The Life of John Marshall Volume II Part 47

FOOTNOTES:

[856] Marshall to Paulding, April 4, 1835; _Lippincott's Magazine_ (1868), ii, 624-25.

[857] Washington to Bushrod Washington, Aug. 27, 1798; _Writings_: Ford, xiv, 75.

[858] _Ib._ In September, 1797, when Marshall was absent on the X. Y. Z.

mission, Washington received a letter from one "John Langhorne" of Albemarle County. Worded with skillful cunning, it was designed to draw from the retired President imprudent expressions that could be used against him and the Federalists. It praised him, denounced his detractors, and begged him to disregard their a.s.saults. (Langhorne to Washington, Sept. 25, 1797; _Writings_: Sparks, xi, 501.) Washington answered vaguely. (Washington to Langhorne, Oct. 15, 1797; _Writings_: Ford, xiii, 428-30.) John Nicholas discovered that the Langhorne letter had been posted at Charlottesville; that no person of that name lived in the vicinity; and that Washington's answer was called for at the Charlottesville post-office (where Jefferson posted and received letters) by a person closely connected with the master of Monticello. It was suspected, therefore, that Jefferson was the author of the fict.i.tious letter. The mystery caused Washington much worry and has never been cleared up. (See Washington to Nicholas, Nov. 30, 1797; _ib._, footnote to 429-30; to Bushrod Washington, March 8, 1798; _ib._, 448; to Nicholas, March 8, 1798; _ib._, 449-50.) It is not known what advice Marshall gave Washington when the latter asked for his opinion; but from his lifelong conduct in such matters and his strong repugnance to personal disputes, it is probable that Marshall advised that the matter be dropped.

[859] Paulding: _Washington_, ii, 191-92.

[860] Marshall to Paulding, _supra._

[861] Marshall to Paulding, _supra._ This letter was in answer to one from Paulding asking Marshall for the facts as to Washington's part in inducing Marshall to run for Congress.

[862] Pickering to Marshall, Sept. 20, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc.

[863] _Ib._

[864] Adams to Pickering, Sept. 14, 1798; _Works_: Adams, viii, 595.

[865] Adams to Pickering, Sept. 26, 1798; _Works_: Adams, viii, 597.

[866] Adams to Rush, June 25, 1807; _Old Family Letters_, 152.

[867] Wood, 260. Wood's book was "suppressed" by Aaron Burr, who bought the plates and printer's rights. It consists of dull attacks on prominent Federalists. Jefferson's friends charged that Burr suppressed it because of his friendship for the Federalist leaders. (See Cheetham's letters to Jefferson, Dec. 29, 1801, Jan. 30, 1802, _Proceedings_, Ma.s.s.

Hist. Soc. (April and May, 1907) 51-58.) Soon afterward Jefferson began his warfare on Burr.

[868] Marshall to Pickering, Oct. 15, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc. This campaign was unusually acrimonious everywhere. "This Electioneering is worse than the Devil." (Smith to Bayard, Aug. 2, 1798; _Bayard Papers_: Donnan, 69.)

[869] See Statutes at Large, 566, 570, 577, for Alien Acts of June 18, June 25, and July 6, and _ib._, 196, for Sedition Law of July 14, 1798.

[870] This section was not made a campaign issue by the Republicans.

[871] Jefferson to Madison, May 10, 1798; _Works_: Ford, viii, 417; and to Monroe, May 21, 1798; _ib._, 423. Jefferson's first harsh word was to Madison, June 7, 1798; _ib._, 434.

[872] Hamilton to Wolcott, June 29, 1798; _Works_: Lodge, x, 295.

[873] Madison to Jefferson, May 20, 1798; _Writings_: Hunt, vi, 320.

[874] For the Federalists' justification of the Alien and Sedition Laws see Gibbs, ii, 78 _et seq._

[875] As a matter of fact, the anger of Republican leaders was chiefly caused by their belief that the Alien and Sedition Laws were aimed at the Republican Party as such, and this, indeed, was true.

[876] Jefferson to S. T. Mason, Oct. 11, 1798; _Works_: Ford, viii, 450.

