text:
Diplomatic history

Diplomatic history deals with the history of international relations between states. Diplomatic history can be different from international relations in that the former can concern itself with the foreign policy of one state while the latter deals with relations between two or more states. Diplomatic history tends to be more concerned with the history of diplomacy, but international relations concern more with current events and creating a model intended to shed explanatory light on international politics.

Ranke
In the 5th century BCE the Greek historian Thucydides was highly concerned with the relations among states. However Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886), the leading German historian of the 19th century, codified the modern form of diplomatic history. Ranke wrote largely on the history of Early Modern Europe, using the diplomatic archives of the European powers (particularly the Republic of Venice) to construct a detailed understanding of the history of Europe wie es eigentlich gewesen ist ("as it actually happened"). Ranke saw diplomatic history as the most important kind of history to write because of his idea of the "Primacy of Foreign Affairs" (Primat der Aussenpolitik), arguing that the concerns of international relations drive the internal development of the state. Ranke's understanding of diplomatic history relied on using as sources the large number of official documents produced by modern western governments; he argued that historians should examine such sources in an objective and neutral spirit.

20th century scholars
Ranke's understanding of the dominance of foreign policy, and hence an emphasis on diplomatic history, remained the dominant paradigm in historical writing through the first half of the twentieth century. In the early 20th centuries, work by prominent diplomatic historians such as Charles Webster, Harold Temperley, and Bernadotte Everly Schmitt focused on great European events, especially wars and peace conferences. A notable breakthrough in diplomatic historiography occurred in 1910 when the French government start to publish all of the archives relating to the war of 1870.

Ranke's approach, combined with the effects of the War Guilt Clause in the Treaty of Versailles (1919) that blamed Germany, stimulated a massive outpouring in many languages on the origins of the war of 1914. The Bolsheviks in Russia published key secret papers from the Allies in 1918 and other governments commissioned carefully edited, multivolume collections of key documents in their possession. Numerous historians wrote multi-volume histories of the origins of the war. In the interwar period, most diplomatic historians tended to blame all of the Great Powers of 1914 for the First World War, arguing that the war was in effect everybody's responsibility. In general, the early works in this vein fit fairly comfortably into Ranke's emphasis on Aussenpolitik.

Historian Muriel Chamberlain notes that after the First World War:
 * diplomatic history replaced constitutional history as the flagship of historical investigation, at once the most important, most exact and most sophisticated of historical studies.

She adds that after 1945, the trend reversed, allowing political, intellectual and social history to displace diplomatic history.

For the first half of the 20th century, most diplomatic history working within the narrow confines of the Primat der Aussenpolitik approach was very narrowly concerned with foreign-policy making elites with little reference to broader historical forces. The most notable exceptions to this tendency were A. J. P. Taylor and William Medlicott in Britain, Pierre Renouvin in France, and William L. Langer in the United States, who examined economic and domestic political forces.

Causes of World War Two
Sir Winston Churchill's multi-volume The Second World War, especially the first volume The Gathering Storm (1948) set the framework and the interpretation for much later historiography. His interpretation, echoing his own position before the war, that World War II was caused by the mad ambitions of Adolf Hitler; Churchill damned the cowardly and weak-willed British and French leaders who used appeasement in a futile effort to avoid the war. Churchill did not consider the argument that the alternative to appeasement was a premature war that Germany would win in 1938. The British historian A. J. P. Taylor's 1961 book The Origins of the Second World War challenged Churchill's viewpoint and argued that Hitler had no master-plan for conquering the world. Instead he was an ordinary statesman –-an opportunistic leader seizing whatever chances he had for expansionism. The fact that a world war started over Poland in 1939 was due to diplomatic miscalculation by all the countries concerned, instead of being a case of German aggression. British historians such as D.C. Watt, Paul Kennedy, George Peden and David Dilks argued that appeasement was not an aberration, and that it was an old British tradition which in this case flowed from numerous structural, economic and military factors. Historians such as Christopher Thorne and Harry Hinsley abandoned the previous focus on individual leaders to discuss the broader societal influences such as public opinion and narrower ones like intelligence on diplomatic relations. In recent years the debates regarding the 1930s have continued, but new approaches are in use, such as an analysis in terms of Britain's national identity.

French approaches
A group of French historians centered around Pierre Renouvin (1893–1974) and his protégés Jean-Baptiste Duroselle and Maurice Baumont started a new type of international history in the 1950s that included taking into account what Renouvin called forces profondes (profound forces) such as the influence of domestic politics on French foreign policy. However, Renouvin and his followers still followed the concept of la décadence with Renouvin arguing that French society under the Third Republic was “sorely lacking in initiative and dynamism” and Baumont arguing that French politicians had allowed "personal interests" to override "any sense of the general interest". In 1979, Duroselle's book La Décadence offered a total condemnation of the entire Third Republic as weak, cowardly and degenerate.

Fischer debate on World War One
At the same time, in 1961 when the German historian Fritz Fischer published Griff nach der Weltmacht, which established that Germany had caused the First World War led to the fierce "Fischer Controversy" that tore apart the West German historical profession. One result of Fischer's book was the rise in the Primat der Innenpolitik (Primacy of Domestic Politics) approach. As a result of the rise of the Primat der Innenpolitik school, diplomatic historians increasing started to pay attention to domestic politics. In the 1970s, the conservative German historian Andreas Hillgruber, together with his close associate Klaus Hildebrand, was involved in a very acrimonious debate with the leftish German historian Hans-Ulrich Wehler over the merits of the Primat der Aussenpolitik ("primacy of foreign politics") and Primat der Innenpolitik ("primacy of domestic politics") schools. Hillgruber and Hildebrand made a case for the traditional Primat der Aussenpolitik approach to diplomatic history with the stress on examining the records of the relevant foreign ministry and studies of the foreign policy decision-making elite. Wehler, who favored the Primat der Innenpolitik approach, for his part contended that diplomatic history should be treated as a sub-branch of social history, calling for theoretically based research, and argued that the real focus should be on the study of the society in question. Moreover, under the influence of the Primat der Innenpolitik approach, diplomatic historians in the 1960s, 70s and 80s start to borrow models from the social sciences.

Mason–Overy debate on internal pressures inside Nazi Germany
A notable example of the Primat der Innenpolitik approach was the claim by the British Marxist historian Timothy Mason who claimed that the launch of World War II in 1939 was best understood as a “barbaric variant of social imperialism”. Mason argued that “Nazi Germany was always bent at some time upon a major war of expansion”. However, Mason argued that the timing of such a war was determined by domestic political pressures, especially as relating to a failing economy, and had nothing to do with what Hitler wanted. In Mason's view in the period between 1936 and 1941, it was the state of the German economy, and not Hitler's "will" or "intentions" that was the most important determinate on German decision-making on foreign policy. Mason argued that the Nazi leaders were deeply haunted by the November Revolution of 1918, and was most unwilling to see any fall in working class living standards out of the fear that it might provoke another November Revolution. According to Mason, by 1939, the “overheating” of the German economy caused by rearmament, the failure of various rearmament plans produced by the shortages of skilled workers, industrial unrest caused by the breakdown of German social policies, and the sharp drop in living standards for the German working class forced Hitler into going to war at a time and place not of his choosing. Mason contended that when faced with the deep socio-economic crisis the Nazi leadership had decided to embark upon a ruthless “smash and grab” foreign policy of seizing territory in Eastern Europe which could be pitilessly plundered to support living standards in Germany. Mason's theory of a "Flight into war" being imposed on Hitler generated much controversy, and in the 1980s he conducted a series of debates with economic historian Richard Overy over this matter. Overy maintained the decision to attack Poland was not caused by structural economic problems, but rather was the result of Hitler wanting a localized war at that particular time in history. For Overy, a major problem with the Mason thesis was that it rested on the assumption that in a way unrecorded by the records, that information was passed on to Hitler about the Reich economic problems. Overy argued that there was a major difference between economic pressures inducted by the problems of the Four Year Plan, and economic motives to seize raw materials, industry and foreign reserve of neighboring states as a way of accelerating the Four Year Plan. Moreover, Overy asserted that the repressive capacity of the German state as a way of dealing with domestic unhappiness was somewhat downplayed by Mason.

Japanese-American relations
In addition, because World War II was a global war, diplomatic historians start to focus on Japanese-American relations to understand why Japan had attacked the United States in 1941. This in turn led diplomatic historians to start to abandon the previous Euro-centric approach in favor of a more global approach. A sign of the changing times was the rise to prominence of such diplomatic historians such as the Japanese historian Chihiro Hosoya, the British historian Ian Nish, and the American historian Akira Iriye, which was the first time that Asian specialists became noted diplomatic historians.

Vietnam war and revisionism
The Cold War and decolonization greatly added the tendency to a more global diplomatic history. The Vietnam War led to the rise of a revisionist school in the United States, which led many American historians such as Gabriel Kolko and William Appleman Williams to reject traditional diplomatic history in favor of a Primat der Innenpolitik approach that saw a widespread examination of the influence of American domestic politics together with various social, economic and cultural forces on foreign-policy making. In general, the American Cold War revisionists tended to focus on American foreign policy decision-making with respect to the genesis of the Cold War in the 1940s and on how the United States became involved in Vietnam in the 1960s. Starting in the 1960s, a ferocious debate has taken place within Cold War historiography between the advocates of the “orthodox” school which saw the Cold War as a case of Soviet aggression such as Vojtech Mastny against the proponents of the “revisionist” school which saw the Cold War as a case of American aggression. Latterly, a third school known as "neo-orthodox" whose most prominent member is the American historian John Lewis Gaddis has emerged, which holds through the United States borne some responsibility for the Cold War, the lion's share of the responsibility goes to the Soviet Union.

