with his conversation and friendship, are sensible that the world knew but little of his talents or merit.

Of the vivacity, fertility, and richness of his imagination, every man who had the smallest pretension to taste, learning, or discrimination, can bear the most ample testimony. In this respect he stands without a rival in our own country, and if we can be permitted to judge from the printed works of cotemporaneous Europeans, there has been but one man of his age who can be placed in comparison with him. If MR. BURKE excelled him in the richness and variety of his imagery, in the beauty and aptitude of his classick allusions, it can be attributed only to the superior advantages of an early and excellent education, and to more extended practice in the best school of modern eloquence, the British Parliament.

If the health of Mr. AMES had permitted him to pursue his natural disposition for political disquisition, and parliamentary discussion, and if he had lived to the mature age of Mr. BURKE, it is to doubted whether he would not have been a very formida ble rival to that unequalled statesman.

But the exuberance and chastity of Mr. AMES's imagination were among the smallest of his talents, as they were of no account in comparison with his publick and private virtues. The profoundness of his mind, the extent and correctness of his political and moral reflections, far exceeded the splendour and inexhaustible fertility of his fancy. No man ever entered his society without being informed, and few quitted it without being improved. The most abstract thoughts, the most profound ideas seemed to flow from him without any mental exertion. Although capable of entering into abstruse disquisitions on every subject, yet a natural bias to politicks, the habits of early life, and a patriotism sincere, strong, and ardent even in death, led him chiefly to confine his vast mind to the political situation of the world and more especially of his own country. Living in an age the most changeful, and the most eventful, he gave full scope to his deep and penetrating understanding. He perceived the causes and the consequences of passing measures unnoticed by thoughtless and vulgar statesmen; and if his prophecies of future events should be as strictly fulfilled hereafter as they have heretofore been, his surviving fellow-patriots have no small reason of disquiet and apprehension.

He was one of the few men who foresaw and foretold the frightful despotism which would terminate the French revolution; and if his predictions of the effects of the influence of aspiring demagogues are (as they are likely to be) as literally fulfilled in our own country, this amiable and regretted prophet has not found too early a grave.

Of the events of such a man's life, shrinking from publick notice, and dreading publick distinction, courting only domestick and literary enjoyments, little ought to be said, because, although distinguished and honoured by his country, he conferred more honour than he received.

Let those who have no other merit than official distinctions retail the long catalogue of their titles, it is sufficient to say of MR. AMES, that in the few offices into which he was forced, he, rendered his country services which no other man could render, and he left behind him in the councils of the nation, an example and reputation, which it is, and ought to be the pride of his successors to imitate, though few can hope to equal.

Of his brightest, best traits, those of domestick and retired life, those which ornamented and exalted the man above the statesman, one would never be weary in their praise. But there was a tenderness and delicacy which his inestimable softness of character excited in his relations and friends, which ought not to be wounded. Of such sentiments and such sensibilities, those who did not know him cannot judge. Their loss can never be too much deplored, their wounds can never be healed, the world can never repair the one, or cure the other.

Questions respecting Maritime Concerns.

ACCORDING to the principle or usage, what is the evidence to be given of national character between armed vessels of different powers at sea?

In those parts of the ocean which are common to all, have publick armed vessels the right to ask and ascertain the national character of other vessels if armed?

How are regularly commissioned vessels of war, whether publick vessels or privateers, to be distinguished at sea from pirates or unauthorized corsairs?

How far is the publick armed vessel of one power warranted in principle to show colours of another power, or to disguise its character?

What privilege at sea is attached to the national character of an armed vessel whether belligerent or neutral, before such character is declared or made known?

What is the rule as to salutations between publick armed vessels of different powers, or between such vessels and privateers or merchant vessels, on the main ocean?

To ascertain the character of an armed vessel at sea, may a publick vessel regularly commissioned give chase?

Are there, or are there not, any cases in which a regularly commissioned vessel of a neutral power may give chase within a maritime league of the shore of its own country, or while in sight of land, or while on soundings, or elsewhere on the ocean?

May the publick armed vessel of one power on the main ocean, demand of the publick armed vessel of another power the seamen belonging to the country of the vessel making the demand?

Is the commander of the vessel so applied to bound to give the names of all such seamen, if the application be general, or is he bound to answer to such a general inquiry, or to a question respecting any particular seaman or seamen?

If he answers, is he or is he not bound to answer according to the truth?

If in his answer he acknowledges any such seaman to be on board but refuses to deliver him up, what then is the duty of the commander who made application for the seaman?

ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN.

AN argument, (says a late London paper) as curious as it is interesting, is depending, respecting the marriage of illegitimate children. The case before the court upon this subject is as follows:-A gentleman dying, left his natural daughter a very considerable estate. At that period she was living under the guardianship of her mother, and before she attained the age of 21, she was married with her mother's consent. The question before the court is, whether the issue of that marriage can inherit the estate left by the grandfather. The legitimate issue of the grandfather say they cannot, and seek to recover it back.

The argument in support of that position is, that natural children, in contemplation of law, have no father nor mother, and consequently the marriage above alluded to, by the provisions of the marriage-act, is null and void, as the mother could not make the marriage binding by her consent; and the natural daughter being in that case married without the consent of a legal parent, and she being a minor at the time, the issue of marriage are bastardized, and the estate must revert back to the legitimate issue of the grandfather. The reply is, that the mother of a natural daugher is a parent for the purpose of assenting or dissenting to her marriage when a minor; but if she is not a parent within the meaning of the act, then are the issue no children within the meaning of the act, and the suit must fail.

If the act recognized none but legal parents, then could it recognize none but legitimate children; so that, whichever way the argument shaped itself, the issue of the marriage could not be deprived of the estate in question.

The court took time to consider of their judgment.
No. XV.
S

SPEECH OF MISS POLLY BAKER,

Delivered before a Court of Judicature in Connecticut, New England, where she was prosecuted for having a bastard child.

May it please the honourable bench, to indulge me in a few words:-I am a poor, unhappy woman, who have no money to fee lawyers to plead for me, being hard put to it to get a tolerable living.

I shall not trouble your honours with a long speech, for I have not the presumption to expect, that you may by any means be prevailed on to deviate in your sentence from the law in my favour. All I humbly hope is, that your honours would charitably move the governour's goodness in my behalf, that my fine may be remitted. This is the fifth time, gentlemen, that I have been dragged before your court on the same account; twice I have paid heavy fines, and twice have been brought to publick punishment, for want of money to pay those fines. This may have been agreeable to the laws, and I don't dispute it. but since laws are sometimes unreasonable in themselves, and therefore repealed; and others bear too hard on the subject in particular circumstances, and therefore there is left a power somewhat to dispense with the execution of them. I take the liberty to say, that I think this law, by which I am punished, is both unreasonable in itself, and particularly severe with regard to me, who have always lived an inoffensible life in the neighbourhood where I was born; and defy my enemies, if I have any, to say I ever wronged man, woman, or child. Abstracted from the law, I cannot perceive, may it please your honours, what the nature of my offence is.