The Three Great Early Influences on Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), sometimes referred to as America’s Da Vinci, was the third President of the USA from 1801-1809, and a great intellect across a wide range of areas. Here, William Floyd Junior tells us about three of his great early educational influences: George Wythe, William Small, and Francis Fauquier.

Thomas Jefferson in London in 1786. By Mather Brown.

President John F. Kennedy addressing a group of Nobel Prize winners at the White House on April 29, 1962 stated, “I think this is the most extraordinary collection of human knowledge, that has gathered in the White House with the possible exception when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.” It says something about Jefferson that the obelisk that marks his grave at Monticello and lists what he believed were his greatest accomplishments, has no mention of his being President of the United States. Some historians have referred to him as “America’s Da Vinci.” However, Jefferson did not achieve all that he did alone. He had plenty of help along the way and was fortunate in the three remarkable men he met while a student at William and Mary College.

Early years

Thomas Jefferson’s earliest education began with his father Peter, a self-educated man. Young Tom’s first formal education began at the English School at age 5 and then the Latin School at 9. He would then go on to the Reverend Maury, a classical scholar, where he would remain for two years. In March 1760, Jefferson and his slave, Jupiter, packed a wagon and drove 150 miles east to Williamsburg where Thomas would take up his studies at William and Mary. It would be his first real exposure to the outside world. At the college he gained a reputation as an obsessive student, sometimes spending as many as fifteen hours a day in study and three hours practicing the violin.

During his time in Williamsburg, Jefferson would have the very good fortune of meeting three extraordinary men who were living in Williamsburg at the time. They included George Wythe, William Small, and Francis Fauquier, the Royal Governor, all of whom played a huge roll in Jefferson’s education, both inside and outside the classroom. The four would dine regularly at the Governor’s Palace where they would play music and discuss a wide range of topics. Jefferson would remark about their partee quaree, “To the habitual conversations on these occasions I owed much instruction.”

George Wythe

George Wythe (1726-1806) mastered Greek and Latin as a teenager, graduated college at nineteen and was admitted to the bar at twenty. Among Wythe’s many accomplishments included, being a self-taught lawyer, a member of the House of Burgesses and the Virginia State Legislature, delegate to the Continental Congress, assisting in writing a new legal code for the state of Virginia, a judge on Virginia’s Chancery Court, and Chief Justice of Virginia.

After two years at William and Mary, Jefferson would begin a legal apprenticeship with George Wythe that would last five years, an unusually long period during this time, in which the first year was spent at home reading the assigned texts. In addition to the reading of law books, there was a good deal of time reading in the humanities. In 1767, Jefferson would be admitted to the bar of the General Court which would consume his time until 1774, when the work of the Revolution drew him in to politics and diplomacy.

In response to the Stamp Act, Wythe would be the author of a remonstrance sent to the British government in protest. However, the Stamp Act would go into effect in November 1765.

In 1790 Wythe would resign from William and Mary. One of the reasons for his resignation was his need to travel to Richmond four times a year as the single judge on the High Court of Chancery. In the autumn of 1791, with mixed emotions, Wythe would move to Richmond and purchase a home close to the capitol. Judge Wythe would rule on a variety of issues which included rulings against cases on slavery.

In 1806, George Wythe Sweeney, the judge’s grandnephew was living in Wythe’s house. On May 25, 1806, as Wythe was having breakfast, he became violently ill. Lydia Broadnax and Michael Brown, both free African Americans living in Wythe’s house also became ill.  Brown would die on June 1. It is believed that Sweeney thought he would receive a larger share of Wythe’s will by the poisoning of Broadnax and Brown. Before passing away on June 8, Wythe amended his will to disinherit Sweeney. Sweeney was later acquitted of the murder charge. 

George Wythe probably had more direct influence on Jefferson’s thinking, by virtue of the long periods of time they spent together. Jefferson would later say that: “Mr. Wythe continued to be my faithful and beloved mentor in youth, and my most affectionate friend through life.”

William Small

After fifty years of not having seen William Small, Jefferson would write: “It was my great good fortune, and what probably fixed the destinies of my life that Dr. William Small of Scotland was then professor of mathematics, a man most profound in the useful branches of science, with a happy talent of communication, correct, gentlemanly manners & an enlarged and liberal mind. He, most happy for me, became soon attached to me & made me his daily companion when not engaged in the school.” Small’s influence over the young Thomas Jefferson was one of his most outstanding accomplishments in a life filled with outstanding accomplishments.

