ERENWEEWW

OF’

Elm ilhrcfifi

DELIVERED BY

HoN.JoHN Q.ADAM&

AT WASHINGTON‘,

0N

«NH 01:‘ JULY, 1811..

BOSTON:
WELLS Mm LILLY, COURT-STREET.

V U 0 i V I Q ‘I

ADVERTISEMENT.

TI-IE following paper Was offered for insertion
in the North American Review, at the request
of one of the conductors; An unvvilli11gr1ess was
expressed to decide on it immediately, in conse--
quence of the absence of two of',tl1eir number
from town; as it was thought desirable not
to delay its publication, except with a certainty
of its eventually appearing in that Work, it is

now given to the publick in a separate shape.

‘anaemia;

An Address, delivered at the Request of the Coannzittee
of Arrangements, for Celebrating the Anniversary
of Independence, at the City of Wamirzgton, on
the 4+flb of July, 1821. By Joan QUINCY Anams.

'1‘ I-IE Author of this Address holds the second poli—-
tical station in our country :-----l1e‘is an experienced
and able politician :----he formerly filled the chair of
the professor of rhetorick and oratory, in tl1e oldest
and best endowed literary institution in America:
---«and, What is still more, he has been for along time
looked up to as one of our most accomplished schol-
ars. It was therefore but a matter of course that
the performance should attract much more of pub»
lic attention, than is usually bestowed on similar
productions. So far as we have been able to learn
the opinion of those qualified to judge on such sub»-
jects, we have seldom witnessed with regard to any
production, a sorer disappointment. If this feeling
were merely negative,----—-if it Were merely the case
that«Mr. Adams had not done as well as his reputa-
tion has led us to_ expect, we should not think it.
Worth while to say any thing on the subject. But
when it is thought that the production is marked
by positive and glaring faults 5-----We hold it right and

0

ml-uul

6

proper, for several reasons, that those faults should
be pointed out. In the first place, we fear that there
are some parts of this Address, which considered in
connexion with the character of the author, will
cause it to be read abroad. And if this should be
the case, it would be anticipating rather more cha-
rity than We have hitherto experienced, to suppose
that it will be viewed in any other light, than as a
fair sample of American literature. And indeed,
when a piece comes from one of our best scholars;
and is extensively read Without being pointedly con-
demned amongst ourselves----We do not see how for-
eigners, even those most liberally disposed towards
us, can do otherwise than to look at such a piece as
a criterion of our taste. And if we will sit still; and
from motives of personal delicacy, or from mistaken
notions of national pride, allow such a production to go
forth to the world, without attempting to show that
we are capable of discovering and of condemning its
faults----we shall have no right to complain, when
foreign critics speak irreverently of our literature.
For ourselves, We have no hesitation in saying, that
if our educated men could be gratified with such
stuff as this Address is made of, we should on the
score of taste, merit no better treatment from abroad
than that which We have hitherto experienced. We

. know however, that this is not the case ; and know-

ing it ourselves, it behoves us as far as We are able,
to make it apparent to others.

But even if it were possible to confine the circu-
lation of this Address to our own country, our obli--
gations to deal with it according to its deserts, would

‘"7

not be the less strong. If there is ever a time when
criticism should speak boldly and pointedly, it is
when herjust canons are violated by those like Mr.
Adams, Whose examples are likely to be imitated,
and whose precedents may be appealed to as an-
thorities. And when We consider how much of the
young ambition of the country is directed towards po-
litics, We can conceive of nothing so entirely calcu-
lated to debauch what of taste there is among us,
than a few performances from men of Mr. Adams’
standing, written in a style as vitiated as that of the
piece before us.

It is not our intention to go through an examina-
tion of the opinions advanced in this Address ;----for
as to the greater part of them, We shall hardly be
thought to dissent from Mr. Adams. If, however,
in the greater parit of these opinions we see no»
thing to condemn, We are not aware of many which
call for any peculiar praise for their novelty or ori-
ginality. Although most of the topics immediately
connected with our national anniversary are some-
what hacknied; yet We had thought that a politi-
cian of Mr. Adams’ age, learning and experience,
would hardly treat of any national subject without

giving us something which by its maturity of thought,

its comprehensiveness and discrimination of view, and
dignity of feeling, would have been distinguished from
the ordinary crowd of performances on the same oc—-
casion. Others may have been more fortunate :--mbut
for ourselves we have met with nothing of the kind 5

and it is only by the help of the title page that We

8

have been able to discover, that the piece was Writ-
ten byan accomplished scholar more than fifty years
old.

