The Project Gutenberg eBook of James Otis, the Pre

Published：2026-07-30 20:38:48 Source: best water tables for 13 year olds under 30 dollars Author: Strategy Games

Great Americans of History

JAMES OTIS THE PRE-REVOLUTIONIST

BY JOHN CLARK RIDPATH,kids pottery kits for siblings LL.D. AUTHOR OF A "Cyclopaedia of
Universal History," "Great Races of Mankind," "Life and Times of
William E. Gladstone," etc., etc.

THE CHARACTER OF JAMES OTIS BY CHARLES K. EDMUNDS, Ph.D.

WITH AN ESSAY ON THE PATRIOT BY G. MERCER ADAM Late Editor
"Self-Culture" Magazine, Etc., Etc.

TOGETHER WITH ANECDOTES, CHARACTERISTICS, AND CHRONOLOGY

Near the northeast corner of the old Common of Boston a sectionof ground was put apart long before the beginning of theeighteenth century to be a burying ground for some of the heroicdead of the city of the Puritans. For some quaint reason orcaprice this acre of God was called "The Granary" and is socalled to this day. Perhaps the name was given because the deadwere here, garnered as grain from the reaping until the bins beopened at the last day's threshing when the chaff shall be drivenfrom the wheat.

Here the thoughtless throng looking through the iron railing maysee the old weather-beaten and time-eaten slabs with theircurious lettering which designate the spots where many of the menof the pre-revolutionary epoch were laid to their last repose.The word cemetery is from Greek and means the little place whereI lie down.

In the Granary Burying Ground are the tombs of many whom historyhas gathered and recorded as her own. But history looks in vainamong the blue-black slabs of semi-slate for the name of one whowas greatest perhaps of them all; but whose last days were sostrangely clouded and whose sepulchre was so obscure as to leavethe world in doubt for more than a half century as to where thebody of the great sleeper had been laid. Curiosity, whetted bypatriotism, then discovered the spot. But the name of anotherwas on the covering slab, and no small token was to be foundindicative of the last resting place of the lightning-smittenbody of James Otis, the prophetic giant of the pre-revolutionarydays. He who had lived like one of the Homeric heroes, who haddied like a Titan under a thunderbolt, and had been buried asobscurely as Richard the Lion Hearted, or Frederick Barbarossa,must lie neglected in an unknown tomb within a few rods of thespot where his eloquence aforetime had aroused his countrymen tonational consciousness, and made a foreign tyranny foreverimpossible in that old Boston, the very name of which becamehenceforth the menace of kings and the synonym of liberty.

Tradition rather than history has preserved thus much. In theearly part of the present century a row of great elms, known asthe Paddock elms, stood in what is now the sidewalk on the westside of Tremont Street skirting the Granary Burying Ground.These trees were cut away and the first section of the burialspace was invaded with the spade. Tomb No. 40, over which theiron railing now passes, was divided down as far as where theoccupants are lying. Within the sepulchre were several bodies.One was the body of Nathaniel Cunningham, Sr. Another was RuthCunningham, his wife. The younger members of the family werealso there in death.

When the lid of one coffin in this invaded tomb was lifted, itwas found that a mass of the living roots of the old strong elmnear by had twined about the skull of the sleeper, had enteredthrough the apertures, and had eaten up the brain. It was thebrain of James Otis which had given itself to the life of the elmand had been transformed into branch and leaf and blossom, thusbreathing itself forth again into the free air and the UniversalFlow.

The body of the patriot had been deposited in this tomb of hisfather-in-law, the Nathaniel Cunningham just referred to, andhad there reposed until the searching fibres of another order oflife had found it out, and lifted and dispensed its sublimer partinto the viewless air. Over the grave in which the body was laidis still one of the rude slabs which the fathers provided, and onthis is cut the name of "George Longley, 1809," he being thesuccessor of the Cunninghams in the ownership of Tomb No. 40.

Here, then, was witnessed the last transformation of thematerial, visible man called James Otis, the courageous heraldwho ran swinging a torch in the early dawn of the AmericanRevolution.

The pre-revolutionists are the Titans of human history; therevolutionists proper are only heroes; and thepost-revolutionists are too frequently dwarfs and weaklings.This signifies that civilization advances by revolutionarystages, and that history sends out her tallest and best sons toexplore the line of march, and to select the spot for the nextcamping-ground. It is not they who actually command theoncoming columns and who seem so huge against the historicalbackground—it is not these, but rather the hoarse forerunnersand shaggy prophets of progress who are the real kings of men—the true princes of the human empire.

These principles of the civilized life were strongly illustratedin our War of Independence. The forerunners of that war were arace of giants. Their like has hardly been seen in any otherepoch of that sublime scrimmage called history. Five or sixnames may be selected from the list of the early Americanprophets whose deeds and outcry, if reduced to hexameters, wouldbe not the Iliad, not the Jerusalem Delivered, but the Epic ofHuman Liberty.

The greatest of these, our protagonists of freedom, was BenjaminFranklin. After him it were difficult to name the second. It isalways difficult to find the second man; for there are severalwho come after. In the case of our forerunners the second mayhave been Thomas Jefferson; it may have been Samuel Adams; it mayhave been his cousin; it may have been Thomas Paine; it may havebeen Patrick Henry; it may have been James Otis, the subject ofthis monograph.

It is remarkable to note how elusive are the lives of many greatmen. Some of the greatest have hardly been known at all. Othersare known only by glimpses and outlines. Some are known chieflyby myth and tradition. Nor does the effort to discover thedetails of such lives yield any considerable results. There aregreat names which have come to us from antiquity, or out of theMiddle Ages, that are known only as names, or only by a fewstriking incidents. In some cases our actual knowledge of menwho are believed to have taken a conspicuous part in the drama oftheir times is so meagre and uncertain that critical disputeshave arisen respecting the very existence of such personages.

Homer for example—was he myth or man? The Christ? Where washe and how did he pass his life from his twelfth year to thebeginning of his ministry? What were the dates of his birth anddeath? Shakespeare? Why should not the details of his life, orsome considerable portion of the facts, compare in plenitude andauthenticity with the events in Dr. Johnson's career?

It seems to be the law of biography that those characters who areknown to the world by a few brilliant strokes of genius have as arule only a meagre personal history, while they whose charactershave been built up painfully and slowly out of the commonplace,like the coral islands of the Atlantic, have a great variety andmultitude of materials ready for the hands of the biographer.

James Otis belonged to the first of these classes. There is ameasure of elusiveness about his life. Our lack of knowledgerespecting him, however, is due in part to the fact that near theclose of his life, while he was oscillating in a half-rationalcondition between Andover and Boston, with an occasional visit toPlymouth, he fell into a fit of pessimism and despair duringwhich he spent two days in obliterating the materials for hisbiography, by destroying all his letters and manuscripts. He didas much as he could to make impossible any adequate account ofhis career or any suitable revelation of his character asdeveloped in his correspondence. Over and above this, however,the materials of his life are of small extent, and fragmentary.It is to his formal publications and the common tradition of whathe did, that we must turn for our biographical and historicalestimate of the man. In this respect he is in analogy withPatrick Henry who appears only fitfully in history, but withmeteoric brilliancy; or with Abraham Lincoln the narrative ofwhose life for the first forty-five years can be adequatelywritten in ten pages.

The American Otises of the seventeenth century were of Englishdescent. The emigration of the family from the mother countryoccurred at an early day when the settlements in New England werestill infrequent and weak. The Otis family was among the firstto settle at the town of Hingham. Nor was it long until the nameappeared in the public records, indicating official rank andleadership. From Hingham, John Otis, who was born in 1657,ancestor of the subject of this sketch, removed to Barnstable,near the center of the peninsula of Massachusetts, and became oneof the first men of that settlement. He was sent to theLegislature and thence to the Council of the Colony in which hehad a seat for twenty-one years. During this period he waspromoted to the place of Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, andwhile holding this important place he was also judge of theProbate Court. The family rose and flourished in reputation.

In 1702, James Otis, son of Judge John Otis, was born. Hefollowed in his father's footsteps becoming a lawyer and colonialpublicist, afterwards a colonel of the militia, a judge of theCommon Pleas, a judge of the Probate Court, and a member of theCouncil of Massachusetts. Just after reaching his majorityColonel Otis took in marriage Mary Alleyne, and of this unionwere born thirteen children. The eldest was a son, and to himwas given his father's name. It was to this child that destinyhad assigned the heroic work of confronting the aggressions ofGreat Britain on the American colonists, and of inspiring thelatter to forcible resistance.

James Otis, Junior, was born at a place called Great Marshes, nowknown as West Barnstable, on the 5th of February, 1725. Heinherited from his father and grandfather not only a largemeasure of talents but also a passion for public life whichimpelled him strongly to the study and solution of thosequestions which related to the welfare of the American colonies,and to the means by which their political independence might beultimately secured.

The character and intellect of Colonel Otis of Barnstable weretransmitted to other members of his family also. The daughterMercy, oldest sister of James Otis, was married to James Warrenwho made his home at Plymouth. This lady had her brother'spassion for politics—an enthusiasm which could hardly berestrained. She wrote and conversed in a fiery manner on therevolutionary topics of the day. Almost coincidently with theBattle of Bunker Hill she composed and published (without hername, however,) a biting satire on the colonial policy of GreatBritain, calling her brochure "The Group." Fifteen yearsafterwards she published a volume of poems, mostly patrioticpieces, and finally in 1805 a brief "History of the AmericanRevolution," which was considered a reputable work after itskind.

Samuel Alleyne Otis, youngest brother of James, outlived nearlyall the other members of the family, and was recognized as aprominent political leader. He, also, had the strong patrioticand revolutionary bent of the family, was popular andinfluential, and was honored with a long term of service asSecretary of the Senate of the United States. In this capacityhe participated, April 30, 1789, in the inauguration ofWashington, holding the Bible on which the Father of his Countrytook the oath of office. The other brothers and sisters were ofless conspicuous ability, and were not so well known to their ownand other times.

In New England in the first half of the eighteenth century thesentiment of education was universal. Among the leading people,the sentiment was intense. Colonel Otis, of Barnstable, wasalert with respect to the discipline and development of hischildren. He gave to them all, to the sons especially, the bestadvantages which the commonwealth afforded. James Otis wasassigned to the care of Reverend Jonathan Russell, the ministerat Barnstable, who prepared the youth for college. By the middleof his fifteenth year he was thought to be ready formatriculation. He was accordingly entered as a freshman atHarvard, in June, 1739.

Of the incidents of his preceding boyhood, we know but little. Atradition exists that he was more precocious than diligent; thathis will was strong; that his activities were marked with areckless audacity, which, however, did not distinguish him muchfrom the other promising New England boys of his age. Somethingof these characteristics are noticeable in his college career.At Harvard he showed an abundance of youthful spirits; a strongsocial disposition, and a well-marked discrimination between hisfriends and his enemies. At times he applied himselfassiduously, and at other times mused and read rather thanstudied. On the whole he did not greatly distinguish himself asa student. His passion for literature was marked, and he becameconspicuous for his forensic abilities. Towards the end of hiscourse, his character as a student was intensified, and he wasnot often seen away from his books. Out of term time, he wouldreturn to his father's home taking his books with him. At suchtimes he was rarely seen by his former companions of Barnstable,because of his habit of secluding himself for study.

It is narrated that at this period of his life, young Otis gavestrong evidence of the excitable temperament with which he wasendowed. In the intervals of his study his nervous system, underthe stimulus of games or controversial dispute, would become sotense with excitement as to provoke remark. Nor may we in theretrospect fail to discover in this quality of mind and temperthe premonitions of that malady which finally prevailed over thelucid understanding, and rational activities of James Otis.

The youth did not much effect social accomplishments. He had apassion for music and learned to play the violin. With thisinstrument he was wont to entertain himself in the intervals ofstudy. Sometimes he would play for company. It was one of hishabits to break off suddenly and rather capriciously in the midstof what he was doing. Thus did he with his music. It isnarrated that on a certain occasion while playing by invitationfor some friends, he suddenly put aside the instrument, saying ina sort of declamatory manner as was his wont—

"So fiddled Orpheus and so danced the brutes."

He then ran into the garden, and could not be induced to play theviolin again.

Young Otis passed through the regular classes at Harvard and wasgraduated in 1743. On that occasion he took part in adisputation which was one of the exercises of his class.Otherwise his record at the college is not accented with anyspecial work which he did. At the time of his graduation he wasin his nineteenth year. It had been his father's purpose and hisown that his profession should be the law. It does not appear,however, that his college studies were especially directed tothis end. At any rate, he did not devote himself at once to thelaw, but assiduously for two years (1743-45) to a general courseof study chosen and directed by himself with a view to thefurther discipline of his mind and the widening of hisinformation. It was an educational theory with Otis that such aninterval of personal and spontaneous application should intervenebetween a young man's graduation and the beginning of hisprofessional career. Having pursued this course with himself heinsisted that his younger brother, Samuel Alleyne Otis, shouldtake the same course. In one of his letters to his father—acommunication fortunately rescued from the holocaust of hiscorrespondence—he discusses the question and urges thepropriety of the young man's devoting a year or two to generalstudy before taking up his law books. An extract from the letterwill prove of interest. The writer says: "It is with sincerestpleasure I find my brother Samuel has well employed his timeduring his residence at home. I am sure you don't think the timelong he is spending in his present course of studies; since it ispast all doubt they are not only ornamental and useful, butindispensably necessary preparatories for the figure I hope oneday, for his and your sake, as well as my own, to see him make inthe profession he is determined to pursue. I am sure the yearand a half I spent in the same way, after leaving the academy,was as well spent as any part of my life; and I shall alwayslament I did not take a year or two further for more generalinquiries in the arts and sciences, before I sat down to thelaborious study of the laws of my country.

"My brother's judgment can't at present be supposed to be ripeenough for so severe an exercise as the proper reading and welldigesting the common law. Very sure I am, if he would stay ayear or two from the time of his degree, before he begins withthe law, he will be able to make better progress in one week,than he could now, without a miracle, in six. Early and shortclerkships, and a premature rushing into practice, without acompetent knowledge in the theory of law, have blasted the hopes,and ruined the expectations, formed by the parents of most of thestudents in the profession, who have fallen within my observationfor these ten or fifteen years past."

The writer of this well-timed communication then adds in proof ofhis position, the names of several distinguished jurists whopostponed the beginning of their legal studies, or at least theirlegal practice, to a time of life quite beyond the conventionalstudent period. Mr. Otis then declares his conviction that ayoung man may well procrastinate his legal studies until he shallhave attained the age of thirty or even of forty years. Hedeclares his belief that such postponement will as a rule lead tobetter result than can be attained by a youth who begins attwenty, however brilliant his genius may be.

This view of the case was with James Otis both theory andpractice. He began his legal studies in 1745. In that year hebecame a law student under the tuition of Jeremiah Gridley who atthat time was already regarded as one of the most able andaccomplished lawyers in Massachusetts. Preceptor and studentwere at the first in accord in their political and socialprinciples. At the time of the young man's law course, Gridleywas a member of the General Court of Massachusetts. He belongedto the party called Whig; for the political jargon of GreatBritain had infected the Americans also, and they dividedaccording to the names and principles of the British partisans ofthe period.

Judge Gridley, while he remained on the bench, took sides withthe colonists in their oncoming contention with the mothercountry. Afterwards, however, by accepting the appointment ofAttorney General he became one of the king's officers, and it wasin this relation that he was subsequently brought face to facewith his distinguished pupil in the trial of the most remarkablecase which preceded the Revolutions.

Mr. Otis devoted two years of time to his legal studies beforebeginning the practice of his profession. The study of law atthat time was much more difficult than at the present day. Thestudent was obliged to begin de novo with the old statutes anddecisions, and to make up the science for himself by a difficultinduction, which not many young men were able to do successfully.

Law text-books were virtually unknown. Otis did not even haveaccess to "Blackstone's Commentaries." No authoritative works onevidence or pleading existed in the English language.

The student must get down his Acts of Parliament, his decisionsof the King's Bench, his Coke, his black-letter dissertations onthe common law, and out of these construct the best he could alegal system for himself. To this work Mr. Otis devoted himselffrom 1745 to 1747, after which he left the office of JudgeGridley and went to Plymouth, where he applied for admission tothe bar, and was accepted by the court. He began to practice in1748—the year of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, when thepolitical and historical status of Europe was again fixed for abrief period.

The young attorney almost immediately took rank at the Plymouthbar. The old records of the court at that place still show thefrequent appearance of Otis for one or the other of the parties.In this manner were passed the years 1748 and 1749. It does notappear that at this time he concerned himself very much with theaffairs of the town or the larger affairs of the commonwealth.The tax records show his name with an entry to the effect that in1748 he estimated his personal estate at twenty pounds besideshis "faculty," by which was meant, his professional value.

A few incidents of this period in Otis's life have come down bytradition. He soon made a favorable impression on the court andbar. He gained the good opinion of his fellows for both abilityand integrity of character. This reputation he carried with himto Boston, whither he removed early in the year 1750. He hadalready acquired sufficient character to bring his services intorequisition at places somewhat distant from Plymouth.

His reception in Boston was accordingly favorable. Beyond thelimits of the colony he became known as an advocate. He was sentfor in important cases, and showed such signal ability as toattract the admiring attention of both court and people. Alreadyat the conclusion of his twenty-fifth year he was a young man ofnote, rising to eminence.

There was good ground for this reputation in both his principlesof conduct and his legal abilities. From the first he avoidedthe littleness and quibble which are the bane of the bar. He hada high notion of what a lawyer should be and of the method andspirit in which he should conduct his cases. He had as muchdignity as audacity, a sense of justice as keen as the purposewas zealous in pursuing it.

It came to be understood in the courts of Boston when Otisappeared as an advocate that he had a case and believed in it.He avoided accepting retainers in cases, of the justice of whichhe was in doubt. Pursuing this method, he was sometimes involvedin law-suits in which he was constrained to turn upon his ownclient.

The story goes of one such instance in which he brought suit forthe collection of a bill. Believing in his client and in thejustice of the claim, he pressed the matter in court and wasabout to obtain a judgment when he accidentally discovered, amonghis client's papers, a receipt which the plaintiff had signed forthe very claim under consideration. Through some mistake thereceipt had again got back into the man's possession, and he hadtaken advantage of the fact to institute a suit for thecollection of the claim a second time.

Seeing through the matter at once, Otis took the plaintiff aside,confronted him with the receipt and denounced him to his face asa rascal. The man gave down and begged for quarter, but Otis wasinexorable; he went back to the bar and stated to the court thatreasons existed why the case of his client should be dismissed.The court, presided over by Judge Hutchinson, afterwardLieutenant-Governor and Chief Justice of Massachusetts, expressedits surprise at the turn of affairs, complimented Otis for hishonorable course as an advocate, commended his conduct to thebar, and dismissed the case.

With the spread of his reputation Mr. Otis was summoned on legalbusiness to distant parts. On one occasion he was called toHalifax to defend some prisoners under arrest for piracy;believing them to be innocent he convinced the court in aneloquent plea and secured the acquittal of the prisoners.

On another occasion he was summoned to Plymouth to defend somecitizens of that town who had become involved in a riot on theanniversary of the Gunpowder Plot. It was the custom in the NewEngland towns to observe this day with a mock procession, inwhich effigies representing the Pope, the Old Bad One, and Jamesthe Pretender, were carried through the streets to be consignedat the end to a bonfire. In this instance violence was done bysome of the participants; windows were smashed, gates were brokendown, etc. Mr. Otis conducted the defense, showing that thearrested persons taking part in a noisy anniversary, andcommitting acts that were innocent in spirit, if not innocent perse, ought not to be adjudged guilty of serious misdemeanor. Thisplea prevailed and the young men were acquitted.

It is to be greatly regretted that the legal pleas and addressesof James Otis have not been preserved. A volume of his speecheswould reveal not only his style and character, but also much ofthe history of the times. The materials, however, are wanting.He kept a commonplace book in which most of his business lettersof the period under consideration were recorded. But these givehardly a glimpse at the man, the orator, or his work. Tradition,however, is rife with the myth of his method and manner. He wasessentially an orator. He had the orator's fire and passion;also the orator's eccentricities—his sudden high flights andtransitions, his quick appeals and succession of images.

To these qualities of the orator in general Otis added the powerof applying himself to the facts; also the power of cogentreasoning and masterful search for the truth which gained for himat length the fame of first orator of the revolution. Thepassion and vehemence of the man made him at times censorious andsatirical. His manner towards his opponents was at times hard tobear. His wit was of that sarcastic kind which, like a hot wind,withers its object.

All of these dispositions seemed to increase his power and toaugment his reputation, but they did not augment his happiness.His character as an advocate and as a man came out in full forceduring the first period of his Boston practice; that is, in theinterval from 1750 to 1755.

On attaining his thirtieth year Mr. Otis came to the event of hismarriage. He took in union, in the spring of 1755, RuthCunningham, daughter of a Boston merchant. From one point ofview his choice was opportune, for it added to his socialstanding and also to his means. From another aspect, however,the marriage was less fortunate.

The Cunningham family was not well grounded in the principles ofpatriotism. The timid commercial spirit showed itself in thefather, and with this the daughter sympathized. The sharp lineof division between patriotism and loyalty had not yet been drawn—as it was drawn five years afterward. But it began to be drawnvery soon after the marriage with serious consequences to thedomestic peace of the family.

It appears that beside this general cause of divergence, thestaid and unenthusiastic character of Mrs. Otis rather chilledthe ardor of the husband, and he, for his part, by his vehemenceand eccentricity, did not strongly conciliate her favor. Therewere times of active disagreement in the family, and in lateryears the marriage was rather a fact than a principle.

The result of Mr. Otis's marriage was a family of one son and twodaughters. The son, who was given his father's name, showed hisfather's characteristics from childhood, and certainly a measureof his genius. The lad, however, entered the navy at theoutbreak of the Revolution, became a midshipman, and died in hiseighteenth year. The oldest daughter, Elizabeth, went whollyagainst her father's grain and purpose. Just before thebeginning of the Revolution, but after the case had been clearlymade up, she was married to a certain Captain Brown, at that timea British officer in Boston, cordially disliked, if not hated, byJames Otis. Personally, Brown was respectable, but his cause wasodious. He was seriously wounded in the Battle of Bunker Hill.Afterwards he was promoted and was given a command in England.Thither his wife went with him, and Mr. Otis discarded them both,if not with anathema at least with contempt.

It would appear that his natural affection was blotted out. Atleast his resentment was life-long, and when he came to make hiswill he described the circumstances and disinherited Elizabethwith a shilling. The fact that Mrs. Otis favored the unfortunatemarriage, and perhaps brought it about—availing herself as itis said, of one of Mr. Otis's spells of mental aberration tocarry out her purposes—aggravated the difficulty and made herhusband's exasperation everlasting.

The younger daughter of the family shared her father'spatriotism. She was married to Benjamin Lincoln, Jr., a younglawyer of Boston, whose father was General Benjamin Lincoln ofrevolutionary fame. The marriage was a happy one, but ultimatelyclouded with honorable grief. Two promising sons were born, buteach died before reaching his majority. The father also diedwhen he was twenty-eight years old. The wife and mother residedin Cambridge, and died there in 1806.

The second period in James Otis's life may be regarded asextending from 1755 to 1760; that is, from his thirtieth to histhirty-fifth year. It was in this period that he rose toeminence. Already distinguished as a lawyer, he now became moredistinguished as a civilian and a man of public affairs.

He caught the rising interest as at the springing of the tide,and rose with it until it broke in lines of foam along the shoresof New England. He gained the confidence of the patriot party,of which he was the natural leader. His influence becamepredominant. He was the peer of the two Adamses, and touchedhands right and left with the foremost men of all the colonies.

It surprises us to note that at this time James Otis devoted aconsiderable section of his time to scholastic and literarypursuits. He was a student not only of men and affairs but ofbooks. Now it was that the influence of his Harvard educationwas seen in both his studies and his works. We are surprised tofind him engaged in the composition of a text-book which is stillextant, and, however obsolete, by no means devoid of merits. Thework was clearly a result left on his mind from his student days.

He composed and, in the year 1760, published, by the house of B.Mecom in Boston, a 72 page brochure entitled "The Rudiments ofLatin Prosody with a Dissertation on Letters and the Principlesof Harmony in Poetic and Prosaic Composition, collected from someof the best Writers."

The work is primarily a text in Latin Prosody in which the authorthought himself to improve on the existing treatises on thatsubject. The afterpart of the pamphlet is devoted to a curiousexamination of the qualities of the letters of the Greek andRoman alphabets.

In this he attempts to teach the distinction between quantity andaccent in the Greek language, but more particularly to describethe position and physiological action of the organs of speech inproducing the elementary sounds in the languages referred to.The author declares his conviction that the growth of science hadbeen seriously impeded by the inattention of people to thecorrect utterance of elementary sounds. He also points out thegreat abuses in the prevailing methods and declares that theseabuses have so impeded the work of education "that many haveremained children all their days."

Having written and published his work on Latin prosody, Mr. Otisnext produced a similar work on the prosody of Greek. This,however, he did not publish, and he is said to have destroyed themanuscript at the time of burning his correspondence near the endof his life.

A conversation of James Otis is narrated by Francis Bowen, inJared Sparks's "American Biography" in which the orator isrepresented, in speaking of the bad literary taste prevalentamong the boys of the time, as saying, "These lads are very fondof talking about poetry and repeating passages of it. The poetsthey quote I know nothing of; but do you take care, James, [Otiswas addressing James Perkins, Esq., of Boston] that you don'tgive in to this folly. If you want to read poetry, readShakespeare, Milton, Dryden and Pope and throw all the rest intothe fire; these are all that are worth reading." In this briefcomment the severity of Otis's literary taste is indicated andalso something of the rather abrupt and dogmatic character of hismind. His criticism, though true, can hardly be said to bejudicious.

