“ note, it was unnoticed. as soon as Publicola attacked Paine, swarms appeared in his defence. to Publicola then & not in the least degree to my note, this whole contest is to be ascribed & all it’s consequences. You speak of the execrable paragraph in the Connecticut paper. this it is true appeared before Publicola. but it had no more relation to Paine’s pamphlet & my note, than to the Alcoran. I am satisfied the writer of it had never seen either; for when I past through Connecticut about the middle of June, not a copy had ever been seen by anybody either in Harford [ sic -- Ed. ] or New Haven, nor probably in that whole state: and that paragraph was so notoriously the reverse of the disinterestedness of character which you are known to profess by every body who knows your name, that I never heard a person speak of the paragraph but with an indignation in your behalf, which did you entire justice. this paragraph then certainly did not flow from my note, any more than the publications which Publicola produced. indeed it was impossible that my note should occasion your name to be brought into question; for so far from naming you, I had not even in view any writing which I mi [ ght] suppose to be yours, & the opinions I alluded to were principally those I had heard in common conversation from a sect aiming at the subversion of the present government to bring in their favorite form of a king, lords, & commons . . . ”

On July 28, between the writing of his letter to Adams and reply of the latter, Jefferson wrote to William Short: “ . . . Paine’s pamphlet has been published & read with general applause here. it was attacked by a writer under the name of Publicola, and defended by a host of republican volunteers. none of the defenders are known. I have desired m ( ^~ r) Remsen to make up a complete collection of these pieces from Bache’s papers, the tory-paper of Fenno rarely admitting anything which defends the present form of government in opposition to his desire of subverting it to make way for a king, lords & commons. there are high names here in favour of this doctrine, but these publications have drawn forth pretty generally expressions of the public sentiment on this subject, & I thank God to find they are, to a man, firm as a rock in their republicanism . . . ”

The following day, July 29, Jefferson wrote to Paine himself, at that time in London: “ Your favor of Sep. 28. 1790. did not come to my hands till Feb. 11. and I have not answered it sooner because it said you would be here in the Spring. That expectation being past, I now acknolege the reciept. indeed I am glad you did not come away till you had written your ‘Rights of man’. that has been much read here, with avidity [ and] pleasure. a writer under the signature of Publicola, attacked it. a host of champions entered the arena immediately in your defence. the discussion excited the public attention. recalled it to the ‘Defence of the American constitutions’ and the ‘Discourses on Davila’, which it had kindly passed over without censure in the moment, and very general expressions of their sense have been now drawn forth: & I thank god that they appear firm in their republicanism notwithstanding the contrary hopes & assertions of a sect here, high in names, but small in numbers. these had flattered themselves that the silence of the people under the ‘Defence’ and ‘Davila’ was a symptom of their conversion to the doctrine of king, lords, & commons. they are checked at least by your pamphlet, & the people confirmed in their good old faith . . . ”

On February 13, 1792, Paine wrote from London to Jefferson: “. . . I have enclosed six copies of my work for yourself in a parcel addressed to the President, and three or four for my other friends, which I wish you to take the trouble of presenting . . .”

Jefferson acknowledged these on June 19: “ I received with great pleasure the present of your pamphlets, as well for the thing itself as that it was a testimony of your recollection. would you believe it possible that in this country there should be high & important characters who need your lessons in republicanism, & who do not heed them? it is but too true that we have a sect preaching up & panting after an English constitution of king, lords, & commons, & whose heads are itching for crowns, coronets & mitres, but our people, my good friend, are firm and unanimous in their principles of republicanism, & there is no better proof of it than that they love wdat [ sic -- Ed. ] you write and read it with ”