There is throughout a constant straining after hy-
perbole, both of thought and expression, which is not
only to be condemned in point of taste, but which often
causes Mr. Adams when starting with a correct idea
to render it apparently otherwise, by his unqualified
and extravagant statement of it. Thus, what he
says about the “ sympathies” appears to us metaphy--
sical and overstrained. His theory on this subject is
certainly carried too far, and would lead him to con»-
sequences, at wl1ich he and every honest man must
shudder. After representing patriotism as merely
an extension of those sympathies which unite us to
our relations and families; he says--—--—“ But these
sympathies can never exist for a country we have
never seen.”-~—-“ The ties of neighbourhood are bro.-
ken up, those of friendship can never be formed,
with an intervening ocean; and the natural ties of
domestic life, the all-subduing sympathies of love,
the indissoluble bonds of marriage, the heart-riveted
kindliness of consanguinity, gradually wither and de-
cay in the lapse of a few generations. All the ele-
ments which form the basis of that sympathy be-
tween the individual and his country, are dissolved.”
(p. 14.) Now if all this be true, (which we deny)
we are unable to discover how it is that the distant
parts of a large empire are ever held together:
and especially how it is that our own glorious union,
not onlv, spreadingover a vast extent of territory

9

but composed of separate, independentistates, has‘.

been preserved, and seems to have gained new
strength the Wider it has spread. We are far from
supposing that Mr. Adams meant to embrace such
consequences in his theory: butthis part of the
Address is a specimen of the undiscriminating and
unqualified style in which the Whole is written. We
have seen several descriptions of that feeling, or
-rather of that combination of feelings denominated
patriotism, some of which We liked for their elo-
quence,tbut none, that We recollect, which altogeth-
er satisfied us with a philosophical definition of the
term. That the domestic afiectioiis come in as a
part of its composition, and furnish it with not a
little of its dignity We have no doubt: but that they
form its only basis, and that the feeling cannot exist
for regions too distant to furnish the scene for the
exercise of those affections, We think, is disproved
by our own daily experience. And as to asight
of the country being necessary to the support of our
attachment to it,——--if this be true it is clifiicultto tell
how any love of the common country should ever
pervade the mass of the community, since it is but
comparatively a small number who have ever seen
any thing more of it than their own little town or
district. The passion is a more complex one, than
Mr. Adams seems to imaginei Community of inter-
est, common objects of pride and attachment, a com-
mon language, similarity of laws, of manners and
customs, are to a certain degree necessary to hold a

country together; but these have generally. been-

1e
found sufficient for the purpose, Without the exis«-
tence of what Mr. Adams calls “ the heart-riveted

i kindliness of consanguinity” between all its citizens.

We have said more than We intended on this subject,
and Will only add, that whether Mr, Adams be right
or wrong in his metaphysics, We doubt his being cor-
rect in point of history, if it were his intention
to intimate that his remarks were illustrated by the

separation of the colonies from Great Britain. cWejjj

are far from believing that the aflections of the colo-
nists for the mother country had died of themselves,
before the revolutionary contest came in to destroy
them. All that we have been able to read of the
history of those times had led us to a different con»
clusion: to the belief that up to the time of the
contest those affections continued strong and ardent.
And this so far from detracting from the merit of
our countrymen, seemed rather to enhance it: as it
showed more clearly than any thing else that their
conduct was the result of principle, and not of pas-
sion, or a groundless spirit of disaffection. But to
detain our readers no longer, we refer them to the
last No. of the North American Review, for some
lucid remarks on this subject, to the article on Otis’
Botta. a

It seems to be an object of some magnitude with
Mr. A. to prove that the liberties enjoyed by Ame-»
ricans are something different in kind as Well as in
degree, from those enjoyed by any other people.
Itis not enough for him that we are more free

than the people of any other nation, but he seems

ll

desirous of having it thought that our liberties
are likewise of a higher order; inasmuch as the
liberties of other nations were originally derived
by grant or charter from their sovereigns. We will
give our first sample of the style of this Address,
by quoting a passage connected with this topic.