In order to understand the part which James Otis played in thegreat work of revolution and independence it is now necessary tonote with care the conditions into which he was cast and withwhich he was environed at that period of his life when theman-fire flames highest and the audacity of the soul boundsfurthest into the arena of danger.

Every man is the joint product of himself and his environment.His life is the resultant of the two forces by which he is heldand balanced. At the time when James Otis reached histhirty-fifth year a condition had supervened in the Americancolonies which reacted upon his passionate and Patriotic natureso powerfully as to bring into full play all of his faculties andto direct the whole force of his nature against the tyrannicalmethod of the mother country.

Let us look for a moment at the course of events which hadpreceded and which succeeded the crisis in James Otis's life, andmade him the born leader of his countrymen in their firstconflict for independence.

Great Britain had aforetime permitted the American colonists toplant themselves where, when, and as they would. Almost everycolonial settlement had been an adventure. The emigrants fromthe other side of the Atlantic had been squeezed out by the harddiscipline of church and state. In America they settled as theymight.

"And England didn't look to know or care."

In the language of one of the bards of this age,

"That is England's awful way of doing business."

She permitted her persecuted children to brave the intolerableocean in leaking ships, to reach the new world if they could, andsurvive if they might.

Notwithstanding this hard strain on the sentiment of thePilgrims, the Cavaliers, and the Hugenots, they remained loyal tothe mother country. They built their little states in thewilderness and were proud to christen their towns and villageswith the cherished names of the home places in England. Theydefended themselves as well as they could against theinhospitality of nature, the neglect of the mother country, andthe cruelty of savage races.

It was only when they grew and multiplied and flourished that ourlittle seashore republics attracted the attention of the motherland and suggested to the ministers of the crown the possibilityof plucking something from the new states which had nowdemonstrated their ability to exist and to yield an increase.

Meanwhile, for six generations, the colonists had developed theirown social affairs and managed their own civil affairs accordingto the exegencies of the case and the principles of democracy.Their methods of government were necessarily republican.

The military necessities which were ever at the door had taughtour fathers the availability of arms as the final argument in thedebate with wrong. The conflicts with the Indians and theexperiences of the French and Indian war had shown that theAmericans were able to hold their own in battle.

Under these conditions there was a natural growth of publicopinion in the colonies tending to independence of action, and toindignant protest against foreign dictation. In the sixth decadeof the eighteenth century many of the leading young men ofAmerica talked and wrote of independence as a thing desirable andpossible.

In 1755, when James Otis was thirty years of age, his youngfriend, John Adams, sitting one day in his school house inConnecticut, wrote this in his diary: "In another century allEurope will not be able to subdue us. The only way to keep usfrom setting up for ourselves is to disunite us."

We thus note natural conditions as tending to produce a rebellionof the American colonies; also the inherited disposition of thecolonists under the discipline of their times; also the growth ofpublic opinion among the leading spirits—to which we must addthe character of the reigning king and of the ministers to whomhe entrusted his government as the general conditions antecedentto the revolutionary movement of our fathers.

But there were more immediate and forceful causes which operatedto the same end. Among these should be mentioned as a prevailinginfluence the right of arbitrary government claimed by GreatBritain and at length resisted by the colonists. The right ofarbitrarily controlling the American states was shown in a numberof specific acts which we must here discuss.

The first of these was the old Navigation Act of 1651. Themeasure adopted by the government of Cromwell had never beenstrenuously enforced. It was the peculiarity of all the earlylegislation of Great Britain relative to the colonies that it waseither misdirected or permitted to lapse by disuse.

The colonies thus literally grew, with little home direction.After the navigation act had been nominally in force foreighty-two years it was revived and supplemented by anothermeasure known as the Importation Act.

This statute, dating from the year 1733, was intended to be anactual device for controlling the commercial relations with thecolonies. By the terms of the Act heavy duties were laid on allthe sugar, molasses, and rum which should be imported into thecolonies. The customs were exorbitant and were from the firstevaded as far as possible by the American merchants.

This may be regarded as the first actual breach of justice on theone side and good faith on the other, as between the homegovernment and the American dependencies of Great Britain.

The reader will note that the question at issue was from thefirst commercial. It was a question of taking something from thecolonists and of giving no equivalent, either in value orpolitical rights. Had the American colonists been willing to betaxed and searched without an equivalent, then would there havebeen no revolution.

It will be noted from the nature of the question that the issue,since it was a matter of the merchants, was also a matter of thecities. For the merchant and the city go together. With thecountry folk of the pre-revolutionary era, the faultfinding anddispute related always to political questions proper—toquestions of rights as between the king and his subjects; toquestions of institutional forms, the best method of governing,etc.

All of these matters, however, could have been easily adjusted,and if there were an "if" in history they would have beenadjusted without revolution and without independence. Thecommercial question, however, involving money rights, andimplying the privilege and power of the Mother Country to takefrom the Colonists their property, however small the amount,could but engender resistance, and if the claim were notrelinquished could but lead to war and disruption.

The neglected growth of the Colonies had in the meantimeestablished in the seaboard towns of America, usages and customswhich were repugnant to British notions of regular and orderlygovernment. The commercial life had taken a form of its own.

The Americans had built ships and warehouses. They had engagedin commerce as they would. They had made their trade as free aspossible. They had ignored the old Navigation Act, and when theImportation Act was passed, it confronted a condition in America.

It applied to a state of affairs that already existed.

The American ship, trading with the West Indies and bringing backto Boston a cargo of molasses or rum, was met at custom housewith an exorbitant requisition. The officer acting under theImportation Act, virtually said, "Stand and deliver."

If it were a British ship the resistance to the duty would beoffered by the land merchants rather than by the sea traders; forthe merchants did not desire that the cost of the merchandise tothemselves and their customers should be doubled without someequivalent advantage. No equivalent advantage was either visibleor invisible. What, therefore, should they do but first evadeand then openly resist?

There was an epoch of evasion. This covered a period of aboutseventeen years, extending from 1733 to 1750. In the latter yearan act was passed by Parliament forbidding the erection of ironworks in America. The manufacture of steel was especiallyinterdicted. The measure which was in reality directed againstshipbuilding included a provision which forbade the felling ofpines outside of enclosures. It was thus sought by indirectionto prevent the creation of a merchant marine by the AmericanColonists and to limit their commerce to British ships. Thismeasure like the Importation Act was also ignored and resisted.For eleven years the Americans persisted in their usual course,making iron, cutting pine timber and building ships, importingmolasses and rum, evading the duties, and thus getting themselvesinto the category of smugglers.

It was this precise condition of affairs which led to a stillmore stringent measure on the part of the home government. Itwas determined in Parliament to put an end to the evasion andresistance of the American merchants and importers with respectto the existing laws. The customs should be collected. It wasdeemed best, however, that the new measure should issue from thejudiciary.

An appeal was made to the Court of Exchequer in England for thegranting of search warrants to be issued in America by the king'sofficers for the purpose of ferreting out contraband goods.These warrants granted by the Court of Exchequer were the Writsof Assistance, the name of which appears so frequently and withso much odium in the colonial history of the times. These writswere granted by the court under pressure of the ministry in theyear 1760.

The Writs of Assistance were directed to the officers of thecustoms in America. But any officer could arm one of hissubordinates, or indeed any other person whom he shoulddesignate, with one of the writs, and the person so appointedmight act in the name of the king's officer.

The thing to be done was the examination of any place and allplaces where contraband goods might be supposed to be lodged.Whether there were evidence or no evidence, the case was thesame. The document was a writ of arbitrary search.

Any house, public or private, might be entered at any time; anycloset or any cellar might be opened. Neither the bridal chambernor the room of the dead was sacred on the approach of any pettycustoms constable or deputy in whose hands a Writ of Assistancehad been placed. The antecedent proceedings required noaffidavit or any other legal formality. The object was to laybare the whole privacy of a people on sheer suspicion ofsmuggling.

It could hardly be supposed that our fathers would tamely submitto such an odious and despotic procedure. To have done so wouldhave been to subscribe to a statute for their own enslavement.Nor may we pass from the consideration of these writs and theresistance offered thereto by the patriots of all our colonieswithout noticing the un-English character of these laws.

Of a certainty Englishmen in whatever continent or island of thisworld would never tolerate such a tyrannical interference withtheir rights. This was demonstrated not only in America, but inEngland also.

The issuance in England of just such illegal and arbitrarywarrants was one of the causes that led to the tremendousagitation headed by John Wilkes. The excitement in thatcontroversy grew, and notwithstanding the repeated arrests ofWilkes and his expulsions from Parliament, his reelection wasrepeated as often, and his following increased until not only theministry but the throne itself was shaken by the cry of "Wilkesand Liberty." Nor did this well-timed ebullition of human rightssubside until the arbitrary warrants were annulled by a decisionof the King's Bench.

It was the trial of this issue in America that brought on theRevolution. It was a great cause that had to be pleaded, and theoccasion and the city and the man, were as great as the cause.The parties to it were clearly defined, and were set in sharpantagonism.

On the one side were the king's officers in the province, headedby the governor. This following included the officers of thecustoms in particular. It also included the not inconsiderableclass of American respectabilities who were feeble in Americansentiments, and who belonged by nature and affiliation to theestablished order. These were the loyalists, destined to bedesignated as Tories, and to become the bete noire of patriotism.

On the other side was a whole phalanx of the common people—aphalanx bounded on the popular side by the outskirt of societyand on the high-up side by the intellectual and philosophicalpatriots who were as pronounced as any for the cause of theircountry, and with better reason than the reason of the many.

The officers of the province elected by the home folks were allpatriots, but the appointed officers of the crown were quiteunanimous for the prerogative of the crown, holding severemeasures should be taken with the resisting colonists, and inparticular that the Writs of Assistance were good law and correctpolicy.

We should here note the particular play of the personal forces inthe year 1760. There were two notable deaths—the one notablein Massachusetts and the other in the world. The first was thatof Chief Justice Stephen Sewall of Massachusetts, and the otherwas that of His Majesty George II, the

"Snuffy old drone from the German hive,"

as he is described by the "Autocrat of the Breakfast Table." Thefirst was succeeded in office by Thomas Hutchinson,Lieutenant-Governor of the province under Sir Fraucis Bernard,who was appointed governor in this notable year 1760 as thesuccessor of Thomas Pownall, who had succeeded Governor WilliamShirley.

Hutchinson—to use the adjective which John Adams was wont toapply to himself and other patriots to the manner born—was aMassachusettensian. He had sympathized with the people, but henow turned against them. Before Judge Sewall went away it wassaid and believed that Governor Shirley had promised the place ofChief Justice, when the same should be vacant, to no other thanColonel James Otis of Barnstable, father of the subject of thissketch.

But Governor Bernard, Shirley's second successor in office, tookanother view of the matter and appointed Lieutenant-GovernorHutchinson to the high office of Chief Justice.

It was the belief and allegation of the King's party that thisappointment and this disappointment—the first of Hutchinson andthe second of Colonel Otis—bore heavily on all the Otises, andindeed converted them from royalism to patriotism.

Chief Justice Hutchinson himself is on record to this effect. Inhis "History of Massachusetts," speaking of his own appointmentto the judicial office, he says:

"The expected opposition ensued. Both gentlemen (that is,Colonel Otis and James Otis, Jr.) had been friends to thegovernment. From this time they were at the head of everymeasure in opposition, not merely in those points which concernedthe Governor in his administration, but in such as concerned theauthority of Parliament; the opposition to which first began inthis colony, and was moved and conducted by one of them, both inthe Assembly and the town of Boston. From so small a spark, agreat fire seems to have been kindled."

The statement of a partisan, especially if he be a beneficiary,must be taken with the usual allowance of salt.

It may be that the patriotic trend of the Otises was intensifieda little by a personal pique in the matter referred to. But thateither father or son was transferred from the king's party to thepeople's party by the failure of Colonel Otis to be appointedChief Justice is not to be believed. Other stories are to bedismissed in the same manner.

One slander prevalent about the Custom House ran to the effectthat James Otis had declared that he would set the province onfire even if he had to perish in the flames. The art ofpolitical lying was known even among our fathers.

Such was the situation of affairs when the sycophants of theforeign government in Boston undertook to enforce the Writs ofAssistance. They soon found that they needed more assistance todo it. The banded merchants, and the patriots generally, saidthat the acts were illegal, and that they would not submit to theofficers. The governor and his subordinates and the custom-houseretinue in particular, said that the writs were legal, and thatthey should be enforced. The matter came to a clash and a trial.

The case as made up presented this question: Shall the personsemployed in enforcing the Acts of Trade have the power to invokegenerally the assistance of all the executive officers of thecolony?

This issue was, in February of 1761, taken into court in the oldTown House, afterwards the old State House, of Boston. Therewere sitting the five Judges of the Superior Court of theprovince. Chief Justice Hutchinson, still holding the office ofLieutenant-Governor, his membership in the Council, and hisposition of Judge of Probate, presided at the trial. Perhapsthere was never in America an instance in which a high officialso nearly fulfilled the part of "Pooh Bah."

The trial evoked an attendance of all who could be admitted, andof many more. The officers of the crown were out in full force,and resolute patriotism completed the crowd. John Adams was oneof the spectators.

Another element in the dramatic situation was the fact that JamesOtis had, in the meantime, received the appointment to the crownoffice of Advocate General, to which an ample salary wasattached. In this relation it would be his especial duty tosupport the petition of the custom-house officers in upholdingthe Writs of Assistance and in constraining the executiveofficers of the province to support them in doing so.

This contingency brought out the mettle of the man. When therevenue officers came to him with the request that he defendtheir case, he at once resigned his office, and this being knownthe merchants immediately sought his services as counsel touphold their protest against the Writs. For his assistant theyselected Mr. Oxenbridge Thatcher.

Otis accepted the invitation without a fee. His action involvedthe loss of his official position as well as his means of living.

It chanced at this time that his old law preceptor, JeremiahGridley, was selected as King's Attorney, and it fell to his lotto take the place which Otis would not accept. Thus master andpupil were brought face to face at the bar in the hottest legalencounter which preceded our rupture with the mother country.

The trial that ensued has been described by John Adams, an eyewitness of the whole proceedings. He gives in his works adescription of the conduct of the case as it was presented forand against the crown, and also notes of Otis's argument.

After the pleas were presented and other preliminary mattersarranged, Mr. Gridley addressed the court in support of thegovernment's position. He defended the petition of thecustom-house officials as both legal and just. Two statutes ofthe time of Charles II, empowering the court of Exchequer toissue writs such as those which were now denied, were adduced.He then cited the statute of the sixth year of Queen Anne, whichcontinued to inforce the processes which had been authorized inthe twelfth and fourteenth years of the reign of Charles.

Still more to the point were the statutes of the seventh andeighth years of William III, which authorized the collection ofrevenue "in the British plantations" by officers who might searchboth public and private houses to find goods that had evaded theduty. These statutes Mr. Gridley claimed as a warrant for thelike usage in America.

In answer to Gridley, Oxenbridge Thatcher,[1] himself a lawyer ofno mean abilities, spoke for the counter petitioners. His pleawas a strong confutation of Gridley's arguments. After thisbrief address Mr. Otis rose to continue the plea for the people.

Of the speech which followed we have no complete record or whollysatisfactory summary. It is to John Adams, and to the noteswhich he made on the occasion, that we must look for our opinionof what was, if we mistake not, the greatest and most effectiveoration delivered in the American colonies before the Revolution.

Such was the accepted belief of those who heard Otis, andwitnessed the effect of his tremendous oratory.

Making all allowance for exaggeration, it seems to have been oneof those inspired appeals by which History and Providence atcritical epochs make themselves known to mankind. John Adams,then twenty-five years of age, passing from his notes ofThatcher's speech, says of the greater actor:

"But Otis was a flame of fire; with a promptitude of classicalallusions, a depth of research, a rapid summary of historicalevents and dates, a profusion of legal authorities, a propheticglance of his eyes into futurity, and a rapid torrent ofimpetuous eloquence, he hurried away all before him. AmericanIndependence was then and there born. The seeds of patriots andheroes, to defend the Non sine diis animosus infans, to defendthe vigorous youth, were then and there sown. Every man of animmense crowded audience appeared to me to go away, as I did,ready to take arms against Writs of Assistance. Then and therewas the first scene of the first act of opposition to thearbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and there the childIndependence was born. In fifteen years, that is in 1776, hegrew up to manhood, and declared himself free."

We may allow a little for the enthusiasm of a young patriot suchas Adams, but there can be no doubt that his unmeasured eulogywas well deserved. Such was the description of Otis's speech.

As to the speech itself we have only a second-hand and inadequatereport. Minot, in his "History of Massachusetts," presents whatpurports to be a tolerably full outline of the great address.

Mr. Otis spoke for five hours, during which time with his ratherrapid utterance he would perhaps deliver an oration of 30,000words. Minot's report appears to have been derived from Adams'notes done into full form by an unknown writer, who probably putin here and there some rather florid paragraphs of his own. At asubsequent period, Adams took up the subject and correctedMinot's report, giving the revised address to William Tudor, whoused the same in his biography of James Otis. From these sourceswe are able to present a fair abstract of what were the leadingparts of Otis's speech. In the beginning he said:

"May it please your Honors:

"I was desired by one of the court to look into the books, andconsider the question now before them concerning Writs ofAssistance. I have accordingly considered it, and now appear,not only in obedience to your order, but likewise in behalf ofthe inhabitants of this town, who have present another petition,and out of regard to the liberties of the subject. And I takethis liberty to declare, that, whether under a fee or not (for insuch a cause as this I despise a fee), I will to my dying dayoppose, with all the powers and faculties God has given me, allsuch instruments of slavery on the one hand, and villainy on theother, as this Writ of Assistance is.

"It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, themost destructive of English liberty and the fundamentalprinciples of law, that was ever found in an English law-book. Imust, therefore, beg your Honors' patience and attention to thewhole range of an argument, that may, perhaps, appear uncommon inmany things, as well as to points of learning that are moreremote and unusual, that the whole tendency of my design may themore easily be perceived, the conclusions better descend, and theforce of them be better felt.

"I shall not think much of my pains in this case, as I engaged init from principle. I was solicited to argue this case asadvocate-general; and because I would not, I have been chargedwith desertion from my office. To this charge I can give a verysufficient answer. I renounced that office, and I argue thiscase, from the same principle; and I argue it with the greaterpleasure, as it is in favor of British liberty, at a time when wehear the greatest monarch upon earth declaring from his throne,that he glories in the name of Briton, and that the privileges ofhis people are dearer to him than the most valuable prerogativesof his crown; and it is in opposition to a kind of power, theexercise of which, in former periods of English history, cost oneking of England his head, and another his throne.

"I have taken more pains in this case than I ever will takeagain, although my engaging in this and another popular case hasraised much resentment. But I think I can sincerely declare,that I cheerfully submit myself to every odious name forconscience' sake; and from my soul I despise all those whoseguilt, malice or folly, has made them my foes.

"Let the consequences be what they will, I am determined toproceed. The only principles of public conduct, that are worthyof a gentleman or a man, are to sacrifice estate, ease, healthand applause, and even life, to the sacred calls of his country.

"These manly sentiments, in private life, make the good citizen;in public life, the patriot and the hero. I do not say that,when brought to the test, I shall be invincible. I pray God Imay never be brought to the melancholy trial; but if ever Ishould, it will then be known how far I can reduce to practiceprinciples which I know to be founded in truth. In the meantime,I will proceed to the subject of this writ."

After this introductory part we are obliged to fall back on thesummary given by Mr. Adams. According to his report, Otis in thenext place went into fundamentals and discussed the rights of manin a state of nature. In this part, the argument ran in ananalagous vein to that of Rousseau in the Contrat Social that is,man in the first place is a sovereign subject only to the higherlaws revealed in his own conscience. In this state he has aright to life, to liberty, to property.

Here the speaker fell into the manner of Jefferson in the openingparagraphs of the Declaration. It is to be noted that Otispresented the truth absolutely; he including negroes in thecommon humanity to whom inalienable rights belong.

Mr. Otis next took up the social compact, and showed that societyis the individual enlarged and generalized. This brought him tothe question before the court; for the conflict now on was astruggle of society, endowed with inalienable rights, againstarbitrary authority and its abusive exercise.

The abusive exercise was shown in the attempts to enforce theActs of Trade. Of this kind was the old Navigation Act, and oflike character was the Importation Act. It was to enforce thesethat the Writs of Assistance had been devised. Mr. Otis thencontinued:

"Your Honors will find, in the old books concerning the office ofa justice of the peace, precedents of general warrants to searchsuspected houses. But, in more modern books, you will find onlyspecial warrants to search such and such houses, specially named,in which the complainant has before sworn, that he suspects hisgoods are concealed; and will find it adjudged, that specialwarrants only are legal. In the same manner, I rely in it, thatthe writ prayed for in this petition, being general, is illegal.It is a power that places the liberty of every man in the handsof every petty officer.

"I say, I admit that special Writs of Assistance, to searchspecial places, may be granted to certain persons on oath; but Ideny that the writ now prayed for can be granted; for I beg leaveto make some observations on the writ itself, before I proceed toother acts of Parliament.

"In the first place, the writ is universal, being directed to'all and singular justices, sheriffs, constables, and all otherofficers and subjects;' so that, in short, it is directed toevery subject in the King's dominions. Every one, with thiswrit, may be a tyrant in a legal manner, and may control,imprison, or murder, any one within the realm.

"In the next place it is perpetual; there is no return. A man isaccountable to no person for his doings. Every man may reignsecure in his petty tyranny, and spread terror and desolationaround him, until the trump of the archangel shall excitedifferent emotions in his soul.

"In the third place, a person with this writ, in the daytime, mayenter all houses, shops, etc., at will, and command all to assisthim.

"Fourthly, by this writ, not only deputies, etc., but even theirmenial servants, are allowed to lord it over us. What is thisbut to have the curse of Canaan with a witness on us? To be theservant of servants, the most despicable of God's creation?

"Now, one of the most essential branches of English liberty isthe freedom of one's house. A man's house is his castle; andwhilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in hiscastle. This writ, if it should be declared legal, would totallyannihilate this privilege. Custom-house officers may enter ourhouses when they please; we are commanded to permit their entry.Their menial servants may enter, may break locks, bars, and everything in their way; and whether they break through malice orrevenge, no man, no court, can inquire. Bare suspicion, withoutoath, is sufficient.

"This wanton exercise of this power is not a chimericalsuggestion of a heated brain. I will mention some facts. Mr.Pew had one of these writs, and, when Mr. Ware succeeded him, heendorsed this writ over to Mr. Ware; so that these writs arenegotiable from one officer to another; and so your Honors haveno opportunity of judging the persons to whom this vast power isdelegated. Another instance is this:

"Mr. Justice Walley had called this same Mr. Ware before him, bya constable, to answer for a breach of the Sabbath-day acts, orthat of profane swearing. As soon as he had finished, Mr. Wareasked him if he had done. He replied, 'Yes.' 'Well, then,' saidMr. Ware, 'I will show you a little of my power. I command youto permit me to search your house for uncustomed goods;' and wenton to search the house from the garret to the cellar; and thenserved the constable in the same manner.

"But to show another absurdity in this writ, if it beestablished, I insist upon it, every person, by the 14th ofCharles the Second, has this power, as well as the custom-houseofficers. The words are, 'It shall be lawful for any person, orpersons, authorized,' etc. What a scene does this open. Everyman prompted by revenge, ill-humor, or wantonness, to inspect theinside of his neighbor's house, may get a Writ of Assistance.Others will ask it from self-defence; one arbitrary exertion willprovoke another, until society be involved in tumult and inblood."

This extract may serve to show the Demosthenic power of JamesOtis as an orator. We cannot within our limits present manyadditional paragraphs from his great plea in the cause of hiscountrymen.

To the next division of his argument he confuted the positiontaken by Gridley with respect to the alleged legal precedents forthe Writs of Assistance. He showed that the writs were whollydifferent from those provided for in the time of Charles II.Even if they had not been so, the epoch and the manner of KingCharles had passed away. Neither could the Writs be justified byinferences and constructions deduced from any previous statutesof Parliament.

Besides, such odious Writs could never be enforced. They couldnever be enforced in the City of the Pilgrims. If the King ofEngland should himself encamp with twenty thousand soldiers onthe Common of Boston, he could not enforce such laws. Heassailed the sugar tax with unmeasured invective. And over andabove all, this despotic legislation was in direct conflict withthe Charter of Massachusetts.

Here the orator broke forth in his most impassioned straindeclaring that the British King, the British Parliament and theBritish nation, were all guilty of ingratitude and oppression inattempting to impose tyrannical enactment on the people ofAmerica. Thus he concluded his argument appeal.

Those who heard the oration were convulsed with excitement. TheKing's party was enraged. The patriots were inspired anddefiant. It was in every respect a critical and a historic hour.

What would the court do with the case? The action of that bodywas obscure and double. There seems to have been a dispositionof the Associate Judges to decide for the counter-petitioners;but Chief Justice Hutchinson induced them to assent to his policyof withholding a decision. He accordingly announced that thecourt would decide the case at the ensuing session. He thenwrote to the home government, and the records show that thedecision was rendered for the petitioners. That is, for theCustom House officials, and in favor of the Writs.

The Chief Justice is also on record to the effect that hecontinued to issue the Writs; but if so, no officer of the kingever dared to present one of them in Boston! The famous (andinfamous) Writs of Assistance were as dead as the mummies ofEgypt.

It is from this point of view that the character and work ofJames Otis appear to the greatest historical advantage. Therecan be no doubt that his was the living voice which called toresistance, first Boston, then Massachusetts, then New Englandand then the world! For ultimately the world heard the soundthereof and was glad. The American Colonies resisted, and atlength won their independence. The sparks fell in France, andthe jets of flame ran together in a conflagration the light ofwhich was seen over Europe, and if over Europe, then over theworld. The Pre-revolutionist had cried out and mankind heardhim. Resistance to tyranny became obedience to God.

