Friends Divided

by Gordon S. Wood

  Rush went on to describe the letters between these two great patriots that followed from the renewal of their friendship, letters full of “many precious aphorisms, the result of observation, experience, and profound reflection.” After these two “rival friends” had outlived their parties and were “sunk into the grave nearly at the same time,” the nation would benefit greatly from such a correspondence.6

  “A Dream again!” exclaimed Adams in his quick response. “I wish you would dream all day and all Night, for one of your Dreams puts me in spirits for a Month. I have no other objection to your Dream, but that it is not History. It may be Prophecy.”7

  As indeed it was, but not immediately. In the meantime, Rush knew he had to work on Jefferson and prepare him for a renewal of the friendship. Although he corresponded regularly with Jefferson, two or three letters a year, Rush did not have an intimate relationship with him, certainly nothing like the one he had with Adams.

  On January 2, 1811, Rush wrote to Jefferson and in the middle of his letter casually mentioned that “now and then” he exchanged letters with Adams, who, he said, glowed with his recollections of the patriot years of 1774–1776. Knowing how Jefferson felt about banks, Rush cited some hostile remarks that Adams had made about banks and the aristocracy they bred. After softening Jefferson up in this way, he mentioned Jefferson’s “early attachment” to Adams and stressed the degree to which their concerted labors had contributed to independence. Finally Rush told Jefferson how much he “ardently wished a friendly and epistolary intercourse might be revived” between him and Adams before they died. Such an exchange of letters, he said, not only would honor their talents and their patriotism, but would also be useful to republicanism in the United States and all over the world. “Posterity will revere the friendship of two ex-Presidents that were once opposed to each other.”8

  Jefferson soon answered Rush in a long letter, explaining that he was not responsible for the discontinuance of the correspondence. He recalled that during the early years of the Revolution he and Adams had possessed “a high degree of mutual respect & esteem” for each other. “Certainly no man,” he said of Adams, “was ever truer than he was, in that day, to those principles of rational republicanism” that underlay America’s new governments. “Altho’ he swerved afterwards towards the principles of the English constitution, our friendship did not abate on that account.” Unlike Hamilton, Jefferson said, “Adams was honest as a politician as well as a man.” But during the crisis of 1798, Adams, overwhelmed by lurid accounts of the ferocities of the French Revolution, had gleefully expressed his “new principles of government” to Jefferson, mingling his kindness with “a little superciliousness.” Even Mrs. Adams, “with all her good sense & prudence,” had been “sensibly flushed.”

  He described his immediate anger over Adams’s “midnight appointments,” but he told Rush how “a little time and reflection” had restored to him “that just estimate” of Adams’s “virtues & passions” made familiar by their long friendship. Knowing that Adams “was not rich,” he had first considered appointing him to a lucrative office in Massachusetts. But when his fellow Republicans objected, he “dropped the idea.” Still, he yearned for an opportunity to renew the friendship, but he believed that his awkward exchange with Mrs. Adams in 1804 made any reconciliation very difficult. To convince Rush of his good intentions, he sent the 1804 correspondence with Abigail to Rush for his perusal.

  Jefferson said that he believed Adams to be “an honest man” and “a powerful advocate” for independence. Unfortunately, however, Adams had become alienated from him by listening to lies “contrived for electioneering purposes”—lies that accused Jefferson of having been involved in the intrigues against and slander of his former friend. He believed that Adams’s conduct had been likewise honorable toward him, but that it was “part of his character to suspect foul play in those of whom he is jealous,” and it was not easy for him “to relinquish his suspicions.” Jefferson told Rush that he supplied all these details so that he might have a full picture of the relationship in order to be able to judge the possibility of a revival of the friendship.9

  Rush quickly replied, assuring Jefferson that he had been more than fair with Mrs. Adams. Indeed, he was struck by “the kindness, benevolence, and even friendship” expressed in his letters to Mrs. Adams—“genuine effusions of your heart.” Many, he said, were “the evils of a political life,” but none was so great “as the dissolution of friendships.” He repeated his hope that he and Adams might be brought back together and mentioned again how much Adams hated banks and that he had “expressed favorable sentiments towards you.”10

