Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

156 LITERARY. WILLIAM ». MANN, Editor. The Southern Field and Fireside IS PUBLISHED KTKRT SATURDAY. TERMS—S2.OO s year, invariably in advance. All Postmasters arc authorized agents. ” - SATURDAY, OCT. 8, 1859. ~ BACK NUMBERS. Persons subscribing to the Field and Fireside can bo supplied with all the back numbers. — TERMS TO NEWS-DEALERS. This paper is mailed to news-dealers at the rate of two dollars and fifty cents per one hundred copies. TO CORRESPONDENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS “Erie Evarton” and “Frederick,” have for gotten to comply with our rule, which require? : communication of the real name of contributors, i Their articles will not be read till this omission shall be supplied. We have received during the week, “ The Rum-Devil, or the Autobiography of a Drunk ard,” by S. N. B. “The Iron Chest, a Tale of the South in early Times,” by J. M. T. The Artist, by Hope Everall. Several communications relative to China, from Rev. B. W. W. An Article on our Common School System, by J. C. P “Old Winter is nere," by Penna. Lines composed at the Funeral of a Young Child. “ Come to me, Come to me.” “ Coming,” by M. C. 8., is of charming sim plicity, and could be made a beautiful piece, by the assiduous and judicious application of labor lima;. Without it, we must decline the Lines. We have received from Idle Wild , (not from N. P. Willis,) two poems, “The Guilty Lovers of Ceylon” and “Isabel” -The writer has given us two “ first efforts,” of considerable merit, nis versification is skillful and the melody of his composition shows a good ear, and promises, if the writer be young, and we presume he is, a rliymster in futuro, much above the average. The lines are musical, but a whole column of them at once would be rather monotonous Besides, though the moral of the story is good, and the facts true, we don’t exactly like to en tertain our young readers with stories of “ Guilty Lovers. ” We think the best way to treat such persons, and such conduct as Idle Wild has made his theme, is not to make heroes and heroines of them in verse; but to reprobate them in a few plain, downright, upright, honest and earnest sentences in homespun prose. As for Isabel, she is a very lovely and estimable young lady, we have no doubt: nor have we, that the lines to her praise would please her more than they do us. We hope he will send these to her, and to us the next—not the very next “The Release,” by Helen Grey, is accepted. We hope to hear from nelen Grey again. Sho is evidently careful and laborious in the construc tion of the verses; yet she has more talent than many who think they have enough to permit them to dispense with any attention to the rules of versification. J. E. W. sends us a short poem, “ Maybel Bright," which, says he, “ I scribbled off du ring an idle moment;” then he asks us, if we reject the lines, to give, in our “Answers to Cor respondents,” our “candid opinion of their merits.” Well, then, in the first place, we “can didly ” and very seriously ask J. E. W., and all others, who may feel disposed to do as he has done, to send us no more lines “ scribbled off in an idle moment.” It is not one writer in five hundred that can “ scribble off in an idle mo ment ” anything we would think worth pub lishing : and of those that can, not one in five hundred but could do much better with a few hours of patient, intelligent labor. We want the best, both in prose and verse, that our contributors can give, or we would prefer that they keep their productions in their private port-folios, for their own particular ad miration, and that of partial, more amiable, and loss critical friends. We declare that, almost always, our esteem of contributions “scribbled off in an idle moment” is, seriously, as slight as the writers pretend theirs to be. We think it inconsiderate and unjust in persons who are so economical of their own time and labor, to com pel us to waste ours, by reading page after page of crude composition, in the honest effort and hope to find them worthy of publication, in spite of defects which the writers themselves could, and ought to have removed. Some, with serene impertinence, even ask us to “ correct bad spel ling and punctuation.” Why, ladies and gentle men, what are your dictionaries and grammars for? If literary editors are (we admit they ought to be) pretty good dictionaries and gram mars, they are not yours, “to have and to hold,’’ to use and abuse, and you have no right thus to tax them. And we humbly suggeat, however ex orbitant it may