We shall here sketch rapidly and briefly the unsteady way andunfortunate decline of James Otis down to the time of the eclipseof his intellect and his tragic death.

Three months after he had, according to John Adams; "breathedinto the nation the breath of life," he was chosen to representBoston in the legislature of the Commonwealth. All of hiscolleagues were patriots. Boston was in that mood.

There runs a story that when he was entering upon his duties hewas counselled by a friend to curb his impetuosity and to gainleadership by the mastery of self—advice most salutary to oneof his temperament. But it was much like advising General Putnamto be calm at Bunker Hill! Otis promised, however, that if hisfriends would warn him when his temperature was rising, he wouldcommand himself.

It is also narrated that his friends did attempt to pluck him bythe coat, but he turned upon them demanding to know if he was aschool boy to be called down!

At this time the relations between Governor Bernard and theLegislature were greatly strained. Otis rather increased thetension. A question arose about a financial measure whereby goldwas to be exported and silver money retained as the currency ofthe colony—the former at less than its nominal value—in amanner to juggle the people into paying their obligations twiceover. The argument became hot and the Council taking the side ofthe administration was opposed by the legislative assembly.

Chief Justice Hutchinson and James Otis got into a controversywhich was bitter enough, and which may be illustrated with thefollowing letter which James Otis addressed to the printer of anewspaper:

"Perhaps I should not have troubled you or the public with anythoughts of mine, had not his Honor the Lieutenant-Governorcondescended to give me a personal challenge. This is an honorthat I never had vanity enough to aspire after, and I shall everrespect Mr. Hutchinson for it so long as I live, as he certainlyconsulted my reputation more than his own when he bestowed it. Ageneral officer in the army would be thought very condescendingto accept, much more to give, a challenge to a subaltern. Thehonor of entering the lists with a gentleman so much one'ssuperior in one view is certainly tempting; it is at leastpossible that his Honor may lose much; but from those who haveand desire but little, but little can possibly be taken away.

"I am your humble servant,
"JAMES OTIS, JR."

This controversy continued for some time, and it is thought thatto it must be attributed much of the animosity displayed by theChief Justice towards Otis in the "History of Massachusetts Bay."

Mr. Otis continued his aggressive policy in the session of theassembly held in 1762. It was at this session that thegovernment in the hope of getting a sum of money adopted the ruseof creating an alarm relative to a French invasion ofNewfoundland. But the patriots would have none of it. They wentso far as to say that if arbitrary government was to beestablished in America, it made no difference whether theAmericans should have King Stork or King Log. To this effect rana resolution offered by James Otis:

"No necessity can be sufficient to justify a House ofRepresentatives in giving up such a privilege; for it would be oflittle consequence to the people, whether they were subject toGeorge or Louis, the King of Great Britain or the French King; ifboth were arbitrary, as both would be, if both could levy taxeswithout Parliament."

It is said that when this resolution was offered a loyalistmember cried out in the Virginian manner, "Treason, treason." Itwas in this way that Mr. Otis gained the undying enmity of theKing's party in America.

It was in the period following his legislative service that JamesOtis prepared his powerful pamphlet entitled "A Vindication ofthe Conduct of the House of Representatives of the Province ofthe Massachusetts Bay." In this work he traverses and justifiesthe course pursued by the patriot legislature during the sessionsof his attendance.

Great was the joy of the American Colonies at the conclusion ofthe French and Indian War. The Treaty of Paris in February of1763 conceded Canada to Great Britain and insured thepredominance of English institutions in the New World.

The animosities of the Americans towards the mother countryrapidly subsided. Meetings were held in the principal towns toratify the peace. At the jubilee in Boston, James Otis presided.

He made on the occasion one of his notable addresses. Hereferred with enthusiasm to the "expulsion of the heathen"—meaning the French, and then expressed sentiments of strongaffection for Great Britain and appreciation of the filialrelations of the American Colonies to her.

In these utterances Otis reflected the sentiment of theBostonians and of the whole people. The General Assembly ofMassachusetts took up the theme and passed resolutions ofgratitude and loyalty. At this particular juncture the Americansdid not anticipate what was soon to follow.

The English Ministry was already preparing a scheme for theraising of revenue in America: The question of the right oftaxation suddenly obtruded itself. The Americans claimed theright as Englishmen to tax themselves. The English ministersreplied that Parliament, and not the Colonial Assemblies, was theproper body to vote taxes in any and all parts of the BritishEmpire. The Americans replied that they were not represented inParliament. Parliament replied that many of the towns, shires,and boroughs in England were not represented. If they were notrepresented, they ought to be, said the Americans;—and thus thecase was made up.

By the beginning of 1764 it was known that the Ministers haddetermined to make a rigorous enforcement of the Sugar Act. Thanthis, nothing could be more odious to America.

In the spring of the year just named, the citizens of Boston helda great meeting to protest against the impending policy of thecrown. As a member of the Assembly and as chairman of acommittee Mr. Otis made a report which was ordered to be sent tothe agent of the government along with the copy of Otis's recentpamphlet, "The Rights of the British Colonies asserted andproved."

At this time Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson was about to becomethe representative of the Colony in its contention with the crownand for some reason, not very apparent, Mr. Otis favored hisappointment. Governor Bernard, however, opposed the measure, andHutchinson declined the appointment. Otis's course was censuredby the patriots and his popularity was for the while impaired.However, he took strong grounds against the Sugar Act, and soonafterward still more strenuously opposed the Stamp Act.

He regained the impaired confidence of the people and at theclose of the session of the Assembly he was appointed chairman ofa committee to correspond with the other Colonies, and thus topromote the common interest of all. This, after theintercolonial conference which Franklin had promoted, was perhapsthe first step towards the creation of the Continental Congress.Mr. Otis's letter to the provincial agent went to England, thoughit was sent in the name of the Lower House only. In thisdocument the writer said:

"Granting the time may come, which we hope is far off, when theBritish Parliament shall think fit to oblige the North Americans,not only to maintain civil government among themselves, for thisthey have already done, but to support an army to protect them,can it be possible, that the duties to be imposed and the taxesto be levied shall be assessed without the voice or consent ofone American in Parliament? If we are not represented, we areslaves."

This document was one of the few American papers which was readand criticized in the British Parliament. The merits of Mr.Otis's pamphlet were actually debated in the House of Lords byLord Littleton and Lord Mansfield. The latter in the course ofhis remarks said:

"Otis is a man of consequence among the people there. They havechosen him for one of their deputies at the Congress, and generalmeeting from the respective governments. It is said the man ismad. What then? One madman often makes many. Massaniello wasmad, nobody doubts; yet for all that, he overturned thegovernment of Naples. Madness is catching in all popularassemblies, and upon all popular matters. The book is full ofwildness. I never read it till a few days ago, for I seldom lookinto such things."

It was in the course of this pamphlet that the Mr. Otis spoke sostrongly on taxation and representation. "The very act oftaxing," said he, "exercised over those who are not represented,appears to me to be depriving them of one of their most essentialrights; and, if continued seems to be, in effect, an entiredisfranchisement of every civil right. For what one civil rightis worth a rush, after a man's property is subject to be takenfrom him at pleasure, without his consent?"[2]

In this was the germ of the stern resistance offered by the
Americans to the Stamp Act. No man in the colonies did so much
to confute the principles on which the Stamp Act rested as did
James Otis.

When the General Assembly of Massachusetts met in May of 1765,Governor Bernard urged in his address the duty of submission toParliament as to the "conservators of liberty." It was thisrecommendation which being referred to a Committee, of which Otiswas a member, led to the adoption of a resolution for the holdingof a Colonial Congress in New York.

Nine colonies accepted the invitation of Massachusetts, and JamesOtis headed the delegation of three members chosen to representthe mother colony in that prophetic body.

The story of the contest of the Americans with the homegovernment on the subject of the Stamp Act is well known. Thecontroversy resulted on the 18th of March, 1766, in the repeal ofthe Act by Parliament. But the repeal was accompanied with asalvo to British obduracy in the form of a declaration thatParliament had "the right to bind the colonies in all caseswhatsoever."

Notwithstanding this hateful addendum, the repeal of the Act wasreceived in America with the greatest joy. During the excitementantecedent to the repeal, mobs had surged through the streets ofBoston, building bonfires and burning effigies of officers andother adherents of the king's party. In one of theseebullitions, the house of Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson wasattacked and pillaged. The better people had nothing to do withit. Many were arrested and imprisoned.

Governor Bernard was so much alarmed that he declared himself tobe a governor only in name. The partisans of the crown started astory that James Otis was the instigator of the riots. There isa hint to this effect in Hutchinson's "History of MassachusettsBay." But it is evident that the charge was unfounded—exceptin this, that in times of public excitement the utterances oforators are frequently wrested from their purpose by the ignorantand made to do service in the cause of anarchy.

Meanwhile on the first of November, Mr. Otis returned from the
Congress in New York, laid a copy of the proceedings before the
Assembly, and was formally thanked for his services.

During the Stamp Act year, Mr. Otis found time to compose twopamphlets setting forth his views on the great questions of theday. There had recently appeared a letter written by a Halifaxgentleman and addressed to a Rhode Island friend. The latterpersonage was unknown; the former was ascertained to be a certainMr. Howard. The so-called "Letter" was written with much abilityand in a bitter spirit.

To this Otis replied with great asperity, and with his power ofinvective untrammeled. He called his pamphlet "A Vindication ofthe British Colonies against the Aspersions of the HalifaxGentleman, in his Letter to a Rhode Island Friend." A singlepassage from the work may serve to show the cogency of thewriter's style and especially his anticipation of the doctrinesof the Declaration of Independence.

"Is the gentleman," said he, "a British-born subject and alawyer, and ignorant that charters from the crown have usuallybeen given for enlarging the liberties and privileges of thegrantees, not for limiting them, much less for curtailing thoseessential rights, which all his Majesty's subjects are entitledto, by the laws of God and nature, as well as by the common lawand by the constitution of their country?

"The gentleman's positions and principles, if true, would afforda curious train of consequences. Life, liberty, and propertyare, by the law of nature, as well as by the common law, securedto the happy inhabitants of South Britain, and constitute theirprimary, civil, or political, rights."

The other pamphlet bearing date of September 4, 1765, wasentitled "Considerations on Behalf of the Colonists, in a Letterto a Noble Lord." In this the writer discusses the question ofTaxation and in particular the specious claim of the BritishMinistry that the home government might justly tax the coloniststo defray the expenses of the French and Indian War.

In answer to this Otis says, in a manner worthy of an Americanpatriot in the year 1898, "The national debt is confessed on allhands to be a terrible evil, and may in time ruin the state. Butit should be remembered, that the colonies never occasioned itsincrease, nor ever reaped any of the sweet fruits of involvingthe finest kingdom in the world in the sad calamity of anenormous, overgrown mortgage to state and stock-jobbers."

The period here under consideration was that in which the StampAct was nominally in force. The law required all legal businessto be done on stamped paper. Therefore no legal business wasdone.

Hutchinson in his History says: "No wills were proved, noadministrations granted, no deeds nor bonds executed." Of coursematters could not go on in this manner forever. Governor Bernardwas induced to call the legislature together. When that bodyconvened an answer to the Governor's previous message was adoptedby the House, and the answer was the work of James Otis. Anextract will show the temper of the people at that juncture:

"The courts of justice must be open, open immediately, and thelaw, the great rule of right, in every county in the province,executed. The stopping the courts of justice is a grievancewhich this House must inquire into. Justice must be fullyadministered through the province, by which the shocking effectswhich your Excellency apprehended from the people'snon-compliance with the Stamp Act will be prevented."

Meanwhile the public agitation continued; the newspapers teemedwith controversy. The administration was firm, but patriotismwas rampant. The party of the people adopted the policy ofembarrassing the government as much as possible. Then came thenews of the repeal of the act, and the jubilation of the peopleto which we have already referred came after.

When the legislature met in May of 1767, James Otis was chosenspeaker; but his election was vetoed by the Governor. The Housewas obliged to submit, which it did in sullen temper, and thenchose Thomas Cushing for its presiding officer. The otherelections indicated the patriotic purpose of the House.

There was almost a deadlock between the legislative and executivedepartments. Governor Bernard addressed the representatives in asupercilious and dogmatic manner, which they for their partresented with scant courtesy.

On one occasion they said (the language being Otis's) in aconcluding paragraph: "With regard to the rest of yourExcellency's speech, we are sorry we are constrained to observe,that the general air and style of it savor much more of an act offree grace and pardon, than of a parliamentary address to the twoHouses of Assembly; and we most sincerely wish your Excellencyhad been pleased to reserve it, if needful, for a proclamation."

The state papers on affairs—at least that portion of thememanating from the legislative department—were, up to the year1769, nearly all prepared by Mr. Otis; but it was generallynecessary to tone down the first drafts of his work. For thisduty the speaker (Thomas Cushing) and Samuel Adams were generallyselected. It was reckoned necessary to put the damper on thefire!

The popular tendency at this time was illustrated in aproposition made by Mr. Otis to open the gallery of the House tosuch of the people as might wish to hear the debates.

Otis continued his correspondence, a great deal of which wasofficial. His style and spirit suited the temper of therepresentatives, and they kept him occupied as chairman of acommittee to answer messages from the Government, and, indeed,messages from anybody who might assail the patriot party.

In the meantime the animosity between him and the Governor of theprovince waxed hot. The Governor constantly charged the patriotleader with being an incendiary, and the latter replied in amanner to convict Governor Bernard of despotic usages and aspirit hostile to American liberty.

The next measure adopted by Parliament inimical to the colonieswas the act of 1767 imposing duties on glass, paper, painters'colors, and tea, and appointing a commission for the specialpurpose of collecting the revenues. The commissioners soappointed were to reside in the colonies.

This measure, hardly less odious than the Stamp Act, wasstrangely enough resisted with less vehemence. Several of thepopular leaders were disposed to counsel moderation. Among thesewas Otis himself. But nearly all outside of the official circleswere united against the new act. They formed associations andsigned agreements not to use any of the articles on which theduty was imposed. This was equivalent to making the act of noeffect.

In the legislative assembly of 1768, Mr. Otis was appointed withSamuel Adams to prepare an important paper on the state of publicaffairs. This they did by drawing up a petition which has beenregarded as one of the ablest of its kind.

There is some controversy as to who actually wrote this famouspaper, but it appears to have been done mostly by Mr. Otis,though the refining hand of Samuel Adams may be clearly seen inthe style. The publication of the paper still further strainedthe relations between Governor Bernard and the representativebranch.

Meanwhile, the news of the assembling of the Colonial Congress inNew York had produced a sensation in England, and the petition ofthe Massachusetts legislature added to the temper of theministry. In May of 1768, Bernard sent to the assembly arequisition that that body should rescind the resolution whichthey had passed for sending a circular letter to the othercolonies.

To this Mr. Otis, acting for the assembly, prepared a replywhich, while it was not less severe, was more respectful andconcessive than were most of his communications. At theconclusion he says:

"We have now only to inform your Excellency, that this House havevoted not to rescind, as required, the resolution of the lastHouse; and that, upon a decision on the question, there wereninety-two nays and seventeen yeas."

In this manner the controversy dragged on through the years1768-69, but in the summer of the former year an event occurredwhich roused the people to a high pitch of excitement. Some ofthe custom-house officers seized a vessel belonging to JohnHancock. For this they were assailed by a mob which burned theboat of the collector of customs. The officers fled to thecastle. It was for this business that a body of British soldierswas first sent to Boston.

On the 12th of September, 1768, a great meeting was held inFaneuil Hall, but the crowd was such as to make necessary andadjournment to Sewall's Meeting-house. James Otis was moderatorof the meeting. The presence of British soldiers, evidently sentto Boston to enforce the decrees of an arbitrary government, wassufficient to bring into play all the elements of patriotism.

The British soldier's coat in the old town was of the same coloras the scarf which the picador shakes in the face of the enragedanimal! The effect in either case was the same.

At the meeting just mentioned, Mr. Otis presided and spoke. Areport of what occurred was written (presumptively by some enemyof the patriots), and was sent as a report to the Britishministry. In this Otis was charged with saying, "In case GreatBritain is not disposed to redress our grievances after properapplication, the people have nothing more to do, but to gird thesword on the thigh and shoulder the musket." Doubtless thisreport was a perversion of the truth.

Other meetings were held, and resolutions were the order of theday. On the 22nd of June, Faneuil Hall was again crowded. JamesOtis, Thomas Cushing, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock wereselected as representatives to meet Committees of other towns ina convention. At this meeting it was voted that the peopleshould arm themselves. The convention met with delegates presentfrom nearly ninety towns. The movement against the ministerialscheme had already become revolutionary.

Meanwhile in 1768, the general assembly was unceremoniouslyprorogued by Governor Bernard, but in May of the following year,the body was re-convened. On the meeting day the building wassurrounded with British troops.

Otis made an address, declaring that free legislation would beimpossible in the presence of an armed soldiery. He moved theappointment of a committee to remonstrate with the Governor, andto request the withdrawal of the soldiers. To this the Governorreplied evasively that he had not the authority to order thewithdrawal of the military. Otis in answer reported that theGovernor's reply was according to English law, more impossiblethan the thing which the Assembly had petitioned for.

The matter resulted in the adjournment of the body to meet atCambridge, in the chapel of Harvard College. Assembled at thatplace the legislature was addressed by Otis with impassionedeloquence. The people as well as the legislators were gathered.

"The times are dark and trying," said the speaker. "We may soonbe called on in turn to act or to suffer." "You," he continued,"should study and emulate the models of ancient patriotism. Toyou your country may one day look for support, and you shouldrecollect that the noblest of all duties is to serve thatcountry, and if necessary to devote your lives in her cause."

The House soon prepared a paper to be sent to the BritishMinistry denouncing the administration of Governor Bernard andprotesting against the further presence of a British Soldiery inBoston. On the 27th of June, 1769, the representatives wentfurther and prepared a petition, praying for the removal ofBernard from the government. This they might well do for theking had already recalled him!

The Governor went away in such odor as the breezes of the Old Bayhave hardly yet dissipated. He went away, but in the fall addedhis compliments to the Americans by the publication of sundryletters in which they were traduced and vilified. To this JamesOtis and Samuel Adams, were appointed a committee to reply. Theydid so in a pamphlet entitled "An Appeal to the World, or aVindication of the Town of Boston," etc.

It was in these tumultuous and honorable labors and excitementsextending over a period of fully ten years that the intellect ofJames Otis became overstrained and, at length, warped from itspurpose.

We may regard his rational career as ending with the year 1769.In September of this year it was noticed that he had becomeexcitable, and that his natural eccentricity was accented attimes to the extent of rendering his conduct irrational.

It was at this time that he published in the Boston "Gazette"what he called an advertisement, in which he placarded the fourcommissioners of customs, on the ground that they had assailedhis character, declaring that they had formed a confederacy ofvillainy, and warning the officers of the crown to pay noattention to them.

On the evening of the following day, Mr. Otis went into acoffee-house where John Robinson, one of the commissioners whomhe had lampooned, was sitting. On entering the room, Mr. Otiswas attacked by Robinson who struck him with his cane. Otisstruck back. There was a battle. Those who were present wereRobinson's friends. The fight became a melee.

A young man named Gridley undertook to assist Otis, but washimself overpowered and pitched out of the house. Mr. Otis wasseriously wounded in the head, and was taken to his house,bleeding and exhausted. The principle wound appeared to beinflicted with a sword; it was in the nature of a cut, and anempty scabbard was found on the floor of the room in which thealtercation occurred.

On the morrow, Boston was aflame with excitement. Otis wasseriously injured; in fact he never recovered from the effects ofthe assault. He brought suit against Robinson, and a jury gave ajudgment of two thousand pounds damages against the defendant.The latter arose in court with a writing of open confession andapology, and hereupon the spirited and generous Otis refused toavail himself of the verdict.

Could he have thrown off the effects of the injury in likemanner, his last years might have been a happier sequel to auseful and patriotic life.

During the sessions of the Assembly, in the years 1770 and 1771,James Otis retained his membership, but the mental disease whichafflicted him began to grow worse, and he participated only atintervals (and eccentrically) in the business of legislation.

In May of 1770, a town meeting was held in Boston, and aresolution of thanks was passed to the distinguishedrepresentative for his services in the General Assembly. Thiswas on the occasion of his retirement into the country, in thehope of regaining his health. At the close, the resolutiondeclared:

"The town cannot but express their ardent wishes for the recoveryof his (Mr. Otis's) health, and the continuance of those publicservices, that must long be remembered with gratitude, anddistinguish his name among the Patriots of America."

From this time forth the usefulness of James Otis was virtuallyat an end. In the immortal drama on which the curtain was rising—the drama of Liberty and Independence—he was destined to takeno part. The pre-revolutionist in eclipse must give place tothe Revolutionist who was rising. John Adams came after, notwholly by his own ambition, but at the call of inexorableHistory, to take the part and place of the great Forerunner.

What must have been the thoughts and emotions of that Forerunnerwhen the minute men of Massachusetts came firing and chargingafter the British soldiers in full retreat from Concord Bridgeand Lexington? With what convulsion must his mind, insemi-darkness and ruin, have received the news of the stillgreater deed at Bunker Hill? History is silent as to what thebroken Titan thought and said in those heroic days.

The patriot in dim eclipse became at times wholly rational, butwith the least excitement his malady would return. Inconversation something of his old brilliancy would return inflashes. For the rest, the chimes in that high soul no longerplayed the music of reason, but gave out only the discords ofinsanity. He was never reduced to serious delirium or to violentfrenzy, but he was an insane man; and under this shadow he walkedfor the greater part of ten years, during which Independence wasdeclared and the Revolution fought out to a victorious end.

It was in this period of decline and obscuration that James Otiswitnessed through the gathering shadows the rise to distinctionand fame of many of the patriots whom he had led in the firstcampaigns for liberty. John Adams and Hancock were now at thefore battling for independence. Among those who rose to eminencein the immortal eighth decade was Samuel Alleyne Otis, who in1776 was elected a representative in the great Congress of theRevolution. James did not live to see his brother become speakerof the House, but he witnessed in 1780 his service as a member ofthe Constitutional Convention of Massachusetts. Afterward, in1787, he was a commissioner to negotiate a settlement with theparticipants in Shay's Rebellion. With the organization of thenew national government he became Secretary of the Senate of theUnited States, and served in that capacity until his death, April22, 1814.

In 1781, Mr. Otis was taken by his friend, Colonel Samuel Osgood,to the home of the latter in Andover. There the enfeebledpatriot passed the remainder of his life. He became very obese,and his nervous excitability to an extent subsided.

He was amiable and interesting to his friends. His health was insome measure restored, but his intellectual strength did notreturn. He thought of going back to Boston, and in one instancehe accepted and conducted a case in the court of Common Pleas;but his manner was that of a paretic giant.

The favorable turn in Mr. Otis's condition was at length arrestedby an attempt on his part to dine with Governor Hancock. At thedinner he was observed to become first sad and then to waver intomental occultation. He was taken by his brother, Hon. SamuelAlleyne Otis, to Andover. The event convinced the sufferer thatthe end of his life was not distant.

Strange, strange are the foregleams of the things to come! Onone occasion he said to his sister, Mrs. Warren, "I hope when GodAlmighty in his Providence shall take me out of time intoeternity, it will be by a flash of lightning!" The traditiongoes that he frequently gave expression to this wish. Did thesoul foresee the manner of its exit?

A marvelous and tragic end was indeed at hand. On the 23d ofMay, 1783, only a few months before the Briton left our shoresnever to return but by the courtesy of the Republic, athundercloud, such as the season brings in New England, passedover Andover.

James Otis stood against the lintel of the door watching thecommotion of the elements. There was a crash of thunder. Thelightning, serpent-like, darted from heaven to earth and passedthrough the body of the patriot! Instantly he was dead.

There was no mark upon him; no contortion left its snarling twiston the placid features of him who had contributed so much ofgenius and patriotic fire to the freedom and future greatness ofhis country—so much to the happiness of his countrymen.

On the 24th of the month the body of Mr. Otis was taken to Bostonand was placed in modest state in his former home. The funeralon the 25th was conducted by the Brotherhood of Free and AcceptedMasons to which Mr. Otis belonged. The sepulture was made, asnarrated in the first pages of this monograph, in the Cunninghamtomb in the Old Granary Burying Ground. In that tomb, also waslaid six years afterwards, the body of Ruth Cunningham Otis, hiswife. Out of this brief narrative of a great life, let eachreader for himself deduce as he may, the inspiration and purpose,without which American citizenship is no better that some other.

Since the first pages of this monograph were written (in March1898,) the Sons of the American Revolution have marked the graveof James Otis with a bronze reproduction of their armorial badge,and a small tablet, as seen in the Illustration on this page.

[1] John Adams attempts to classify the pre-revolutionary oratorsof New England according to their ardor and influence. "Thecharacters," says he, "the most conspicuous, the most ardent andinfluential, from 1760 to 1766, were first and foremost, aboveall and over all, James Otis; next to him was OxenbridgeThatcher, next to him Samuel Adams; next to him, John Hancock,then Doctor Mayhew."—Works of John Adams, Vol. X, p. 284.

If we should insert in this list the name of John Adams himselfhis place would be between his cousin and Hancock.

[2] In a further discussion of the prerogatives of the crown Mr.Otis said: "When the Parliament shall think fit to allow thecolonists a representation in the House of Commons, the equity oftheir taxing the colonists will be as clear as their power is, atpresent, of doing it if they please."

THE CHARACTER OF JAMES OTIS BY CHARLES K. EDMUNDS, PH. D.