William Small was born October 13, 1734 in the Scottish town of Carmyllie, Forfarshire at the time of the Enlightenment. He would graduate from Marischal College in 1755, one of the most scientifically and philosophically advanced schools in the country. There is some evidence that Small studied medicine at King’s College after leaving Marischal. 

The College of William and Mary where Small would arrive in 1758 was chartered in 1693 and was practically a reproduction of Oxford and Cambridge in England. Small would teach both mathematics and moral philosophy. He would also introduce to the college the study of the natural sciences and experimental philosophy. He acquainted Jefferson and other students with Sir Isaac Newton and would open the wonders of an ordered universe while demonstrating what the mind can do.

In the six years he spent at William and Mary, Small would do much to liberalize the college. He would do away with the old practice of making students memorize lessons. Instead, he instituted the modern lecture system. It was also believed to be the first time in America when physics principles came into use in the classroom. For a year, Small would be the only recorded master of the philosophical school, which gave him control of the curriculum.

Jefferson continued to be excited by all he was learning and found that Dr. Small had awakened in him a love of mathematics that had begun with his father years earlier. It would remain his favorite subject from then on. Whenever Jefferson travelled, he would carry mathematical instruments, a ruler, and a book of logarithms.

Much to Jefferson’s disappointment, Small would return to England in 1764. The circumstances surrounding his departure were not pleasant. Among his reasons for leaving was the passing of a new rule by the college board affirming the right to remove any member of the faculty at will, something that Small could not accept. In spite of his short time at William and Mary, his influence at the college would have a long-lasting effect.

Back in England, Small would become one of the founders of the Birmingham Hospital. Although, he often felt that medicine was a prison while his real interests were mathematics, mechanics, and chemistry. 

There is some evidence that upon his return, Small may have played a central role in the founding of the Lunar Society. The Society would become the most prominent and influential of any provincial intellectual club. Meetings were normally held on the Sunday closest to the full moon so the members could more easily find their way home. When the members could not meet, they would write to one another and would ship samples and other items such as bones, fossils, vases, and urns. Their inquiries and discussions covered almost every topic imaginable.

Small’s health had been poor since leaving Virginia, possibly suffering from malaria he may have contracted while living in Williamsburg. At the beginning of 1775, Small became increasingly ill and died on February 25, 1775. On May 5, 1775, Jefferson would write to Small, not knowing that he had died months before. The letter had been sent with three dozen bottles of Moderia wine.

Francis Fauquier

Francis Fauquier would be made Lieutenant Governor of the colony of Virginia by a commission given to him in on February 10, 1758. It was the custom at this time that the Governor would remain in England with the Lieutenant Governor residing in the colony.

Thus, would begin Francis Fauquier’s term beginning in 1758 and continuing until his death in Williamsburg on March 3, 1768. Fauquier would bring his wife and elder son, Francis, with him to Virginia where the two would stay until May 1766.

In John Burke’s, “The History of Virginia from its First Settlement to the Present Day,” he describes Francis Fauquier’s arrival in Williamsburg, “as having an effect on the literature of Virginia.” He goes on to write that, “Fauquier was elegant in his manners, correct and classical in conversation and writing. He was a patron of learning and was thought of in Virginia as a model scholar.”  However, Burke would also mention Fauquier’s habit of gambling, which was very popular among the state’s elite.

Francis was the second child of John Francis and his wife, Elizabeth. He was born in late June or early July 1703. The date of Francis’ marriage to Catherine Dalston is not known, but by the start of 1733, a son, Francis, had been born and a second son, William, not long after. Francis would be elected a director of the South Sea Company, and a governor of the Foundling Hospital. He was also elected a “Fellow of the Royal Society.”

As governor, Fauquier would face a number of difficult issues, the most serious of which were the Stamp Act and the French and Indian War. The Stamp Act, passed by the British Parliament in 1765 would impose a stamp duty on newspapers and legal documents. Colonial opposition to the “Act” led to its repeal in 1766. The French and Indian War (1756-1763) was also known as the Seven Years War. It began with France’s expansion into the Ohio River Valley resulting in a number of battles between the warring parties.

