John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were not in the Constitutional Convention, nor did they participate in any of the ratification debates in their respective States. John Adams served as U.S. Minister to Great Britain from 1785 until June of 1788. Jefferson served as U.S. Minister to France from 1784 until late 1789. They expressed views about the process and Constitution to each other and others in letters. For example, in a letter to Adams dated November 13, 1787, Jefferson expressed some views on the House of Representatives and the Presidency.
“The house of federal representatives will not be adequate to the management of affairs either foreign or federal. Their president seems a bad edition of a Polish king. He may be reelected from 4 years to 4 years for life.”[1]
In the same letter, Jefferson stated plainly that he would have preferred changes to the Articles of Confederation as opposed to an entirely new document.
“Indeed I think all the good of this new constitution might have been couched in three or four new articles to be added to the good, old, and venerable fabric, which should have been preserved even as a religious relique.”
Adams replied from London in a letter dated December 6, 1787.
“The Project of a new Constitution, has Objections against it, to which I find it difficult to reconcile my self, but I am so unfortunate as to differ somewhat from you in the Articles, according to your last kind Letter.”[2]
Adams went on to address the concerns that Jefferson had expressed in his letter but did not say anything else related to the Articles. He did not try and convince Jefferson of anything. He only gave him his views. He gets to their differences by saying “You are Apprehensive of Monarchy; I, of Aristocracy. I would therefore have given more Power to the President and less to the Senate.”
Jefferson also expressed his concerns about the power of the presidency to James Madison in a December 20, 1787 letter. Jefferson felt strongly that the indefinite number of four-year terms was a huge issue.
“If once elected, and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes, he will pretend false votes, foul play, hold possession of the reins of government, be supported by the states voting for him, especially if they are the central ones lying in a compact body themselves and separating their opponents: and they will be aided by one nation of Europe, while the majority are aided by another. The election of a President of America some years hence will be much more interesting to certain nations of Europe than ever the election of a king of Poland was.”[3]
In the same letter, Jefferson praised parts of the Constitution. He liked “the organization of the government into Legislative, Judiciary and Executive.” He also liked that the legislature that taxed was directly elected by the people but there was some risk in that. Jefferson liked “the negative given to the Executive with a third of either house” although he thought the Judiciary would have been better for that purpose. He said he was “captivated” by the compromise where the Senate provides “equal” representation of the States and the House of Representatives “proportional influence.” He then got into what he did “not like”. The first item was that there was no Bill of Rights. He mentioned James Wilson and said his rationale for a Bill of Rights being unnecessary was “surely gratis dictum”. Basically, whatever Wilson said, it was not binding so get it in writing. Next, “The second feature I dislike, and greatly dislike, is the abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President.” Could there be stronger language? We can see that John Adams’ view and letter had little impact!
It seems Jefferson is very careful in how he ended the letter and uses many words to do it. He was harsh in his criticism of the items he did “not like” and he was suggesting that it would be reasonable to not adopt the Constitution until it had been modified based on all the feedback they have received. What is striking in the Jefferson letters to Adams and Madison is that he does not mention any fear of the States losing their sovereignty. At least he did not say it directly. The closest he came was towards the end of his letter to Madison:
“I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.”
These letters capture Jefferson’s consistent preference for a more restrained general government rooted in the Articles’ federal principles. Though distant from the debates, his views reinforced the Anti-Federalist emphasis on limited power that would echo in later defenses of state sovereignty.
*****************************************************************
[1] Lester J. Cappon, ed., The Adams-Jefferson Letters (The University of North Carolina Press, 1959), 212.
[2] Cappon, The Adams-Jefferson Letters, 213.
[3] Thomas Jefferson, “Letter from Thomas Jefferson to James Madison (December 20, 1787),” in Cyclopedia Virgina, December 20, 1787, https://encyclopediavirginia.org/primary-documents/letter-from-thomas-jefferson-to-james-madison-december-20-1787/.
The views expressed at AbbevilleInstitute.org are not necessarily those of the Abbeville Institute.
Thank you. Am near the end of a text by Maharry and Boldin: “The Anti-Federalists Were Right? Writings of Luther Martin, George Mason, Eldridge Gerry, Cato, a group of Pennsylvania Dissenters against the Constitution’s ratification.A very sobering read.
Good article sir. I have read so much on Jefferson, over 40 books including Dumas Malone’s 6 Vol series and a condensed version of Jefferson’s writings, but I missed that part where he said he would rather have added to the old Articles. That’s some good debate material.