Chapter 12: The General Dies and Jefferson Resurrects the Ideas of Dr. Thornton
 |
| The North Wing in 1800 |
As the city came to life with the arrival of the federal government in 1800, Thornton’s reputation as an architect depended solely on the Capitol. Despite being one of the commissioners, Thornton was unable to associate his name with the design of the North Wing. On November 18, 1799, Superintendent Hoban handed the commissioners his report that proved that the building was ready to receive congress. The commissioners added his reports on the other public buildings and sent them all to Philadelphia where they were printed and submitted to congress along with President Adams' annual message which reported that the commissioners "conclude that the removal of the seat of government to that place at the time required will be practicable and the accommodation satisfactory."
In the main, Hoban's reports are as moving as the dimensions and specifications in a building contract but in a few words he described the Senate Chamber in a way to suggest that it had been thoughtfully designed: "the arcade piers, on a semi eliptic plan, are trimmed, with pannelled work, and the columns raised on the arcade, 16 in number, with two semi pilasters to correspond, of the ancient ionic order, two feet three inches in diameter; the entablature is finished with stucco ornaments, and the walls and ceiling finished, two coats of mortar floated, and one coat of stucco; the sully seats are framing, to form an amphitheatre one hundred ten feet in circumference."(2)
There is no evidence that Thornton ever instructed Hoban, an experienced builder and trained architect from Dublin, about Classical architecture, but he was not prone to use the phrase "of the ancient ionic order."He also would never claim that he designed any part of the building other than the roof. The board as a whole may have pressured him to describe it as finished. Actually, the capitals of the columns, and likely many of the classical ornaments, were not finished. Thornton likely wrote the very brief description of the Senate chamber. Someone reading it description might want to know who designed the chamber, and Thornton could take a bow. To be sure, in a 1795 letter, he assured the president that “Mr Hoban & I have made no material alteration that can affect the Sections of the principal Rooms made by Mr Hallet,…” But then in a 1798 letter to his colleagues, he proposed “that the columns be executed in the ancient Ionic order…” In February 1800, he would draw them.
Eleven days after President Adams annual message giving the all clear to move to the city, congress and the nation had a reason to focus on the Capitol. On December 14, the General died. Thornton hoped to lead the discussion. He had long planned to accommodate the General’s body in the Capitol, but it’s not clear that the General approved or that anybody understood Thornton's idea or even that he was quite sure what should be done. In his 1793 explanation of his design, he placed the Equestrian statue of the General, mandated by a 1783 congressional resolution, under the dome. At the same time he noted and presumably labeled a "Great Repository" amidst the arcades that held up the floor upon which stood the columns holding up the dome. In his November 1795 letter to the president defending a basement from Hadfield's attack on the plans handed to him by Hoban, he almost pinpointed the General's resting place "in a large mass of rock nearly the height of the arcade." But, he crossed that out. Ironically, on July 9, 1799, just after Thornton spent three nights at Mount Vernon, the General signed his last will and testament. He wanted Mount Vernon's family vault rebuilt on a different spot that he designated. He wanted to be entombed there. On December 23, 1799, congress resolved "that a marble monument be erected by the United States, in the Capitol, in the city of Washington, and that the family of General Washington be requested to permit his body to be layed under it."(3)
When Mrs. Thornton began keeping a diary on January 1, 1800, she refrained from describing what must have been her husband's difficult adjustment to the loss of his patron and friend. He had arrived at Mount Vernon with the Laws a day late, and would long regret that he had not arrived soon enough to perform a tracheotomy, not that there is any evidence that he had ever slit anyone's throat. He would eventually write a fantasy claiming that, the day after his death, he offered to bring the General back to life but "was not seconded." In January, she merely noted letters from Mount Vernon. On January 3, Tobias Lear wrote that "Mrs. Washington had consented to give up the body of her late husband to be placed in a Monument to be erected by congress in the Capitol." After dinner on Saturday January 4, Thornton took his wife and her mother inside the General’s houses. Then they went to the Capitol "where we staid for some time by a fire in a room where they were glazing the windows - while Dr. T-n laid out an Oval, round which is to be the communication to the Gallery of the Senate Room.”(4) She didn't associate the news from Mount Vernon with their strange interlude in the Capitol. Unless Hoban's report was a complete fabrication, all the rooms had been "laid out" and built.