Recent trends
In Europe diplomatic history fell out of favor in the late Cold War era. Since the collapse of communism in 1989–91, however, there has been a renaissance, led especially by historians of the early modern era, in the history of diplomacy. The new approach differs from previous perspectives by the wholesale incorporation of perspectives from political science, sociology, the history of mentalities, and cultural history.

In the U.S. since the 1980s, the discipline of diplomatic history has become more relevant to and better integrated with the mainstream of the academic history profession. It has taken the lead in internationalization of American historical studies. Since it explores the interaction of domestic and international forces, the field has become increasingly important for its study of culture and identity and the exploration of political ideologies as applied to foreign affairs. There have been major influences from other new approaches such as Orientalism and globalism, as well as gender and racial history. The history of human rights has become important as well. Despite all these innovations, however, the core endeavor of diplomatic history remains the study of the state interacting with other states, which is also a key to its broadening appeal, since considerations of America's superpower status is essential to understanding the world internationally.

In the early 1980s, historian Jeffrey Kimball surveyed the ideological preferences of 109 active diplomatic historians in the United States as well as 54 active military historians. He reports that:
 * Of historians in the field of diplomatic history, 7% are Socialist, 19% are Other, 53% are Liberal, 11% are None and 10% Conservative. Of military historians, 0% are Socialist, 8% are Other, 35% are Liberal, 18% are None and 40% are Conservative.

Historical studies
In Europe, diplomatic history fell out of favor in the late Cold War era. Since the collapse of communism, there has been a renaissance, led especially by historians of the early modern era, in the history of diplomacy. The new approach differs from previous perspectives by the wholesale incorporation of perspectives from political science, sociology, the history of mentalities, and cultural history.

In the U.S. since 1980, the discipline of diplomatic history has become more relevant to and integrated with the mainstream of the historiographic profession, having been in the forefront of the internationalization of American historical studies. As a field that explores the meeting of domestic and international forces, the study of US foreign relations has become increasingly important for its examination of both the study of culture and identity and the exploration of political ideologies. Particularly shaped by the influence of studies of Orientalism and globalism, gender studies, race, and considerations of national identity, diplomatic history was often at the cutting edge of historical research. Despite such innovations, however, the core endeavor of diplomatic history remains the study of the state, which is also a key to its broadening appeal, since considerations of US state power are essential to understanding the world internationally.

Prominent diplomatic historians

 * Henry Brooks Adams, (1838–1918), US 1800–1816
 * Henry Adams, U.S.
 * Charles A. Beard, (1874–1948), revisionist history of coming of World War II
 * Michael Beschloss, (born 1955) World War II; Cold War
 * Samuel Flagg Bemis, U.S.
 * Charles Howard Carter (1927–1990), Western Europe 1590–1635
 * Winston Churchill, World War I; World War II
 * Gordon A. Craig, (1913–2005) Germany
 * Robert Dallek, 1930s to 1960s U.S.
 * Jean-Baptiste Duroselle (1917–1994), 20th century Europe
 * Herbert Feis (1893 – 1972), World War II; International trade
 * Orlando Figes, (born 1957), Russian
 * John Lewis Gaddis, Cold War
 * Lloyd Gardner, 20th century U.S.
 * Felix Gilbert, Renaissance
 * George Peabody Gooch, (1873–1968), English historian of Modern Diplomacy
 * Andreas Hillgruber, 20c Germany
 * Akira Iriye (b. 1934) U.S. - Japan
 * George F. Kennan, Russia
 * Paul Kennedy, 19th and 20th century
 * Henry Kissinger, (1923–2023); Nineteenth and twentieth century
 * Walter LaFeber, 20th century U.S.
 * William L. Langer, (1896–1977), US historian, World and diplomatic history
 * John Lukacs, World War II
 * Thomas J. McCormick, U.S.
 * Walter A. McDougall, U.S. and European diplomatic history.
 * Margaret MacMillan 20th century
 * Charles S. Maier, 20th-century Europe
 * William McNeill, world history
 * Garrett Mattingly, Early modern Europe
 * Arno J. Mayer, World War I
 * Lewis Bernstein Namier, coming of World War II
 * Geoffrey Parker, (born 1943) early modern
 * Bradford Perkins, (1925–2008) Anglo-American relationships
 * Leopold von Ranke, (1795–1886), European
 * Pierre Renouvin, (1893–1974), 1815 to 1945
 * Paul W. Schroeder, modern Europe
 * Jean Edward Smith, Cold War
 * Justin Harvey Smith, Mexican–American War
 * Hew Strachan, World War I
 * David Tal (historian), Israel
 * A.J.P. Taylor, (1906–1990), Modern Europe, World Wars
 * Harold Temperley, (1879–1939), British
 * Arnold J. Toynbee, (1889–1975), 20th century
 * Voltaire, (1694–1778), European
 * Charles Webster, (1886–1961) British
 * Gerhard Weinberg, World War Two, Germany
 * John Wheeler-Bennett, British and German
 * William Appleman Williams, American
 * Randall Woods, 20th century U.S.
 * Ernest Llewellyn Woodward, (1890–1971), British
 * Karl W. Schweizer (1946-)18th century Britain/Europe
 * Sergio Romano (writer) (1929), Italy and Russia

World view

 * Anderson, M.S. The Rise of Modern Diplomacy 1450 - 1919 (1993) excerpt  how diplomats operated
 * Black, Jeremy. A History of Diplomacy (2010)
 * Boia, Lucian, ed. Great Historians of the Modern Age: An International Dictionary (Greenwood, 1991), 868 pp.
 * Crean, Jeffrey. The Fear of Chinese Power: An International History (Bloomsbury, 2023).
 * Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy (1994), historical studies of diplomatic crises
 * Stearns, Peter N. An Encyclopedia of World History (6th ed. 2001) 1244pp; very detailed outline; see also previous editions edited by William L. Langer, which have even more detail.
 * Woolf, Daniel R., ed. A global encyclopedia of historical writing (2 vol. Routledge, 2014) vol 2 online.

European diplomacy

 * Albrecht-Carrié, René. A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1958), 736pp; a basic introduction, online free to borrow
 * Black, Jeremy.  European International Relations, 1648-1815 (2002) excerpt and text search
 * Hill, David Jayne. A history of diplomacy in the international development of Europe (3 vol. 1914) |lang_fr&id=LtABAAAAYAAJ online v 3, 1648-1775; also online;  vol 2 online  1313-1648
 * Langer, William. European Alliances and Alignments 1870-1890 (2nd ed. 1950); advanced coverage of Bismarckian system
 * Langer, William L.  The Diplomacy of Imperialism 1890-1902 (2 vol, 1935); advanced analysis
 * Leira, Halvard. "Diplomacy: The world of states and beyond." in Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations (Routledge, 2021). 302–310. [
 * Mowat, R. B. A History of European Diplomacy 1815-1914 (1922), basic introduction
 * Mowat, R. B. History of European Diplomacy, 1451–1789 (1928) 324 pp online free
 * Petrie, Charles. Earlier diplomatic history, 1492–1713 (1949), covers all of Europe; online
 * Petrie, Charles. Diplomatic History, 1713–1933 (1946), broad summary online
 * Roosen. William J. "The functioning of ambassadors under Louis XIV." French Historical Studies 6.3 (1970): 311–332. online
 * Schroeder, Paul. The Transformation of European Politics 1763–1848 (1994) online; advanced diplomatic history
 * Schweizer, Karl W., and Matt Schuman. The Seven Years War (2010)
 * Sowerby, Tracey A., and Jan Hennings, eds. Practices of diplomacy in the early modern world c. 1410-1800 (Taylor & Francis, 2017) online.
 * Steiner, Zara. The Lights that Failed: European International History 1919-1933 (2007) excerpt and text search
 * Steiner, Zara. The Triumph of the Dark: European International History 1933-1939 (2011) excerpt and text search
 * Taylor, A. J. P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918 (1957) excerpt and text search, advanced  coverage of all major powers
 * Taylor, A. J. P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918 (1957) excerpt and text search, advanced  coverage of all major powers

United States

 * Dietrich, Christopher RW, ed. A Companion to US Foreign Relations: Colonial Era to the Present (Wiley, 2020) online
 * Dobson, Alan and Steve Marsh. US Foreign Policy Since 1945 (2nd ed. 2006)
 * Gleijeses, Piero. America's road to empire: foreign policy from independence to World War One (Bloomsbury, 2021)
 * McMahon, Robert J., and Thomas W. Zeiler, eds. Guide to US foreign policy: A diplomatic history (CQ Press, 2012).
 * Pauly, Robert J., ed. The Ashgate research companion to US foreign policy (2010) online.
 * Reeder, Tyson, ed. The Routledge History of U.S. Foreign Relations (2021) online

