political philosophe r Jefferson taught
great doctrines. As President of the United States he met the direct and
immediate responsibil ities. He did not violate the Constitutio n­whateve r was
said at the time, we know it now; but in a great public emergency he departed
from his general theory of interpretat ion, and in doing so he did an act of
transcende nt statesmans hip and he achieved an incalculabl e advantage for the
republic.



I have not been trained in the Jefferson school of thought, belonging to the
opposing school. But I recognize and honor the incalculabl e services which
Jefferson rendered to the country, not merely in its first great expansion but
in the influence of his whole administrat ion. The Constitutio n had not then
gained any traditional sanctity. There were thousands of honest men who
believed that it was dangerous to the liberties of the people. They felt that
in the hands of Washington , of Hamilton and of Adams it had been directed
along imperialisti c lines, and that it was hostile to the spirit of the
Revolution. The immeasurab le value of Jefferson's incomparab le service was
that, as the leader of the opposing host, he came into authority, calmed the
disquietud e, exercised the same rights and powers and met the same high
responsibil ity in the same statesmanli ke way, and he dissipated any lingering
fear that the Constitutio n and governmen t of our republic involved any peril
to the freedom of the people.



The Louisiana Purchase vii



And so, as a devoted admirer of his great political rival, I honor, I salute
Jefferson for his immortal work, and I join with the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Association in urging a national memorial to one of the most illustrious among
the founders of the Republic.



CONTENTS.



                                                                               
        PAGE 

THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE. By Charles Emory

Smith, LL. D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . i-vii



REPORTS AND OPINIONS WHILE SECRETARY OF

STATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .1-314



Report on methods for obtaining Fresh Water

from Salt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . I        



The Report on Copper Coinage; communicat ed

to the House of Representatives, April 15th,

1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .II



Opinion on the question whether the Senate has

the right to negative the grade of persons 

appointed by the Executive to fill Foreign 

Missions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .15 



Opinion upon the validity of a grant made by 

the State of Georgia to certain companies of 

individuals , of a tract of country whereof the 

Indian right had never been extinguished, 

with power to such individuals to extinguish

the Indian right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 18 



Opinion in favor of the resolutions of May 21st,

1790, directing that in all cases where payment 

had not been already made, the debts 

due to the soldiers of Virginia and North Carolina 

should be paid to the original claimants or their 

attorneys, and not to their assignees . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .21



Plan for establishin g uniformity in the Coinage, 

Weights, and Measures of the United States. 

Communicat ed to the House of Representatives, 

July 13th, 1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .26



Appendix, containing illustration s and developments 

of some passages of the preceding report  . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .52



The Measures, .Weights, and Coins of the Decimal 

System estimated in those of England, now used 

in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 54



Postscript . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 57



Opinion upon the question whether the President 

should veto the Bill declaring that the seat of 

governmen t shall be transferred to the Potomac, 

in the year 1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 59



Opinion respecting the expenses and salaries

of Foreign Ministers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
. . . . . . 67



Opinion in regard to the continuance of the

monopoly of the commerce of the Creek

nation, enjoyed by Col. McGillivray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .72 



Opinion respecting our foreign debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .74



Opinion upon the question what the answer of

the President should be, in case Lord Dorchester 

should apply for permission to march troops 

through the territory of the United States from 

Detroit to the Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .78 



Opinion on the questions stated in the President's 

note of August 27th, 1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 79 



Opinion on the question whether it will be expedient 

to notify to Lord Dorchester the real object of the 

expedition preparing by Governor St. Clair.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81



Opinion on proceedings to be had under the Residence act . . . . .82



Report by the Secretary of State to the President 

of the United States on the Report of the Secretary 

of the Government northwest of the Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 



Opinion on certain proceedings of the Executive

in the Northweste rn Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .88 



Report on certain letters from the President to Mr. 

Gouverneu r Morris, and from Mr. Morris to the 

President, relative to our difficulties with England-1790 . . . . . . .90 



Report relative to the Mediterranean trade. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  94 



Report on the Algerine Prisoners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
112



Report of the Secretary of State on the subjects of the 

cod and whale fisheries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 120 



Opinion against the constitutionality of a National Bank . . . . . .145



Opinion relative to locating the Ten Mile Square for the 

Federal Government, and building the Federal city . . . . . . . . . 153



Report on the policy of securing particular marks to 

Manufacturers, by law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.156 



Opinion relative to the demolition of Mr. Carroll's 

house by Major L'Enfant, in laying out the Federal city . . . . . .158



Opinion relative to certain lands on Lake Erie, sold by 

the United States to Pennsylvan ia  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.162 



Report relative to negotiations with Spain to secure 

the free navigation of the Mississippi and a port on 

the same . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 164



Report on the case of Charles Russell and others,

claiming certain lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .198 



Report relative to negotiation s at Madrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .199



Opinion on the bill apportionin g Representa tion . . . . . . . . . . 201



Opinion relative to a case of recapture, by citizens 

of the United States, of slaves escaped into Florida, 

and of an American captain enticing French slaves 

from St. Domingo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 212



A note added by Mr. Jefferson at a later period . . . . . . . . . . .214 



Report on Assays at the Mint, communicated to 

the House of Representatives, January 8th, 1793 . . . . . . . . . .215 



Report on the petition. of John Rogers, relative 

to certain lands on the northeast side of the Tennessee . . . . . .217 



Report relative to the Boundaries of the Lands 

between the Ohio and the Lakes, acquired by

treaties from the Indians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 220 



Report on the proceedings of the Secretary 

of State to transfer to Europe the annual fund

of $40,000, appropriat ed to that Department . . . . . . . . . . . .223 



Opinion on the question whether the United 

States have a right to renounce their treaties with 

France, or to hold them suspended till the 

governmen t of that country shall be established . . . . . . . . . . 226



Opinion relative to granting of passports 

to American vessels .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.243 



Opinion relative to case of a British vessel 

captured by a French vessel, purchased by 

French citizens, and fitted out as a Privateer 

on one of our ports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . .
.247 



 Opinion on the proposition of the Secretary 

of the Treasury to open a new Loan . . . . . . . . .  . . .  . . . . .251 



Opinion relative to the policy of a new Loan . . .  . . .  . . . . .256



Report on the privileges and restrictions on 

the commerce of the United States in 

foreign countries  . . . . . . . .  . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .261



Report on the Mint. Communicated to the 

Senate, December 31st, 1793 . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283



Report on the Tonnage payable by French 

vessels in the Ports of the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286



Report on Vermont Nominations  . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .296 



 Report on Unclaimed Lands . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 



 Report on the Petition of John Mangnall  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .299



 Report on the Petition of William Howe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 



 Report on the Petition of John Neufville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .302



 Report on Expediency of Appointing a 

 Consul at Copenhagen . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .306



 Report of Decree rendered by the 

 National Assembly of France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 



INAUGURAL ADDRESSES ANDMESSAGES .317- 494



Inauguration Address, March 4th, 1801  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .317 



Message on the Act for the Defence of 

Rivers and Harbors-March, 1808  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 



First Annual Message-December 8th, 1801. . . . . . . . . . . .327 



Second Annual Message-December 15th, 1802  . . . . . . . 340 



Special Message-January 28th, 1802 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  349 



Special Message-February 24th, 1803 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  350



Third Annual Message-October 17th, 1803  . . . . . . . . . . 351 



Special Message-October 21st, 1803 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361



Special Message-November 4th, 1803  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  362



Special Message-November 25th, 1803 . . . . .  . . . . . . .  363



Special Message-December 5th, 1803  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  363



Special Message-January 16th, 1804. . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . 364



Special Message-March 20th 1804  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  366



Fourth Annual Message-November 8th, 1804 . . . . . . . . 366 



Second Inaugural Address-March 4th, 1805 . . . . . . . . . 375 



Fifth Annual Message-December 3d, 1805  . . . . . . . . .  384



Message on Spanish Spoliations -December 6th, 1805  .396 



Special Message-January 13th, 1806 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402



Special Message-January 17th, 1806 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407



Special Message-February 3d, 1806  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  409



Special Message-February 19th, 1806. . . . . .  . . . . . .  409



Special Message-March 20th,1806  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412



Special Message-April 14th, 1806 . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . 413



Sixth Annual Message-December 2d, 1806  . . . . . . . . .414 



Special Message-December 3d, 1806  . . . . . . . . . . . . .426



Special Message-January 22d 1807  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 



Special Message-January 28th, 1807 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .437 



Special Message-January 31st, 1807  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438



Special Message-February 10th, 1807 . . . . . . . . . . . . 439 



Seventh Annual Message-October 27th 1807 . . . . . . . 444 



Special Message-November 23d 1807 . . . . .  . . . . . . 454 



Confidentia l Message-December 7th, 1807 . . . . . . . . 454 



Special Message-December 18th, 1807  . . . . . . . . . . .455 



Special Message-January 20th 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .456 



Special Message-January 30th, 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460 



Special Message-January 30th, 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462 



Special Message-February 2d, 1808  . . . . . . . . . . . . .463 



Special Message-February 4th, 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . . .464 



Special Message-February 9th 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 



Special Message-February 15th, 1808 . . . . . .  . . . . . 465 



Special Message-February 19th, 1808 . . . . . . . . . . . .466 



Special Message-February 25th, 1808 . . . . . .  . . . . . 467 



Special Message-March 7th, 1808  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 



Special Message-March 17th, 1808  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 470 



Special Message-March 28th, 1808  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471



Special Message-March 22d,1808  . . . . . .  . . . . . . . 472 



Eighth Annual Message-November 8th, 1808 . . . . . . 475



Special Message-December 30th, 1808 . . . . . .  . . . .486 



Special Message-January 6th, 1809 . . . . . . . .  . . . . .487



APPENDIX  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489-494 



Confidentia l Message Recommend ing a Western 

Exploring Expedition- January 18th, 1803 . . . . . . . . .489





REPORTS AND OPINIONS  WHILE  SECRETARY OF STATE. 



INTRODUCTORY NOTES. 



Under the head of "Reports and Opinions while Secretary of State" are included
Jefferson's Reports to Congress; his Reports to President Washington ; and his
Cabinet Opinions. It seems to have been the practice of Washington to take
written opinions of his Secretaries upon important points arising during his
administrat ion, and the opinions of Jefferson, here published, were given in
reply to questions propounde d and points submitted to him by the President, in
conformity with this practice. These opinions relate to a great variety of
matters connected with the early history of our governmen t, and the principles
of interpretat ion to be applied to the Federal Constitutio n, and will be
found both interesting and valuable. 



Some of these Reports (from page 286 to 310), including the Report on Unclaimed
Lands, the Report on Vermont Nomination s, the Report of Decree Rendered by the
National Assembly of France, etc., were not published in the Congressio nal
edition of 1853 



Jefferson's appointmen t was brought about in the following manner. In August,
1789, while filling the position of American Minister Plenipotent iary to
France, he obtained leave of absence and returned to the United States. He
arrived at Norfolk on November 23d, and on his way to Monticello received from
President Washington a letter offering him the appointmen t of Secretary of
State, at the organizatio n of the Federal Governmen t under the Constitutio n,
which had then been adopted. (See Autobiogra phy, Vol. I, page 160.) His
inclinations were to return to France, to continue representi ng the United
States at that court, as the President gave him the option of either position,
but he finally concluded to accede to the wishes of Washington that he accept a
seat in his cabinet. 



