Jefferson, Thomas (1743-1826) to Daniel Call
High-resolution images are available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription. Or click here for more information. You may also order a pdf of the image from us here.
Gilder Lehrman Collection #: GLC00963 Author/Creator: Jefferson, Thomas (1743-1826) Place Written: Monticello, Virginia Type: Autograph letter signed Date: 23 October 1799 Pagination: 1 p. ; 25 x 20.5 cm. Order a Copy
States that he received the decree against the Hendersons and is satisfied with it. Discusses the legal proceedings against his neighbors, the Henderson family, who built a mill and dam downstream from Jefferson's mill and dam on the Rivanna River. Their dam was affecting the water flow to his property. Remarks that he does not know if the defendants will oppose the decree. Mentions that all of the defendants but three are infants.
Daniel Call was a lawyer of Richmond, Va. and brother-in-law to John Marshall. The Henderson family consisted of Elizabeth, the widow of Bennett Henderson who died in 1793, and eleven children. They held land adjacent to Jefferson's estate upon which they had erected a flour mill and dam downstream from Jefferson's own mill and dam on the Rivanna River. To avoid impairment of his own mill, Jefferson sought and obtained an injunction preventing the Hendersons from increasing the height of their dam. Malone, Sage of Monticello, 505 and Boynton Merill, Jr., Jefferson's Nephews: A Frontier Tragedy (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1976), 55-63.
Monticello Oct. 23. 1799.
Sir
I recieved in due time your favor inclosing the decree against the Hendersons & thank you for your advice on the mode of executing it. I shall use the cautions you recommend. The decree is upon the whole quite satisfactory. It is true I had thought that he who erected a nuisance ought to be made to abate it, & that in the present case the abatement will be considerably expensive yet that once incurred, is done with for ever; [struck: & the] whereas the principle established will be perpetually valuable; that is to say that the water shall be reduced to it's natural level as before the erection of the mills. It happens that nature furnishes the evidence of that; for it was fixed by a natural ridge of rocks running across the river at Henderson's mill. This [struck: threw] caused a reflux [inserted above: within my lines &] to within a small distance of my mill. Every stone therefore laid on this natural ridge for raising the water, was a wrong to me & must be removed. If I find I can get other stone as convenient for my mill, I shall [struck: leave] throw this into the water adjacent: If I cannot I think I shall take whatever of it suits me on the rule that he who confuses my property by mixing it with his own, thereby gives me his. I do not know whether the principal def[endent]. will oppose the execution. He may perhaps on [inserted: some] pretence of construction. I much wonder I did not state in the bill that all the defs. but three are infants, the youngest not more than 7 years old now. It appears only I suppose in the sheriff's returns, who served the process on the guardians of the infants. However we will let it go off as it is, as I am perfectly satisfied they can never shake the main principle of the decree. I am with esteem Sir
Your most obedt. humble servt.
Th. Jefferson
Daniel Call esq.
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.