Historiography

 * Cannon, John Ashton et al. eds. The Blackwell dictionary of historians (1988).short biographies of hundreds of historians from many countries. 495pp
 * Carrió-Invernizzi, Diana. "A New Diplomatic History and the Networks of Spanish Diplomacy in the Baroque Era." International History Review 36.4 (2014): 603–618.
 * Carvalho, Benjamin de et al. eds. Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations (2021) online
 * Crapol, Edward P. "Coming to Terms with Empire: The Historiography of Late-Nineteenth-Century American Foreign Relations." Diplomatic History (1992) 16#4 pp: 573–598.
 * Elman, Colin, and Miriam Fendius Elman. "Diplomatic history and international relations theory: respecting difference and crossing boundaries." International Security (1997) 22#1: 5-21. Online
 * Forrest, Alan, and Peter Hicks, eds. The Cambridge History of the Napoleonic Wars: Volume 3, Experience, Culture and Memory (2022)
 * Gaddis, John Lewis. "New conceptual approaches to the study of American Foreign Relations: interdisciplinary perspectives." Diplomatic History (1990) 14#3 pp: 405–424.
 * Giudici, Giacomo. "From new diplomatic history to new political history: The rise of the holistic approach." European History Quarterly 48.2 (2018): 314–324.
 * Hogan, Michael J. and Thomas G. Paterson, eds. Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations, (2004),  articles originally appeared in Diplomatic History and cover all main fields of American diplomatic history
 * Plummer, Brenda Gayle. “The Changing Face of Diplomatic History: A Literature Review.” History Teacher 38#3 (2005), pp. 385–400. online. focus on United States
 * Schweizer, K.W. and M.J. Schumann. “The Revitalisation of Diplomatic History: Renewed Reflections,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 19 (2008): 149–186
 * Sowerby, Tracey A. "Early Modern Diplomatic History" History Compass (2016) 14#9 pp 441–456 DOI: 10.1111/hic3.12329; Europe 1600–1790
 * Watkins, John. "Toward a new diplomatic history of medieval and early modern Europe." Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 38.1 (2008): 1–14.
 * Zeiler, Thomas W. ed. American Foreign Relations since 1600: A Guide to the Literature (2007), online
 * Zelikow, Philip, Niall Ferguson, Francis J. Gavin, Anne Karalekas, and Daniel Sargent. "Forum 31 on the Importance of the Scholarship of Ernest May" H-DIPLO Dec. 17, 2021 online
 * Zeiler, Thomas W. ed. American Foreign Relations since 1600: A Guide to the Literature (2007), online
 * Zelikow, Philip, Niall Ferguson, Francis J. Gavin, Anne Karalekas, and Daniel Sargent. "Forum 31 on the Importance of the Scholarship of Ernest May" H-DIPLO Dec. 17, 2021 online
 * Zelikow, Philip, Niall Ferguson, Francis J. Gavin, Anne Karalekas, and Daniel Sargent. "Forum 31 on the Importance of the Scholarship of Ernest May" H-DIPLO Dec. 17, 2021 online

title: Diplomatic history


text:
John Breckinridge (U.S. Attorney General)

John Breckinridge (December 2, 1760 – December 14, 1806) was an American lawyer, slave-owning planter, soldier, and politician in Virginia and Kentucky. He served several terms each in both state's legislatures before legislators elected him to the U.S. Senate. He also served as United States Attorney General during the second term of President Thomas Jefferson. He is the progenitor of Kentucky's Breckinridge political family and the namesake of Breckinridge County, Kentucky.

Breckinridge's father was landowner and colonel in the local Virginia militia who married into the Preston political family. Breckinridge attended the William and Mary College intermittently between 1780 and 1784; his attendance was interrupted by the Revolutionary War and he three times won election to the Virginia House of Delegates. One of the youngest members of that (part-time) body, this allowed him to meet many prominent politicians. In 1785, he married "Polly" Cabell, a member of the Cabell political family. Despite making his legal and farming activities, letters from relatives in Kentucky convinced him to move to the western frontier. He established "Cabell's Dale", his plantation, near Lexington, Kentucky, in 1793.

Breckinridge continued his legal and political career and was appointed as the state's attorney general soon after arriving. In November 1797, he resigned to campaign, then won election to the Kentucky House of Representatives. As a legislator, Breckinridge secured passage of a more humane criminal code that abolished the death penalty for all offenses except first-degree murder. On a 1798 trip back to Virginia, an intermediary gave him Thomas Jefferson's Kentucky Resolutions, which denounced the Alien and Sedition Acts. At Jefferson's request, Breckinridge assumed credit for the modified resolutions he shepherded through the Kentucky General Assembly; Jefferson's authorship was not discovered until after Breckinridge's death. Although Breckinridge opposed calling a constitutional convention for the new state in 1799 he was elected as a delegate. Due to his influence, the state's government remained comparatively aristocratic, maintaining protections for slavery and limiting the power of the electorate. Called the father of the resultant constitution, he emerged from the convention as the acknowledged leader of the state's Democratic-Republican Party and fellow delegates elected him Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives in 1799 and 1800.

Elected to the U.S. Senate in 1800, Breckinridge functioned as Jefferson's floor leader, guiding administration bills through the chamber that was narrowly controlled by his party. Residents of the western frontier called for his nomination as vice president in 1804, but Jefferson appointed him as U.S. Attorney General in 1805 instead. He was the first cabinet-level official from the West but had little impact before his death from tuberculosis on December 14, 1806, at the age of 46.

Early life and family
John Breckinridge's grandfather, Alexander Breckenridge, immigrated from Ireland to Bucks County, Pennsylvania, around 1728, while the Breckinridge family originated in Ayrshire, Scotland, before migrating to Ulster (possibly County Antrim or County Londonderry) probably in the late 17th century. In 1740, the family moved to Augusta County, Virginia, near the city of Staunton and Alexander died there in 1743.

John Breckinridge was born in Augusta County on December 2, 1760, the second of six children of Robert Breckenridge and his second wife, Lettice (Preston) Breckenridge. His mother was the daughter of John Preston of Virginia's Preston political family. Robert Breckenridge had two children by a previous marriage, and through one of these half-brothers John Breckinridge was uncle to future Congressman James D. Breckinridge. A veteran of the French and Indian War, Robert Breckenridge had farmed as well as served first as Augusta County's under-sheriff, then as sheriff, then justice of the peace. Soon after John Breckinridge's birth, the family moved southward along the Wilderness Road to Botetourt County where Robert Breckenridge farmed, as well as became a constable and justice of the peace, and served in the local militia. He died in 1773, leaving 12-year-old John 300 acre of land, one slave, and half-ownership of another slave.

Breckinridge received a private education suitable to his class, possibly including Augusta Academy (now Washington and Lee University), but any records containing this information have been lost. After his father's death, the younger Breckinridge helped support the family by selling whiskey, brandy, and hemp. He learned surveying from his uncle, William Preston, and between 1774 and 1779, held a clerical job in the Botetourt County land office in Fincastle. Preston sought opportunities for his nephew to attend private schools alongside his sons, but Breckinridge's other responsibilities interfered with his attendance. Preston also nominated Breckinridge as deputy surveyor of Montgomery County, a position he accepted after passing the requisite exam on February 1, 1780. Later that year, he joined his cousin, future Kentucky Senator John Brown, at William and Mary College (now College of William & Mary). The instructors who influenced him most were Reverend James Madison and George Wythe.

The Revolutionary War forced William and Mary to close in 1781, and during various times during the conflict British, French, and American troops used them as barracks while controlling the surrounding area. Although William C. Davis records that Breckinridge had previously served as an ensign in the Botetourt County militia, Harrison notes that the most reliable records of Virginians' military service do not indicate his participation in the Revolutionary War, and less reliable sources mention him as a subaltern in the Virginia militia. If Breckinridge served, Harrison speculates that such occurred in one or two short 1780 militia campaigns supporting Nathanael Greene's army in southwest Virginia.

Early political career
Although he had not sought the office and was not old enough to serve, Botetourt County voters twice elected Breckinridge to represent them part-time as one of the western county's representatives in the Virginia House of Delegates in late 1780. Though without documentary support, some claim fellow delegates twice refused Breckinridge his seat because of his age, but his constituents reelected him each time, and he was seated the third time. His legislative colleagues included Patrick Henry, Benjamin Harrison, John Tyler, John Taylor of Caroline, George Nicholas, Daniel Boone, and Benjamin Logan.

Prevented by British soldiers from meeting at Williamsburg, the House convened May 7, 1781, in Richmond, but failed to achieve a quorum. Because of British General Charles Cornwallis' May 10 advance on that city, the legislators adjourned to Charlottesville on May 24. Breckinridge arrived in Charlottesville on May 28; a quorum was present to conduct legislative business through June 3. The next morning, Jack Jouett rode into the city, warning the legislators that 250 light cavalrymen under Banastre Tarleton were approaching. Legislators quickly adjourned to Staunton and fled for their horses. Days later, they completed the session's business there. Breckinridge stayed at his mother's house between sessions, rejoining the legislature in Richmond in November 1781. Much of the session consisted of adopting resolutions of thanks for individuals who had made that city safe by defeating Cornwallis at Yorktown.

Financial difficulties prevented Breckinridge's return to college. He did not seek reelection in 1782; instead, he spent a year earning money by surveying, and was reelected to the House of Delegates in 1783, joining his legislative colleagues in May. He also joined the Constitutional Society of Virginia; fellow society members included future U.S. presidents James Madison and James Monroe. The House adjourned June 28, 1783, and Breckinridge returned to William and Mary, studying through the end of the year, excepting the legislative session in November and December. With the war over, he urged that no economic or political penalties be imposed on former Loyalists. In contrast to his later political views, he desired a stronger central government than provided for in the Articles of Confederation; he argued that the national government could not survive unless it could tax its citizens, a power it did not have under the Articles.

Financial problems caused Breckinridge to leave William and Mary after the spring semester in 1784. Because of his studies earlier in the year, he had no time to campaign for reelection to the House of Delegates, so he asked his brother Joseph and his cousin John Preston to campaign on his behalf. Initially, his prospects seemed favorable, but he was beaten by future Virginia Congressman George Hancock. After the defeat, voters from Montgomery County – where Breckinridge had previously been a surveyor – chose him to represent them in the House. As a Virginia legislator, Breckinridge served on the prestigious committees on Propositions and Grievances, Courts of Justice, Religion, and Investigation of the Land Offices. His fellow committee members included Henry Tazewell, Carter Henry Harrison, Edward Carrington, Spencer Roane, John Marshall, Richard Bland Lee, and Wilson Cary Nicholas. Inspired by his legislative service, he spent the summer between legislative sessions studying to become a lawyer. The legislative session focused on domestic issues like whether Virginia should establish a tax to benefit religion in the state. Breckinridge was not associated with any denomination, and his writings indicate that he was opposed to such a tax. Instead, he and James Madison secured approval of a religious liberty bill first proposed by Thomas Jefferson over five years earlier. The legislature rose on January 7, 1785, and Breckinridge was admitted to the bar later that year, beginning practice in Charlottesville.

