your personal dignity, nor raise you higher than you already stand; but they would not readily put another in the same situation, because they feel the elevation of others as operating, by comparison, the degradation of themselves; and however absurd the idea may be, yet you will agree with me that men must be treated as men, and not as machines, much less as philosophers, and least of all things as reasonable creatures, seeing that, in effect, they reason not to direct but to excuse their condition. Thus much for the public opinion on these subjects, which is not to be neglected in a country where opinion is everything.—Page 289–90, vol. I, of Life of Governeur Morris, by Sparks.

Speech of Mr. Webster.

The father of Daniel Webster was a member of the convention in New Hampshire, which assembled in February, 1788, to act upon the national constitution. A majority of the delegates had instructions from their towns to vote against the adoption of the Constitution. This was the case with Colonel Webster. But the convention was adjourned to meet again in June, and, in the meantime, Col. Webster obtained from his constituents permission to vote according to his own judgment. When the vote was about to be taken, he rose, and said:

Mr. President, I have listened to the arguments for and against the constitution. I am convinced such a government as that constitution will establish, if adopted—a government acting directly on the people of the States—is necessary for the common defense and the general welfare. It is the only government which will enable us to pay off the national debt-the debt which we owe for the Revolution, and which we are bound in honor fully and fairly to discharge. Besides, I have followed the lead of Washington through seven years of war, and I have never been misled. His name is subscribed to this constitution. He will not mislead us now. I shall vote for its adoption.”. Note to pages 9, 10 of George Ticknor Curtis' Life of Daniel Webster. New York, Appleton & Co., 1870.

As to the Farewell Address.

D. C. Claypool, former editor of the newspaper, the Daily Advertiser, published in Philadelphia, wrote from Philadelphia, February 22, 1826, relative to the first publication, in the year 1796, of ⚫ the valedictory or farewell address by President Washington, stating that, a few days before the appearance of this memorable document in print, he received a message from the President, by his private secretary; and when he waited on the President, he stated that he had, for some time, contemplated retiring from public life, and had, at length, concluded to do so at the end of the (then) present term: that he had some thoughts and reflections on the occasion, which he deemed proper to communicate to the people of the United States, in the form of an address, and which he wished to appear in the Daily Advertiser, of which I was editor. After some conversation, the following Monday was fixed on as the time of its appearance; and he told me that his secretary would call on me, with a copy of the address, on the next (Friday) morning.

After the proof sheet had been compared with the copy, and corrected by myself, I carried another proof, and then a revise, to be examined by the President, who made but few alterations from the original, except in the punctuation, in which he was very minute.

The publication of the address, dated United States, September 17, 1796, being completed on the 19th, I waited on the President, with the original; and, in presenting it to him, expressed my regret at parting with it, and how much I should be gratified by being permitted to retain it: upon which, in an obliging manner, he handed it back to me, saying that, if I wished for it, I might keep it; and then I took my leave of him. I may say that his handwriting was familiar to me. The manuscript copy consists of thirty-two pages of quarto letter paper, sewed together as a book, and with many alterations; as, in some places, whole paragraphs are erased, and others substituted; in others, many lines struck out; in others, sentences and words erased, and others interlined, in their stead. The tenth, eleventh, and sixteenth pages are almost entirely expunged, saving only a few lines; and one half of the thirty-first page is also effaced. A critical examination will show that the whole, from first to last, with all its numerous corrections, was the work of the same hand; and I can confidentally affirm, that no other pen ever touched the manuscript now in my possession than that of the great and good man whose signature it bears.

PHILADELPHIA, February 22, 1826.

D. C. CLAYPOOL.

See the whole of the letter of Mr. Claypool, vol. I, p. 265-266–267, of the Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, published in 1864.

The original manuscript of the farewell address was, upon Mr. Claypool's death, sold at auction, in Philadelphia, by his representatives, and purchased by Mr. James Lenox, of New York, who printed an edition of a limited number of copies for private distribution, following the text as hitherto published, but noting from the manuscript the alterations and corrections of the illustrious author.— Editor.

Also, see ante, p. 307, as to the farewell address.

General Washington was born on 22d of February, 1732.

His farewell address was published September 17, 1796.

His second term expired on 4th March, 1797.

He died on 4th December, 1799, aged above 67 years.

JOHN ADAMS.

To Mr. Adams the country is deeply indebted. He was among the foremost in opposition to the aggressions of the King and Parliament. He was the early advocate for independence, and he supported the measure strenuously by his voice and his vote. Being subsequently in England, in an important diplomatic position, he imbibed a desire, or had his predilection strengthened for titles, as giving dignity to official position. He entertained an extravagant idea of the dignity or personal importance of the presidential office, and was in favor of surrounding it with striking marks of distinction. The official etiquette first established was maintained till the inauguration of Jefferson, when the coach and four, and other official paraphanalia, were omitted, with the attendance of members of both Houses on the President, in their answer to his inaugural or address, at the commencement of each session.

