he could not be compared with his living colleague and namesake, whose deep conceptions, nervous style, and undaunted firmness, made him truly our bulwark in debate. But Mr. Samuel Adams, although not of fluent elocution, was so rigorously logical, so clear in his views, abundant in good sense, and master always of his subject, that he commanded the most profound attention whenever he rose in an assembly, by which the froth of declamation was heard with the most sovereign contempt.

"You know the opinion I formerly entertained of my friend, Mr. JOHN ADAMS. I afterwards saw proofs. which convicted him of a degree of vanity and of a blindness to it of which no germe then appeared. He is vain, irritable, and a bad calculator of the force and probable effect of the motives which govern men.— This is all the ill which can possibly be said of him. He is as disinterested as the Being who made him; he is profound in his views, and accurate in his judgement, except where knowledge of the world is necessary to form a judgement. He is so amiable, that I pronounce you will love him if ever you become acquainted with him. He would be, as he was, a great man in Congress."

But it was not to the revision of the laws of his state, or other laborious publick duties, that Mr. Jefferson entirely devoted himself. He at this time, in a noble manner, displayed the sternness of his justice, the purity of his heart, and the softness of his feelings, by deprecating all cruelty to a fallen foe, and by extending a hand of charity to the foiled ravagers of his coun try. His sympathies were excited by proposed wrong

to the unfortunate, and he gave his indignant, powerful, and successful pen to their assistance.

Congress, it will be recollected, had resolved to retain in America the troops who had surrendered at Saratoga, until the terms of capitulation, which had been entered into by the British general, were duly ratified by, and obtained from, his government. Until this was done and received, it was thought expedient to remove them into the interiour of the country; and the neighbourhood of Charlottesville, in Virginia, was selected as the place of their residence.

"There they arrived early in the year 1779. The winter was uncommonly severe; the barracks unfinished for want of labourers; no sufficient stores of bread laid in; and the roads rendered impassable by the inclemency of the weather and the number of wagons which had lately traversed them." Mr. Jefferson, aided by Mr. Hawkins, the commissary general, and the benevolent disposition of his fellow citizens, adopted every plan to alleviate the distresses of the troops, and to soften, as much as possible, the hardships of captivity. Their efforts were attended with success. The officers who were able to command money rented houses and small farms in the neighbourhood, while the soldiers enlarged the barracks and improved their accommodations, so as in a short time to form a little community, flourishing and happy. These arrangements had scarcely been completed, when, in consequence of a power lodged in them by Congress, the Governour and Council of Virginia determined to remove the prisoners to another state, or to another part of the same state. This intention was heard by the

captives with distress. Mr. Jefferson immediately addressed a letter to Governour Henry, in which he stated the impolicy, impropriety, and cruelty of such a

measure.

But we will give this admirable letter to the reader. It speaks so well for the writer, is so illustrative of the more amiable traits of his character, is so correct in sentiment and glowing in language, and was finally so powerful in effect, that it would be an inexcusable omission in the memoirs of his life. Its incidents will repay perusal, while no tedium can affect the patience.

TO HIS EXCELLENCY PATRICK HENRY.

SIR,

Albemarle, March 27, 1779.

A report prevailing here, that in consequence of some powers from Congress, the Governour and Council have it in contemplation to remove the Convention troops, either wholly or in part, from their present situation, I take the liberty of troubling you with some observations on that subject. The reputation and interest of our country, in general, may be affected by such a measure; it would, therefore, hardly be deemed an indecent liberty in the most private citizen, to offer his thoughts to the consideration of the Executive.The locality of my situation, particularly in the neighbourhood of the present barracks, and the publick relation in which I stand to the people among whom they are situated, together with a confidence, which a personal knowledge of the members of the Executive gives me, that they will be glad of information from any quarter, on a subject interesting to the publick,

induce me to hope that they will acquit me of impro priety in the present representation.

By an article in the Convention of Saratoga, it is stipulated, on the part of the United States, that the officers shall not be separated from their men. I suppose the term officers, includes general as well as regimental officers. As there are general officers who command all the troops, no part of them can be separated from these officers without a violation of the article: they cannot, of course, be separated from one another, unless the same general officer could be in different places at the same time. It is true, the article adds the words, as far as circumstances will admit.” This was a necessary qualification; because, in no place in America, I suppose, could there have been found quarters for both officers and men together; those for the officers to be according to their rank.— So far, then, as the circumstances of the place where they should be quartered, should render a separation necessary, in order to procure quarters for the officers, according to their rank, the article admits that separation. And these are the circumstances which must have been under the contemplation of the parties; both of whom, and all the world beside, (who are ultimate judges in the case,) would still understand that they were to be as near in the environs of the camp as convenient quarters could be procured; and not that the qualification of the article destroyed the article itself, and laid it wholly at our discretion. Congress, indeed, have admitted of this separation; but are they so far lords of right and wrong as that our consciences may be quiet with their dispensation? Or is the case

amended by saying they leave it optional in the Governour and Council to separate the troops or not? At the same time that it exculpates not them, it is drawing the Governour and Council into a participation in the breach of faith. If, indeed, it is only proposed, that a separation of the troops shall be referred to the consent of their officers; that is a very different matter. Having carefully avoided conversation with them on publick subjects, I cannot say, of my own knowledge, how they would relish such a proposition. I have heard from others, that they will choose to undergo any thing together, rather than to be separated, and that they will remonstrate against it in the strongest terms. The Executive, therefore, if voluntary agents in this measure, must be drawn into a paper war with them, the more disagreeable, as it seems that faith and reason will be on the other side. As an American, I cannot help feeling a thorough mortification, that our Congress should have permitted an infraction of our publick honour; as a citizen of Virginia, I cannot help hoping and confiding, that our supreme Executive, whose acts will be considered as the acts of the commonwealth, estimate that honour too highly to make its infraction their own act. I may be permitted to hope, then, that if any removal takes place, it will be a general one: and as it is said to be left to the Gov ernour and Council to determine on this, I am satisfi ed that, suppressing every other consideration, and weighing the matter dispassionately, they will determine upon this sole question, Is it for the benefit of those for whom they act, that the Convention troops should be removed from among them? Under the