“In the progress of time, that vial of wrath was exhausted.
After seven years of exploits and achievements like these, per»
formed under the orders of the British king; to use the lan-
guage of the Treaty of Peace, “ it having pleased the Divine
Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most
potent Prince, George the Third, by the grace of God king of
Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of
Brunswick and Luneburg, arch treasurer and prince elector of
the holy Roman empire, and so forth----and of the United States
of America, to”---vvhat ?---—-“ to forget all past misunderstandings
and differences that have unhappily”---vvhat ?--—-“, interrupted‘
the good correspondence and friendship which they mutually
wish to restore”-—what then? why---“ His Britannic majesty
.ACI{NOWLE];)GES the said United States, viz. N ew-Hampshire,
l\/Iassachcusetts Bay, Ithode Island and Providence Plantations,
Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, 'Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Geor-
gia, to be free, sovereign, and indejienclcnt States ; that he treats
with them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors,
relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and terrie-
torial rights of the same, and every part thereof.” *

“ ‘Fellow Citizens, I am not Without apprehension that some
parts of this extract, cited to the word and to the letter from
the Treaty of Peace, of 1783, may have discoxnposed the se-
renity of your temper. V Far be it from me, to dispose, your
Izwrts to a levity unhecorning the hallowed dignity of this day.”
p. £236, 937. -

‘If all this were intended for Wit, as from the
two last sentences We have no doubt it Was, We
have only to say, that it is Wit of the most rnechan-A-v

12

jical and ordinary sort. The sentence which fol-»
lows is not of a more elevated character, viz. “ But i
this Treaty of Peace is the dessert appropriate
to the sumptuous banquet of the Declaration.”
In our opinion Mr. A. would have done better to
have kept this for his toast after dinner.-——-But this
sumptuous banquet and appropriate dessert seem to
have animated the orator; for hiesuddenly exclaims
---—-“ Observe, my countrymen and friends, how the
rules of unity, prescribed by the great masters of
the fictive stage, were preserved in this — tragedy of
pity and terror in real life. Here was a beginning,
a middle, and an end, of one mighty action.”---—-p. 52.7..
Viz. beginning was the Declaration of Independence;
-wmiddle the Revolutionary War (how unlucky that...
the middle began before the beginning !)-—-«the end
the Treaty of Peace ! The Whole idea strikes us as
a most puerile conceit.* Having exhausted his plea-
santry, Mr. A. obsierves-mm“ Here Was no great‘ char»
ter of Runnimead, yielded and accepted as a grant of
royal bounty. That which the Declaration had as-
serted, which seven years of mercy-harrowing War
hadcontested, was here in express and unequivocal
terms acknowledged.” (p. 28.)

 Mr. Adams knows as well as any man, what is meant by the “ umties ;"7
and ought to have seen how wholly inappropriate was the above figure (if
figure it maybe called.) A piece is said “to preserve the rules of unity,”
when it has unity of time, of place, and of action. Mr. A.however would make
these rules to apply merely to action. And as to the unity of act*2Jo7z—-it con»
sists in all the incidents having a relation to a. common end. We believe it is
not very remarkable for the transactions of this world to have a beginvzning, a
mgddle, and an and ; and that our Revolution is not in that respect particu-
larly distinguished.

13 y

“ Mercy~harrowz'ng war !"’----But to return to the arm
gument.——-M-It, is doubtless true that the operative
Words of Magma Charta are “ dedimus et concessi-
mus,” and the word “ .,concessimus” Mr. . A. may
translate “ We have granted,” though we conceive
it would not be wrong to translate it “ we have yield»
ed.” In the treaty of 1783, which Mr. :A. cites
with such pomp and circumstance, the King “ ac»-
knowledges” us to be independent, and “ relinquislu
es” his claim to all sovereignty over us. N ow what
is the mighty difference between the two cases ? In
one the King grants or yields (as Mr. A. pleases ;)
in the other he relinquishes: in the one he giyes
up a part and that not a small part of his preroga-
tive, which he would have been very glad to have
retained ;—---in the other, he gives up a part of his
territorial jurisdiction, which likewise he would have
been very glad to have kept. But whatever may
have been the formal language of,Magna Charta,

we will rernind Mr. A. that English lawyers do not i

admit that the liberties therein secured were merely
the gift of their sovereign’s bounty; and would refer
him to what Sir Edward Coke, and Sir William
Blackstone have said on the subject. The latter in

speaking of the attempts against the tyranny of’ the

Normans, and more particularly of Magna Charta,
says-——--—“ and which therefore is not to be looked upon

