[72] Cicero de Officiis, Lib. I. -- 43.
[73] A fac-simile of this ever-memorable state paper, as drafted by Mr.
Jefferson, with the interlineations alluded to in the text, is contained in Mr. Jefferson"s Writings, Vol. I. p. 146. See, also, in reference to the history of the Declaration, the Life and Works of John Adams Vol. II. p. 512 _et seq._
[74] This question, of the power of Parliament over the Colonies, was discussed with singular ability, by Governor Hutchinson on the one side, and the House of Representatives of Ma.s.sachusetts on the other, in 1773. The argument of the House is in the form of an answer to the Governor"s Message, and was reported by Mr.
Samuel Adams, Mr. Hanc.o.c.k, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Bowers, Mr. Hobson, Mr. Foster, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Thayer. As the power of the Parliament had been acknowledged, so far at least as to affect us by laws of trade, it was not easy to settle the line of distinction. It was thought, however, to be very clear, that the charters of the Colonies had exempted them from the general legislation of the British Parliament. See Ma.s.sachusetts State Papers, p. 351. The important a.s.sistance rendered by John Adams in the preparation of the answer of the House to the Message of the Governor may be learned from the Life and Works of John Adams, Vol. II. p. 311 _et seq._
[75] The official copy of the Declaration, as engrossed and signed by the members of Congress, is framed and preserved in the Hall over the Patent-Office at Washington.
[76] See Life and Works of John Adams, Vol. II. p. 417 _et seq._
[77] On the authorship of this speech, see Note at the end of the Discourse.
[78] In this Convention he served as chairman of the committee for preparing the draft of a Const.i.tution.
[79] Upon the organization of this body, 15th November, 1820, John Adams was elected its President; an office which the infirmities of age compelled him to decline. For the interesting proceedings of the Convention on this occasion, the address of Chief Justice Parker, and the reply of Mr. Adams, see Journal of Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of Delegates chosen to revise the Const.i.tution of Ma.s.sachusetts, p. 8 _et seq._
[80] For an account of Mr. Webster"s last interview with Mr. Adams, see March"s Reminiscences of Congress, p. 62.
[81] Mr. Jefferson himself considered his services in establishing the University of Virginia as among the most important rendered by him to the country. In Mr. Wirt"s Eulogy, it is stated that a private memorandum was found among his papers, containing the following inscription to be placed on his monument:--"Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of Independence, of the Statutes of Virginia for Religious Freedom, and Father of the University of Virginia." Eulogies on Adams and Jefferson, p. 426.
NOTE.
Page 136.
The question has often been asked, whether the anonymous speech against the Declaration of Independence, and the speech in support of it ascribed to John Adams in the preceding Discourse, are a portion of the debates which actually took place in 1776 in the Continental Congress.
Not only has this inquiry been propounded in the public papers, but several letters on the subject have been addressed to Mr. Webster and his friends. For this reason, it may be proper to state, that those speeches were composed by Mr. Webster, after the manner of the ancient historians, as embodying in an impressive form the arguments relied upon by the friends and opponents of the measure, respectively. They of course represent the speeches that were actually made on both sides, but no report of the debates of this period has been preserved, and the orator on the present occasion had no aid in framing these addresses, but what was furnished by general tradition and the known line of argument pursued by the speakers and writers of that day for and against the measure of Independence. The first sentence of the speech ascribed to Mr. Adams was of course suggested by the parting scene with Jonathan Sewall, as described by Mr. Adams himself, in the Preface to the Letters of Novanglus and Ma.s.sachusettensis.
So much interest has been taken in this subject, that it has been thought proper, by way of settling the question in the most authentic manner, to give publicity to the following answer, written by Mr.
Webster to one of the letters of inquiry above alluded to.
"_Washington, 22 January, 1846._
"DEAR SIR:--
"I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 18th instant. Its contents hardly surprise me, as I have received very many similar communications.
"Your inquiry is easily answered. The Congress of the Revolution sat with closed doors. Its proceedings were made known to the public, from time to time, by printing its journal; but the debates were not published. So far as I know, there is not existing, in print or ma.n.u.script, the speech, or any part or fragment of the speech, delivered by Mr. Adams on the question of the Declaration of Independence. We only know from the testimony of his auditors, that he spoke with remarkable ability and characteristic earnestness.
"The day after the Declaration was made, Mr. Adams, in writing to a friend,[82] declared the event to be one that "ought to be commemorated, as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to G.o.d Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, for evermore."
"And on the day of his death, hearing the noise of bells and cannon, he asked the occasion. On being reminded that it was "Independent day," he replied, "Independence for ever!" These expressions were introduced into the speech _supposed_ to have been made by him. For the rest, I must be answerable. The speech was written by me, in my house in Boston, the day before the delivery of the Discourse in Faneuil Hall; a poor subst.i.tute, I am sure it would appear to be, if we could now see the speech actually made by Mr. Adams on that transcendently important occasion.
"I am, respectfully, "Your obedient servant,
"DANIEL WEBSTER."
FOOTNOTES
[82] See Letters of John Adams to his Wife, Vol. I. p. 128, note.
THE ELECTION OF 1825.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE.
It has already been observed in the Introductory Memoir, that, from the return of peace in 1815, a tendency manifested itself in many parts of the country toward a dissolution of the old parties. The overwrought feelings of the people demanded repose. The subject-matter of several of the points of party dissension had expired with the war. New questions of great public interest, traversing the old party lines, had sprung up. General Jackson, in a letter addressed to Mr. Monroe, in 1817, on the subject of the formation of his cabinet, had advised him to discard the former party divisions. In the progress of his eight years" administration, it was every day more and more apparent, that the old party influences had spent their force. It became at last impossible to recognize their continued existence.