His Reports and Opinions on the Currency; on Weights and Measures; on the
Fisheries; on Commercial Restriction s; on Treaties with Foreign Governmen ts;
and numerous other subjects, all give ample proof of his ability as a
statesman. In 1790 Jefferson accompanie d Washington on a visit to Rhode
Island, after that State had accepted the Federal Constitutio n. In 1791, being
called on by the President for his Opinion on the Act passed by Congress
establishin g a National Bank, he made a written communicat ion, objecting to
such 



 Introducto ry Notes xix 



an institution as unconstitut ional. The bill, however, was approved by
President Washington . While holding office as Secretary of State, Jefferson
disapprove d of many of the measures of Washington's administrat ion,
particularl y of those measures which originated with the Secretary of the
Treasury; Alexander Hamilton. Between Hamilton and Jefferson there were
irreconcila ble differences of opinion on political matters, which caused
constant bickerings in Washington 's first cabinet. Hamilton was the head of
the Federal party and the opposition to the Federalists assumed an organized
form under the auspices of Jefferson. By Jefferson's advice, the opposition
party, which had been called anti-federa list, claimed the name of Republican
s, while their Federal opponents called them Democrats. Jefferson was an
advocate of State sovereignt y and of decentraliz ation. He was strongly
opposed to the leading features of the British Constitutio n, and in cordial
sympathy with the new school of politics which had recently begun to be felt in
the governmen t of France. His five years' residence in France had greatly
strengthen ed him in these views and they more or less affected his treatment
of all questions that came under him as a Cabinet Minister. Hamilton's great
fear, on the other hand, was that the central governmen t under the new
Constitutio n would be too weak, and he favored all measures that tended to
exalt and strengthen the Executive, and to bring the governmen t more in
harmony with that of England. 



The most perplexing questions which occupied Jefferson's attention as Secretary
of State grew out of the war declared by France in 1793 against Holland and
Great Britain. What was the natural policy and what should be insisted upon as
the natural rights of the United States? Upon this question both parties put
forth their whole strength. The Republican s, under Jefferson's lead, mostly
sympathize d with the French, and advocated that privateers be fitted out in
American ports to cruise against British vessels. This policy was opposed by
the Federalists , who advocated peace with all and entangling alliances with
none. Jefferson advocated the propriety of receiving a diplomatic representa
tive from the French Republic. His advice prevailed, and Genet was promptly
sent as Minister. Genet proceeded to fit out privateers, and empower French
consuls in the United States to organize courts of admiralty to condemn prizes.
This led to heated discussions in the cabinet, and finally to the recall of
Genet. Partly from discontent with a position in which he did not feel that he
possessed the absolute confidence of the President, and partly because of the
embarrasse d condition of his private affairs, due mainly to the ravages of
war, Jefferson resigned his seat in the cabinet, December 



xx INTRODUCT ORY NOTES 



31, 1793, and retired to Monticello. He resigned office at a fortunate time for
his reputation. His correspond ence with George Hammond, the English
Plenipotent iary, and Edmond Genet, the French Plenipotentiary, had just been
published in a formidable pamphlet, and Jefferson's letters were so moderate,
conciliator y and just, that they won even the approval of the Federalists .
John Marshall, Chief Justice of the United States, and a confirmed Federalist,
writes in his "Life of Washington " that this correspond ence lessened the
hostility of Jefferson's opponents, without diminishing the attachment of his
friends. 



JEFFERSON 'S WORKS. 1



REPORTS AND OPINIONS WHILE SECRETARY OF STATE. 



Report on the methods for obtaining Fresh Water from Salt. 



The Secretary of State, to whom was referred by the House of Representa tives
of the United States, the petition of Jacob Isaacs of Newport in Rhode Island,
has examined into the truth and importance of the allegations therein set
forth, and makes thereon the following report: 



The petitioner sets forth, that by various experiment s, with considerabl e
labor and expense, he has discovered a method of converting salt-water into
fresh, in the proportion of 8 parts out of 10, by a process so simple that it
may be performed on board of vessels at sea by the common iron caboose, with
small alterations, by the same fire, and in the same time, which is used for
cooking the ship's provisions, and offers to convey to the governmen t of the
United States a faithful account of his art or secret, 



#VOL. III-I# 



2 Jefferson's Works 

to be used by, or within the United States, on their giving to him a reward
suitable to the importance of the discovery, and in the opinion of governmen t,
adequate to his expenses and the time he has devoted to the bringing it into
effect. 



In order to ascertain the merit of the petitioner's discovery, it becomes
necessary to examine the advances already made in the art of converting
saltwater into fresh. 



Lord Bacon, to whom the world is indebted for the first germs of so many
branches of science, had observed, that with a heat sufficient for
distillation, salt will not rise in vapor, and that salt-water distilled is
fresh; and it would seem, that all mankind might have observed that the earth
is supplied with fresh water chiefly by exhalation from the sea, which is, in
fact, an insensible distillation effected by the heat of the sun; yet this,
although the most obvious, was not the first idea in the essays for converting
salt-water into fresh; filtration was tried in vain; and congelation could be
resorted to only in the coldest regions and seasons. In all the earlier trials
by distillation, some mixture was thought necessary to aid the operation by a
partial precipitatio n of the salt, and other foreign matters contained in
seawater. Of this kind, were the methods of Sir Richard Hawkins in the
sixteenth century, of Glauber, Hauton, and Lister, in the seventeent h, and of
Hales, Appleby, Butler, Chapman, Hoffman, and Dore, in the eighteenth; nor was
there anything in 



Official Papers 3 



these methods worthy noting on the present occasion, except the very simple
still contrived extempore by Captain Chapman, and made from such materials as
are to be found on board every ship, great or small; this was a common pot,
with a wooded lid of the usual form; in the centre of which a hole was bored to
receive perpendicu larly, a short wooden tube made with an inch-and-a-half
auger, which perpendicu lar tube received at its top, and at an acute angle,
another tube of wood also, which descended until it joined a third of pewter
made by rolling up a dish and passing it obliquely through a cask of cold
water; with this simple machine he obtained two quarts of fresh water an hour,
and observed that the expense of fuel would be very trifling, if the still was
contrived to stand on the fire along with the ship's boiler. 



In 1762, Doctor Lind, proposing to make experiment of several different
mixtures, first distilled rain-water, which he supposed would be the purest,
and then sea-water, without any mixture, which he expected would be the least
pure, in order to arrange between these two supposed extremes, the degree of
merit of the several ingredients he meant to try; "to his great surprise," as
he confesses, the sea-water distilled without any mixture, was as pure as the
rainwater; he pursued the discovery and established the fact, that a pure and
potable fresh water may be obtained from salt-water by simple distillation,
without the aid of any mixture for fining or precipitati ng



4 Jefferson's Works 



its, foreign contents. In 1767, he proposed an extempore still, which, in fact,
was Chapman's only substitutin g a gun-barrel instead of Chapman's pewter tube,
and the hand-pump of the ship to be cut in two obliquely and joined again at an
acute angle, instead of Chapman's wooden tubes bored expressly; or instead of
the wooden lid and upright tube, he proposed a tea-kettle (without its lid or
handle) to be turned bottom upwards over the mouth of the pot by way of
still-head, and a wooden tube leading from the spout to a gun-barrel passing
through a cask of water, the whole luted with equal parts of chalk and meal
moistened with salt-water. With this apparatus of a pot, tea-kettle, and
gunbarrel, the Dolphin, a twenty-gu n ship, in her voyage around the world in
1768, from 56 gallons of seawater and with 9 lbs. of wood and 69 lbs. of
pit-coal made 42 gallons of good fresh water, at the rate of 8 gallons an hour.
The Dorsetshire , in her passage from Gibraltar to Mahon in 1769, made 19
quarts of pure water in f our hours with 10 lbs. of wood, and the Slambal in
1773, between Bombay and Bengal, with the hand-pump , gun-barrel , and a pot of
6 gallons of seawater, made ten quarts of fresh water in three hours. 



In 1771, Dr. Irvin putting together Lind's idea of distilling without a
mixture, Chapman's still, and Dr. Franklin's method of cooling by evaporatio n,
obtained a premium of five thousand pounds from the British parliament. He wet
his tube constantly with a mop instead of passing it through a cask of 



Official Papers 5 



water; he enlarged its bore also, in order to give a free passage to the vapor,
and thereby increase its quantity by lessening the resistance or pressure on
the evaporatin g surface. This last improveme nt was his own; it doubtless
contribute d to the success of his process; and we may suppose the enlargemen t
of the tube to be useful to that point at which the central parts of the vapor
passing through it would begin to escape condensati on. Lord Mulgrave used his
method in his voyage towards the north pole in 1773, making from 34 to 40
gallons of fresh water a day, without any great addition of fuel, as he says. 



M. de Bougainvill e, in his voyage round the world, used very successfull y a
still which had been contrived in 1763 by Poyssonier to guard against the water
being thrown over from the boiler into the pipe, by the agitation of the ship.
In this, one singularity was, that the furnace or fire-box was in the middle of
the boiler, so that the water surrounde d it in contact. This still, however,
was expensive, and occupied much room. 



Such were the advances already made in the art of obtaining fresh from
salt-water, when Mr. Isaacs, the petitioner, suggested his discovery. As the
merit of this could be ascertained by experiment only, the Secretary of State
asked the favor of Mr. Rittenhous e, President of the American Philosophic al
Society, of Dr. Wistar, professor of chemistry in the college at Philadelphi a,
and Dr. Hutchinson , professor of chemistry in the University of Pennsylvan ia,



6 Jefferson's Works 



to be present at the experiment s. Mr. Isaacs fixed the pot, a small caboose,
with a tin cap and straight tube of tin passing obliquely through a cask of
cold water; he made use of a mixture, the composition of which he did not
explain, and from 24 pints of sea-water, taken up about three miles out of the
Capes of Delaware, at flood-tide, he distilled 22 pints of fresh water in four
hours with 20 lbs. of seasoned pine, which was a little wetted by having lain
in the rain. 



In a second experiment of the 21st of March, performed in a furnace, and
five-gallon still at the college, from 32 pints of sea-water he drew 31 pints
of fresh water in 7 hours and 24 minutes, with 51 lbs. of hickory, which had
been cut about six months. In order to decide whether Mr. Isaacs' mixture
contribute d in any and what degree to the success of the operation, it was
thought proper to repeat his experiment under the same circumstan ces exactly,
except the omission of the mixture. Accordingl y, on the next day, the same
quantity of sea-water was put into the same still, the same furnace was used,
and fuel from the same parcel; it yielded, as his had done, 31 pints fresh
water in 11 minutes more of time, and with 10 lbs. less of wood. 



On the 24th of March, Mr. Isaacs performed a third experiment. For this, a
common iron pot of three and a half gallons was fixed in brick work, and the
flue from the hearth wound once around this pot spirally, and then passed off
up a chimney. 



Official Papers 7 



The cap was of tin, and a straight tin tube of about two inches diameter
passing obliquely through a barrel of water, served instead of a worm. From
sixteen pints of sea-water he drew off fifteen pints of fresh water, in two
hours fifty-five minutes, with 3 lbs. of dry hickory and 8 lbs. of seasoned
pine. This experiment was also repeated the next day, with the same apparatus,
and fuel from the same parcel; but without the mixture, sixteen pints of
sea-water yielded in like manner fifteen pints of fresh in one minute more of
time, and with ½lb. less of wood On the whole, it was evident that Mr. Isaacs'
mixture produced no advantage either in the process or result of the
distillation. 



The distilled water in all these instances, was found on experiment to be as
pure as the best pump water of the city; its taste, indeed, was not as
agreeable, but it was not such as to produce any disgust. In fact, we drink, in
common life, in many places, and under many circumstan ces, and almost always
at sea, a worse tasting and probably a less wholesome water. 