seem, that writers who undertake to instruct or entertain by books, or even in the columns of a Literary Weekly, should be able to spell and punctuate correctly, and should do so, before they send their offerings to the press. As for poetical contributions in particular, we must say to J. E. W., that our first impulse is to * toss incontinently, all impromptus of more than four lines, without reading, into a certain basket, (a literary “ bourn," established lor the conve nience of such “ travelers,” about five feet from our arm-chair,) whence no visitant “ returns.” Why, sir, almost any body can conceive, or, in default of imagination, can borrow a pretty idea or fine sentiment, and put the same into some sort of language, and in measure of some sort, into lines beginning with capitals, and end ing with rhymes. But that is not a Poem, any more than the rough-hewn marble block upon which the sculptor has begun to pencil his con ception, and which, under the hand of rude workmen, has assumed an ill-defined shape, TMM BmTWMMM YXSO MMO YX&KBXSS. j faintly foreshadowing, in vague outline, the I sculptor’s idea, is the glorious Statue. Canova’s I informing chisel has not yet touched the marble. I It is only after many months of patient study ! aud persisting toil—after ten thousand delicate strokes of the master’s chisel, and again ten thousand finishing touches of the master-hand, that the statue issues from the studio, though a stone, almost instinct with life, a complete and beauteous creation, of which Immortality is the reward. So we say to J. E. W., that his “ Maybel Bright” is, in idea, a very pretty little poem, but he must, by labor and study, put it in much more artistic form, before we shall deem it, in fact, a poem worthy of praise, and of accep tance for our columns. We have answered J. E. W. at much greater length than we had proposed, and very “ can didly," as he requested. We would be sorry to offend him, and hope that he will write us again when he can show that he has profited by our counsel. We think that it is in him. We decline, with much hesitation, the lines entitled “An Appointed Tryst on the Shores of the World to Come.” Will not the writer prune, trim, and polish them a little, (a good deal, we meant to say.) and then send them back to us. The lines are worth the trouble, and we know the writer can make such as we would be glad to accord place to. “The Sword of Wallace,"contains some very fine lines, but they are scattered so sparsely along the two closely written pages of foolscap, that we cannot undertake to cull, .nor to publish the piece entire. We wish this writer would take the advice we have given, just above, to another friend. We respectfully decline the lines commencing with— '■ In this wide world, is there one breast,” Ac. The Sinner’s Prayer and Answer; The lines commencing with: “ I stood beside a new-made grave”; Lines addressed to Ella; Lines entitled “ The Passage”; “ I Dreamed of my Home,” by Timotheus; A poem, “ Vision of the Night"; “ The Girl with the azure Eye,” by Timotheus; Lines commencing “ Sleep on, my little friend”; What is our Life ? Thirty Lines, Home-Spun. — WHO IS "NED BRACE 1” Until the appearance of “ Master Mitten,” the story by A. B. Loxgstreet, which has adorned the first page of The Southern* Field and Fireside, from its first number to the pres ent, it was very generally believed that a dis tinguished citizen of South Carolina, Mr. Ed mund Bacon, was the original “Ned Brace;” that striking character so graphically delineated as “ The Native Georgian,” in a former work of Judge Longstreet’s, the widely-read “ Georgia Scenes." But upon the re-appearance of “ Ned Brace ” in Master Mitten, as a student of Doctor Waddel’s school at Willington, the friends and admirers of “ Ned ” and the Judge, were taken all aback. The scenes at Willington are des cribed as occurring about the year 1806; but, as was remembered by many, and known to all, Edmund Bacon was, at that date, a married man, and practicing attorney. The question then, “ Who was Ned Brace ?” recurred with in creased interest, many insisting still that it was Bacon, only the Judge was taking poetic license with dates: others contended that the character of “The Native Georgian ” was not drawn from Mr. Bacon, but from another gentleman of our own more immediate vicinage, and well remem bered by many of us, Mr. Dred Pace, who was, we believe, a pupil of Doctor Waddel at Wil lington, within the historic times of “ Master Mitten.” Mr. Bacon, we think, was not. Both these names have been cited recently in the public prints