On the 6th, Thornton wrote a long letter to John Marshall, who chaired the House committee that wrote the resolution. Thornton had never met the General's close friend but he wrote as if Marshall must know of Thornton: "I doubted not [congress] would deposit his body in the place that was long contemplated for its reception; I accordingly requested that it might be enclosed in lead. It was done and I cannot easily express the pleasure I feel in this melancholy gratification of my hope that the Congress would place him in the center of that national temple which he approved of for a Capitol...." No other recollection of preparations for the funeral credits Thornton for the arrival of a plumber along with the undertaker. Also, after the 1795 debacle and constant shortage of funds, the president and commissioners permanently postponed any discussion of the center of the building.
But, in his letter to Marshall, Thornton described the Capitol dome in a way that made its completion seem crucial. In 1791, as Andrew Ellicott surveyed the District of Columbia and L'Enfant planned the City of Washington, they hit on the idea of shifting the prime meridian from Greenwich, England, to the Capitol by making the center of North and South Capitol Streets 0 degree longitude. Thornton particularized it. He explained to Marshall: "Here, in the center of the intended dome is the point from which we calculate our longitudes, and here I presume Congress mean to place the body of the beloved and lamented chief. It will be a very great inducement to the completion of the whole building, which has been thought by some contracted minds, unacquainted with grand works, to be upon too great a scale." Marshall replied a month later and evidently only acknowledged receiving Thornton’s letter. Meanwhile, Thornton got the letter from Stoddert not about the Capitol or the General but about making the grounds of the President’s house conform to the high standards set by the richest man in Philadelphia.(5)
Three weeks after he got Stoddert's January 23 letter, finally, someone in Philadelphia asked Thornton what he thought. In his reply to Blodget, Thornton described his idea for a tomb under the dome. He recalled an engraving he had seen in Scotland of the monument to Peter the Great in St. Petersburg. The Czar was mounted on a horse rearing up on a massive rock with a long snake below its hooves. Thornton sketched and described a "massy rock" inspired by that monument. Sculptures on the rock featured the General on foot climbing to heaven and, among other figures below him, was a woman with a snake coiled around her body, symbolizing eternity.
There is no evidence that Thornton’s proposal had any influence on the on-going congressional debate that was soon focused on a pyramidal mausoleum to be placed near the President’s house for which Benjamin Latrobe drew a design. Thornton didn’t show how his “massy rock” would fit into his grand vestibule. If he ever made a drawing or sketch of the interior of any room he designed, it is no longer extant(6)
Thomas Law also wanted a tomb in the Capitol, and went to to Philadelphia to lobby congress. Given his duties, Thornton couldn't but he could go to Mount Vernon where any plan for disposing of the body might be vetoed or endorsed. He went in early January, then again in March and finally in August. Mrs. Washington liked him and adored his wife, but on his first two trips he went alone. Thornton focused on the most prominent male resident. In January, he helped Lawrence Lewis with an unpaid canal lottery ticket. After his March trip, he told his wife that he pointed out to Lewis where to cut trees to make way for his house. Thanks to an August 1800 entry in his wife’s diary, Thornton is credited for designing Lewis’s house Woodlawn. Clearly, the death of the General coincided with Thornton's condescending to design houses. If he had done that in 1798, perhaps the General might have asked him to design his houses. As it turned out, Lewis and his wife were in no hurry to leave Mount Vernon. Work on the central portion of the house with two wings began in 1804. C. M. Harris has no interest in it: "the house as it appears today has no resemblance to Thornton's other designs." He makes a very good point. Judging from the earliest photograph of it, the house had no oval rooms, many windows but with no consistent design ideas, an underwhelming portico with Tuscan columns and, as the General had wanted, a small pediment with no parapet.(7)
Thornton also worked on his Capitol design. The day after she finished the elevation for the house in Square 171, Mrs. Thornton wrote in her diary “Dr. T- at work all day on the East Elevation of the Capitol. - I assisted a little till evening then worked at my netting." But that’s all she wrote; she didn't explain what his suddenly restless genius was up to. Otherwise, he came up with a way to make his mark as designer of the Capitol. On February 10, according to the board's proceedings written in Thornton's hand, the plasterer John Kearney asked for a drawing of the ornaments for the tops of the columns circling the interior of the Senate chamber. The board directed "James Hoban to furnish him with, in conformity to the drawing given to John Kearney by Wm. Thornton - in the ancient Ionic stile, but with volutes like the modern Ionic." In a footnote to the Papers of William Thornton, Harris highlights the proceedings that he thinks made clear that Thornton was directing Hoban, and made a drawing to inform a working drawing to be made by Hoban. However, the Superintendent may have been confused. On February 15, 1800, Mrs. Thornton noted that Hoban called on her husband after dinner to "consult about the Capitals.…"(8)
Then on April 26, Thornton's anxiety about getting credit for the Capitol eased. A gentleman interested in business opportunities in the federal city handed Thornton a letter of introduction from Vice President Jefferson. The bulk of the letter shared his ideas about the Senate chamber, especially the position of the seat for the presiding officer, i.e. the vice president. While it might seem obvious that Jefferson wanted to open a discussion about the layout of the Senate chamber, Thornton rightly read the letter as an expression of support for his design. Jefferson assured Thornton that he wasn't pulling rank on him and that he recognized that Thornton alone made final decisions about arrangements in the Capitol: "I pray you to consider these hints as written privately to yourself, and as meant to have no other weight than your own judgment may give them."
