Chapter Eleven: On Those Healthy Hills Near Panama

 

The Doctor Examined, or Why William Thornton Did Not Design the Octagon House or the Capitol

by Bob Arnebeck

Table of Contents

Chapter Eleven: On Those Healthy Hills Near Panama

Capitol in 1800

In a brief memoir about her husband written just after his death in 1828, Mrs. Thornton regretted his embracing "a greater variety of sciences" because it prevented him from attaining what he truly wanted. She credited him for genius in many fields - "philosophy, politics, Finance, astronomy, medicine, Botany, Poetry, painting, religion, agriculture, in short all subjects by turns occupied his active and indefatigable mind." She concluded that "had his genius been confined to fewer subjects, had he concentrated his study in some particular science, he would have attained Celebrity."(1) 

Beginning in 1802, Thornton's genius was confined by bureaucracy, and he attained celebrity. He vexed patent applicants by claiming a free speech right to attack their patents, and vexed president's by practicing the same right to undermine their foreign policy. Congress refused to raise his salary and in response he bullied inventors to share their profits. He did wrest enough support from congress to hire workers and oversee Dr. Thornton's "museum of the arts" that became a notable tourist destination. Congress still refused to raise his salary, but he was the best known bureaucrat in the city.(2) Not surprisingly, he wanted more, especially continued control of the Capitol design as well as credit for inventing the steamboat and royalties from whoever built one. In regards to both the Capitol and steamboat, he deceived himself as to extent of his accomplishments. He was not successful convincing contemporaries and once Jefferson left office lost any influence over the design and construction of the Capitol. However, historians believe his claims about the Capitol and accepting those claims makes it easier to credit Thornton for designing the General's, Law's and Tayloe's houses. As for his claims about the steamboat, they too prove that Thornton's writings are not the best source for any history of the period unless the goal of the historian is the glorification of Thornton.

On June 21, 1802, a little after two weeks of contemplating the meager file of American patents, Thornton wrote to his old master Dr. Fell. A letter he wrote to him in 1797 celebrated his Capitol design but didn't mention his work with the steamboat company. The one written in June 1802 glorified his work on the steamboat which predated his Capitol design: "I engaged in constructing a steamboat capable of carrying 150 passengers and made it go eight miles an hour through dead water...." He didn't mention Fitch and blamed the company's failure on his orders not being obeyed. As he left for Tortola, he had told the company's board to make the boat bigger but not to simplify it. They did and it failed. As he put it to Fell, he had to work against "wind, tide and ignorance." He overcame the first two but "the last is an overwhelming flood." Then he turned to the Capitol but at the part where "I was opposed by regular architects from France, Italy and various other countries," which repeated what he wrote in 1797, the draft ended and what he actually sent is unknown.(3)

In the summer of 1802, once Superintendent Munroe dismissed Hoban, Thornton had no rival at Capitol. Then the debacle of 1795, that darkened his relationship with President Washington, almost repeated itself. In October 1802, just before congress returned for its second session in the city, the president, who got his exercise by riding around on horseback, became alarmed. He wrote to Claxton: "Observing that the roof of the Representatives chambers has sunk in the middle, that the walls are cracked in several places and pressing out from the perpendicular, I think it necessary that the cause should be examined into by good & experienced persons...." He mentioned Hadfield and Blagden, but not Thornton, Hoban and Lovering. The next day, the experts blamed the roof "which presses the walls outward," and recommended buttressing the walls. No one in the city had yet built an oval roof.(4)

On November 2, 1802, a week after the experts made their report, Jefferson asked Benjamin Latrobe to come the city. He had become Philadelphia's most prominent architect and engineer, an active fellow in the Philosophical Society, and ardent Republican, as supporters of Jefferson were called. The president wanted to put most of the US Navy's frigates in dry docks along the Eastern Branch and wanted Latrobe to design and build the dry docks. That was a cost-cutting measure. With ships on land and their captains only getting half pay, money saved could pay down the national debt. Latrobe drew elaborate plans but congress tabled the idea, and with relatively little debate.(5)

In 1803, the city experienced its second short session of congress which adjourned on March 3. Capitol Hill boarding houses emptied. Law, Carroll and lesser landlords suffered. However, that year there were advantages for the city. One of the longer unresolved debates was on a resolution to leave the city. One of the shortest debates ended with a $50,000 appropriation to build the South Wing. During that short debate a friend of the administration assured his colleagues that an "eminent architect" vouched for that sum as sufficient. No one asked about the design of the South Wing.(6)

On March 6, the president, who had invited the Thorntons to dinner, sent a message to F Street asking Thornton to "come a quarter or half an hour before the company, say at three a clock & bring with you the plans of the Capitol...." He also sent two letters to Latrobe who was back in Philadelphia. One offered him the position of "Surveyor of the Public Buildings," and asked him to get to the city as soon as possible and get to work. In a "private letter" sent the same day, he admitted that $50,000 was not enough money. "I think it will raise the external walls to the uppermost window-sills, being those of the entresols; and I have no doubt Congress at their next session will give another 50,000. D. which will compleat that wing inside & out in the year 1804."(7) The president likely had previously discussed the South Wing with Latrobe. A word like entresols, a French variant on  mezzanine, does not pop up in a letter out of the blue. He sent a "private letter" because of his devious way of financing the project. He did not mention consulting with Thornton.

What conversation the president had with Thornton a half hour before dinner is not known. At some time, the president asked Thornton to show how committee rooms would be distributed in the South Wing. There was no immediate follow-up with Thornton. On March 7, the president left for three weeks vacation at Monticello. 

Latrobe left Philadelphia as soon as he could and soon after his arrival, he consulted Thornton. He asked why the principal chambers were on the basement floor, and Thornton told him that he was advised to lower them to allow for greater height in the chamber for the House. He did not mention Jefferson. Latrobe inspected what had been built and in a long report to the president, he noted that the elliptical room seemed to be "intended for the permanent basement of the elliptical colonnade." He found its foundation poorly laid and "wholly unfit to carry the weight of the colonnade." The surrounding foundation walls of the rectangular building also had to be pulled down. Then he criticized the workmanship and design of North Wing and, not knowing Jefferson's role in its design, ridiculed the South Wing at length. But he stopped short of demeaning the Capitol: "The Senate chamber independent of its slight construction and badness of workmanship is otherwise a handsome room, and if justice should be done to the vestibule in the execution, Europe will not be able to exhibit a more magnificent public Saloon. It will be worthy of the intention of the building." Latrobe also attested to Thornton's "talent."(8)

Latrobe began hiring men and arranging to acquire building material, but also had work to do in Philadelphia and on the Delaware-Chesapeake canal. There is no evidence that the president replied to his report in writing or in person. Although Latrobe was seldom on the scene, faulty foundation walls were brought down and the permanent South Wing began to arise around the buttressed temporary House chamber. John Lenthall, Latrobe's assistant, sent the president a copy of the weekly, largely statistical, report he sent to Latrobe. When Lenthall shared a drawing of curious building technique in the old wall, Latrobe described it as more evidence of "Thornton's stupid genius." While in the city, Latrobe did mock battle with Thornton over their competing designs for a monument for the General. Latrobe had proposed a pyramid-like mausoleum near the President's house to honor the General. At a social gathering,  Thornton held up Latrobe's design as done by an engineer with no artistic sensibilities. Then to the amusement of the gathered, Latrobe mocked Thornton's eternity with a snake around her neck. Thornton seemed offended but Latrobe thought they remained friends.(9)

However, as he took his measure of Thornton, Latrobe balanced his discovery of his flaws as an architect, with his liking the man and his respect for his multifarious activities. For two years they were friendly. In 1802, the president had invited them both to the same dinner along with the Madisons and a few other notables. During the city's social season the Latrobes enjoyed being entertained by the Thorntons. The doctor talked about all manner of things. He offered himself as a public intellectual. In 1803, the government swelled the national debt by buying the Louisiana territory from the France for $15 millions. In 1804, Thornton published a 24 page letter that proposed increasing the debt by buying all the country's slaves, putting them to work on canals and roads, and then freeing them in the outer reaches of the newly acquired territory, thus keeping the races separated forever. He also amused the city's politicians by offering "a new confederate system of Government for the United States." On the back burner was his plan for "an universal system of education; the result of which in his opinion would be to produce in fifty years time a greater number of ingenious and learned men in the United States, than in all the world besides."(10)

In February 1804, Latrobe's plans for the upcoming building season required presidential approval. Latrobe also had to appear before a House committee in support of the  appropriation for the work. The elliptical room had to be taken down, forcing the House back to the North Wing, and Latrobe had to describe what would replace it. Latrobe anticipated a crisis even though the president offered to talk to Thornton about difficulties with the plan. Latrobe went to see Thornton first and they had a brief encounter outside Thornton's office in the State department.