Marriage and children

On June 28, 1785, Breckinridge married Mary Hopkins ("Polly") Cabell, daughter of Joseph Cabell, a member of the Cabell political family. Polly's dowry included a 400-acre (1.6-km2) plantation in Albemarle County dubbed "The Glebe". Nine children were born to the John and Polly Breckinridge – Letitia Preston (b. 1786), Joseph "Cabell" (b. 1787), Mary Hopkins (b. 1790), Robert (b. 1793), Mary Ann (b. 1795), John (b. 1797), Robert Jefferson (b. 1800), William Lewis (b. 1803), and James Monroe (b. 1806).

Polly, Cabell, and Letitia all fell ill but survived a smallpox epidemic in 1793; however, Mary Hopkins and their first son named Robert died. Cabell Breckinridge would later follow a similar career as a planter, lawyer and politician, and become Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives and later Kentucky's Secretary of State. Other sons became ministers and planters; the family's loyalties would be split during the American Civil War long after this man's death. Cabell Beckinridge's son John C. Breckinridge continued the family legal, planter and political traditions and become U.S. Vice President John C. Breckinridge, and a presidential candidate, only to side with the Confederacy during the American Civil War. Meanwhile his brother John Breckinridge also attended the same university, receiving a degree from Princeton Theological Seminary, before serving as chaplain of the U.S. House of Representatives, and president of Oglethorpe College (now Oglethorpe University) in Georgia. Robert Jefferson Breckinridge became superintendent of public instruction under Governor William Owsley and became known as the father of Kentucky's public education system. William Lewis Breckinridge became a prominent Presbyterian minister, serving as moderator of the Presbyterian General Assembly in 1859 and later as president of Centre College in Danville, Kentucky, and Oakland College in Yale, Mississippi. In 1804, this Breckinridge's daughter Letitia married Alfred W. Grayson, son of Virginia Senator William Grayson. Alfred Grayson died in 1808, and in 1816, the widowed Letitia married Peter Buell Porter, who would later serve as Secretary of War under President John Quincy Adams.

Meanwhile, farming at the Glebe proved barely enough for Breckinridge's growing family. Breckinridge's legal career provided enough money for some comforts but required long hours and difficult work. Patrick Henry regularly represented clients opposite Breckinridge, and John Marshall both referred clients to him and asked him to represent his own clients in his absence. Though still interested in politics, Breckinridge refused to campaign for the people's support. He believed changes were needed to the Articles of Confederation and agreed with much of the proposed U.S. constitution, but he did not support equal representation of the states in the Senate nor the federal judiciary. Heeding the advice of his brother James and his friend, Archibald Stuart, he did not seek election as a delegate to Virginia's ratification convention.

Relocation to Kentucky
Breckinridge's half-brothers, Andrew and Robert, moved to Kentucky in 1781, and his brother William followed in 1783. By 1785, Andrew and Robert were trustees of Louisville. Their letters described Kentucky's abundant land and plentiful legal business, in contrast to the crowded bar and scarce unclaimed land in Virginia. By 1788, Breckinridge was convinced that Kentucky offered him more opportunity, and the next year, he traveled west to seek land on which to construct an estate. Although inaccurate reports of his death reached Virginia, he arrived safely in Kentucky on April 15, 1789, and returned to Virginia in June. The following year, he paid 360 pounds sterling for 600 acre along the North Elkhorn Creek about 6 mi from present-day Lexington, Kentucky. The land, purchased from his only sister Betsy's father-in-law, lay adjacent to land owned by his sister, and in 1792, he purchased an adjacent 1000 acre, bringing his total holdings in Kentucky to 1600 acre. After the purchase, he instructed William Russell, a friend already living in Kentucky, to find tenants to lease and improve the land.

In February 1792, Breckinridge, a Democratic-Republican, was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives over token opposition. On the date of the election, he wrote to Archibald Stuart, "The People appearing willing to elect, I could have no objection to serve them one Winter in Congress." Despite this, he left for Kentucky in March 1793 and resigned without serving a day in Congress, which convened on March 4. He chose the longer but safer route to Kentucky, joining a group of flatboats at Brownsville, Pennsylvania, for the trip down the Monongahela and Ohio rivers to Limestone (now Maysville, Kentucky). His family, along with 25 slaves, arrived in April and established their plantation, Cabell's Dale. By the time of Breckinridge's move, he owned 30000 acre in Kentucky.

Domestic life in Kentucky
When he arrived in Kentucky, much of Breckinridge's land was occupied by tenant farmers whose leases had not yet expired. He planted rye and wheat on 20 acre of unleased land and sent 11 slaves and an overseer to clear land for the fall planting. Eventually, his crops at Cabell's Dale included corn, wheat, rye, barley, hay, grass seed, and hemp, but he refused to grow tobacco, a major cash crop, which he found too vulnerable to over-cultivation. He also bred thoroughbred horses, planted an orchard, and practiced law. He engaged in land speculation, particularly in the Northwest Territory, and at various times owned interests in iron and salt works, but these ventures were never very successful.

As his plantation became more productive, Breckinridge became interested in ways to sell his excess goods. On August 26, 1793, he became a charter member of the Democratic Society of Kentucky, which lobbied the federal government to secure unrestricted use of the Mississippi River from Spain. Breckinridge was elected chairman, Robert Todd and John Bradford were chosen as vice-chairmen, and Thomas Todd and Thomas Bodley were elected as clerks. Breckinridge authored a tract entitled Remonstrance of the Citizens West of the Mountains to the President and Congress of the United States and may have also written To the Inhabitants of the United States West of the Allegany (sic) and Apalachian (sic) Mountains. He pledged funding to French minister Edmond-Charles Genêt's proposed military operation against Spain, but Genêt was recalled before it could be executed. Although alarmed that frontier settlers might initiate war with Spain, President George Washington made no immediate attempt to obtain use of the Mississippi, which the society maintained was "the natural right of the citizens of this Commonwealth". The resistance of the eastern states, particularly Federalist politicians, caused Breckinridge to reconsider his support of a strong central government.

Breckinridge was also concerned with easing overland transport of goods to Virginia. In mid-1795, he, Robert Barr, Elijah Craig, and Harry Toulmin formed a committee to raise funds for a road connecting the Cumberland Gap to central Kentucky. Breckinridge was disappointed with the quality of the route, which was finished in late 1796, concluding that the individual maintaining it was keeping most of the tolls instead of using them for the road's upkeep.

Breckinridge was also interested in education. Before moving to Kentucky, he accumulated a substantial library of histories, biographies, law and government texts, and classical literature. Frequently, he allowed aspiring lawyers and students access to the library, which was one of the most extensive in the west. He also provided funding for a municipal library in Lexington. His lobbying for a college to be established in Lexington bore fruit with the opening of Transylvania Seminary (now Transylvania University) in 1788. He was elected to the seminary's board of trustees on October 9, 1793, and supported hiring Harry Toulmin as president in February 1794 and consolidating the seminary with Kentucky Academy in 1796. Conservatives on the board and in the Kentucky General Assembly forced Toulmin – a liberal Unitarian – to resign in 1796, and Breckinridge's enthusiasm for his trusteeship waned. He attended board meetings less frequently and resigned in late 1797.

Kentucky Attorney General
Kentucky needed qualified governmental leaders, and on December 19, 1793, Kentucky Governor Isaac Shelby appointed Breckinridge attorney general. Three weeks after accepting, he was offered the post of District Attorney for the Federal District of Kentucky, but he declined. Secretary of State Edmund Randolph directed Shelby to prevent French agents in Kentucky from organizing an expedition against Spanish Louisiana. On Breckinridge's advice, Shelby responded that he lacked the authority to interfere. Lack of funding prevented the expedition, but Shelby's noncommittal response helped prompt passage of the Neutrality Act of 1794 which outlawed participation by U.S. citizens in such expeditions.

In November 1794, the Democratic-Republicans nominated Breckinridge to succeed John Edwards in the U.S. Senate. Federalists were generally unpopular in Kentucky, but the signing of Pinckney's Treaty – which temporarily secured Kentucky's use of the Mississippi River – and Anthony Wayne's expedition against the Indians in the Northwest Territory prompted a surge of support for the federal government in Kentucky. The election's first ballot reflected this, as Federalist candidate Humphrey Marshall received 18 votes to Breckinridge's 16, John Fowler's 8, and 7 votes for the incumbent Edwards. On the runoff ballot, Marshall was elected over Breckinridge by a vote of 28–22. Harrison posits that Marshall's incumbency in the General Assembly may have aided his election but notes that Marshall downplayed its significance.

In May 1796, Kentucky's gubernatorial electors convened to choose Shelby's successor. Their votes were split among four candidates; frontiersman Benjamin Logan received 21 votes, Baptist minister James Garrard received 17, Thomas Todd received 14, and Breckinridge's cousin, Senator John Brown, received 1. The Kentucky Constitution did not specify whether a plurality or a majority was required for election, but the electors held a runoff vote. Most of Todd's supporters voted for Garrard, and he won the election. Breckinridge claimed he had no authority to intervene but declared that, as a private citizen, he believed Logan should be governor. The state senate was authorized to settle disputed elections, but they, too, refused to intervene. Breckinridge resigned as attorney general on November 30, 1797; the extension of the attorney general's duties to include representing the state in federal district court as well as the Kentucky Court of Appeals, and reluctance to serve under Garrard after publicly declaring he had no right to his office may have contributed to the decision. A month later, he declared his candidacy to fill a vacancy in the Fayette County delegation to the Kentucky House of Representatives. Of the 1,323 votes cast, he garnered 594 (45%), the most of any of the six candidates in the race.