Jefferson asked one direct question: "Are the rooms for the two houses so far advanced as that their interior arrangements are fixed & begun?" With an eye to his legacy, rather than making the building more convenient for those obliged to use it, Thornton jumped at the opportunity to confirm the supremacy of his plans. He did not discuss the matter at all. He simply thanked Jefferson for his "kindness in suggesting several important considerations respecting the Arrangements in the Capitol & I have the satisfaction of informing you that they are so nearly consonant to my Plans that what I had directed will I flatter myself meet with your approbation...." He filled out his letter to Jefferson, who was also president of the American Philosophical Society, with his theories on the prevention of yellow fever epidemics that included spreading “quick lime and fresh ashes” in reservoirs.(9)
The interior arrangements were not fixed. A month after sending his reply to Jefferson, Thornton met with Thomas Claxton, the Doorkeeper of the House of the Representatives who, Mrs. Thornton wrote, "is empowered to procure the necessary furniture for the Capitol." Then, "they sent for Mr. Hoban and were consulting respecting the seat for the President of the Senate." She left it unclear if Thornton and Claxton sent for Hoban to receive Thornton's orders or Claxton's, or perhaps Hoban explained to both where the seat had to be. Claxton was not under the control of the commissioners. Rather than trust the commissioners to furnish the Capitol, congress gave money to the cabinet officers and they gave it to Claxton. He would be responsible for putting red Morocco leather on the senators' sully seats, a feature that would attract more notice than the ancient ionic capitals.(10)
Of course, Thornton invited the vice president to see his plans when he passed through the federal city. That suggests that Thornton had not shares any of his architectural ideas with the vice president since 1797 when he drew plans to replaces those that were lost in 1793. He didn't stop by in May 1800. When President Adams came in June to inspect the city. Thornton got him to agree to see his plans, but an hour after the appointed time, Adams' chariot and four rumbled by the house and didn’t stop. Thornton came up with an idea to impress the president. He found a way to demonstrate his genius in the President's House. He found a plasterer in Baltimore, George Andrews, who could make stucco ornaments better than Kearney. Thornton suggested the designs. On November 1, the chariot and four rattled by Thornton's house on its way to the President's House. Exactly how the president expressed his displeasure is not known. But that day, the board sent a note to the plasterer to "take down figures at the president's house intended to represent man or beast" and replace them with plaster urns. Thinking ahead, Thornton took Andrews under his wing and tried to show samples of his ornaments to Jefferson.(11)
While Thornton hoped that his friend Jefferson would win the election of 1800, in regards to politics,Thornton behaved correctly and was rewarded. Adams had been warned that he was pro-French, but then in 1798, Thornton offered the same secret naval weapons to the American navy that he offered to the French in 1794. He did not campaign for either candidate, supported Adams's appointment of his nephew William Cranch to replace Commissioner Scott who died on Christmas Day and Thornton was one of Adams’ midnight appointments that incoming Secretary of State James Madison tried to annul. But thanks to the new Chief Justice, John Marshall, Thornton remained one of the District of Columbia's 28 justices of the peace until he died in 1828. In early 1800, Thornton had courted then Secretary of State John Marshall, and even offered him a room in his house. In 1801, he would make the same offer to Madison.
With the help of Blodget and Law, Thornton tried to present himself as an expert and impartial civil servant in the British model with a portfolio in architecture. In October, an anonymous letter to the nation's newspapers shaped Thornton not as the avatar of the grand and expensive Capitol to be at 0 degrees longitude, but as the author of what had been built: "the most elegant building in the world, [that] does great credit to Mr. Thornton's taste." Then the letter extolled Blodget’s hotel which betrayed Blodget as its author. Otherwise, in newspaper commentary about the Capitol, there was no mention of Thornton. One report attributed the Senate chamber’s “very magnificent appearance” to its "being handsomely painted and furnished.” Its columns were lofty pillars, neither ancient nor modern ionic was mentioned. In December, Blodget let the National Intelligencer print Thornton's February letter on the "massy rock." Then to aid Law’s lobbying to get some memorial built in the Capitol, Thornton offered himself as an expert. The Intelligencer reported on December 31 that several cost estimates had been submitted for the Equestrian statue of the General, "among which was one in writing submitted by Dr. Thornton which states with confidence that the expense of the Equestrian stuate(sic) would not exceed from 8,000 to 15,000 pounds [$25,000] currency." That was well under the cost of the mausoleums offered by Latrobe and Benjamin West who had sent a design from London.(12)
However, judging by Mrs. Thornton's diary, he did not forget his Capitol design. On December 19, Mrs. Thorntons wrote "I began to copy the ground plan." On December 20, she added: "did all I could with Dr T's directions to the plan of the Capitol." Presumably, he was trying to fit in a memorial to the General.
