тог арг

ргоог от папту сапеа been a Federal man, and therefore was not entitled to lenity.

The removal of this Judge is but the beginning of this species of demolition. The day following this impeachment, R-d-ph, the Bonaparte of Democracy, made a motion, the object of which was to impeach Judge Chase. It was made early in the sitting, and brought on a very warm and interesting debate. Attempts were made, but in vain, to postpone the question for one day. At a late hour the question was avoided, after many motions had been made for the purpose, by obtaining a vote for adjournment. It seems he had not consulted his party; several of some consequence were opposed, but by the next morning they had got their cue, and the motion was called up as soon as the House came to order. An amendment was proposed to add Judge Peters, and carried. Debates succeeiled with great acrimony on the part of the majority.

Some evidence, of mal-conduct or specific charges, was called for, by the minority, and pressed with able arguments and becoming dignity, but to no purpose.

At length one member, Smilie, mentioned the trial of Fries, and said these Judges gave an opinion on a law point, for which they ought be impeached and removed. It seems on this trial it was the opinion of the Judges that, agreeably to the indictment, the crime charged was made treason by the Constitution. This decision prevented the counsel for Fries availing themselves of a plea of sedition, founded on a violation of a statute law. Knowing that the evidence of the fact was clear, they withdrew. The investigation of this trial harrowed up the feelings of the insurgents, which became very apparent, for many of the leaders were members of the House. After all, no specific charge was made, but some other malefactions were barely alluded to, and the question called for in the most pressing manner. Motions were repeatedly made for adjournment, and negatived. At length, just at candle-lighting, a motion for adjournment, taken by yeas and nays, was barely carried. Early on the next day the debates were renewed, and continued to a very late hour, much as the day before, when the question was taken. Yeas, 80; nays, 40. It is some satisfacare appointed and empowered to search after matter of accusation, to send for men, papers, records, and documents, in any part of the Union. In a word, the Committee is quite in the style of a Spanish inquisition. The impeachment will doubtless take place before the rising of Congress.

I have given you the course of the businəss, in detail (though I can give you no idea of the debates), for the purpose of conveying to you some conception of the present state of things, Never before have I seen the demon of Jacobinism display the cloven hoof with equal audacity. Never have I believed that the hottest, maddest Democrats would have openly and boldly avowed principles advanced in the course of these debates. But it appears evidently to be the prosecution of the system formed when the Judiciary was at first attacked---not merely to remove Federal Judges, which his Democratic Majesty in his work of destruction has not power to 'assail—but to prostrate, completely, the Judiciary branch of our government. What will you say to such principles as these? That a Judge is impeachable for an opinion, in a law point, if that opinion should be judged erroneous by the House of Representatives? That a judge ought in duty to favor the ruling political party? · And that he is bound to be governed by the will of the people (so-called)? The next to be impeached, we are told, is to be Judge Bee, of North Carolina, but it is doubtful whether it will be brought forward this session. The utmost secrecy is preserved in the Cabinet-no one but those immediately concerned can tell us what is to be on the morrow. Democracy is progressing, if not with hasty strides, with unabated zeal. Will none of their destructive measures awaken the public mind? Will the people see with indifference their judges converted into mere automatons on the bench, or, what is infinitely worse, made the servile creatures of the Legislature? Is there a reflecting man but must recognize and deplore the existence of the same spirit in our country which has ruined France, and spread distress over the fairest parts of Europe?

The imbecility of the leaders of Democracy here may afford a giddy presumption in attempting impracticable theories, like their speculative teachers, Rousseau, Helvetius, and Godwin, whose writings seem to have turned their brains ; although they agree in their rage for innovation, yet they differ in their theories of government. This difference has been more apparent this session than before, yet they strongly combine in opposition to every prudent, practical maxim, and can always command a physical power, against which reason, argument, and experience are feeble repellents. Can any one, who has sense enough to ask questions about facts, really believe, at this late day, that the old enemies of the Constitution are now its best, its only friends, and because they say so? That the professed admirers of the French abominations are the safest keepers of our liberties? That open revilers and scoffers at religion are the men who will draw down the blessing of Heaven on our heads? Have the people found better men than the excluded Federalists? Do they not see that the strife has been for power and office ?