as the type of “ Ned Brace.” We are fortunately enabled to settlo ex cathedra, this mooted question. Perhaps it will be found that both the gentlemen above named are enti tled to share the immortality to which “ Ned Brace ” is destined. The youth who was really at school in Wil lington, and who has re-appeared as "Ned Brace," in “ Master Mitten ” was, as we are told, a great admirer, and a copyist, as far as ho could be, of Edmund Bacon. He imitated B. in every thing but his literary attainments—not that Pace was at all wanting in native talents, though, in this respect, he was far below his model. It was the student Pace whom Judge Longstreet had in his eye, when he commenced his sketch of “The Character of a Native Georgian;” and he had proceeded about one-half through the sketch, and sent what he had written ninety miles from his residence, to the press, when it occurred to him that the interest of the sketch would be much enhanced by the substitution of the original for the imitator. He determined, therefore, to make the change—the more readily because what had been written was not very much out of character with Bacon. The conse quence of this change was that “ The Character of a Native Georgian” does not suit exactly, either Bacon or Pace, while there is no feature of it, nor incident, which does not suit, pretty nearly, one or the other. “Brace,”of “The Georgia Scenes,” is described as a very large man: so the youth at school in Willington, the “ Brace” of Master Mitten, Pace, grew up to be. But Bacon, though a portly man, was not of re markable stature. Bacon was a man of more polished manners and of more refinement, than his youthful imitator ever proved to be. Judge Longstreet believes that Mr. Bacon was not a native Georgian, though he must havo come to the State at a very early age. At school, he was a youth of very brilliant promise. In 1791 f whan he was of tender age, he delivered an ad dress to Gen. Washington, composed by Isaac Briggs, that “ electrified and melted everybody,’’ and so delighted the General, that as soon as he reached Mount Vernon, he sent to young Bacon a beautifully bound copy of Cicero’s Ora- tions. The Address was published in one of j he Magazines of the day. The precious gift- ; book from Washington, was afterwards des- ; troyed by fire. As a mere declaimer, the " Brace of Doctor Waddel's school was probably quite the equal of Bacon. “He invariably bore off,” says our informant, “the prizes in speaking, from liis competitors; but in scholarship his standing was rather low.” We have been assured by the author, that when “ The Georgia Scenes” were written, he did not suppose that he would ever see them assume the form of a book; much less did he anticipate the very flattering reception they have met with from the public. When first pub lished in boot form, the author yielded his as sent only after earnest solicitation; and the entire management of the publication was left to another. He states that many errors abound in the published volume. We have some reason to believe that a new, revised and enlarged edi tion of “The Georgia Scenes,” is contemplated by the author, in which, with other emendations, the discordant portions of the Chapters devoted to the “Character of a Native Georgian, ’ will be harmonized, and made to form a congruous whole. As for the characters in “ Master Mitten ,” we have it from the be t authority, that with the exception of Ked Jrace and Doctor Waddel, there are no particular persons or characters de. signed to be por rayed. “ Mitten is a fancy character entirely; o his mother; so Markham; so the Glibs; so Sc itli; so Jones. Nobody is represented under these names.” Many of the incidents, however which are described as ta king place at Mr. ‘’Vaddel’s school, did really occur there, with 11 the funniness which the graphic pen of the Judge has imparted to them. So much we hav3 deemed it proper to say, touching the story which is now in course of publication in The Southern Field and Fire side ; for wo have already heard the character of Mitten himself very erroneously ascribed to persons who wero not at all in the mind of the author as he wrote the pages; and the author is seriously desirous of effacing such impressions from the minds of individuals, and of the public. — JUDGE O'NT ALL'S NEW WORK. We acknowledge, with pleasure, the reception, from the publishers in Charleston, of several ad vance sheets of a cow work, by Judge O’Neau., soon to issue from the press of the Messrs. Courtenay. The work will nake two Volumes of 500 pages, comprising a >ont one hundred