However, congress lost interest in the very idea let alone deciding on what build. Also, despite expectations that it would, congress did not abolish the board. The legal complexities arising from the ownership of lots after the failures of Greenleaf, Morris and Nicholson, as well as paying the interest and principal on loans from the State of Maryland deterred congress from simply taking over the city or even the public buildings. After all, the sale of lots was supposed to pay for everything without congressional appropriations. So, congress left town leaving another token $10,000 under the control of the president for more necessary improvements.(14)
Then on June 1, rather than concentrate on the city’s infrastructure, the board reported to the president: "We have taken into consideration the prospect of an encreased Representation in Congress, and have concluded, that the present House will not, after the next apportionment of Members, be sufficient for their accommodation." The Census of 1800 dictated commencing, if not completing, the construction of the South Wing. Four days earlier the board had directed Hoban draw plans for a temporary building “on the eliptic Foundation in the South wing of the Capitol” so that “the Arcades, and as much of the other work as can be done consistently with the general Plan of the Capitol may remain permanent.”(15)
In a March 27 letter, George Hadfield warned the president about the team of Thornton and Hoban. His roof would have been cheaper and would not have leaked.(16) Evidently, due to Thornton’s insistence, Hoban drew a plan with two stories as well as one with the chamber confined to one story. Although the president expected to see his Halle au Ble ideas embodied in Thornton's room, he opted for one story. He wrote to the commissioners: "mr Hobens observes there will be considerable inconveniencies in carrying up the elliptical wall now without the square one, & the square one in future without the elliptical wall, and that these difficulties increase as the walls get higher." Of course, Hoban was warning that Thornton's stricture that the elliptical chamber must stand alone on the elliptical foundation wouldn't work. The president put off the higher chamber until Thornton was proved right. Hoban hired Lovering as the contractor. He had designed and supervised construction of oval rooms in Law's and Tayloe's houses. A paragraph appeared in the nation’s newspaper: “The Commissioners of Washington City have determined to build an elliptical room in the South Wing of the Capitol for the accommodation of the House of Representatives. The dimensions will be 88 by 66 feet and it is intended to construct it as to make it part of the permanent building of the Capitol and in perfect harmony with the original plan.” The Seventh Congress convened on December 7, 1801, in the elliptical room.(17)
What was likely equally gratifying to Thornton was how easily decisions were made with the president living in the city. He saw the problem, recognized that Thornton's prize winning plan had the solution and that Thornton and Hoban worked well together. Before the president moved to the city, Thornton had prospected for a better paying federal office, which made clear that he thought he could fulfill the obligations of the design contest winner without also being a commissioner. On Inauguration Day, he applied to the president to fill any vacancy.
