for granted must exist, or that he could not find some American Boswell, who would relieve him of the task, and secure these fading memorials, which, if once suffered to be lost, can never be recalled. "Tradition," let us remember, "is but a meteor, which, if it once falls, cannot be rekindled." Cicero thought his discovery of the forgotten and neglected tomb of Archimedes, an event interesting and important enough to be introduced into one of the gravest of his philosophical disquisitions; surely therefore no man has a right to think it labour too humble for his talents, to investigate any circumstances, however minute, which may contribute to illustrate the character of Washington. There is scarcely any thing, which would give us greater pleasure than sit down to the examination of a work, which would acquaint us with the private habits of our hero; and notwithstanding any thing which has yet appeared, such a work is still altogether a desideratum. To the English edition is annexed an account of the ancestors of Washington from the herald's office, which, as it supplies one of Judge M.'s deficiencies, and as we presume it is not very common among us, we shall extract; though, indeed, Washington is not a man whose fame can receive any additional lustre from any lineage however splendid.

"This Sir William had, among other younger brothers, two, named John and Laurence; and the latter appears to have been a student at Oxford, in 1622.

"John and Laurence Washington, brothers, emigrated from the north of England, (according to the tradition in the family of the President) and settled at Bridge's Creek, on the Potomack River, in the county of Westmoreland. John was employed as General against the Indians, in Maryland, and the parish in which he lived was called after him. He was the father of Laurence Washington, gentleman, who died in 1697, leaving two sons, John and Augustine.

"Augustine died in 1743, at the age of forty-nine, leaving several sous by his two marriages. George, the President, was the eldest by the second wife, Marv Ball, and was born the 11th of February, 1732."

We have before hinted a wish that our author had given us a disquisition on the causes and grounds

* This John had previously resided at South Cave, in the east riding of the county of York, upon an estate now the property and residence of H B. Barnard, esq. of Cave castle, South Cave, and he emigrated to America about the year 1657. ENGLISH EDITOR.

of the American revolution, and among other reasons because we should have been gratified with seeing on what principles so distinguished a politician as Judge M. would now defend the justice of it. Without pretending to have either thought or read much on the subject, it strikes us, that the plea on which it was usually rested at the time, that England could not justly claim the right of taxation, without allowing us to be represented in her Parlament, would not now be thought the most cogent. While we acknowledged ourselves to be subjects of Great Britain, and couceded to her the full right of legislation, it appears to us that we gave up the right of making this plea. Legislution includes all the powers of civil government, and none more clearly than that of taxation. The right to demand the protection of the civ. il power, and the obligation to support it are reciprocal and inseparable. As subjects of the British crown indeed, we had the right to representation, whenever the exercise of that right was practicable, but as the exercise of this right in our case was acknowledged to be im ossible, we might lament the circumstance as an evil, but we had no right to complain of it, or any of its necessary consequences as a griev

ance.

Taxation is no tyranny, even without representation, when circumstances are such as to make representation impossible. If this evil was insupportable, as certainly it would ultimately have been, that would have been a sufficient ground to justify a dissolution of our connexion, and a renunciation of all our rights as well as obligations as British subjects. But to acknowledge the general right to legislate, and to deny the application of it in a most essential particular, in our opinion,

included an absurdity; and every act of opposition, therefo e, before the Declaration of Independence was an act of rebellion. We shall not, we presume, be misunderstood. We are only quest oning, as a mere matter of speculation, the theory on which our resistance was defended. We mean only to say, that there could be no alternative between submission and independence, and that the ground therefore, which was so universally taken in the early stages of the contest, was untenable and inconsistent. With regard to the general principle of the necessity of the revolution, there can be now no division of sentiment. No men can believe more firmly than ourselves, in the propriety and utility of that glorious event, or be more deeply penetrated with reverence and gratitude for the heroes and sages who effected it. That an immense continent should be governed by a power a thousand leagues distant, was too monstrous to be long supported; and the interest of England, quite as much as that of America, demanded the separation. If we were to offer to resume our ancient connexion with her tomorrow, every motive of policy would require her to decline it.

The events of the war are in general narrated with spirit and elegance. Judge Marshall's superiority to the historians which preceded him, consists principally in the greater fullness and exactness of his statements of political transactions. His narrative of the negociations with France and Spain is particularly luminous and interesting, and sufficiently displays the folly of supposing that we are under any obli gations of gratitude to either of those nations, for espousing our cause. "Friendship," "generosity," "gratitude," &c. do very well

We think Judge Marshall has also given us a better survey of the proceedings of Congress, than we have before seen, and enabled us to appreciate more fully the difficulties with which Gen. Washington was compelled to struggle. Yet even here we have been disappointed in our hope of finding a more ample account of the parties in Congress, their principles, views, &c. concerning which little correct information has hitherto been presented to the publick. If we mistake not, there is a great deal of curious and interesting information, which the world does not yet possess, respecting the first Congress, with which Judge M. does not furnish us, and which, if not preserved, must in a few years be irretrievably lost. We will indulge the hope, that he will hereafter find leisure to review and perfect his work, and that the task of preparing a new edition will form the dignified amusement of the evening of life.