  Something was needed to break the impasse—something that would convince Jefferson that the bad ending of his correspondence with Abigail in 1804 was not irreparable. In the summer of 1811, two young Virginian brothers, John and Edward Coles, who were neighbors and friends of Jefferson, traveled north and paid a two-day visit to Adams in Quincy. They reported their discussion to Jefferson, who in turn related to Rush the nature of their conversation with Adams. During the Coleses’ visit, Adams apparently spoke very freely, “without any reserve,” about his presidential administration. He said that “his masters, as he called his heads of departments,” had acted “above his control, & often against his opinions.”11

  According to a much fuller account given by Edward Coles in 1857 to Jefferson’s biographer Henry S. Randall, Adams had voiced his grievances over the way he had been treated by Jefferson in the election of 1800. The Coleses told Adams that they could not reconcile his remarks with the complimentary things they had often heard Jefferson say about Adams, even to his fellow Republicans. After the election results were known, Jefferson had hesitated about paying a call on Adams, unsure of the proper time, “fearing that if he called too soon, it might have the appearance of exulting over him,” but at the same time afraid that if he delayed too long, Adams’s “sensitive feelings might construe it into a slight, or the turning a cold shoulder to him.” When Jefferson finally made his call, he realized that it was gone too soon, for Adams was “deeply agitated.” Only with difficulty did Jefferson compose him by stressing that their competition was political, not personal. Adams apparently agreed with the brothers’ account of the meeting, but was “astonished” to learn that Jefferson had given so much thought to the timing of his visit. At this he burst out, “I always loved Jefferson, and still love him.”12

  This last spontaneous outburst, so characteristic of Adams, Edward Coles had relayed to Jefferson. Deeply touched, Jefferson in turn related this cherished remark to Rush, concluding, “this is enough for me.” All he needed, he said, was this knowledge of Adams’s feelings “to revive towards him all the affections of the most cordial moments of our lives.” He told Rush he would change only a single part of Franklin’s famous characterization of Adams, by replacing “absolutely out of his senses” with “sometimes incorrect & precipitate in his judgments.” Since Adams possessed “so many other estimable qualities, why should we be dissocialized by mere differences of opinion in politics, in religion in philosophy, or any thing else”—an extraordinary statement that revealed Jefferson’s deep affection for Adams the man. He went on to say that Adams’s “opinions are as honestly formed as my own,” and concluded in good Lockean sensationalist manner that their different views on the same subject were “the result of a difference in our organization & experience.” Since he had never withdrawn from the society of anyone because of these sorts of differences of opinion, “altho’ many have done it from me,” why would he do so with someone “with whom I had gone thro’ with hand & heart, so many trying scenes”?

  He told Rush that all he needed was an appropriate occasion in order to express to Adams his “unchanged affections for him.” He realized that because of his previous correspondence with Mrs. Adams that she must be separated from any resumption of “this fusion of mutual affections.” So much had he been taken aback
by her coldness that he thought that it would “only be necessary that I never name her.” He hoped that Rush’s suggestion to Adams of his “continued cordiality towards him” might prompt “the natural warmth of his heart” into writing.13

  Rush wrote immediately to Adams, incorporating passages from Jefferson’s letter that expressed Jefferson’s “unchanged affection” for his former colleague. “And now, my dear friend,” said Rush, “permit me again to suggest to you to receive the olive which has been offered to you by the hand of a man who still loves you.”

  Rush then launched into a peroration that he hoped would clinch his appeal: “Fellow laborers in erecting the great fabric of American independence!—fellow sufferers in calumnies and falsehoods of party rage!—fellow heirs of the gratitude and affection of posterity!—and fellow passengers in a stage that must shortly convey you both into the presence of a Judge with whom the forgiveness and love of enemies is the condition of acceptance!—embrace—embrace each other!”