Meanwhile, Thornton had befriended the Treasurer of the United States, a virtual sinecure with a $3,000 a year salary, and learned when he planned to retire. In September 1801, Thornton asked his old friend Madison to send and endorse his application for the job to the president. A month earlier, he had done Madison a very big favor. He learned that the president was trying to find a rental for Madison. He took over that task and in August advanced rent for a house being built next to his. He also extracted an agreement that the builder would pay $1,000 if the house wasn't ready on October 1. In early August, the builder had advertised that he wanted to hire laborers to work until November 1. Thornton also claimed that he gave directions to the builder, telling Madison that: "I have directed the third Story to be divided into four Rooms, two very good Bed-chambers, & the other two smaller Bed chambers. The Cellar I have directed to be divided, that one may serve for wine &c, the other for Coals &c—and for security against Fire a Cupola on the roof...." Madison expressed his gratitude. On the basis of Thornton's letter, C. M. Harris claims that Thornton "supervised the construction" of Madison's rental. Thornton certainly made a rhetorical show of it but there is evidence that Madison was disappointed in what he found in October. In August, he had emphasized to Thornton that he needed a good stable. In June 1802, Madison finally signed a rental agreement with the builder on condition that he build a brick stable and "what remains to be done to the dwelling house shall also be finished."(18)
The president replaced the retiring Treasurer with a Virginia M. D. who was also a Revolutionary War veteran. Thornton had to assume that the president simply wanted him to continue what he had been doing as a commissioner. When congress abolished the board in April 1802 effective June 1, it assigned its duties to a new Superintendent of the City, to be appointed by the president. Before disbanding, the board advised the president about decisions he should make. On April 17, Thornton sent a long letter addressing the problem of a Water Street running along the entire waterfront of the city. Commissioner White had already written to the president doubting the "propriety" of Thornton's grand ideas. The president agreed with White and perhaps Thornton's letter, in which he pointed to the Bordeaux waterfront as a good example, wearied the president. Still, Thornton and his ladies could delightfully fill out a table. A few days later, he invited all three to dinner.(19)
On June 1, the president made Thomas Munroe, the board's clerk, the new Superintendent. Mrs. Thornton asked him why he didn't appoint her husband. The president assured her that the job was temporary. Munroe held the job until 1815. But Thornton was not forgotten. In 1793, congress delegated its authority to grant patents to the State department, and at the same gave it no authority to deny a patent for any reason other than the applicant not being an American citizen or not paying the $30 fee. On June 2, 1802, Madison hired his friend and next door neighbor as the clerk to file away each application and fill out each patent to be signed by the secretary of state and president. Thornton soon thought of better things to do like spying on French diplomats. There was one problem with his new position. The salary, $1400, was very high for a clerk but after 8 years of government service, he took a 12.5% cut in salary. The president was conscious of his slighting Thornton so he also appointed him one of the bankruptcy commissioners for the District of Columbia and calculated that Thornton would make $600 a year in fees. Thornton later claimed that out of pity for bankrupts, he never asked for fees.(20)
In the summer of 1802, once Superintendent Munroe dismissed Hoban, Thornton had no rival as Architect of the Capitol. Then the debacle of 1795, that darkened his relationship with President Washington, almost repeated itself. In October, 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.(21)
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 an 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 captains getting half pay, money saved could pay down the national debt. Latrobe drew elaborate plans but congress tabled the idea.(22)
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.
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." 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.(23)
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’s enthusiasm for the Halle au Ble. 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."(24)
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 a curious building technique in the old wall, Latrobe described it as more evidence of "Thornton's stupid genius." While in the city at a social gathering, Latrobe did mock battle with Thornton over their competing designs for a monument for the General. 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.(25)
Latrobe and his new wife enjoyed being entertained by the Thorntons. There was always more to talk about then the Capitol. Thornton 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." Latrobe was taken by Thornton’s publication of a 24 page letter that proposed 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 Louisiana territory, thus keeping the races separated forever.(26)
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. He anticipated a crisis even though the president offered to talk to Thornton about difficulties with his 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: "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 he 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: "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 was 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 had 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 to the design.
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 by 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."(27
Jefferson’s simplification of the process was made easier by Thornton’s accepting Hallet’s arrangement of the interior of North Wing as his own “modified plan.” As a matter of policy, crediting Thornton for the plan made sense. Plus, Thornton was showing his good sense by no longer defending his amateurish January 1793 design that in Jefferson’s view was only important because it got the president excited about the tripartite arrangement that Jefferson tried to get Hallet to perfect. Surely he regretted it, but Jefferson had no reason to promote Hallet as the first architect of the Capitol. He did make a tracing of Hallet’s July plan. Perhaps he realized even then that as much as what Hallet drew could be construed as Thornton’s ideas, Thornton was incapable of making a drawing with such detail and integrity. But at that time, Jefferson had no choice but to let historians sort it all out.
Two other men were on the scene who had studied Thornton's original design. Hoban remained silent. Blodget had a motive for supporting Thornton who provided security to keep him out of jail. Blodget spent a good deal of time on F Street when congress moved to the city. He even sketched what he labeled as the “original” design of the Capitol which showed a colonade topped with a dome high above the Conference Room half falling down the hill to the west. Blodget didn't wait for historians to sort out the genesis of the Capitol's design. He flattered Thornton and put him in his place. In his book on the American economy published in 1806, he lauded Thornton's design but also invited Thornton to assume a new role: "For this truly sublime and beautiful building, Dr. William Thornton received the premium; but as it has undergone some changes, by deviations agreeably to taste... of the several ingenious gentlemen who have superintended the work, we know not how much the architect will disown.” That sentence explodes any notion that as a commissioner Thornton had restored his original plan with which Blodget was familiar. As Blodget saw it, Thornton was only left with offering his opinion on what was good or bad in the building.(29)
Latrobe 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. 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, and 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 Thornton 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." 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 Thornton's design of the South Wing.(28)
However, Thornton was incapable of seeing the evolution of the Capitol design as a process. It had to be a contest. Thornton and Latrobe had a good deal in common with wide interests that fellows of the Philosophical Society were expected to have. They had mutual friends and Latrobe liked and enjoyed Thornton. Nonetheless, in 1804, Latrobe feared that a letter he got from Thornton was a prelude 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. Ironically, around the same time, Latrobe wrote to Lenthall fuming 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?