In a letter to the president, Latrobe paraphrased Thornton's stance: "that no difficulties existed in his plan, but such as those that were made by those too ignorant to remove them...." Latrobe allowed that his first impulse was to resign, but told the president he would make the project his "difficulte vaincue." That is to say, given the design in hand, the only boon to his reputation as architect would be that he managed to build such an impossible plan. The president responded immediately and sympathetically, but somewhat disingenuously. He took refuge in a simplified history of the design process: "on Dr. Thornton's plan of the Capitol, the North Wing has been executed, and the South raised one story. In order to get along with any public undertaking it is necessary that some stability of plan to observed. Nothing impedes progress as much as perpetual changes of design. I yield to this principle in the present case more willingly because the plan begun for the Representative room will in my opinion be more handsome and commodious than any thing which can be proposed on the same area." The president neglected to mention Hallet's critique of Thornton's winning plan which a committee of experts chaired by Jefferson echoed. Plus, the "handsome and commodious" room was Jefferson's idea, not Dr. Thornton's. However, Jefferson did assure Latrobe that if circumstances arose in the building process changes could be made. In his reply, Latrobe assured the president that changes had to be made but the "elliptical form and the colonnade, the principal features of the work will remain." Then he closed the letter railing at Thornton and vowing that while Thornton had bested Hallet and ruined Hadfield, he would not beat Latrobe: "If I felt the slightest respect for the original author as an architect, I should be fearless as respects to myself but placed as I am on the very spot from which Hallet and Hadfield fell, attacked by the same weapons, and with the same activity, nothing but a resolute defense can save me."(11)

Latrobe was misreading the history of the design process. Hallet had argued that Thornton's ideas were actually his. When Hadfield presented his plan to President Washington in Philadelphia, Hoban, not Thornton, was also there and defended the adopted plan which had been drawn by Hallet. By attacking Thornton, Latrobe gave the doctor undeserved credit for the design, but how else could he disabuse the president from his belief that Thornton's design was worth building?  

Then the next day, in writing, he assured the House committee that Thornton's plan had the force of law and that he would  build it and have it ready by 1806, thus he acceded to the president's view. Then he shared a more accurate history of the design. He noted that the original design was missing, that Hallet was hired to correct its deficiencies which he did until he was sacked. Then Hadfield succeeded him and, with only imperfect sketches to work with, he tried to correct the "radical deficiencies of the design." With the loss of Hadfield, Blagden "assured the excellent execution of the freestone work of the North Wing." Latrobe obliquely referenced the role the author of the design played while he was a commissioner: "The most indisputable evidence was brought before me to prove that no sections or detailed drawings of the building existed excepting those that were made from time to time by Messrs. Hallet and Hadfield for their own use in the direction of the work." He then listed ten objections to the plan, principally the need for more rooms to make the chamber convenient. He assured the committee that changes he recommended have been "laid before the President of the United States and received his serious consideration."(12) A little over a week later, in a letter to Lenthall, Latrobe vented his spleen: "when once erected the absurdity can never be recalled and the public explanation can only amount to this that one president was blockhead enough to adopt a plan, which another another was fool enough to retain, when he might have altered it." Not until his 1811 letter to Latrobe would Jefferson reveal how much he was invested in the design of the South Wing.(13)

Thornton sent a letter to Latrobe couched in terms that generally served as a prologue to a duel: "I am sorry to be obliged to declare that your Letter to the Committee is, as it respects me, not only ungentlemanly but false." Latrobe scrambled to defuse the situation. He joked about a duel and complimented Thornton for his ideas about slavery. Thornton confirmed in a letter to Latrobe that some months ago he had been prepared to take a dispute to the field, and, for the moment left it at that.(14) 

Ironically, a month after his letter to the committee, Latrobe wrote to Lenthall and fumed about a senator's proposal to save money by stopping work on the Capitol,  moving congress into the President's house, and the president into a private house. Latrobe observed that "there is absolutely not a house in Washington into which he might go, excepting Mr. Tayloe's." If Thornton had designed the house would the feud between Thornton and Latrobe have raged for almost a decade?(15)

On January 1, 1805, Thornton responded to Latrobe's 1804 report to congress with a printed letter, "To the members of the House of Representatives replying to criticisms of Benjamin H. Latrobe on the Capitol." In it, Thornton made much of Latrobe complimenting his plan when he first saw it: "....he never saw any plan of a building beside his own that he would deign to build.... I must own that I can not easily conceive why previous to this appointment I should hear nothing but approbation of my plan and after his appointment nothing but condemnation."

The witnesses that he summoned to prove that his design of South Wing could be built were anonymous: "It has been deemed practicable by very skillful and practical architects and I have never heard it disputed by other than himself." He claimed that the old board had asked him to superintend the construction of the Capitol. He trusted Hallet and then had no difficulty correcting his mistakes. He made sure that Hadfield didn't make any. As for drawing sections, he mocks the idea that Hallet could have drawn one because he never superintended the building. The only section extant is attributed to Hallet. Referring to Hadfield, Thornton wrote: "the other did not make a single section that I ever heard of, but requested sections of me, which I drew, of which Mr. Munroe informs me he had informed Mr. Latrobe." However, Munroe was not the board's clerk when Hadfield made his request, and Thornton artfully verified his claim by merely offering evidence that someone else remembered his making the claim. He doesn't explain what happened to the sections he drew, let alone produce them.(16)

Neither of the rival newspapers, the pro-administration National Intelligencer or the Washington Federalist, printed or mentioned Thornton's letter. Latrobe did not respond to it, nor did Hallet and Hadfield. The French architect had lost interest in the city and evidently architecture, too. The English architect was in the city, but had received minor jobs from the administration, the jail and Marine barracks, as well as the Custis mansion. He had no reason to invite controversy.(17)

Hoban likely knew about the Capitol design process better than anyone, but he concentrated his fire on Latrobe for his impugning the design and workmanship of the roof of the President's house. The first newspaper war that would flare up involving Latrobe was initiated by Hoban who, in the March 6, 1805, Washington Federalist, lampooned the often absent and seemingly always arrogant architect. Lovering was among those who attested to the quality of work done on the President's house roof when Hoban was in charge. Anonymous squibs in Federalist mocking Latrobe's work at the Capitol soon followed, and Latrobe suspected that Thornton wrote them. He probably didn't. He kept to the high road, right to the president.(18)

Beginning in 1805, Thornton had another distraction that he was convinced would make millions for himself and investors. Gold had been found in North Carolina in 1799. In 1805, Thornton toured sites with an eye trained by Faujas in the summer of '84 for identifying rock formations and minerals. He calculated how much land had to be bought, formed a company in the federal city and even Latrobe bought stock in it.(19) In the summer of 1806, just before he left for North Carolina, Thornton wrote a letter to Madison sounding an alarm for the fate of the Capitol dome. He cited an example of what must be done. He claimed that in 1794, President Washington had personally banished Hallet after he tried to change Thornton's design of the Capitol. That described something that had never happened which didn't prevent Thornton from applying that lesson to defeat a threat that didn't exist: "Mr. Latrobe, as if determined to oppose every thing previously intended has carried up a large block of building on the very foundation intended to be taken up, by which the Dome is so encroached on that the part already carried up on the north side will be useless. I am confident the President could never have permitted such a deviation from the original Intention if it had been made known to him. I think it my Duty to mention it now before it be too late to prevent its progress."