But I will trouble you with no more remarks. Ilow great is

our consolation that THE LORD REIGNS!


WASHINGTON, Jan. 26, 1804. To DR. TORREY.

I am glad to hear of the attention to religion in Salem, and should still more rejoice if it might generally prevail. I do not know that there is any real difference here, but I do not see so much, and so painful a profanation of the Sabbath, as in former sessions. At the Treasury, where I generally attend, there is a small, but very attentive and serious society. I am much pleased with Mr. Laurie as a preacher, and with his conversation. I find him quite a polished and agreeable man, possessed of handsome talents, a scholar, and well informed. He was educated at the university at Edinburgh. I much regret that you have no better prospect of a resettlement. The settlement of a minister often proves a more arduous work than many imagine.

It was my intention to have sent you Mr. Tracy's speech ; and, although a prodigious number were printed by subscripstates, and, the last week, the subject of the Georgia lands, have all been measures to which every decent lorthern Democrat has been opposed.

The folly of throwing the whole power of the general gove ernment into the hands of Virginians and the Southern people is very sensibly felt. Our colleagues have generally voted together for some time past. When in the last Congress, there was only one instance in each session.

An event took place on Sunday, at a Democratic lodginghouse, which has afforded much amusement and much diversion to the Federalists, and extreme mortification to their opponents. It was, in a very strict sense, a square fight between the all-important head man of the party and another who ranks as his second, or perhaps third, Lieutenant. The fracas began at table between Johnny Randolph and Ashton. It was about the debate on the Georgia lands, which we had the week before for four or five days. Johnny had made several highly inflammatory speeches, but had been extremely mortified by the question going against him. Ashton ventured rather indirectly to contradict this political giant in some matter of fact. Johnny told him he should not permit himself to be contradicted by any man without satisfaction, and especially from such a man as he was. Hard words followed. Johnny rose and conducted some ladies from the table into another room; returned, took a wine-glass filled, and dashed the wine into Ashton's eyes and broke the glass to pieces over his head; after some bustle, he took up a gin-bottle and dashed it at him and left the room. This is the short of the story. This morning, much was said about a duel. Neither of them coming to the House, it was said they were gone out to fight. This I did not credit. We are now told that Ashton has taken Randolph with a special warrant; that he has this day been arraigned before the Supreme Court, now sitting in the Capitol. The decision of the Judges we have not heard; ut the cream of it is, that Randolph should be brought to the r before Judge Chase, whom he is about to impeach. Judge

UnASC (Vile ve we largest men I ever saw) is as remarkable for the largeness as Johnny for the smallness of his size.

I have received a very polite letter this morning, dated at Danvers, January 20th, without being signed by any name. I suspect it might be from General Foster. swer seems to be desired, which I should readily give, but I am in doubt to whom to address my letter.

. Your affectionate parent,


An an

[Extract from letter to Mr. Poole, February 21, 1804.]

With regard to the Jubilee (on possession of Louisiana), it occasioned much conversation beforehand, but turned out a very trifling matter. Three or four cannon were fired; a number of Demo's had a dinner, with whom Jefferson and Burr dined, but a large number of their own party refused to join them. There was no parade nor collections among the people. Very little has since been said about it. The ball on the next Tuesday was at Georgetown, and the most that has been said since is, that they affronted the British Minister and his lady, whom they had invited.


[To Mrs. Poole.]

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28, 1804. My Dear Daughter :

The British Minister and his lady have been the subjects of much conversation, especially with respect to repeated affronts they have received.* There can be no doubt they have been treated very improperly. A few days since, Mr. J. Q. Adams, of the Senate, General Wadsworth and myself, made the Minister a formal visit. We were introduced by Mr. Adams, and treated with

* Mrs. Madison describes a state dinner at the “White House," to which many of the Diplomats were invited, when, to her surprise, the President stepped forward and offered her his arm, as the wife of the Secretary of State. She demurred, and whispered, "Take Mrs. Merry" (the wife of the British Minister). But, firmly refusing, she was obliged then, and always, during his administration, to take the head of the table. Mrs. Merry, feeling deeply insulted, seized her husband's arm, and walked in behind him.- Memoirs und Letters of Dolly Madison (by her Grandniece).

« VorigeDoorgaan »