Kentucky House of Representatives
Breckinridge pressed to reform the state's criminal code, which was based on the English system and imposed the death penalty for over 200 different crimes. Inspired by Thomas Jefferson's failed attempt to reform Virginia's code, he first asked the Lexington Democratic Society to study ways to make punishments more proportional to crimes in November 1793. By 1796, he was drafting a new code based on the principles that criminals should be rehabilitated, victims should be compensated for their injury, the public should be reimbursed for the cost of prosecuting the criminal, and the punishment's severity should serve as a deterrent for would-be offenders. In January 1798, he introduced his proposed code in the General Assembly. A month later, the Assembly reformed the code, abolishing the death penalty for every crime except first-degree murder.

Kentucky Resolutions
In August, Breckinridge traveled to Virginia's Sweet Springs to improve his health. He visited family and friends while there, but the exact dates and locations he visited are not known. At some point, he obtained a draft of resolutions written by Vice President Thomas Jefferson denouncing the recently-enacted Alien and Sedition Acts. Jefferson wished to keep his authorship secret, and Breckinridge accepted credit for them during his life. In 1814, John Taylor revealed Jefferson's authorship; Breckinridge's grandson, John C. Breckinridge, wrote Jefferson for confirmation of Taylor's claims. Cautioning that the passage of time and his failing memory might cause him to inaccurately recount the details, Jefferson responded that he, Breckinridge, Wilson Nicholas, and possibly James Madison met at Monticello, at a date Jefferson could not recall, to discuss the need for resolutions denouncing the Alien and Sedition Acts. They decided that Jefferson would pen the resolutions and that Breckinridge would introduce them in the Kentucky legislature upon his return to that state.

Letters between Nicholas and Jefferson indicate a different series of events. In a letter dated October 4, 1798, Nicholas informed Jefferson that he had given "a copy of the resolutions you sent me" to Breckinridge, who would introduce them in Kentucky. The letter also indicated that this was a deviation from the original plan to deliver the draft to a legislator in North Carolina for introduction in the legislature there. Nicholas felt that recipient was too closely associated with Jefferson, risking his being discovered as the resolutions' author. According to Nicholas, Breckinridge wanted to discuss the draft with Jefferson, but Nicholas advised against the meeting, fearing it could implicate Jefferson. A subsequent letter from Jefferson expressed his approval of Nicholas' actions. Lowell Harrison notes that after Breckinridge left Virginia, his contacts with Jefferson were few until his election to the Senate in 1801. Harrison considered it unlikely that Jefferson was mistaken about a meeting between the two to discuss a matter as important as the resolutions, positing that Jefferson may have met separately with Breckinridge and Nicholas to discuss the resolutions, and that the meeting with Breckinridge was kept secret from Nicholas. Because of the uncertainty surrounding Breckinridge's activities in Virginia in 1798, the extent of his influence on Jefferson's original draft of the resolutions is unknown.

In Garrard's November 5, 1798, State of the Commonwealth address, he encouraged the General Assembly to declare its views on the Alien and Sedition Acts. Breckinridge was chosen as chairman of a three-person committee to carry out the governor's charge. The resolutions that the committee brought to the floor on November 10 became known as the Kentucky Resolutions. The first seven were exactly as Jefferson had written them, but Breckinridge modified the last two, eliminating Jefferson's suggestion of nullifying the unpopular acts. During the debate on the House floor, Breckinridge endorsed nullification if Congress would not repeal the acts after a majority of states declared their opposition to them. Federalist William Murray led opposition to the resolutions in the House but was the only dissenting vote on five of the nine; John Pope led similarly unsuccessful Federalist opposition in the Senate. Upon concurrence of both houses, Garrard signed the resolutions.

Federalist state legislatures, primarily those north of the Potomac River, sent the Kentucky General Assembly negative responses to the resolutions. Nicholas convinced Jefferson that Kentucky should adopt a second set of resolutions affirming the first, lest the lack of a reply be seen acquiescence. Jefferson refused to compose these resolutions, maintaining that there were sufficiently talented individuals in Kentucky to compose them and fearing still that he would be discovered as the author of the first set. Breckinridge, chosen Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives at the outset of the 1799 session, took on the task, drafting resolutions reasserting the original principles and endorsing nullification. The resolutions unanimously passed the House. The Federalist minority in the Senate opposed them, especially the endorsement of nullification, but that chamber also adopted the resolutions as written. Breckinridge's presumed authorship of the original resolutions and his subsequent defense of them caused his popularity to soar in Kentucky.

Kentucky Constitution of 1799
Some Kentucky citizens were already displeased with parts of the state's constitution, and the disputed gubernatorial election of 1796 had added to the enthusiasm of those calling for a constitutional convention to revise it. Breckinridge opposed such a call, fearing changes would imperil his wealth and power. John Breckinridge asked, "Where is the difference whether I am robbed of my horse by a highway-man, or of my slave by a set of people called a Convention? ... If they can by one experiment emancipate our slaves; the same principle pursued, will enable them at a second experiment to extinguish our land titles; both are held by rights equally sound." The desire for a convention was so strong, even in aristocratic Fayette County, that Breckinridge's position nearly cost him his seat in the legislature. Seeking election to a full term in May 1798, he was the seventh-highest vote-getter, securing the last of Fayette County's seats in the legislature by only eight votes. Despite the efforts of conservatives like Breckinridge and George Nicholas, in late 1798, the General Assembly called a convention for July 22, 1799. Delegates to the convention were to be elected in May 1799, and the conservatives immediately began organizing slates of candidates that would represent their interests. Popular because of his role in securing adoption of the Kentucky Resolutions, Breckinridge was among the six conservative candidates promoted in Fayette County, all of whom were elected. Out of the fifty-eight men who arrived in Frankfort in late July as convention delegates, fifty-seven owned slaves and fifty held substantial property. Between the election and the convention, Breckinridge and Judge Caleb Wallace worked with Nicholas (who did not seek election as a delegate) to draft resolutions that Breckinridge would introduce at the convention in an attempt to steer the proceedings toward conservative positions.

The largest group of delegates at the convention – about 18 in number – were aristocrats who advocated protection of their wealth and status, including instituting voice voting in the legislature (which left legislators vulnerable to intimidation), safeguarding legal slavery, and limiting the power of the electorate. A smaller group led by Green Clay and Robert Johnson consisted mostly of planters who opposed most limits on the power of the legislature, which they believed was superior to the executive and judicial branches. A third group, led by future governor John Adair, agreed with the notion of legislative supremacy, but opposed limits on other branches of the government. The smallest group was the most populist and was led by John Bailey. The conservative faction strengthened the previous constitution's slavery protections by denying suffrage to free blacks and mulattoes. Legislative apportionment based on population, the addition of a lieutenant governor, and voice voting of the legislature – all issues advocated by Breckinridge – were also adopted. He was unable to preserve the electoral college that elected the governor and state senators, but the direct election of these officers was balanced by a provision that county sheriffs and judges be appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate. Attempts to make judicial decisions subject to legislative approval were defeated after Breckinridge defended the extant judicial system. He was also the architect of the constitution's provisions for amendment, which made changing the document difficult, but not entirely impossible. Because of his leading role in the convention, Breckinridge was regarded as the father of the resultant constitution, which was ratified in 1799, and emerged from the convention as the leader of his party. He was reelected as Speaker of the House in 1800.

U.S. Senator
On November 20, 1800, the Kentucky General Assembly elected Breckinridge to the U.S. Senate by a vote of 68–13 over John Adair. He was eligible for the special congressional session called for March 4, 1801, but his summons to the session remained undelivered at the Lexington post office until March 5, and he consequently missed the entire session. When he left for Washington, D.C., late in the year, he left several of his pending legal cases in the hands of rising attorney Henry Clay, who would later become U.S. Secretary of State.

Although Democratic-Republicans held a narrow majority in the Senate, the Federalist senators were both experienced and devoted their cause. Breckinridge acted as floor leader for the Democratic-Republicans and newly elected president, Thomas Jefferson. His proposed repeal of the Federalist-supported Judicial Act of 1801, which had increased the number of federal courts and judges, was particularly controversial. On January 4, 1802, he presented caseload data to argue that the new courts and judges were unnecessary. Federalist leader Gouverneur Morris countered that the proposal was unconstitutional; once established, courts were inviolate, he maintained. On January 20, Federalist Jonathan Dayton moved to return the bill to a committee to consider amendments. South Carolina's John E. Colhoun, a Democratic-Republican, voted with the Federalists, and the result was a 15–15 tie. Empowered to break the tie, Jefferson's vice president, Aaron Burr, voted with the Federalists. The five-man committee consisted of three Federalists, enough to prevent the bill's return to the floor, but when Vermont Senator Stephen R. Bradley, who had traveled home because of a family illness, returned to the chamber, the Democratic-Republicans regained a majority and introduced a successful discharge petition. In one last attempt to derail the legislation in debate, Federalists argued that the judiciary would strike down the repeal as unconstitutional; Breckinridge denied the notion that the courts had the power to invalidate an act of Congress. On February 3, the Senate repealed the act by a vote of 16–15, with the House concurring a month later.

Louisiana Purchase
Breckinridge advocated internal improvements and formed a coalition of legislators from South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky to support a system of roads connecting the Southern coastal states with the western frontier, but the routes they proposed proved impossible to construct with the technology available at the time. Spanish revocation of Kentucky's right of deposit at New Orleans – in violation of Pinckney's Treaty – further frustrated and angered frontier residents. Although many desired war with Spain, Jefferson believed a diplomatic resolution was possible and urged restraint. Federalists, seeking to divide the Democratic-Republicans and curry favor with the West, abandoned their usual advocacy of peace. Pennsylvania Federalist James Ross introduced a measure allocating $5 million and raising 50,000 militiamen to seize the Louisiana Territory from Spain. Cognizant of Jefferson's desire for more time, Breckinridge offered a substitute resolution on February 23, 1803, allocating 80,000 troops and unlimited funds for the potential invasion of New Orleans, but he left their use at the discretion of the president. Breckinridge's resolution was adopted after a heated debate.