Madison sent Thornton's letter to the president and described it as "disclosing the perturbation excited in his mind, by some of the operations of Mr. la Trobe." Jefferson took Thornton's letter more seriously and replied to Madison: "If Dr. Thornton’s complaint of Latrobe’s having built inconsistently with his plan of the middle part of the capitol be correct, it is without my knolege, & against my instructions. For altho’ I consider that plan as incapable of execution, yet I determined that nothing should be done which would not leave the question of it’s execution free." That is to say, nothing should be done to preclude Thornton and congress from thinking that his plan would be carried out even though both Jefferson and Latrobe knew the plan was "incapable of execution."(20)

Latrobe 1806 drawing of his idea for finished Capitol

Thornton, his wife and mother-in-law stopped at Monticello on their way back from North Caroline. Mrs. Thornton kept a journal during the trip, but didn't mention any topic of conversation at Monticello. How Jefferson replied to Thornton's letter is unknown, but Latrobe was not banished and Thornton soon made clear that he was an anti-administration Federalist. Madison jokingly accused him of being another Vicar of Bray.(21)

Latrobe by Peale

In 1806, Latrobe redesigned the central part of the building that eliminated the Conference Room and put a grand stairway up to a portico with a much longer colonnade. The dome remained. However, he didn't ask the president to approve the changes. Delays in finishing the South Wing precluded inviting more scrutiny from congress. Latrobe had to make annual reports on his progress to congress.  In the fall of 1806, he also sent a special "private letter" giving more personal details of problems he faced, one of which was the design contest that Thornton won. He pointed out that while popular, contests attract amateurs who know nothing about building. On March 3, 1807, at the end of the short session, Thornton had friends distribute a satire on Latrobe's private letter. "Index to my Private Letter & C." had Latrobe making light of his own mistakes, and expressing contempt for General Washington who need not be entombed under the dome because "he was not higher in the scale of creation than some other great men or myself."(22)

In the fall  of 1807, as the House moved into its new chamber, the editor of the National Intelligencer asked Latrobe to describe the South Wing. He began by describing Thornton's plan as a striking combination of circumlinear rooms: two circular rooms in the middle, the semi-circular Senate chamber and the larger elliptical House chamber. But then he explained that to fit in other convenient features, he had to change the elliptical chamber into a parallelogram with two semi-circles at each end. Then he described the North Wing and lauded Hadfield. "His exquisite taste appears in many parts of the North wing, particularly in the introduction of the impost tablature which crowns the basement story and gives an harmonious character to the whole mass which it could not have otherwise possessed." Then, somewhat cancelling that remark, Latrobe added that his job building the South Wing would have been easier and the interior even better if he had not been constrained by its exterior having to match the North Wing's.(23)

Thornton found the condescension and insults intolerable. He attacked Latrobe and the South Wing in the April 27, 1808, Washington Federalist. He claimed that he had a drawing to the North Wing proving that he drew the elements that Latrobe lauded before Hadfield was hired. In 1819, Hadfield would claim in a letter to the editor that he had designed the tablature and Thornton didn't respond. Then, he damned Latrobe for squeezing the elliptical room. A growing nation with ever more representatives needed more room not less. Then, he turned to Latrobe's motives. Why does he go against the wish of General Washington to have Thornton's design built? He did so to spite the General for not trusting him: "...for that great man was asked by a very respectable gentleman now living, why he did not employ Mr. Latrobe: 'because I can place no confidence in him whatever-' was the answer." Thornton also ridiculed every decoration in the South wing: an eagle looked like an Egyptian ibis, Liberty on an eagle looked like Leda and the swan, country people mistook an eagle on the frieze of an entablature "for the skin of an owl, such as they have seen nailed on their barn doors." He ridiculed the echoes in the House chamber. He dismissed Latrobe as a "carver of chimney pieces in London" who came to America a "missionary of the Moravians." Thornton attacked other buildings Latrobe had designed and his gate at the Navy Yard.

Then he defended his own standing as an architect, not by  revealing other buildings that he had designed, but by striking grand chords:

I travelled in many parts of Europe, and saw several of the masterpieces of the ancients. I have studied the works of the best masters, and my long attention to drawing and painting would enable me to form some judgment of the difference of proportions. An acquaintance with some of the grandest of the ancient structures, a knowledge of the orders of Architecture, and also of the genuine effects of proportion furnish the requisites of the great outlines of composition. The minutiae are attainable by a more attentive study of what is necessary to the execution of such works, and the whole must be subservient to the conveniences required. Architecture embraces many subordinate studies, and it must be admitted is a profession which requires great talents, great taste, great memory. I do not pretend to any thing great, but must take the liberty of reminding Mr. Latrobe, that physicians study a greater variety of sciences than gentlemen of any other profession.... The Louvre in Paris was erected after the architectural designs of a physician, Claude Perrault, whose plan was adopted in preference to the designs of Bernini, though the latter was called from Italy by Louis the 14th.

Recall that Thornton landed on continental Europe at the end of December 1783 at the earliest and returned to Britain by mid-August 1784. Based on a watercolor, biographers also credit him with a trip to the Alps during that 8 month period. At the time, he seemed to have ended his medical studies and embraced mineralogy. 

Latrobe didn't bother to probe into Thornton's background. He explained that his parents were Moravians, and described his relations with George Washington. But he couldn't resist smearing Thornton as "a calumniator who is the subject of ridicule, of pity, or of contempt to all who know him..... a man too feeble for personal chastisement, and too ignorant, despicable and vain for argumentative refutation."

Thornton's response came a few days later. He credited Ferdinando Fairfax for the General's assessment of Latrobe. Then he further smeared Latrobe in a style reminiscent of British farces: "The late Moll Turner who lived between Havre de Grace and Baltimore, a woman so infamous in character, that the Poissardes of Paris would have appeared as vestals in comparison, was never outmatched in blackguardism, except by Mr. Latrobe, and it is suspected that this broke her heart,--" Then he ascended the heights: "if I had been so reprehensible a character as he represents, I should hardly have been appointed to the honorable office I had under General Washington, and have received letter of approbation on his retiring from public life, nor should I have been appointed and continued in other respectable offices by his two successors...." He closed by revealing that he challenged Latrobe to a duel in 1804 but received no answer. He put a belligerent couplet under his name: "Only five feet eight; limbs straight;/ and about one hundred and sixty weight." Latrobe, who was six feet two, countered with a libel suit.(24)

On May 8, 1808, a little over a week after Thornton's attack, Mrs. Thornton noted that her husband drew a plan for their good friend Thomas Peter. In archives, there are several undated floor plans with two large elliptical rooms and a circular colonnaded entrance. As built in upper Georgetown, Tudor Place would only have the Roman temple-like entrance. In 1811, Peter would began describing himself as a resident of Tudor Place, Georgetown, which suggests that his mansion connecting two houses previously built there was effectively finished. Ridout and others consider it as another manifestation of Thornton's innovative use ovals. Indeed, his floor plans made transparent how he drew the elliptical rooms by overlapping two perfect ovals. As if keen to show how he mathematically simplified the design process, he did not erase the outlines of the circles. His floor plan and elevation had few windows so it resembles his unbuilt design for Lot 17 in Square 171, not the well lit mansion that Lovering built for Tayloe. Perhaps, Thornton considered what he drew as a challenge to Latrobe rather than a plan to accommodate the growing Peter family. If so, it can be counted as a brave display of his genius, but it came at a time when the saga of Thornton and Capitol effectively ended.(25)