and fifty biographic sketches of eminent judicial and professional men of South Carolina. The work is handsomely gotten up, and will prove a val uable addition to all professional and private libraries. We extract from the pages furnished us, the following sketch of Chancellor Hugh Rutledge. There are few brighter names in any State than Carolina boasts in her Rutledges; and The Southern Field and Fireside seizes with alac rity this opportunity of holding forth, for the emulation of Southern youth, one of the three brothers who have made that name illustrious. The three brothers, John, Edward, and Hugh, were model gentlemen and patriots. They have made the name of Rutledge the synonym of private worth and civic virtue. Carolina may well be proud of it: “ Hugh Rutledge, a younger brother of John Rutledge, in the Spring of ’76, under the Consti tution of that year, was appointed a Judge of the Court of Admiralty of South Carolina. After the fall of Charleston, he, with his brother Ed ward, Governor Gadsden, and many others, were sent as prisoners to St. Augustine. In ’77, Hugh Rutledge was Speaker of the Legislative Council, and so continued until 17th of October, 1778. In 1782, he became Speaker of the House of Representatives, and so contin ued to 1785. In 1790, the Constitution of the State was adopted. The first section of the third article declared, that “the judicial power shall be vest ed in such superior and iuferior Courts of Law, and Equity, as the Legislature shall, from time to time, direct and establish.” Under this, it may well be doubted, whether the term “ Chan cellor ” was any longer a proper designation, and whether, in strictness, such an officer should not be called, as he was liefore ’24, “ a Judge of the Court of Equity.” On the 19th of February, 1791, and after the Act to establish a Court of Equity had been passed, and his brother John had been elevated to the office of Chief Justice, Hugh Rutledge was appointed a Judge of the Court of Equity. He experienced the neglect of his Court by the Legislature in not filling the places of Mathews and Hunt, (who had been elected in the place of Hutson, and who died in a few months,) for two years—during which time he was a single Judge of a Court, then consisting, according to law, of three members. I see it was gravely doubted, whether the Court had not ceased to exist: but a matchless argument of H. W. DeSaussure, af terwards the Chancellor, showed conclusively that it had not, and perhaps also served to re mind the Legislature of their duty. Chancellor Rutledge died in January, 1811.— His talents are said to have not been so “ bril liant, nor of so distinguished a cast as those of his brothers, John and Edward—but for solidity of judgment, and strong manly sense, he was not inferior to either of them.” “As a firm, in trepid patriot, he was pre-eminently distinguish ed by the cheerful performance of every duty to his country.” The following account of Chancellor Rutledge, from the pen of an honored citizen of Charleston, does him full justice: There are many reasons why the author of this sketch should feel embarrassed by its pre paration ; but there ore many more why every virtuous man in society should desire to have justice done to those who have preceded us and surpassed us in good works. No movement has ever been made in the for mation of our national character, where the name of Rutledge is not found. The first Con gress, which met at New York in 1765, has been, not improperly, called the “Ovum Reipublic;e.” Nine colonies only represented, and South Car olina among them, with Thomas Lynch, Christo plier Gadsden, and John Rutledge fully authoriz ed to pledge their constituents for “ weal or for woe.” In this year Patrick Henry earned im mortality for himself by that celebrated speech in Virginia, which put the ball of Revolution in motion. Again we find what was called the Associa- tion, assembled at Philadelphia in 1774; and in the proceedings we see the “ Seal ” of our State, supporting and sustaining “ the cause” with two members of the Rutledge family acting for ns.