The obtaining fresh from salt-water was for ages considered as an important
desideratu m for the use of navigators. The process for doing this by simple
distillation is so efficacious, the erecting an extempore still with such
utensils as are found on board of every ship, is so practicable , as to
authorize the assertion that this desideratu m is satisfied to a very useful
degree. But though this has been done for 



8 Jefferson's Works 



upwards of thirty years, though its reality has been established by the actual
experience of several vessels which have had recourse to it, yet neither the
fact nor the process is known to the mass of seamen, to whom it would be the
most useful, and for whom it was principally wanted. The Secretary of State is
therefore of opinion that since the subject has now been brought under
observatio n, it should be made the occasion of disseminati ng its knowledge
generally and effectually among the seafaring citizens of the United States.
The following is one of the many methods which might be proposed for doing
this: Let the clearance f or every vessel sailing from the ports of the United
States be printed on a paper, in the back whereof shall be a printed account of
the essays which have been made for obtaining fresh from salt-water, mentioning
shortly those which have been unsuccessf ul, and more fully those which have
succeeded, describing the methods which have been found to answer for
constructin g extempore stills of such implements as are generally on board of
every vessel, with a recommend ation in all cases where they shall have
occasion to resort to this expedient for obtaining water, to publish the result
of their trial in some gazette on their return to the United States, or to
communicat e it for publication to the office of the Secretary of State, in
order that others may, by their success, be encouraged to make similar trials,
and be benefited by any improveme nts or new ideas which may occur to them in
practice. 



Official Papers 9 



Opinion on the proposition for establishin g a Woollen Manufactor y in
Virginia. 



The House of Delegates of Virginia seemed disposed to adventure £2,500 for the
encourage ment of this undertakin g, but the Senate did not concur. By their
returning to the subject, however, at a subsequent session, and wishing more
specific proposition s, it is probable they might be induced to concur, if they
saw a certain provision that their money would not be paid for nothing. Some
unsuccessf ul experiment s heretofore may have suggested this caution. 



Suppose the proposition s brought into some such shape as this: The undertaker
is to contribute £1,000, the State £2,500, viz.: the undertaker having laid out
his £1,000 in the necessary implements to be brought from Europe, and these
being landed in Virginia as a security that he will proceed, let the State pay
for the first necessary purposes then to 

occur .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         
£1,000  

Let it pay him a stipend of £100 a year for 

the  first three years  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       300
 

Let it give him a bounty (suppose one-third)  

on every yard of woollen cloth equal to good  

plains, which he shall weave for five years, not  

exceeding £250 a year (20,000 yards) the four  

first years, and £200 the fifth .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         1,200 



                                                             £2,500 



10 Jefferson's Works 



To every workman whom he shall import, let them give, after he shall have
worked in the manufactor y five years, warrants for acres of land, and pay the
expenses of survey, patents, &c. [This last article is to meet the proposition
of the undertaker . I do not like it, because it tends to draw off the
manufactur er from his trade. I should better like a premium to him on his
continuanc e in it; as, for instance, that he should be free from State taxes
as long as he should carry on his trade.] 



The President's interventio n seems necessary till the contracts shall be
concluded. It is presumed he would not like to be embarrasse d afterwards with
the details of superinten dence. Suppose, in his answer to the Governor of
Virginia, he should say that the undertaker being in Europe, more specific
proposition s cannot be obtained from him in time to be laid before this
assembly; that in order to secure to the State the benefits of the establishme
nt, and yet guard them against an unproducti ve grant of money, he thinks some
plan like the preceding one might be proposed to the undertaker . 



That as it is not known whether he would accept it exactly in that form, it
might disappoint the views of the State were they to prescribe that or any
other form rigorously, consequent ly that a discretiona ry power must be given
to a certain extent. 



That he would willingly cooperate with their executive in effecting the
contract, and certainly would not conclude it on any terms worse for the State 



Official Papers 11 

than those before explained, and that the contracts being once concluded, his
distance and other occupation s would oblige him to leave the execution open to
the Executive of the State. 



The Report on Copper Coinage, communicat ed to the House of Representa tives,
April 15th, 1790. 



April 14, 1790. The Secretary of State, to whom was referred, by the House of
Representa tives, the letter of John H. Mitchell, reciting certain proposals
for supplying the United States with copper coinage, has had the same under
considerati on, according to instruction s, and begs leave to report thereon as
follows: 



The person who wishes to undertake the supply of a copper coinage, sets forth,
that the superiority of his apparatus and process for coining, enables him to
furnish a coinage better and cheaper than can be done by any country or person
whatever; that his dies are engraved by the first artist in that line in
Europe; that his apparatus for striking the edge at the same blow with the
faces, is new, and singularly ingenious; that he coins by a press on a new
principle, and worked by a fire-engine , more regularly than can be done by
hand; that he will deliver any quantity of coin, of any size and device, of
pure, unalloyed copper, wrapped in paper and packed in casks, ready for
shipping, for fourteen pence sterling the pound. 



The Secretary of State has before been apprized, 



12 Jefferson's Works 



from other sources of information , of the great improveme nts made by this
undertaker , in sundry arts; he is acquainted with the artist who invented the
method of striking the edge, and both faces of the coin at one blow; he has
seen his process and coins, and sent to the former Congress some specimens of
them, with certain offers from him, before he entered into the service of the
present undertaker , (which specimens he takes the liberty of now submitting to
the inspection of the House, as proofs of the superiority of this method of
coinage, in gold and silver as well as copper). 



He is, therefore, of opinion, that the undertaker , aided by that artist, and
by his own excellent machines, is truly in a condition to furnish coin in a
state of higher perfection than has ever yet been issued by any nation; that
perfection in the engraving is among the greatest safeguards against
counterfeit s, because engravers of the first class are few, and elevated by
their rank in their art, far above the base and dangerous business of
counterfeit ing. That the perfection of coins will indeed disappear, after they
are for some time worn among other pieces, and especially where the figures are
rather faintly relieved, as on those of this artist; yet, their high finishing,
while new, is not the less a guard against counterfeit s, because these, if
carried to any extent, may be ushered into circulation new, also, and
consequent ly, may be compared with genuine coins in the same state; that,
therefore, whenever the United 



Official Papers 13 



States shall be disposed to have a coin of their own, it will be desirable to
aim at this kind of perfection. That this cannot be better effected, than by
availing themselves, if possible, of the services of the undertaker , and of
this artist, whose excellent methods and machines are said to have abridged, as
well as perfected, the operations of coinage. These operations, however, and
their expense, being new, and unknown here, he is unable to say whether the
price proposed be reasonable or not. He is also uncertain whether, instead of
the larger copper coin, the Legislature might not prefer a lighter one of
billon, or mixed metal, as is practised, with convenienc e, by several other
nations-a specimen of which kind of coinage is submitted to their inspection. 



But the proposition s under consideration suppose that the work is to be
carried on in a foreign country, and that the implements are to remain the
property of the undertaker ; which conditions, in his opinion, render them
inadmissibl e, for these reasons: 



Coinage is peculiarly an attribute of sovereignt y. To transfer its exercise
into another country, is to submit it to another sovereign. 



Its transportat ion across the ocean, besides the ordinary dangers of the sea,
would expose it to acts of piracy, by the crews to whom it would be confided,
as well as by others apprized of its passage. 



In time of war, it would offer to the enterprises of an enemy, what have been
emphaticall y called the sinews of war. 



14 Jefferson's Works 



If the war were with the nation within whose territory the coinage is, the
first act of war, or reprisal, might be to arrest this operation, with the
implements, and materials coined and uncoined, to be used at their discretion. 



The reputation and principles of the present undertaker are safeguards against
the abuses of a coinage, carried on in a foreign country, where no checks could
be provided by the proper sovereign, no regulations established , no police, no
guard exercised; in short, none of the numerous cautions hitherto thought
essential at every mint; but in hands less entitled to confidence, these will
become dangers. We may be secured, indeed, by proper experiment s as to the
purity of the coin delivered us according to contract, but we cannot be secured
against that which, though less pure, shall be struck in the genuine die, and
protected against the vigilance of Governmen t, till it shall have entered into
circulation. 



We lose the opportunit y of calling in and re-coining the clipped money in
circulation, or we double our risk by a double transportat ion. 



We lose, in like manner, the resource of coining up our household plate in the
instant of great distress. 



We lose the means of forming artists to continue the works, when the common
accidents of mortality shall have deprived us of those who began them. 



In fine, the carrying on a coinage in a foreign country, as far as the
Secretary knows, is without example; and general example is weighty authority. 



Official Papers 15 



He is, therefore, of opinion, on the whole, that a mint, whenever established ,
should be established at home; that the superiority , the merit, and means of
the undertaker , will suggest him as the proper person to be engaged in the
establishme nt and conduct of a mint, on a scale which, relinquishi ng nothing
in the perfection of the coin, shall be duly proportion ed to our purposes. 



And, in the meanwhile, he is of opinion the present proposals should be
declined. 



Opinion on the question whether the Senate has the right to negative the grade
of persons appointed by the Executive to fill Foreign Missions. 



NEW YORK, April 24, 1790. 



The constitutio n having declared that the President shall nominate and, by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassador s, other
public ministers, and consuls, the President desired my opinion whether the
Senate has a right to negative the grade he may think it expedient to use in a
foreign mission as well as the person to be appointed. 



I think the Senate has no right to negative the grade. 



The constitutio n has divided the powers of governmen t into three branches,
Legislative, Executive and Judiciary, lodging each with a distinct magistracy.



16 Jefferson's Works 



The Legislative it has given completely to the Senate and House of Representa
tives. It has declared that the Executive powers shall be vested in the
President, submitting special articles of it to a negative by the Senate, and
it has vested the Judiciary power in the courts of justice, with certain
exceptions also in favor of the Senate. 



The transaction of business with foreign nations is Executive altogether. It
belongs, then, to the head of that department , except as to such portions of
it as are specially submitted to the Senate. Exceptions are to be construed
strictly. 



The Constitutio n itself indeed has taken care to circumscri be this one within
very strict limits; for it gives the nomination of the foreign agents to the
President; the appointmen ts to him and the Senate jointly, and the commissioni
ng to the President. 



This analysis calls our attention the strict import of each term. To nominate
must be to propose. Appointmen t seems that act of the will which constitutes
or makes the agent, and the commission is the public evidence of it. But there
are still other acts previous to, these not specially enumerated in the
constitutio n, to wit: 1st. The destination of a mission to the particular
country where the public service calls for it, and second the character or
grade to be employed in it. The natural order of all these is first,
destination ; second, grade; third, nomination; fourth, appointmen t; fifth,
commission. If appointmen t does not comprehen d the neighborin g 



Official Papers 17 



acts of nomination or commission, (and the Constitutio n says it shall not, by
giving them exclusively to the President,) still less can it pretend to
comprehen d those previous and more remote, of destination and grade. 



The Constitutio n, analysing the three last, shows they do not comprehen d the
two first. The fourth is the only one it submits to the Senate, shaping it into
a right to say that "A or B is unfit to be appointed." Now, this cannot
comprehen d a right to say that "A or B is indeed fit to be appointed," but the
grade fixed on is not the fit one to employ, or, "our connection s with the
country of his destination are not such as to call for any mission." 



The Senate is not supposed by the constitutio n to be acquainted with the
concerns of the Executive department . It was not intended that these should be
communicat ed to them, nor can they therefore be qualified to judge of the
necessity which calls for a mission to any particular place, or of the
particular grade, more or less marked, which special and secret circumstan ces
may call for. All this is left to the President. They are only to see that no
unfit person be employed. 



It may be objected that the Senate may by continual negatives on the person, do
what amounts to a negative on the grade, and so, indirectly, defeat this right
of the President. But this would be a breach of trust; an abuse of power
confided to the Senate, of which that body cannot be supposed capable. So 



#VOL. III-2# 

18 Jefferson's Works 



the President has a power to convoke the Legislature , and the Senate might
defeat that power by refusing to come. This equally amounts to a negative on
the power of convoking. Yet nobody will say they possess such a negative, or
would be capable of usurping it by such oblique means. If the Constitutio n had
meant to give the Senate a negative on the grade or destination , as well as
the person, it would have said so in direct terms, and not left it to be
effected by a sidewind. It could never mean to give them the use of one power
through the abuse of another. 



