er when it is in the hands of others, and the moment they get it into their own, to make bolder strides than those they have resisted! Are such men to be sanctified with the hallowed name of patriots? Are they not rather to be branded as men who make their passions, prejudices, and interests the sole measure of their own and others' rights? The history of mankind is too full of these melancholy contradictions."

He closed with the following impressive observations:"Those who are at present intrusted with power in all these infant republics, hold the most sacred deposit that ever was confided to human hands. It is with governments as with individuals, first impressions and early habits give a lasting bias to the temper and character. Our governments hitherto have no habits. How important to the happiness, not of America alone, but of mankind, that they should acquire good ones! If we set out with justice, moderation, liberality, and a scrupulous regard to the constitution, the government will acquire a spirit and tone productive of permanent blessings to the community. If, on the contrary, the public councils are guided by humour, passion, and prejudice-if, from resentment to individuals or a dread of partial inconveniences, the constitution is slighted or explained away upon every frivolous pretext—the future spirit of government will be feeble, distracted, and arbitrary. The rights of the subject will be the sport of every vicissitude. There will be no settled rule of conduct, but every thing will fluctuate with the alternate prevalency of contending factions.

"The world has its eye upon America. The noble struggle we have made in the cause of liberty, has occasioned a kind of revolution in human sentiment. The influence of our example has penetrated the gloomy regions of despotism, and has pointed the way to inquiries which may shake it to its deepest foundations. Men begin to ask ev

ery where, 'Who is this tyrant, that dares to build his greatness on our misery and degradation? What commission has he to sacrifice millions to the wanton appetites of himself and the few minions that surround his throne?" "To ripen inquiry into action, it remains for us to justify the revolution by its fruits. If the consequences prove that we have really asserted the cause of human happiness, what may not be expected from so illustrious an example? In a greater or less degree, the world will bless and imi

tate.

"But if experience, in this instance, verifies the lesson long taught by the enemies of liberty-that the bulk of mankind are not fit to govern themselves-that they must have a master, and were only made for the rein and the spur-we shall then see the final triumph of despotism over liberty. The advocates of the latter must acknowledge it to be an ignis fatuus, and abandon the pursuit. With the greatest advantages for promoting it that ever a people had, we shall have betrayed the cause of human nature! Let those in whose hands it is placed, pause for a moment, and contemplate with an eye of reverence the vast trust committed to them. Let them retire into their own bosoms and examine the motives which there prevail. Let them ask themselves this solemn question-Is the sacrifice of a few mistaken or criminal individuals an object worthy of the shifts to which we are reduced to evade the constitution and our national engagements? Then let them review the arguments that have been offered with dispassionate candour, and if they even doubt the propriety of the measures they may be about to adopt, let them remember that in a doubtful case the constitution ought never to be hazarded without extreme necessity."

This glowing appeal, which repels all the allegations that Hamilton was the friend of arbitrary government-this appeal to the better sense of the people prevailed.

"The force of plain truth," as the author observed, "carried it along the stream of prejudice, and the principles it held out, gained ground in spite of the opposition of those who were either too angry or too much interested to be convinced." The bill, "declaring a certain description of persons without the protection of the laws,” which Hamilton characterized as "an attempt to transfer the sceptre from the hands of government to those of individuals, to arm one part of the community against another, to enact a civil war," had passed. But its passage was fatal to the influence of those who had sustained it. The lessons of moderation and good faith which were inculcated, were soon found to be the lessons of true wisdom; and instead of looking upon the return of the tories with alarm and discontent, the reflecting part of the public admitted that their wealth would be subservient to the interests of the community, and while they acknowledged that their temporary influence might be prejudicial, were willing to confide our institutions to the irresistible current of free opinions.

These generous views extended rapidly. As the arts of peace advanced, the popular clamour gradually subsided, and the general sense of the country settled down in favour of the policy Hamilton had supported.*

The spirit of plunder, originating with the violent and unprincipled, disappointed in its aims, now turned upon him with its fellest rancour.

From that hour of honest

"The rising generation then just entering on the stage of action, readily imbibed those sentiments of temperate civil liberty, and of sound constitu tional law, which Hamilton had so clearly taught and so eloquently inculcated. The benign influence of such doctrines, was happily felt and retained through the whole course of the generation to whom they were addressed. I speak for myself as one of that generation, that no hasty production of the press could have been more auspicious."-Chancellor Kent's Recol. lections.

triumph, he was marked as the object of incessant calumny. The sense of defeat, rankling in the breasts of the persecuting demagogues, united with other passions, and with the facility with which vicious sentiments usually associate, soon grew into an unscrupulous and unrelenting hostility.

But this feeling did not extend far. In all civilized societies the greater part are quiescent, and, as Hamilton observed, "were either for liberal or moderate measures, or, at most, for some legislative discriminations; a few only were very violent; the most heated were the warm adherents of the governor, and the objects of his peculiar patronage." They were rewarded for their intolerance— Hamilton was proscribed for his clemency.

Of the personal animosity which his opposition to democratic tyranny had awakened, a painful instance is related. There existed at this time an evening club, composed of persons conspicuous in the prosecution of these attainders, some of whom had written in opposition to "Phocion," and who felt themselves the deserved objects of its just denunciations.

Early in an evening of this meeting, it was proposed that Hamilton should be challenged, and in case the first challenger should fall, that others should challenge him in succession. At this moment Ledyard entered the apartment, and, on hearing the proposition, broke out with loud indignation. "This, gentlemen, never can be. What? you write what you please, and because you cannot refute what he writes in reply, you form a combination to take his life. One challenges, and if he falls, another follows!" By this remonstrance the blow was suspended.

Some time after, Hamilton, who had heard of the occurence, was dining in company with Ledyard, when he was casually addressed as Mentor. He instantly arose, and taking him by the hand, exclaimed, "Then you, my dear

sir, are the friend who saved my life." Ledyard replied, "That, you know, you once did for me."

Of his professional efforts at this time, the traces among his papers are few and of little value. The practice of reporting adjudicated cases had not obtained. Stenography was unknown in America and the vestiges of the eloquence of the men whose genius embellished the infancy of our republic, are rare and imperfect.

The recollections of a youthful contemporary* remark Hamilton's "clear, elegant, and fluent style, and commanding manner. He never made any argument in court without displaying his habits of thinking, and resorting at once to some well-founded principle of law, and drawing his deductions logically from his premises. Law was always treated by him as a science founded on established principles. His manners were gentle, affable, and kind. He appeared to be frank, liberal, and courteous in all his professional intercourse." Referring to an important trial of this period, they state-"Hamilton, by means of his fine melodious voice and dignified deportment, his reasoning powers and persuasive address, soared above all competition; his pre-eminence was at once universally conceded."+

He continued throughout this and the succeeding year deeply engaged in his professional labours, as to which he observed―" Legislative folly had afforded so plentiful a

*Chancellor Kent.

+Chancellor Livingston was the opposite counsel. On the brief in this cause the following pleasantry is found.

"Recipe for a good title in ejectment.

Two or three void patents..

As many old ex-parte surveys.

One or two acts of usurpation, acquiesced in for a time, but afterwards proved to be such.

Half a dozen scripture allusions.

Some ghosts, fairies, elves, hobgoblins, and a quantum sufficit of eloquence."