In viewing Washington as the "Father" of our country, as hecertainly was in a sense which we of to-day are coming more andmore to appreciate, in classing Hamilton and Jefferson asbrothers of Washington in his great work, and in ascribing toFranklin even a greater share in establishing "The United Statesof America" than to any of these three, we are apt to forgetthose patriots who did so much to keep alive the spirit ofliberty and justice in our land during the troublesome timespreceding the actual rupture between England and her AmericanColonies. While we ascribe great and merited praise to those whonot only helped to lay the foundation but also actually began tobuild the superstructure of our nationhood, let us not forgetthose who by reason of the slightly earlier day in which theystrove needed even a clearer vision to follow the same plans.They labored before the day had dawned, and yet they held everbefore them the same high-minded general principles of libertyand justice which actuated the lives of those who took up theirwork after them, when the light of Independence was fast breakingon our shores. Among these pre-revolutionists there is nonemore worthy of remembrance and admiration than James Otis, theforemost advocate of his time in the Colonies. Very vigorouslyhe toiled in sowing seed the fruits of which he himself was notto see, but which under the nurture of other able hands and inthe providence of the God of Nations budded at last into "TheGreat Republic." Thus it becomes the purpose of this article torecall briefly the most striking characteristics of him whosename must always be intimately associated with the ardent debatesand the troublesome events which foreshadowed the great strugglebetween the greatest of colonizing nations and her greatestColonies.

The exigency of these times was great; and men of courage andcapacity, wise in council and prompt in action rose to meet it.They were not men ennobled merely by their appearance on thestage at the time when great scenes were passing. They took apart in those scenes with a degree of aptness and energyproportional to the magnitude of the occasion and throughoutdisplayed high qualities of character.

Otis's part was played not so much in the revolution itself, asin the agitations and controversies by which it was heralded andits way prepared. "Admirably fitted by his popular talents, legalacquirements, and ardent temperament, to take an active share inthe discussion respecting the comparative rights of the Coloniesand the British Parliament, and in preparing the minds of hiscountrymen for the great step of a final separation from England,and having exhausted, as it were, his mental powers in thispreparatory effort, his mind was darkened when the contest reallycame, and he remained an impotent spectator of the struggle, bywhich the liberties of his native land were at last permanentlyestablished."

The Life of James Otis as narrated by William Tudor is one of themost pleasant and instructive in the whole range of Americanbiographies, and leaves few particulars in the personal life ofOtis to be gathered by the subsequent investigator. The sketchby Francis Bowen in Jared Sparks' Library of American Biographyfurnishes additional and valuable illustrations of the characterand services of Otis, which were secured from the third volume ofThomas Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts, (first publishedafter Tudor's Life of Otis appeared), from the copies of papersin the office of the English Board of Trade relating to thecolonial history of Massachusetts, and from the privatecorrespondence of Governors Bernard and Hutchinson with theEnglish Ministry, during the time of Otis's public career. Thesesources throw much light on the conduct of Otis as the chiefpolitical opponent of the these two colonial executives.

It is the purpose of the present article merely to emphasize thethree striking traits of his character,—his impetuosity andearnestness, his high integrity and devotion to truth andjustice, and his marked ability as an advocate before the bar.

In reading the memoirs of James Otis one is struck from first tolast with the impetuosity, the earnestness, the ardent temper ofhis nature. This was at once the secret of a great measure ofhis power and also the partial source of his mental undoing. Asa student at Harvard, the last two years of his college life weremarked with great assiduity in study, and while at home duringthe vacations in this period, he devoted himself so closely tohis books, that he was seldom seen by his friends, and often itwas not known that he had returned, till he had been in hisfather's house for some days. Such severe application doubtlessserved to sow the first seeds of mental derangement, whichfalling on the fertile soil of his feverish disposition andnutured by the constant and intense argumentative strife of hislater political career, finally found their fruition in themental collapse which so distressingly darkened his latter days.When participating in the common amusements of youth he exhibitedall the vivacity of an excitable temperament.

The earnestness of his nature led him to resign a lucrativeoffice, renounce the favor of government, abandon the fairestprospects of professional emolument and distinction, and todevote himself to the service of his country with unflinchingcourage, quenchless zeal, and untiring energy.

As an orator the impetuosity of his speech and the earnestness ofhis voice and manner were so impressive, that they forcedconviction upon his hearers even when his arguments did not reachtheir judgment. Such was the fluency and animation of hislanguage, whether written or spoken, that though it was sometimescoarse and defective in taste, it was always, as will be seenfrom the examples quoted in this paper, extremely effective.

In political controversy the impetuosity of his nature led him tobe irascible and harsh towards his opponents and sometimes hastyin judgment. But towards those whom he liked he was equallyeffusive in expressions of regard, and was generous,high-spirited and placable.

The fiery and impetuous temper of Otis is well illustratedby the following anecdote given by Tudor, who, however, does notvouch for its authenticity. Upon first taking his seat in thehouse, a friend sitting near, said: "Mr. Otis, you have greatabilities, but are too warm, too impetuous; your opponents,though they cannot meet you in argument, will get the advantageby interrupting you, and putting you in a passion." "Well,"said Otis, "if you see me growing warm, give me a hint, and I'llcommand myself." Later on when a question of some importancearose, Otis and this friend were on the Boston seat together.Otis said he was going to speak, and his companion again warnedhim against being irritated by interruptions from the opposition.

He soon rose, and was speaking with great fluency and powerfullogic, when Timothy Ruggles interrupted him; he grew warm inreply, and his friend pulled his coat slightly. Otis scowled ashe turned round, but taking the hint moderated his tone. Soonafterwards, Mr. Choate, of Ipswich, broke in on him again. Thisaroused his temper, and his coat was pulled a second time;turning round quickly he said in an undertone to his monitor,"Let me alone; do you take me for a schoolboy?" and continuinghis address with great impetuosity he overwhelmed his opponentwith sarcasm and invective.

Without doubt James Otis was a strong man,—a man of strong andpositive character, whose friends and enemies were equally strongin their feelings of like and dislike. The men who were rangedas his enemies have for the most part been relegated to a secondplace on the page of history (this does not apply to ThomasHutchinson, who in his official capacity was Otis's chiefpolitical opponent, but who did not exhibit the personal enemityof Bernard and others); while those who were his friends standout boldly among the notable characters of the past. As Otishimself remarked concerning Charles Lee, we are not at a loss toknow which is the highest evidence of his virtues—the greatnessand number of his friends, or the malice and envy of his foes.But friends and foes alike agree in ascribing to him a veryardent temperament, though with the latter it is unjustlyregarded as violent. There is a great contrast between theestimate of Otis given by Hutchinson (quoted below) and thatexhibited in the following extract from a long letter written byGovernor Bernard to Lord Shelburne, near the end of the year1766, which is entirely filled with a review of Otis's career andcharacter, and is a curious specimen of studied calumniation.The introductory remarks show sufficiently well the spirit of thewhole. "I would avoid personalities, but in the present case itis impossible. The troubles in this country take their risefrom, and owe their continuance to, one man, so much, that thishistory alone would contain a full account of them. This man,James Otis, Esq., was a lawyer at Boston when I first came to thegovernment. He is by nature a passionate, violent, and desperateman, which qualities sometimes work him up to an absolutefrenzy.—I say nothing of him, which is not known to be hiscertain character, confirmed by frequent experience."

While sympathy for Otis made the public commonly ascribe thealienation of his reason chiefly to the injuries received duringhis encounter with Robinson in the British Coffee House, it isfairly certain that the commencement of the disease dates furtherback, and that the blows on the head hastened and aggravated analready incipient malady superinduced by very different causes.

In the ardor and assiduity of his devotion to the colonial causeOtis had overtaxed his mental powers. His fine faculties thathad been exerted so strenuously, and with such striking effect,in the service of his country, were sinking under the excitementand the effort which had sustained them in the heat of action.For ten years he had abandoned the ordinary practice of hisprofession and renouncing all recreation had given his entiretime and thought, himself, verily, to the "great argument" whichinvolved the welfare of the Colonies, and as we now see it, ofthe world. To allow one idea exclusive occupancy of the mind andconstantly to ponder a single topic, is a very frequent andalmost sure cause of mental distress. It was his highest meritand at the same time his greatest misfortune, that Otis permittedthis political controversy to have such an absorbing and despoticcommand of his attention that melancholy consequences graduallyappeared and left little hope of his final restoration. Hisexcitable and passionate temperament allowed the fire to be soonkindled, and nourished the flame in which his intellect, strongas it had been, was ultimately destroyed.

Otis's mental malady first appeared in a form which was mistakenfor mere eccentricity of humor, and some time elapsed before hisoddities of fancy and conduct deepened into acknowledgedinsanity. An incident which might have aroused the suspicions ofhis friends occurred during the legislative session of 1769, whenat the close of a powerful and ingenious speech by BrigadierRuggles in which he had made a deep impression, Otis at oncearose and in an impassioned tone and manner which struck awe uponall those present, exclaimed, "Mr. Speaker, the liberty of thiscountry is gone forever, and I'll go after it;" and turning roundimmediately left the House. Some members stared, some laughed,but none seemed to suspect the true cause of this odd behavior.

How, after the encounter with Robinson, this mental disease madeinroads on his fine powers, we best know from John Adams, who onSeptember 3, 1769, wrote: "Otis talks all; he grows the mosttalkative man alive; no other gentleman in company can find spaceto put in a word. He grows narrative like an old man." OnSeptember 5th occurred the encounter with Robinson, one of theCommissioners of Customs, at the British Coffee House, whichgreatly aggravated his mental disorder. From this time on he wasa subject of some perplexity to the Whig leaders, though thespell with which he influenced the people was long in breaking.On January 16, Adams again wrote: "Otis is in confusion yet; heloses himself; he rambles and wanders like a ship without a helm;attempted to tell a story which took up almost all the evening. ** * In one word, Otis will spoil the club. He talks so much, andtakes up so much of our time, and fills it with trash,obsceneness, profaneness, nonsense, and distraction, that we havenone left for rational amusements or inquiries. * * * I fear, Itremble, I mourn, for the man and for his country; many othersmourn over him with tears in their eyes."

In connection with Otis's charge against Hutchinson as torapacious office-seeking the following extract from JohnAdams's diary is of curious interest. After detailing certaindetractions of which he had been the victim, the diarist breaksout testily: "This is the rant of Mr. Otis concerning me. * * *But be it known to Mr. Otis I have been in the public cause aslong as he, though I was never in the General Court but one year.

I have sacrificed as much to it as he. I have never got myfather chosen Speaker and Counselor by it; my brother-in-lawchosen into the House and chosen Speaker by it; nor abrother-in-law's brother-in-law into the House and Council by it;nor did I ever turn about in the House, and rant it on the sideof the prerogative for a whole year, to get a father into aProbate office first Justice of a Court of Common Pleas, and abrother into a clerk's office. There is a complication ofmalice, envy, and jealousy in this man, in the present disorderedstate of his mind, which is quite shocking." (Oct. 27, 1772.)

In this incapacity of Otis, who at last had to seek confinement,Samuel Adams came to the front of the opposition to Hutchinson asrepresenting the government policy, and in nothing did he showmore adroitness than in the manner in which he humored andexploited the colleague, whom, though sick, the people would notsuffer to be withdrawn, as is shown by the following resolution:

RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT A TOWN MEETING IN BOSTON, MAY 8, 1770.

"The Honorable James Otis having, by advice of his physician,retired into the country for the recovery of his health; Voted,That thanks of the town be given to the Honorable James Otis forthe great and important services, which, as a representative inthe General Assembly through a course of years, he has renderedto this town and province, particularly for his undauntedexertions in the common cause of the Colonies, from the beginningof the present glorious struggle for the rights of the Britishconsituation. At the same time, the town cannot but expresstheir ardent wishes for the recovery of his health, and thecontinuance of those public services, that must long beremembered with gratitude, and distinguish his name among thepatriots of America."

During short periods of sanity, or of only partial aberration,Otis's wit and humor, rendered more quaint and striking by thepeculiarities of his mental condition, made him the delight of asmall circle of friends. The following anecdote, admirably toldby President Adams, presents in a very graphic manner thepeculiarities of his character:

"Otis belonged to a club, who met on evenings; of which clubWilliam Molineux was a member. Molineux had a petition beforethe legislature, which did not succeed to his wishes, and hebecame for several evenings sour, and wearied the company withhis complaints of services, losses, sacrifices, etc., and said,'That a man who has behaved as I have, should be treated as I am,is intolerable,' etc. Otis had said nothing; but the companywere disgusted and out of patience, when Otis rose from his seat,and said, 'Come, come, Will, quit this subject, and let us enjoyourselves; I also have a list of grievances; will you hear it?'The club expected some fun, and all cried out, 'Ay! ay! let ushear your list.'

"'Well, then, Will; in the first place, I resigned the office ofthe Advocate-General, which I held from the crown, that producedme—how much do you think?' 'A great deal, no doubt,' saidMolineux. 'Shall we say two hundred sterling a year?' 'Ay, moreI believe,' said Molineux. 'Well, let it be two hundred; thatfor ten years, is two thousand. In the next place, I have beenobliged to relinquish the greatest part of my business at thebar. Will you set that at two hundred more?' 'O, I believe itmuch more than that.' 'Well, let it be two hundred; this, forten years, is two thousand. You allow, then, I have lost fourthousand pounds sterling?' 'Ay, and much more, too,' saidMolineux.

"'In the next place, I have lost a hundred friends; among whomwere the men of the first rank, fortune, and power, in theprovince. At what price will you estimate them?' 'D—n them,'said Molineux; 'at nothing: you are better without them thanwith them.' A loud laugh. 'Be it so,' said Otis.

"'In the next place, I have made a thousand enemies; among whomare the government of the province and the nation. What do youthink of this item?' 'That is as it may happen,' said Molineux.

"'In the next place, you know, I love pleasure; but I haverenounced all amusement for ten years. What is that worth to aman of pleasure?' 'No great matter,' said Molineux; 'you havemade politics your amusement.' A hearty laugh.

"'In the next place, I have ruined as fine health, and as good aconstitution of body, as nature ever gave to man.' 'This ismelancholy indeed,' said Molineux; 'there is nothing to be saidon that point.'

"'Once more,' said Otis, holding his head down before Molineux;'look upon this head!' (Where was a scar in which a man mightbury his finger.) 'What do you think of this? And, what isworse, my friends think I have a monstrous crack in my skull.'

"This made all the company very grave, and look very solemn. ButOtis, setting up a laugh, and with a gay countenance, said toMolineux, 'Now, Willy, my advice to you is, to say no more aboutyour grievances; for you and I had better put up our accounts ofprofit and loss in our pockets, and say no more about them, lestthe world should laugh at us.'"

This whimsical dialogue put all the company, including Molineux,in a good humor, and they passed the rest of the evening verypleasantly.

One of the few fragments in Otis' handwriting now extant, is amemorandum made during the two years of transient sanity justpreceding his tragic death. Returning one Sunday from publicworship, he wrote: "I have this day attended divine service, andheard a sensible discourse; and thanks be to God, I now enjoy thegreatest of all blessings, mens sana in copore sano" (a soundmind in a sound body). But this gleam of reason was as transientas others that had preceded, and with Bowen we willingly draw aveil over the sad record of this most terrible misfortune of ourhero. "To be among men, and yet not of them; to preserve theoutward form and lineaments of a human being, while the spiritwithin is wanting, or is transformed into a wreck of what it hasbeen; is surely one of the most impressive and affectinginstances of the ills to which mortality is exposed. It enforceswith melancholy earnestness the moral lesson, that the onlyobjects of the affections are the character and the intellect;and when these are destroyed, we look upon the external shape andfeatures only as on the tomb in which the mortal remains of afriend repose. We even long for the closing of the scene, andthink it would be far better if the now tenantless and ruinedhouse were levelled with the ground."

A nice sense of honor was perhaps the second most striking pointin Otis's energetic and strongly-marked character. Called byreason of his fame as an advocate to the management of suits evenat a distance from home, and receiving the largest fees evergiven to an advocate in the province, he yet disdained to sufferthe success of any of his cases to rest on any petty arts orundue evasions. Conscious of possessing eminent abilities andsufficient learning he undertook to advocate no cause that he didnot truly and fully believe in. His ardent pleading and thefairness of his dealing before the courts was the result of hisfirm belief in the justice of his cause. Nothing but truth couldgive him this firmness; but plain truth and clear evidence can bebeat down by no ability in handling the quirks and substitutes ofthe law.

It was from this source as from no other that Otis drew his poweras a pleader. He was as John Adams records concerning his speechon the "Writs of Assistance," "a flame of fire," but he was aflame of fire set burning to consume the dross of injustice andto purify and rescue the gold of liberty and fair-dealing.Thomas Hutchinson, before whom Otis often pleaded and whosetestimony is of the greatest weight when we remember that Otiswas his political opponent, has said that he never knew fairer ormore noble conduct in a pleader than in Otis; that he alwaysdisdained to take advantage of any clerical error or similarinadvertence, but passed over minor points, and defended hiscauses solely on their broad and substantial foundations. Inthis regard Otis seems to satisfy Emerson's definition of a greatman, when in his essay on the "Uses of Great Men" the latterdeclares: "I count him a great man who inhabits a higher sphereof thought, into which other men rise with labor and difficulty;he has but to open his eyes to see things in a true light, and inlarge relations; whilst they must make painful corrections, andkeep a vigilant eye on many sources of error."

Indeed, it can be said of Otis as Coleridge said of O'Connell,"See how triumphant in debate and action he is. And why?Because he asserts a broad principle, acts up to it, rests hisbody upon it, and has faith in it." The world is upheld, asEmerson says, by the veracity of good men; and so the great powerof Otis as an advocate before the civil bar in the minor cases ofhis career, and as an advocate of the people in the larger courtin the great case of his life, for the liberty of opposingarbitrary power by speaking and writing the truth, arose almostentirely from his absolute integrity and fairmindedness.Clarendon's portrait of Falkland applies equally as well to Otis,—"He was so severe an adorer of the truth that he could aseasily have given himself leave to steal as to dissemble." Inshort, Otis acted aright, and feared not the consequences, andthus became a power in the community because of his personalcharacter.

The great popularity that he immediately acquired he used for nosinister or selfish ends. He stooped to none of the arts of thedemagogue; he was never carried away by a blind spirit offaction. He opposed the arbitrary design of the English ministrywith great spirit and firmness, though with some indiscretion;but he was no advocate of turbulent dissensions or causelessrevolt. He allowed himself to be ruled by the greater moderationand prudence of his associates, while he inspired them with hisown resistless energy and determination.

No imputation can justly be thrown on the sincerity of hispatriotism, although the attempt was made by some of hiscontemporaries.

When in 1764, Otis, as chairman of a committee of the Assemblyappointed to consider the status of the Sugar Act, favored thecommission of Hutchinson as a special agent of the Colony to goto England and present the claims of the colonists, he wasaccused of inconsistency in opinion and action, and ofdereliction of duty as the acknowledged leader of the patrioticparty. Combined with the extraordinary appointment ofHutchinson, which however never took effect owing to theopposition of Governor Bernard, Otis was also charged with a tooabsolute recognition of the supremacy of Parliament in hispamphlet on the Rights of the Colonies. As his father hadrecently received a judicial appointment, of no great importance,however, some persons went so far as to suspect Otis's fidelityto the cause, among whom was John Adams, as we see from his diaryquoted elsewhere in this paper. People talked of a compromise inwhich he was supposed to be engaged for gradually withdrawing allresistance to the proceedings of the ministry.

Such charges, however, were but the indications of theunsteadiness and injustice of fickle popular favor. Thesacrifices which Otis made for the cause, as told of by himselfin the narrative given in this paper, were far too heavy for hispatriotism to be doubted for an instant, and any remaining doubtmust certainly be removed by a glance at the officialcorrespondence of Governor Bernard in which he is from first tolast regarded as the chief opponent of the prerogative and issubjected to much calumny on that account.

The selection of Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson as the specialagent of the Colony, though appearing at first sight somewhatstrange, is easily explained and appears as the best possiblechoice. He was a native of the province, and as such thoroughlyacquainted with its interests and desirous of promoting them. Afew years before he had given sound advice to both Houses inrelation to the very matter of the Sugar Act, counselling themnot to apply for a reduction of the duty, lest they should appearas indirectly consenting to pay it under any circumstances;advice which had prevailed against the preconceived opinion of amajority of both branches of the legislature. Moreover,Hutchinson's attachment to the interests of the crown, and hisintimate relations with the ministry, would enable him toprosecute the suit of the province to great advantage, whereas aknown leader of the popular party in Massachusetts would not bereceived with much favor at the Board of Trade, whatever hiserrand.

As to Otis's rather unstinted recognition of the prerogatives ofthe crown and the right of Parliament to tax the Colonies, weremark that he had undoubtedly the same ends in view as the otherpopular leaders, but he differed from them in the choice of themeans, the selection of arguments, and the proper mode ofconducting the controversy. All certainly desired to be exemptfrom taxation and to secure freedom of trade; the question washow best attain these ends and reconcile their pretensions withthe acknowledged principles of English law? Otis opposed boththe Sugar Act and the Stamp Act on the same broad principle onwhich Hampden in England resisted the payment of ship-money,namely, that neither measure was sanctioned by therepresentatives of the people on whom these contributions for thesupport of the government were to be levied. He was too good alawyer to question openly the abstract supremacy of Parliament,or to deny the technical "right" of this body to tax America, orto do anything else. But he affirmed that he could notjustifiably exercise this right unless representatives elected byAmerica were admitted to sit in the House of Commons. "WhenParliament," said he, "shall think fit to allow the colonists arepresentation in the House of Commons, the equity of theirtaxing the colonists will be as clear as their power is atpresent of doing it, if they please." These opinions did notcoincide with the sentiments of the greater part of the people atthis period, and they were displeased with the explicit andcomprehensive terms in which Otis acknowledged the authority ofParliament; they did not care to be reminded of their subjectionin such positive language. Otis's incautious use of words mayhave led him to exaggerate the sovereignty of England over herColonies, but the course which he pursued was undoubtedly themost judicious one for the interests of America.

That this criticism and disaffection concerning Otis was of shortduration, and justly so, is shown by the fact that at the end ofthe legislative session he was appointed chairman of thecommittee charged with securing the co-operation of the otherColonies in a united effort of opposition to the scheme fortaxing America. That he was sufficiently alive to the trueinterests of the Colonies and watchful of any imposition upontheir rights as subjects under the English Constitution, we maycite one or two brief extracts from the letter of instructions tothe provincial agent in England, written by him and adopted bythe representatives. "The silence of the province," he says inregard to the Sugar Act, "should have been imputed to any cause,even to despair, rather than be construed into tacit cession oftheir rights, or an acknowledgment of a right in the Parliamentof Great Britain to impose duties and taxes upon a people, whoare not represented in the House of Commons." "Ireland is aconquered country, which is not the case with the northernColonies, except Canada; yet no duties have been levied by theBritish Parliament on Ireland. No internal or external taxeshave been assessed on them, but by their own Parliament."

"Granting that the time may come, which we hope is far off, whenthe British Parliament shall think fit to oblige the NorthAmericans, not only to maintain civil government amongthemselves, for this they have already done, but to support anarmy to protect them, can it be possible that the duties to beimposed and the taxes to be levied shall be assessed without thevoice or consent of one American in Parliament? If we are notrepresented, we are slaves."

The charge that Otis turned from his support of the governmentpolicy because his father failed to receive the desiredappointment as Chief Justice is as unfounded as it is improbable.

The office of Chief Justice was worth not over a hundred andtwenty pounds sterling a year, and as Colonel Otis's practice atthe bar was worth much more than this, and his seat in thelegislature gave him all the power and reputation he needed, theloss of the Chief Justiceship could not have been a very greatconcern to him. On the other hand one of the first measures ofOtis in coming into public life was to resign his office asAdvocate-General which was worth twice as much as the seat on thebench. Of course a person of his fiery disposition felt keenlythe insult involved in the rejection of his father, and doubtlessthe event imbittered his language towards Hutchinson; but itwould hardly be likely to shape his whole political career whenpublic questions of such great moment were at stake.

There was no trace of meanness or selfishness in his disposition.

To be sure, Otis's admitted superiority over his legal associatesand the natural impetuosity of his nature sometimes made himexcessively dogmatic, and his manner though courteous even to afineness towards those whom he liked was imperious and evenunguarded toward his political enemies. At one time, havingcited Dormat (the noted French jurist, 1625-1696, author of "TheCivil Laws in their Natural Order," 1689) in the course of anargument, Governor Bernard inquired "who Dormat was." Otisanswered that "he was a very distinguished civilian, and not theless an authority for being unknown to your excellency." Yetnotice the high-minded courtesy exhibited in the followingincident: When Charles Lee was in command of the left wing ofthe army with his headquarters at Winter Hill, in what is nowSomerville, he refused to have an interview and conference withhis old friend Burgoyne, then lately arrived in Boston, lookingtoward the restoration of an amicable understanding between thecolonies and the mother country. Four months later, a lettercame from the Old World containing a warning that Lee was not aman of trustworthy character. Otis was at that time theexecutive head of the provisional government which had beenformed in Massachusetts, during one of the last of his lucidintervals. On behalf of the government he sent a letter to Lee,quite touching for its fairminded simplicity. The council hadcome into possesssion of a letter from Ireland making veryunfavorable mention of Lee. It produced no impression upon thecouncil. "On the contrary," says Otis, "we are at a loss toknow which is the highest evidence of your virtues—thegreatness and number of your friends, or the malice and envy ofyour foes." This was a most delicate and effective way ofoffering good advice.

When he had suffered so cruelly at the hands of CommissionerRobinson and his companions at the British Coffee House, and hadbeen awarded damages by the court, Otis's high spirit revolted atthe idea of receiving pecuniary compensation for a personalinsult; and Robinson's release drawn up by Otis himself is to befound in the files of the Supreme Judicial Court ofMassachusetts, along with Robinson's written acknowledgment andapology.