Opinion upon the validity of a grant made by the State of Georgia to certain
companies o f individuals , of a tract of country whereof the Indian right had
never been extinguishe d, with power to such individuals to extinguish the
Indian right. 



May 3d, 1790. The State of Georgia, having granted to certain individuals a
tract of country, within their chartered limits, whereof the Indian right has
never yet been acquired; with a proviso in the grants, which implies that those
individuals may take measures for extinguishi ng the Indian rights under the
authority of that Governmen t, it becomes a question how far this grant is
good? 



A society, taking possession of a vacant country, and declaring they mean to
occupy it, does thereby 



Official Papers 19 



appropriat e to themselves as prime occupants what was before common. A
practice introduced since the discovery of America, authorizes them to go
further, and to fix the limits which they assume to themselves; and it seems,
for the common good, to admit this right to a moderate and reasonable extent. 



If the country, instead of being altogether vacant, is thinly occupied by
another nation, the right of the native forms an exception to that of the new
comers; that is to say, these will only have a right against all other nations
except the natives. Consequent ly, they have the exclusive privilege of
acquiring the native right by purchase or other just means. This is called the
right of preemption , and is become a principle of the law of nations,
fundamenta l with respect to America. There are but two means of acquiring the
native title. First, war; for even war may, sometimes, give a just title.
Second, contracts or treaty. 



The States of America before their present union possessed completely, each
within its own limits, the exclusive right to use these two means of acquiring
the native title, and, by their act of union, they have as completely ceded
both to the general governmen t. Art. 2d, Section 1st, "The President shall
have power, by and with the advice of the Senate, to make treaties, provided
two thirds of the Senators present concur." Art. 1st, Section 8th, "The
Congress shall have power to declare war, to raise and support armies." Section
10th, "No State shall 

20 Jefferson's Works 



enter into any treaty, alliance or confederati on. No State shall, without the
consent of Congress, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into
any agreement or compact with another State or with a foreign power, or engage
in war, unless actually invaded or in such imminent danger as will not admit of
delay." 



These paragraphs of the Constitutio n, declaring that the general governmen t
shall have, and that the particular ones shall not have, the right of war and
treaty, are so explicit that no commentar y can explain them further, nor can
any explain them away. Consequent ly, Georgia, possessing the exclusive right
to acquire the native title, but having relinquishe d the means of doing it to
the general governmen t, can only have put her grantee into her own condition.
She could convey to them the exclusive right to acquire; but she could not
convey what she had not herself, that is, the means of acquiring. 



For these they must come to the general governmen t, in whose hands they have
been wisely deposited for the purposes both of peace and justice. 



What is to be done? The right of the general governmen t is, in my opinion, to
be maintained. The case is sound, and the means of doing it as practicable as
can ever occur. But respect and friendship should, I think, mark the conduct of
the general towards the particular government, and explanation s should be
asked and time and color given them to tread back their steps before coercion
is held up to their view. 



Official Papers 21 



I am told there is already a strong party in Georgia opposed to the act of
their governmen t. 



I should think it better then that the first measures, while firm, be yet so
temperate as to secure their alliance and aid to the general governmen t. 



Might not the eclat of a proclamation revolt their pride and passion, and throw
them hastily into the opposite scale? It will be proper indeed to require from
the governmen t of Georgia, in the first moment, that while the general
governmen t shall be expecting and ­consideri ng her explanation s, things
shall remain in statu quo, and not a move be made towards carrying what they
have begun into execution. 



Perhaps it might not be superfluou s to send some person to the Indians
interested, to explain to them the views of governmen t, and to watch with
their aid the territory in question.



Opinion in favor of the resolutions of May 21st, 1790, directing that, in all
cases where payment had not been already made, the debts due to the soldiers of
Virginia and North Carolina, should be paid to the original claimants or their
attorneys, and not to their assignees. 



June 3d, 1790. The accounts of the soldiers of Virginia and North Carolina,
having been examined by the proper officer of governmen t, the balances due to
each individual. 



22 Jefferson's Works 



ascertained , and a list of these balances made out, this list became known to
certain persons before the soldiers themselves had information of it, and those
persons, by unfair means, as is said, and f or very inadequate considerati ons,
obtained assignment s from many of the soldiers of whatever sum should be due
to them from the public, without specifying the amount. 



The legislature, to defeat this fraud, passed resolutions on the 21st of May,
1790, directing that where payment had not been made to the original claimant
in person or his representa tives, it shall be made to him or them personally,
or to their attorney, producing a power for that purpose, attested by two
justices of the county where he resides, and specifying the certain sum he is
to receive. 



It has been objected to these resolutions that they annul transfers of property
which were good by the laws under which they were made; that they take from the
assignees their lawful property; are contrary to the principles of the
constitutio n, which condemn retrospecti ve laws; and are, therefore, not
worthy of the President's approbatio n. 



I agree in an almost unlimited condemnati on of retrospecti ve laws. The few
instances of wrong which they redress are so overweighe d by the insecurity
they draw over all property and even over life itself, and by the atrocious
violations of both to which they lead that it is better to live under the evil
than the remedy. 



Official Papers 23 



The only question I shall make is, whether these resolutions annul acts which
were valid when they were done? 



This question respects the laws of Virginia and North Carolina only. On the
latter I am not qualified to decide, and therefore beg leave to confine myself
to the former. 



By the common law of England (adopted in Virginia) the conveyance of a right to
a debt or other thing whereof the party is not in possession, is not only void,
but severely punishable under the names of Maintenanc e and Champerty. The
Law-merch ants, however, which is permitted to have course between merchants,
allows the assignment of a bill of exchange for the convenienc e of commerce.
This, therefore, forms one exception to the general rule, that a mere right or
thing in action is not assignable. A second exception has been formed by an
English statute (copied into the laws of Virginia) permitting promissory notes
to be assigned. The laws of Virginia have gone yet further than the statute,
and have allowed, as a third exception, that a bond should be assigned, which
cannot be done even at this day in England. So that, in Virginia, when a debt
has been settled between the parties and put into the form of a bill of
exchange, promissory note or bond, the law admits it to be transferre d by
assignment . In all other cases the assignment of a debt is void. 



The debts from the United States to the soldiers 



24 Jefferson's Works 



of Virginia, not having been put into either of these forms, the assignment s
of them were void in law. 



A creditor may give an order on his debtor in favor of another, but if the
debtor does not accept it, he must be sued in the creditor's name; which shows
that the order does not transfer the property of the debts. The creditor may
appoint another to be his attorney to receive and recover his debt, and he may
covenant that when received the attorney may apply it to his own use. But he
must sue as attorney to the original proprietor, and not in his own right. 



This proves that a power of attorney, with such a covenant, does not transfer
the property of the debt. A further proof in both cases is, that the original
creditor may at any time before payment or acceptance revoke either his order
or his power of attorney. 



In that event the person in whose favor they were given has recourse to a court
of equity. When there, the judge examines whether he has done equity. If he
finds his transaction has been a fair one, he gives him aid. If he finds it has
been otherwise, not permitting his court to be made a handmaid to fraud, he
leaves him without remedy in equity as he was in law. The assignment s in the
present case, therefore, if unfairly obtained, as seems to be admitted, are
void in equity as they are in law. And they derive their nullity from the laws
under which they were made, not from the new resolutions of Congress. These are
not retrospecti ve. They only direct their 



Official Papers 25 



treasurer not to give validity to an assignment which had it not before, by
payments to the assignee until he in whom the legal property still is, shall
order it in such a form as to show he is apprized of the sum he is to part
with, and its readiness to be paid into his or any other hands, and that he
chooses, notwithsta nding, to acquiesce under the fraud which has been
practised on him. In that case he has only to execute before two justices a
power of attorney to the same person, expressing the specific sum of his
demand, and it is to be complied with. Actual payment, in this case, is an
important act. If made to the assignee, it would put the burthen of proof and
process on the original owner. If made to that owner, it puts it on the
assignee, who must then come forward and show that his transaction has been
that of an honest man. 



Governmen t seems to be doing in this what every individual, I think, would
feel himself bound to do in the case of his own debt. For, being free in the
law, to pay to the one or the other, he would certainly give the advantage to
the party who has suffered wrong rather than to him who has committed it. 



It is not honorable to take a mere legal advantage, when it happens to be
contrary to justice. 



But it is honorable to embrace a salutary principle of law when a relinquish
ment of it is solicited only to support a fraud. 



I think the resolutions , therefore, merit approbatio n. I have before
professed my incompeten ce to 



26 Jefferson's Works 



say what are the laws of North Carolina on this subject. They, like Virginia,
adopted the English laws in the gross. These laws forbid in general the buying
and selling of debts, and their policy in this is so wise that I presume they
had not changed it till the contrary be shown. 



Plan for establishin g uniformity in the Coinage, Weights, and Measures of the
United States. Communicat ed to the House of Representa tives, July 13, 1790. 



New York, July 4, 1790. 

SIR:­In obedience to the order of the House of Representa tives of January
15th, I have now the honor to enclose you a report on the subject of measures;
weights, and coins. The length of time which intervened between the date of the
order and my arrival in this city, prevented my receiving it till the 15th of
April; and an illness which followed soon after added, unavoidabl y, some weeks
to the delay; so that it was not till about the 20th May that I was able to
finish the report. A desire to lessen the number of its imperfectio ns induced
me still to withhold it awhile, till, on the 15th of June, came to my hands,
from Paris, a printed copy of a proposition made by the Bishop of Autun, to the
National Assembly of France, on the subject of weights and measures; and three
days afterwards I received, through the channel of the public papers, the
speech of Sir John Riggs Miller, of April 13th, in the British House of
Commons, on the same subject. In the report which I had prepared, and was then
about to give in, I had proposed the latitude of 38°, as that which should fix
our standard, because it was the medium latitude of the United States; but the
proposition before the National Assembly of France, to take that of 45° as
being a middle term between the equator and both poles, and a term which
consequent ly might unite the nations of both hemisphere s, appeared to me so
well chosen, and so just, that I did not hesitate a moment to prefer it to that
of 38°. It became necessary, of course, to conform all my calculation s to that
standard­a n operation which has been retarded by my other occupation s. 



Official Papers 27



These circumstan ces will, I hope, apologize for the delay which has attended
the execution of the order of the House; and, perhaps, a disposition on their
part to have due regard for the proceeding s of other nations, engaged on the
same subject, may induce them still to defer deciding ultimately on it till
their next session. Should this be the case, and should any new matter occur in
the meantime, I shall think it my duty to communicat e it to the House, as
supplement al to the present report. 



I have the honor to be, with sentiments of the most profound respect, Sir, your
most obedient and most humble servant. 



The Secretary of State, to whom was referred, by the House of Representa tives,
to prepare and report a proper plan or plans for establishin g uniformity in
the currency, weights, and measures of the United States, in obedience thereto,
makes the following report:



To obtain uniformity in measures, weights, and coins, it is necessary to find
some measure of invariable length, with which, as a standard, they may be
compared. 



There exists not in nature, as far as has been hitherto observed, a single
subject or species of subject, accessible to man, which presents one constant
and uniform dimension. 



The globe of the earth itself, indeed, might be considered as invariable in all
its dimensions, and that its circumfere nce would furnish an invariable
measure; but no one of its circles, great or small, is accessible to admeasure
ment through all its parts, and the various trials to measure definite portions
of them, have been of such various results as to show there is no dependenc e
on that operation for certainty. 



28 Jefferson's Works 



Matter, then, by its mere extension, furnishing nothing invariable, its motion
is the only remaining resource. 



The motion of the earth round its axis, though not absolutely uniform and
invariable, may be considered as such for every human purpose. It is measured
obviously, but unequally, by the departure of a given meridian from the sun,
and its return to it, constitutin g a solar day. Throwing together the
inequalities of solar days, a mean interval, or day, has been found, and
divided, by very general consent, into 86,400 equal parts. 



