number of years after his election, he was at least given public stamp of approval at this time. Through association with the society he was in due time to form valuable and enduring friendships, and during his later residence in Philadelphia was to distinguish himself by great zeal for science.

When the list of members elected in January, 1802, was published in the Philadelphia press," the Gazette of the United States took it upon itself to state exactly who and what "Tom Cooper" was, in order that the public might know how justly to appreciate the American Philosophical Society." A Republican writer hastened to the defense and gave enthusiastic description of Cooper's attainments:

The talents and literary acquirements of Mr. Cooper are known and acknowledged by his very enemies. There are not many men in America who possess knowledge drawn from so great a variety of sources. It is a fact beyond contradiction that there are very few whose reading has been so diversified or so extensive. Whatever may have been the decision of a partial court, it is certainly novel to imagine that a judicial sentence can either augment or diminish the talents or science of any man.62

The writer then stated that the Federalist paper had attacked the American Philosophical Society before, the obvious reason being the election of Jefferson as its president. He admitted that although the constitution of the society forbade political discussion, it was nevertheless true that most of its members and, indeed, most scientific men, were democrats. An editorial in the Aurora of the same date attacked "the impudence of the

60 Aurora, July 23, 1802; Philadelphia Gazette, July 23; cf. list of members and officers in the society's Proceedings, XXVII.

61 Quoted by the Aurora, July 28, 1802.

62 Communication signed "J. R. S." Aurora, July 28, 1802.

Connecticut youths" who published "the Tory Gazette." The Republican paper said that Cooper was prosecuted for speaking the truth, but that he was far superior to his persecutors.

Among the whole of his persecutors, nay, it may be without risque or contradiction asserted, among the whole tory faction— so much learning, genius, universal science, wit, fine taste and love of his species, are not to be found as centred in the man Thomas Cooper-whom philosophy has justified against faction.

The commendation of his learning, if not of his taste, was well deserved. His printed works, his letters, and the catalogue of his private library reveal him as an omnivorous reader. Probably no man of his generation in America had read more widely or could make greater display of erudition. His intellectual judgments were often hasty and not uninfluenced by personal considerations, and he lacked creative originality; but the energy of his mind was almost incredible and few of his contemporaries could compare with him either in intellectual acquirements or in prophetic insight into the future course of thought. He was much like the greater Jefferson in the universality and timelessness of his genius. The American Philosophical Society did well to give him its approbation.

The criticisms based upon the circumstances of his trial and conviction, we may be sure troubled him not at all. He never wavered from his conviction of the entire justification of his conduct. A petition asking the repayment of his fine was presented by him to Congress, April 28, 1802, when it aroused discussion but suffered the inevitable postponement. He had it introduced regu

64

63 Bronson and Chauncy, editors of the Gazette of the United States. See an editorial in the Aurora, July 30, for further defense of Cooper.

64 Annals of Congress, 7 Cong., 1 Sess., p. 1251. There is no account of the discussion. See also Aurora, May 3, 1802.

larly thereafter, wrote many letters about it, ever insisting that the constitutional right of freedom of speech was involved, and, if the family tradition be true, when upon his deathbed requested his wife to carry on the fight, which she did with ultimate success. Far from being ashamed of his conviction under the Sedition Act, he ever gloried in it, and the effort to secure redress extended through and beyond his life.

65 See below, pp. 374-6.

65

CHAPTER VI

A CONSERVATIVE JUDGE AND THE

DEMOCRACY, 1804-1811

2

His work on the Luzerne claims completed, Cooper became in August, 1804, president judge of the third district of the state of Pennsylvania. He had long expected an appointment to the bench. Shortly after the inauguration in 1801 he had written Jefferson that Governor McKean expected to nominate him president judge under the new judiciary system which the Republicans expected to establish at the next session of the legislature.1 A reorganization and enlargement of the judiciary was recommended by the governor at the next session, but the recommendation was not carried into effect until 1806. Meanwhile, Cooper had been appointed to the Luzerne commission and by the time his work there was finished a vacancy had occurred and he received the longpromised appointment. The third district included the counties of Berks, Northampton, Luzerne, and Northumberland. In 1806, the state was divided into ten districts instead of five, and he was then assigned to the eighth district, consisting of the counties of Northumberland, Luzerne, and Lycoming. So his entire service as judge was among the people of his home county and among the

3

1 March 17, 1801, Jefferson Papers, CX.

2 See his address to the legislature, Dec. 5, 1801, Aurora, Dec. 9; cf. ibid., Jan. 1, 1802.

3 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, ch. 2646, sec. 12.

Luzerne settlers for whom he had done so much. The president judge with the county judges in each county constituted the court of common pleas and by 1806, certainly, Cooper received a salary of sixteen hundred dollars.*

While he was absorbed in work of an essentially judicial character in Luzerne, and was less free and doubtless less inclined to play his accustomed rôle as a member of the opposition, certain of the Republicans of the state turned upon the judiciary, where offensive Federalists and others unmindful of democracy yet lingered." Alexander Addison, president judge of the fifth district, was impeached and found guilty of misdemeanor by the senate in January, 1803, removed from office, and disqualified. The Aurora, a few weeks later, gave a list of sixteen judges and justices of the peace against whom complaints had been preferred to the house of representatives. In four cases besides that of Addison the governor had been addressed by the two houses for removal and the decision was pending in several other cases."

Not only was there this direct assault upon the judges, but there were also numerous flank attacks in the agitation for the reconstitution of the judiciary so as to make it more democratic. As early as the autumn of 1803, Cooper opposed in the press certain of the proposed "hazardous experiments," and stated that he saw little

4 Pennsylvania Constitution of 1790, art. V, sec. IV; Act of April 13, 1791, Statutes at Large, ch. 1575, sec. 3; ch. 2646, sec. 13.

An admirable summary of political developments in the state during this entire period is given by William M. Meigs in his "Pennsylvania Politics Early in this Century," Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XVII, 462-90. For the period 1800-1805, see also McMaster, United States, III, 153-162.

6 March 29, 1803.

7 The constitution of 1790 provided both for impeachment and for removal by the governor upon the address of two-thirds of each branch of the legislature. Art. V, sec. II.