of) was exceedingly affectionate, and familiar. They spoke to each other by their Christian names, or surnames only; but yet there was a courtesy and dignity which always made it the intercourse of gentlemen. All of them were in the habit of using expressions, (no doubt acquired in the army,) which hardly seemed to be profaneness in them, though it would now be such, if used by any one. They were in many respects a noble set of men. It is to be hoped, that the race is not extinct. Perhaps the occasion made them what they were; for there seems to be few such men in these days.

It was of this same Henry Knox, that Thomas Jefferson has published to his countrymen, and for the benefit of posterity, as follows: (vol. iv. page 484 :) "Knox subscribed at

once to Hamilton's opinion, that we ought to declare the "treaty void, (French treaty of 1778,) acknowledging, at "the same time, like a fool as he is, that he knew nothing "about it." "There having been an intimation by Randolph, "that in so great a question he should choose to give a written "opinion, and this being approved by the President, I gave "in mine April the 28th. Hamilton gave in his. I believe "Knox's was never thought worth offering, or asking for." (In the same vol. page 491,) "Knox, in a FOOLISH, incohe"rent sort of a speech, introduced the pasquinade, lately "printed, called the funeral of George W

-n, and James “W———n,” (Judge Wilson, of the Supreme Court of the United States, one of the framers of the constitution,) "King and Judge, &c. where the President was placed on "a guillotine. The President was much inflamed; got into one of those passions when he cannot command himself; "defied any man on earth to produce one single act of his, "since he had been in the government, which was not done

66

66

on the purest motives." In this page Mr. Jefferson records Washington as using an oath; " that by God, he had rather "be in his grave than in his present situation." Thus,

Mr. Jefferson is the American, who has taken pains to record for the public eye, (true or false,) that Washington was guilty of profaneness!

66

"Some officers of the army," (vol. iv. page 444,)" as it has "always been said, and believed, (and Steuben and Knox "have ever been named as the leading agents,) trained to "monarchy by military habits, are understood to have proposed to General Washington, to decide this great question by the army, before its disbandment, and to assume, him"self, the crown, on the assurance of their support." It is well known, that anonymous letters were circulated in camp, to the above effect; but this is the only case in which the names of Knox and Steuben are so connected therewith. On the contrary, two men (who afterwards figured eminently, in the ranks of democracy,) have ever been "named," truly or otherwise as the authors of these let

ters.

Mr. Jefferson may have been of the number of those who believed with Rochefoucauld, a French philosopher, and maxim-writer, that there is something in the misfortunes of our best friends which does not displease us. It is quite certain that the misfortunes of Mr. Jefferson's political adversaries gave him no pain. In a letter to Mr. Madison, (January 3, 1799, vol. iii. page 406,) he says, "General "Knox has become bankrupt for four hundred thousand dol"lars, and has resigned his military commission. He took in "General Lincoln for one hundred and fifty thousand dol"lars, which breaks him. Colonel Jackson also sunk with "him." The manner of this annunciation may be some indication of the sort of heart, which Mr. Jefferson had. It is to be hoped, that he did some injustice to that of Mr. Madison, in so addressing him. It was undoubtedly true, that General Knox, from causes before stated, was a debtor, and embarrassed; and, in some degree, from like causes, with those which occasioned Mr. Jefferson's own embar

rassments; (a circumstance in his life which gave no pleas ure to his political adversaries); but it was never known, in this part of the country, that General Lincoln was broken, nor that Colonel Jackson had sunk. Both of them befriended Knox, and the fortunes of both may have been, in some degree impaired. But both ever entertained for

him the most affectionate attachment.

In making such assertions as are found in Mr. Jefferson's volumes, and in recording what he calls, "false facts," has Mr. Jefferson erred? One can speak to another such things, as, if believed, would deprive the person spoken to, of the esteem and respect of his fellow men, and perhaps subject him to public punishment. The speaker, in such case, must be presumed to have weighed consequences. One can speak of another, those things which would, if believed, deprive him of the esteem and respect of his fellow men, and subject him to public punishment. There may be cases where it is justifiable and dutiful so to speak. Suppose one to speak such things, as are adapted to produce such effects, and that these things are false, and that the speaker hopes these effects will be produced, but that he shall not be known as the speaker; what says the true law of honor, the law of the land, and the precepts of Christianity in such case? Suppose one to write deliberately, and calmly to revise falsehoods of the dead, and of the living, and to reserve these falsehoods for publication, when he should be beyond personal accountability to the living, and to the representatives of the dead, what is the sentence which impartial justice must pronounce on his own fame? Whether Mr. Jefferson has or has not erred, in any of these respects, is a question, on which he has appealed to posterity. Let posterity pronounce its judgment.

Pious Ass!

LETTER XXV.

APRIL 15, 1833.

THERE were several distinguished persons visiting in the United States, in the last five years of the last century, and among them some of royal blood. The Duke of Kent, son of George the Third, was here, father of the young princess, now heiress to the throne. He was a tall man, of light complexion; no opportunity occurred to describe, in him, any peculiar traits of character. The present King of France was here, by the name of Mons. d'Orleans, accompanied by his two brothers, who were called, before the revolution, by the respective names of the Duke of Montpensier and the Duke de Beaujolois. Both the latter are long since deceased. The Duke of Orleans was a man rather above middle stature, dark complexion, rather sunken eyes, and of very dignified deportment. He kept aloof from the agitation of politics. The friends of France, apparently, did not think that his possible destiny could affect their interests. He made extensive excursions in this country, and was well informed, probably from his own observation, of its condition and prospects. He was in the best society in the several cities. The instability of human fortune has been strongly illustrated in the life of this person. Born to high distinction, he had the affliction of seeing it all disappear as a vision, and himself reduced to the necessity of toiling for subsistence. He bore his reverses with magnanimity, and profited from them, and may now be the better monarch from these causes. Since his exaltation to the throne he has done honor to his own heart by recognising the courtesies and kindness experienced in this country.

A gentleman now known as one of the first merchants in the world, and as a member of Parliament, Sir Alexander

Baring, was then in this country. He was a man of middle stature, of light complexion and blue eyes. He was considered to be a well informed person, and of highly respectable manners. As to the former, this has since been verified by useful and intelligent performances in parliamentary debate. He married an American lady, the daughter of Mr. Senator Bingham, who built and dwelt in the house now known as the "Mansion House" in Philadelphia. This was one of the places at that time of elegant hospitality in the "beautiful city," as it was called. "Beautiful," however, should have been applied to what is intellectual and social, in that day, no less than to that which has not yielded to the unsparing hand of time. Certainly, the social intercourse of Philadelphia, at the close of the last century, was as delightful and interesting as could be found on the globe. There may have been elsewhere, more names, places of assembly, titles, and distinctions, than in Philadelphia, at this period. But being the seat of government, and place of Washington's abode, and Congress being then an object of attraction to visiters, and this city the attractive point for all distinguished foreigners, the society of Philadelphia was well entitled to the praise of elegant, and refined.

Volney, the correspondent of Mr. Jefferson, the celebrated traveller, philosopher, and contemner of Christianity, (as his works show,) figured here at this time. He had a genuine. French physiognomy, which no one could misunderstand. He was a tall, straight, well formed person; high forehead, blue eyes, small mouth, and peculiar expression of face. He asked Washington to give him letters of recommendation, to be used in his excursion in the states. He was probably understood. The letter given contained only these words: "C. Volney needs no recommendation from George Washington."

The foreign ministers, then in Philadelphia, made their houses places of agreeable resort. They usually gave a