The Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom Also Stated, “To Compel a Man to Furnish Contributions of Money for the Propagation of Opinions which He Disbelieves Is Sinful and Tyrannical”

It [the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom] asserted: “The impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time.” It also stated, “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.” And: “Even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion” would be a deprivation of liberty.

--Alf J. Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2008), 176.

The Mind Must Be Freed from the Tyranny of Censoring Governments: “I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God Eternal Hostility to Every Form of Tyranny over the Mind of Man”

But Jefferson was so impressed with the last words of the “epitaph,” whatever their origin, that he tried to have them adopted as Virginia's motto and, failing that, adopted them as the personal motto surrounding the monogram on his seal: “Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” Later Jefferson was to express a similar idea in even more memorable words of his own: “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” Freedom of the mind was, to him, at least as vital as freedom of speech and press. The mind must be freed from the tyranny of censoring governments, but it must be freed also from the domination of ignorance and superstition.

--Alf J. Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2008), 174.

To Take a Single Step Beyond the Boundaries Thus Especially Drawn Around the Powers of Congress Is to Take Possession of a Boundless Field of Power, No Longer Susceptible of Any Definition

Attorney General Randolph had already expressed his firm conviction that the National Bank bill was unconstitutional when Jefferson wrote his reply to Washington. Thus the Secretary of State, along with Madison and Randolph, became part of a trio of Virginians making an orchestrated attack on the bank.

In his reply to the President, Jefferson methodically listed the three things that the bill was designed to do. It would form a corporation with functions crossing state lines and challenging state authority. In effect, it would grant a monopoly. It would authorize directors of this new corporate monopoly to make regulations superseding in some instances the laws of the states. He then examined these provisions in the light of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States which had not yet been formally adopted but was assured of passage. He anticipated that it would be the Twelfth Amendment, and so designated it, but it became the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to  the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." "To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus especially drawn around the powers of Congress," Jefferson argued, "is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition."

--Alf J. Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2008), 294.

Whether One Generation of Men Has a Right to Bind Another Is a Question Pertaining to the Fundamental Principles of Every Government

The concluding article of Lafayette's draft, asserting the right of successive generations "to examine and, if necessary, to modify the form of government" seemed to echo Jefferson's Declaration of Independence. At this distance, in view of the close association of Enlightenment figures from France and the United States, it is difficult to say who influenced whom. It must have been difficult even in their own generation. Distinguished historians have cited Jefferson's letter of September 6, 1789, to James Madison as an example of radically original thought, yet there is strong evidence that its central idea was simply borrowed from an Englishman and amplified by Jefferson. The American minister wrote:

The question whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have ben started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government. . . . I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, 'that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living': that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. . . . 

It may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. . . . 

This principle that the earth belongs to the living, and not to the dead, is of very extensive application and consequences, in every country, and most especially in France. 

--Alf J. Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2008), 268.

In Obedience to the Principle So Often Attributed to Sir Thomas Gresham, Paper Money Issued by the National Bank Was Driving Out Dependable Coinage

Jefferson charged that the national debt had been grossly mishandled. It had become too large to be taken care of by the ordinary sources of revenue, so that the impost had been raised to such a height that the collectors might have to bear arms. Even so, the sums obtained were still insufficient to service the debt, and the federal government had to resort to excise taxes. This expedient was so unpopular as to invite mass resistance. To the Revolutionary generation, revolt against taxation was not inconceivable.

In obedience to the principle so often attributed to Sir Thomas Gresham, paper money issued by the National Bank was driving out dependable coinage. This ghost currency served only the lenders, whose annual profit of 10 to 12 percent was "taken out of the pockets of the people." The bank, which was supposed to stimulate commerce and insure national prosperity, was imperiling both commerce and agriculture by substituting "paper speculation" for true production.

The political and social effects of the bank, he argued, were even worse than the economic. The institution's policies had created in Congress a "corrupt squadron." The term now conjures up visions of outright bribery but Jefferson meant simply conflict of interest in that Congressmen who were stockholders in the bank were also framing the legislation that governed it.

--Alf J. Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2008), 308.