Without a doubt, Fauquier’s most enjoyable times as governor were the dinners he hosted at the Governor’s Palace with his three good friends. It was here that Jefferson would learn the art of living well. At the dinners elegance and good conversation took place, two things he greatly cherished. The older men would encourage Jefferson in his playing of the violin. He would be invited to join Fauquier on the governor’s musical evenings, performing at the palace. Jefferson would later write about the time he spent at the Palace: “I have heard more good sense, more rational, and philosophical conversation than in all my life besides.” The group represented four of the most brilliant minds in Virginia at the time, and perhaps in all of the colonies.

For the remainder of his life Jefferson attempted to replicate those nights he would spend at the Governor’s Palace as a member of the “Partee Quarre.” Whether it was at Monticello, the salons of Paris, the rooms of boarding houses, or the White House, Jefferson encouraged conversation in science, the arts, politics, or other topics of the day.

Francis Fauquier would pass away on March 3, 1768 and was buried in the north isle of Bruton Parish Church in Williamsburg.

What do you think of Jefferson’s early educational influences? Let us know below.

James Madison: Helping make Thomas Jefferson an icon

This is William Bodkin’s fourth post for History is Now.  The first three touched on aspects of the lives of George Washington (link here), John Adams (link here), and Thomas Jefferson (link here). Today William discusses the fourth president of the United States, James Madison (president from 1809-1817). Madison was to have a great influence on another Founding Father – or Founding Brother – Thomas Jefferson.

I have always been fascinated by the personal relationships among the American Founders.  As I mentioned in last month’s post on Thomas Jefferson, their friendships, rivalries, alliances and disagreements still shape the country’s political discourse, with Jefferson having the most lasting influence.  However, when reading all of Jefferson’s writings, this influence and reach can come as a surprise, as it often seems that posterity was neither his intent nor his goal. 

James Madison by John Vanderlyn, 1816.

Jefferson was, of all the Founders, perhaps the truest revolutionary in spirit.  He expressed it unhesitatingly in his writings and letters when commenting on the events at the time.  One of Jefferson’s more famous expressions of his revolutionary fervor came not in the Declaration of Independence, but in a letter reflecting on Shays’ Rebellion in 1787.  Daniel Shays was a former captain in the Continental Army who took charge of a group of farmers in central and western Massachusetts protesting the Massachusetts’ government’s failure to take steps to alleviate the farmers’ debt burden, which often cost the farmers’ their property and landed them in prison.[1]  In response to a query about the rebellion, Jefferson stated “God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion.”[2]{cke_protected_1}  Jefferson noted that the United States had been independent eleven years, with only one such rebellion.  He wrote “What county before ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion?  What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?”  It was in this letter he also observed that the “tree of liberty” must be “refreshed by the blood of patriots and tyrants.”[3]

How then, was this literally bloody-minded revolutionary transformed into the guiding philosophical spirit of a nation?  The answer is simple: James Madison.  Madison spent a good portion of his political career serving as a check and balance on Jefferson’s revolutionary spirit.

Madison, the fourth President of the United States, is rightfully celebrated for many of his personal accomplishments, including being the ‘Father of the Constitution’.  He was, if not the document’s primary draftsman, (it is generally agreed that that distinction belongs to New York’s Gouverneur Morris)[4] the driving force behind the “Spirit of 1787”, with its realization that the decentralized government of the Articles of Confederation had failed.  A new, stronger central government was needed if the United States of America was to survive.  This idea, however, seemed incongruous with the revolution that had just passed.  The Spirit of 1776 had at its core an inherent distrust of removed, centralized governments that were unresponsive to the needs of the populace.[5]  The resolution of this tension between the Spirits of 1776 and 1787 can be found in Jefferson’s and Madison’s friendship.  As the sixth President, John Quincy Adams, noted, “the mutual influence of these two mighty minds upon each other” was “a phenomenon.”  Future historians, thought Adams, would, upon examining the Jefferson-Madison relationship, “discover the solution of much of our national history not otherwise easily accountable.”[6]

Take, for example, Jefferson’s most famous pronouncement on the nature of law, expressed to Madison in a letter from 1789, where he questioned “whether one generation of man had the right to bind another” with its laws.  Jefferson believed that the earth belonged only to the living.  “By law of nature, one generation is to another as independent as one nation is to another.”[7]  Jefferson expressed this idea at a delicate time.  George Washington had just taken office as the new Republic’s first president.  Congress was sitting for the first time.  Questions abounded concerning whether the new nation could last.  Surely the word of Thomas Jefferson that the work being done could or should be undone in a mere twenty years would undermine the new government’s legitimacy.