as consisting; of mere encroachrnents on the crown, and

infringements on the prerogative, as some slavish and

narrow»-mindecl writers in the last century endeavour-

ed to maintain: but as, in general, a gradual restora-
3

14-

tion of that ancient constitution, whereof our Saxon
forefathers had been unjustly deprived, partly by the
policy, and partly by the force of the Normans.”*
And such we believe to be the language generally of
writers on the English Constitution. We however
do not think it a matter of much practical impor-
tance, What were the ideas of government prevalent
in the time of KingJohn.i We do not suppose that
the men, who framed Magna Charta, were so enlight-
ened on subjects of this nature, as those who framed
our Declaration of Independence. It however be-
comes us to pause, before We speak reproachfully of
Magna Charta, seeing that at the time it was frani-—
ed, our fathers were Englishmen; and the glory or
disgrace of the measure (Whichever it be) makes
part of our inheritance. Our own liberties and those
of Englishmen flowed from a common source; and
it ill becomes us to cryout, that the fountain of theirs
was polluted. If it be true that Englishmen origi-
nally held their liberties by grant from their sove-
reign, and the time of the Charter of Runnimead is
pointed to as the time when this happened, then is
the assertion true of us likewise : and if the fact be
disgraceful to the one, it is equally so to the other.
But if Mr. Adams meant farther to insinuate, that
this is still considered in England as the tenure of the
liberty of the subject, (and from his exulting chal-
lenge to “ the chivalrous knights of chartered liberties
and the rotten borough,” it would seem that he did)
We have only to express our astonishment at the

59?} Bl. Com. 419.

15

boldness of the insinuation: We are inclined to think
it would startle even Mr. Hunt and the most clamor»
ous of the radical reformers, to be told that Eng-
lishmen possessed no unalienable rights ;,---that all
power, according to the English constitution, or
rather according to the English notions of govern-—
ment (for of course Englancl has no constitution) was
vested in the King 3 and that the subject possessed
no privileges but such as he held from the boun.ty
of his sovoI'eig1‘1. He might be inclined to ask;
how the present Brunswick family came to the
throne ‘? rVVl1ether they claimed to hold by conquest
or any “ divine 1~i,gl1ts of kirigs °.3”-—-~VVl1etl1er they
ever had it in their power tosay how much liberty
the nation should enjoy; or Whether it was not the
nation who determined how much power the king
should possess ; and then Who should be the king ‘?
If Mr. A. could answer these questions consistently
with this theory, it is more than we could.

Havixag given above a specimen of Mr. A.’s wit, We
will. furnish an instance or two of his attempts at the
sublime: l

‘-‘ Fellow Citizens, ourifathiers have been faithful to them be»
fore us.‘ ‘ When the little band of their Delegates, ‘‘ with a firm
resliianice one the protection of Divine Providence, for the sup»-

port of this declaration, mutually pledged to each other their.

lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honour,” from every dwel-

ling, street, and square of your populous cities, itvvasre--echoed
with shouts of joy and gratulation ! and if the silent language‘ of r

the heart could have been heard, every hill upon the surface
of this continent which had been trodden by the foot of civiliz.~
ed man, every valley in which the toil of your fathers had open-
ed a paradise upon the wild, would have rung, with one accord-

16

ant voice, louder than the thunders, sweeter than the harmonies.
of the heavens, with the solemn and responsive words, “ We
swear.”-—-p. 24, 95.

Again-----the following school-boy figure :----~----

‘‘ It was with a sling and a stone, that your fathers Went forth
to encounter the massive vigour of this Goliah. They slung the
heaven-directed stone, and

6‘ With heaviest sound, the giant monster fell.”

In speaking of the Declaration. of Independence,
Mr.i A. says,

“ It was the first solemn declaration of a nation of the only
legitimate foundation of civil government.”---p. 22.