With the South Wing finished, Jefferson had Latrobe work again on the North Wing. In 1804, he had told Latrobe that it properly fulfilled Thornton's design. In 1808, he allowed Latrobe to make changes, and everyone soon knew that was what Latrobe was doing. In September, Lenthall was crushed to death when a brick arch in the North Wing gave way. Initially, Latrobe suspected foul play. Hoban renewed his attacks, but then Latrobe restrained himself. In the press at least, Thornton was silent, perhaps because of the libel suit or because he realized he had lost the Capitol. Work on the North Wing continued after Madison succeeded Jefferson. While he evidently continued to like him personally, he was more in tune with the sportsman. He invited both Thornton and Tayloe to dinner before the 1811 Jockey Club races. President Madison had no interest in the "ideas of Dr. Thornton." By 1811, Latrobe had moved the Senate chamber to the first floor. Thornton made no public comment. Congress did not appropriate money to continue work on the Capitol, or the President's house where Latrobe was helping Mrs. Madison redecorated building. Latrobe moved to Pittsburgh intending to build a steamboat and sail it to New Orleans. The libel case dragged on until June 1813. In April of that year, Thornton advertised all his property for sale. By the way, in 1802 he assigned the lot next to the General's houses to his mother-in-law, likely to avoid losing it in a lawsuit. The jury found for Latrobe and awarded him one cent in damages with costs. Claiming that Latrobe had sued him for $10,000 in damages, Thornton declared victory. Latrobe would later claim that he didn't ask for damages.(26)(34)

Meanwhile, Thornton had another rival to fight. By becoming the State Department clerk in charge of patents, Thornton relieved future admirers from having to explain why his pretensions as an architect ended. He was simply too busy and arguably doing work that was more important. 

Actually, all Thornton had to do was pass on the $30 application fee to the Treasury, fill out a patent form for the signatures of the Secretary of State and President, file away the application and a description of the invention, and, if possible, retain a model. He did not have to verify that, as required by law, the invention was both useful and novel. The applicant signed an oath that it was. It was up to others to challenge that in federal court. It was also not legally incumbent on Thornton to encourage inventors, and he didn't. In December 1804, Senator John Quincy Adams checked on a patent application for a constituent. Adams wrote in his diary that Thornton explained that "he thought it not a new invention— Which indeed he says is the case of almost all the applications for Patents— And others are for things impossible."(27) 

That said, Thornton made the most of it. For example, in her 1808 notebook for August 6, Mrs. Thornton jotted down: "The Hawkins won't stand to their agreement and are very angry at not getting their patent." In 1811, citing his 1792 letter to the King's gunsmith and a gun made according his drawings in 1810, Thornton insisted that John Hancock Hall agree to a joint patent for the breech loading rifle. The young Maine inventor was advised by others to give in and he did. Thornton insisted that Jacob Cist change his patent for making printer's ink from anthracite coal and then angled to become his sales agent. A bully can always fill his time and Thornton thought he was helping inventors who usually didn't know the scientific principles that explained their invention. At least he worked with some inventors. He reviled Hallet the architect, but did work with Hallet the inventor. In 1809, when he applied for a patent, Hallet brought his hydraulic ram to the city. After his session with Thornton, he wrote to President Madison: "Dr. Wm. Thornton examined it Very Carefully, witnessed Some trials and was So kind as to take an active part in the Experiment we have exhibited in the City. As I could not wish to meet with a better Judge of the matter I beg leave to refer your Excelency to that Gentleman’s explanations as to the merits of the machine; and to Capt Hobben as to the practicability and Utility of its aplication to the President’s House."

However, with one exception, none of the inventions crossing Thornton's desk amounted to much. The stakes were not high. The steamboat was that one exception. After trying to impress the British and French governments with his submarine and torpedo, Robert Fulton came to the federal city in late 1806 to promote national defense with "Torpedo War," as he would call his book published in 1810. He also had a pamphlet on the necessity of a network of canals for defense and commerce. The Navy was skeptical. The Jefferson administration embraced him. Thornton spent New Year's Day 1807 with Fulton. In the summer of 1807, thanks to being bankrolled by the Livingston family, Fulton's steamboat made successful round trips from Manhattan to Albany which was 150 miles away with an average speed of 4 miles an hour. In the fall of 1808, he spent more time in the federal city to work on a patent application for his boat.

Thornton had to be envious of Fulton's success. In 1807 and 1808, Thornton did not get money from Tortola. Plus, in 1806, the debts he had to service doubled. In 1803, Blodget faced a court judgment to pay $21,000 to the winner of the unfinished Grand Hotel. He had to sell his properties and that netted Thornton ownership of his F Street home and other real estate. However, Thornton was not a vulture picking at his friend's estate. He also secured Blodget's $10,000 bail. In 1806, Blodget broke the bounds that confined him to the city, and consequently Thornton became responsible for Blodget's debts. Thornton tried in vain to sell his thoroughbreds. The only property he could sell was in Lancaster, England. His surviving aunt moved in with Robert Foster's sister. The $20,000 from the sale soothed Thornton's bankers and Blodget's creditors. In December 1808, a few days before having tea with Fulton, Thornton sent $3500 to a city bank and Bills of Exchange for 400 Pounds Sterling from Aunt Jane to Philadelphia to be cashed in Philadelphia.1 Two weeks later, Thornton fled to his farm to avoid a writ obtained by the brother of the late North Carolina worthy who sold most of the gold lands to Thornton. Mrs. Brodeau, his mother-in-law, eventually paid his bail and kept Thornton out of jail.(28)

 In a December 1808 letter to Secretary of State Madison, Thornton explained his absence, his financial problems and asked for a raise. A week earlier he had sent Madison his application for a patent for his improvements to the steamboat. In January, he received his patent the day before Fulton applied for his. In May, Thornton tried to open negotiations with Fulton and Livingston. Fitch's steamboat used a line of paddles. Fulton's had paddle wheel. However, Thornton credited himself for Fitch's boiler and for suggesting a paddle wheel which was to be on the company's next boat. In an 1812 letter complaining to Secretary of State Monroe, Fulton traced Thornton's demands from a demand for equal thirds to one-eighth of the net profits. Fulton didn't take him seriously. Then Thornton attacked, writing letters to state legislatures where Fulton was trying to get a monopoly. Since Fulton's company was building steamboats, the continuance of the monopoly depended on continued service by his ships. Thornton attested that Fulton's patent described nothing new and thus any monopoly awarded would stifle genuine improvements to the steamboat. In response, Fulton got another patent in 1811 describing improvements he had since made to his steamboats.(32) 

Thornton didn't win support because he made a better steamboat, he merely flattered the bias Americans had against monopolies. However, while keen to support free competition on America's rivers, Thornton still wanted shipbuilders to pay him a royalty. In 1806, he tried to get Latobe fired. On the evening of April 11, 1812, as Mrs. Thornton put it in her notebook, Thornton "had a long talk" with President Madison "respecting Fulton & c." After the meeting, all Madison did was ask congress to raise Thornton's salary. He was bitter and wrote to a friend: "If I had never accepted any Employment under the last & present administration I should I really believe have been many thousand Dollars better in Situation than at present...."