On January 1, 1805, Thornton publicly responded to Latrobe's 1804 report to congress by publishing a letter, "To the members of the House of Representatives replying to criticisms of Benjamin H. Latrobe on the Capitol." In it, Thornton made much about 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. Instead, he trusted Hallet and then had no difficulty correcting his mistakes when laying the foundation. As for drawing sections, he mocked 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 supposedly made his request. Thornton verified his claim by offering evidence that someone else remembered his making the claim. He did not explain what happened to the sections he drew, let alone produce them.(30)
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. In 1809, he would come to the city from New York to promote a hydraulic pump he co-invented. Hadfield continued to build a career and had no reason to invite controversy. 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 on 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 the Federalist mocking Latrobe's work at the Capitol soon followed, and Latrobe suspected that Thornton wrote them. He probably didn't.(31)
In the fall of 1806, Latrobe sent a "private letter" to congress giving more details of problems he faced that delayed completion of the building. The initial problem was the design contest that Thornton won. 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."(33)
Otherwise, Thornton counted on his two friends in power to right the wrongs being done to his design. In the summer of 1806, just before Madison left for Montpelier, Thornton sounded an alarm for the fate of the Capitol dome and held up 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."
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 over Thornton’s grand vestibule. However, Latrobe didn't ask the president to approve the changes. Delays in finishing the South Wing precluded inviting more scrutiny from congress. Since Thornton would continue to harp on Latrobe’s building the South Wing so there could be no dome, he evidently didn’t know about Latrobe’s dome. Around the same time that Latrobe bought into Thornton’s dome. He bought stock in Thornton’s latest enthusiasm, the North Carolina Gold Company. Gold had been found in North Carolina in 1799. In 1805 and 1806, Thornton toured sites with an eye trained by Faujas in the summer of '84 and decided that he would make millions for himself and investors.1 Latrobe and Thornton could easily have reconciled their quests for fame and fortune. But the doctor had to have his way. Thornton took his wife and mother-in-law with him to North Carolina on their return trips they visited Madison and Jefferson at their summer seats. The talk must have been more about gold then domes but if anything was said about the latter, it didn’t assuage Thornton. He soon made clear that he was an anti-administration Federalist. Madison jokingly accused him of being another Vicar of Bray shifting his loyalty after failing to get yet another favor from his old friends.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. If he had left it at that, Thornton may have had no complaint. Then Latrobe 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, 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.(34)
Thornton found the condescension and insults intolerable. He attacked Latrobe in the April 27, 1808, Washington Federalist. He claimed that he had a drawing proving that he drew the elements that Latrobe lauded before Hadfield was hired. At the time, Hadfield wisely ignored the controversy. In 1819, he would claim in a letter to the editor that he had designed "the impost cornices of the basement, without the Galosh ornament, that was meant to top the basement without any moulding." Thornton didn't respond. Thornton 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 the14th.
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. In his reply, 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.(35)
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. 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.(36)
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. Madison continued to like Thornton, but preferred to flatter the sportsman. He invited both Thornton and Tayloe to dinner before the 1811 Jockey Club races. But 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 redecorate the building. Latrobe moved to Pittsburgh intending to build a steamboat. 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.(37)
In 1814, Thornton was in the city but never wrote anything about the fire damage to the Capitol except that he assured Jefferson that it could be repaired. He joked that by burning the library in the North Wing, the British did congress a favor because Jefferson donated his library to fill the void. Latrobe's steamboat project drove him into debt. He asked President Madison to let him restore the Capitol. Once back in the city, he sent a complete report on the damage to the building to Jefferson with drawings of compromised Classical orders.(38)
Fortunately for Thornton's posthumous reputation as an architect, in 1817, Jefferson asked him for advice. He sent Thornton a sketch of a large quadrangle for a university bounded by "a range" of one story dormitories behind a colonnade linking two story pavilions with a classroom below and an apartment for a professor above. He wanted the pavilions to "be models of taste & good architecture, & of a variety of appearance, no two alike, so as to serve as specimens for the Architectural lectures." He asked Thornton for his ideas.