Before an invasion became necessary, U.S. ambassadors learned that Spain had ceded Louisiana to France via the Third Treaty of San Ildefonso, and France offered to sell the territory to the U.S. Robert R. Livingston and James Monroe, U.S. ministers to France, agreed to the purchase, even though they had not been given the authority to do so. Jefferson was pleased with the purchase, but feared he had no constitutional authority to effect it. In an August 12, 1803, letter to Breckinridge, Jefferson discussed his constitutional misgivings about the Louisiana Purchase and proposed that Breckinridge introduce a simple constitutional amendment in the Senate: "Louisiana, as ceded by France to the U.S., is made a part of the U.S." Breckinridge ignored the proposed amendment and immediately formed a coalition of western senators to approve the purchase.

After the purchase was approved, Jefferson drafted a system of governing the newly acquired territory. Fearing that the Federalists would oppose any system he had devised, he delivered his draft to Breckinridge and asked him to introduce it in the Senate as his own. To maintain the ruse, Breckinridge moved that a committee be formed to recommend a plan for governing Louisiana Territory. Working through the committee, he brought Jefferson's plan to the Senate floor with its essentials intact. Because the plan provided for the taxation of Louisiana residents without giving them representation in Congress, Federalists and some Democratic-Republicans opposed it. Nevertheless, it passed by a vote of 26–6.

Consideration for the vice presidency
By July 1803, citizens of the western states, desiring more representation in the federal government and intent on breaking the pattern of nominating a Virginians and New Yorkers for most important federal offices, were advocating Breckinridge's nomination as vice president in the 1804 presidential election. Thomas Jefferson was expected to be reelected, but most Democratic-Republicans had grown disenchanted with Vice President Aaron Burr; he would not be Jefferson's running mate. Breckinridge's service as Senate floor leader made him a natural choice.

The Democratic-Republican congressional caucus convened February 25, 1804. Contrary to previous conventions, the proceedings were open and formal. Afraid that taking vice presidential nominations from the floor would precipitate divisive oratory, chairman Stephen Bradley called for open balloting for the nomination. New York's George Clinton received a majority with 67 votes; Breckinridge garnered 20 votes, mostly from western delegates, and the remaining votes were scattered among 4 other candidates. Historian James C. Klotter concluded that the solons felt a ticket composed of Jefferson, a Virginian, and Breckinridge, a former Virginian, made little political sense. Breckinridge acceded to the choice; some reports hold that he asked his colleagues not to vote for him at all. Before the caucus adjourned, a thirteen-man committee was formed to promote the election of the Democratic-Republican ticket; Breckinridge represented Kentucky on the committee.

Westerners expressed dissent over Clinton's nomination instead of their preferred candidate. The June 29, 1804, edition of Philadelphia's Independent Gazetteer carried an editorial, signed "True American", that denounced the Virginia–New York coalition, attacked Clinton as too old, and called for electors to vote for Breckinridge for vice president. Potential electors in western states pledged to carry out "True American"'s proposal. Allan B. Magruder attempted to warn Breckinridge in advance of the editorial's publication, but his letter – dated June 23, 1804 – did not reach Breckinridge until July 1. On July 5, Breckinridge published a response in the Kentucky Palladium denouncing the proposal and encouraging electors to vote for the Democratic-Republican slate as nominated. He requested that all newspapers that had printed the "True American" editorial also print his response.

In the same edition that carried Breckinridge's response, Daniel Bradford, editor of the Kentucky Gazette, penned an editorial revealing Breckinridge's close friend, William Stevenson, as the author of the "True American" article and noting that Breckinridge had waited nearly a week to publish a response, and claiming the delay was intended to allow him to gauge public sentiment before denouncing Stevenson's proposal. Bradford had been at odds with Breckinridge since the 1799 constitutional convention, and his dislike intensified when Breckinridge refused to use his influence to gain appointments for Bradford's relatives – John Bradford and James Bradford – as Public Printer of the United States and Secretary of Louisiana Territory, respectively. Bradford's claims were quickly endorsed by anonymous editorial writers in newspapers across the west.

Stevenson swore under oath that Breckinridge had no part in composing the "True American" article. Breckinridge publicly stated that Bradford's brother, Charles, had shown him a draft of the "True American" editorial prior to its publication and asked his opinion of it; Breckinridge advised him not to publish it, and Bradford temporarily obliged. An illness, Breckinridge said, had confined him to his home at the time of the editorial's publication, and he was not aware that the Independent Gazetteer had printed it until he attended the court at Frankfort days later; he immediately returned home and composed his rebuttal. In light of this evidence, few still maintained the credibility of the reports in the Kentucky Gazette by the time of the election. Every Kentucky elector voted for both Jefferson and Clinton.

Other Senate matters
After the Louisiana Purchase, Breckinridge focused on securing a vote to present the Twelfth Amendment to the states for ratification. He did not agree with all the changes effected by the amendment, the primary purpose of which was to direct presidential electors to vote separately for president and vice president; he supported abolishing the electoral college, electing both officials by popular vote. Democratic-Republicans wanted the amendment adopted before the 1804 election to avoid Jefferson's being saddled with a hostile vice president again, and Breckinridge announced his support for the amendment in late October. With several members of his party absent, he would not be able to secure the two-thirds majority needed to send the amendment to the states for ratification. Recognizing this fact, Federalists pushed for an immediate vote, putting Breckinridge in the position of trying to delay a vote on a measure both he and his constituents supported. Debate began on November 23 after several Democratic-Republicans had returned. South Carolina Federalist Pierce Butler contended that the amendment would allow large states to pick the president; James Jackson, a Democratic-Republican from Georgia, countered by taunting, "Never will there be a Federal President or Vice-President again elected, to the end of time." Federalists moved adjournment at 6:00 p.m. on December 2, but Breckinridge, determined to hold a vote that night, blocked the move and took the floor for the first time in days. By 10:00 p.m., senators clamored for a vote, and the measure was approved 22–10. State legislatures quickly acted on the amendment, and by September 23, 1804, it was declared in force for the upcoming election.

Other business in the session included creating a special fund that would allow Jefferson to recover the USS Philadelphia (1799), which had been captured off the coast of northern Africa, and the repeal of the Bankruptcy Act of 1800; Breckinridge supported the passage of both measures. He feared that passage of an act making permanent the pay raises for executive administrative personnel first enacted in 1799 would hurt his party in the upcoming elections, especially in the House, but the act passed and there was no significant backlash at the polls. Robert Wright's measure adjourning Congress to Baltimore, Maryland, in protest of legislators' poor accommodations in Washington, D.C., was defeated by a vote of 9–19, but Breckinridge considered the issue of moving the U.S. capital worthy of further study. Breckinridge supported the successful impeachment of federal judge John Pickering and also served on the Senate committee that prepared the rules governing the impeachment trial of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. The latter impeachment was widely seen as politically motivated, and some Democratic-Republicans joined the Federalist minority in voting for acquittal. Majorities were obtained on only three of the eight articles of impeachment, and each of those fell at least three votes short of the required two-thirds majority. Breckinridge and three other Democratic-Republicans voted to convict on every article except the fifth, on which every senator sided with Chase.

U.S. Attorney General
When U.S. Attorney General Levi Lincoln resigned in December 1804, Jefferson and Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin sought a replacement. Virginia's John Thomson Mason, Gallatin's first choice, declined the appointment. U.S. Navy Secretary Robert Smith desired the office, and Jefferson agreed to appoint him, contingent upon finding a suitable replacement for Smith as Secretary of the Navy. Jefferson appointed Massachusetts Congressman Jacob Crowninshield to replace Smith, and both appointments were confirmed by the Senate March 3, 1805. Crowninshield refused his appointment, however, and Smith was forced to remain as Secretary of the Navy. Jefferson then offered the position to Breckinridge, Gallatin's second choice. Breckinridge resigned from the Senate on August 7, 1805, to accept the appointment. He was the first U.S. cabinet-level official from west of the Allegheny Mountains, and his appointment boosted Jefferson's popularity in the west. Lowell Harrison called the appointment a mistake by Jefferson, not because Breckinridge lacked any qualifications, but because Jefferson was not able to replace his leadership in the Senate. He noted that after Breckinridge's departure from the chamber, the Federalist minority experienced a revival of influence under the leadership of Connecticut's Uriah Tracy.

Stopping to visit with friends en route to Washington, D.C., Breckinridge arrived on December 7, 1805. His nomination was confirmed by the Senate on December 20. He was influential in Jefferson's infrequent cabinet meetings, where he served as the lone voice of the west. His most notable advisory opinion – that no local government in the Territory of Orleans had the power to tax federal property there – was upheld in the Supreme Court by Chief Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland. He was sworn in to represent the federal government before the Supreme Court when it convened – about a week late because of the illness of several justices – on February 12, 1806. He was spared the awkwardness of practicing before a judge he had voted to impeach because Samuel Chase was absent for the Court's entire six-week term. The court heard only six cases during the term; most of them were cases Breckinridge had inherited from his predecessor, and Harrison wrote that none were of lasting importance. Cases such as Maley v. Shattuck involved international maritime law – an area with which Breckinridge was not familiar – and arose from the Napoleonic Wars, which complicated neutral American trade with both Great Britain and France. During the term, Breckinridge lost four cases, won one, and the justices sent one back for retrial in a lower court.