The grand principle of the Declaration of lnde-
pendence is this :—-M-that governmeI1t is instituted.
for the protection of the unalienable rights to which
all are by nature equally entitled gm--that it derives
its just powers from the consent of thegoverned;
--—-and that When it becomes subversive of these
ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish
it. This principle Wasnot first discovered or pro-
claimed on the 4th of July, 1776. Tl1e avowal of

A the doctrine was not new in this country; and in other

countries if not so openly avowed, it had certainly
been acted on. Upon what other ground could the
separation of Holland from Spain have been justifi-
ed? How was it in the revolution in the time of
Charles 1st, and in that of 1688? All of these and
many others which might be cited, Were practical
applications of the principle that a people have
a right to change the government, When it becomes
subversive of the purposes for which it. was institute

17

ed. But then it is true, there is in this respect a dif-«
ference between us and other nations. Even in Eng-
land they are fond of considering their liberties as
an inheritance; and when they have from time to
time made any improvements in their civil polity.in-
stead of calling‘ them by their right name, their law-

yers are Wont to call them a restoration of their

ancient liberty. They are more fond of talking of
the rights of Englishmen, than of the rights of men.
Thus the revolution of 1688, although to all intents
and purposes a clialige of the government; although
it was a full exercise of the ultimate sovereignty of
the people, for if they felt a right to drive James
from the throne and place William on it, they must
have felt that they had a rightto declare that they
would have no King,--—---yet they avoided as far as
possible declaring it to be so. The reasons of this
were merely those of policy. They are afraid,
excessiveily afraid of the spirit of innovation. And
in niaking an alteration of any part of the constitu——
tion, they are cautious to guard against its furnishing
a precedent for an attack upon the sounder parts.
To show What are the views of Exiglisli politgicians

on this subject, it may not be uninteresting to quote

the Words of Mr. Burke. “ You will observe, that
from Magna Charta to the declaration of right, it
has been the uniform policy of our constitution to
claim and assert our liberties, as an intailed inheri-~
tance derived to us from our forefathers, and to be
transmitted to our posterity; as an estate specially

belonging to the people of this kingdom without any

18

referen.ce whatever to any other more general or
prior right. By this means our constitution preserves
an unity in so great adiversity of its parts. Wethave
an inheritable crown, an inheritable peerage; and a
house of commons, and a people inheriting privileg-
es, franchises, and liberties, from a long line of an--
cestors.

“ This policy appears to me to be the result
of profound reflection; or rather the happy of»
feet of following nature, which is wisdom without
reflection, and above it. A spirit of innovation is
generally the result of a selfish temper and confined
views. People will not look forward to posterity,
who never look backward to their ancestors.”

 as as as as as

“ Through the same plan of a conformity to nature
in our artificial institutions, and by calling in the aid
of her unerring and powerful instincts to fortify the
fallibleand feeble‘ contrivancesooft our reason, we
have derived several other, and those no “small bene-
fits from considering our liberties in the light of an
inheritance. Always acting as if in the presence of
canonized forefathers, the spirit of freedom, leading
in itself to misrule and excess, is tempered with an
awful gravity. This idea of a liberal descent inspires
us with a sense of habitual native dignity, which pre--
vents that upstart insolence almost inevitably ad-
hering to and disgracing those who are the first ac-i

by t quirers of any distinction. By this means our Iiber‘-V
t A ty becomes a noble freedom. It carries an imposing

and majestic aspect. It has a pedigree and illustrat-

 ing ancestors. It has its bearings and ensigns armo-

19

rial. It has its gallery of portraits ; its monumen-»
tal inscriptions; its records, evidences, and titles.
We procure reverence to our civil institutions on
the principle upon which nature teaches us to revere
individual men; on account of their age; and on ac-
count of those from Whom they are descended.” r
But in this country the case is different. We have
uniformly avowed Without reserve, the right of the
people to change their government, when they
please; and the exercise of the right seems hardly
to be thought a matter of extreme danger. This
principleappears onithei face of all our institutions:
and although there is much eloquence, and not a little
good sense in the observations We have just quoted,
yet we think the efliects of thus constantly keeping
the principle in View have been of the happiest kind.
Our government has hence acquired a simplicity in
theory and practice, which seems the best preserva-
tive of its purity and economy. We therefore
think that Mr; A. well selected this peculiarity in our
politics, as the chief topic of his address. Indeed,
the general plan of his oration seems to us very hap-
py. Our complaints are chiefly of its execution.
Considering how minutely Mr. A. isacquainted with
ancient and modern history; and how peculiar have

been his opportunities for personal observation of

the effects of almost every form of government,-—---it
seems to us that he might by following the track he
had entered on, have furnished a dignified, manly,

"“ Reflections on the Revolution in France, 17. 76-80.

20

and judicious defence of our institutions, which would
have been interesting (if not altogether new) at
home, and have attracted notice and been respected
abroad. Instead of this, his remarks on this subject
are principally made up of the merest declamation,
like that We have extracted above, and the follow»,
ing.