A pendulum, vibrating freely, in small and equal arcs, may be so adjusted in
its length, as, by its vibrations, to make this division of the earth's motion
into 86,400 equal parts, called seconds of mean time. 



Such a pendulum, then, becomes itself a measure of determinat e length, to
which all others may be referred to as to a standard. 



But even a pendulum is not without its uncertainti es. 



1. The difficulty of ascertainin g, in practice, its centre of oscillation, as
depending on the form of the bob, and its distance from the point of suspension
; the effect of the weight of the suspending wire towards displacing the centre
of oscillation; that centre being seated within the body of the bob, and
therefore inaccessibl e to the measure, are sources of considerabl e uncertaint
y. 



2. Both theory and experience prove that, to pre



Official Papers 29 



serve its isochronis m, it must be shorter towards the equator, and longer
towards the poles. 



3. The height of the situation above the common level, as being an increment to
the radius of the earth, diminishes the length of the pendulum. 



4. The pendulum being made of metal, as is best, it varies its length with the
variations in the temperatur e of the atmosphere . 



5. To continue small and equal vibrations, through a sufficient length of time,
and to count these vibrations, machinery and a power are necessary, which may
exert a small but constant effort to renew the waste of motion; and the
difficulty is so to apply these, as that they shall neither retard nor
accelerate the vibrations. 



1. In order to avoid the uncertainti es which respect the centre of
oscillation, it has been proposed by Mr. Leslie, an ingenious artist of
Philadelphi a, to substitute, for the pendulum, a uniform cylindrical rod,
without a bob. 



Could the diameter of such a rod be infinitely small, the centre of oscillation
would be exactly at two-thirds of the whole length, measured from the point of
suspension . Giving it a diameter which shall render it sufficiently
inflexible, the centre will be displaced, indeed; but, in a second rod not the
(1) six hundred thousandth part of its length, and not the hundredth part as
much as in a second pendulum with a spherical bob of proper diameter. This
displaceme nt is so infinitely minute, then, that we may 



30 Jefferson's Works 



consider the centre of oscillation, for all practical purposes, as residing at
two-thirds of the length from the centre of suspension . The distance between
these two centres might be easily and accurately ascertained in practice. But
the whole rod is better for a standard than any portion of it, because sensibly
defined at both its extremities. 



2. The uncertaint y arising from the difference of length requisite for the
second pendulum, or the second rod, in different latitudes, may be avoided by
fixing on some one latitude, to which our standard shall refer. That of 38°, as
being the middle latitude of the United States, might seem the most convenient,
were we to consider ourselves alone; but connected with other nations by
commerce and science, it is better to fix on that parallel which bids fairest
to be adopted by them also. The 45th, as being the middle term between the
equator and pole, has been heretofore proposed in Europe, and the proposition
has been lately renewed there under circumstan ces which may very possibly give
it some effect. This parallel is distinguish ed with us also as forming our
principal northern boundary. Let the completion of the 45th degree, then, give
the standard for our union, with the hope that it may become a line of union
with the rest of the world. 



The difference between the second rod for 45° of latitude, and that for 31°,
our other extreme, is to be examined. 



The second pendulum for 45° of latitude, according 



Official Papers 31 



to Sir Isaac Newton's computatio n, must be of (2) 39.14912 inches English
measure; and a rod, to vibrate in the same time, must be of the same length
between the centres of suspension and oscillation; and, consequent ly, its
whole length 58.7 (or, more exactly, 58.72368) inches. This is longer than the
rod which shall vibrate seconds in the 31° of latitude, by about 1/679 part of
its whole length; a difference so minute, that it might be neglected, as
insensible, for the common purposes of life, but, in cases requiring perfect
exactness, the second rod, found by trial of its vibrations in any part of the
United States, may be corrected by computatio n for the (3) latitude of the
place, and so brought exactly to the standard of 45°. 



3. By making the experiment in the level of the ocean, the difference will be
avoided, which a higher position might occasion. 



4. The expansion and contraction of the rod with the change of temperatur e, is
the fourth source of uncertaint y before mentioned. According to the high
authority so often quoted, an iron rod, of given length, may vary, between
summer and winter, in temperate latitudes, and in the common exposure of house
clocks, from 1/1728 to 1/2592 of its whole length which, in a rod of 58.7
inches, will be from about two to three hundredth s of an inch. This may be
avoided by adjusting and preserving the standard in a cellar, or other place,
the temperatur e of which never varies. Iron is named for this purpose, because
the least expansible of the metals. 



32 Jefferson's Works 



5. The practical difficulty resulting from the effect of the machinery and
moving power is very inconsidera ble in the present state of the arts; and; in
their progress towards perfection, will become less and less. To estimate and
obviate this, will be the artist's province. It is as nothing when compared
with the sources of inaccuracy hitherto attending measures. 



Before quitting the subject of the inconvenie nces, some of which attend the
pendulum alone, others both the pendulum and rod, it must be added that the rod
would have an accidental but very precious advantage over the pendulum in this
country, in the event of our fixing the foot at the nearest aliquot part of
either; for the difference between the common foot, and those so to be deduced,
would be three times greater in the case of the pendulum than in that of the
rod. 



Let the standard of measure, then, be a uniform cylindrical rod of iron, of
such length as, in latitude 45°, in the level of the ocean, and in a cellar, or
other place, the temperatur e of which does not vary through the year, shall
perform its vibrations in small and equal arcs, in one second of mean time. 



A standard of invariable length being thus obtained, we may proceed to
identify, by that, the measures, weights and coins of the United States; but
here a doubt presents itself as to the extent of the reformation meditated by
the House of Representa tives.



Official Papers 33 



The experiment made by Congress in the year one thousand seven hundred and
eighty-six, by declaring that there should be one money of account and payment
through the United States, and that its parts and multiples should be in a
decimal ratio,¹ has obtained such general approbatio n, both at home and
abroad, that nothing seems wanting but the actual coinage, to banish the
discordant pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings of the different States, and
to establish in their stead the new denominati ons. Is it in contemplati on
with the House of Representa tives to extend a like improveme nt to our
measures and weights, and to arrange them also in a decimal ratio? The facility
which this would introduce into the vulgar arithmetic would, unquestion ably,
be soon and sensibly felt by the whole mass of the people, who would thereby be
enabled to compute for themselves whatever they should have occasion to buy, to
sell, or to measure, which the present complicated and difficult ratios place
beyond their computatio n for the most part. Or, is it the opinion of the
Representa tives that the difficulty of changing the established habits of a
whole nation opposes an insuperabl e bar to this improveme nt? Under this
uncertaint y, the Secretary of State thinks it his duty to submit alternative
plans, that the House may, at their will, adopt either the one or the other,
exclusively , or the one for the present and the other for a future 



#¹ See Vol. I. p. 162. VOL. III-3# 



34 Jefferson's Works 



time, when the public mind may be supposed to have become familiarized to it. 

1. And first, on the supposition that the present measures and weights are to
be retained but to be rendered uniform and invariable, by bringing them to the
same invariable standard. 



The first settlers of these States, having come chiefly from England, brought
with them the measures and weights of that country. These alone are generally
established among us, either by law or usage; and these, therefore, are alone
to be retained and fixed. We must resort to that country for information of
what they are, or ought to be. 



This rests, principally, on the evidence of certain standard measures and
weights, which have been preserved, of long time, in different deposits. But
differences among these having been known to exist, the House of Commons, in
the years 1757 and 1758, appointed committees to inquire into the original
standards of their weights and measures. These committees, assisted by able
mathematici ans and artists, examined and compared with each other the several
standard measures and weights, and made reports on them in the years 1758 and
1759. The circumstan ces under which these reports were made entitle them to be
considered, as for as they go, as the best written testimony existing of the
standard measures and weights of England; and as such, they will be relied on
in the progress of this report. 



Official Papers 35 



MEASURES OF LENGTH. 



The measures of length in use among us are: 



The league of 3 miles,  

The mile of 8 furlongs,  

The furlong of 40 poles or perches,  

The pole or perch of 5 ½ yards,  

The fathom of 2 yards,  

The ell of a yard and quarter,  

The yard of 3 feet,  

The foot of 12 inches, and  

The inch of 10 lines. 



On this branch of their subject, the committee of 1757-1758, says that the
standard measures of length at the receipt of the exchequer, are a yard,
supposed to be of the time of Henry VII., and a yard and ell supposed to have
been made about the year 1601; that they are brass rods, very coarsely made,
their divisions not exact, and the rods bent; and that in the year 1742, some
members of the Royal Society had been at great pains in taking an exact measure
of these standards, by very curious instrument s, prepared by the ingenious Mr.
Graham; that the Royal Society had had a brass rod made pursuant to their
experiment s, which was made so accurately, and by persons so skilful and
exact, that it was thought not easy to obtain a more exact one; and the
committee, in fact, found it to agree with the standards at the exchequer, as
near as it was possible. They furnish no means, to persons at a distance, of
knowing what 



36 Jefferson's Works 



this standard is. This, however, is supplied by the evidence of the second
pendulum, which, according to the authority before quoted, is, at London,
39.1682 English inches, and, consequent ly, the second rod there is of 58.7523
of the same inches. When we shall have found, then, by actual trial, the second
rod for 45° by adding the difference of their computed length, to wit:
287/10,000 of an inch, or rather 3/10 of a line (which in practice will
endanger less error than an attempt at so minute a fraction as the ten
thousandth parts of an inch) we shall have the second rod of London, or a true
measure of 58 ¾ English inches. Or, to shorten the operation, without varying
the result, 



Let the standard rod of 45° be divided into 587 1/5 equal parts, and let each
of these parts be declared a line. 



10 lines an inch,  

12 inches a foot,  

3 feet a yard,  

3 feet 9 inches an ell,  

6 feet a fathom,  

5 ½yards a perch or pole,  

40 poles or perches a furlong,  

8 furlongs a mile, 

 3 miles a league. 



SUPERFICI AL MEASURES. 



Our measures of surf ace are, the acre, of 4 roods and the rood of 40 square
poles; so established by a statute of 33 Edw. I. Let them remain the same. 



Official Papers 37 



MEASURES OF CAPACITY. 



The measures of capacity in use among us are of the following names and
proportion s: 



The gill, four of which make a pint.  

Two pints make a quart. 

Two quarts a pottle. 

Two pottles a gallon.  

Two gallons a peck, dry measure. 

Eight gallons make a measure called a firkin, in liquid substances , and a
bushel, dry.  

Two firkins, or bushels, make a measure called a rundlet or kilderkin, liquid,
and a strike, dry.  Two kilderkins, or strikes, make a measure called a barrel,
liquid, and a coomb, dry; this last term being ancient and little used.  

Two barrels, or coombs, make a measure called a hogshead, liquid, or a quarter,
dry; each being the quarter of a ton.  

A hogshead and a third make a tierce, or third of a ton.  

Two hogsheads make a pipe, butt, or puncheon; and  

Two pipes make a ton. 



But no one of these measures is of a determinat e capacity. The report of the
committee of 1757-8, shows that the gallon is of very various content; and that
being the unit, all the others must vary with it. 



The gallon and bushel contain-

 224 and 1792 cubic inches, according to the standard wine gallon preserved at
Guildhall. 



38 Jefferson's Works 



231 and 1848, according to the statute of 5th of Anne.  

264.8 and 2118.4, according to the ancient Rumored  quart, of 1228, examined by
the committee. 265.5 and 2124, according to three standard bushels preserved in
the Exchequer, to wit: one of Henry VII., without a rim; one dated 1091,
supposed for 1591, or 1601, and one dated 1601. 266.25 and 2130, according to
the ancient Rumored  gallon of 122 8, examined by the committee. 268.75 and
2150, according to the Winchester bushel, as declared by statute 13, 14,
William III., which has been the model for some of the grain States.  