Mr. Adams was possessed of much vanity or self-esteem, and the exhibition of that quality in the Senate, and his interference there in matters not pertaining to his office, and as to which such action in the Vice President would not now be tolerated, caused repugnance towards him on the part of Senators.

After the declaration by Washington of his design to retire from office, Mr. Adams was nominated by the Federal party, without material opposition, and pretty much, as a matter of course; but his administration in that position manifested that, though possessing much ability and unquestionable patriotism and integrity, yet he was considered as deficient in the judgment, discretion, and temper, material to the proper discharge of the duties of that elevated station. He was charged with a want of discretion relative to the French complication, and his distrust of other distinguished men of his party, his repugnance to Mr. Hamilton, especially, and, perhaps, a desire to be considered as administering the government mainly by his own volition, without material influence by his cabinet officers, or other leading members of the Federal party, dissatisfied many, and a change in the presidential nomination was desired. It being difficult to accomplish such a result, he was continued at the helm, and was defeated; and Washington being dead, the party could

not be rallied; and this defeat, with the abortive and discreditable attempt to elect Burr over Jefferson, and thus disappoint or violate the known wishes of the people, overwhelmed the Federal party, and under that name it passed out of existence. The constitution was soon after altered, requiring electors to designate the office for which their votes are intended.

Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Adams acted in harmony in the early stage of the revolutionary struggle, and then became especially distinguished, the first as the draughtsman of the Declaration, and the other as its advocate on the floor of the convention. They became for a time, from the force of political circumstances, estranged from each other; but, towards the end of their lives, their friendship revived and continued till their death. They were, at its conclusion, but for a brief space of time in this world, divided. They died on the same day, the 4th of July, 1826, the anniversary of that day which they had done so much to commemorate.

Mr. Jefferson was also the writer of the resolutions adopted by the Kentucky Legislature in November, 1798, which were construed or defined by that Legislature, in 1799, as follows: Resolved, That the several States who formed the constitution, being sovereign, and, of course, independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction, and that a nullification by those sovereignties of all unauthorized acts, done under color of that instrument, is the rightful remedy.*

Mr. Madison, in a letter in April, 1787, proposing a plan of a constitution of the United States, was in favor of giving to the General Government an absolute and unqualified veto on all acts whatever of the State Legislatures. But he afterwards drew up the resolutions adopted by the Virginia Legislature, in December, 1798, which were to the same effect as the resolutions adopted in Kentucky, which were drawn by Mr. Jefferson, in November, of the same year. Mr. Webster combatted the doctrine above referred to, in his celebrated speech in 1830, in reply to the speech of Mr. Hayne, of South Carolina, contending that the constitution was established not by the States, but by the people. This opinion is the prevailing one in the northern States, the other is the prevalent one in the southern States of the Union.-Editor.

NOTE.-General Washington, in a letter to Lafayette, December 25, 1798, declared, "The constitution, according to their (the Anti-Federalists) interpretation of it, would be a mere cipher." He also wrote, "We are to-day one nation, and to to-morrow thirteen.-See Conts., page 151.

* See the Constitutional History of the United States, by Von Holst, p. 147.

As to Mr. Adams, Mr. Sullivan in his " Public Men of the Revolution," wrote: Mr. Adams, on the day of his inauguration, March 4, 1797, was in his sixty-second year. He was dressed in a full suit of pearl-colored broadcloth; with powdered hair. He was then bald on the top of his head. He was of middle stature, and full person; and of slow, deliberate manner, unless he was excited; and when this happened, he expressed himself with great energy.

Mr. Adams was a man of strong mind, of great learning, and of eminent ability to use knowledge, both in speech and writing. He was ever a man of purest morals, and is said to have been a firm believer in Christianity, not from habit and example, but from diligent investigation of its proofs. He had an uncompromising regard for his own opinion; and was strongly contrasted with Washington in this respect. He seemed to have supposed that his opinions could not be corrected by those of other men, nor bettered by any compariMr. Adams came to the presidency at the time when more forbearance and discretion were required than he is supposed to have had. He seems to have been deficient in the rare excellence of attempting to see himself as others saw him; and he ventured to act as though everybody saw as he saw himself. He considered only what was right in his own views, and that was to be carried by main force, whatever the obstacles.

son.

* *

There was great difference of opinion among the Federal party whether to seek the election of John Adams or Thomas Pinckney. As the Constitution then was, both were voted for by that party, expecting that one of them would be President and the other Vice President. Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Clinton, of New York, were the two opposing candidates. Most unexpectedly the result was that Mr. Adams stood highest-Mr. Jefferson next, and Mr. Pinckney third. It was supposed that so many of the eastern electors as preferred Mr. Adams to Mr. Pinckney, placed the latter candidate lower than they intended to do, and thereby gave a result which was exceedingly unwelcome as to the Vice President.-Sullivan.