Setting Jefferson straight

Madison took care to set Jefferson straight.  When he responded to Jefferson, he first hailed the “idea” as a “great one,” that offered “interesting reflections” to legislators.  That said, Madison remarked that he was skeptical of this “great idea” in practice.  Madison wrote that a government “so often revised” could never retain its best features, even if they were the most “rational” ideas of government in an “enlightened age.”  The result, Madison stated, would be anarchy. “All the rights depending on positive laws,” such as to property would be “absolutely defunct.”  The most “violent struggles” would ensue between those interested in maintaining the status quo and those interested in bringing about the new.  All this being said, Madison thought the idea should at least be mentioned in the “proceedings of the United States,” since it might help to prevent legislators “from imposing unjust or unnecessary burdens on their successors.” [8]

Madison’s argument carried the day.  Jefferson never mentioned this idea to him again, and certainly never attempted to seriously advance the idea during his presidency.  As we know now, the great self-governance experiment envisioned by Madison has indeed carried on, allowing Jefferson, over time and history, to be honored as one of its great architects.  The idea that earth belonged only to the living, though, remained a philosophical theme to which Jefferson would return in his writings.  Indeed, it is perhaps “the single statement in the vast literature by and about Jefferson that provides a clear and deep look into his thinking about the way the world ought to work.”[9]

The relationship between Jefferson and Madison suffered not at all for this fundamental disagreement about the nature of law.  Madison went on to serve as Jefferson’s Secretary of State and then succeed him to the presidency.  Jefferson, always appreciative of Madison’s counsel, wrote toward the end of his life that “the friendship which has subsisted between us, now half a century, and the harmony of our political principles and pursuits, have been sources of constant happiness to me.”  Jefferson also recognized Madison’s frequent advocacy on his behalf, writing in the same letter that it was a “great solace” to him that Madison was “engaged in vindicating to posterity the course we have pursued.”  Jefferson acknowledged to Madison that “you have been a pillar of support through life,” and asked his old friend to “take care of me when dead, and be assured that I shall leave with you my last affections.”[10]

The often warm personal relationships between the Founding Fathers cannot be understated.  Amongst their peers, they were Founding Brothers.  It was these bonds of genuine affection that permitted, despite their conflicts, John Adams’ dying words to be of Thomas Jefferson, and despite the dueling interests of the Spirit of 1776 and the Spirit of 1787 for Jefferson to ask Madison to take care of him when dead.  The founders inspire many things in the American experience.  The nation’s political discourse continues their arguments today.  What often seems to be missing, however, is perhaps the Founders’ most important idea - that friendship can transcend partisan differences when it comes to advancing the interests of the nation.

Did you enjoy the article? If so, let the world know! Tweet about it, like it or share it by clicking on one of the buttons below!

A brief note from the author:

The good people who run this website have graciously agreed to let me contribute columns on one of my favorite topics, the presidents of the United States.  My plan is to focus, roughly once a month, on less appreciated aspects of their lives, hopefully some things that most people don’t think about when considering the presidents.  This task is far easier with the Founding Fathers; often their time as president was their least important contribution to the United States.  I anticipate some challenges with the presidents to come.  For example, other than Hawkeye in M*A*S*H being named for him, I am unsure what Franklin Pierce’s contribution to the nation was, prominent or otherwise.  In any event, I will try my best to continue delivering what I think are interesting columns about the presidents, and hope the readers agree.

[1] For a fuller discussion, see www.ushistory.org, Chapter 15 “Drafting the Constitution,” (a) Shays’ Rebellion.

[2] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to William S. Smith, Nov. 13, 1787.

[3] Id.

[4] See, e.g., “Miracle at Philadelphia” by Catherine Drinker Bowen (1966).

[5] See e.g., Ellis, Joseph, “Founding Brothers,” Preface, “The Generation.”