271, less 2 spoonfuls, and 2168, less 16 spoonfuls, according to a standard
gallon of Henry VII., and another dated 1601, marked E. E., both in the
Exchequer.  

271 and 2168, according to a standard gallon in the Exchequer, dated 1601,
marked E., and called the corn gallon.  

272 and 2176, according to the three standard corn gallons last mentioned, as
measured in 1688, by an artist for the Commission ers of the Excise, generally
used in the seaport towns, and by mercantile people, and thence introduced into
some of the grain States. 



Official Papers 39 



277.18 and 2217.44, as established for the measure of coal by the statute 12
Anne.  

278 and 2224, according to the standard bushel of Henry VII., with a copper
rim, in the Exchequer.  

278.4 and 2227.2, according to two standard pints of 1601 and 1602, in the
Exchequer.  

280 and 2240, according to the standard quart of 1601, in the Exchequer.  

282 and 2256, according to the standard gallon for beer and ale in the
Treasury. 



There are, moreover, varieties on these varieties, from the barrel to the ton,
inclusive; for, if the barrel be of herrings, it must contain 28 gallons by the
statute 13 Eliz. c. II. If of wine, it must contain 31 ½ gallons by the statute
2 Henry VI. c. II, and 1 Rich. III. c. 15. If of beer or ale, it must contain
34 gallons by the statute I William and Mary, c. 24, and the higher measures in
proportion. 



In those of the United States which have not adopted the statutes of William
and Mary, and of Anne before cited, nor their substance, the wine gallon of 231
cubic inches rests on the authority of very long usage, before the 5th of Anne,
the origin and foundation of which are unknown; the bushel is the Winchester
bushel, by the 11 Henry VII. undefined; and the barrel of ale 32 gallons, and
of beer 36 gallons, by the statute 23 Henry VIII. c. 4. 



The Secretary of State is not informed whether 



40 Jefferson's Works 



there have been any, and what, alterations of these measures by the laws of the
particular States. 



It is proposed to retain this series of measures, but to fix the gallon to one
determinat e capacity, as the unit of measure, both wet and dry; for convenienc
e is in favor of abolishing the distinction between wet and dry measures. 



The wine gallon, whether of 224 or 231 cubic inches, may be altogether
disregarde d, as concerning , principally, the mercantile and the wealthy, the
least numerous part of the society, and the most capable of reducing one
measure to another by calculation. This gallon is little used among the mass of
farmers, whose chief habits and interests are in the size of the corn bushel.



Of the standard measures before stated, two are principally distinguish ed in
authority and practice. The statute bushel of 2150 cubic inches, which gives a
gallon of 268.75 cubic inches, and the standard gallon of 1601, called the corn
gallon of 271 or 272 cubic inches, which has introduced the mercantile bushel
of 2276 inches. The former of these is most used in some of the grain States,
the latter in others. The middle term of 270 cubic inches may be taken as a
mutual compromise of convenienc e, and as offering this general advantage: that
the bushel being of 2160 cubic inches, is exactly a cubic foot and a quarter,
and so, facilitates the conversion of wet and dry measures into solid contents
and tonnage, and simplifies the connection of measures 



Official Papers 41 



and weights, as will be shown hereafter. It may be added, in favor of this, as
a medium measure, that eight of the standard, or statute measures before
enumerated , are below this term, and nine above it. 



The measures to be made for use, being four sided, with rectangula r sides and
bottom.  

The pint will be 3 inches square, and 3 4 inches deep;  

The quart 3 inches square, and 7 ½ inches deep;  

The pottle 3 inches square, and 15 inches deep, or 412, 5, and 6 inches;  

The gallon 6 inches square, and 7 ½ inches deep, or 5, 6, and 9 inches;  

The peck 6, 9, and 10 inches;  

The half bushel 12 inches square, and 7 ½ inches deep; and  

The bushel 12 inches square, and 15 inches deep, or 9, 15, and 16 inches. 

Cylindrical measures have the advantage of superior strength, but square ones
have the greater advantage of enabling every one who has a rule in his pocket,
to verify their contents by measuring them. Moreover, till the circle can be
squared, the cylinder cannot be cubed, nor its contents exactly expressed in
figures. 



Let the measures of capacity, then, for the United States be -



A gallon of 270 cubic inches;  

The gallon to contain 2 pottles; 



42 Jefferson's Works 



The pottle 2 quarts;  

The quart 2 pints;  

The pint 4 gills;  

Two gallons to make a peck;  

Eight gallons a bushel or firkin;  

Two bushels, or firkin, a strike or kilderkin;  

Two strikes, or kilderkins, a coomb or barrel;  

Two coombs, or barrels, a quarter or hogshead;  

A hogshead and a third one tierce; 

Two hogsheads a pipe, butt, or puncheon; and  

Two pipes a ton.  

And let all measures of capacity of dry subjects be stricken with a straight
strike. 



WEIGHTS. 



There are two series of weights in use among us; the one called avoirdupoi s,
the other troy. 



In the Avoirdupoi s series: 



The pound is divided into 16 ounces;  

The ounce into 16 drachms;  

The drachm into 4 quarters. 



In the Troy series: 



The pound is divided into 12 ounces;  

The ounce (according to the subdivision of the apothecarie s) into 8 drachms;  

The drachm into 3 scruples;  

The scruple into 20 grains.  

According to the subdivision for gold and silver, 



Official Papers 43 



the ounce is divided into twenty pennyweig hts, and the pennyweig ht into
twenty-fou r grains. 



So that the pound troy contains 5760 grains, of which 7000 are requisite to
make the pound avoirdupoi s; of course the weight of the pound troy is to that
of the pound avoirdupoi s as 5760 to 7000, or as 144 to 175. 



It is remarkable that this is exactly the proportion of the ancient liquid
gallon of Guildhall of 224 cubic inches, to the corn gallon of 272; for 224 are
to 272 as 144 to 175. (4.) 



It is further remarkable still, that this is also the exact proportion between
the specific weight of any measure of wheat, and of the same measure of water:
for the statute bushel is of 64 pounds of wheat. Now as 144 to 175, so are 64
pounds to 77.7 pounds; but 77.7 pounds is known to be the weight of (5.) 2150.4
cubic inches of pure water, which is exactly the content of the Winchester
bushel, as declared by the statute 13, 14, Will. 3. That statute determined the
bushel to be a cylinder of 18 ½ inches diameter, and 8 inches depth. Such a
cylinder, as nearly as it can be cubed, and expressed in figures, contains
2150.425 cubic inches; a result which reflects authority on the declaration of
Parliament, and induces a favorable opinion of the care with which they
investigated the contents of the ancient bushel, and also a belief that there
might exist evidence of it at that day, unknown to the committees of 1758 and
1759. 



44 Jefferson's Works 



We find, then, in a continued proportion 64 to 77.7 as 224 to 272, and as 144
to 175, that is to say, the specific weight of a measure of wheat, to that of
the same measure of water, as the cubic contents of the wet gallon, to those of
the dry; and as the weight of a pound troy to that of a pound avoirdupoi s. 

This seems to have been so combined as to render it indifferent whether a thing
were dealt out by weight or measure; for the dry gallon of wheat, and the
liquid one of wine, were of the same weight; and the avoirdupoi s pound of
wheat, and the troy pound of wine, were of the same measure. Water and the
vinous liquors, which enter most into commerce, are so nearly of a weight, that
the difference, in moderate quantities, would be neglected by both buyer and
seller; some of the wines being a little heavier, and some a little lighter,
than water. 



Another remarkable correspond ence is that between weights and measures. For
1000 ounces avoirdupoi s of pure water fill a cubic foot, with mathematic al
exactness. 



What circumstan ces of the times, or purposes of barter or commerce, called for
this combinatio n of weights and measures, with the subjects to be exchanged or
purchased, are not now to be ascertained . But a triple set of exact proportion
als representi ng weights, measures, and the things to be weighed and measured,
and a relation so integral between weights and solid measures, must have 



Official Papers 45 



been the result of design and scientific calculation, and not a mere
coincidence of hazard. It proves that the dry and wet measures, the heavy and
light weights, must have been original parts of the system they compose-co
ntrary to the opinion of the committee of 1757, 1758, who thought that the
avoirdupoi s weight was not an ancient weight of the kingdom, nor ever even a
legal weight, but during a single year of the reign of Henry VIII.; and,
therefore, concluded, otherwise than will be here proposed, to suppress it
altogether. Their opinion was founded chiefly on the silence of the laws as to
this weight. But the harmony here developed in the system of weights and
measures, of which the avoirdupoi s makes an essential member, corroborat ed by
a general use, from very high antiquity, of that, or of a nearly similar weight
under another (6.) name, seem stronger proofs that this is legal weight, than
the mere silence of the written laws is of the contrary. 



Be this as it may, it is in such general use with us, that, on the principle of
popular convenienc e, its higher denominati ons, at least, must be preserved.
It is by the avoirdupoi s pound and ounce that our citizens have been used to
buy and sell. But the smaller subdivision s of drachms and quarters are not in
use with them. On the other hand, they have been used to weigh their money and
medicine with the pennyweig hts and grains troy weight, and are not in the
habit of using the pounds and ounces of that series. It would be for their
convenienc e, then, 



46 Jefferson's Works 



to suppress the pound and ounce troy, and the drachm and quarter avoirdupoi s;
and to form into one series the avoirdupoi s pound and ounce, and the troy
pennyweig ht and grain. The avoirdupoi s ounce contains 18 pennyweig hts 5 ½
grains troy weight. Divide it, then, into 18 pennyweig hts, and the pennyweig
ht, as heretofore, into 24 grains, and the new pennyweig ht will contain
between a third and a quarter of a grain more than the present troy pennyweig
ht; or, more accurately, it will be to that as 875 to 864 a difference not to
be noticed, either in money or medicine, below the denominati on of an ounce. 



But it will be necessary to refer these weights to a determinat e mass of some
substance, the specific gravity of which is invariable. Rain water is such a
substance, and may be referred to everywher e, and through all time. It has
been found by accurate experiment s that a cubic foot of rain water weighs 1000
ounces avoirdupoi s, standard weights of the exchequer. It is true that among
these standard weights the committee report small variations; but this
experiment must decide in favor of those particular weights, between which, and
an integral mass of water, so remarkable a coincidence has been found. To
render this standard more exact, the water should be weighed always in the same
temperatur e of air; as heat, by increasing its volume, lessens its specific
gravity. The cellar of uniform temperatur e is best for this also. 



Official Papers 47 



Let it, then, be established that an ounce is of the weight of a cube of rain
water, of one-tenth of a foot; or, rather, that it is the thousandth part of
the weight of a cubic foot of rain water, weighed in the standard temperatur e;
that the series of weights of the United States shall consist of pounds,
ounces, pennyweig hts, and grains; whereof  

24 grains shall be one pennyweig ht;  

18 pennyweig hts one ounce;  1

6 ounces one pound. 



COINS. 



Congress, in 1786, established the money unit at 375.64 troy grains of pure
silver. It is proposed to enlarge this by about the third of a grain in weight,
or a mill in value; that is to say, to establish it at 376 (or, more exactly,
375.989343) instead of 375.64 grains; because it will be shown that this, as
the unit of coin, will link in system with the units of length, surf ace,
capacity, and weight, whenever it shall be thought proper to extend the decimal
ratio through all these branches. It is to preserve the possibility of doing
this, that this very minute alteration is proposed. 



We have this proportion, then, 875 to 864, as 375.989343 grains troy to
371.2626277 ; the expression of the unit in the new grains. 



Let it be declared, therefore, that the money unit, or dollar of the United
States, shall contain 371.262 American grains of pure silver. 