Next to his impetuous devotion to the true relations of things,the source of Otis's power lay in his adequate preparation forthe life of an advocate. Bred to the law at a time long beforethe pathway had been smoothed by the multiplication of elementaryworks and other modern improvements, he yet fully mastered thatabstruse science, which perhaps does more to quicken andinvigorate the understanding than many of the other kinds oflearning put together. As a sufficient foundation for his laterlegal studies he had pursued at Harvard, the foremost college inthe colonies, not only the regular undergraduate classicalcourse, but also the three years of work required for theMaster's degree. Moreover, in conformity with his views on thenecessity of a generous and comprehensive culture of the mind asa means of success at the bar, or in any professional career,Otis did not plunge at once from his collegiate courses into theroutine of the legal office; but allowed himself two years ofself-directed general study with a view toward furtherdisciplining his mind and widening his information. The subjectsthus pursued and the general culture which he acquired served toopen and to liberalize his mind in nearly the same proportion asthe assiduous study of the law was next to invigorate and quickenit. In conversation with his brother he remarked, "thatBlackstone's Commentaries would have saved him seven years' laborpouring over and delving in black letter." He appears to haveformed a very correct judgment respecting the nature ofprofessional education and the best means of mastering itsabstruse details. He constantly inculcated upon the young menwho came to study in his office the maxim, "that a lawyer oughtnever to be without a volume of natural or public law, or moralphilosophy, on his table or in his pocket."

After two years of practice in Plymouth, he removed to Boston(1750), where he found the larger field which was demanded by hissuperior training and abilities; and he very soon rose to thefront rank of his profession.

The regard which he entertained for his master in the law is wellshown by his conduct as the opposing advocate during the hearingon the Writs of Assistance, when Otis having resigned his post ofAdvocate-General of the Province in order to champion thepeople's cause, the vacancy was filled by the appointment ofGridley. Otis held the character and abilities of his formerteacher in very high respect, and allowed this differentialfeeling to appear throughout the trial. "It was," says JohnAdams, who was present on this occasion, and from whom nearly allthe details of the course of this affair are derived, "it was amoral spectacle more affecting to me than any I have ever seenupon the stage, to observe a pupil treating his master with allthe deference, respect, esteem, and affection of a son to afather, and that without the least affectation; while he baffledand confounded all his authorities, confuted all his arguments,and reduced him to silence." Nor was a suitable return wantingon the part of Mr. Gridley, who "seemed to me to exult inwardlyat the glory and triumph of his pupil."

Though he made no pretensions to scholarship, some of hiswritings showed a cultivated taste and a love of literarypursuits, which were gratified so far as his numerous engagementsin public service would permit. With a literary taste formed andmatured by the study of Latin and Greek prosidy as constituted inthe best models of antiquity, it is not surprising that hisopinions on matters of criticism and scholarship were those ofthe Odd school, and that he decried all the forms of innovationin letters which had begun to show themselves in his day, andwhich he regarded as affectations. His constant advice to youngpeople was if you want to read poetry, read Shakespeare, Milton,Dryden, and Pope; throw all the rest in the fire. And with theaddition of but one or two names which have appeared since histime, such counsel is judicious advice even to-day.

His abilities were, perhaps, somewhat overrated in the admiringjudgment of his contemporaries. His style as a writer wascopious and energetic; but it was sometimes careless, coarse andeven incorrect. His eloquence was better adapted to popularassemblies than to the graver occasions of legislative debate; inthe halls of justice, it produced a greater effect on the jurythan on the judge. "The few fragments of his speeches that werereported and are now extant give no idea of the enthusiasm thatwas created by their delivery. The elevation of his mind, andthe known integrity of his purposes, enabled him to speak withdecision and dignity, and commanded the respect as well as theadmiration of his audience." While his arguments were sometimescomprehensive and varied, they generally related only to a fewpoints which they placed in a very clear and convincing light.His object was immediate effect. He had studied the art of clearexpression and forcible argument in order to act with facilityand force upon the minds of others to such an extent as toconvince them, and then to convert their conviction into action.He employed the facility and the power thus gained not for anypersonal agrandizement, but to advocate political reform for thegood of the whole people.

In the latter part of his speech on the Writs of Assistance, hediscussed the incompatibility of the acts of trade as latelyadopted by the English Ministry with the charter of the colony.In so doing "he reproached the nation, Parliament, and King,"says John Adams, "with injustice, illiberality, ingratitude, andoppression, in their conduct towards the people of this country,in a style of oratory that I never heard equalled in this or anyother country." As to the effect of this oration in increasingthe courage of the colonists, inciting them to scrutinize moreclosely and resist more strenuously, the claims of the BritishMinistry and Parliament, we have Adams's significant statement,—"I do say in the most solemn manner that Mr. Otis's orationagainst Writs of Assistance breathed into this nation the breathof life."

The longest and most elaborate production from his pen is thepamphlet on the "Rights of the Colonies." It affords a fairspecimen of his impetuous and inaccurate rhetoric, his rapid andeager manner of accumulating facts, arguments, and daringassertions, and the "glowing earnestness and depth of patrioticfeeling with which all his compositions are animated." It is notsurprising that a book written in this style caused the author tobe suspected of wildness and even of madness. But there was, asBowen remarks, a method and a good deal of logical power in hismadness.

The pamphlet was reprinted, circulated, and read in Great Britainand even attracted the attention of the House of Lords. InFebruary, 1766, during a debate in that body on the disturbancesin America, Lord Littleton made some allusion to the peculiaropinions of Mr. Otis, and spoke slightingly of his book. LordMansfield replied, "With respect to what has been said, orwritten, upon this subject, I differ from the noble Lord, whospoke of Mr. Otis and his book with contempt, though hemaintained the same doctrine in some points, although, in others,he carried it further than Otis himself, who allows everywherethe supremacy of the crown over the colonies. No man on such asubject is contemptible. Otis is a man of consequence among thepeople there. They have chosen him for one of their deputies atthe Congress, and general meeting from the respectivegovernments. It was said the man is mad. What then? One madmanoften makes many. Massaniello was mad, no body doubts; yet forall that, he overturned the government of Naples. Madness iscatching in all popular assemblies, and upon all popular matters.

The book is full of wildness. I never read it till a few daysago, for I seldom look into such things."

In some of his arguments he lays down general principles with aquaint extravagance which marks the peculiar humor of the man."No government has the right to make hobby-horses, asses, andslaves of the subject; nature having made sufficient of the twoformer, for all the lawful purposes of man, from the harmlesspeasant in the field to the most refined politician in thecabinet; but none of the last, which infallibly proves that theyare unnecessary." "The British constitution of government as nowestablished in his Majesty's person and family, is the wisest andbest in the world. The King of Great Britain is the best as wellas the most glorious monarch upon the globe, and his subjects thehappiest in the universe. The French King is a despotic,arbitrary prince, and, consequently, his subjects are verymiserable." The last specimen which we shall quote comes fromhis defence of the objectionable passage in the remonstrancedrawn up by Otis on behalf of the Assembly of 1762 againstGovernor Bernard's conduct in increasing the expenses of thecolony without previously obtaining the consent of theLegislature. This passage was as follows: "No necessity can besufficient to justify a House of Representatives in giving upsuch a privilege; for it would be of little consequence to thepeople, whether they were subject to George or Louis, the King ofGreat Britain or the French King, if both were arbitrary, as bothwould be, if both could levy taxes without Parliament."Afterwards in commenting on this passage he made the followingdefense of its apparent unpatriotic sentiment. "It may beobjected, that there are some differences between arbitraryprinces, in this respect, at least, that some are more rigorousthan others. It is granted; but, then, let it be remembered,that the life of man is a vapor that soon vanisheth away, and weknow not who may come after him, a wise man or a fool; though thechances, before and since Solomon, have ever been in favor of thelatter."—"That I should die very soon after my head should bestruck off, whether by a sabre or a broadsword, whether choppedoff to gratify a tyrant by the Christian name of Tom, Dick, orHarry, is evident. That the name of the tyrant would be of nomore avail to save my life, than the name of the executioner,needs no proof. It is, therefore, manifestly of no importancewhat a prince's Christian name is, if he be arbitrary, any more,indeed, than if he were not arbitrary. So the whole amount ofthis dangerous proposition may, at least in one view, be reducedto this, viz.: It is of little importance what a king'sChristian name is. It is, indeed, of importance, that a king, agovernor, and all good Christians, should have a Christian name;but whether Edward, Francis, or William, is of none, that I candiscern."

A passage ascribed to Otis during a session of the legislature atCambridge gives some idea of the character of his invective. Ithad been said in defence of some measure that it had been takenby the advice of Council, when Otis exclaimed, "Ay, by the adviceof Council, forsooth! And so it goes, and so we are to beruined! The Council are governed by his Excellency, hisExcellency by Lord Hillsborough, Lord Hillsborough by hisMajesty, his Majesty by Lord Bute, and Lord Bute by the Lordknows who. This recalls to mind what used to be said when I wasa student in this place. It was observed at that time, that thePresident directed the scholars how they should act, madamedirected the President, Titus, their black servant, governedmadame, and the devil prompted Titus."

The most comprehensive and just appreciation of the character andwork of Otis is given us by Francis Bowen in Jared Spark'sLibrary of American Biography. In part he says: "The serviceswhich Mr. Otis rendered to this country were so conspicuous andimportant, that it is difficult to form an estimate of hischaracter with the impartiality that history requires.Gratitude might justly efface the memory of his faults from theminds of those who have profited so largely by his patriotism andhis virtues. But it is not necessary thus to seek excuses forhis failings, or reasons for covering up the errors that hecommitted. The defects of his temperament and conduct may befreely mentioned, for they are not such as materially lessen ourrespect for him as a man. * * * * * * * * * * *"As the vindicator of American rights, during the period ofcolonial subordination, as the acknowledged leader, inMassachusetts, of the constitutional opposition to ministerialinfluence and parliamentary usurpation, the services of Mr. Otiscannot be too highly appreciated. * * * * * * * * * * *"He was not permitted to witness the grand result of his labors.He did not live to enjoy the final triumph; he can hardly be saidto have survived till the opening of the struggle. But thehistorian who searches into the causes of this great event, andseeks to determine the comparative merits of the men who achievedit, will dwell long upon the services, and pay a just tribute ofadmiration and respect to the memory of James Otis."

THE USE AND ABUSE OF ARBITRARY POWER, Including Tracts from
Burke, 0tis and Wilkes. By Charles K. Edmunds, Ph.D.

It is the honor of England that she had deposited in the virginsoil of her colonies the germ of freedom. Nearly all at theirfoundation, or shortly after, received charters which conferredthe franchises of the mother country on the colonists. Thesecharters were neither a vain show nor a dead letter, but reallydid establish and allow powerful institutions which impelled thecolonists to defend their liberty, and to control the power byparticipating in it as constituted in the grant of supplies, theelection of public councils, trial by jury, and the right ofassembling to discuss the general affairs. To us of to-day theseappear as common-sense or logically necessary rights; but we mustremember that in those early days of colonization they weredistinct privileges accorded in power to the colonists. And itis in these very privileges that we behold the germinatingprinciple which was ultimately to bring to life the new republicthen as yet unborn. For as Thomas Jefferson afterward wrote,"where every man is a sharer in the direction of histown-republic, and feels that he is a participator in thegovernment of affairs, not merely at an election one day in theyear, but every day; when there shall not be a man in the Statewho will not be a member of some one of its councils, great orsmall, he will let the heart be torn out of his body sooner thanallow his power to be wrested from him by a Caesar or aBonaparte. How powerfully did we feel the energy of thisorganization in the case of the embargo!"

Notwithstanding the widely different origin of the variouscolonists, the circumstances in which they were placed were sosimilar, that the same general form of personal character mustinevitably have developed itself, and produced a growingconsciousness of power and impatience of foreign imposition. Theproximate independence of America need not have been a certainty,however, had the eyes of English statesmen not been blinded tothe truth of the principles urged by such men as Otis in Americaand Burke in England. The causes which were to produce a finalrupture were, to be sure, already at work (their full operationbeing delayed by the lack of union among the differentprovinces), but there was at the same time a warm hereditaryattachment to the parent country, under whose wings the provinceshad grown up, by whose arms they had been shielded, and by whosecommerce, in spite of jealous restrictions, they had beenenriched.

Indeed life in the Colonies was so closely related to that in themother country that in a very marked degree, the history of theColonies is only the more practical and laborious development ofthe spirit of liberty flourishing amid the conditions of life inthe new country under the standard of the laws and traditions ofthe old country. As the eminent philosophical historian, M.Guizat, has said, "It might be considered the history of Englandherself." The resemblance is the more striking when we rememberthat the majority of the American Colonies and the more importantof them were founded or increased the most rapidly at the veryepoch when England was preparing to sustain, and in part alreadysustaining, those fierce conflicts against the pretensions ofabsolute power which were to obtain for her the honor of givingto the world the first example of a great nation free and wellgoverned.

How similarly the state of affairs appeared, in the eyes of thosewho were not blinded by self-interest, on both sides of theAtlantic, is shown by the following extracts from Burke and Otis.

In 1770 Burke thus described the social and political conditionsboth at home and in the Colonies: "That the government is atonce dreaded and contemned; that the laws are despoiled of alltheir respected and salutary terrors; that their inaction is asubject of ridicule and their enforcement of abhorrence; thatrank, and office, and title, and all the solemn plausibilities ofthe world, have lost their reverence and effect; that our foreignpolitics are as much deranged as our domestic economy; that ourdependencies are slackened in their affection and loosened fromtheir obedience; that we know neither how to yield nor how toenforce; that hardly anything above or below, abroad or at home,is sound and entire; but that disconnection and confusion, inoffice, in parties, in families, in parliament, in the nation,prevail beyond the disorders of any former time, these are factsuniversally admitted and lamented."

When in 1768 troops were sent to Boston to prevent a repetitionof the disturbances which had resulted from the arbitrary andinsulting manner in which the commissioners of customs exercisedtheir office, Otis was chosen moderator of the town meeting heldin protest, and is reported to have declared "That in case GreatBritain was not disposed to redress their grievances after properapplications, the inhabitants had nothing more to do, but to girdthe sword to the thigh, and shoulder the musket." Anotheraccount presents a somewhat more temperate tone, representingOtis as "strongly recommending peace and good order, and thegrievances the people labored under might in time be removed; ifnot, and we were called on to defend our liberties andprivileges, he hoped and believed we should, one and all, resisteven unto blood; but at the same time, he prayed Almighty God itmight never so happen."

The change from favorable conditions both in England and in theColonies to the state of unrest depicted by these passages fromBurke and Otis, had been brought about by the attempt to usestrong measures, enforced with no just regard for the welfare ofthe whole people. The English Ministry failed to realize that itis of the utmost importance not to make mistakes in the use ofstrong measures; that firmness is a virtue only when itaccompanies the most perfect wisdom. Their course of politicalconduct, combined with the establishment of a system offavoritism both at home and abroad like that adopted by Henry theThird of France, produced results of the same kind as the latter.

Members of parliament for the most part were practicallyconvinced that they did not depend on the affection or opinion ofthe people for their political being, and gave themselves over,with scarcely the appearance of reserve, to the influence of thecourt. There was thus developed both a ministry and parliamentunconnected with the people, and we have the deplorable pictureof the executive and legislative parts of a government attemptingto exist apart from their true foundation—the opinion of thepeople. How signally such attempts have always failed is amatter of historical record. And the steadfast belief that theyalways will so fail constitutes the great force of public opinionto-day.

Had the English Ministry and the Colonial Governors, inparticular Governor Bernard of Massachusetts, recognized certaincardinal principles of individual and national liberty, whichwere so strongly advocated by Burke and Otis, the course ofevents in their dealing with the colonists would in allprobability have been greatly different from that actuallydeveloped. Burke declared that as long as reputation, the mostprecious possession of every individual, and as long as opinion,the great support of the state, depend entirely upon the voice ofthe people, the latter can never be considered as a thing oflittle consequence either to individuals or to governments. Hepointed out that nations are governed by the same methods, and onthe same principles, by which an individual without authority isoften able to govern those who are his equals or even hissuperiors, namely, by a knowledge of their temper, and by ajudicious management of it; that is, when public affairs aresteadily and quietly conducted, not when government descends to acontinued scuffle between the magistrate and the multitude, inwhich sometimes the one and sometimes the other is uppermost;each alternately yielding and prevailing in a series ofcontemptible victories and scandalous submissions. "The temperof the people amongst whom he presides ought, therefore, to bethe first study of a statesman. And the knowledge of this temperit is by no means impossible for him to attain, if he has not aninterest in being ignorant of what it is his duty to learn."

Of course it will not do to think that the people are never inthe wrong. They have frequently been so, both in other countriesand in England; but in all disputes between them and theirrulers, the presumption is at least upon a par in favor of thepeople. History justifies us in going even further, for whenpopular discontents have been very prevalent something hasgenerally been found amiss in the constitution, or in the conductof the government. As Burke declares, "the people have nointerest in disorder. When they do wrong, it is their error, andnot their crime. But with the governing part of the state it isfar otherwise. They certainly may act ill by design, as well asby mistake. * * * If this presumption in favor of the subjectsagainst the trustees of power be not the more probable, I am sureit is the more comfortable speculation; because it is more easyto change an administration than to reform a people."

Very much the same ideas are presented by Otis in his article onthe "Rights of the Colonists," and the passage bearing on thispresent topic will be given for comparison with Burke'streatment. The pamphlet is divided into four parts, treatingrespectively of the origin of government, of colonies in general,of the natural rights of colonists, and of the political andcivil rights of the British colonists. The writer maintains,that government is founded not as some had supposed on compact,but as Paley afterwards affirmed, on the will of God. By thedivine will, the supreme power is placed "originally andultimately in the people; and they never did, in fact, freely,nor can they rightfully, make an absolute, unlimited renunciationof this divine right. It is ever in the nature of a thing givenin trust; and on a condition the performance of which no mortalcan dispense with, namely, that the person or persons, on whomthe sovereignty is conferred by the people, shall incessantlyconsult their good. Tyranny of all kinds is to be abhorred,whether it be in the hands of one, or of the few, or of the many.

The colonies were not at all unwilling to pay revenue to the homegovernment, if the manner of payment was just and right. Theywere so far from refusing to grant money that the Assembly ofPennsylvania resolved to the following effect: "That they alwayshad, so they always should think it their duty to grant aid tothe crown, according to their abilities, whenever required ofthem in the usual constitutional manner." This resolution waspresented by Franklin, who was a member of the PennsylvaniaAssembly, to the Prime Minister of England, Mr. Grenville, beforethe latter introduced the Stamp Act into Parliament. Othercolonies made similar resolutions, and had Grenville instead ofthe Stamp Act, applied to the King for proper requisitionalletters to be circulated among the colonies by the Secretary ofState, it is highly probable that he would have obtained moremoney from the colonies by their voluntary grants than he himselfexpected from the stamps. Such at any rate is the claim ofFranklin, who was surely in a position to feel the pulse of thecolonies better than any other one man. "But he (Grenville)chose compulsion rather than persuasion, and would not receivefrom their good-will what he thought he could obtain without it.Thus the golden bridge which the Americans were charged withunwisely and unbecomingly refusing to hold out to the ministerand parliament, was actually held out to them, but they refusedto walk over it."

The action of the English Ministry in the matter of the tea taxin particular, and of the whole question of American taxation ingeneral, is thus spoken of by Burke in his famous address in theHouse of Commons:

"There is nothing simple, nothing manly, nothing ingenious, open,decisive, or steady, in the proceeding, with regard either to thecontinuance or the repeal of the taxes. The whole has an air oflittleness and fraud. * * * There is no fair dealing in any partof the transaction." * * * * * * * * * * *"No man ever doubted that the commodity of tea could bear animposition of three-pence. But no commodity will bearthree-pence, or will bear a penny, when the general feelings ofmen are irritated, and two millions of people are resolved not topay. The feelings of the colonists were formerly the feelings ofGreat Britain. Theirs were formerly the feelings of Mr. Hampdenwhen called upon for the payment of twenty shillings. Wouldtwenty shillings have ruined Mr. Hampden's fortune? No, but thepayment of half twenty shillings, on the principle it wasdemanded, would have made him a slave. * * * It is then upon theprinciple of this measure, and nothing else, that we are atissue." * * * * * * * * * * *"I select the obnoxious colony of Massachusetts Bay, which atthis time (but without hearing her) is so heavily a culpritbefore parliament—I will select their proceedings even undercircumstances of no small irritation. For, a little imprudently,I must say, Governor Bernard mixed in the administration of thelenitive of the repeal no small acrimony arising from matters ofa separate nature. Yet see, Sir, the effect of that lenitive,though mixed with these bitter ingredients; and how this ruggedpeople can express themselves on a measure of concession.

"'If it is not in our power,' (say they in their address toGovernor Bernard), "in so full a manner as will be expected, toshow our respectful gratitude to the mother country, or to make adutiful and affectionate return to the indulgence of the king andparliament, it shall be no fault of ours; for this we intend, andhope we shall be able fully to effect.'

"Would to God that this tender had been cultivated, managed, andset in action; other effects than those which we have since feltwould have resulted from it. On the requisition for compensationto those who had suffered from the violence of the populace, inthe same address they say, 'The recommendation enjoined by Mr.Secretary Conway's letter, and in consequence thereof made to us,we will embrace the first convenient opportunity to consider andact upon.' They did consider; they did act upon, it. Theyobeyed the requisition. I know the mode has been chicaned upon,but it was substantially obeyed, and much better obeyed than Ifear the parliamentary requisition of this session will be,though enforced by all your rigour, and backed with all yourpower. In a word, the damages of popular fury were compensatedby legislative gravity. Almost every other part of America invarious ways demonstrated their gratitude. I am bold to say,that so sudden a calm recovered after so violent a storm iswithout parallel in history. To say that no other disturbanceshould happen from any other cause, is folly. But as far asappearances went, by the judicious sacrifice of one law, youprocured an acquiescence in all that remained. After thisexperience, nobody shall persuade me, when a whole people areconcerned, that acts of lenity are not means of conciliation."

"0PP0SITI0N T0 ARBITRARY POWER," By John Wilkes, 1763.

While Otis and other patriots were opposing the arbitrarymeasures of the English Ministry in their dealings with theColonies, certain men in England were equally as ardent in theiropposition to such a course whether pursued at home or abroad.Most prominent among these were Edmund Burke and John Wilkes,both members of Parliament. In this connection the followingextracts frown Wilkes' article on "Opposition to Arbitrary Power"will be of interest. This article appeared in the famous No. 45of "The North Briton," edited by Wilkes, who was very clever butsomewhat profligate.

* * * "In vain will such a minister (referring to Lord Bute), orthe foul dregs of his power, the tools of corruption anddespotism, preach up in the speech that spirit of concord, andthat obedience to the laws, which is essential to good order.They have sent the spirit of discord through the land, and I willprophesy, that it will never be extinguished, but by theextinction of their power. Is the spirit of concord to go handin hand with the Peace and Excise, through this nation? Is it tobe expected between an insolent Excisemen, and a peer, gentleman,freeholder, or farmer, whose private houses are now made liableto be entered and searched at pleasure? The spirit of concordhath not gone forth among men, but the spirit of liberty has, anda noble opposition has been given to the wicked instruments ofoppression. A nation as sensible as the English, will see that aspirit of concord when they are oppressed, means a tamesubmission to injury, and that a spirit of liberty ought then toarise, and I am sure ever will, in proportion to the weight ofthe grievance they feel. Every legal attempt of a contrarytendency to the spirit of concord will be deemed a justifiableresistance, warranted by the spirit of the English constitution.

"A despotic minister will always endeavor to dazzle his princewith high-flown ideas of the prerogative and honor of thecrown, which the minister will make a parade of firmlymaintaining. I wish as much as any man in the kingdom to see thehonor of the crown maintained in a manner truly becoming Royalty.

* * * * The prerogative of the crown is to exert theconstitutional powers entrusted to it in a way not of blind favorand partiality, but of wisdom and judgment. This is the spiritof our constitution. The people too have their prerogative, andI hope the fine words of Dryden will be engraven on our hearts:'Freedom is the English Subject's Prerogative.'"

JOSEPH WARREN'S OPINION OF GOVERNOR BERNARD, OTIS'S PRINCIPALENEMY.

Governor Bernard's bad temper and bad taste in dealing with thelegislature may justly be ranked among the principal causes whichgradually, but effectually, alienated the affections of thepeople of Massachusetts, first from the persons immediatelycharged with the government of the province, and finally, fromthe royal authority and whole English dominion. "With anarrogant and self-sufficient manner, constantly identifyinghimself with the authority of which he was merely therepresentative, and constantly indulging in irritating personalallusions, he entirely lost sight of the courtesy and respect dueto a co-ordinate branch of the government, and made himselfridiculous, while he was ruining the interests of the sovereignwhom he was most anxious to serve. Even Hutchinson, as we learnfrom the third volume of his History, though he was attached tothe same policy, and favored the same measures, censures the toneof Bernard's messages as ungracious, impolitic, and offensive."

Popular animosity against Governor Bernard waxed exceedinglystrong during the controversy concerning the circular letter sentby the Massachusetts Assembly to each House of Representatives inthe thirteen Colonies, in which the Colonies were urged toconcert a uniform plan for remonstrance against the governmentpolicy. Bernard sent advices to England declaring that stringentmeasures were imperative. Among those who were particularlyvehement in their denunciation of Bernard's character and conductwas Joseph Warren, a young physician of twenty-seven years,Otis's brother-in-law, for some time a writer for the papers,who was even more drastic than Otis in his arraignment ofBernard's tactics as governor, and who caused somewhat of asensation by publishing the following in the "Boston Gazette" ofFebruary 29, 1768. (Warren was killed while serving as avolunteer aide at the battle of Bunker Hill.)

