elaborate oratory contemptible. Even genius itself then feels rebuked, and subdued, as in the presence of higher qualities. Then, patriotism is eloquent; then, self-devotion is eloquent. The clear conception, outrunning the deductions of logic, the high purpose, the firm resolve, the dauntless spirit, speaking on the tongue, beaming from the eye, informing every feature, and urging the whole man onward, right onward to his object-this, this is eloquence; or rather it is something greater and higher than all eloquence, it is action, noble, sublime, godlike action.'

The declining years of Mr. Jefferson are faithfully and beautifully drawn, exhibiting the composure of wisdom and the serenity of moral courage. The old age of most men is querulous and feeble: they are distressed to think life has passed on so far, and that they have so short a time to finish up the business of it. Mr. Jefferson seemed to wait with patience, and was ready to obey the summons for his departure— watching the last rays of his setting sun as one wishing for rest after the toils and fatigues of the day; that rest had come, and the orator had in charge his fame.

Both Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson had the pleasure of knowing that the respect, which they so largely received, was not paid to their official stations. They were not men made great by office; but great men, on whom the country for its own benefit had conferred office. There was that in them, which office did not give, and which the relinquishment of office did not, and could not, take away. In their retirement, in the midst of their fellow-citizens, themselves private citizens, they enjoyed as high regard and esteem, as when filling the most im portant places of public trust.

'There remained to Mr. Jefferson yet one other work

of patriotism and beneficence, the establishment of a university in his native State. To this object he devoted years of incessant and anxious attention, and by the enlightened liberality of the legislature of Virginia, and the co-operation of other able and zealous friends, he lived to see it accomplished. May all success attend this infant seminary; and may those who enjoy its advantages, as often as their eyes shall rest on the neighboring height, recollect what they owe to their disinterested and indefatigable benefactor; and may letters honor him who thus labored in the cause of letters.

Thus useful, and thus respected, passed the old age of Thomas Jefferson. But time was on its ever-ceaseless wing, and was now bringing the last hour of this illustrious man. He saw its approach, with undisturbed serenity. He counted the moments, as they passed, and beheld that his last sands were falling. That day, too, was at hand, which he had helped to make immortal. One wish, one hope-if it were not presumptuous-beat in his fainting breast. Could it be so-might it please God-he would desire-once more-to see the sun— once more to look abroad on the scene around him, on the great day of liberty. Heaven, in its mercy, fulfilled that prayer. He saw that sun-he enjoyed its sacred light-he thanked God for his mercy, and bowed his aged head to the grave. "Felix, non vitæ tantum claritate, sed etiam opportunitate mortis."'

In 1821 Mr. Webster was engaged in a cause of no small importance before the High Court of Impeachment in Massachusetts. It was a trial which called up strong feelings in the community, and attracted much attention throughout the Commonwealth: James Prescott, a Judge of Probate of Wills, &c. &c. for the county of Middlesex, in that Commonwealth, was charged by the House of Representatives, acting as a grand inquest

under the Constitution, with misconduct and maladministration in his office, inasmuch as he had held Probate Courts at other times than those authorised by law; and for demanding and taking illegal fees and acting as Counsel, and for receiving fees in cases pending in his own Court before him as judge. Prescott had long been considered a man of talents and integrity, and a most excellent Judge of Probate: his decisions had been held in great respect. In some instances he had found the law silent or vague, and uncertain upon many points. No small part of his course had been founded upon ancient usages; and when new cases arose, he, as was customary in the preceding ages, legislated a little for himself. This was thought no harm. He had proceeded in this course for sixteen years, and no one complained except the lawyers, who lost counsel fees by it. The judge had a little tinge of avarice in his composition, and some share of obstinacy, but no one thought him dishonest, or capable of acting corruptly. In an evil hour, a vindictive neighbor, offended by some cause not arising in the Court of Probate, entered his complaint upon some State allegations to the House of Representatives, on which the House thought it a duty to frame articles of impeachment, and therefore appointed managers to prosecute them to final judgment before the Senate, as the High Court of Impeachment. These managers were six of the most learned and eloquent members of the House, who discharged their duty with great ability. Mr. Web

ster, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Hoar, were of Counsel for the respondent. The defence was opened by the latter gentleman, in a sound and able argument, and closed by Mr. Webster. If acting out of the letter of the statute was wrong, the judge was culpable; but in his defence it was argued that in the alleged cases, the statute was silent, and in no case had he violated any clause of it; and that he had used a fair discretion in holding courts other than those fixed by law, and on occasions of emergency only. The practice was common in almost every county in the Commonwealth ; but this, it was contended by the managers, could not avail if proved, as a common error could not establish a right; but it certainly went far to show that there was no corruption. The taking of fees for advice, it was urged in the defence was not corrupt, for that this advice given was always judicious and saved expense of litigation, and assisted executors or administrators in the prompt discharge of their duties. The managers thought, that if evils had crept into this court, it was high time they were corrected, and this was a proper occasion to make the correction. Mr. Webster put forth his great strength in behalf of his client, and seldom was it more conspicuous. He felt that if his client had, in some instances acted imprudently, that he had not acted corruptly, and he breasted the arguments of the managers most strenuously. He went deeply into the origin of these courts for the probate of wills, and showed most clearly all the ancient usages in the

ecclesiastical courts on which our probate courts were founded. The senate chamber was crowded, for a deep interest was excited: the advocate was more than usually earnest; in fact, he showed most evidently a great anxiety on the subject. His arguments seemed to sweep along like the billows of the ocean; his voice became deep-toned, and now and then almost terrific. He seemed to have a presage of the opinion of the majority of the judges, and he continued to strive with might and main to bring his client off safe. His speech, towards the close, became truly impassioned and sublime. There was a deep feeling in his bursts of eloquence that agitated even those long accustomed to hear his fairest efforts; they saw his whole soul was in the cause, and the audience followed him without holding back a jot, they crowded closer and closer to him as he advanced in his argument; and even envy owned that the struggle was gigantic. The close of the speech has come to us in a tamer form than that in which it was delivered; but as we have it in print, it is one of his most impassioned specimens of forensic eloquence. The reader shall judge for himself.

'I now beg leave to call the attention of the Court to one or two considerations of a general nature, and which appear to me to have an important bearing on the merits of this whole cause. The first is this, that from the day when the respondent was appointed Judge of Probate, down to the period at which these articles of impeachment close-from the year 1805 to 1821-there is not a single case, with the exception of that alleged by Ware, in which it is even pretended that any secrecy was de