Fulton asked that the Commissioner of Patents be barred from publicly criticizing patents and giving patents to himself. Thornton survived criticism and credited the First Amendment right of free speech. But he also won friends throughout the country for fostering genius. While congress never increased his salary, it did answer his plea for a place to display patent models just as the French government did in Paris. Congress bought Blodget's hotel and Latrobe refashioned it to house the Post Office and Patent Office. The National Intelligencer crowed "as the apartments in this building are spacious and lofty, we may soon expect to see the numerous evidences of the ingenuity of our countrymen in this institution arranged and displayed to advantage." Thornton turned it into a popular tourist destination. In March 1811, he sent a long notice to newspapers throughout the country explaining the patent process and expressed his "astonishment" when viewing the "inventions of his countrymen,... no nation on earth surpasses them in genius." (33)

He became an untouchable bureaucrat but not a famous inventor. Thornton turned to history to make his point and lay foundations for his future fame. His pamphlet had a curious title: "Short Account of the Origin of Steamboats Written in 1810 and Now Committed to the Press, 1814." That Thornton waited until 1814 to make his case public may reflect his desire to keep open private negotiations with Fulton. However, it wasn't until 1814 that two crucial witnesses who could challenge his claims died. He had found a prominent inventor who attested that Henry Voight, Fitch's partner, told him that Thornton suggested using a paddle wheel. Voight died in early 1814, and Thornton finally got his patent for the paddle wheel. A fellow federal bureaucrat attested that while in Paris, he was told by an American consul, Aaron Vail, who was Fitch's agent that in 1793 he had given Fulton a complete set of Fitch's drawings and specifications. Vail died in 1813.

In his pamphlet Thornton explained that in 1787 Fitch's boat only made 4 miles an hour. Then at Thornton's suggestion, it was redesigned and made 8 miles an hour. While there remains no corroborating evidence for that claim, there are several references to the boat going 7 miles an hour. There was ample evidence that Fitch's boat provided a ferry service on the Delaware River, and also made a round trip of 80 miles. Newspaper noted the 80 mile round trip, but gave Fitch and Voight full credit.(35)

Thornton implied that he deserved credit for the company's success. That the company failed after he left to see his mother proved that he alone understood the principles of the steamboat. He also implied that he could build a boat better than Fulton's. He agreed "at once" to Fulton's offer of $150,000 if he could make a faster boat, but "he declined to write the terms." Actually, In January 1811, Latrobe challenged Thornton to come up with a better design for a boat that would go 6 miles an hour in still water with a 100 ton load. If Thornton made such a boat that "proved his principles in practice," Fulton promised to assume all its costs and pay Thornton $150,000. Or, if Thornton convinced Fulton "with drawings and demonstration I will join you in the expenses and profit." Given his often repeated claims, presumably, Thornton already had the drawings and expertise. He didn't have the money. Why didn't he propose the terms? His reply, if there was one, is no longer extant. 

Fulton died from a lung disease in February 1815. Thornton told Benjamin Ogle Tayloe that his pamphlet killed him. In his history of the Patent Office, Kenneth Dobyns writes that Thornton sent a letter to Fulton who "read it with symptoms of horror and died a few days later." Thornton continued sharing damning inconsistencies and plagiarism in Fulton's patents. That might have encouraged Fulton's other rivals but it didn't improve the steamboats that began to navigate more American rivers. In Ogden v. Gibbon, the 1824 Supreme Court case ending Fulton's monopoly, Thornton's pamphlet and patents had no bearing on the arguments or decision.(36) 

In 1815, Thornton assigned his rights to his steamboat patent to Ferdinando Fairfax. Thornton found another venue where he could establish his claim as the inventor of the steamboat. He was granted a monopoly in Columbia. Any steamboat plying the Magdalena River had to pay him royalties. In 1819, he tried to enlist the aid of the American consul for a monopoly in Bahia. He explained that Fitch was "a poor ignorant and illiterate man," and his boat was too slow. Thornton "engaged to make it go at the rate of eight miles an hour within 18 months.... In one year I succeeded." As for Fulton seeing plans for the steamboat, Thornton claimed that "Mr. Fulton had seen my papers describing the steam boat in the hands of one of Fitch's partners in France to whom I had sent them to take out a patent there.... [Fulton] of course succeeded but without having invented a single improvement. Success however give him not only all the profits but the eclat of the Invention, with those who are not acquainted with the circumstances."(37)

Actually, Fitch was a prolific writer and his papers remain in several libraries from New York City to Washington. In a 1794 letter to Thornton, Fitch referred him to "my manuscripts" that he wanted Thornton to revise. He had before used Thornton and other directors to improve his prose. However, in a 1791 letter, as Fitch prepared to go to France, a fellow director described to Thornton how he wrote the contract for the agent in France and couldn't resist taunting Thornton: "You still condemn the French scheme." Thornton's constant advice to Fitch was to use a copper boiler. The inventor was incorrigible. While in France, Fitch wanted to build a boat. Pointing out that copper was impossible to buy during the war between France and Britain, he asked Thornton to send him cedar for a boiler. If Fulton saw a description of Fitch's boat in Paris, he imbibed Fitch's ideas not Thornton's.(38) 

Thornton had more profound reasons to be interested in South America. In April, 1815, he published "Outlines of a Constitution for United North and South Columbia." His outlines were startling. He divided the Western Hemisphere into 13 commonwealths and in a manner that would force the United States to give up the Louisiana Purchase. He challenged the United States to set a good example for colonial powers. He had the hemisphere's capital, called the City of America, "on those healthy hills, that intersect the Isthmus at, or near Panama, where a canal may be made from sea to sea, by locks." Of course, the premise of his idea was that Spanish colonies would declare their independence from the Spanish crown. Why his constitution would embolden revolutionaries is puzzling. All he advised in that regard was "if the South Columbians will their freedom they are free!" But Thornton prefaced his essay with a short history suggesting that he had been acquainting South American revolutionaries with his ideas since "about 1800." He claimed that he told "Dr. Burke" to go to Venezuela and spread Thornton's ideas. He wrote that the same British doctor had defended the American Revolution which suggest that Thornton was referring to the famous Edmund Burke. But he had died in 1797. Dr. William Burke, a former clerk in the British foreign office, was in Caracas in 1810, and died in Jamaica in 1812 only 33 years old. He didn't mention Thornton in what he wrote about his efforts.(38A) What Thornton is known to have done was evidently too embarrassing for Thornton to mention in 1815. On the witness stand in 1807 at the treason trial of Aaron Burr, an American general testified that Thornton asked him to raise an army for Francisco Miranda who aimed to capture Caracas. 

Thornton had a knack for lacing his latest obsession to a lifetime of work and thought on the same topic. But his South American obsession signified an attempt to break with all for which he had previously striven. The spare jottings in Mrs. Thornton's 1815 notebook captured the transition: "April 11th ...General Vanness, Tench Ringgold and Mr. Lee of Alex[andria] appointed Commissioners for the public buildings...." Thornton did not get back his old job which would have allowed him to oversee the restoration of the Capitol. "April 13th ... Mr. Pinto a South American from Buenos Ayres dined here." Six years later, in a January 1821 letter to Jefferson, Thornton dismissed "the trivial office I still hold, which does not give support to my Family," and outlined what the Patriots could do for him: "I was offered the immediate rank of Colonel of horse; & a high office in their Civil Service; with land enough whereon to settle a Colony. I refused every thing, but rendered them, as a friend, every Service in my power, & all the great revolutionary Characters of South America have considered my House, as a place of friendly Consultation."

Thornton asked Jefferson to persuade President Monroe to send him on a mission to Columbia both as a diplomat and to write a natural history of the country. Other than knowing all the Columbian leaders, Thornton bragged on his lifetime commitment to revolution. As for writing a natural history, he mentioned men well known to Jefferson who understood his talents in that regard. In Paris, the Duke de Penthievre tried to get permission for him to explore the mineralogy of Mexico; also Franklin offered his salary as President of Pennsylvania to support Thornton's touring so he could share his observations with the US government.