We will indulge ourselves in extracting the following picture of the spirit displayed by Congress, in the most disastrous period of our history.

The firmness manifested by congress throughout the gloomy and trying period which intervened between the loss of fort Washington, and the battle of Pirnceton, entitles the members of that day to the admiration of the world, and the gratitude of their fellow citizens. Unawed by the dangers which threatened

them, and regardless of personal safety, they did not for an instant admit the idea, that the independence they had declared was to be surrendered, and peace to be purchased by returning to their ancient colonial situation. As the Brit

ish army advanced through Jersey, and the consequent insecurity of Philadel phia rendered an adjournment of congress from that place to one further removed from the seat of war, a necessary measure of precaution, their exertions seemed to increase with their difficulties. They sought to remove the despondence which was seizing and paralyzing the public mind, by an address to the states, in which every argument was suggested which could rouse them to vigorous action. They made the most strenuous efforts, too, to animate the militia, and impel them to the field, by the agency of those whose popular eloquence best fitted them for such a service.

When reassembled at Baltimore, the place to which they had adjourned, their resolutions exhibited no evidences of confusion or dismay; and the most judicious efforts were made, by collecting as soon as possible a respectable military force, to repair the mischief produced by past errors.

Declaring that in the present situation

of things the very existence of civil lib erty depended on the right execution of military powers, to a vigorous direction of which, distant numerous, and deliberative bodics, were entirely unequal; they authorized general Washington to raise sixteen additional regiments, and conferred upon him, for six months, powers for the conduct of the war which were almost unlimited.

When reduced to their lowest ebb, towards the close of 176, while the tide of frtune was running strongest against them, some few members, distrusting their ability to make a successful resistance,

proposed to authorizecommissioners they had deputed to the court of Versailles, to transfer to that country the same monopoly of their trade which Great Brittain had hitherto enjoyed. This proposition is stated to have been relinquished, because it was believed that conceptions

* General Mifflin reas on this occasion pe culiarly useful. + Ramay

of this kind would destroy the force of many arguments which had been used in favor of independence, and, probably disunite the people. It was next proposed to offer a monopoly of certain enumerated articles of produce. To

this the variant interests of the states were so directly opp sed, that it received a speedy and decided negative. Some proposed offering to France a league offensive and de e s ve; but this also was rejected. The more enlightened members of congress argued that, though the friendship of small states might be purchased, that of France could not. They alledged that if she would risk a war with Great Britain by openly espousing their cause, it would not be so much from the prospect of direct advantages, as from a natural desire to lessen the overgrown power of a dangerous rival. It was therefore supposed that the only inducement likely to influence France to an interference, was an assurance that the United States were determined to persevere in refusing to return to their former allegiance. Under the influence of this better opinion, resolutions were again entered into, declaratory of their determination to listen to no terms founded on the idea of their resuming the character of British subjects; but trusting the event to Providence, and risking all consequences, to adhere to the Independence they had declared.and the freedom of trade they had proffered to all nations. Copies of these resolutions were sent to the principal courts of Europe; and proper persons were appointed to solicit their friendship to the new formed states. These dispatches fell into the hands of the British, and by them were published; a circumstance by no means unwished for by congress, who were persuaded that an apprehension of their making up all differences with Great Britain was a principal objection to the interference of foreign Courts, in what was represented to be no more than a domestic quarrel. A resolution adopted in the deepest distress, and in the worst of times, that congress would listen to vo terms of re-union with their parent state, would, it was believed, convince those who wished for the dismemberment of the British empire, that it was sou: d policy to interfere, so far as would prevent the conquest of the United States.

The narrative of the events of the

various campaigns, does not, as far as we observe, differ in any important particulars from that of preThe attack on ceding writers. Quebeck is narrated with more minuteness than by any other historian, and if it were not done with so much spirit, we should say that it occupies a greater space than its importance justifies. In the account of the defence of Long Island, and the battle of Brandywine, we think that our author has fallen into the usual failing of biographers, that of attempting to make his hero too faultless. In our opinion it would not be the slightest impeachment of the talents of Gen. Washington, if we were to admit that he was outgeneralled in both those affairs by Gen. Howe. When we recollect that neither he or his troops had ever before seen any regular service, we shall not be surprised, that in his first encounters, he displayed some inferiority to a veteran in European tactics. We have not the slightest pretensions to any knowledge of these subjects, but we confess that the statements of Mr. Gal

loway, of the conduct of Sir William Howe, have strongly inclined us to believe that the American army was saved only by that general's want of enterprise. As Mr. G's pamphlet is rare, we will extract his summary of the charges against Gen. Howe for his conduct during the campaign of 1777. It is scarcely necessary to remind the reader that some of these representations are coloured by the prejudices of the ex-speaker of the assembly of Pennsylvania.

"It seems impossible for a candid inquirer aft r truth, however painful the task, not to take a brief

* Letters to a nobleman on the conduct of the war in the middle colonies.