[6] “The Jubilee of the Constitution,” A Discourse Delivered at the Request of the New York Historical Society in the City of New York, on Tuesday the 30th of April 1839; being the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Inauguration of George Washington as President of the United States, on Thursday the 30th of April 1789 (Samuel Colman, VIII Astor House 1839).

[7] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, September 6, 1789

[8] Letter of James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, February 4, 1790.

[9] Joseph Ellis, “American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson,” 132-133 (Knopf, 1996).

[10] Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, February 17, 1826

Thomas Jefferson – The President who re-wrote the Gospels

Thomas Jefferson is today known as one of America’s greater presidents. So much so that both Democrats and Republicans claim him as their own. But he also undertook another remarkable feat – he re-wrote the Gospels to make them less miraculous. William Bodkin explains.

Few people in American history have been picked over as much as Thomas Jefferson. Of the Founding Fathers, he is considered second only to George Washington, and of the presidents, only Abraham Lincoln may have had more written about him. This is all with good reason. Jefferson, alongside John Adams, formed the original American frenemies; together they forged the creative relationship that gave birth to the United States. Their influence, and conflicts, remain to this day. The United States runs for political office in the language of Jefferson, that of personal freedom and self-determination, but governs in the language of Adams, that of a technocratic elite managing a strong central government.

A portrait of Thomas Jefferson. Circa 1791.

In my last post, I considered John Adams’ Declaration of Independence, the May 15, 1776 resolution he believed to be the real Declaration, consigning Jefferson’s to a mere ceremonial afterthought.[1] Adams, eyes firmly locked on posterity, seemed to compete for immortality with Jefferson. However, despite recent efforts to rehabilitate the image of the second president, Adams, who knew he had made himself obnoxious to his colleagues[2], has largely lost this battle.

Jefferson, by contrast, is beloved as the genius Founding Father whom everyone claims as their own.  The Democrats revere him for founding their party, one of the oldest in the world. The Republicans, and the tea party movement in particular, love to quote his language of personal freedom and revolution, like invoking his statement that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”[3] All agree that his “ceremonial afterthought” should be celebrated for all time.

And yet, though he has won history’s affections, there’s an excellent chance Jefferson would be irritated by being worshiped or followed today.  After all, Jefferson had “sworn eternal hostility” against “any form of tyranny over the mind of man,”[4] believing that one generation of humanity could not bind another with its ideas, or even its laws. Jefferson said that it was “self-evident” that “the earth belongs to the living.”[5] Indeed, were he alive today, he would probably encourage us to discard things such as the “original intent” of the Founding Fathers much in the same way he discarded the work of the Evangelists who wrote the Christian Gospels.

REWRITING THE GOSPELS

Jefferson was not known for his devotion to religion. Abigail Adams wrote, after Jefferson had defeated her husband John Adams for the presidency, that the young nation had “chosen as our chief Magistrate a man who makes no pretensions to the belief of an all wise and supreme Governor of the World.” Mrs. Adams did not think Jefferson was an atheist. Rather, Jefferson believed religion to only be as “useful as it may be made a political Engine” and that its rituals were a mere charade. Mrs. Adams concluded that Jefferson was “not a believer in the Christian system.”[6]

Jefferson, who always professed a high regard for the teachings of Jesus, found the Gospels to be “defective as a whole,” with Jesus’ teachings “mutilated, misstated, and often unintelligible.”[7] Jefferson seemed most offended by the accounts of miracles. The Gospels could be improved, he concluded, by removing the magical thinking - that is, anything that could not be explained by human reason.

Following his presidency, Jefferson reconciled with John Adams once Adams had recovered from the bitter sting of presidential defeat. Jefferson confided in his old friend about the project he had undertaken to rewrite the Gospels. Jefferson wrote to Adams that “by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book,” he was able to separate out “the matter which is evidently his (Jesus’),” which Jefferson found to be “as distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill.”[8] Adams responded favorably to Jefferson’s project, commenting “if I had eyes and nerves I would go through both Testaments and mark all that I understand.”[9]

Jefferson, though, was not finished. He believed the effort he described to Adams was “too hastily done”.  It had been “the work of one or two evenings only, while I lived in Washington.”[10] Think, for a moment, how astounding that is. Jefferson’s first effort at reworking the Gospels came while he “lived in Washington,” meaning while he was president. So for fun, after steering the American ship of state, he rewrote the Gospels.