Thornton made the same claims in a letter to Madison. He also marshaled support from senators and congressmen, all in vain. In the wake of his 1815 essay, first as "Southern Columbian" and then as "A Columbian," he wrote essay that tried to shape American foreign policy. He ridiculed Spanish power and the ability of any potential ally to help. He kindled American self interest. While helping the Patriots in Mexico and South America. Americans could take Puerto Rico and Cuba. By the way, Tortola-born Thornton characterized himself as one of them. He was a "Caribe." He also didn't doubt the motives of anyone who joined the Patriot cause. However, when opposed by other anonymous authors, Thornton accused them of being Spanish spies. 

The policy of the Madison and Monroe administrations was neutrality and negotiations in the country's self interest. Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans made buying Florida from Spain the highest priority. It would prevent an invasion of Florida by General Jackson. Thornton had a better idea, support a freebooter named MacGregor who with 1500 men planned to take Amelia Island from the pirates who controlled it and with a few more men could take all of Florida.He offered to sell it to the US government for $1.5 million. Thornton couldn't resist ridiculing the Monroe administration for negotiating with Spain to buy it for $2 million.

Thornton met MacGregor in June 1817, and suggested he talk to the British minister in Washington. In a January 7 letter in the National Intelligencer, "A Columbian" revealed MacGregor's plan and added that he had revealed it to a member of Monroe's cabinet. Bagot told Secretary of State John Quincy Adams about his chilly reception of MacGregor and his amazement that Thornton sent him. Adams told Monroe who wasn't pleased and told Adams to talk with Thornton.  On February 7, Adams asked Thornton who was the cabinet member. Thornton fingered Richard Rush. Adams asked for "the substance of his Conversations with M’Gregor, and with Mr Rush. Then Thornton "entered into some general statements of his connections with South American Patriots which has been of long standing, and in his view very important— ."

On February 13, they went at it again. Adams objected to the January 7th letter's "tone of censure upon the measures of the administration, relating to Amelia-Island—and implying a charge even of duplicity...." In his diary, Adams accused Thornton of  pretending that that he thought U.S. Naval Officers there were acting without orders from the Government. Adams then challenged Thornton's recollection of his conversation with Rush. Thornton replied that "he was sure his statement was perfectly correct; for after drawing it up, he had shewn it to his Clerk Elliot, and asked him, if it was not exactly conformable to what he had told Elliott at the time; of what Mr Rush had said— That Elliott fully confirmed it; and if necessary was ready to attest to it upon Oath."

Thornton relied on his clerks to be ready to attest. He had used that ploy against Latrobe and would again in 1819 when the National Intelligencer announced that an Army board approved the breech loading rifle of John Hancock Hall. The next day, the editor announced that the rifle was actually invented by Dr. Thornton. Hall retorted that while he had drawings and a working gun, Thornton had lost his drawings and relied on his clerks to attest that they had once seen them. His actual gun was also a dud.(39) 

In their next encounter, Thornton told Adams that he had reread his article "and did not see there was anything in it offensive to the President, to whom it was very respectful— I told him the President’s disapprobation was of his transactions with M’Gregor, and then with Mr Rush; and his advising M’Gregor to go to Mr Bagot— He denied the fact— I told him I had it from Bagot himself— He then said he did not advise M’Gregor to go and see Bagot to talk with him about Florida, but as a Scotchman, because his family estates had lately been restored to him— And he had a great distrust of M’Gregor, as soon as he had heard he had talked with Bagot about the Florida project."(39A)

John Quincy Adams acknowledged that Thornton was "a Man of learning, ingenuity, wit and humour; well meaning, good-natured, and mainly honest," but then added that he was "without judgment or discretion." Thanks to their becoming next door neighbors in 1820, Thornton had an extraordinary relationship with Adams. The Capitol was finished during Adams' term and that thanks to the Residence Act on 1790, he had the final say on its design. While secretary of state in 1819, he visited the Patent Office and Thornton told him about how he invented the steamboat. But judging from Adams' diary, he never told a story about how he designed the Capitol. Disappointed by the design for the frieze on the pediment to be raised over the portico of the East front, Adams suggested that Thornton and two others be asked for a design. Thornton did not respond and Adams made the design himself.(44)

Fortunately for Thornton's posthumous reputation Jefferson tapped him for design ideas which proved to posterity at least that he was still a great architect. He sent Thornton a sketch of a large quadrangle bounded by "a range" of one story dormatories behind a colonnade linking two story pavilions with classrooms below and lodging for professors above. He wanted "that these pavilions as they will shew themselves above the dormitories, shall be models of taste & good architecture, & of a variety of appearance, no two alike, so as to serve as specimens for the Architectural lectures." 

In reply, Thornton sent a long letter about how to organize a university as well as build it. For example, he advised that "There ought to be extra grounds for the great Exercises; such as running, riding, Archery[,] Shooting with Pistols, rifles, Cannon,—The military Exercises on horseback & foot.—In the Roman Catholic Academy, in George Town, Ca, they have erected a Ball Alley, but I would allow no Child’s-play." He drew "a Pavilion for the Centre, with Corinthian Columns, and a Pediment." That prompts C. M. Harris to suggest that Thornton "most noticeably influenced Jefferson in his design for Pavilion VII...." However, when attacking Hallet and Hadfield, Thornton had made a virtue out of thin columns elevated by arches and that is what he drew. To Jefferson, they must have seemed anemic. A bold presentation of the Classical orders was the whole point of his project. If Thornton's sketch did influence his design, Jefferson never discussed it with Thornton. They did not correspond again until 1821. Jefferson also wrote to Latrobe pressing him for ideas, too. In his notebook, Jefferson attributed the design of the Corinthian pavilion to Latrobe. Yet in the cursory histories of the project, Latrobe is paired with Thornton as the distinguished architects who advised the amateur Jefferson. He valued Latrobe much more. In his last letter to Latrobe, he wrote "... in the public bui[ld]ings which will be daily growing up in this growing countr[y] [you?] can have no competitor for employ." He wrote that after Latrobe had left the Capitol as the logical conclusion to his  physically threatening the Supervisor who President Monroe appointed to succeed the commissioners. Latrobe died of yellow fever in September 1820 while in New Orleans working on a waterworks to prevent that scourge. His son had died there previously of the same disease. He left behind a redesigned House chamber as his legacy.(42)

Congress returned to the Capitol in December 1819. The Jefferson/Thornton ellipse was halved. The Supervisor asked Thornton and others for suggestions on how to cure chamber's acoustics of an echo. He responded full blast, but no one seemed to be listening. In a draft of letter found in his papers, Thornton recommended curtains soaked in arsenic so they wouldn't be eaten by moths. He also took the opportunity to attack Latrobe for changing his ellipses to semi-circles and attacked whatever Latrobe's replacement, Charles Bulfinch, had done or planned to do. In his history of the Capitol, William Allen strung together "Thornton’s gifts of sarcasm and exaggeration:" Skylights were “borrowed from some carpenter’s shop, for there never was so mean a window exhibited before in any public building on the face of the globe.” Dwarf columns belonged in London’s Newgate prison “where the convicts are executed wholesale, for never were such galleries seen in any building of dignity and national grandeur.” As for the whole, it recalled “the old fashioned Tea Canisters, Bohea at one end, Green Tea at the other, and in the center the large sugar dish.” Allen concluded that "Thornton’s letter made it clear that his bitterness had not been soothed by time, and his pretensions to architectural authority were as delusional as ever." If sent, his letter to Lane was not printed in the newspapers or congressional documents. There were serious controversies that marked the change in command. Bulfinch and others deprecated Latrobe's plan to support the dome which forced Latrobe to publish a vindication. Despite that portion of the building having long been his pet, Thornton offered no opinion.(40)