— And in 1776, when that great “proclamation” was made to the world, who can ever read the most important document, now extant, without admiring the chaste and graceful, and manly sig nature of “ Edward Rutledge,” to the “ Decla ration of Independence” 7 And perhaps it may be admissible to mention here that the biogra pher of Mr. Jefferson, (of course hostile to the Federal party,) speaking of them as the “ old train bands of the Treasury Department,” and as “ men who had been enriched by frauds,” with other epithets, upon which I do not propose to comment, makes this honorable offering to South Carolina. Mr. Randall says : “If General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney ever, in public or in private life, acted otherwise than as a manly, pure and high toned politician, patriot and gen tleman, we have failed to discover a solitary in; stance of the fact,” and then adds in a note, “ we think this remark applies fairly to nearly all the leading * South Carolina Federalists.’ * * * was accused of being one of the greediest of the 1 Treasury Squad,’ but the Pinckneys, the Rut ledges, the Ac., Ac., Ac., were men above personal suspicion.” Neither of those families ever required this certificate, and they certainly do not now; but the words are quoted, as used by a political opponent, and as applynig to the period of bitterest party strife. Our purpose, however, is to speak of the Chancellor. Hugh Rutledge was one of those three broth ers who gave themselves to their country, when the success of American arms and the achieve ment of American liberty depended upon such “ gifts.” He was born in Christ Church Parish, District of Charleston, about the middle of the last century. His widowed mother intended him for the legal profession, and after receiving his preparatory education, he was sent to Eng land, as was usual, to “study in the Temple.”— He returned in due time and took his position at the Bar, and upon the authority of the late Thomas S.Grinke, it is said that he “rated as among the very best common-law lawyers of his day.” The Revolution soon commenced, and under the head “ Hugh Rutledge,” we find by a cotemporaneous historian these words: “ As a firm and intrepid patriot, he was eminently dis tinguished by the cheerful performance of every duty to his country.” And again, that when the lower part of the State was a conquered province, Mr. Rutledge having been created Judge of Admiralty, he “refused the offer of protection, and bore all the hardships of exile at St. Augustine, sharing the sufferings of such men as Arthur Middleton, Edward Rutledge, Christopher Gadsden, Daniel DeSaussure, and others. And that after his exchange he was called to fill the Speaker’s chair in the Houso of Representatives, and did so greatly to the satis faction of its members, Ac., Ac., Ac. Mr. Rutledge married the daughter of Tlios. Smith, ancestor of the Rhett family, and by his marriage had a son, “Hugh,” who died in early manhood, and a daughter, “ Sarah,” now the wife of Alfred Huger. After the death of the mother of these children, he married “ Mary,” the daugh ter of Major Benjamin Huger, who was killed during the war of the revolution; ho left by this marriage five children, Maria, afterwards wife of Dr. Thomas Waties, of Sumter; Benjamin, who served during the entire war of 1812 to 1815 ; Francis, now Bishop of Florida; Ann and John, who died single. Among his male de scendants are John Waties and B. Huger Rut ledge, both members of the Bar. Waties at Co lumbia and Rutledge at Charleston. According to Chancellor DeSaussure’s Equity Reports, “ upon the erection and establishment of the Court of Chancery, after the revolution, John Rutledge, Richard Hutton, and John Ma thews, were elected Judges of that Court, and served until 1791, at which time John Rutledge was elected Chief Justice of the Court of Com mon Pleas and Sessions, and to fill the vacancy thus made, Hugh Rutledge was then elected a Judge of the Court of Equity.” He continued on this Bench to the day of his death. How he performed the functions of this high office, it is our purpose now to speak, so far as is consistent with the objects of the present sketch. No de partment of the law affords finer opportunities for the gratification of elevated judicial aspira tions, than that branch of the general science which is known to legal writers as the Law of Equity. Conversant with the most difficult and complicated matters which belong to the muni cipal law, it requires a large and comprehensive mind to embrace the subject in its various rela tions, as well as great patience of investigation, and nice powers of discrimination in him who undertakes to wield the remedial processes of its delicate and refined machinery, and to adjust the claims of opposite conflicting equities to the purposes of practical life. Moreover, there are other requisites, especially necessary to the Equity Judge, which arise out of the peculiar jurisdiction of the Courts which administer this branch of the law. A sound judgment is, taking all things into consideration, the