interest would be jeopardized by a capricious change; more especially as he would, knowing he held the office by such a tenure, be induced to sacrifice public good to private emolument. In their opinion, offices created for the benefit of the community, should never be prostituted to reward favorites. They seem to have foreseen, that after a warmly contested election, the successful candidate would be strongly urged to make use of this all-powerful instrument to reward his friends, and punish his opponents; that his own inclinations, together with what he might suppose would be conducive to his re-election, would lead to the same object, and that their combined influence would be irresistible. They adduced no instances of such a corrupt and unprincipled course; no president having, as yet, ventured on the experiment of removing faithful officers, for the purpose of rewarding the active instruments of his election. But they argued with great force, as well from the imperfections of human nature, as from the history of other countries, that such might, and probably would be the case in future, which they considered as one of the last stages of degeneracy and corruption.

In another report, from the same committee, in which they recommend an amendment of the constitution, providing that "no senator or representative shall be appointed to any civil office, place, or emolument, under the authority of the United States, until the expiration of the presidential term in which such person shall have served as a senator or representative," they denominate this power of making vacancies, a kingly prerogative, and consider the exercise of it, when the vacancies are filled, for the most part, from members of congress, as effectually destroying the inde pendence of that body.

The report, with its accompanying bills, after being published and distributed, has hitherto lain dormant on the files of the senate. The course pursued by the administration of 1825, in regard to the principal topics, was calculated to allay the apprehensions intended to be excited. No vacancies were made, on account of the part which the incumbent had taken in the preceding contest, and no undue proportion of such as occurred, were filled from the halls of congress. As an electioneering project, the report stands unrivalled in the annals of congress. It touched, with a masterly hand, the most sensitive chords, inducing a belief that a large portion of the revenue was expended in corrupting the purity of elections, not, indeed, by direct bribery.

but in a manner more fatal to the liberties of the people, by prostituting the power of removal and appointment to that purpose, and maintaining a host of useless officers, dependent on the executive will. That this enormous power was now in the hands of a chief magistrate, who was not the choice of the people, and who would make use of the whole weight of executive patronage, to secure his re-election.

The reports were ably drawn, and pointed out in strong language the prominent dangers to which the republic was exposed. The misfortune was, that this committee, who, in 1826, so faithfully warned the people against these dangers, should, in 1830, be reduced to the alternative of abandoning the principles of their reports, or the administration of their choice.

A bill for the relief of F. Larche, of little consequence in itself, which had passed the senate without opposition, in the house of representatives was made the occasion of a serious and protracted debate, on account of a principle supposed to be involved in its passage.

At the time of the invasion of New Orleans, a horse, cart, and slave, the property of Larche, was pressed into the service, and employed on the fortifications; and while thus employed, the slave was killed by a cannon shot from the enemy. The bill made provisions for paying the owner the value of the slave. The principle adopted at the close of the war, on this subject, was, that the United States should make compensation for private property, in public service, destroyed by the enemy, but not for human life; and the questions in the discussion of which the slave-holding and non-slave-holding states brought out all their forces, were, under which head the applicant's loss was to be classed, and whether slaves were property or persons? Aside from the obscurity thrown upon the subject, by the ingenuity of debate, it must have been perfectly evident, that they partook of the nature of both. Possessing the human form, features, and mind, they were properly considered as persons; being by the laws of Louisiana, the subject of use, traffick, and transfer, they possessed the essential ingredients of property. This being the only claim of the kind, the question was not worth, in a pecuniary view, a single day's debate; and its discussion, on this occasion, served no other purpose but to awaken sectional jealousies. The committee of claims, to whom the subject was referred in the house of representatives, recommend the rejection of the bill, upon principle: they say, that "the emergency justified the im

pressment of every moral agent, capable of contributing to the defense of the place; to call upon the master to defend himself and slave, as well as the slave to defend his master. It would be the height of injustice to call upon the free citizens of states many hundred miles distant from the point assailed, to pour out their blood, and sacrifice their lives, for its defense, and, at the same time, exonerate from that service its own physical and moral force. Men were wanted, and in that capacity the slave was put in requisition. The master, too, might have been called upon, and his sons, and his hired servants, as they were in other parts of the country, where sons, and fathers, and husbands, fought and died, without having their lives valued, or compensated in money.