John Quincy Adams' diary best described Thornton's pointless final years. On May 22, 1825, he called on him while he was ill, and noted in his diary that Thornton's clerk at the Patent Office "has done most of the business for some years...." Primarily, Thornton pestered Adams about being sent on a diplomatic mission. Despite that, Adams liked his neighbor. He once confided in his diary that "Thornton gave us after dinner a perfect surfeit of buffoonery." One spring evening in 1821, "we spent the Evening at Dr Thornton’s where we were entertained with Music— Mrs Thornton performed on the Piano, and sung Handels’ Anthem of “Comfort ye my People”—much to my satisfaction." Then there were encounters that made little sense." Dr Thornton called this morning, and gave me some of his ideas about body and soul. He is writing a pamphlet or dissertation in which he will broach some of his own strange ideas. He denies the existence of the Soul, but believes in the immortality of the body— And he has a theory of suspended animation in which he vouches certain wonderful phenomena, to support the wildest absurdities—"

One of those wild absurdities may have been his claim that he could have restored General Washington to life: "first to thaw him in cold water, then to lay him in blankets, and by degrees and by friction give him warmth, and to put in activity the minute blood vessels, at the same time to open a passage to the lungs by the trachaea, and to inflate them with air, to produce an artificial respiration and to transfuse blood into him from a lamb..."(48)

President Adams was at Thornton's funeral, and he noted that it attracted 50 carriages, a very good turn out. A remembrance of Thornton published in the National Intelligencer did not mention the steamboat or his design of the Capitol. He was credited for being one of the city's founders and the first Superintendent of the Patent Office. His eulogist also credited him for his "...early, eager, and disinterested efforts of argument and eloquence which are embodied in his memorials, some of which preceded public opinion, and probably contributed to incline its tardy prudence in favor of Greek liberty and South American Independence..." 

On the other hand, the board of the American Society for the Colonization of Free Negroes mourned a loss that "must be severely felt by Africa and mankind." Thornton had cheered the society's founding in 1816 and served on its board but never blessed Liberia with one of his slaves. When he died, he owned eleven in America. He had sold Joe Key in 1808 but Key escaped. He was found on the farm next to the Thornton's in 1812 and sold again.(49)

After his death, Mrs. Thornton was soon rid of the Tortola slaves. In 1829, 131 slaves, 73 females and 58 males, were sold and the proceeds divided by her and Thornton's step-brother's heirs. As for the American's slaves bequeathed to her, she adhered to her husband's standards. They must learn to write and be moral. Belonging to one who considered himself a philanthropist and emancipator was more complicated then might seem. In 1835, Arthur Bowen, the son of her favorite slave Maria, who slept in the same room, entered their room drunk and holding an ax. The ensuing riot aimed at free blacks was on the other side of town near the Navy Yard. After Mrs. Thornton begged him to, President Jackson saved Bowen from the hangman. He was sold and sent to Florida where he served as a steward on a Navy steamboat.

While his design of the Capitol was not mentioned in his obituary, it was in his wife's. She died in 1865, 91 years old. For just over a decade, the city had been focused on the completion of the New Capitol which dwarfed the Old. Thornton was remembered as the architect of the "original Capitol." That was garbled in her obituary as "the original architect of the Capitol." Then he managed to take over her obituary, written 37 years after his own death, with the improbable claim that "...Mrs. Thornton was the daughter of the unfortunate Dr. Dodd, of London, who was executed for forgery in 1777." According to the obituary, her mother "emigrated to Philadelphia, under the name of Brodeau, soon after the death of her husband, bringing her daughter with her." She actually came to the city by December 1775 when she advertised the opening of her boarding school. The obituary cited a source for the revelation that Dodd was her father: "It is not believed that she was aware that she was the daughter of Dr. Dodd, although her husband was, and mentioned it to his friend, the late Col. Bomford." The best that can be said of that is that it may have diverted attention from memories of the 1835 race riot. But is it true?

Thornton certainly knew of Dodd. He was 18 when Dodd stretched and likely read the lurid coverage of the eccentric profligate known as the "Macaroni Parson" because of his dress. He was famous for his sermons to the fallen women at London's Magdalen Hospital. Perhaps he missed coverage of Dodd's wife of 22 years who was taken to the insane asylum after the hanging. Thornton also told this story: "when a lad at school he handed his uncle two 5 Pound notes and asked him to select the one better engraved. The uncle selected the counterfeit just made by young Thornton." In an essay published in 1819 that argued for paper currency, Thornton claimed that he had "invented" a test to detect forgeries. All to say, he seemed to have a fascination with forgery. However, just before Dodd was arrested in 1777, he wrote to Franklin asking about a woman who had moved to Philadelphia. For American historians, that verifies Thornton's claim that the then 3 year old Anna Maria Brodeau was Dodd's daughter.(50)

Because a man is a liar does not make him a rascal. Mrs. Brodeau chose Thornton for a son-in-law and lived with him until he died. Washington and Jefferson weighed his false pretenses, and managed them to their advantage. Madison seemed to enjoy Thornton's perturbations and his efforts to overcome them until he almost turned the most problematic period of the nation's history into a disaster.  Monroe had no use for Thornton. Measuring Thornton through the eyes of presidents makes sense because he was essentially a courtier and he knew it. John Quincy Adams pitied Thornton and the disorder of his latter days, but always smiled at his childlike ardor. In May 1825 knowing that Thornton was ill, Adams went to see him and found him "exceedingly reduced both by his disease and his remedies— He can scarcely speak, but retains his facetious humour, and his South-American ardour— He was very fearful that the British would cut a canal for Line of Battle and India Ships, and obtain an exclusive right of navigating for forty years."(51)

Thornton's contributions to the architecture of the Capitol and city are overblown. The design he brought to Philadelphia would not do and he was coached on how to make one that would. It embodied the ideas of Jefferson, L'Enfant and Hallet. The Capitol would more or less have looked the same in 1829 even if Thornton had not pretended that he was an architect. The solution to the problem of fitting a house next to an angled intersection was not solved by Thornton. He did embrace it, but his February 1800 design for Lot 17 was never built. 

In conclusion, if this examination of Dr. T- does not change the current take on the amateur architect and abiding genius of the nation's capital, the author asks one indulgence. Let future historians be more sympathetic to what Hallet, Hadfield, Hoban, and Latrobe faced at the Capitol thanks to Thornton's vain scorn. As for Lovering, when historians happen into that rarity, an oval sitting room, and think of the Octagon, also remember its architect William Lovering, the "ingenious A" who offered specimens of designs suitable for angles acute or obtuse.

1. Clark, "Dr. and Mrs. Thornton", p. 148;

2. Harrs, p. liii 

3. WT to  Fell 21 June 1802, pp. 573-4.

4. Jefferson to Claxton, 26 October 1802, Harbaugh et al to Jefferson 27 October 1802;

5. Latrobe to Jefferson, 27 March 1802; Jefferson to Latrobe, 2 November 1802; Latrobe to Jefferson, 9 November 1802, 28 November 1802.

6. Annals of Congress, House, 28 February 1803

7.  Jefferson to WT 6 March 1803; Jefferson to Latrobe 6 March 1803.

8. Latrobe to Jefferson, 4 April 1803 Enclosure,"Report on the Public Buildings:" Latrobe, Benjamin, The Correspondence and Miscellaneous Papers of, p. 278;

9. Latrobe to Lenthall, 5 May 1803, Ibid. p. 289

10.  Latrobe to his wife  24 November 1802, , Correspondence p. 232; to Thornton 28 April 1804; W. T., "Political Economy: Founded in Justice and Humanity, in a letter to a friend;" John Quincy Adams diary 12 March 1805; Latrobe Journal p. 206; "Extract of a Letter to vice president Thomas Jefferson..." Baltimore Daily Advertiser 23 August 1800;.

