of Mount Vernon, and such "upstart" barristers as John Marshall and John Jay.

As we pass to the "successful rebel," after he had stood as the minister of a free country in the presence of the sovereign to whom he was born in allegiance, and had become President of the United States, we read his communications to his Cabinet, and to other personages whom he had occasion to address, with interest and profit. These papers are frank in statement, convey his meaning in the fewest words possible, display accurate information of the condition of public affairs, and are of no small value as materials for history. Again, as we compare the style, topics, and length of his speeches and messages to Congress with similar documents of the present day, we are struck with the change, the whole of his papers of this class during the four years, nearly thirty in number, occupying about the space of one of the annual messages of our late chief magistrate.

In the general correspondence our readers will find much that is full of instruction, and we would especially invite thei attention to the letters to Jefferson, to Mr. Tudor, to Rev. Dr. Morse, and to Mr. Lloyd, which are very numerous. The communication to the latter of April 24, 1815,* shows a quality of character which we may here pause to notice, once for all. It is devoted principally to an account of the appointment of Washington to the command of the army. Honest, warm-tempered men are somewhat apt to use strong words when speaking of their own deeds, as well as when commenting upon the conduct of those with whom they have been in conflict as to act or opinion. Mr. Adams was by no means an exception. No one disputes that it was owing to his sagacity and exertions that the right selection was made of even, save to fill vacancies caused by death! In the Legislative Council of another Colony, only one less than half of the members were partners in the same private bank, and only one less than half, too, were relatives; while another member was also Chief Justice, and had a seat in the Executive Council, and thus in these three capacities assisted to make, to administer, and to advise the Governor in executing, the laws. Those who are familiar with colonial politics will remember that the quarrel with these Loyalists, or "old families," preceded the demands on the crown for a general relaxation of the rigors and disabilities of the colonial system, and that the construction of the Councils was one of the first things complained of. *Vol. X. p. 162.

commander-in-chief, or that his service in this behalf was one of the most meritorious, and, in its results, one of the most important, of his whole career. But we cannot conceive, as implied in this letter, that he was so far in advance of his associates in Congress, of officers in the army, and of leading Whigs everywhere, as to have incurred such reproaches as he mentions, and illustrates by reference to the odium which had attached to him for his defence of Preston and his soldiers five years previously.

In this instance of self-praise, then, as well as in his censures, or equivocal commendations, of Franklin, Hamilton, and Pinckney, and of several others with whom he disagreed more or less seriously, as also in the motives of action which he sometimes attributes to persons who opposed his advancement, we are to make allowance for the ardor of his temperament, and, it may be, for a disposition to undervalue the character of his associates. Cases in which we are called upon to exercise our own judgment are not so rare as we could wish. In fact, the displays of vanity, of egotism, and of apprehension seemingly that some one else would appropriate the credit due to his labors, sacrifices, and fidelity in the exigencies which arose in promoting the common cause, are quite too numerous. And yet, grave faults though they are, we are glad the papers in which they appear are not suppressed, since we see, and posterity will see, the man just as he was to his contemporaries. "Vanity," he wrote at twenty, “I am sensible, is my cardinal vice and cardinal folly." It was so ever afterwards. In his sensitiveness to praise and to censure, in his continual rehearsals of his own merits and of his country's obligations to him, in his painful brooding over ungrateful requitals, his resemblance to Cicero is very strongly marked; and he surpassed the Roman in this, that, while Cicero did but ask another to chronicle his achievements, he was his own Lucius Lucceius. But let none forget, some are prone to do,-when pointing out these weaknesses in our great countryman, that, though sometimes "his feelings were worth a guinea a minute," we enjoy

as

*Mr. Adams's own remark of General Wayne," Mad Anthony," - the hero of Stony Point.

blessings procured by this very vanity; that its possessor, when his associates were timid or undecided, equal in his own estimation to every emergency, boldly led off, and that whatever he undertook he accomplished. Let us admit that inordinate self-esteem in a revolutionist is a positive virtue; and say that, as, according to the French aphorist, "Unbounded modesty is nothing more than unavowed vanity," he differed from the man whom the world calls modest only because he spoke without concealment.