 |
Jefferson's campus above; Thornton's idea below  |
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, they have erected a Ball Alley, but I would allow no Child’s-play." He corrected Jefferson's sketch of the campus by absurdly taking "the liberty of advising that the two buildings next the Angles be joined together, & be placed in the angles." He sent a drawing of "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 and that was what he drew. To Jefferson, they must have seemed anemic. A bold presentation of the Classical orders was the whole point of his project.(AA) Jefferson also wrote to Latrobe pressing him for ideas. In his notebook, Jefferson attributed the design of the Corinthian pavilion to Latrobe, and didn’t mention Thornton in any regard.(39)
Perhaps the best opportunity for Thornton to make another stand against changes to his original design was in February 1819 when the City of Washington Gazette printed a “vignette” of what the Capitol would look like when completed. The Gazette’s editor claimed it was Hadfield’s design as approved by General Washington. It had Thornton’s wings but not as Latrobe restored them with a canopy on top. The center of the building boldly raised a dome atop a squared attic half the height of the wings. The dome swelled higher than the height of the attic. He made the sketch for an engraver to put on a $50 bill printed by the city’s Bank of the Metropolis just after the war. Hadfield corrected the editor’s claim that General Washington approved design and also allowed that Thornton was acknowledged as the designer of the wings. But Hadfield did tout his dome as “more consistent with good architecture,"and thus better than Thornton’s as depicted in his East Elevation that was finally published as a small engraving on a map in 1818. Thornton did not challenge Hadfield. (40)
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. Then he attacked Latrobe for changing his ellipse into a semi-circle and attacked whatever his 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." 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. At the same time, John Trumbull delivered the first of his historical paintings and began lobbying for adequate space and lighting in what increasingly was called the Rotunda. Despite that portion of the building having long been his pet, Thornton offered no opinion.(41)
Ironically, of the plans for the dome, Thornton’s was the lowest which did attract some economical supporters. Latrobe changed the name of the Great Repository to the Crypt which was to be under the floor of the Rotunda. That basement feature, still waiting for the Corpse, made it difficult for Thornton’s Grand Vestibule to rival Latrobe’s garish yet vacuous demi-Halle aux Bles. That in turn prompted calls for a much higher dome, or, to use Thornton’s words: a much larger sugar dish. Thornton can be excused for trying to change the topic of his life. In all his endeavors, his exaggerations continues to influence historians, but contemporaries to did not accord him the fame he thought he deserved. One who knew him well and kept copious notes caught his lying which should reflect on his one-sided narrative of the genesis of the Capitol’s design.1. National Intelligencer 5 January 1801, p. 4 & 1 February 1802.
2. "No. 9 Report of James Hoban...November 13, 1799" in New York Gazette 17 December 1799 p. 3.
3. Harris p. 333 footnote 11; Last will and testament ; Annals of Congress
4. Harris p. 528; Diary pp. 90-1.
5. WT to Marshall 2 or 6 January 1800 Harris p. 526, Harris dates the letter four days before AMT wrote that "in the afternoon wrote to Genl. Marshall...." p. 92 - Harris strains to give WT a leading role but Lear to Adams 1 January 1800 covers issues raised by Thornton in his letter to Marshall; Stoddert to WT 23 January 1800 Harris pp. 532-3.
6. WT to Blodget 23 February 1800, Harris p. 535-8; Latrobe to Robert G. Harper, 24 April 1800, Correspondence p. 160.
7. Harris p. 523; AMT notebook vol. 1 image ; Diary pp. 89-90, 115, 174-5; Harris pp. 582, 591; WT to Jefferson 27 May 1817.
8. Diary p. 102, 107; Harris, p. 490
9. Jefferson to WT 23 April 1800; WT to Jefferson 7 May 1800,
10. Diary p. 146.
11. Commissioners to Andrews, 1 November 1800; Diary pp. 151-2, 208, 222;
11A. Greenleaf and Law in the Federal City, p. 250.
12. Tristram Dalton to Adams 21 June 1798, Adams Papers; WT to Stoddert 28 June 1798; WT to Jefferson 30 December 1800; National Intelligencer 8 & 31 December 1800; Norwich Courier 8 October 1800;
13. Diary p. 223; The Kennebec Gazette 6 March 1801; the War office caught fire on November 8, 1800, and the Treasury Building on January 20, 1801, Bryan, pp. 384-5.