48 Jefferson's Works 



If nothing more, then, is proposed, than to render uniform and stable the
system we already possess, this may be effected on the plan herein detailed;
the sum of which is: 1st. That the present measures of length be retained, and
fixed by an invariable standard. 2d. That the measures of surface remain as
they are, and be invariable also as the measures of length to which they are to
refer. 3d. That the unit of capacity, now so equivocal, be settled at a medium
and convenient term, and defined by the same invariable measures of length.
4th. That the more known terms in the two kinds of weights be retained, and
reduced to one series, and that they be referred to a definite mass of some
substance, the specific gravity of which never changes. And 5th. That the
quantity of pure silver in the money unit be expressed in parts of the weights
so defined. 



In the whole of this no change is proposed, except an insensible one in the
troy grain and pennyweig ht, and the very minute one in the money unit. 



II. But if it be thought that, either now, or at any future time, the citizens
of the United States may be induced to undertake a thorough reformation of
their whole system of measures, weights and coins, reducing every branch to the
same decimal ratio already established in their coins, and thus bringing the
calculation of the principal affairs of life within the arithmetic of every man
who can multiply and divide plain numbers, greater changes will be necessary. 



Official Papers 49 



The unit of measure is still that which must give law through the whole system;
and from whatever unit we set out, the coincidence s between the old and new
ratios will be rare. All that can be done, will be to choose such a unit as
will produce the most of these. In this respect the second rod has been found,
on trial, to be far preferable to the second pendulum. 



MEASURES OF LENGTH. 



Let the second rod, then, as before described, be the standard of measure; and
let it be divided into five equal parts, each of which shall be called a foot;
for, perhaps, it may be better generally to retain the name of the nearest
present measure, where there is one tolerably near. It will be about one
quarter of an inch shorter than the present foot.           

Let the foot be divided into 10 inches;  

The inch into 10 lines;  

The line into 10 points;  

Let 10 feet make a decad;  

10 decads one rood;  

10 roods a furlong;  

10 furlongs a mile. 



SUPERFICI AL MEASURES. 



Superficial measures have been estimated, and so may continue to be, in squares
of the measures of length, except in the case of lands, which have been
estimated by squares, called roods and acres. Let 



#VOL. III-4# 



50 Jefferson's Works 



the rood be equal to a square, every side of which is 100 feet. This will be
6.483 English feet less than the English (7.) rood every way, and 1311 square
feet less in its whole contents; that is to say, about one-eighth; in which
proportion, also, 4 roods will be less than the present acre. 



MEASURES OF CAPACITY. 



Let the unit of capacity be the cubic foot; to be called a bushel. It will
contain 1620.055068 62 cubic inches, English; be about one-fourth less than
that before proposed to be adopted as a medium; one-tenth less than the bushel
made from 8 of the Guildhall gallons; and one-fourte enth less than the bushel
made from 8 Irish gallons of 217.6 cubic inches. 



Let the bushel be divided into 10 pottles;  

Each pottle into 10 demi-pints;  

Each demi-pint into 10 metres, which will be of a cubic inch each.  

Let 10 bushels be a quarter, and 

10 quarters a last, or double ton. 



The measures for use being four-sided, and the sides and bottoms rectangula r,
the bushel will be a foot cube. 



The pottle 5 inches square and 4 inches deep;  

The demi-pint 2 inches square, and 2 ½ inches deep;  

The metre, an inch cube. 



Official Papers 51 



WEIGHTS. 



Let the weight of a cubic inch of rain water, or the thousandth part of a cubic
foot, be called an ounce; and let the ounce be divided into 10 double scruples:




The double scruple into 10 carats;  

The carat into 10 minims or demi-grain s;  

The minim into 10 mites;  

Let 10 ounces make a pound;  

10 pounds a stone;  

16 stones a kental;  

10 kentals a hogshead;



COINS. 



Let the money unit, or dollar, contain eleven twelfths of an ounce of pure
silver. This will be 376 troy grains, (or more exactly, 375.989343 troy
grains,) which will be about a third of a grain, (or more exactly, .349343 of a
grain, more than the present unit.) This, with the twelfth of alloy already
established , will make the dollar or unit, of the weight of an ounce, or of a
cubic inch of rain water, exactly. The series of mills, cents, dimes, dollars,
and eagles, to remain as already established . (8.) 



The second rod, or the second pendulum, expressed in the measures of other
countries, will give the proportion between their measures and those of the
United States.



Measures, weights and coins, thus referred to standards unchangea ble in their
nature, (as is the 



52 Jefferson's Works 



length of a rod vibrating seconds, and the weight of a definite mass of rain
water,) will themselves be unchangea ble. These standards, too, are such as to
be accessible to all persons, in all times and places. The measures and weights
derived from them fall in so nearly with some of those now in use, as to
facilitate their introductio n; and being arranged in decimal ratio, they are
within the calculation of every one who possesses the first elements of
arithmetic, and of easy comparison , both for foreigners and citizens, with the
measures, weights, and coins of other countries. 



A gradual introductio n would lessen the inconvenie nces which might attend too
sudden a substitutio n, even of an easier for a more difficult system. After a
given term, for instance, it might begin in the custom-hou ses, where the
merchants would become familiarized to it. After a further term, it might be
introduced into all legal proceeding s, and merchants and traders in foreign
commoditie s might be required to use it in their dealings with one another.
After a still further term, all other description s of people might receive it
into common use. Too long a postponeme nt, on the other hand, would increase
the difficulties of its reception with the increase of our population. 



Appendix, containing illustration s and developmen ts of some passages of the
preceding report. 



(1.) In the second pendulum with a spherical bob, 



Official Papers 53 



call the distance between the centres of suspension and of the bob, 2 x 19.575,
or 2d, and the radius of the bob = r; then 2d : r :: r : rr/2d and 2/5 of this
last proportion al expresses the displaceme nt of the centre of oscillation, to
wit : 2rr/5X2d = rr/2d Two inches have been proposed as a proper diameter for
such a bob. In that case r will be= 1. inch, and rr/5d=1/97 87 inches. 



In the cylindrical second rod, call the length of the rod, 3X19.575. or 3d, and
its radius=r and rr/2x3d=rr /6d will express the displaceme nt of the centre of
oscillation. It is thought the rod will be sufficiently inflexible if it be 1/5
of an inch in diameter. Then r will be=.1 inch, and rr/6d=1/11 745 inches,
which is but the 120th part of the displaceme nt in the case of the pendulum
with a spherical bob, and but the 689,710th part of the whole length of the
rod. If the rod be even of half an inch diameter, the displaceme nt will be but
1/1879 of an inch, or 1/110356 of the length of the rod. 



(2.) Sir Isaac Newton computes the pendulum for 45° to be 36 pouces 8.428
lignes. Picard made the English foot 11 pouces 2.6 lignes, and Dr. Maskelyne 11
pouces 3.11 lignes. D'Alembert states it at 11 pouces 3 lignes, which has been
used in these calculation s as a middle term, and gives us 36 pouces 8.428
lignes = 39.1491 inches. This length for the pendulum of 45° had been adopted
in this report before the Bishop of Autun's proposition was known here. He
relies on Mairan's ratio for the length of the pendulum in the latitude of
Paris, to wit: 



54 Jefferson's Works 



504:257::72 pouces to a 4th proportion al, which will be 36.71428 pouces=39.
1619 inches, the length of the pendulum for latitude 48° 50'. The difference
between this and the pendulum for 45° is .0113 of an inch; so that the pendulum
for 45° would be estimated, according to Mairan, at 39.1619-.01 13= 39.1506
inches, almost precisely the same with Newton's computatio n herein adopted. 



(3.) Sir Isaac Newton's computatio ns for the different degrees of latitude,
from 30° to 45°, are as follows: 



                 Pieds.                  Lignes.                  Pieds.       
          Lignes. 



        30° -            3 -                 7.948                 42° -       
    3 -                 8.327  

        35 -            3 -                  8-099                 43 -        
   3 -                 8.361  

        40 -            3 -                 8.261                 44 -         
  3 -                  8.394  

        41 -            3 -                 8.294                 45 -         
  3 -                 8.428 



(4. ) Or, more exactly, 144 : 175 :: 224 : 272.2. 



(5.) Or, more exactly, 62.5: 1728::77.7: 2150039. 



(6.) The merchant's weight. 



(7.) The English rood contains 10,890 square feet = 104.355 feet square. 



(8.) The Measures, Weights, and Coins of the Decimal System, estimated in those
of England, now used in the United States. 



1. MEASURES OF LENGTH.                  

                        Feet.         Equivalent in English measure.  

        The point,        .001                . .011 inch.  



        The line,        .01                . .117  



        The inch,        .1                . 1.174, about 1/7 more than the
English inch: 



Official Papers 55 



                        Feet.                  Equivalent in English measure.  
        

        The foot,        1.                         11.744736                
about 1/48 less          .                                €                 
.978728 feet,        €         than the English foot.  



        The decad, .        10                         9.787, about 1/48 less
than the 10 feet rod of the                                                    
     carpenters.  



        The rood,.        100.        .                 97.872, about       
1/16 less than the side        of an English                                   
                       square rood.  



        The furlong,         1000.        .                978.728, about 1/3
more than the English furlong.  

         The mile,         10000.        .         9787.28, about 1 6/7        
English mile, nearly the                                                       
   Scotch and Irish mile, and ½ the                                            
                           German mile. 



2. SUPERFICI AL MEASURE. 



                                 Roods. 



        The hundredth, . . .          01 .                 95.69 square feet
English.  



        The tenth, . . . .          1 .                 957.9  



        The rood, . . .           1. .                  9579.085  



        The double acre, .           10: .                 2.199, or say 2.2
acres English.  



        The square furlong, .           100. .         22.  



3. MEASURE OF CAPACITY. 



                                 Bushels.                  Cub. Inches. 



        The metre, . . .         001                          1.62  The
demi-pint, . .

                                01                          16.2, about 1/24
less than the English                                                          
       half-pint. 



56 Jefferson's Works 



                         Bushels.                  Cub. Inches. 



The pottle, . . .        1 .                          162.005, about1/6 more
than the English pottle.



                                                 1620.055068 62  

The bushel, . .         1.. .                         9375318684 14884352 cu
feet.

                                 about 1/4 less than the middle sized English
bushel. 



The quarter, .                  10. .                         9.375, about 1/5
less than the English quarter. 



The last, . . .                 100. .                          93.753, about
1/7 more than  the English last.  



                                                 4. WEIGHTS.                  

                

                 Pounds.                 Avoirdupoi s.                 Troy. 



Mite,                 .00001        .        .        .        ..         .041
grains,                                                                   about
1/5 less than the English mite. 



Minim, or                                                         .4101  about
1/5 less than          demi-grain,                 .0001        .        .     
  .        .        .         half grain troy.                                 
                                        

Carat, .                . .001        .        .        .        ..        
.4101, about 1/40                                                              
               more than the carat troy. 



Double                                   .        .         .         41.017,
about 1/40 more than

scruple, €                 .01.                                               
2 scruples troy.                                                          

Ounce,                .1                 9375318684 148                 
410.1701924 31                                                  €         84352
oz.           €             €           .85452 oz.                             
                                     about 1/16 less than the ounce avoirdupoi
s. 



Pound,                1.                  9.375                                
 .712101 lb.,                                                   € .5859574177
59 lb.€€            about 1/4 less                                             
                                        than the pound troy.  



Stone,                        10                  93.753oz.                    
    7.121 about 1/4                                                            
    € 5.8595 lb.                €     less than the                            
                                        English stone of 8 lbs. avoirdupoi s. 



Official Papers 57 



Kental,                          100.                   937.531 oz.            
                  71.21 about 4/10                                             
    €         58.5957 lb.                            €   less than the         
                                                         English kental of
100lbs. avoirdupoi s. 



Hogshead,                         1000.                   9375.318 oz.         
     712.101                                                                   
        €  585.9574 lb.                 €



5. COINS. 



                         Dollars. Troy grains. 



The mill, .                 001 .                                  375.98934306
pure silver.  