best qualifica tion of every judicial officer. In a Chancellor, it is absolutely indispensable. The Court over which he presides, is charged with that portion of the sovereign authority which exerts itself in behalf of those who are unable, under the law, to protect themselves. The Cnancellor thus be comes, as it were, the general supervisor and custodian of the interests both of person and property of those classes of individuals—orphans, idiots, lunatics, Ac., Ac., —whose unprotected and forlorn condition attracts tfie sympathies of every benevolent mind. Mere learning, how ever great, (although very much to be desired,) is not all sufficient to carry him successfully through the varied and responsible duties of his position. The Chancellor ought to be more than a mere book-man. A well balanced judgment, strong practical wisdom, and a thorough knowl edge of business and of life, are essential char acteristics of any one who desires to become an ornament to the Equity Bench. In short, a good Chancellor, is one of the rarest, as well as one of the most valuable and efficient officers in the service of the State. In estimating the charac ter of any one who has been engaged injudicial labors, and who has passed for some time from the stage of life, there are two ways, chiefly, by which posterity are enabled to arrive at just con clusions. The one is from the examination of his efforts wherever they appear upon the re cords of the Courts to which he was attached, in the shape of judgments or decrees. The oth er is from the testimony of those who were his cotemporaries, and who, together with him, in their day and generation, fought through the battle of life in the same calling.” [The author here incorporates into the vol ume two of the judgments of Chancellor Hugh Rutledge, extracted from DeSaussuue’s Eq. Reports. These wo omit as unlikely to prove of interest to the generality of our readers.— Ed. F. A F.] “ The above cases are enough to illustrate Chancellor Rutledge’s judicial style. They show that althougn versed in the learning of the law, he was not so bound down by the force of pre- cedents as to be unable to act independently of them when the interests of the country plainly required it. In conclusion of this part of our subject, we may indulge in this general obser vation : That Chancellor Rutledge’s mind was logical and exact —his style clear and perspicu ous—his learning comprehensive and accurate— and his judgment sound and independent. VTe come now to speak of the second source of information above referred to as the means of acquiring knowledge concerning the character istics of those who are passed away—the judg ments of cotemporaries. Let the cotemporaries of Chancellor Rutledge, most of them opposed to hiii. in politics, declare what opinions they en tertained of him. Tuesday Morning, Jan. 22, 1811. “At a full meetmg of the gentlemen of the Bar, convened in the Equity Court Room, and upon John Julius Pringle, Esq., being called to the chair, the following resolutions were unan imously adopted: The members of the Bar in Charleston, deep ly regretting the death of the lato Hon. Hugh Rutledge , and bearing in mind the many public and private virtues and important services to his country, which distinguished him through out a long and honorable life ; being convened for the purpose of testifying their respect and veneration for his memory, have adopted the following preamble and resolutions: Whereas , the Hon. Hugh Rutledge, late and for many years, a Chancellor of this State, from early life devoted himself to the service of his country, during her struggles for liberty gallant ly fighting in her ranus, and by his example throughout, animating his eountrymeu in the field, in captivity and in banishment, to meet and sustain with heroic fortitude all various trials of the Revolutionary conflict, and after the establishment and consolidation of the indepen dence of his country, requiting her well earned confidence by the able and faithful discharge of the duties of several high and important sta tions, and in his late capacity of Chancellor, (wherein those who pay this tribute were the constant witnesses of his conduct) administering public justice during a long course of service, with great learning and ability, with unsullied purity and inflexible virtue; always adorning the judgment seat with a deportment mild and dignified, humane and liberal; and in private life uniting all those amiable and valuable quali ties which prompt esteem, cement friendship, and produce extensive usefulness: And Where as the recent