“ A nation was born in a day.
i i “ How many ages hence
Shall this their lofty scene be acted o’er
, In states unborn, and accents yet unknown .9”
It will be acted o"er, fellow-citizens, but it can never be repeated.
l t stands, and must forever stand alone, a beacon on the summit
of the mountain, to which all the inhabitants ot; the earth may
turn their eyes for a genial and saving light, till time shall be
lost in eternity, and this globe itself dissolve, norleave a wreck

behind. It stands forever, at light of admonition to the rulers of’

men; a light of salvation and redemption to the oppressed.
So long as this planet shall be inhabited by human beings, so
long as man shall be of social nature, so long as government

i shall. be necessary to the great moral purposes of society, and so

long as it shall be abused to the . purposes of oppression, so long
shall this declaration hold out to the sovereign and to the subject
the extent and the boundaries of their respective rights and du-
ties; founded in the laws of nature and of nature"s God.”-—-p.
e3, 24. i

It was not our intention when we sat down, to write
a defence of England or of English politics. But
so much of the address is occupied with sneers and
bitter remarks on that nation, that We shall perhaps
seem to be so doing. We will, however, new state
distinctly that one of our great objections to the piece,
is the temper which it discoverson this subject. If
there were ever two nations on the globe, Who owed

21s

it to humanity, to true religion, and to civil liberty,
to cultivate peace and good Will----Great Britain and
the United States are such nations. Yet the mel-~
ancholy fact is, that in England the vilest traducers
of our country are encouraged and applauded;
Whilst here, Where we profess the most unbounded
freedom of discussion, where We may praise What-
ever is good in any other foreign country, yet if a
man would speak well of England, he must stop to
choose his Words and measure his expressions, for
fear that his patriotism may be called in question.
For ourselves We declare that we will not new or at
any time be restrained by such paltry considerations.
Whilst we will yieldto none in a real love of our coun-
try; whilst We will never be found the apologists of
any Wrongs which Britain has done us, or which she
may hereafter do; yet We hereby notify all whom it
may concern, that We have none of that self styled
“ national feeling,” which lives upon hatred or con-
tempt of other nations, and particularly of that one
which we hold to be the greatest, and next to our
own, the freest and the happiest nation on earth.
Whilst we make it one of our charges against Great:
Britain, that she cherishes a feeling hostile tothis
country; let us look toit, that we give her no oc--
casion for flinging back the charge. We havelnever

been satisfied with the spirit in which that, which

has been dignified with the name of the “literary
controversy” between the two nations, has been
conducted. We do not consider it am fortunate cir~—
cumstance, that the dirty work of crimination and
recrimination has passed into more reputable hands,
4 x

22

than those which f'orn1er'lyaexercised it. The con»-
troversymay thus acquire more importance; but
we fear it will lose little of its asperity.» t But to con-

plfine ,_ our remarks to Mr. A. His situation, with re-

spect to foreign nations, is a peculiar one, and seems
to us tocall for rather more than ordinary caution.»
Wihat he says on such subjects will not be uttered
to inattentive years or treacherous , memories. It
must be viewed as indicative of the temperof the
cabinet, if not of the nation. England, to say no
more of her, is a nation on friendly terms with us;
a treaty of Peace exists unbroken between the two
nations, and her minister is residing at our capital.

It seems to us to belong to the Secretary of State------!

if to no one else—--———~to wear the appearance of cour-
tesy towards her, and all nations similarly situated.‘
He is not to seek opportunities of speaking evil of
them; and when it becomes his duty to do so, he
owes it to hisstation and to the dignity of his coun-

try, not to do it in language, Which, if , applied to an «

individual, would amount to absolute rudeness. But
in this Address,-—--whilst the feelings it breathes are
of the most bitter kind, they are expressed in the
coarsest style of newspaper phillipicks- Let any
man, who feels offended at this remark, a-sk'himseIf,,

what would be the feelings of this country, if the

Marquis of Londonderry, at any public festival,
should condescend to use respecting America, lane-~
guage similar to that used by Mr. Adams in speaking‘
of England °.3—---VVhat, for instance, could Va be consi-
dered more insulting to the pride of Englishmen than
to hear the late head qf their nation thus unnecessa-
rily assailed ? i

23

t‘ It is not by the yearly reiteration of the wrongs endured by
your ~fathers,to evoke from the sepulchre of time the shades of
departed tyranny; it is not to draw from their dread abode the
frailties of an unfortunate monarch, who now sleeps with his fa-
thers, and the sufierings of whose latter days may have atoned at
the bar ‘of divine mercy, for the sins which the accusing angel
will read from this scroll to his charge :--J’ p. 11..