  Rush told Adams to forget all that had caused the separation. Explanations may be required between lovers, he said, “but are never so between divided friends.” If he were with Adams, he would put a pen in his hand and guide it to write: “Friend and fellow laborer in the cause of the liberty and independence of our common country, I salute you with the most cordial good wishes for your health and happiness.”14

  The next day, December 17, 1811, Rush wrote to Jefferson, telling him what he had said to Adams, including his peroration. He hoped this second effort to revive the friendship would be successful. “Patriotism, liberty, science, and religion would all gain a triumph by it.”15

  Adams replied to Rush on Christmas with self-protective joshing. How should he answer Rush’s letter? he asked. “Shall I assume a sober Face and write a grave Essay on Religion philosophy, Laws or Government? Shall I laugh like Bacchus among his Grapes, wine vats and Bottles? or Shall I assume the Man of the World, the Fine Gentleman, the Courtier and Bow and scrape, with a smooth smiling Face, Soft Words, many Compliments and Apologies? think myself highly honoured, bound in gratitude? &c. &c. &c.”

  Realizing that Rush had been teasing him and Jefferson to write to each other, Adams said the image of an olive branch was misplaced, since he and Jefferson had never been at war. He claimed that he and Jefferson had no difference of opinion over “the Constitution, or Forms of Government in General.” Then Adams outlined the differences he did have over several measures of Jefferson’s administration. But he had raised no public clamor over these measures. “The Nation approved them, and what is my Judgment against that of the Nation.” They had differed over the French Revolution. Jefferson “thought it wise and good and that it would end in the Establishment of a free Republick.” He, on the other hand, had seen through the falseness of the Revolution, even before it broke out, and had predicted that it would “end only in a Restoration of the Bourbons or a military Despotism, after deluging France and Europe in blood.” Since Rush had likewise supported the French Revolution and he and Adams were still friends, Adams saw no reason that issue should make enemies of him and Jefferson.

  He then went on to describe the differences he had with Jefferson over republicanism as trivial and meaningless: they were differences of speeches over messages, and levees over dinners. Eager to belittle what after all had been very serious disagreements, Adams joked that Jefferson was “for Liberty and Strait Hair,” while he “thought curled Hair was as Republican as Strait.” Rush had been so solemn and sincere in his exhortations that Adams couldn’t restrain his “inclination to be ludicrous” with him. “Why do you make so much ado about nothing.” What use could an exchange of letters between him and Jefferson have? Neither could have anything to say to each other except to wish each other “an easy Journey to Heaven when he goes.” But Adams ended his letter by hinting that time and chance, “or possibly design,” might soon produce a letter between him and Jefferson.16

  He meant it. A week later, on New Year’s Day 1812, he sent Jefferson a humorous and affable letter. Knowing that Jefferson was a friend of American manufactures, he had taken the liberty of sending him “a Packett containing two Pieces of Homespun lately produced in this quarter by One who was honoured in his youth with some of your Attention and much of your kindness.”17 The “two Pieces of Homespun” were the two volumes of John Quincy’s Lectures on Rhetoric and Oratory, prepared while he was a professor at Harvard in 1806–1809.

  Because the volumes hadn’t yet arrived by the time Jefferson received Adams’s letter and had replied, he had forgotten how facetious Adams could be and simply assumed that some real manufactured items were on their way to him. Consequently, in response he wrote a short dissertation on the state of manufacturing in Virginia that must have amused Adams.18

  At the same time Jefferson wrote a brief note to Rush, enclosing copies of his and Adams’s letters. He told Rush that because of his “kind interposition” in bringing two old friends together, he had a right to know how the first approaches had been made. He explained that he had written “a rambling, gossiping epistle” to Adams in order to avoid mentioning “the subject of his family,” meaning Abigail, “on which I could say nothing.” But he hoped his letter expressed his “sincere feelings” and would at least furnish Adams with “ground of reciprocation.”19