death of this excellent Judge and most worthy citizen, is a public bereavement greatly to be deplored, and is deeply regretted by the members of the Bar, they have, there fore, Resolved, As a testimony of their sense of the loss sustained by the public, of the esteem which they bore to his person, and of the respect and veneration which they cherish tor liis memory, that the members of the Bar, now convened, will put on mourning for him, by wearing a crape on the left arm for thirty days, from the date hereof. Also, That the Chairman of this meeting do request the Reverend Mr. Simons, Rector of St. Philips Church, to preach a funeral sermon on the occasion as soon as may be convenient to him. That the foregoing preample and resolutions, signed by tho Chairman, bo published in the Charleston newspapers. John Julius Pringle, Chairman. January 21,1811. [Charleston Courier. “ Chancellor Rutledge had lived in the most tempestuous period of our history; he had gone through the seven years of incessant trial and conflict, and ho had endured all that such a struggle had to inflict. War, with all the con comitants of war, was followed by political di vision, the most relentless and bitter. He did not escape, but he met the violence and the fu ry of party as he had previously met the com mon enemy of our country; he put both at defi ance, and he did so successfully. Chancellor Rutledge early adopted the opin ions of Washington and of Marshall; and with his two brothers, the two Pinckneys, and oth ers, was one of those South Carolina Federal ists of whom the biographer of Mr. Jefferon has spoken; he died as lie had lived, neither changing his creed, nor compromising his doc trine. But in behalf of such men, let it here be said, that so far as this State is concerned, the history of that party has never been writ ten. And that when the bugle sounded again in 1812, they were found standirg by their country, seeking no emolument for themselves. I have a distinct recollection of the three Rut ledges, of the two Pinchneys, and of other men of those days—Moultrie, Davy, Burke, William Washington, Isaac Huger, Ac., Ac., —and I have seen the man of whom we are speaking in company with some of them, His appearance was dignified in the extreme —somewhat stern, but polished beyond mistake —and his manners spoke his position and his training. Rigidly, but courteously polite, and perhaps a littie se vere in his deportment, it was impossible to be in his presence and not recognize the school to which he belonged. He was always the same model of a republican gentleman, affable and ac cessible, but never familiar; always gentle, but never doubtful, and on questions of principle, unyielding and immovable without reference to policy or circumstances. The basis of his whole character was truth, and though he never de parted from the highest refinement, yet where his own conceptions of integrity and morality were concerned, he would neither give nor take. He was inflexible himself, and not indulgent to those whose conduct savored of delinquency.— All his intelligence and all his research, seemed, on this subject, only to confirm his natural dis position. I do not imagine that any one, with the ordi nary knowledge of good breeding, could have taken a liberty with such a man; and lam very sure he never would intentionally have trespass ed on the feelings of another. He was charita ble and generous; he was kind, humane, affec tionate and brave; his friendships were like his “ will,” proverbially firm and unchanging. His only pride was that which every honest man has a right to indulge in, the consciousness of his own rectitude and the strength of his own reso lution, and he necessarily commanded the res pect and confidence of every virtuous mind. In life, Chancellor Rutledge performed his duty without fear or favor, and with an utter contempt for everything like ostentation or pa rade. Believing himself, as a citizen, equal to others, he nevor sought for patronage, but ac knowledged the rights and prerogatives of all men; and in death ho was calm and tranquil, but still preserving his peculiar aversion to the vanities of the world. Once when required to prepare an inscription for the tomb of a friend who was prominent in his regard, he simply wrote, “An honest man's tho noblest work of God.” And when the last arrow was hastening him away, having made his peace with heaven, he turned to those who wept at his side, giving them comfort and consolation, leaving with them this injunction: “Place me near my brother, Edward, but let no stone mark where I lie.”