“This would be strong language to use of a private
individual. A man of Mr. A."s sense of religion, one
would think, would pause before undertaking to pro-
nounce on What, in any particular case, will be the
judgments at “ the bar of divine mercy ;” or to scan
the motives of the most dreadful visitation of Pro-—
vidence to which our nature is liable. Besides, for
aught We ever heard, George III., though not of the
most commanding political character, was far from
being a Worthless or unprincipled individual. How
far the King in England, is answerable for the acts
of the kingdom, Mr. A. knows as Well as any one:
and to his sober judgment, too, We are Willing to
leave it to decide, how far it is safe for either party
in a political contest, to take upon themselves to say,
in what light the motives of their opponents will be
viewed atthe bar of God.

Again, A,

“ Stand forth, ye champions of Britannia, ruler of the waves 3,
Stand forth, ye chivalrous knights of chartered liberties and the
rotten boroughs 1"’ p. 3%.  

“ In the half century which has elapsed since the decla-
ration of American independence, what have you done for the
benefit of mankind?” p. 33.. '

 

If “Britannia, ruler of the Waves,” should conde-
scend to answer so polished an appeal, We think it
possible she might show some small services render»-

24

ed for the benefit of mankind, within the last half
century. She would probably ask, “ Towhom is it
owing that there is now more than one independent
power in Europe; and that the whole civilized world
has been saved from the sternest despotism which
ever oppressed it? «Go back to the period of 1798.
A general despair had settled on the nations of the
continent. Holland and Italy were subdued; Aus-
tria had been compelled to receive, at the gates of
her own capital, such a peace as the generosity of
her conqueror had vouchsafed; Prussia was exliaust-
ed; Russia, under a shortsighted monarch, was not
yet awake to the danger of Europe. Yet, not con-
tent with the domination of Europe, France had al-
ready sent a large army to Egypt, under her ablest
general, andwas plotting with the native chiefs of the
East for the conquest of India. America, though
distant, was not beyond the reach of her ambition.
She had openly demanded of you a tribute; and to
punish your presumption in refusing it, she had com»-
menced hostilities on your commerce. To resist
theseaggressions, and others with which you were
threatened, your Truxton was abroad on the ocean;
whilst at home you had raised a large army, for the
Command of Which, Washington himself, though in
the decline of life, had consented to quithis retire-
ment. At this moment, if, in accordance of the
the prayers of some of your politicians, Britain had
been sunk in the ocean ;--.--what would now be the
situation of the world? But she stood, and under the
guidance of her greatest statesman. She sent forth
her Nelson; and from the shores of Aboukir there
went forth a voice proclaiming hope to the oppress-

'25

ed and deliverance to the nations. Of more recent
events, We will not speak. For when the erner-
gency Was over, the politicks of America took a new
turn, without condemning Which, it may not be easy
for you to praise the efforts of England. But we
would ask of you, Mr. Secretary; or rather we would
ask of your venerable father; if, when he first heard
of the battle of the Nile, he would have said that
Britain had done nothing for the benefit of man-
kind.”

But Whether We are right or Wrong in our ideas
of diplomatic propriety, in supposing that a man in
Mr. Adams’s station ought not to seek occasions of
speaking reproachfully of the English nation; we
are quite confident that, as a scholar, he has no right
to speak sneeringly of her literature and philo-
sophy. Mr. Adams seems to us to do this. There
is a taunting, reproachful manner about him When»
ever he speaks upon these subjects, which We are
mortified in Witnessing in any American scholar.
For instancem

“ And now, friends and countrymen, if the wise and learned
philosophers of the older world, the first observers of nutation.
and aberration, the discoverers of maddening ether and invisible
planets, the inventors of Congreve rockets and sharpnel shells,
should find their hearts disposed to inquire,” &Lc.---p. 31.

"-‘ Enter the lists, ye boasters of in-ueaztiee genius ! ye mighty
masters of the palette and the brush! ye improvers upon the
sculpture of the Elgin marbles! ye spawners of fustian romance
and lascivious lyrics !’’----—--p. 33.

