Jefferson Memorial Education Series: Each New Generation

Inscription on the southeast interior wall of the Jefferson Memorial

NPS

Grade Level:

High School: Ninth through Twelfth Grade

Objective:

Compare an inscription in the Jefferson Memorial to its original source. Determine how and why an inscription is used. Analyze Jefferson's argument in the original source. Does the edited inscription change your understanding of the argument?

Vocabulary

amendment: the process of altering or amending a law or document
barbarous: harsh or cruel
constitution:  the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it
corporeal: a physical thing that is capable of being seen and touched
inscription: words that are written or engraved on a surface
preposterous: contrary to reason or common sense
quotation: a group of words taken from a text or speech and repeated by someone other than the original author or speaker 
Quoting out of Context: the practice of misquoting someone by shortening what they said or by leaving out surrounding words or sentences 
reformation: the action or process of changing an institution or practice

Guiding Questions

Why do you think the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission chose this quotation?
Does this inscription accurately represent Jefferson's beliefs and philosophies?
After reading the letter and comparing it to the inscription, do you think this is an example of quoting out of context?
If you were on the commission, how would you write the inscription? 

Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816

Library of Congress

Jefferson and Government

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission chose the inscription on the southeast wall of the memorial chamber to represent Thomas Jefferson's views on government. The text comes from a letter that Jefferson wrote to an innkeeper and author from Virginia named Samuel Kercheval on July 12, 1816. Kercheval, who was well-known for writing the book History of the Valley of Virginia, wrote to Jefferson to ask his opinion on the “necessity of calling a convention for the revision and amendment of our State constitution.” Kercheval was part of an effort to give more legislative power to Virginia’s western counties. Since Thomas Jefferson helped write Virginia's original state constitution, Kercheval wanted to know his thoughts about changing it.

Think About It

Based solely on the inscription, what does Jefferson think about amending constitutions and changing laws?  

Compare the Primary Source

The full paragraph of Jefferson's response to Kercheval in his letter is too long to put on the wall of the memorial, so the commission had to edit it. Here is the complete text. The words that were pulled out for the inscription are underlined.

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors. It is this preposterous idea which has lately deluged Europe in blood. Their monarchs, instead of wisely yielding to the gradual change of circumstances, of favoring progressive accommodation to progressive improvement, have clung to old abuses, entrenched themselves behind steady habits, and obliged their subjects to seek through blood and violence rash and ruinous innovations, which, had they been referred to the peaceful deliberations and collected wisdom of the nation, would have been put into acceptable and salutary forms. Let us follow no such examples, nor weakly believe that one generation is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its own affairs. Let us, as our sister States have done, avail ourselves of our reason and experience, to correct the crude essays of our first and unexperienced, although wise, virtuous, and well-meaning councils. And lastly, let us provide in our constitution for its revision at stated periods. What these periods should be, nature herself indicates. By the European tables of mortality, of the adults living at any one moment of time, a majority will be dead in about nineteen years. At the end of that period, then, a new majority is come into place; or, in other words, a new generation. Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before. It has then, like them, a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness; consequently, to accommodate to the circumstances in which it finds itself, that received from its predecessors; and it is for the peace and good of mankind, that a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years, should be provided by the constitution; so that it may be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation, to the end of time, if anything human can so long endure. It is now forty years since the constitution of Virginia was formed. The same tables inform us, that, within that period, two-thirds of the adults then living are now dead. Have then the remaining third, even if they had the wish, the right to hold in obedience to their will, and to laws heretofore made by them, the other two-thirds, who, with themselves, compose the present mass of adults? If they have not, who has? The dead? But the dead have no rights. They are nothing; and nothing cannot own something. Where there is no substance, there can be no accident. This corporeal globe, and everything upon it, belong to its present corporeal inhabitants, during their generation. They alone have a right to direct what is the concern of themselves alone, and to declare the law of that direction; and this declaration can only be made by their majority. That majority, then, has a right to depute representatives to a convention, and to make the constitution what they think will be the best for themselves. But how collect their voice? This is the real difficulty. If invited by private authority, or county or district meetings, these divisions are so large that few will attend; and their voice will be imperfectly, or falsely pronounced. Here, then, would be one of the advantages of the ward divisions I have proposed. The mayor of every ward, on a question like the present, would call his ward together, take the simple yea or nay of its members, convey these to the county court, who would hand on those of all its wards to the proper general authority; and the voice of the whole people would be thus fairly, fully, and peaceably expressed, discussed, and decided by the common reason of the society. If this avenue be shut to the call of sufferance, it will make itself heard through that of force, and we shall go on, as other nations are doing, in the endless circle of oppression, rebellion, reformation; and oppression, rebellion, reformation, again; and so on forever.

1776 Virginia State Constitution

Library of Virginia

Think About It

Does the context of the full paragraph change your analysis of Jefferson's argument?

In the letter, Jefferson states that each new generation has a right to choose for itself “the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness.” That every 20 years, the state constitution should be handed off to the next generation to amend and repair as they see fit.

• Do you agree with the idea that state constitutions should be rewritten every 20 years? How about the U.S. Constitution? Explain your answer, including any positive and negative effects of regular change.
• Jefferson is concerned that not everyone in a generation will have their voice heard if a constitution is amended by calling a constitutional convention. Describe in your own words Jefferson's idea for how to "collect voices." Do you think this is a good plan?
• What are some ways that people in your generation communicate? How are these methods different than the way people in other generations (parents, grandparents, teachers, young children) get their voices heard?
• What changes would you like to see in the way government works today?

For Teachers

Samuel Kercheval wanted Thomas Jefferson's approval of the plan to amend the Virginia state constitution. Jefferson was the former president and one of the original authors of the existing state constitution, so his endorsement would be very valuable. Jefferson responded favorably to the idea. He acknowledged that in 1776, the leaders of the revolution were focused more on eliminating anything associated with a monarchy than on creating a properly functioning republic. He refused however, to give Kercheval permission to publish his views on the matter suggesting that he no longer wanted to participate in controversies.

The views described in this letter were not initially considered for inclusion in the memorial. The inscription gained support, however, after the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission could not come to a consensus on an inscription regarding Jefferson’s position on slavery.

Additional Resources

You can access the full text of Samuel Kercheval's letter and Thomas Jefferson's reply at the National Archives:
“Henry Tompkinson” (Samuel Kercheval) to Thomas Jefferson, 13 June 1816
Proposals to Revise the Virginia Constitution: I. Thomas Jefferson to “Henry Tompkinson” (Samuel Kercheval), 12 July 1816