A NEW WAY OF THINKING

While working on his second Gospel revision, Jefferson described his complete disdain for the Evangelists. He found their work to be underpinned by “a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstitions, fanaticisms and fabrications.” Yet he still believed that “intermixed with these” were “sublime ideas of the Supreme Being”, “aphorisms and precepts of the purest morality and benevolence,” that had been “sanctioned by a life of humility, innocence and simplicity of manners, neglect of riches, absence of worldly ambition and honors.” All had been expressed, by Jesus, “with an eloquence and persuasiveness which have not been surpassed.” Jefferson could not accept that Jesus’ purest teachings were the “inventions of the groveling authors who relate them.” Those teachings were “far beyond the powers of their feeble minds.” Yes, the Evangelists had shown that there was a character named Jesus, but his “splendid conceptions” could not be considered “interpolations from their hands.” To Jefferson, the task was clear once more. He would “undertake to winnow this grain from its chaff.”  It would not “require a moment's consideration”, as the difference “is obvious to the eye and to the understanding.”[11]

At the end of this process, Jefferson, in his seventy-sixth year, had completed his Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, extracted from the Gospels in Greek, Latin, French & English, an account of the life of Jesus, bereft of any mention of the miraculous. No wedding feast at Cana, no resurrection of Lazarus, and ending with the disciples laying Jesus in the tomb, rolling a great stone to the door, and then departing.

Jefferson’s rewriting of the Gospels is a perfect distillation of his belief that each generation could take and shape the meaning of the Gospels, or really, anything, for their own purposes. Jefferson took these beliefs to his gravestone. Prior to his death, he chose to list there, of all his accomplishments, his three great contributions to the freedom of thought: “Author of the Declaration of American Independence and the Virginia Statutes on Religious Freedom; Father of the University of Virginia.” Jefferson hoped, perhaps, to inspire successive generations not to follow his words, but rather, to live by his example, and cast off the intellectual bonds of the past in order to create a new way of thinking.

Did you find this article interesting? If so, tell the world! Share it, tweet about it or like it by clicking on one of the buttons below…

[1] See, Ellis, Joseph, Revolutionary Summer: The Birth of American Independence, Chapter 1 , “Prudence Dictates.” (Knopf 2013).

[2] Id.

[3] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Novmeber 13, 1787.

[4] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800.

[5] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, September 6, 1789

[6] Letter of Abigail Adams to Mary Cranch (her sister) dated February 7, 1801.

[7] Jefferson, Thomas. “Syllabus of an estimate of the merit of the Doctrines of Jesus, compared with those of others.” College of William and Mary, Digital Archive (https://digitalarchive.wm.edu/handle/10288/15130).

[8]Letter of Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, October 13, 1813.

[9] Letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, November 14, 1813.

[10] Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Rev. F.A. van der Kemp, May 25, 1816.

[11] Letter of Thomas Jefferson to William Short, August 4, 1820.

America’s Great 19th Century Statement of Intent

In this fascinating article, Wout Vergauwen tells us about the Monroe Doctrine, an Empire of Liberty – and America’s expansion across the West and beyond into the rest of the American Continent.

THE MONROE DOCTRINE AND MANIFEST DESTINY

“We shall divert through our own Country a branch of commerce which the European States have thought worthy of the most important struggles and sacrifices, and in the event of peace … we shall form to the American union a barrier against the dangerous extension of the British Province of Canada and add to the Empire of liberty an extensive and fertile Country thereby converting dangerous Enemies into valuable friends.”

Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States

Thomas Jefferson was a great many things, but above all he was a visionary. Yet, it is hard to imagine that even he understood to the fullest extent what his Empire of Liberty could become. Several presidents have, at least to a certain extent, broadened the interpretation. Whereas Jefferson’s empire ideally stretched, as Katharine Lee Bates wrote “from sea to shining sea,” it would become an idea that was applied to the United States’ expansionist efforts, both at home and abroad. However, the first extension of Jefferson’s Empire of Liberty almost caused Mr. Madison to lose US territory in the War of 1812. Luckily for the Americans, the British were too busy fighting Napoleon to pursue their efforts in North America. Ultimately, the British and the Americans signed the 1814 Treaty of Ghent, reaching a modus vivendi on the expense of the Native Americans. Yet, it quickly became clear that Uncle Joe intended to look across the border. 