‘-‘ Fustian l” In our humble opinion, the man who
talks as Mr. A. does of “ mercy--harrowing War”--of
being “ bound by the grappling hooks of common suf-

tfering under the scourge of despotism”-----of “ an im-

26

perial diadem, flashing in false and tarnished lustre

the murky radiance of dominion and power”----of
“soaring to fame on a rocket and bursting into glory

from a shell”-—-with other figures equally forced and

unnatural--—-such an orator should be cautious of
suggesting to his hearers that epithet “ fustian.” It

will be lucky for him if none of them think of it

Without being prompted. “ Fustian romances!”

and this too in the age of Miss Edgevvorth and
the author of Waverley! “ Lascivious lyrics _I”

Proh dolor! Prob pudor! A man of letters can

think of the land of Shakspeare and Milton, of
Dryden, Pope and Cowper only as the “spawner of
lasczivious Zyricks .’ J”

Again:
5‘ We shall not contend with you for the prize of music, paint-
ing, or sculpture. We shall not disturb the extatic trances of

. your chemists, nor call from the heavens the ardent gaze of

your astronomers.”--—p. 33.

“ It is not by the contrivance of agents of destruction that
America wishes to commend her inventive genius to the admi-
ration or gratitude of after times ;”

Be it so ;—---but then the rest of the sentence is»---~

--—“ nor is it even by the detection of the secrets or the com-
position of new combinations of physical nature.”—-—-p. 34.

And Why not ".3 VVhy should not America seek to
commend herself to the admiration or gratitude of
after times by her attention to the physical scien--
ces‘? In point of practical utility they are not the
least important of the sciences ;-——-Cicero (who We
remember was in former days no light authority with

27’

Mr. A.) has said something about a “ commune Vin»
culum” of all the sciences and arts; and Mr. A;

himself, if We remember the first part of his Ad--y

dress, has there spoken of the discovery of the ma-

riner"s needle, the invention of gunpowder, and of’

the art of printing, as events which had some little in---
fluence in forwarding the religious and political re-
formation of the world.-----Then why should these
sciences be thought unworthy of American genius ‘?

We hardly know of terms in which to express
our disgust at passages like those we have just quot-

ed. If the time is coming, when it is to he consid-l

ered a mark of patriotism and American feeling to
speak contemptuously of the rich and noble litera-
ture of England (and with a few such examples as
that of Mr. Adams, it would Very shortly come ;)
and if at the same time our own great men are to
furnish us with models of composition like this ad-
dress, then are our literary prospects melancholy in-
deed : and we see nothing in store for our country
but a base, Carthagenian greatness, such as after
times will never point to, but by Way of derision or
warning.

The two last pages of this address, beginning with
“ stand forth ye champions of Britannia,” are writ-~

ten in such extremelyibad taste, that the rest of the

piece appears almost good in comparisonf "We have
already made two or three extracts from them, and
will conclude with the very last sentence.

f‘ My countrymen, fellow-citizens, and friends; could that

Spirit, which dictated the Declaration we have this day read,

28

that Spirit which ‘ prefers before all temples the upright heart
and pure,’a-t this moment descend from his habitation in the
skies, and Within this hall, in language audible to mortal ears,
address each one of us, here assembled, our beloved country,
Britannia ruler of the waves, and every individual among the
sceptered lords of humankind; his words would be,

‘ Go thou and do likewise 1”’

What this adverb “ likewise” refers to, What it is
that each of Mr. Adams’ auditors, and Britannia
ruler of the Waves, and every scepteredindividual
is to go and do,--—-nlevery one may guess out for him-—
self. Mr. A. for some time previous has been in-
dulging himself in a tirade against England, and telling
us that our country has “ a spear and a shield, and
that the motto upon her shield is Freedom, Indepen-
dence, Peace.” And he then ends by telling us to go
and do likewise. Now if this refers to the example
which Mr. A. had been setting——---to that which he
himself had been doing (and this seems to us the only
grammatical construction ;) We beg leave to say,----
that though what Britannia and the other sceptered
ladies and gentlemen may do isnone of our concern,
---yet We protest against such an example being fol~
lowed in this country. We are quite aware that
there are many (all those who would “ soar to fame
on a rocl<:et,”) Who Will have: no disinclination to fol»
low such. a mandate, attested as it is by John Quincy
£l.dams,Secretary of State. But upon the Whole,
do trust there is sober taste enough in the coun-
try, which will disregard both the authority and the
example. g i