Thomas Jefferson, a Character Sketch | Page 4

Magna Charta was accepted and signed with
unbounded enthusiasm and that scarcely any opposition to it appeared,
but the contrary was the fact.
While Jefferson was the author of the instrument, John Adams, more
than any one man or half a dozen men brought about its adoption.
When the question was afterward asked him, whether every member of
congress cordially approved it, he replied, "Majorities were constantly
against it. For many days the majority depended on Mr. Hewes of
North Carolina. While a member one day was reading documents to
prove that public opinion was in favor of the measure, Mr. Hewes
suddenly started upright, and lifting up both hands to heaven, as if in a
trance, cried out:
'It is done, and I will abide by it.'
I would give more for a perfect painting of the terror and horror of the
faces of the old majority at that moment than for the best piece of
Raphael."
Jefferson has given a synopsis of the arguments for and against the
adoption of the Declaration. It will be remembered that the hope of the
colonies or new States, even after the war had continued for a
considerable time, was not so much independence as to extort justice
from Great Britain.
Had this been granted, the separation would have been deferred and
when it came, as come it must, probably would have been peaceable.
At the same time, there was a strenuous, aggressive minority who was
insistent from the first for a complete severance of the ties binding us to
the mother country.
The debate in congress showed that New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and South Carolina were not ready

to take the irrevocable step, but it was evident that they were fast
approaching that mood, and the wise leaders tarried in order to take
them in their company.
In the vote of July 1, the Pennsylvania and South Carolina delegates
still opposed, while those from New York did the same, contrary to
their own convictions but in obedience to home instructions, which
later were changed.
The signs of unanimity became unmistakable on the Second, and two
days later, as every one knows, the adoption of the Declaration took
place, though it was not until the Second of August that all the
members, excepting John Dickinson had signed.
Five years passed before the Articles of Confederation were formally
adopted by the states, by which time it had become clear that they must
totally fail of their purpose, for each state decided for itself whether to
respond to the demands of congress. The poison of nullification thus
infused into the body politic at its birth bore baleful fruit in the years
that followed.
On six separate occasions, there were overt acts on the part of the
States.
The first occurred in 1798, when Virginia and Kentucky passed
nullification resolutions.
The second was the attempt of New England in 1803 to form a northern
confederacy, comprising five New England States, and New York and
New Jersey. The third was Aaron Burr's wild scheme in the Southwest.
The fourth, the resolution of the New England States to withhold
cooperation in the War of 1812.
The fifth, the nullification acts of South Carolina in 1832.
The sixth and last, the effort of eleven states to form the Southern
Confederacy. This brought the burning issue to a head and settled the

question for the ages to come.
It seems incredible in these times that the country submitted for a
month to the intolerable Alien and Sedition acts. Should any
congressman propose their reenactment to-day, he would be looked
upon as a crank and be laughed out of court. They were enacted when
Jefferson was Vice President and were the creation of the brilliant
Alexander Hamilton, whose belief was in a monarchy rather than a
republic.
The Sedition act made it a felony punishable with a fine of $5000 and
five years imprisonment for persons to combine in order to impede the
operation of any law of the United States, or to intimidate persons from
taking Federal office, or to commit or advise a riot or insurrection or
unlawful assembly.
It declared further that the writing or publishing of any scandalous,
malicious or false statement against the president or either house of
congress should be punishable by a fine of $2000 and imprisonment for
two years.
It will be noted that this law precluded all free discussion of an act of
congress, or the conduct of the president.
In other words, it was meant to be the death blow to freedom of speech.
But bad as it was, the Alien act, which congress passed at the same
session, 1798, was ten fold worse.
There had been much unrest caused by the intermeddling of foreigners
in the States, and