The cent, .                 01                  Dollar, 1.          
34.18084937 alloy.  



The dime, .                 1                   Eagle, 10.         410.1701924
3 



Postscript. 



January 10, 1791  

It is scarcely necessary to observe that the measures, weights, and coins,
proposed in the preceding report, will be derived altogether from mechanical
operations, viz.: A rod, vibrating seconds, divided into five equal parts, one
of these sub-divide d, and multiplied decimally, for every measure of length,
surface, and capacity, and these last filled with water  to determine the
weights and coins. The arithmetica l estimates in the report were intended only
to give an idea of what the new measures, weights, and coins, would be nearly,
when compared with the old. The length of the standard or second rod,
therefore, was assumed from that of the pendulum; and as there has been small
differences in the estimates of the pendulum by different persons, 



58 Jefferson's Works 



that of Sir Isaac Newton was taken, the highest authority the world has yet
known. But, if even he has erred, the measures, weights, and coins proposed,
will not be an atom the more or less. In cubing the new foot, which was
estimated at .978728 of an English foot, or 11.744736 English inches, an
arithmetica l error of an unit happened in the fourth column of decimals, and
was repeated in another line in the sixth column, so as to make the result one
ten thousandth and one millionth of a foot too much. The thousandth part of
this error (about one ten millionth of a foot) consequent ly fell on the metre
of measure, the ounce weight, and the unit of money. In the last it made a
difference of about the twenty-fift h part of a grain Troy, in weight, or the
ninety-thir d of a cent in value. As it happened, this error was on the
favorable side, so that the detection of it approximat es our estimate of the
new unit exactly that much nearer to the old, and reduces the difference
between them to 34, instead of 38 hundredth s of a grain Troy; that is to say,
the money unit instead of 375.64 Troy grains of pure silver, as established
heretofore, will now be 375.9893430 6 grains, as far as our knowledge of the
length of the second pendulum enables us to judge; and the current of
authorities since Sir Isaac Newton's time, gives reason to believe that his
estimate is more probably above than below the truth, consequently future
corrections of it will bring the estimate of the new unit still nearer to the
old. 



Official Papers 59 



The numbers in which the arithmetica l error before mentioned showed itself in
the table, at the end of the report, have been rectified, and the table
re-printed.  



The head of superficial measures in the last part of the report, is thought to
be not sufficiently developed. It is proposed that the rood of land, being 100
feet square, (and nearly a quarter of the present acre,) shall be the unit of
land measure. This will naturally be divided into tenths and hundredth s, the
latter of which will be a square decad. Its multiples will also, of course, be
tens, which may be called double acres, and hundreds, which will be equal to a
square furlong each. The surveyor's chain should be composed of 100 links of
one foot each. 



Opinion upon the question whether the President should veto the Bill, declaring
that the seat of governmen t shall be transferre d to the Potomac, in the year
1790. 



July 15, 1790. A bill having passed both houses of Congress, and being now
before the President, declaring that the seat of the federal governmen t shall
be transferre d to the Potomac in the year 1790, that the session of Congress
next ensuing the present shall be held in Philadelphi a, to which place the
offices shall be transferre d before the 1st of December next, a writer in a
public paper of July 13, has urged on the considerati on



60 Jefferson's Works 



of the President, that the Constitutio n has given to the two houses of
Congress the exclusive right to adjourn themselves; that the will of the
President mixed with theirs in a decision of this kind, would be an inoperative
ingredient, repugnant to the Constitutio n, and that he ought not to permit
them to part, in a single instance, with their constitutio nal rights;
consequent ly, that he ought to negative the bill.



That is now to be considered. 



Every man, and every body of men on earth, possesses the right of self-gover
nment. They receive it with their being from the hand of nature. Individuals
exercise it by their single will; collections of men by that of their majority;
for the law of the majority is the natural law' of every society of men. When a
certain description of men are to transact together a particular business, the
times and places of their meeting and separating, depend on their own will;
they make a part of the natural right of self-governmen t. This, like all other
natural rights, may be abridged or modified in its exercise by their own
consent, or by the law of those who depute them, if they meet in the right of
others; but as far as it is not abridged or modified, they retain it as a
natural right and may exercise them in what form they please, either
exclusively by themselves, or in association with others, or by others
altogether, as they shall agree. 



Each house of Congress possesses this natural right 



Official Papers 61 



of governing itself, and, consequent ly, of fixing its own times and places of
meeting, so far as it has not been abridged by the law of those who employ
them, that is to say, by the Constitutio n. This act manifestly considers them
as possessing this right of course, and therefore has nowhere given it to them.
In the several different passages where it touches this right, it treats it as
an existing thing, not as one called into existence by them. To evince this,
every passage of the Constitutio n shall be quoted, where the right of
adjournme nt is touched; and it will be seen that no one of them pretends to
give that right; that, on the contrary, every one is evidently introduced
either to enlarge the right where it would be too narrow, to restrain it where,
in its natural and full exercise, it might be too large, and lead to inconvenie
nce, to defend it from the latitude of its own phrases, where these were not
meant to comprehen d it; or to provide for its exercise by others, when they
cannot exercise it themselves. 



"A majority of each house shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a
smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the
attendance of absent members." Art., 1, Sec. 5. A majority of every collection
of men being naturally necessary to constitute its will, and it being
frequently to happen that a majority is not assembled, it was necessary to
enlarge the natural right by giving to "a smaller number than a majority" a
right to compel the attendance of the absent 



62 Jefferson's Works 



members, and, in the meantime, to adjourn from day to day. This clause, then,
does not pretend to give to a majority a right which it knew that majority
would have of themselves, but to a number less than a majority, a right to
which it knew that lesser number could not have of themselves. 



"Neither house, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of
the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that
in which the two houses shall be sitting." Ibid. Each house exercising
separately its natural right to meet when and where it should think best, it
might happen that the two houses would separate either in time or place, which
would be inconvenie nt. It was necessary, therefore, to keep them together by
restraining their natural right of deciding on separate times and places, and
by requiring a concurrenc e of will. 



But, as it might happen that obstinacy, or a difference of object, might
prevent this concurrenc e, it goes on to take from them, in that instance, the
right of adjournme nt altogether, and to transfer it to another, by declaring,
Art. 2, Sec. 3, that "in case of disagreeme nt between the two houses, with
respect to the time of adjournme nt, the President may adjourn them to such
time as he shall think proper." 



These clauses, then, do not import a gift, to the two houses, of a general
right of adjournme nt, which it was known they would have without that gift,
but to restrain or abrogate the right it was known they 



Official Papers 63 



would have, in an instance where, exercised in its full extent, it might lead
to inconvenie nce, and to give that right to another who would not naturally
have had it. It also gives to the President a right, which he otherwise would
not have had, "to convene both houses, or either of them, on extraordina ry
occasions:" Thus substitutin g the will of another, where they are not in a
situation to exercise their own. 



"Every order, resolution, or vote, to which the concurrenc e of the Senate and
House of Representa tives may be necessary (except on a question of
adjournment), shall be presented to the President for his approbatio n, &c."
Art. I Sec. 7. The latitude of the general words here used would have subjected
the natural right of adjournme nt of the two houses to the will of the
President, which was not intended. They therefore expressly "except questions
of adjournme nt" out of their operation. They do not here give a right of
adjournme nt, which it was known would exist without their gift, but they
defend the existing right against the latitude of their own phrases, in a case
where there was no good reason to abridge it. The exception admits they will
have the right of adjournme nt, without pointing out the source from which they
will derive it. 



These are all the passages of the Constitutio n (one only excepted, which shall
be presently cited) where the right of adjournme nt is touched; and it is
evident that none of these are introduced to give that right; but every one
supposes it to be existing, and provides 



64 Jefferson's Works 



some specific modificatio n for cases where either a defeat in the natural
right, or a too full use of it, would occasion inconvenie nce. 



The right of adjournme nt, then, is not given by the Constitutio n, and
consequent ly it may be modified by law without interfering with that
instrument. It is a natural right, and, like all other natural rights, may be
abridged or regulated in its exercise by law; and the concurrenc e of the third
branch in any law regulating its exercise is so efficient an ingredient in that
law, that the right cannot be otherwise exercised but after a repeal by a new
law. The express terms of the Constitutio n itself show that this right may be
modified by law, when, in Art. 1, Sec. 4, (the only remaining passage on the
subject not yet quoted) it says, "The Congress shall assemble at least once in
every year, and such meeting shall be the first Monday in December, unless they
shall, by law, appoint a different day." Then another day may be appointed by
law; and the President's assent is an efficient ingredient in that law. Nay
further, they cannot adjourn over the first Monday of December but by a law.
This is another constitutio nal abridgment of their natural right of adjournme
nt; and completing our review of all the clauses in the Constitutio n which
touch that right, authorizes us to say no part of that instrument gives it; and
that the houses hold it, not from the Constitutio n, but from nature. 



A consequenc e of this is, that the houses may, by 



Official Papers 65 



a joint resolution, remove themselves from place to place, because it is a part
of their right of self-gover nment; but that as the right of self-gover nment
does not comprehen d the governmen t of others, the two houses cannot, by a
joint resolution of their majorities only, remove the Executive and Judiciary
from place to place. These branches possessing also the rights of self-gover
nment from nature, cannot be controlled in the exercise of them but by a law,
passed in the forms of the Constitutio n. The clause of the bill in question,
therefore, was necessary to be put into the form of a law, and to be submitted
to the President, so far as it proposes to effect the removal of the Executive
and Judiciary to Philadelphi a. So far as respects the removal of the present
houses of legislation thither, it was not necessary to be submitted to the
President; but such a submission is not repugnant to the Constitutio n. On the
contrary, if he concurs, it will so far fix the next session of Congress at
Philadelphi a that it cannot be changed but by a regular law. 



The sense of Congress itself is always respectable authority. It has been given
very remarkably on the present subject. The address to the President in the
paper of the 13th is a complete digest of all the arguments urged on the floor
of the Representa tives against the constitutio nality of the bill now before
the President; and they were overruled by a majority of that house, comprehen
ding the delegation of all the States south of the Hudson, except South
Carolina.



#VOL. III- 5# 



66 Jefferson's Works 



At the last session of Congress, when the bill for remaining a certain term at
New York, and then removing to Susquehan na or Germantow n was objected to on
the same ground, the objection was overruled by a majority comprehen ding the
delegations of the northern half of the union with that of South Carolina. So
that the sense of every State in the union has been expressed, by its
delegation, against this objection South Carolina excepted, and excepting also
Rhode Island, which has never yet had a delegation in place to vote on the
question. In both these instances, the Senate concurred with the majority of
the Representa tives. The sense of the two houses is stronger authority in this
case, as it is given against their own supposed privilege. 



It would be as tedious, as it is unnecessar y, to take up and discuss one by
one, the objections proposed in the paper of July 13. Every one of them is
founded on the supposition that the two houses hold their right of adjournme nt
from the Constitutio n. This error being corrected, the objections founded on
it fall of themselves. 



It would also be work of mere supereroga tion to show that, granting what this
writer takes for granted (that the President's assent would be an inoperative
ingredient, because excluded by the Constitutio n, as he says), yet the
particular views of the writer would be frustrated, for on every hypothesis of
what the President may do, Congress must go to Philadelphi a. 1. If he assents
to the bill, that 



Official Papers 67



assent makes good law of the part relative to the Potomac; and the part for
holding the next session at Philadelphi a is good, either as an ordinance, or a
vote of the two houses, containing a complete declaration of their will in a
case where it is competent to the object; so that they must go to Philadelphi a
in that case. 2. If he dissents from the bill it annuls the part relative to
the Potomac; but as to the clause for adjourning to Philadelphi a, his dissent
being as inefficient as his assent, it remains a good ordinance or vote, of the
two houses for going thither, and consequent ly they must go in this case also.
3. If the Presid