  When the two books Adams had sent arrived a day after his letter, an embarrassed Jefferson sent off a quick letter to Adams, apologizing that “a little more sagacity of conjecture” on his part would have saved Adams from having to read his “long dissertation” on manufacturing in Virginia. Jefferson recovered nicely by showering praise on John Quincy’s books, saying they were “a mine of learning and taste” that revealed that young Adams, who had written some acute reviews of the works of leading Federalists, excelled “in more than one character of writing.” By making a point of equally criticizing both France and England, describing “one as a den of robbers, and the other of pirates,” Jefferson, courteous as always, revealed his acute sensitivity to Adams’s feelings. Perhaps realizing what had happened with his correspondence with Abigail in 1804, Jefferson was determined from the outset to make this reconciliation work. Without his patience and courtesy and willingness to put up with numerous affronts and provocations, the correspondence could easily have been terminated.20

  • • •

  WITH THE ICE FINALLY BROKEN, the letters began flowing freely. Adams immediately answered Jefferson with two letters, a week apart, explaining the actual nature of the gift and telling Jefferson that his dissertation on Virginia’s manufacturing was “a feast to me.” He then responded to Jefferson’s claim that he had given up politics and newspapers “in exchange for Tacitus and Thucydides, for Newton and Euclid.” Adams said that he wished he had spent more time with Newton, contemplating the heavens instead of wasting time “on Plato, and Aristotle, Bacon, (Nat) Acherly, Bolingbroke, De Lolme, Harrington, Sidney, Hobbes, Plato Redivivus, Marchmont Nedham, with twenty others upon Subjects which Mankind is determined never to Understand, and those who do Understand them are resolved never to practice, or countenance.” He then went on to complain about how he had sacrificed his popularity in New England for the sake of the Union. But instead of receiving thanks from the great families of Virginia he had suffered their mistreatment.21

  This initial exchange clearly revealed the nature of the 158 letters the two men would write to each other over the next fourteen years. Adams seemed to enjoy the correspondence more than Jefferson, telling Jefferson that he couldn’t write “a hundredth part of what” he wished to say to him. Although he apologized at one point for writing four letters to one of Jefferson’s (“Never mind it, my dear Sir . . . ; your one is worth more than my four”), overall he actually wrote only three times as many as Jefferson.22 In the summer of 1813, he wrote a dozen letters in a row before Jefferson replied. But, of course, Jefferson was an international celebrity, “the man,” said the French philosophe
Antoine Destutt de Tracy, “whom I respect most in the universe and from whom I crave approval the most.”23 Since Jefferson’s many correspondents ranged from the tsar of Russia to the Polish patriot Tadeusz Kosciuszko, from the wife of Napoleon’s youngest brother to the great German naturalist Alexander von Humboldt, Jefferson had many more letters to write than Adams. In 1822 Jefferson claimed that he had received 1,267 letters in 1820, most of which he answered. By contrast, in that same year of 1820, Adams received 123 letters and wrote 121, a mere fraction of Jefferson’s enormous correspondence. It’s not surprising that Adams put more into his exchanges than Jefferson did.24

  Adams knew very well that he was in a different celebrity league from Jefferson. He was embarrassed that “all the literary Gentlemen” of New England had “an Ambitious Curiosity to see the Philosopher and Statesman of Monticello,” and they all applied to him for introductions. If only he had received one introduction from Jefferson, he said he wouldn’t feel so bad in foisting so many young men on Jefferson.25

  Jefferson’s relationship with Abigail remained stilted. In July 1813, at the end of one of Adams’s letters to Jefferson, Abigail broke the silence by penning a short note, in which she offered “the regards of an old Friend, which are still cherished and preserved through all the changes and v[ic]issitudes which have taken place since we first became acquainted.”26 Jefferson responded awkwardly, explaining that his neglect of his “duty of saluting you with friendship and respect” was due to “the unremitting labors of public engagement.” He went on to ask after her health, to describe a bit of his health, and to compare numbers of grandchildren.27