14. William Smith Shaw to Thomas Boylston Adams 8 January 1801; on problems with speculators see John Thomson Mason to Jefferson 31 March 1801; on problems with Maryland loan see Commrs. to Jefferson 28 March 1801; on $10,000 appropriated for local improvements see Inhabitants (Thomas Law) to Jefferson 21 March 1801.
15. Commrs. to Jefferson 1 June 1801
16. Hadfield to Jefferson 27 March 1801; Daniel Brent to Jefferson 26 June 1802.
17. Jefferson to Commrs., 2 June 1801; Philadelphia Gazette 18 June 1801.
18. WT to Madison 8 September 1801; Madison to Jefferson 16 September 1801. Madison to WT 8 August 1801; WT to Madison 16 March 1801, 15 August 1801; Harris pp. 560-1, 581, National Intelligencer 8 December 1800; agreement with Voss 26 June 1802.
19. WT to Jefferson 17 April 1802; Jefferson enclosure 14 April 1802; White to Jefferson 13 April 1802; Jefferson to WT 23 April 1802: Munroe to Jefferson 15 June 1802.
20. On termination of board see Commrs. to Jefferson 1 June 1802; Clark, "Dr. and Mrs. Thornton" p. 189; On Patent Office appointment see 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; Thornton deposition, American State Papers vol p. 193
21. Jefferson to Claxton, 26 October 1802, Harbaugh et al to Jefferson 27 October 1802;
22. Latrobe to Jefferson, 27 March 1802; Jefferson to Latrobe, 2 November 1802; Latrobe to Jefferson, 9 November 1802, 28 November 1802.
23. Annals of Congress, House, 28 February 1803; Jefferson to WT 6 March 1803; Jefferson to Latrobe 6 March 1803.
24. Latrobe to Jefferson, 4 April 1803 Enclosure,"Report on the Public Buildings:" Latrobe, Benjamin, The Correspondence and Miscellaneous Papers of, p. 278;
25. Latrobe to Lenthall, 5 May 1803, Ibid. p. 289; Latrobe Journal p. 207 ;
26. Latrobe 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;
27. Latrobe to Jefferson, 27 & 28 February 1804, Jefferson to Latrobe 28 February 1804; Op. Cit. pp. 437ff
28. "The Report of the Surveyor of Public Buildings," Latrobe Correspondence pp. 444-5; Latrobe to Lenthall, 8 March 1804, Correspondence p. 458.
29. Blodget, Economica; a Statistical Manual for the United States, 1806, pp. iii, 167.
30. In his memoir B. O. Tayloe described the duel as arising from Thornton's "ludicrous account" in verse of another duel settled without a shot. p. 99; Latrobe to WT 28 April 1804, Correspondence pp. 481-2; Latrobe to Lenthall 28 March 1804 p. 463; Brown, History of Capitol, new edition, pp. 113ff.
31. Hallet to Madison 9 September 1809; Washington Federalist 6 March 1805.
32. ad in National Intelligencer 23 April 1806; Thornton v. Carson's Executor, Google Books; WT to Madison 6 August 1806, Madison to Jefferson 15 August 1806; Jefferson to Madison, 28 August 1806; AMT notebook vol. 2 image 137ff; Madison Papers "Account with William Thornton" 5 December 1809.
33. Latrobe's Private Letter is in Correspondence vol. 2 pp. 305ff where quotes from Thornton's Index can be found in footnotes.
34. National Intelligencer 30 November 1807p. 1.
35. Washington Federalist, 20 April 1808; Latrobe Correspondence vol. 2 pp. 600ff; Ibid., 30 April 1808, p 2; 7 May 1808, p. 3.
36. AMT notebook vol. 3 image 121; Ridout p. 122.
37. Washington Expositor September 24, 1808; Washington Federalist 15 November 1808 p. 3; Latrobe to Madison 8 September 1809; AMT notebook vol. 3 image 130.
38. WT to Jefferson 11 December 1814 ; Latrobe to Jefferson 12 July 1815; Latrobe to Madison 25 February 1815;
39. Harris, Charles M, Library of Congress web article "William Thornton 1759-1828:", Jefferson to WT 9 May 1817; WT to Jefferson 27 May 1817; Latrobe to Jefferson, 24 July 1817; Jefferson to Latrobe, 9 May 1817; Jefferson to Latrobe, 19 May 1818, Latrobe to Jefferson, 30 March 1818, enclosure; Carter, Edward C., Benjamin Henry Latrobe: Growth and Development of Washington. RCHS vot 71/72, p 142.
40. 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.
41. Allen, William, "The Bulfinch Years 1818-1829" History of the United States Capitol, p. 143; Latrobe, Benjamin, Vindication, 1819
Comments
Post a Comment