With the approach of the national election in the autumn of 1824, at which four candidates were supported for the office of President, no thoughts were entertained in any quarter of recommending either of them as a candidate to be supported or opposed by one or the other of the ancient parties. If there was any seeming departure from this principle, it must have been to some quite limited extent, and for supposed advantage in narrow localities. In the Union at large, no such attempt was made. The several candidates were sustained on broad national grounds.
This was eminently the case in Ma.s.sachusetts, where a very large majority of the people, a.s.suming the name of National Republicans, and without reference to former divisions, were united in the support of their fellow-citizen, John Quincy Adams. At the State elections next succeeding his accession to the Presidency, in the spring of 1825, the candidates for the offices of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, who, at the last contested election, had been brought forward by the Democratic party, were almost unanimously supported, and a union ticket for Senators was nominated in most of the counties of the State. Such was the case in Suffolk County; and at a meeting held in Faneuil Hall, without distinction of party, to ratify these nominations, the following remarks were made by Mr. Webster.
THE ELECTION OF 1825.[83]
Mr. Webster said, he was quite unaccustomed to appear in that place; having on no occasion addressed his fellow-citizens there, either to recommend or to oppose the support of any candidates for public office.
He had long been of opinion, that to preserve the distinction and the hostility of political parties was not consistent with the highest degree of public good. At the same time, he did not find fault with the conduct, nor question the motives, of those who thought otherwise. But, entertaining this opinion, he had habitually abstained from attending on those occasions on which the merits of public men, and of candidates for office, were discussed, necessarily with more or less reference to party attachment and party organization.
The present was an occasion of a different kind. The sentiment which had called this meeting together was one of union and conciliation; a sentiment so congenial to his own feelings, and to his opinion of the public interest, that he could not resist the inclination to be present, and to express his entire and hearty concurrence.
He should forbear, he said, from all remarks upon the particular names which had been recommended by the committee. They had been selected, he must presume, fairly, and with due consideration, by those who were appointed for that purpose. In cases of this sort, every one cannot expect to find every thing precisely as he might wish it; but those who concurred in the general sentiment which dictated the selection would naturally allow that sentiment to prevail as far as possible over particular objections.
On the general question he would make a few remarks, begging the indulgence of the meeting if he should say any thing which might with more propriety proceed from others.
He hardly conceived how well disposed and intelligent minds could differ as to the question, whether party contest and party strife, organized, systematic, and continued, were of themselves desirable ingredients in the composition of society. Difference of opinion on political subjects, honorable compet.i.tion, and emulous rivalry, may indeed be useful. But these are very different things from organized and systematic party combinations. He admitted, it was true, that party a.s.sociations were sometimes unavoidable, and perhaps necessary to the accomplishment of other ends and purposes. But this did not prove that, of themselves, they were good; or that they should be continued and preserved for their own sake, when there had ceased to be any object to be effected by them.
But there were those who supposed, that, whether political party distinctions were or were not useful, it was impossible to abolish them.
Now he thought, on the contrary, that, under present circ.u.mstances, it was quite impossible to continue them. New parties, indeed, might arise, growing out of new events or new questions; but as to those old parties which had sprung from controversies now no longer pending, or from feelings which time and other causes had now changed, or greatly allayed, he did not believe that they could long remain. Efforts, indeed, made to that end, with zeal and perseverance, might delay their extinction, but, he thought, could not prevent it. There was nothing to keep alive these distinctions in the interests and objects which now engaged society. New questions and new objects arise, having no connection with the subjects of past controversies, and present interest overcomes or absorbs the recollection of former controversies. Those who are united on these existing questions and present interests will not be disposed to weaken their efforts to promote them, by angry reflections on past differences. If there were nothing _in things_ to divide about, he thought the people not likely to maintain systematic controversies about _men_. They have no interest in so doing. a.s.sociations formed to support _principles_ may be called _parties_; but if they have no bond of union but adherence to particular _men_, they become _factions_.
The people, in his opinion, were at present grateful to all parties for whatever of good they had accomplished, and indulgent to all for whatever of error they had committed; and, with these feelings, were now mainly intent on the great objects which affected their present interests. There might be exceptions to this remark; he was afraid there were; but, nevertheless, such appeared to him to be the general feeling in the country. It was natural that some prejudices should remain longer than their causes, as the waves lash the sh.o.r.e for a time after the storm has subsided; but the tendency of the elements was to repose.
Monopolies of all sorts were getting out of fashion; they were yielding to liberal ideas, and to the obvious justice and expediency of fair compet.i.tion.
An administration of the general government, which had been in general highly satisfactory to the country, had now closed.[84] He was not aware that it could with propriety be said, that that administration had been either supported or opposed by any party a.s.sociations or on any party principles. Certain it was, that, as far as there had been any organized opposition to the administration, it had had nothing to do with former parties. A new administration had now commenced, and he need hardly say that the most liberal and conciliatory principles had been avowed in the Inaugural Address of the newly elected President. It could not be doubted that his administration would conform to those principles. Thus far, he believed, its course had given general satisfaction. After what they all had seen in relation to the gentleman holding the highest appointment in the executive department under the President, he would take this opportunity to say, that, having been a member of the House of Representatives for six years, during the greater part of which time Mr.
Clay had presided in that House, he was most happy in being able, in a manner less formal and more explicit than by concurring in the usual vote of thanks, to express his own opinion of his liberality, independence, and honorable feeling. And he would take this occasion also to add, if his opinion could be of any value in such a case, that he thought nothing more unfounded than that that gentleman owed his present situation to any unworthy compromise or arrangement whatever.
He owed it to his talent, to his prominent standing in the community, to his course of public service, not now a short one, and to the high estimation in which he stands with that part of the country to which he belongs.