There is not much in Mr. Adams's public life, prior to the adoption of the Constitution, which even his enemies fastened upon him to lessen his fame, save the alleged monarchical doctrines of the Defence, and his occasional exhibitions of self-esteem, irritability, and the like. From the commencement to the close of his connection with the Federal government, however, he was exposed to more or less blame, not only from his opponents, but from persons of decisive influence in his own party. The Federalists, in fact, allege that his measures, as President, first divided, and at last ruined them. We believe that it was not so, that he was not the cause of democratic ascendency. Of this debatable period, justice demands a full and calm survey. When we regard the question as one of history, to be decided upon the evidence, we do not wonder at the fall of Federalism, but rather marvel that the Constitution of the United States was ever adopted; or at least that its original friends were allowed to continue in power for a period of twelve years. In the popular mind, the Federalists as a body were held to be aristocrats who had little sympathy with the common people; who were secretly monarchists, or, at best, stern advocates of stern laws; who would pardon nothing to the outbreaks of indebted poverty, the direct result of the war for freedom,—to the occasional excesses of emancipated colonists, who, in the joy of severed bonds, hardly knew at times how to use, without abusing, their newly acquired privileges. In our view, there was a perpetual struggle against Federalism, as thus understood, until its overthrow. But had no such impressions existed, we entertain the opinion that the policy of Washington in the French Revolution, and his assent to Jay's treaty, rendered the decline of the Federal party certain.

Thus premising, and with a single desire to state the truth, fall where it may, we proceed to a brief survey of Mr. Adams's relations to his countrymen while he was second under the first, and first under the second, administration. That he was no favorite with several prominent statesmen, is well known; and had Samuel Adams, or Hancock, been supposed sound on the Constitution, one of them probably would have been selected as Vice-President. At the outset, then, he was not the first choice of those who assumed to control affairs; and he entered upon his duties with the humiliating recollection that, though Washington had received every electoral suffrage, it had been so arranged that a minority vote only had been cast for him, ten other candidates receiving a combined majority of one. His course as presiding officer of the Senate, during the first term, was satisfactory to most, and indeed was generally applauded; but at the second election, while the illustrious chief was re-elected with entire unanimity, he was again so opposed in the electoral colleges, that a change of six votes would have defeated him.

Nor, as the division of the country into distinct political parties became more manifest, would he have been nominated to succeed Washington, but for the fear that Jay's popularity had been seriously impaired by the negotiation of the treaty which bears his name. As it was, though many Federalists disliked Mr. Adams, they "were driven to adopt him" by the force of circumstances; but coupled their support of him with the notable device of giving Thomas Pinckney, the candidate for the Vice-Presidency, an "equal support," or of holding the power of excluding Mr. Adams from the first office by some chance vote in the colleges, or, in the last resort, of electing Pinckney in the House of Representatives.* This plan, if not devised by Hamilton, had his sanction. It well-nigh succeeded, not in elevating Pinckney, but in the discomfiture of the Federalists; for Jefferson, who of all men was regarded as their evil genius, was elected to the second place, and Mr.

* It is hardly necessary to say, that, as the Constitution then stood, the highest candidate in the electoral colleges was to be President, and the second, Vice-President, and that, when two persons received an equal number, the election devolved upon the lower house of Congress, as now when there is no choice by the Electors.

Adams secured the first by a majority of one; or, to state the result differently, two votes added to the Democratic candidate would have put an end to Federal rule. Thus, though the President was a Federalist, a Democrat was placed in the succession. So near its fall was Federalism at the first election after the retirement of Washington. For the policyto give it no harsher name - adopted as above stated, if we judge by written testimony, there is no sufficient explanation. We can well understand that fears might have been entertained that Mr. Adams, as chief magistrate, would want steadiness of purpose, and exhibit his infirmities to the injury of the public interests; but we are amazed that, his nomination once considerately made, no matter on what grounds, any persons who consented to it should have forgotten their obligations to observe good faith towards him, and towards those of the Federal party who, without such apprehensions, preferred him to all others.

We pass by the events of Mr. Adams's administration, until we come to the mission to France, which produced divisions from which the Federalists never recovered. Previousl and down to the inception of that measure, dissatisfaction had been inconsiderable among his political friends, as appears by the letters of distinguished members of his party, whose confidence he then lost. It is claimed in his behalf, that Washington did not object to a renewal of negotiations with our old ally, and that his letters on the subject warrant a still stronger statement.* Be this as it may, many wise and pure men did express their satisfaction that the "indirect" overtures of the French rulers were not rejected. Among these was John Marshall, whose opinions were always entitled to the weight of judicial decision, and who, in this particular case, was well advised, because, having been member of a previous mission to France, he had become intimately acquainted with the exact relations between the two countries. The military men, as a class, and many civilians of consideration, were, however, sorely displeased. We admit that one party to this issue was as patriotic as the other; still, we cannot but

* There are two letters addressed to Mr. Adams, February and March, 1799; see Washington's Writings, Vol. II. pp. 398, 403.