"We have for a long time known your enmity to this Province. Wehave had full proof of your cruelty to a loyal people. No agehas, perhaps, furnished a more glaring instance of obstinateperseverance in the path of malice. * * * Could you have reapedany advantage from injuring this people, there would have beensome excuse for the manifold abuses with which you have loadedthem. But when a diabolical thirst for mischief is the alonemotive of your conduct, you must not wonder if you are treatedwith open dislike; for it is impossible, how much soever weendeavor it, to feel any esteem for a man like you. * * *Nothing has ever been more intolerable than your insolence upon alate occasion when you had, by your jesuitical insinuations,induced a worthy minister of state to form a most unfavorableopinion of the Province in general, and some of the mostrespectable inhabitants in particular. You had the effrontery toproduce a letter from his Lordship as a proof of your success incalumniating us. * * * We never can treat good and patrioticrulers with too great reverence. But it is certain that mentotally abandoned to wickedness can never merit our regard, betheir stations ever so high.

'If such men are by God appointed, The Devil may be the Lord'sanointed.' A TRUE PATRIOT.

Hutchinson tried to induce the grand jury to indict Warren forlibel on account of this intemperate attack. The jury, however,returned "ignoramus," and the Governor had to bear the affront,which was but one of a series directed against him during hisremaining days in America.

On the other hand, direct attacks were also made against Otis,and some were marked by scurrility and coarseness of language,which could not fail to arouse a man of his temper and fine senseof honor. How he did regard them appears from the followingextract from a letter to his sister, Mrs. Warren:

"Tell my dear brother Warren to give himself no concern about thescurrilous piece in Tom Fleet's paper. It has served me as muchas the song did last year. The tories are all ashamed of this,as they were of that; the author is not yet certainly known,though I think I am within a week of detecting him for certain.If I should, I shall try to cure him once for all, by stringinghim up, not bodily, but in such a way as shall gibbet his memoryin terrorem. It lies between Bernard, Waterhouse, and JonathanSewall. The first, they say, has not wit enough to writeanything; the second swears off; and the third must plead guiltyor not guilty as soon as I see him. Till matters are settled inEngland, I dare not leave this town, as men's minds are in such asituation, that every nerve is requisite to keep them fromrunning to some irregularity and imprudence; and some are yetwishing for an opportunity to hurt the country."

OTIS'S AFFECTION FOR ENGLAND IN SPITE OF HIS OPPOSITION TO THE
ARBITRARY MEASURES OF HER MINISTRY. By Charles K. Edmunds, Ph. D.

Otis defended the rights of his countrymen by vindicating theirenjoyment of English liberty, not by asserting the demand forAmerican independence. He, however, sowed the seed withoutknowing what kind of harvest it was to produce, for his writingsand speeches did more than those of any other man towardpreparing the minds of others for the final separation fromEngland. That such was his purpose he steadfastly repudiated,and the following quotations from his pen exhibit full well hisattachment to the mother country and to the principles of herconstitution.

When in January, 1763, the joyful news was received at Bostonthat the preliminaries of peace between Great Britain and Francehad been signed, and that Canada was permanently annexed to theformer country, the colonists justly rejoiced, and a town meetingwas held of which Otis was chosen moderator. In the course ofhis speech, Otis declared in his usual earnest way that "the trueinterests of Great Britain and her plantations are mutual, andwhat God in his providence united, let no man dare attempt topull asunder." Similar sentiments expressed by other leadersamong the various Colonies might be quoted. We give one morefrom Otis's pamphlet on the "Rights of the Colonies," publishedin 1765. In speaking of the colonists, he says: "Their loyaltyhas been abundantly proved, especially in the late war. Theiraffection and reverence for their mother country areunquestionable. They yield the most cheerful and ready obedienceto her laws, particularly to the power of that august body, theParliament of Great Britain, the supreme legislative of thekingdom and its dominions. These, I declare, are my ownsentiments of duty and loyalty." He angrily repels the chargethat the Colonies were seeking for independence, insisting thatthe people had a "natural and almost mechanical affection forGreat Britain which they conceive under no other sense, and callby no other name, than that of home. We all think ourselveshappy under Great Britain. We love, esteem, and reverence ourmother country, and adore our King. And could the choice ofindependency be offered the colonies or subjection to GreatBritain on any terms above absolute slavery, I am convinced theywould accept the latter."

In 1769 he wrote: "The cause of America is, in my humbleopinion, the cause of the whole British empire; an empire which,from my youth, I have been taught to love and revere, as foundedin the principles of natural reason and justice, and upon thewhole, best calculated for general happiness of any yet risen inthe world. In this view of the British empire, my Lord, Isincerely pray for its prosperity, and sincerely lament alladverse circumstances. Situated as we are, my Lord, in thewilderness of America, a thousand leagues distant from thefountains of honor and justice, in all our distresses, we prideourselves in loyalty to the King, and affection to the mothercountry."

OTIS AS A PROPHET.

Otis was not much given to general speculations upon the future;but there is something very striking in the following language,taken from his pamphlet "The Rights of the Colonies," if weconsider how soon after there occurred the two great crises inthe world's affairs, the American and French revolutions. "Ipretend neither to the spirit of prophecy, nor to any uncommonskill in predicting a crisis; much less to tell when it begins tobe nascent, or is fairly midwived into the world. But I shouldsay the world was at the eve of the highest scene of earthlypower and grandeur, that has ever yet been displayed to the viewof mankind. The cards are shuffling fast through all Europe.Who will win the prize is with God. This, however, I know, deturdigniori. The next universal monarchy will be favorable to thehuman race; for it must be founded on the principles of equity,moderation, and justice."

JAMES OTIS. [1725 - 1783.] By G. Mercer Adam[3]

The character and life-work of few men belonging to thepre-Revolutionary era are better worth studying than are those ofJames Otis, the patriot-orator of Massachusetts, who took soprominent a part in opposing England's obnoxious Stamp Act and inarousing the American Colonies to a sense of the outrage donethem by the issue of the arbitrary Writs of Assistance. Thoughthe records of his personal life are somewhat meagre, sufficientis known of Otis's public career to interest students of hiscountry's history and entitle him to the admiration of all, asone of the most earnest and eloquent advocates of Liberty in theNation's youth-time, and a sturdy and noble defender of its causeat the critical era of England's injustice and oppression. Noman of the period, it may be hazarded, did more yeoman servicethan Otis did in the cause of American Freedom, or was moresensible of the rights of the Colonists and of the injustice donethem by the Motherland in her assaults on their civil andpolitical status in the years preceding the Revolution. Not onlywas he one of the most fearless asserters of the great principlesfor which our forefathers fought and bled, but few men betterthan he saw more clearly the malign character of the arbitraryacts imposed upon the Colonies that brought about separation andlaid the foundation of American independence. In resisting theenforcement of these Acts, Otis was actuated not only bydisinterested and patriotic motives, but by a statesmanlikediscernment of their unconstitutional character and the wrongthey would inflict, in being inconsistent with the foundationcharter of the Massachusetts Colony. Like many of theRevolutionary fathers, Otis was not at heart a rebel, or from theoutset disloyal to the Crown in its administration of the affairsof the Colonies. His occupancy of the Crown post ofAdvocate-General and his own well-known integrity andconscientiousness forbid that idea, not to speak of his pride inthe fact that his ancestors were English and for generations hadheld high judicial offices and militia appointments in the giftof the King and the ministry of the period. But though bytradition and training, at the outset of his career, a subject ofmonarchy and a true man in his official relations with England,Otis was at the same time ardent in his interests for thewellbeing of the Colonies and zealous for their rights andprivileges. When these came into conflict, the stand he took wasstaunchly patriotic, even to the sacrifice of his office and itsemoluments; while in espousing the popular cause against the Kingand the ministry he stood forth, as John Adams expressed it, as"a flame of fire," full of consuming zeal for his country and anardent upholder of its rights and prerogatives. In assuming thisattitude, that Otis's zeal and energy were at times unrestrainedand his language occasionally unguarded and overvehement, isdoubtless true; but this was certainly excusable in a man of hisardent temperament and strength of character; while the situationof affairs was such as to call not only for patriotic enthusiasm,but for righteous indignation and heated denunciation, in a causethat stirred to the depths the heart and brain of an impetuousand commanding orator. Nor do we well to forget what thisconsuming, patriotic passion and heated vindication of hiscountry's rights cost Otis, in the responsibility he felt and thesolicitation he manifested, especially in the middle and laterstages of his strenuous career, for the cause he had so keenly atheart. Pathetic is the story of the ailment that clouded hisclosing years; and only exculpatory can be the judgment nowpassed upon the man and his work when we consider what the strainwas that he had long and anxiously borne and that revealed itseffects in periods of sad mental alienation and incipientmadness. To speak and write strongly on taxation and itsinjustice, in the case of the Colonies, might well, however,disturb the mental equilibrium of even a strong man, and the moreso when actively protesting, as Otis long continued to protest,against unlawful encroachments upon the liberties of the Coloniesand the other arbitrary acts that then characterized theadministration of the Crown. Whatever it cost Otis personally toengage in this defence, the result, as we all now know and admit,was only and wholly beneficent—in the defeat of an unrighteousautocracy, and the emancipation of a Continent from a fetteringand baleful administration.

This herald of and actor in the great drama of his time was bornat West Barnstable, formerly known as the Great Marshes, inMassachusetts, on the 5th of February, 1723. He was one ofthirteen children, his father being Colonel James Otis (born in1702), the son of Judge John Otis, whose immediate ancestor hademigrated from England in the preceding century and settled inNew England at the town of Hingham, calling the region after theold home of the family in the Motherland. This John Otis, whowas born in A.D. 1657, became a prominent man in the Settlement,was a member of the Council of the Colony, and ultimately becameChief-Justice of the Common Pleas and Probate Court. Otis's ownfather (Colonel James Otis) likewise became a lawyer andpublicist, a colonel in the local militia, and rose to a highpost in the judiciary and was a member of the Council ofMassachusetts. He married Mary Alleyne and transmitted to thefuture patriot, the subject of this sketch, the talents and manyof the characteristics of his progenitors. A brother of ourhero, Samuel Alleyne Otis, rose to prominence in the politics ofthe State and as Secretary of the Senate administered toWashington the oath of office as President, holding the Bible onwhich he was sworn as honored chief of the future nation. Asister, Mercy, an ardent and loyal patriot, married the notablerepublican, James Warren of Plymouth, and lived herself to writea compend of the "History of the American Revolution," togetherwith a collection of patriotic verse.

James Otis, whom we know as one of the most eloquent orators ofthe Revolutionary era and an ardent promoter of Americanindependence, was educated for his career at Harvard, whichinstitution he entered as a freshman in 1739, having previouslybeen prepared for college by the Rev. Jonathan Russell. Hisuniversity course, so far as can be gathered from any account ofit that has come down to us, was not a notable one, though he hada fair scholastic career and graduated at the age of nineteen in1743. While popular after a fashion at college, he was a bit ofa recluse and a diligent student of literature, with apredilection, it is said, for music, playing well on the violin.After graduating, he wisely spent two years in general readingbefore entering upon the study of the law, which he did in 1745under James Gridley, a prominent jurist of Massachusetts andsometime Crown Attorney-General. Three years later, he wasadmitted to the bar, and in 1748 began to practice his professionat Plymouth, Mass. In 1750, he removed to Boston, and therebecame known as an advocate of note and high promise, actuated bynice professional instincts, with a fine sense of honor, andkeenly appreciating, it is recorded, his responsibilities in hisrelations with his clients, which led him to accept only suchcases as he could conscientiously defend and take retainers from.

This characteristic scruple in the lawyer gave him a highstanding in his profession, and naturally led to success at thebar, besides winning for him the respect and admiration of troopsof warm and attached friends.

About this time he appears to have developed uncommon gifts as anorator, and his rather irascible nature gave scope to his keenwit and powers of sarcasm. His extensive reading and ultimatestudy of good literary models naturally bore fruit in thepractice of the forensic art and gave him prestige at the bar, aswell as, later on, in taking to public life and to the advocacyof the rights of the Colonists in the controversy with the Crown.

In 1755, when he had attained his thirtieth year, Otis marriedRuth Cunningham, the daughter of an influential Boston merchant.The lady, from all accounts, was undemonstrative and devoid ofher husband's patriotic ardor, traits that did not tend todomestic felicity or lead, on the wife's part, to a commandinginfluence over her vehement and somewhat eccentric husband. Thefruit of the union was one son and two daughters. The sonentered the navy, but unhappily died in his eighteenth year. Oneof the daughters, the elder of the two, probably under themother's influence, angered her father by espousing the Englishcause and marrying a Captain Brown, a British officer on duty atBoston. The marriage was a source of irritation and unhappinessto Otis, who, after his son-in-law had fought and been wounded atBunker Hill, withdrew with his wife to England, and was theredisowned and cut off by the irate patriot, whose affection wasalso dried up for the erring daughter. The younger daughter, onthe other hand, was a devoted and patriotic woman, who shared herfather's enthusiasm for the popular cause. She married BenjaminLincoln of Boston, but early became a widow.

By this time, Otis had become not only a man eminent in hisprofession in Boston, but a powerful factor in the public life ofthe city. The New England commonwealth was then beginning to begreatly exercised over the aggressions of the Motherland, andthis was keenly watched by Otis, who took a lively and patrioticinterest in Colonial affairs. Beyond his profession, which hadclosely engrossed him, he had heretofore taken little part inpublic life; his leisure, indeed, he had employed more as astudent of books rather than of national affairs, as his work onthe "Rudiments of Latin Prosody," published in 1760, bearswitness. As the era of a conflict with England neared, hehowever altered in this respect, and became a zealous advocate ofnon-interference on the part of the Crown in the affairs of theColonies and an ardent protester against English oppression andinjustice. Soon grievances arose in the relations between theColonies and England which gave Otis the right to denounce theMotherland and excite dissaffection among the people of the NewWorld. These grievances arose out of the strained commercialrelations between the two countries and the attempt of England todevise and enforce irritating schemes of Colonial control. Ofthese causes of outcry in the New World the two chief were therevival and rigid execution of the English Navigation Acts,designed to limit the freedom of the American Colonies in tradingwith West Indian ports in American built vessels, and theinsistence, on the part of the Crown and the British government,that the Colonies should be taxed for the partial support ofEnglish garrisons in the country. In the development of trade inthe New World, the Colonies reasonably felt that they should notbe harassed by the mother country, and so they permitted commerceto expand as it would; and when this was enjoined by England theynaturally resented interference by her and began to evade thelaws which she imposed upon the young country and bid defiance tothe Crown customs officers in the measures resorted to in the wayof restriction and imposed penalty. This attitude of theColonists in ignoring or defying English laws was soon nowspecially emphasized when the Crown resorted to more stringentmeasures to curb Colonial trade and impose heavy customs dutieson articles entering New World ports. Flagrant acts of evasionfollowed, and defiant smuggling at length brought its legalconsequences—in the issue by the English Court of Exchequer ofsearch warrants, or Writs of Assistance, as they were called, bywhich it was sought to put a stop to smuggling, by resorting tohumiliating arbitrary measures sure to be resented by theColonies. These Writs of Assistance empowered the King'sofficers, or others delegated by them, to board vessels in portand enter and search warehouses, and even the private homes ofthe Colonists, for contraband goods and all importations that hadnot paid toll to His Majesty's customs. This attempted rigidexecution of the Acts of Trade, together with other arbitrarymeasures on the part of the Crown which followed, such as theimposition of the Stamp Act, and the coercive levy of taxes topay part of the cost of maintaining English troops in theColonies, was soon to cost England dear and end in the loss ofher possessions in America and the rise of the New WorldRepublic.

One of the most active men in the Colonies to oppose thisColonial policy of England was, as we know, the patriot JamesOtis, at the time Advocate-General of the Crown, who tookstrong ground against the Writs of Assistance, arguing that theywere not only arbitrary and despotic in their operation, butunconstitutional in their imposition on the Colony, since theywere irreconcilable with the Colonial charters and a violation ofthe rights and prerogatives of the people. Rather than upholdthem as a Crown officer, Otis resigned his post ofAdvocate-General, and became a fervent pleader of the popularcause and denouncer of the legal processes by which the Crownsought to impose, with its authority, its obnoxious trammellingsand restrictions without the consent of and in defiance of theinalienable rights of the American people. Otis not onlyresisted the enforcement by the King's officers of the odiouswarrants and denounced their arbitrary character, but inveighedhotly against English oppression and all attempts of the Crownand its deputy in the province, the Lieutenant-Governor ofMassachusetts, to restrict the liberties of the people and imposeunconstitutional laws upon the Colony. The Writs of Assistancewere, of course, defended by the representatives of the Crown inthe Colony, and on the plea that without some such legal processthe laws could not be executed, and that similar writs were inexistence in England and made use of there on the authority ofEnglish statutes. The pleas against them advanced by Otis tookcognizance of the fact that the Writs were irreconcilable withthe charter of the Massachusetts Colony, that English precedentfor their enforcement had no application in America, and thattaxation by the Motherland and compulsory acts of the nature ofthe Writs did open violence to the rights and liberties of thepeople and were inherently arbitrary and despotic, being imposedwithout the consent of the Colonies and to their grave hurt anddetriment. In pleading the Colonial cause against the Writs,Otis struck a chord in the heart of the people which tingled andvibrated, while stirring up such opposition to them that theauthorities were fain to hold their hand and await instructionsfrom the English ministry as to their withdrawal or enforcement.The response of the home government was that they should beenforced, but little advantage was taken of this mandate in theColonies, since opposition to the Writs had, thanks to thepatriot Otis's denunciation of them, became almost universal;while the people had been roused to a sharp sense of theirsituation, in view of the tyrannous attitude of England towardsthe Colonies, and the next step taken by the Crown, under PrimeMinister Grenville, in threatening them with the no less hatedStamp Tax. This new fiscal infatuation on the part-of theEnglish ministry strained the relations of the Colonies towardthe Crown to almost the point of rupture. It was, moreover, anunwise exhibition of English stubbornness and impolicy, since itrevealed the mistake which England fell into at the time ofconsidering the Settlements of the New World as Colonialpossessions to be held solely for the financial benefit of themother country, rather than for their own advancement andmaterial well-being. It is true, that the Seven Years' War,which had been waged chiefly for the protection of the Americandependencies of the Crown, had left a heavy burden of debt uponEngland which she naturally looked to the Colonies in somemeasure to repay. But the Colonies had ready their argument—they objected to being taxed without their consent, and withoutrepresentation in the British Parliament, besides being, as theythought, sufficiently oppressed by the burden of customs' dutiesalready imposed upon them. The spirit of resistance thereforegrew, and was ere long to take a more determined and, to England,fatal form, for the Stamp Act, though later on repealed, waspassed, in spite of the protests of the Colonial Assemblies andthe increasing soreness of feeling in America against the mothercountry.

The like service James Otis did for the community of the NewWorld in opposing the Writs of Assistance he also did in opposingthe enforcement of the Stamp Act—remonstrances suggested by thepatriot's love of independence, and which, besides numberlessletters, speeches and addresses, drew from thepre-Revolutionist's trenchant pen several able pamphlets, onevindicating the action of the Massachusetts House ofRepresentatives, of which Otis was now a member, in protestingagainst England's intolerance in laying grievous taxation on theColonies, and the others upholding the rights of the Colonies inresisting the Crown's misgovernment, as well as its purpose totax the Colonies to defray some of the cost England had incurredin prosecuting the French and Indian war. In these patrioticservices and labors, Otis, as a public man, took an active andzealous part, besides conducting a large correspondence aschairman of the House Committee of the Legislature on subjectsrelating to the weal of the whole country. Nor were his dutiesconfined to these matters alone, for we find him at this periodengaged in controversies first with Governor Hutchinson, and thenwith his successor, Governor Bernard, both of whom deemed Otis anarch-rebel and incendiary—a man not only without the pale ofconsiderate treatment by lawfully constituted authority in theColonies, but the object of contumely and loathing by theobsequious loyalists of the Motherland and all who desired hercontinued dominance and supremacy in the country. History hashappily long since done justice to James Otis and seen him in afairer and far more worthy light—the light not only of apatriot lover of liberty, but an ardent and invincible defenderof his country against autocratic encroachment, and a fearlessasserter of the principles which have become the foundation stoneof the American nation. In his masterful way, Otis was at timesheedlessly bitter and inveterate in his prejudices against themother country and the King's officers in the Colony; but we mustremember the strength as well as the ardor of his affection forhis native land and the righteousness of the cause he lovinglyespoused and so nobly advocated. We must remember also theantagonisms he naturally aroused, and the hatreds of which he wasthe object, on the part of loyal authority in the Colony whichfeared while it traduced him. This is shown in the mishap thatbefell him in a British coffeehouse in Boston, where he wasroughly assaulted by a man named Robinson, an ally of the revenueofficers whom he had denounced in an article in the BostonGazette, an attack that left its traces in the mental ailmentwhich afterwards distressingly incapacitated him and shortenedhis bright public career. He nevertheless lived to see thefruition of his hopes, in the throwing off by the Colonies of allallegiance to Britain and take part himself in the battle ofBunker Hill. The harvest reaped by his country from the seeds ofliberty he had planted in his day was such as might well cheerhim in the period of mental darkness which fell upon him andregretfully clouded his closing years. Nor was he, in his ownera, without regard and honor among those who delighted in hissplendid patriotism, in the days of his manly strength, mental aswell as physical, and who held him in high esteem as a patriotorator and the staunchly loyal tribune of the New World peoples.In these days of flaccid patriotism and moral declension inpublic life, his example may well stimulate and inspire. In hiswholehearted devotion to the hopes as well as to the interests ofthe Colonies most notable was the polemical fervor with which heespoused their cause and noble the stand he took for liberty andindependence.

Like many men who have attained eminence in public life, JamesOtis was the victim in his day of detraction and envy. Aspecially malignant slander was current with reference to him andhis father at the period of the patriot's resigning his Crownpost of Advocate-General. The motive for throwing up hisappointment and pleading the people's cause against the Writs ofAssistance, it was at the time said, was the disappointment ofthe Otis family at the Chief-Justiceship, then vacant, going toGovernor Hutchinson instead of to Colonel James Otis ofBarnstable, father of our hero. This aspersion of the fair nameof the Otises as patriots and high-minded gentlemen, and thelying assertion that it was this disappointment that led theOtises, father and son, to abandon the Crown's side for that ofthe people, was cruelly false, and especially so as Hutchinson,who got the post, repeats the falsehood in his "History ofMassachusetts" in explanation of the Otises turning their coatsand becoming partisans of the popular cause. Nothing could wellbe more unjust and untrue, for both men were of far too honorablea character and too ardently patriotic to justify the slander andgive even the slightest color to the misrepresentation. Were itnecessary more emphatically to characterize the slander as false,one might confidently point to the happy relations of the Otiseswith the other patriots of the time—to men of the stamp of thetwo Adams statesmen, to Hancock, Randolph, Warren, and otherleaders of the Revolutionary era, as well as to the contemporaryrepute and influence of both men in the heroic annals of theColonial period. The times were indeed trying and critical, andat the outset of the movement for independence and relief fromthe irritating aggressions of the Crown, the attitude, we may besure, was closely watched and not over truthfully reported, ofmen of influence who took the patriot side and helped on thegreat cause which was afterwards to be gloriously andtriumphantly crowned.

But we pass on to relate, in a few brief words, what remains yetto be told of James Otis's career, and of the pathetic decliningdays of the hero and his tragic end. While mind and body wereintact and working perfectly in unison, Otis continued to givehimself heart and soul to the cause he had so patriotically andzealously espoused. Even when his malady showed itself, therewere brief returns of useful activity and old-time mentalalertness, only, however, to be followed by sad relapses into theeclipse-period of his powers. At periods of respite from hisailment, Otis took part fitfully in his duties as member of theMassachusetts Legislature, of which body he had been Speaker, anddid what he could to further the work of legislation. He also atthis time appeared once or twice as an advocate in Court, andalso continued his correspondence in Committee of the GeneralAssembly with prominent men in the other Colonies, seekingsuccessfully cooperation with them in the great drama of thetime. But for the most part we now find him a consideratelycared-for guest of his old-time friend, Colonel Samuel Osgood, atthe latter's farmhouse at Andover. Here the distinguishedpre-Revolutionist had phenomenal premonitions of the comingmanner of his death, related to his sister, Mrs. Warren, to whomthe patriot on more than one occasion said, that when God in hisProvidence should take him hence into the eternal world, he hopedit would be by a stroke of lightning! This tragic fate was erelong to be his, for on the afternoon of May 23rd, 1783, when Otiswas standing amid a family group at the door of the Osgoodhomestead at Andover, a bolt from the blue flashed down fromaloft and felled the hero to the ground. Death wasinstantaneous, and happily it left no mark or contortion on hisbody, while his features had the repose and placidity of seemingsleep. Thus passed the hero from the scenes of earth, and in asense fitly, for the period was that which saw the close of thedrama of the Revolution he had been instrumental in bringingabout, and the departure from the soil of the new-born Republicof the last of the English soldiery.

[3]Historian, Biographer, Essayist, Author of a "Precis ofEnglish History," a "Continuation of Grecian History," etc., andfor many years Editor of Self-Culture Magazine.—The Publishers.

JAMES 0TIS ON THE WRITS 0F ASSISTANCE February, 1761.

May it please your Honours: I was desired by one of the court tolook into the (law) books, and consider the question now beforethem concerning Writs of Assistance. I have accordinglyconsidered it, and now appear not only in obedience to yourorder, but likewise in behalf of the inhabitants of this town,who have presented another petition, and out of regard to theliberties of the subject. And I take this opportunity to declarethat whether under a fee or not (for in such a cause as this Idespise a fee) I will to my dying day oppose, with all the powersand faculties God has given me, all such instruments of slaveryon the one hand and villainly on the other, as this Writ ofAssistance is.