A portrait of Thomas Jefferson from 1791. At the time Jefferson was Secretary of State. Painted by Charles Willson Peale.

When the Spanish failed to control their colonial possessions in the Americas, another opportunity arose for the United States to expand their sphere of influence. Given that the United States had only gained independence as recently as half a century earlier, they did not feel confident to invade a world power’s possessions, even if that world power was waning. However, colonial insurrection in present-day Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Peru, Colombia, and Mexico was too good a chance to let go by. Both the Monroe administration and Congress favored action of at least some sort, because the possibility of having Spain intervene in Latin America would first of all pose a threat to American security. Second of all, reinforced Spanish colonies would also prevent any further expansion of influence across the continent.

Although still dreaming of an Empire of Liberty, caution was required. Spain did indeed still possess Florida, and it would have been unwise to provoke more than strictly necessary. However, immediately after Florida was ceded to the United States, Washington was inevitably going to act quickly. As soon as 1822, the United States recognize the rebelling colonies as independent countries. And besides the ideological ‘support-another-former-colony’ idea, there were several important reasons for having done so. Indeed, a Holy Alliance consisting of Austria, France, Prussia, and Russia had formed in Europe, trying to uphold monarchy and suppress liberalism. The rumors were that after crushing rebellions in both Spain and Italy, the alliance might help Spain to regain control over its prestigious colonies. In a statement supported by Congress, James Monroe read a statement written by future president John Quincy Adams. The American continents, he declared, “are henceforth not to be considered subjects for future colonization by any European power.” That might have been the end of it supposing that there was such a thing as a capable American army. But this was 1823.

FROM TEXAS TO THE WORLD

Just as in 1814, the Americans had the British to thank. Indeed, making a bold statement is one thing. Upholding it is another. Luckily, British interests aligned with America’s. By then, the British had already set up very profitable trade routes with Spain’s former colonies, and they were not going to give them up easily. Already in the early 18th century James Thomson wrote “Rule, Britannia! Rule the waves.” And yes, by 1823, they did. Commanding the most powerful Navy ever seen, King George IV was not going to let an Armada supported by the Holy Alliance cross the Atlantic. The Spanish, still remembering the fate of the Great Armada, decided to hold back and let the Americans have it their way.

Finally having gained the confidence they had lacked since 1776, the Americans went the full mile by 1845. The trigger was, once again, a foreign threat. Although this threat was much less serious when compared to previous ones, some Americans still believed the British might cause trouble in California, Oregon, and Texas. The latter is a special case here. Ever since the Lone Star Republic gained independence from Mexico in 1836, a large majority of the population had wanted to join the United States. Southern states favored the admission of Texas, yet Northern states originally opposed the admission. They feared that Texas might be admitted as a slave state – or worse, divided in up to five slave states – and thus disturb the balance in Congress. Even though a treaty was finally drafted on February 27, 1844, it was not signed. John L. O’Sullivan, an editor from New York, urged President Polk to finally sign the treaty and admit Texas to the union, if only because it was their “manifest destiny.” The term quickly became popular and thrived on the assumption that Providence had intended the United States to control the entire North American continent.

Even though successful attempts were never made to annex Canada, as was Mr. Madison’s dream, Manifest Destiny guided US policy for the rest of the century. Whether manifest destiny caused Polk to annex Texas in 1845 is not entirely clear, and your guess is as good as mine. Yet, in the subsequent eight years, undoubtedly guided by manifest destiny, the US would gain control over the remaining third of its contingent states. An 1846 treaty with Britain gained them Oregon country, also including Washington and Idaho. An 1848 treaty with Mexico gained them present-day California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. Finally, the 1853 Gadsen purchase gained the United States the final part of its contingent states – a thirty thousand square mile border area between Mexico and the United States.

Ultimately, by the end of the century, President Theodore Roosevelt would square the circle by amending the Monroe doctrine, thereby confirming America’s global intent. His Roosevelt Corollary was thus the capstone of Thomas Jefferson’s Empire of Liberty.

Did you enjoy this article? If so, let the world know. Tweet about it, like it, or share it by clicking one of the buttons below!