[877] Washington to Spotswood, Nov. 22, 1798; _Writings_: Ford, xiv, 121-22.

[878] Washington to Murray, Dec. 26, 1798; _Writings_: Ford, xiv, 132.

[879] Washington to Bushrod Washington, Dec. 31, 1798; _ib._, 135-36.

Judge Addison's charge was an able if intemperate interpretation of the Sedition Law. The Republican newspapers a.s.sailed and ridiculed this very effectively in the presidential campaign of 1800. "Alexander Addison has published in a volume a number of his _charges_ to juries--and _precious_ charges they are--brimstone and saltpetre, a.s.sifoetida and train oil." (_Aurora_, Dec. 6, 1800. See Chief Justice Ellsworth's comments upon Judge Addison's charge in Flanders, ii, 193.)

[880] Marshall to Pickering, Aug. 11, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc.

[881] Oct. 11, 1798. The questions of "Freeholder" were, undoubtedly, written with Marshall's knowledge. Indeed a careful study of them leads one to suspect that he wrote or suggested them himself.

[882] The _Times and Virginia Advertiser_, Alexandria, Virginia, October 11, 1798. This paper, however, does not give "Freeholder's" questions.

The _Columbian Centinel_, Boston, October 20, 1798, prints both questions and answers, but makes several errors in the latter. The correct version is given in Appendix III, _infra_, where "Freeholder's"

questions and Marshall's answers appear in full.

[883] Ames to Gore, Dec. 18, 1798; _Works_: Ames, i, 245-47.

[884] Sedgwick to Pickering, Oct. 23, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc.

[885] _Columbian Centinel_ (Boston), Oct. 24, 1798.

[886] Cabot to King, April 26, 1799; King, iii, 9.

[887] This was not true. The Fairfax embarra.s.sment, alone, caused Marshall to go to France in 1797.

[888] Pickering to Sedgwick, Nov. 6, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc.

[889] Murray to J. Q. Adams, March 22, 1799; _Letters_: Ford, 530.

Murray had been a member of Congress and a minor Federalist politician.

By "us" he means the extreme Federalist politicians.

[890] Marshall to Pickering, Oct. 22, 1798; Pickering MSS., Ma.s.s. Hist.

Soc.

[891] Adams: _Gallatin_, 212.

[892] "Freeholder" had not asked Marshall what he thought of the const.i.tutionality of these laws.

[893] Thompson: _The Letters of Curtius._ John Thompson of Petersburg was one of the most brilliant young men that even Virginia ever produced. See Adams: _Gallatin_, 212, 227. There is an interesting resemblance between the uncommon talents and fate of young John Thompson and those of Francis Walker Gilmer. Both were remarkably intellectual and learned; the characters of both were clean, fine, and high. Both were uncommonly handsome men. Neither of them had a strong physical const.i.tution; and both died at a very early age. Had John Thompson and Francis Walker Gilmer lived, their names would have been added to that wonderful list of men that the Virginia of that period gave to the country.

The intellectual brilliancy and power, and the lofty character of Thompson and Gilmer, their feeble physical basis and their early pa.s.sing seem like the last effort of that epochal human impulse which produced Henry, Madison, Mason, Jefferson, Marshall, and Washington.

[894] Taylor to Jefferson, June 25, 1798; as quoted in _Branch Historical Papers_, ii, 225. See entire letter, _ib._, 271-76.

[895] For an excellent treatment of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions see Von Holst: _Const.i.tutional History of the United States_, i, chap. iv.

[896] Nicholas to Jefferson, Oct. 5, 1798; quoted by Channing in "Kentucky Resolutions of 1798"; _Amer. Hist. Rev._, xx, no. 2, Jan., 1915, 333-36.

[897] Writing nearly a quarter of a century later, Jefferson states that Nicholas, Breckenridge, and he conferred on the matter; that his draft of the "Kentucky Resolutions" was the result of this conference; and that he "strictly required" their "solemn a.s.surance" that no one else should know that he was their author. (Jefferson to Breckenridge, Dec.