It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, themost destructive of English liberty and the fundamentalprinciples of law that ever was found in an English lawbook. Imust therefore beg your Honours' patience and attention to thewhole range of an argument that may perhaps appear uncommon inmany things, as well as to points of learning that are moreremote and unusual, that the whole tendency of my design may themore easily be perceived, the conclusions better descend, and theforce of them be better felt. I shall not think much of my painsin this cause, as I engaged in it from principle. I wassolicited to argue this case as Advocate-General; and, because Iwould not, I have been charged with desertion from my office. Tothis charge I can give a very sufficient answer. I renouncedthat office and I argue this cause from the same principle; and Iargue it with the greatest pleasure, as it is in favour ofBritish liberty, at a time when we hear the greatest monarch uponearth declaring from his throne that he glories in the name ofBriton and that the privileges of his people are dearer to himthan the most valuable prerogatives of his crown; and as it is inopposition to a kind of power, the exercise of which in formerperiods of history cost one king of England his head and anotherhis crown, I have taken more pains in this cause than I ever willtake again, although my engaging in this and another popularcause has raised much resentment. But I think I can sincerelydeclare that I cheerfully submit myself to every odious name forconscience' sake; and from my soul I despise all those whoseguilt, malice, or folly has made them my foes. Let theconsequences be what they will, I am determined to proceed. Theonly principles of public conduct that are worthy of a gentlemanor a man are to sacrifice estate, ease, health, and applause, andeven life, to the sacred calls of his country. These manlysentiments, in private life, make good citizens; in public life,the patriot and the hero. I do not say that, when brought to thetest, I shall be invincible. I pray God I may never be broughtto the melancholy trial; but if ever I should, it will then beknown how far I can reduce to practice principles which I know tobe founded in truth. In the meantime, I will proceed to thesubject of this writ.

In the first place, may it please your honours, I will admit thatwrits of one kind may be legal; that is, special writs, directedto special officers, and to search certain houses, etc.,specially set forth in the writ, may be granted by the Court ofExchequer at home, upon oath made before the Lord Treasurer bythe person who asks it, that he suspects such goods to beconcealed in those very places he desires to search. The Act of14 Charles II., which Mr. Gridley[4] mentions, proves this. Andin this light the writ appears like a warrant from a Justice ofthe Peace to search for stolen goods. Your honours will find inthe old books concerning the office of a Justice of the Peace,precedents of general warrants to search suspected houses. Butin more modern books you will find only special warrants tosearch such and such houses, specially named, in which thecomplainant has before sworn that he suspects his goods areconcealed; and will find it adjudged that special warrants onlyare legal. In the same manner I rely on it, that the writ prayedfor in this petition is illegal. It is a power that places theliberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer. I say,I admit that special Writs of Assistance, to search specialplaces, may be granted to certain persons on oath; but I denythat the writ now prayed for can be granted, for I beg leave tomake some observations on the writ itself, before I proceed toother Acts of Parliament. In the first place, the writ isuniversal, being directed "to all and singular justices,sheriffs, constables, and all other officers and subjects"; sothat, in short, it is directed to every subject in the King'sdomains. Every one with this writ may be a tyrant; if thiscommission be legal, a tyrant in a legal manner, also, maycontrol, imprison, or murder any one within the realm. In thenext place, it is perpetual; there is no return. A man isaccountable to no person for his doings. Every man may reignsecure in his petty tyranny, and spread terror and desolationaround him [until the trump of the Archangel shall excitedifferent emotions in his soul]. In the third place, a personwith this writ, in the daytime, may enter all houses, shops,etc., at will, and command all to assist him. Fourthly, by thiswrit not only deputies, etc., but even their menial servants, areallowed to lord it over us. [What is this but to have the curseof Canaan with a witness on us: t o be the servants of servants,the most despicable of God's creation?] Now one of the mostessential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one'shouse. A man's house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, heis as well guarded as a prince in his castle. This writ, if itshould be declared legal, would totally annihilate thisprivilege. Custom-house officers may enter our houses when theyplease; we are commanded to permit their entry. Their menialservants may enter, may break locks, bars, and everything intheir way; and whether they break through malice or revenge, noman, no court can inquire. Bare suspicion without oath issufficient. This wanton exercise of this power is not achimerical suggestion of a heated brain. I will mention somefacts. Mr. Pew had one of these writs, and when Mr. Waresucceeded him, he endorsed this writ over to Mr. Ware, so thatthese writs are negotiable from one officer to another; and soyour Honours have no opportunity of judging the persons to whomthis vast power is delegated. Another instance is this: Mr.Justice Walley had called this same Mr. Ware before him, by aconstable, for a breach of the Sabbath-day Acts, or that ofprofane swearing. As soon as he had finished, Mr. Ware asked himif he had done. He replied, "Yes." "Well, then," said Mr. Ware,"I will show you a little of my power. I command you to permitme to search your house for uncustomed goods," and went on tosearch the house from garret to cellar; and then served theconstable in the same manner! But to show another absurdity inthis writ, if it should be established, I insist upon it everyperson, by the 14 Charles II., has this power as well as theCustom-house officers. The words are, "it shall be lawful forany person or persons authorized, etc." What a scene does thisopen! Every man prompted by revenge, ill-humor or wantonness toinspect the inside of his neighbour's house, may get a Writ ofAssistance. Others will ask it from self defence; one arbitraryexertion will provoke another, until society be involved intumult and in blood!

Again, these writs are not returned. Writs, in their nature, aretemporary things. When the purposes for which they are issuedare answered, they exist no more; but these live forever; no onecan be called to account. Thus reason and the constitution areboth against this writ. Let us see what authority there is forit. Not more than one instance can be found of it in all ourlaw-books; and that was in the zenith of arbitrary power, namely,in the reign of Charles II., when star-chamber powers were pushedto extremity by some ignorant clerk of the exchequer. But hadthis writ been in any book whatever, it would have been illegal.All precedents are under the control of the principles of law.Lord Talbot (the Earl of Shrewsbury, an English peer of the eraof William and Mary) says it is better to observe these than anyprecedents, though in the House of Lords the last resort of thesubject. No Acts of Parliament can establish such a writ; thoughit should be made in the very words of the petition, it would bevoid. An act against the constitution is void. But this provesno more than what I before observed, that special writs may begranted on oath and probable suspicion. The act of 7 and 8William III. that the officers of the plantations shall have thesame powers, etc., is confined to this sense; that an officershould show probable ground; should take his oath of it; shoulddo this before a magistrate; and that such magistrate, if hethink proper, should issue a special warrant to a constable tosearch the places. That of 6 Anne can prove no more.

[4] Otis's opponent—his legal preceptor—who argued in favor ofthe Writs.

JAMES OTIS ON THE STAMP ACT. An Oration Delivered Before the
Governor and Council In Boston, December 20, 1765.

It is with great grief that I appear before your Excellency(Governor Hutchinson) and Honours (of the City Council) on thisoccasion. A wicked and unfeeling minister (Earl Grenville) hascaused a people, the most loyal and affectionate that ever kingwas blest with, to groan under the most insupportable oppression.

But I think, Sir, that he now stands upon the brink of inevitabledestruction; and trust that soon, very soon, he will feel thefull weight of his injured sovereign's righteous indignation. Ihave no doubt, Sir, but that the loyal and dutifulrepresentations of nine provinces, the cries and supplications ofa distressed people, the united voice of all his Majesty's mostloyal and affectionate British-American subjects, will obtain allthat ample redress which they have a right to expect; and thaterelong they will see their cruel and insidious enemies, both athome and abroad, put to shame and confusion.

My brother Adams has entered so largely into the validity of theact, that I shall not enlarge on that head. Indeed, what hasbeen observed is sufficient to convince the most illiteratesavage that the Parliament of England had no regard to the veryfirst principles of their own liberties.

Only the preamble of that oppressive act is enough to rouse theblood of every generous Briton.—"We your Majesty's subjects,the commons of Great Britain, etc., do give and grant"—What?Their own property? No! The treasure, the heart's blood of allyour Majesty's dutiful and affectionate British-Americansubjects.

But the time is far spent. I will not tire your patience. Itwas once a fundamental maxim that every subject had the sameright to his life, liberty, property, and the law that the Kinghad to his crown; and 'tis yet, I venture to say, as much as acrown is worth, to deny the subject his law, which is hisbirthright. 'Tis a first principle "that Majesty should not onlyshine in arms, but be armed with the laws." The administrationof justice is necessary to the very existence of governments.Nothing can warrant the stopping the course of justice but theimpossibility of holding courts, by reason of war, invasion,rebellion, or insurrection. This was law at a time when thewhole island of Great Britain was divided into an infinite numberof petty baronies and principalities; as Germany is, at this day.

Insurrections then, and even invasions, put the whole nation intosuch confusion that justice could not have her equal course;especially as the kings in ancient times frequently sat asjudges. But war has now become so much of a science, and givesso little disturbance to a nation engaged, that no war, foreignor domestic, is a sufficient reason for shutting up the courts.But if it were, we are not in such a state, but far otherwise,the whole people being willing and demanding the fulladministration of justice. The shutting up of the courts is anabdication, a total dissolution of government. Whoever takesfrom the king his executive power, takes from the king hiskingship. "The laws which forbid a man to pursue his right oneway, ought to be understood with this equitable restriction, thatone finds judges to whom he may apply."

I can't but observe that cruel and unheard-of neglect of thatenemy to his king and country, the author of this Act, that, whenall business, the very life and being of a commercial state, wasto be carried on by the use of stamps, that wicked and execrableminister never paid the least regard to the miseries of thisextensive continent, but suffered the time for the taking placeof the Act to elapse months before a single stamp was received.Though this was a high piece of infidelity to the interest of hisroyal master, yet it makes it evident that it could never beintended, that if stamps were not to be had, it should put a stopto all justice, which is, ipse facto, a dissolution of society.

It is a strange kind of law which we hear advanced nowadays, thatbecause one unpopular Act can't be carried into execution, thattherefore there shall be an end of all law. We are not the firstpeople who have risen to prevent the execution of a law; the verypeople of England themselves rose in opposition to the famousJew-bill, and got that immediately repealed. And lawyers knowthat there are limits, beyond which, if parliaments go, theiracts bind not.

The king is always presumed to be present in his courts, holdingout the law to his subjects; and when he shuts his courts, heunkings himself in the most essential point. Magna Charter andthe other statutes are full, "that they will not defer, delay,nor deny any man justice"; "that it shall not be commanded by theGreat Seal, or in any other way, to disturb or delay commonright." The judges of England are "not to counsel, or assent toanything which may turn to the damage or disherison of thecrown." They are sworn not to deny to any man common right, bythe king's letters, nor none other man's, nor for none othercause. Is not the dissolution of society a disherison of thecrown? The "justices are commanded that they shall do even lawand execution of right to all our subjects, rich and poor,without having regard to any person, without letting to do rightfor any letters or commandment which may come to them, or by anyother cause."

ANECDOTES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF OTIS, ETC. OTIS AND HIS FELLOWPATRIOTS.

Professor Hosmer draws the following pictures of Otis and hiscontemporaries:

"The splendid Otis, whose leadership was at first unquestioned,was like the huge cannon on the man-of-war, in Victor Hugo'sstory, that had broken from its moorings in the storm, and becomea terror to those whom it formerly defended. He was indeed agreat gun, from whom in the time of the Stamp Act had been sentthe most powerful bolts against unconstitutional oppression.With lashings parted, however, as the storm grew violent heplunged dangerously from side to side, almost sinking the ship,all the more an object to dread from the calibre that had oncemade him so serviceable. It was a melancholy sight, and yet agreat relief, when his friends saw him at last bound hand andfoot, and carried into retirement.

"Bowdoin, also, was not firm in health, and though most activeand useful in the Council, had thus far done little elsewhere.Hawley, far in the interior, was often absent from the centre incritical times, and somewhat unreliable through a strangemoodiness. Cushing was weak. Hancock was hampered by foiblesthat some times quite canceled his merits. Quincy was abrilliant youth, and, like a youth, sometimes fickle. We haveseen him ready to temporize, when to falter was destruction, asat the time of the casting over of the tea; again in unwisefervor, he would counsel assassination as a proper expedient.Warren, too, could rush into extremes of rashness and ferocity,wishing that he might wade to the knees in blood, and had justreached sober, self-reliant manhood when he was taken off.

"John Adams showed only an intermittent zeal in the public causeuntil the preliminary work was done, and Benjamin Church,half-hearted and venal, early began the double-dealing which wasto bring him to a traitor's end. There was need in this group ofa man of sufficient ascendency, thorough intellect and character,to win deference from all—wise enough to see always the supremeend, to know what each instrument was fit for, and to bring allforces to bear in the right way—a man of consummate adroitness,to sail in torpedo-sown waters without exciting an explosion,though conducting wires of local prejudice, class sensitiveness,and personal foible on every hand led straight down to magazinesof wrath which might shatter the cause in a moment—a man havingresources of his own to such an extent that he could supplementfrom himself what was wanting in others—always awake, thoughothers might want to sleep, always at work though others might betired—a man devoted, without thought of personal gain or fame,simply and solely to the public cause. Such a man there was, andhis name was Samuel Adams."

OTIS AND ADAMS.

Professor Hosmer thus compares Otis and Adams:

"Otis' power was so magnetic that a Boston town meeting, upon hismere entering, would break out into shouts and clapping, and ifhe spoke he produced effects which may be compared with the swayexercised by Chatham, whom as an orator he much resembled. Longafter disease had made him utterly untrustworthy, his spellremained. He brought the American cause to the brink of ruin,because the people would follow him, though he was shattered.

"Of this gift Samuel Adams possessed little. He was always inspeech, straightforward and sensible, and upon occasion could beimpressive, but his endowment was not that of the mouth of gold.

"While Otis was fitful, vacillating and morbid, Samuel Adams waspersistent, undeviating, and sanity itself. While Samuel Adamsnever abated by a hair his opposition to the British policy,James Otis, who at the outset had given the watch-word to thepatriots, later, after Parliament had passed the Stamp Act, said:

"'It is the duty of all humbly and silently to acquiesce in allthe decisions of the supreme legislature. Nine hundred andninety-nine in a thousand will never entertain the thought but ofsubmission to our sovereign, and to the authority of Parliamentin all possible contingencies.'"

OTIS AS AN AUTHOR.

In 1762, a pamphlet appeared, bearing the following title: "AVindication of the Conduct of the House of Representatives, ofthe Province of the Massachusetts Bay: more particularly in thelast session of the General Assembly. By James Otis, Esq., aMember of said House.

"Let such, such only, tread this sacred floor,
Who dare to love their country and be poor.
Or good though rich, humane and wise though great,
Jove give but these, we've naught to fear from fate.

Boston, printed by Edes and Gill."

Instead of copious quotations from this patriotic work, wepresent the following judgment upon its merits by one bestqualified to estimate its worth. "How many volumes," says JohnAdams, "are concentrated in this little fugitive pamphlet, theproduction of a few hurried hours, amidst the continualsolicitation of a crowd of clients; for his business at the barat that time was very extensive, and of the first importance, andamidst the host of politicians, suggesting their plans andschemes!

"Look over the Declarations of Rights and Wrongs issued by
Congress in 1774.

"Look into the Declaration of Independence in 1776.

"Look into the writings of Dr. Price and Dr. Priestley.

"Look into all the French constitutions of government; and to capthe climax, look into Mr. Thomas Paine's 'Common Sense, Crisis,and Rights of Man;' what can you find that is not to be found insolid substance in this Vindication of the House ofRepresentatives?"

THE TOWN MEETING.

Another important feature in the unfolding of our freeinstitutions, was the system of town meetings which began to beheld as early as 1767.

"The chief arena of James Otis' and Sam Adams' influence," asGovernor Hutchinson wrote to Lord Dartmouth, "was the townmeeting, that Olympian race-course of the Yankee athlete."

Writing to Samuel Adams in 1790 John Adams, looking back to theeffect of these events, says:

"Your Boston town meetings and our Harvard College have set theuniverse in motion."

One held in October of 1767 was presided over by James Otis, andwas called to resist new acts of British aggression on colonialrights. On September 12, 1768, a town meeting was held, whichwas opened with a prayer by Dr. Cooper. Otis was chosenmoderator.

The petition for calling the meeting requested, that inquiryshould be made of his Excellency, for "the grounds and reasons ofsundry declarations made by him, that three regiments might bedaily expected," etc.

A committee was appointed to wait upon the governor, urging himin the present critical state of affairs to issue precepts for ageneral assembly of the province, to take suitable measures forthe preservation of their rights and privileges; and that heshould be requested to favor the town with an immediate answer.

In October several ship-loads of troops arrive.

The storm thickens.

Another town meeting is called, and it is voted that the severalministers of the Gospel be requested to appoint the next Tuesdayas a day of fasting and prayer.

The day arrives, and the place of meeting is crowded bycommittees from sixty-two towns.

They petition the governor to call a General Court. Otisappeared in behalf of the people, under circumstances thatstrongly, attest his heroism.

Cannon were planted at the entrance of the building, and a bodyof troops were quartered in the representatives' chamber.

After the court was opened, Otis rose, and moved that they shouldadjourn to Faneuil Hall.

With a significant expression of loathing and scorn, he observed,"that the stench occasioned by the troops in the hall oflegislation might prove infectious, and that it was utterlyderogatory to the court to administer justice at the points ofbayonets and mouths of cannon."

JAMES OTIS AT THE BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL.

In the sketch of the life of James Otis, as presented inAppleton's "Cyclopedia of American Biography," an interestingaccount is given of the part James Otis played in the notedbattle of Bunker Hill, in June, 1775.

The minute men who, hastening to the front, passed by the houseof the sister of James Otis, with whom he was living, atWatertown, Mass.

At this time he was harmlessly insane, and did not need specialwatching.

But, as he saw the patriotic farmers hurrying by and heard of therumor of the impending conflict, he was suddenly seized with amartial spirit. Without saying a word to a single soul, heslipped away unobserved and hurried on towards Boston. On theroadside he stopped at a farmhouse and borrowed a musket, therebeing nothing seemingly in his manner to suggest mentalderangement. Throwing the musket upon his shoulder he hastenedon, and was soon joined by the minute men coming from variousdirections. "Falling in" with them, he took an active part inthat eventful contest until darkness closed in upon thecombatants. Then, wearied beyond description, though he was, heset out for home after midnight. He afterwards pursued his sadand aimless life, as though nothing unusual had occurred.

INFLUENCE OF THE BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL

Two days before the battle of Bunker Hill Washington had beenappointed by the Continental Congress Commander in Chief.

The news of the battle was brought. Foreseeing the significanceof the result he said, "The liberties of the country are safe."

Four days afterward Thomas Jefferson entered Congress and thenext day news was brought of the Charlestown conflict. "This putfire into his ideal statesmanship." Patrick Henry hearing of itsaid, "I am glad of it; a breach of our affections was needed torouse the country to action."

Franklin wrote to his English friends: "England has lost hercolonies forever."

THE ANCESTORS OF JAMES OTIS.

Carlyle says: "I never knew a clever man who came out of entirelystupid people." James Otis's great qualities "were aninheritance, not an accident, and inheritance from the best bloodof old England." Many years ago, when George Ticknor of Bostonwas a guest of Lady Holland, at the famous Holland House, inLondon, her ladyship remarked to him, in her not very engagingway:

"I understand, Mr. Ticknor, that Massachusetts was settled byconvicts."

"Indeed," said Mr. Ticknor, "I thought I was somewhat familiarwith the history of my State, but I was not aware that what yousay was the case."

"But," he continued, "I do now remember that some of yourladyship's ancestors settled in Boston, for there is a monumentto one of them in King's Chapel."

James Otis inherited that sturdy New England pride which putsmanhood above dukedoms and coronets.

"A king may make a belted knight,
A marquis, duke and a' that,
But an honest man's aboon his might."

From a race of the true kings of men he was descended, whoconquered out of the jaws of the wilderness the pricelessinheritance of American privilege and freedom. And while kingsat home were trying to crush out the liberties of their subjects,or were dallying with wantons in the palaces built out of theunrequited toil of the long-suffering and downtrodden people,these men of iron were the pioneers of American civilization, ata time, which Holmes so graphically describes:

"When the crows came cawing through the air
To pluck the Pilgrim's corn,
And bears came snuffing round the door
Wherever a babe was born;
And rattlesnakes were bigger round
Than the butt of the old ram's horn
The deacon blew at meeting time,
On every Sabbath morn."

COL. BARRE ON JAMES OTIS.

In the debate on the Boston Port Bill in Parliament, April 15th,1774, Colonel Barre referred to the ruffianly attack made on Mr.Otis, and his treatment of the injury, in a manner that reflectshonor on both of the orators.

"Is this the return you make them?" inquired the Britishstatesman.

"When a commissioner of the customs, aided by a number ofruffians, assaulted the celebrated Mr. Otis, in the midst of thetown of Boston, and with the most barbarous violence almostmurdered him, did the mob, which is said to rule that town, takevengeance on the perpetrators of this inhuman outrage against aperson who is supposed to be their demagogue?

"No, sir, the law tried them, the law gave heavy damages againstthem, which the irreparably injured Mr. Otis most generouslyforgave, upon an acknowledgment of the offense.

"Can you expect any more such instances of magnanimity under theprinciple of the Bill now proposed?"

THE GENEROSITY OF OTIS.

He was distinguished for generosity to both friends and foes.Governor Hutchinson said of him: "that he never knew fairer ormore noble conduct in a speaker, than in Otis; that he alwaysdisdained to take advantage of any clerical error, or similarinadvertence, but passed over minor points, and defended hiscauses solely on their broad and substantial foundations."

JOHN ADAMS ON OTIS.

But in that contest over the "Writs of Assistance," there wassomething nobler exhibited than superiority to mercenaryconsideration.

"It was," says the Venerable President, John Adams, "a moralspectacle more affecting to me than any I have since seen uponthe stage, to observe a pupil treating his master with all thedeference, respect, esteem, and affection of a son to a father,and that without the least affectation; while he baffled andconfounded all his authorities, confuted all his arguments, andreduced him to silence!

"The crown, by its agents, accumulated construction uponconstruction, and inference upon inference, as the giants heapedPelion upon Ossa; but Otis, like Jupiter, dashed this wholebuilding to pieces, and scattered the pulverized atoms to thefour winds; and no judge, lawyer, or crown officer dared to say,why do ye so?

"He raised such a storm of indignation, that even Hutchinson, whohad been appointed on purpose to sanction this writ, dared notutter a word in its favor, and Mr. Gridley himself seemed to meto exult inwardly at the glory and triumph of his pupil."

OTIS COMPARED WITH RANDOLPH.

"The wit exemplified by Mr. Otis in debate," says Dr. Magoon,"was often keen but never malignant, as in John Randolph. Theattacks of the latter were often fierce and virulent, notunfrequently in an inverse proportion to the necessity of thecase.

"He would yield himself up to a blind and passionate obstinacy,and lacerate his victims for no apparent reason but the merepleasure of inflicting pangs.

"In this respect, the orator of Roanoke resembled the Siciliantyrant whose taste for cruelty led him to seek recreation inputting insects to the torture. If such men cannot strike strongblows, they know how to fight with poisonous weapons; thus bytheir malignity, rather than by their honorable skill, they canbring the noblest antagonist to the ground.

"But Mr. Otis pursued more dignified game and with a loftierpurpose.

"He indeed possessed a Swiftian gift of sarcasm, but, unlike theDean of St. Patrick's, and the forensic gladiator alluded toabove, he never employed it in a spirit of hatred and contempttowards the mass of mankind.

"Such persons should remember the words of Colton, that, 'Strongand sharp as our wit may be, it is not so strong as the memory offools, nor so keen as their resentment; he that has strength ofmind to forgive, is by no means weak enough to forget; and it ismuch more easy to do a cruel thing than to say a severe one.'"

ORATORICAL POWERS

Many of the most effective orators, of all ages, have not beenmost successful in long and formal efforts. Nor have they alwaysbeen close and ready debaters. "Sudden bursts which seemed to bethe effect of inspiration—short sentences which came likelightning, dazzling, burning, striking down everything beforethem—sentences which, spoken at critical moments, decided thefate of great questions—sentences which at once became proverbs—sentences which everybody still knows by heart"—in thesechiefly lay the oratorical power of Mirabeau and Chatham, PatrickHenry and James Otis.—E. L. Magoon.

THE ELOQUENCE OF OTIS.

Otis was naturally elevated in thought, and dwelt with greatestdelight in the calm contemplation of the lofty principles whichshould govern political and moral conduct.

And yet he was keenly suspectible to excitement. His intellectexplored the wilderness of the universe only to increase thediscontent of those noble aspirations of his soul which werenever at rest.

In early manhood he was a close student, but as he advanced inage he became more and more absorbed in public action.

As ominous storms threatened the common weal, he found lessdelight in his library than in the stern strife of the forum.

As he prognosticated the coming tempest and comprehended itsfearful issue, he became transformed in aspect like one inspired.

His appearance in public always commanded prompt and profoundattention; he both awed and delighted the multitudes whom hisbold wisdom so opportunely fortified.

"Old South," the "Old Court House," and the "Cradle of liberty,"in Boston, were familiar with his eloquence, that resounded likea cheerful clarion in "days that tried men's souls." It was thenthat his great heart and fervid intellect wrought withdisinterested and noble zeal; his action became vehement, and hiseyes flashed with unutterable fire; his voice, distinct,melodious, swelling, and increasing in height and depth with eachnew and bolder sentiment, filled, as with the palpable presenceof a deity, the shaking walls. The listeners became rapt andimpassioned like the speaker, till their very breath forsookthem.

He poured forth a "flood of argument and passion" which achievedthe sublimes" earthly good, and happily exemplified thedescription which Percival has given of indignant patriotismexpressed in eloquence:

"Its words
Are few, but deep and solemn, and they break
Fresh from the fount of feeling, and are full
Of all that passion, which, on Carmel, fired
The holy prophet, when his lips were coals,
The language winged with terror, as when bolts
Leap from the brooding tempest, armed with wrath
Commissioned to affright us, and destroy."—E. L. Magoon.