11. Latrobe to Jefferson, 27 & 28 February 1804, Jefferson to Latrobe 28 February 1804;  Op. Cit. pp. 437ff 

12. "The Report of the Surveyor of Public Buildings," Latrobe Correspondence pp. 444-5.

13. Latrobe to Lenthall, 8 March 1804, Correspondence p. 458;

14. Latrobe to WT 28 April 1804, Correspondence pp. 481-2;

15. Latrobe to Lenthall 28 March 1804 p. 463  

16.  Brown, History of Capitol, new edition,  pp. 113ff.

17.  On barracks see footnote in Bryen to Jefferson 16 March 1801; on jail see "Hadfield's estimate..." June 1802.

18. Washington Federalist 6 March 1805.

19. ad in National Intelligencer 23 April 1806; Thornton v. Carson's Executor, Google Books. 

20. WT to Madison 6 August 1806, Madison to Jefferson 15 August 1806; Jefferson to Madison, 28 August 1806.

21. AMT notebook vol. 2 image 137ff; Madison Papers "Account with William Thornton" 5 December 1809. 

22. Latrobe's Private Letter is in Correspondence vol. 2 pp. 305ff where quotes from Thornton's Index can be found in footnotes

23. National Intelligencer 30 November 1807p. 1.

24. Washington Federalist, 20 April 1808; Latrobe Correspondence vol. 2 pp. 600ff; Ibid., 30 April 1808, p 2; 7 May 1808, p. 3.

25. AMT notebook vol. 3 image 121; Ridout p. 122.

26. Washington Expositor September 24, 1808;  Washington Federalist 15 November 1808 p. 3; Latrobe to Madison 8 September 1809; op. cit. 1809 Account; AMT notebook vol. 3 image 130.

27.  John Quincy Adams diary 5 March 1804; Dobyns History of the Patent Office, Chapter 7 and Preston, Daniel, "Administration of Patent Office...." Journal of the Early Republic, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Autumn, 1985), pp. 331-353; on congressional investigation of WT see  American State Papers Misc, vol.1 p. 193

28. Mrs. Thornton's diary November 28, 1800, she sent 230 Pounds Sterling; Natl. Intelligencer 27 October 1806; WT to Madison, 17 December 1808; Thornton v. Carson's Executor, Google Books;

29.  AMT notebook series 4 (1828)  image 11; Dobyns, p. 47

30.  Latrobe to Gilpin  24 May 1808, Correspondence vol. 2 p. 628.

31. AMT notebook, volume 3, image 47; 

32. New York State Library "Steamboats on the Hudson"; Dobyns, Chapter 9; (Mostly) IP History blog has copy of Fulton's patents; Century Magazine vol. 70, 1909 pp. 832-3 ; AMT notebook vol. 3 May 13; Clark, "Dr. and Mrs. Thornton", p. 199;  WT to Madison, 9 December 1808;

33. "Fulton's Invention of the Steamboat" Scribner's Monthly Illustrated Magazine, p. 833; AMT vol. 3 image 181; Annals of Congress, 12th 1st session p. 1324; Thornton to Steele, 18 April 1812, Papers of John Steele NC Digital Collection page 219. Thornton circular dated 5 March 1811

34. Daily National Intelligencer ad dated May 14,1813; House report 397 United States Congressional serial set. 5407.
 n. 775  lots; Latrobe to son 27 June 1813. 

35. Fulton to Madison, 18 March 1813; Thornton, Short Account of the Origin of Steamboats Written in 1810 and Now Committed to the Press, 1814 ; on Voight  see Westcott Life of John Fitch; on Vail see his Geni profile;  Thornton's 1809 patent didn't mention the paddle wheel, though he threatened Fulton with his prior knowledge of it. In 1814, Thornton finally gave himself a patent for the paddle wheel;     

36. Tayloe, In Mememoriam;Duer, William Alexander, "Reply to Mr. Colden's Vindication of the Steamboat Monopoly," 1819. pp. 87; Dobyns;  

37. AMT notebook series 4 (1828)  image 11; James Lloyd to John Adams, 7 April 1815; WT to Jefferson, 9 January 1821; WT to Henry Hill 20 April 1818, in Clark, "Dr. and Mrs. Thornton" pp. 187-8.

38. Richard Stockton to WT 8 December 1791, Harris p. 172; Fitch to WT, 27 July 1794, Harris p. 284.

38A. Thornton, "Outlines..." in Cleven, N. Andrew, "Thornton's Outlines...." Hispanic American Historial Review, Vol.12 No. 2 (May 1932) pp. 198-215. 

39. Demerrit, Dwight D., "John H. Hall and the Origin of the Breechloader." American Society of Arms Collector Bulletin, 42; 24-29. National Intelligencer, 25 March 1819, 1 April 1819;

39A. JQA diary 

40. Allen, William, "The Bulfinch Years 1818-1829" History of the United States Capitol, p. 143; Bulfinch Life and Letters p. 215;  The real controversy at that time was between Bulfinch and Latrobe, see Latrobe, Vindication, 1819.

41. The Gazette, 8 February 1819 p. 1; Bryan, History of National Capital volume one, pp. 317-8; Hunsberger,  The Architecture of George Hadfield, p. 61; King, Julia, Hadfield, p. 95; TJ to Cosway 2 October 1822. 

42. Harris, Charles M, Library of Congress web article "William Thornton 1759-1828:" Jefferson to WT 9 May 1817;  WT to Jefferson, 27 May 1817, Founders online; for Latrobe's suggestions see Latrobe to Jefferson, 24 July 1817; Jefferson to Latrobe, 9 May 1817; Founders online.

43. TJ to Cosway 2 October 1822.  Washington Gazette 17 July 1820

44.  JQA diary 26 April 1819; 22 May 1825

45.   JQA diary 17 May 1825; 

46.  James Lloyd to John Adams, 7 April 1815;  reply 22 April , Founders online; Friis, Herman R., "Baron Alexander von Humboldt's Visit to Washington, D. C., June 1 through June 13, 1804" Records of the Columbia Historical Society, Washington, D.C., Vol. 60/62, p. 27 (book version).

47. WT to Jefferson, 9 January 1821; JQA diary September 22, 1820 ; Monroe to Madison,  13 February 1818; reply 18 February 1818; JQA diary February 14, 1818; see also the diary entry for February 13; James Lloyd to John Adams, 7 April 1815;  reply 22 April , Founders online; Friis, Herman R., "Baron Alexander von Humboldt's Visit to Washington, D. C., June 1 through June 13, 1804" Records of the Columbia Historical Society, Washington, D.C., Vol. 60/62, p. 27 (book version).

48.  November 30, 1819; April 8, 1821; June 25, 1823 ; Harris, p. 528.

49. March 30, 1828;  Daily National Intelligencer 4 April 1828; History of African Colonization p. 256; Legacies of British Slavery, "Pleasant Valley Estate, Tortola, Virgin Islands." AMT Notebook, 10 April 1808; ad dated May 16, 1808.

50.  Tayloe, B.O., , In Memoriam. p. 100; Dodd, "Thoughts in Prison...." Wikimedia commons; Dodd to Franklin  29 January 1777 footnote; Clark, "Dr. and Mrs. Thornton", p. 148; Peterson, Nancy Simons,  "Guarded Pasts: The Lives and Offsprings of Colonel George and Clara (Baldwin) Bomford." pp. 283, 298; Fitzgerald, Percy, A Famous Forgery, 1865, pp. 9, 155ff; See also Claude-Anne Lopez, "Benjamin Franklin and William Dodd: A New Look at an Old Cause Célèbre." Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 129, No. 3 (Sep., 1985), pp. 260-267. Reference to Capt. Bomford in AMT notebooks 1807-1815 image 45 

51. JQA diary May 22, 1825