There is also reason to believe that this construction agrees with the opinions entertained by the state conventions, when they were deliberating on the constitution, especially by those who objected to it; because there was not required, in commercial treaties, the consent of two thirds of the whole number of the members of the Senate, instead of two thirds of the Senators present: and because, in treaties respecting territorial and certain other rights and claims, the concurrence of three fourths of the whole number of the members of both Houses, respectively, was not made necessary.

It is a fact, declared by the general convention, and universally understood, that the constitution of the United States was the result of a spirit of amity and mutual concession. And it is well known that, under this influence, the smaller states were admitted to an equal representation in the Senate with the larger states; and that this branch of the government was invested with great powers for, on the equal participation of those powers, the sovereignty and political safety of the smaller states were deemed essentially to depend.

If other proofs than these, and the plain letter of the constitution itself, be necessary to ascertain the point under consideration, they may be found in the journals of the general convention, which I have deposited in the of fice of the department of state. In those journals, it will appear that a proposition was made, " that no treaty should be binding on the United States which was not ratified by a law;" and that the proposition was explicitly rejected.

As, therefore, it is perfectly clear to my understanding, that the assent of the House of Representatives is not necessary to the validity of a treaty; as the treaty with Great Britain exhibits in itself all the objects requiring legislative provision, and on these the papers called for can throw no light; and as it is essential to the due administration of the government, that the boundaries fixed by the constitution between the different departments should be preserved; a just regard to the constitution and to the duty of my office, under all the circumstances of this case, forbid a compliance with your request.

JOHN ADAMS.

JOHN ADAMS, who had the distinguished honor of succeeding the illustrious Washington in the Presidency of the United States, was born at Quincy, Mass., then a part of the ancient town of Braintree, on the 19th of October, (O. S.) 1735. Discovering a strong taste for reading, at an early age, his father took great care to provide for his education. He accordingly became a member of Harvard College, where he graduated in 1755. At the close of his college career, he was for a time employed in instructing a common school, but soon commenced the study of law, in the office of Samuel Putnam, an eminent barrister at Worcester. By him he was introduced to Jeremiah Gridley, a lawyer of the first distinction, at that time attorney-general of Massachusetts. From the first interview they were friends, and Gridley took him at once into favor, and procured his admission to the bar. Soon after, with an air of mystery he led his young friend to a private chamber, and pointing to a book case, said, Sir, there is the secret of my eminence, and you may avail yourself of it as you please." In this place Mr. Adams labored night and day till he made himself master of the civil code.

66

With a mind naturally inclined to political speculations, the propensity was naturally strengthened within him by the exciting character of the times. The first sparks of revolution were already breaking forth from the masses of our people, and even at the age of twenty years, Mr. Adams seems to have foreseen the great things that were

7

in reserve for the country. In 1755, while a resident at Worcester, he wrote a letter of which the following is an exstract. "Soon after the Reformation, a few people came over into this new world for conscience sake: perhaps this apparently trivial incident may transfer the great seat of empire into America. It looks likely to me; for if we can remove the turbulent Gallicks, our people, according to the exactest computations, will in another century become more numerous than England itself. Should this be the case, since we have, I may say, all the naval stores of the nation in our hands, it will be easy to obtain a mastery of the seas, and the united force of all Europe will not be able to subdue us.” There is something remarkable in this prophetic language, coming from so young a man, and at so early a period in our country's history. It is still more remarkable that he should have lived to see his predictions fulfilled, and to act a prominent part in the events which led to their fulfilment.

In 1766, Mr. Adams, having already risen to great eminence in his profession, removed to Boston. Here he became one of the associates of Otis, Hancock, Samuel Adams, and others, in resistance to the arbitrary measures of the government. His great abilities attracted attention, and the English governor, Barnard, tried to detach him from the cause he had espoused, by tendering him the lucrative office of advocate-general in the court of admiralty. But he rejected the proposition with promptness, choosing rather to expose to hazard his life and prospects, than give up his integrity. Mr. Adams was a member of all the revolutionary conventions in his native state, and was elected a delegate to the first Continental Congress. The second Congress convened at Philadelphia, in May, 1775. It became necessary to appoint a leader for the contest, to command the armies