Death and legacy
Breckinridge returned to Cabell's Dale in early 1806 and fell ill in June. In July, he visited Kentucky's Olympian Springs, hoping it would aid his recovery, but it did not. Doctors disagreed on the cause of his illness, with diagnoses ranging from typhus fever to stomach ailments. He attempted to return to Washington, D.C., on October 22, but while his horse was being prepared for the journey, he collapsed in pain and had to be helped back inside. Friends and relatives hoped for a recovery that never came, and he died on December 14, 1806. The cause of death was eventually determined to be tuberculosis. According to family tradition, Polly Breckinridge was so distraught over her husband's death that she went blind from her incessant crying. Breckinridge was first buried at Cabell's Dale on December 16 but was later reinterred in Lexington Cemetery.

At the time of his death, Breckinridge owned over 20000 acre of land, and his net worth was estimated at more than $20,000. With a workforce of nearly 70 slaves, he was one of the largest slaveholders in the state. The breeding of horses and mules at Cabell's Dale had become more profitable than selling the excess crops raised there. His daughter, Mary Ann, and her husband, David Castleman, inherited the horse and mule breeding operations, which eventually became the thoroughbred stable of Castleton Lyons. Breckinridge County, Kentucky, created from a portion of Hardin County in 1799, was named in Breckinridge's honor.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Leamington, Ontario

Leamington is a municipality in Essex County, Ontario, Canada. With a population of 29,680 in the Canada 2021 Census, it forms the second largest urban centre in Windsor-Essex County after Windsor, Ontario. It includes Point Pelee National Park, the southernmost point of mainland Canada.

Known since the 20th century as the "Tomato Capital of Canada", it is the location of a tomato processing factory owned by Highbury-Canco; founded in 1908, the plant was owned until 2014 by the H. J. Heinz Company. Due to its location in the southernmost part of Canada, Leamington uses the motto "Sun Parlour of Canada".

Communities
Besides the town of Leamington itself, the municipality of Leamington comprises a number of villages and hamlets, including Albuna, Blytheswood, Cherry Lane Estates, Elmdale, Goldsmith, Marentette Beach, Mount Carmel, Oakland, Seacliffe, Wigle, Windfall, Chalmers, Erie Curve, Hillman, Point Pelee and Sturgeon Woods.

History
Leamington was incorporated as a village in 1874, but by 1869, the European-Canadian settlement already had a population of 350. The community was named after Royal Leamington Spa in England, after having originally been called "Gainesville" or "Gainesborough" for local mill owner William Gaines, and before that, Wilkinson Corners. It has had a post office since June 1854.

It was a crossroads hamlet with about 300 residents and was first known for its lumber products rather than tomatoes. There was extensive lumbering in western Ontario, as across the river in Michigan and also upper Michigan. There were several docks, and fish were plentiful in Lake Erie, so much so that sturgeon could be speared from the shore and fish was the cheapest food available.

Leamington was a "sundown town," a place where Black people would face violence or harassment if they were in public after dark. In 1930, a group of Black parishioners on a visit to Seacliff Park were ordered to leave Leamington by several town administrators. David Suzuki attests that he was told, upon arrival in Leamington in 1946, that “no colored person has ever stayed here beyond sunset.”

Leamington was also one of the few Canadian municipalities included in the Negro Motorist Green Book, the American publication listing safe businesses for travelling black people.

On 1 January 1999, the town was amalgamated with the surrounding Township of Mersea to form an expanded Town of Leamington. Similar municipal restructuring took place throughout Essex County.

In the early hours of June 6, 2010, an F1 tornado ripped through portions of southern Essex County, stretching from Harrow, through Kingsville, to southern Leamington before dissipating near Point Pelee National Park, creating considerable damage, but no loss of life or any direct injuries. The tornado passed through Leamington, damaging various important landmarks and facilities in town, including the marina.

Climate
Leamington lies on the 42nd Parallel, the same latitude as Chicago, Boston, the northern border of California, Rome, and Zaragoza. It is located on the north shore of Lake Erie, which acts to moderate its climate.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Leamington had a population of $29,680$ living in $10,547$ of its $11,219$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $27,595$. With a land area of 261.24 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

Language
The majority of people from Leamington speak English. According to the 2016 census, 24,070 speak English only, 12,100 male and 11,970 female, 1,655 people speak both English and French, 735 male and 920 female, and 1,330 people speak neither English nor French.

Residents of Leamington include a population of Lebanese, Portuguese and Italian. Mennonite settlers, whose ancestors immigrated from Russia, have also added to the population.

Age
According to the 2016 census, the average age of people living in Leamington is 41.3 years - for men the age was 39.7 and for women the age was 42.9 years of age.

Immigration
According to a 2006 survey, 7,485 are immigrants or migrants, and 19,365 people are natives of Canada. The majority of migrants come from Mexico and Jamaica, and are employed as seasonal farm workers through the Temporary foreign worker program in Canada. According to the census, Leamington had the highest percentage of Latin Americans in Canada, with 4.9%.

Transportation
Transportation around the city is offered by the Leamington Transit bus system. The city has a small private airport located 4 km to the east of town. The town is also connected to the provincial highway network by Highway 3 (to Windsor), and Highway 77 (to Highway 401).

A rail line that Heinz built from its plant to the harbour has been converted to a bicycle path going from the middle of town to the Marina. Two ferries, (MV Jiiman and MV Pelee Islander II) owned by the Owen Sound Transportation Company, run on a regularly scheduled seasonal basis from Leamington to Pelee Island with continuing service on to Sandusky, Ohio.

Economy
The H. J. Heinz company established a factory in 1908 in Leamington. The Heinz products are shipped from the city with both English and French labels, mostly to the United States. Ketchup and baby food are the main products. In November 2013 Heinz announced that it would close the Leamington plant in 2014, meaning job losses for 740 employees at the plant and hundreds more support workers.

Regional and local businessmen worked to save the plant. A campaign was conducted on Facebook to raise support and funds. As a 54-year-old law in Canada bans the use of tomato paste in tomato juice, thus requiring fresh tomatoes, they arranged a deal whereby Highbury Canco took over the plant in 2014. It produces tomato juice and other products for Heinz. Around 250 workers still process canned products at the over 100-year-old factory.

Leamington has also been known for its greenhouses. It now has the largest concentration of commercial greenhouses in all of North America, with 1969 acres of greenhouse vegetable production in the general area. Major products of the greenhouse industry, in addition to tomatoes, are peppers, cannabis, cucumbers, roses, and other flowers. Hydroponic farming has been very successfully adopted by many greenhouse operators in Leamington. Historically, tobacco was an important crop in the area. Tobacco production declined in the 1960s and today is virtually nonexistent.

Migrant workers, mostly Mexican and Caribbean seasonal labourers, annually arrive in the region to work in Leamington's greenhouses and farms. Several Mexican and Jamaican shops and a Mexican consulate have opened to serve the migrants.

Leamington became a production site of Aphria, one of Canada's largest medicinal and recreational marijuana greenhouse operators. A merger in December 2020 with Nanaimo, British Columbia-based Tilray, led to the closure of Tilray's production site in Leamington and operations were consolidated at the former Aphria site under the name Tilray.

Healthcare
Erie Shores Healthcare serves the city of Leamington, as well as Essex and Chatham Kent. Opened in 1950, Leamington District Memorial Hospital succeeded two smaller healthcare facilities: Hopewell Hospital (c. 1933) and Cottage Hospital (c. 1920). In mid-December 2016, the hospital formally submitted notice to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, it wished to change its name to Erie Shores Healthcare, and subsequently has been approved. Other major healthcare needs can be undertaken in nearby Windsor, Ontario.

Education
English-language public education for kindergarten through secondary school grades in Essex County is administered by the Greater Essex County District School Board, along with the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board which oversees English-language Catholic education.

French-language public and Catholic education are overseen by the Conseil scolaire Viamonde and the Conseil scolaire catholique Providence, respectively. The scope of all of these organizations includes both the County and the City of Windsor.

Prior to 1998, the Essex County Board of Education operated Anglophone secular public schools.

Elementary
Leamington has five public elementary schools, Margaret D. Bennie, Queen Elizabeth, Gore Hill, Mount Carmel - Blytheswood Public School and East Mersea. Leamington has two Catholic elementary schools: Cardinal Carter Middle School and Saint Louis. Leamington also has one French speaking Catholic School, St. Michel. South Shore Christian School is a private elementary school located in Leamington. Leamington has two main school boards, the Greater Essex County District School Board and the Windsor-Essex Catholic School Board.

Queen of Peace Catholic Elementary School faced closure in February 2016, but was since converted to Cardinal Carter Catholic Middle School.

Mill Street Public School was permanently closed at the conclusion of the 2016–2017 school year.

Secondary
Leamington has three secondary schools: Leamington District Secondary School (public), Cardinal Carter Catholic High School, and U.M.E.I. (United Mennonite Education Institute).

Parks
Leamington has several parks including Seacliff Park, the Marina Park, Mersea Park and Garrison Gardens, Henry Park, and Chestnut Park.

As noted, Point Pelee National Park contains the southernmost point on mainland Canada and draws thousands of visitors annually. It is on a flyway of migrating birds and one of the largest annual migrations of monarch butterflies.

Tourism

Tourism contributes significantly to the economy, and the city has many attractions. Its attractions include cycle paths along the lake and the nearby Point Pelee National Park. It is a major site for migrating birds, especially in the autumn. As such, it plays host to many birdwatchers from Canada, the United States, and around the world. The region is also known for the migration of monarch butterflies, which congregate in the fall at Point Pelee before making their way across Lake Erie on their route to winter quarters in central Mexico. Another important natural area near Leamington is the wetland at Hillman Marsh, located 6 km east of the town.

