Discussing the limits of Congressional power, in an autograph letter to Nathan Read of Belfast, Maine, signed by O’Brien, February 22, 1828, at Washington, D.C.
4to. 4-pages (one sheet of American laid paper, folded). Approximately 750 words in ink. Folded for mailing and accompanied by its original franked envelope, bearing a Washington cancellation stamp and O’Brien’s red wax seal (broken). Accompanied by Read’s retained copies of two letters he wrote to O’Brien, the first prompting O’Brien’s response here, the second Read’s response to O’Brien’s comments (Feb. 7 and March 13, 1828; folio, four pages total, approximately 1000 words, each with editing and passages crossed through, approximately 1250 words total). Read (1759-1859) served in Congress, from Massachusetts, 1800-1803, and was a well-regarded judge, farmer, and inventor during his years in Belfast, Maine, 1807-1849. Very good. For the 3 letters and envelope, , Item #70153
Responding to a recent letter from Read (1759-1849; U.S. House of Representatives, 1800-1803) and apparently differing from his viewpoint, O’Brien writes primarily of dubious Constitutional grounds for congressional action on internal improvements and on education, seeing both as doomed to inequity, inefficiency, and excessive cost: “I am not for loading the national government with subjects that can be better & more economically performed by the constituent parts of the Union.” As evidence he cites an example: that of John C. Calhoun, then Vice-President, who had earlier let the controversial “Rip Rap Contract” as Secretary of War and was accused of sharing in profits from it. The letter addresses issues of the day, summarizes a portion of its author’s philosophy of government, and echoes arguments continued through every American era. Read’s first letter shows an impatience with the state of affairs: “But for the virulence of party spirit, excited and kept alive by ambitious and designing men, we should be not only a prosperous but very happy people … as my hopes for the preservation of the Union, for any great length of time, principally rest on the prospect of a more general diffusion of knowledge among the people & a consequent improvement in their manners & morals … this, in my humble opinion, can only be done efficiently by a liberal provision, made by the national government, for the suitable education of youth in every section of the Union.” Read responds to O’Brien’s reply, in part: “Whereas the public lands in the course of a few years, if not appropriated to some objects entirely national & universally satisfactory, will be a bone of contention & may operate as a bounty, at some public expense, to the states adjacent to them, to sever the Union.
Price: $475.00