OTIS COMPARED WITH AMERICAN ORATORS.

"His eloquence, like that of his distinguished successors, wasmarked by a striking individuality.

"It did not partake largely of the placid firmness of SamuelAdams; or of the intense brilliancy and exquisite taste of theyounger Quincy; or the subdued and elaborate beauty of Lee; orthe philosophical depth of John Adams; or the rugged andoverwhelming energy of Patrick Henry; though he, most of allAmericans, resembled the latter."—E. L. Magoon.

OTIS COMPARED WITH ENGLISH ORATORS.

"Compared with English orators," Dr. Magoon says, "our greatcountryman was not unlike Sheridan in natural endowment.

"Like him, he was unequaled in impassioned appeals to the generalheart of mankind.

"He swayed all by his electric fire; charmed the timid, andinspired the weak; subdued the haughty, and enthralled theprejudiced.

"He traversed the field of argument and invective as a Scythianwarrior scours the plain, shooting most deadly arrows when at thegreatest speed.

"He rushed into forensic battle, fearless of all consequences;and as the ancient war-chariot would sometimes set its axle onfire by the rapidity of its own movement, so would the ardentsoul of Otis become ignited and fulminate with thought, as heswept irresistibly to the goal.

"When aroused by some great crisis, his eloquent words were likebolts of granite heated in a volcano, and shot forth withunerring aim, crashing where they fell."

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE.

In respect to physical ability, Otis was happily endowed. Onewho knew him well has recorded, that "he was finely formed, andhad an intelligent countenance: his eye, voice, and manner werevery impressive.

"The elevation of his mind, and the known integrity of hispurposes, enabled him to speak with decision and dignity, andcommanded the respect as well as the admiration of his audience.

"His eloquence showed but little imagination, yet it was instinctwith the fire of passion."

"It may be not unjustly said of Otis, as of Judge Marshall, thathe was one of those rare beings that seem to be sent among menfrom time to time, to keep alive our faith in humanity.

"He had a wonderful power over the popular feelings, but heemployed it only for great public benefits. He seems to havesaid to himself, in the language of the great master of themaxims of life and conduct:

"This above all,—to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man."

PORTRAIT OF OTIS.

The portrait of James Otis, Jr., published as a frontispiece tothis sketch, is from the oil-painting loaned to the BostonianSociety, by Harrison Gray Otis, of Winthrop, Massachusetts. Thepainting from which it is taken, now hanging in the Old StateHouse of Boston, is a reproduction of the original portrait by I.Blackburn, to whom Mr. Otis sat for his portrait in 1755. Theoriginal in possession of Mrs. Rogers, a descendant of JamesOtis, may be seen at her residence, No. 8 Otis Place, Boston.But the original is not so well adapted as is the copy tophotographic reproduction. The two portraits are identical infeature and character, but the original having a light backgroundoffends the camera.

THE SOURCE AND OCCASION OF THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION.

"The question is, perhaps more curious than profitable, thatrelates to the source and occasion of the first of that series ofevents which produced the war of the Revolution. Men have oftenasked, what was its original cause, and who struck the firstblow? This inquiry was well answered by President Jefferson, ina letter to Dr. Waterhouse of Cambridge, written March 3rd, 1818.

"'I suppose it would be difficult to trace our Revolution to itsfirst embryo. We do not know how long it was hatching in theBritish cabinet, before they ventured to make the first of theexperiments which were to develop it in the end, and to producecomplete parliamentary supremacy.

"'Those you mention in Massachusetts as preceding the Stamp Actmight be the first visible symptoms of that design. Theproposition of that Act, in 1764, was the first here. Youropposition, therefore, preceded ours, as occasion was soonergiven there than here, and the truth, I suppose, is, that theopposition, in every colony, began whenever the encroachment waspresented to it.

"'This question of priority is as the inquiry would be, who firstof the three hundred Spartans offered his name to Leonidas. Ishall be happy to see justice done to the merits of all.'"

"In the primitive opposition made by Otis to the arbitrary actsof Trade, aided by the Writs of Assistance, he announced twomaxims which lay at the foundation of all the subsequent war; onewas, that 'taxation without representation was tyranny,' theother, 'that expenditures of public money without appropriationsby the representatives of the people, were arbitrary, andtherefore unconstitutional. '"

"This early and acute sagacity of our statesman, led Burke finelyto describe the political feeling in America as follows;

"'In other countries, the people, more simple, of a lessmercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government, only byan actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge ofthe pressure of the grievance, by the badness of the principle.

"'They augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approachof tyranny in every tainted breeze.'"—E. L. Magoon.

STAMPS AND THE STAMP ACT.

During Robert Walpole's administration [1732], a stamp duty wasproposed. He said "I will leave the taxation of America to someof my successors, who have more courage than I have."

Sir William Keith, governor of Pennsylvania, proposed a tax in1739. Franklin thought it just, when a delegate in the ColonialCongress at Albany, in 1754. But when it was proposed to Pitt in1759 the great English statesman said: "I will never burn myfingers with the American stamp act."

THE STAMPS.

The stamps were upon blue paper, and were to be attached to everypiece of paper or parchment, on which a legal instrument waswritten. For these stamps the Government charged specificprices, for example, for a common property deed, one shilling andsixpence.

THE MINUTE-MAN OF THE REVOLUTION.

The Minute-man of the Revolution! He was the old, themiddle-aged, and the young. He was Capt. Miles, of Concord, whosaid that he went to battle as he went to church. He was Capt.Davis, of Acton, who reproved his men for jesting on the march.He was Deacon Josiah Haynes, of Sudbury, 80 years old, whomarched with his company to the South Bridge at Concord, thenjoined in the hot pursuit to Lexington, and fell as gloriously asWarren at Bunker Hill. He was James Hayward, of Acton, 22 yearsold, foremost in that deadly race from Concord to Charlestown,who raised his piece at the same moment with a British soldier,each exclaiming, "You are a dead man!" The Briton dropped, shotthrough the heart.

James Hayward fell mortally wounded. "Father," he said, "Istarted with forty balls; I have three left. I never did such aday's work before. Tell mother not to mourn too much, and tellher whom I love more than my mother, that I am not sorry I turnedout."—George W. Curtis.

THE BOSTON COMMON SCHOOLS.

The Boston Common Schools were the pride of the town. They weremost jealously guarded, and were opened each day with publicprayer.

They were the nurseries of a true democracy. In them the men whoplayed the most important part in the Revolutionary periodreceived their early education.

The Adamses, Chancey, Cooper, Cushing, Hancock, Mayhew, Warren,and the rest breathed their bracing atmosphere.

ENGLAND AND AMERICA.

I have already dwelt on the significance of the way in which thePilgrim Fathers, driven out of England, begin this compact, withwhich they begin their life in this new world, with warmprofessions of allegiance to England's King.

Old England, whose King and bishops drove them out, is proud ofthem to-day, and counts them as truly her children as Shakespeareand Milton and Vane.

As the American walks the corridors and halls of the ParliamentHouse at Westminster, he pays no great heed to the painted kingsupon the painted windows, and cares little for the gilded thronein the gilded House of Lords. The Speaker's chair in the Commonsdoes not stir him most, nor the white form of Hampden that standssilent at the door; but his heart beats fastest where, amonggreat scenes from English triumphs of the days of Puritanism andthe revolution, he sees the departure of the Pilgim Fathers tofound New England.

England will not let that scene go as a part of American historyonly, but claims it now as one of the proudest scenes in her ownhistory, too.

It is a bud of promise, I said, when I first saw it there. Shallnot its full unfolding be some great reunion of the English race,a prelude to the federation of the world?

Let that picture there in the Parliament House at Westminsterstay always in your mind, to remind you of the England in you.Let the picture of the signing of the compact on the "Mayflower"stay with it, to remind you of progress and greater freedom.That, I take it, is what America—New England, now tempered byNew Germany, New Ireland, New France—that, I take it, is whatAmerica stands for.—Edwin D. Mead.

THE UNIVERSITIES AND THE MEN OF THE REVOLUTION.

You may perhaps remember how Wendell Phillips, in his greatHarvard address on "The Scholar and the Republic" reproached somemen of learning for their conservatism and timidity, theirbackwardness in reform. And it is true that conservatism andtimidity are never so hateful and harmful as in the scholar. "Bebold, be bold, and evermore be bold," those words which Emersonliked to quote, are words which should ever ring in the scholar'sear.

But you must remember that Roger Williams and Sir Harry Vane, thevery men whom Wendell Phillips named as "two men deepest inthought and bravest in speech of all who spoke English in theirday," came, the one from Cambridge, the other from Oxford; andthat Sam Adams and Jefferson, the two men whom he named aspreeminent, in the early days of the republic, for their trust inthe people, were the sons of Harvard and William and Mary. JohnAdams and John Hancock and James Otis and Joseph Warren, thegreat Boston leaders in the Revolution, were all Harvard men,like Samuel Adams; and you will remember how many of the greatVirginians were, like Jefferson, sons of William and Mary.

And never was a revolution so completely led by scholars as thegreat Puritan Revolution which planted New England andestablished the English commonwealth.

No. Scholars have often enough been cowards and trimmers.

But from the days when Moses, learned in all the wisdom of theEgyptians, brought his people up out of bondage, and Paul, whohad sat at the feet of Gamaliel, preached Christ, and Wyclif andLuther preached Reformation, to the time when Eliot and Hampdenand Pym and Cromwell and Milton and Vane, all scholars of Oxfordand Cambridge, worked for English commonwealth, to the time ofJefferson and Samuel Adams and the time of Emerson and Sumner andGladstone, scholars have been leaders and heroes too.—Edwin D.Mead.

EARL PERCY AND YANKEE DOODLE.

Earl Percy was the son of the Duke of Northumberland. When hewas marching out of Boston, his band struck up the tune of YankeeDoodle, in derision.

He saw a boy in Roxbury making himself very merry as he passed.

Percy inquired why he was so merry.

"To think," said the lad, "how you will dance by and by to Chevy
Chase."

Percy was much influenced by presentiments, and the words of theboy made him moody. Percy was a lineal descendant of the EarlPercy who was slain in the battle of Chevy Chase, and he felt allday as if some great calamity might befall him.

STORY OF JAMES OTIS. FOR A SCHOOL OR CLUB PROGRAMME.

Each numbered paragraph is to be given to a pupil or member toread, or to recite in a clear, distinct tone.

If the school or club is small, each person may take three orfour paragraphs, but should not be required to recite them insuccession.

1. James Otis was born in West Barnstable, near the center ofMassachusetts, February 5, 1725.

2. His ancestors were of English descent. The founder of thefamily in America, John Otis, came from Hingham, in Norfolk,England, and settled in Hingham, Massachusetts, in the year 1635.

3. His grandson, John Otis, was born in 1635. He removed fromHingham to Barnstable, where he became a prominent man and heldseveral important positions. For eighteen years he was Colonelof Militia, for twenty years Representative, for twenty-one yearsmember of the Council, for thirteen years Chief Justice of commonpleas, and Judge of Probate.

4. His two sons, John and James, became distinguished in publiclife. James, the father of the subject of this sketch, was aneminent lawyer. He, like his father, became Colonel of Militia,Chief Justice of common pleas, and Judge of Probate.

5. James Otis, Jr. thus by inheritance, derived his legal bentand love for political life.

6. His mother's name was Mary Allyne, or Alleyne, ofWethersfield, Conn., daughter of Joseph Allyne, of Plymouth. Shewas connected with the founders of Plymouth colony, who arrivedin the Mayflower in 1620.

7. James was the oldest of thirteen children, several of whomdied in infancy. Others lived to attain distinction.

8. He was fitted for College by the Rev. Jonathan Russell ofBarnstable, and was so industrious in his studies that he wasready in his fifteenth year to enter as a freshman at Harvard inJune, 1739.

9. There is grave reason for believing that his excessivedevotion to study at this early period, had much to do with hisnervous and excitable condition in succeeding years.

10. "Make haste slowly" is the translation of a Latin motto,which parents and teachers ought to observe in the education ofchildren.

11. Far better is it for the student to take time in making athorough preparation for the great work of life, than to rushthrough his preparatory course at the great risk of health andstrength. Let him aim ever be to present "a sound mind in asound body."

12. James Otis was graduated from college in 1743, aftercompleting a four years successful course.

13. After graduation he wisely gave nearly two years to thepursuits of general literature and science before entering uponthe law.

14. In this, he set a good example to the young men of thepresent day, who are so strongly tempted to enter at once uponprofessional life, without laying a broad and deep foundation forfuture usefulness.

15. James Otis was very fond of the best poets, and "in thezealous emulation of their beauties," says Dr. Magoon, "heenergized his spirit and power of expression.

16. "He did not merely read over the finest passages—he ponderedthem—he fused them into his own soul, and reproduced theircharms with an energy all his own."

17. In 1745 he entered the law office of Jeremiah Gridley, inBoston, who was then one of the most distinguished lawyers in thecountry.

18. He began the practice of law in Plymouth, in 1748, but soonfound that he was "cabined, cribbed and confined" in theopportunity to rise in such a small place.

19. In 1750 he removed to Boston, and there finding full scopefor his powers, soon rose to the foremost rank in his profession.

20. He justly won the high place so generally accorded him, byhis learning, his integrity, and his marvelous eloquence.

21. In acting successfully as counsel for the three men who wereaccused of piracy in Halifax, he received a well earned fee,which was the largest that had ever been paid to a Massachusettslawyer.

22. Like James A. Garfield, he kept up a lively interest inclassical studies during his entire professional career.

23. James Otis married Miss Ruth Cunningham, daughter of a Bostonmerchant, early in 1755.

24. The marriage was not in all respects a happy one, partly onaccount of political differences. While he became an ardentpatriot, she remained a staunch loyalist until her death on Nov.15, 1789.

25. Another reason for the want of complete domestic felicity wasthe peculiar character of his genius, which, so often glowing,excitable and irregular, must have frequently demanded a homeforbearance almost miraculous.

26. The elder daughter, Elizabeth, married a Captain Brown of theBritish army, and ended her days in England. 27. The youngerdaughter, Mary, married Benjamin, the eldest son of thedistinguished General Lincoln.

28. In 1761, when he was thirty-six years of age his greatpolitical career began, by his determined opposition to the"Writs of Assistance."

29. He said with an eloquence that thrilled every heart, "A man'shouse is his castle; and while he is quiet, he is as well guardedas a prince in his castle. This Writ, if it should be declaredlegal, would totally annihilate this privilege."

30. "I am determined to sacrifice estate, ease, health, applauseand even life, to the sacred calls of my country in opposition toa kind of power, the exercise of which cost one king his head andanother his throne."

31. In 1762 he published a pamphlet entitled, "The Rights of theColonies Vindicated," which attracted great attention in Englandfor its finished diction and masterly arguments.

32. In this production he firmly took the unassailable position,that in all questions relating to the expenditure of publicmoney, the rights of a Colonial Legislature were as sacred as therights of the House of Commons.

33. Some of the Parliamentary leaders in England spoke of thework with contempt. Lord Mansfield, the great English legalluminary, who had carefully read it, rebuked them for theirattitude towards it.

34. But they rejoined, as quoted by Bancroft, "The man is mad!""What then?" answered Mansfield. "One mad man often makes many.Massaniello was mad—nobody doubted it—yet for all that heoverturned the government of Naples."

35. In June, 1765, Mr. Otis proposed the calling of a congress ofdelegates from all the colonies to consider the Stamp Act.

36. In that famous Congress which met in October, 1765, inNew York, he was one of the delegates, and was appointed on thecommittee to prepare an address to the Commons of England.

37. In 1767 he was elected Speaker of the Massachusetts Assembly.Governor Bernard took a decidedly negative position against thefiery orator, whom he feared as much as he did the intrepid SamAdams.

38. But Bernard could not put a padlock upon the lips of Otis.When the king, who was greatly offended at the Circular Letter tothe colonies, which requested them to unite in measures forredress demanded of Bernard to dismiss the Assembly unless itshould rescind its action, Otis made a flaming speech.

39. His adversaries said, "It was the most violent, abusive andtreasonable declaration that perhaps was ever uttered."

40. In the debate which ensued upon this royal order, Otis said:"We are asked to rescind, are we? Let Great Britain rescind hermeasures, or the colonies are lost to her forever."

41. Otis carried the House triumphantly with him, and it refusedto rescind by a vote of ninety-two to seventeen.

42. In the summer of 1769 he attacked some of the revenueofficers in an article in "The Boston Gazette." A few eveningsafterwards, while sitting in the British coffee-house in Boston,he was savagely assaulted by a man named Robinson, who struck himon the head with a heavy cane or sword.

43. The severe wound which was produced so greatly aggravated themental disease which had before been somewhat apparent, that hisreason rapidly forsook him.

44. Otis obtained a judgment of L2,000 against Robinson for theattack, but when the penitent officer made a written apology forhis irreparable offense, the sufferer refused to take a penny.

45. In 1771 he was elected to the legislature, and sometimesafterward appeared in court and in the town meeting, but foundhimself unable to take part in public business.

46. In June, 1775, while living in a state of harmless insanitywith his sister, Mercy Warren, at Watertown, Mass., he heard,according to Appleton's "Cyclopedia of American Biography," therumor of battle. On the 17th he slipped away unobserved,"borrowed a musket from some farmhouse by the roadside, andjoined the minute men who were marching to the aid of the troopson Bunker Hill."

47. "He took an active part in that battle, and after it wasover made his way home again after midnight."

48. The last years of his life were spent at the residence ofMr. Osgood in Andover. For a brief season it seemed as thoughhis reason was restored. He even undertook a case in the Courtof Common Pleas in Boston, but found himself unequal to theexertion demanded of him.

49. He had been persuaded to dine with Governor Hancock and someother friends. "But the presence of his former friends and therevived memories of previous events, gave a great shock to hisbroken mind." He was persuaded to go back at once to theresidence of Mr. Osgood.

50. After his mind had become unsettled he said to Mrs. Warren,"My dear sister, I hope, when God Almighty in his righteousprovidence shall take me out of time into eternity, that it willbe by a flash of lightning," and this wish he often repeated.

51. Six weeks exactly after his return, on May 23, 1783, whilestanding in the side doorway during a thunder-shower, with hiscane in his hand, and telling the assembled family a story, hewas struck by lightning and instantly killed. Not one of theseven or eight persons in the room was injured. "No mark of anykind could be found on Otis, nor was there the slightest changeor convulsion on his features."

52. His remains were brought to Boston and interred in theGranary Burying Ground with every mark of respect, a greatnumber of the citizens attending his funeral.

53. James Otis sowed the seeds of liberty in this new worldwithout living to see the harvest, and probably without everdreaming what magnificent crops would be produced.

54. When the usurpations of un-English parliamentarians and theirallies at home, became as burdensome, as they were unjust hedefended his countrymen, in whose veins flowed the best ofEnglish blood, with an eloquence whose ultimate influencetranscended his own sublime aspirations.

55. He taught, in the ominous words, which King James's firstHouse of Commons addressed to the House of Lords, immediatelyafter the monarch had been lecturing them on his own prerogative,that "There may be a People without a king;, but there can be noking without a people."

56. "Fortunately for civil liberty in England and America, in allcountries and in all times," as Edward Everett Hale says, "noneof the Stuarts ever learned in time what this ominous sentencemeans—ot James I, the most foolish of them, nor Charles I, themost false; nor Charles II, the most worthless; nor James II, themost obstinate."

57. It could be said of Otis as Coleridge said of O'Connell, "Seehow triumphant in debate and action he is. And why? Because heasserts a broad principle, acts up to it, rests his body upon it,and has faith in it."

PROGRAMME FOR A JAMES OTIS EVENING.

1. Music 2. Vocal Music—"Remember the Maine." 3. Essay—
"The True Relation of England as a Nation to the Colonies." 4.
Vocal or Instrumental Music. 5. Essay—"Writs of Assistance,
and Otis' Relation to Them." 6. Music. 7. A Stereopticon
Lecture, illustrating the Famous Buildings and noted features of
Boston—The Old North Church, The Old South, Copp's Hill, Bunker
Hill, North Square, House of Paul Revere, Site of the Old Dragon
Inn, The Old State House, Faneuil Hall, etc. 8. Singing—
"America."

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW.

Where is the Granary Burying Ground? Why so named? Whatdistinguishes it? Can you give the names of some eminent personsburied there? In what tomb was James Otis interred? Whatinteresting particular was noted when his body was disinterred?

What names are given to the pre-revolutionists, therevolutionists, and the post-revolutionists?

Who is assigned the first place among the protagonists offreedom? Who the second? What is the remarkable thing about thelives of many great men? Will you expand the thought?

When and where was James Otis born? What offices did he fill?When was James Otis, Jr. born? What did he inherit from hisfather and grandfather? What were transmitted to other membersof the family? Give the name of one of these members and herpeculiar gifts. What was the name of one of the brothers, andwhat is said of him?

By whom was James Otis prepared for College? When did he enterCollege? What is the tradition concerning him? What is said ofhis College course? What of his excitable temperament? Whatanecdote is recorded of him? When, and under what distinguishedlawyer did he begin his legal studies? What is said of hispreceptor?

When and where did he begin to practice law? What are some ofthe incidents of his early legal career? What is said of thedefense by Otis of citizens in connection with the anniversary ofthe Gunpowder Plot? What is the history of the Gunpowder Plot?When was the first period of his Boston practice? What is saidof the non-preservation of the legal pleas and addresses of JamesOtis? What does tradition say of him as an orator?

When and whom did Otis marry? What is said of the Cunnninghamfamily? What is said of Mrs. Otis? Who comprised the family ofMr. and Mrs. Otis? What is said of the marriage of the elderdaughter? What of the younger daughter?

When was the second period in James Otis's life? What is said ofhim as a rising man? What is said of his scholastic and literarypursuits, etc.? What works did he compose? What did James Otissay about the bad literary tastes of the boys of his time?

Of what is every man the joint product? What were the conditionsunder which the colonial settlements were formed? What were thefeelings of the colonists towards England?

What specific conditions in the development of the colonies maybe noted? What were the immediate and forceful causes towardsrevolution? What is said of the Navigation Act? of theImportation Act? What kind of a question was that at issue?Why?

What is said of the seaboard towns? of the traffic with the WestIndies? What period did the epoch of evasion cover? What is saidof the iron and steel industry? of ship building?

What did Hutchinson say of his own Appointment? What were someof the personal forces at work? What is said of Hutchinson andothers? What slander of James Otis was current? In whatlanguage was the case regarding the Writs of Assistance made up?What is said of the trial of the case? Who was one of theeminent spectators? What was the relation of Otis to it?

What did Chief Justice Hutchinson advise in the case of the Writsof Assistance? What is the story narrated of Otis regarding hiswant of self-control?

What is said of the controversy between Hutchinson and Otis?
What resolution did Otis offer in 1762? What is said of his
pamphlet on "The Vindication of the Conduct of the House of
Representatives," etc.? What is said of the Treaty of Paris?
What of the feelings of Americans towards the mother country?
What of the utterances of Otis?

What did the Americans claim? What was the reply of Parliament?What is said of the Sugar Act? What of Otis' relations toLieut.-Governor Hutchinson? Of his relations to the Sugar Actand Stamp Act? Of his relation to an Intercolonial conference?What was Franklin's opinion of this conference? What is thesubstance of Mr. Otis' letter to the provincial agent? Of LordMansfield's view of it?

SUBJECTS FOR SPECIAL STUDY. 1. The French and Indian War. 2.James Otis as an Orator. 3. The English Colonies in America.4. The Influence of College Men in Public Life. 5. How theAmerican Colonies Grew Together. 6. The Commercial Causes ofthe Revolution. 7. The Political Causes of the Revolution. 8.Otis Compared with Samuel Adams. 9. The Repeal of the Stamp Act.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE IN THE LIFE OF JAMES OTIS.

1725 Born in West Barnstable, Massachusetts, Feb. 5.1739 Entered Harvard College, June.1743 Was graduated from Harvard.1745 Begins the study of law.1748 Begins the practice of law at Plymouth, Massachusetts.1750 Removes to Boston.1755 Marries Miss Ruth Cunningham.1760 Publishes "Rudiments of Latin Prosody."1761 Opposes the "Writs of Assistance."1762 Publishes "The Rights of the Colonies Vindicated."1765 Moves resolution for Congress of Delegates to consider "TheStamp Act," June.Attends the Congress called to consider "The Stamp Act" in NewYork, and appointed on the committee to prepare address toParliament, October.1767 Elected Speaker of the Massachusetts Assembly.1769 Attacked and severely injured by Robinson.1771 Elected to the legislature of Massachusetts.1775 Participates in the Battle of Bunker Hill, June 17.1778 Pleads case before court in Boston1783 Killed by stroke of lightning at Andover, Mass., May 23.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

For those who wish to read extensively, the following works areespecially commended:

Library of American Biography. Jared Sparks. Vol. 2. Boston
Charles C. Little and James Brown. 1846.

Life of James Otis. By William Tudor.

Orators of the American Revolution. E. L. Magoon.

"Otis Papers." In Collection of Massachusetts Historical Society,
Boston, 1897.

"Life of James Otis." By Francis Bowen, in Sparks' American
Biography. Vol. XII Boston. 1846.

Cyclopedia of American Biography. D. Appleton & Co. New York.

American Law Register. Vol. 3, page 641.

North American Review. Vol. 16, page 337. J. C. Gray.

"The Old South Leaflets," prepared by Edwin D. Mead. D. C. Heath& Co., Boston, Publishers.

DeToqueville's Democracy in America.

Works of John Fiske.

Ridpath's History of the United States.

Ellis' History of the United States.

End Project Gutenberg Etext of James Otis The Pre-Revolutionist

Related articles