The slave-holding states took the alarm at the principles supposed to be involved in this report. They considered it as amounting to a direct denial that slaves were property, and an assertion that government had right, in cases of emergency, to put arms into their hands. To such an ex-. tent was the excitement, that General Taylor, a senator from Virginia, thought it necessary to give the alarm to the executive of that state, by transmitting a copy of the report, with such remarks as his apprehension of the fearful nature of the consequences suggested. The governor of Virginia responded, that "it was a question big with the fate of the union, and one well calculated to alarm the sensibilities of the patriot."

No such views, however, were entertained by the opponents of the claim. They considered the property of the south in their slaves as sacred and untangible, as that in their houses, lands, and goods. They did consider, however, that in an emergency, like that of New Orleans, government had a right to adopt any measure deemed necessary for its defense. That human life, of which they supposed that slaves in common with others were possessed, which might be lost in the contest, was not to be compensated in money. The report was accepted in the house, and the question decided against the claim..

CHAPTER XX.

Fourth of July, 1826-Death of Adams and Jefferson-How noticed-Important principles established during their political course-Freedom of political discussion, and of the press-Freedom of religious opinion-Its effects-Experiment of a state and national government over the same people-Difference of opinion, as to the manner in which conflicting claims of power are to be settled-Amelioration of criminal law-Confinement in penitentiaries substituted for corporal punishment-Imprisonment for debt ameliorated and nearly abolished-Laws relating to landed titles and the collection of debts improved-Internal improvements-Erie and Champlain canals-Other communications between the Atlantic and the west projected and commenced-Steam navigation-Its commencement, and rapid improvement-Fraud on the custom house at Philadelphia-Abduction of William Morgan-Project of a canal across the isthmus of Panama.

National jubilee. The 4th of July, 1826, completed fifty years since the declaration of independence gave birth to the nation. The day was noticed in all parts of the United States as a national jubilee. This anniversary, always affectionately remembered by the American people, had this year a peculiar interest. It seemed to be a period calling upon them to pause, look back, and observe the progress of events. Their numbers had quadrupled, progressing from two and an half to ten millions. Their wealth, strength, and means of defense had increased more than tenfold. From a small, scattered population, bordering on the western shores of the Atlantic, they had extended beyond the banks of the Mississippi to the base of the rocky mountains. The very singular occurrence on this day of the death of Adams and Jefferson, two of the three distinguished signers of the declaration of independence who lived to see its light, gave it a peculiar interest.

Death of president Adams. Mr. Adams died at his seat in Quincy, Mass., at six o'clock in the evening of the anniversary, at the age of ninety years. His illness, other than the general debility of age, was but of a few days continuance.. A short period before his death, the citizens of Quincy requested his attendance at the proposed celebration. The infirmities incident to his years obliged him to decline, but he expressed his patriotic feelings in a sentiment to be used. at their festive board-INDEPENDENCE FOR EVER,

Of president Jefferson. On the same day, at one o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Jefferson died at his seat at Monticello, Virginia, at the age of eighty-three years. For some months previous, his strength had been gradually wasting by a disorder, which, by its slow and sure approaches, indicated the fatal result. He expressed a strong desire to see the jubilee of American independence, and that that might be the day of his departure. His wish was gratified.

Their characters. Mr. Jefferson was chairman of a committee of congress, of which Mr. Adams was a member, which prepared and drafted the declaration of independence. That instrument was from the pen of the former, who always gave his colleague, Mr. Adams, the credit of being its ablest supporter. As well from their talents, as from the circumstance that they represented two of the most important colonies in different sections, they had a controlling influence in congress. They were united in the important and hazardous measures which terminated in the union of the colonies, and their separation from the parent state. Supported by a population but a little more numerous than the state of New York at the present day, and with far less ability to resist, they, with their compatriots, fearlessly braved the whole power of Britain, with a certainty that death in its most appalling forms awaited them in case of failure. The chances, calculating upon any human means or probabilities, were all against them. They were both in the prime of life, one thirty-three, and the other forty, at the period of the declaration. Both were employed, and acted in perfect harmony in the highest political stations during the contest, and the fearful period which intervened between its close, and the commencement of the federal government. On the questions relating to the adoption of the constitution, and the leading measures of congress immediately thereafter, the people were divided into two great political parties, and nearly equally balanced; the one believing that too much of state sovereignty was yielded, and that the incipient measures were of too strong a character; the other, seeing no such imperfections in the system, were the advocates of an energetic course of conduct. Mr. Jefferson was the head of the former, and Mr. Adams, after the retirement of General Washington, of the latter. During the first two presidential terms, Mr. Adams held the second office in the government, by the national suffrage, and was himself president the third term. General Washington, with a liberality and