Leamington has a large marina, as many people engage in sailing and other water sports. The marina also features a promenade that extends from the Marina to the Historical Leamington Dock, a port for ferry services to Pelee Island using the Jiiman and Pelee Islander II.

Annual events and festivals

 * Festival of Birds – Every year over 40,000 visitors head to Point Pelee National Park for the Festival of Birds at the beginning of May. Over 300 species of birds migrate through the park every year, providing close up views of birds not seen anywhere else in the country.
 * Leamington Fair – For over 170 years, the Leamington District Agricultural Society holds the Fair, typically during the third week in June. The Fair features a Midway full of rides and games, a Demolition Derby, and a variety of contests for arts, crafts, livestock, and food in a classic county fair.
 * Music Onthe42 Summer Concert Series – The Music Onthe42 Summer Concert Series that runs from late June to the end of August at the Seacliff Park Amphitheatre. Seven free concerts feature national and local bands of all genres performing Saturday evenings.
 * Arts @ The Marina – The South Essex Arts Association/Leamington Arts Centre presents an Annual Outdoor Arts and Crafts Show towards the end of June at the Leamington Municipal Marina.
 * Hogs For Hospice – An annual motorcycle rally usually held at the beginning of August. It is centered around Seacliff Park and includes concerts featuring music, and a weekend long craft and vendor show. Proceeds from the weekend are donated to the Leamington Hospice.

The town's water tower, visible for kilometres in the flat southern Ontario landscape, is in the shape and colour of a giant tomato. The former tourist information booth in the centre of town is shaped like a large fibreglass tomato.

Sports

 * Leamington Flyers play in the Western Division of the Greater Ontario Junior Hockey League at Highbury Canco Arena
 * Wheatley Sharks play in the Great Lakes Junior C Hockey League
 * Southpoint Capitals play in the Ontario Minor Hockey Association (OMHA)
 * Leamington Barons Baseball
 * Leamington District Minor Baseball Association - t-ball / baseball / softball for over 500 kids
 * Leamington Minor Soccer Association has over 800 players every year
 * Leamington S.C. United Soccer Club, formed in Dec. 2008, has become a major sports club with 10 competitive travelling teams from under-11 to Senior Men's
 * Sun County Crows play in the Zone 7 of the Ontario Lacrosse Association at Highbury Canco Arena
 * Velocity Volleyball

Print
Leamington's weekly newspaper is the Southpoint Sun-Journal. The weekly newspaper that was Leamington Post ceased operations in 2012 after 138 years in publication.

Radio
Leamington is home to two regional commercial radio stations.

Leamington is also served by Weatheradio Canada station VAZ533, transmitting at 162.475 MHz in the weather band.

Notable people

 * Margaret Birch (1921-2020), first female cabinet minister in the Government of Ontario
 * Kirk Bowman, former NHL player
 * Stephen Eustáquio, pro soccer player
 * Lana Gay, radio personality on CIND-FM, and formerly CBC Radio 3
 * Bob Hooper (1922-1980), MLB pitcher
 * Danny Klassen, former MLB infielder
 * Randy Manery, former NHL player
 * Darren McCarty, former NHL player
 * Billy Raffoul, rock singer-songwriter
 * Pat Ribble, former NHL player
 * Nino Ricci, author
 * Brad Selwood, former NHL player and coach
 * Bill Sherk, author
 * Lynsay Sands, author
 * Wally Tatomir (d. 2022), former equipment manager for the NHL's Carolina Hurricanes
 * Rosalie Trombley (1939-2021), music director of AM Top 40 radio station CKLW

In popular culture

 * The book Splat! by Eric Walters takes place in Leamington at the tomato festival.

title: Leamington, Ontario


text:
Talk:John Breckinridge (U.S. Attorney General)

Untitled
People of this era weren't known for their spelling. :)

Hephaestos 06:31 Feb 2, 2003 (UTC)

5th United States Attorney General
Sure? See Robert Smith (cabinet), correct please (both have the same number - fifth).Thanks--AnjaManix (talk) 14:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Breckinridge (U.S. Attorney General). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130102081608/http://www.castletonlyons.com/history.htm to http://www.castletonlyons.com/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

KY AG start date discrepancy
Both this article (specifically the body) and the Attorney General of Kentucky article say that Breckinridge's term as KY Attorney General began in 1793. However, the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress and this article's infobox say his tenure began in 1795. What is the correct date, and is there a reason for the discrepancy? --1990'sguy (talk) 00:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I did a lot of the work on this article, and although it's been a while, I think I know what probably happened. I tend to use the less specific sources first, and then go back and fill in the gaps with more specific sources. I probably did the date in the infobox based on the Biographical Directory (which appears to be wrong) and never went back and changed the infobox when more specific dates came up in better sources. Both the Harrison source cited and The Kentucky Encyclopedia, which I just re-checked, give December 1793; both of these should be preferred to the Biographical Directory. I have made the change in the infobox. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 16:40, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

more work needed
A couple of years ago, Therequiembellishere eliminated most references to this politician's legislative career in the infobox. I managed to check out the Leonard volume from the Library of Virginia a couple of weeks ago, and made the correction today. I realize the few additional lines make it longer, but I don't have time to parse the article as a whole to make clear that this man served three different terms. I don't dispute the good article status, and do appreciate mention of his slaveownership already had been made in the paragraphs concerning his inheritance from his father, and later in mentioning the size of his estate. Quickly looking at ancestry's census records does not indicate his slave ownership. He may also have owned land in Bourboun County, if he is the man of that name in the army tract census record for 1800, but I believe he represented Fayette County in the Kentucky legislature, both since the article for his son indicates Cabell's Dale is in Fayette County, and because both Fayette and nearby Bourboun were two of the new state's original counties. Frankly, I was a little annoyed at all the passive tense in the article, but left in the folk-talish mention of him opposing statehood. Gotta go no.Jweaver28 (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


text:
Paradox of hedonism

The paradox of hedonism, also called the pleasure paradox, refers to the practical difficulties encountered in the pursuit of pleasure. For the hedonist, constant pleasure-seeking may not yield the most actual pleasure or happiness in the long term when consciously pursuing pleasure interferes with experiencing it.

The utilitarian philosopher Henry Sidgwick was first to note in The Methods of Ethics that the paradox of hedonism is that pleasure cannot be acquired directly. Variations on this theme appear in the realms of philosophy, psychology, and economics.

Overview
Failing to attain pleasures while deliberately seeking them has been variously described:

"But I now thought that this end [one's happiness] was only to be attained by not making it the direct end. Those only are happy (I thought) who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness[...] Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness along the way[...] Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so."
 * John Stuart Mill, the utilitarian philosopher, in his autobiography:

"Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side effect of one's personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one's surrender to a person other than oneself."
 * Viktor Frankl in Man's Search for Meaning:

"The more a man tries to demonstrate his sexual potency or a woman her ability to experience orgasm, the less they are able to succeed. Pleasure is, and must remain, a side-effect or by-product, and is destroyed and spoiled to the degree to which it is made a goal in itself."

What is good? Everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself.
 * Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche in The Antichrist (1895) and The Will to Power (1901):

What is bad? Everything that is born of weakness.

What is happiness? The feeling that power increases—that a resistance is overcome.

"[...] it is significantly enlightening to substitute for the individual 'happiness' (for which every living being is supposed to strive) power [...] joy is only a symptom of the feeling of attained power [...] (one does not strive for joy [...] joy accompanies; joy does not move)"

"Nietzsche's 'will to power' and 'will to seem' embrace many of our views, which again resemble in some respects the views of Féré and the older writers, according to whom the sensation of pleasure originates in a feeling of power, that of pain in a feeling of feebleness."
 * Psychologist Alfred Adler in The Neurotic Constitution (1912):

The love of praise, howe'er concealed by art,
 * Poet and satirist Edward Young:

Reigns more or less supreme in every heart;

The Proud to gain it, toils on toils endure;

The modest shun it, but to make it sure!

"Happiness is like a cat, if you try to coax it or call it, it will avoid you; it will never come. But if you pay no attention to it and go about your business, you'll find it rubbing against your legs and jumping into your lap."
 * Politician William Bennett:

"Happiness is found only in little moments of inattention."
 * Novelist João Guimarães Rosa:

Suggested explanations
Happiness is often imprecisely equated with pleasure. If, for whatever reason, one does equate happiness with pleasure, then the paradox of hedonism arises. When one aims solely towards pleasure itself, one's aim is frustrated. Henry Sidgwick comments on such frustration after a discussion of self-love in the above-mentioned work:

"I should not, however, infer from this that the pursuit of pleasure is necessarily self-defeating and futile; but merely that the principle of Egoistic Hedonism, when applied with a due knowledge of the laws of human nature, is practically self-limiting; i.e., that a rational method of attaining the end at which it aims requires that we should to some extent put it out of sight and not directly aim at it."

While not addressing the paradox directly, Aristotle commented on the futility of pursuing pleasure. Human beings are actors whose endeavours bring about consequences, and among these is pleasure. Aristotle then argues as follows:

"How, then, is it that no one is continuously pleased? Is it that we grow weary? Certainly all human things are incapable of continuous activity. Therefore pleasure also is not continuous; for it accompanies activity."

Sooner or later, finite beings will be unable to acquire and expend the resources necessary to maintain their sole goal of pleasure; thus, they find themselves in the company of misery. Evolutionary theory explains that humans evolved through natural selection and follow genetic imperatives that seek to maximize reproduction, not happiness. As a result of these selection pressures, the extent of human happiness is limited biologically. David Pearce argues in his treatise The Hedonistic Imperative that humans might be able to use genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and neuroscience to eliminate suffering in all human life and allow for peak levels of happiness and pleasure that are currently unimaginable.

Competing philosophies seek to balance hedonism with good acts and intentions, thus "earning" the pleasure.

title: Paradox of hedonism