I was not the less obliged to Mr. Rawle for distinguishing me as he did; which gave me a standing at the bar, which I could not have expected for many years to come. I am happy in this opportunity to pay a grateful tribute to his memory.

I was not the only young man whom Mr. Rawle thus patronized; for benevolence was a strong trait in his character. I particularly remember a foreigner whom he generously took by the hand, and by his recommendations introduced into business in the line that he professed, and who afterwards repaid him with the blackest ingratitude. I forbear saying more upon this subject. I must not disturb the ashes of the dead. The ungrateful man gradually lost by his conduct the esteem which Mr. Rawle's friendship, and some talents that he possessed, had obtained for him. He left this country and went to England, where he died. There are, probably, persons yet living who will know to whom I allude.

I married in the year 1788, and from that time I began to lead a very retired life, attending only to the duties of my profession. My intercourse, therefore, with Mr. Rawle, was not so frequent as it used to be. We met in courts of justice in a friendly, but not so intimate a manner as theretofore. In the same year the federal constitution was promulgated. We took different sides. I regret to say, that I belonged to what was called the anti-federal party. I thought I was right: subsequent events have proved that I was in the wrong. The French revolution followed, and parties became still more exasperated. Under the administration of the elder Adams, Mr. Rawle was made district attorney. This brought us still more in opposition to each other; for in the great political causes, and the prize causes, which at that time were so numerous, we were almost always engaged on opposite sides. Notwithstanding all this, I can say with truth, that our mutual esteem never suffered any diminution. We met as antagonists, but always parted as friends. In all our forensic debates, and they were numerous, I do not remember a single harsh expression, or even a word that could inflict a wound on one or the other of the combatants. Mr. Rawle was sometimes satirical: he never suffered an unguarded expression of mine to escape, without some good stroke of wit, that was any thing but amusing to me; but it was always done in such a delicate, good humoured way, that it was impossible for me to take offence; and I well remember that once, when I had in an address to a jury fairly laid myself open to his shafts, I begged of him to spare me in his reply, which he was kind enough to promise, and kept his word. In the beginning of the present century, during the reign of the embargo, non-intercourse, and other restrictive measures produced by the British orders in council, and the Berlin and Milan decrees, a great number of causes were carried up from this city to the supreme court of the United States. The counsel engaged in those causes, were in the habit of going together to Washington, to argue their cases before that tribunal. These were Mr. Ingersoll, Mr. Dallas, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Edward Tilghman, Mr. Rawle, and myself, who am, alas! the only survivor of that joyous band. We hired a stage to ourselves, in which we

proceeded by easy journeys. The court sat then, as it does at present, or did until lately, in the month of February; so that we had to travel in the depth of winter, through bad roads, in the midst of rain, hail and snow, in no very comfortable way. Nevertheless, as soon as we were out of the city, and felt the flush of air, we were like school boys on the play ground on a holiday; and we began to kill time by all the means that our imagination could suggest. Flashes of wit shot their coruscations on all sides; puns of the genuine Philadelphia stamp were handed about; old college stories were revived; macaronic Latin was spoken with great purity; songs were sung, even classical songs, among which I recollect the famous Bacchanalian of the arch-deacon of Oxford, “Mihi est propositum in tabernâ mori;” in short, we might have been taken for any thing but the grave counsellors of the celebrated bar of Philadelphia.

The Emperor Napoleon was right, when he told the great actor Talma, that he did not know how to act the part of kings, when conversing with their confidential friends. "You make us speak," says he, "as if we were in a public audience in the full display of majesty. You should, on the contrary, make us speak exactly like other men; when in the bosom of our families, and with our intimate friends, we take off with great pleasure, the mask that we have been obliged to wear in public; and freed from that troublesome constraint, we sometimes say and do more foolish things, than those who are always at liberty to do as they please." So did the Philadelphia lawyers, when they had left the bar and the judges many miles behind them. Mr. Rawle was not so excited as some of us were: he was always mild and placid; but his strokes of wit produced the greater effect, as they came from him naturally and without study or pretensions. Mr. Ingersoll sat serious and composed, thinking of his causes, and little inclined to mirth. I sometimes thought of addressing him with Cur in theatrum, Cato severe venisti? I shall always remember with pleasure, those delightful journeys, in which we all became intimately acquainted with each other; for on such occasions, when free scope is given to the imagination, men appear in their true characters, and no art can prevent them from showing themselves as they really are.

Our appearance at the bar of the supreme court was always a scene of triumph. We entered the hall together, and judge Washington was heard to say, “This is my bar." Our causes had a preference over all others, in consideration of the distance we had to travel. The greatest liberality was shown to us, by the members of the profession who usually attended that court. It was really a proud thing at that time, to be a Philadelphia lawyer.

We returned home, of course, in the same manner that we had proceeded to the capitol. We occasionally met with accidents in going or returning, but none that is worth relating, except the one that I am about to mention. It was in the year 1808. I had argued against Mr. Rawle, the cause of M'Ilvaine v. Coxe (4 Cranch 209.) The main question in this case was, whether a native of New Jersey, who had left this country shortly after the declaration of independence, and had ever since resided abroad and always adhered to his first alle

giance, was to be considered as a citizen or an alien. I contended that he was born a British subject, and remained such through life. On the other side, it was argued that the revolution was a new birth, and that on independence being declared, he was made a citizen against his will. On this I observed, that I had never heard of a surgical operation, by which the subject was extracted from the womb, with the revolutionary forceps. This produced much mirth on the bench and at the bar, as did the strokes of keen wit which Mr. Rawle, who was a counsel on the other side, shot at me in reply. On the whole, however, I lost my cause; and the obstetrical operation was decreed to have been secundum

artem.

This little incident would not be worth relating, if it were not for the comicoserious accident that it produced. The cause that I have mentioned, being the last we had to argue, we immediately afterwards set out on our return home. The argument of that cause was yet fresh upon our minds, and became the subject of conversation, on our way to Baltimore. We were all in very high spirits, and the forceps was found a very good subject for raillery. Mr. Rawle had said something about a poker, which hit the fancy of our colleagues, and which I cannot now remember. When the spirits are high, any thing will do to found a jest upon. So that the poker and the forceps became the common topics of our conversation. Every one cracked his joke upon one or the other. Fingers were pointed at us, in imitation of those instruments. To such a degree was our mirth carried, that our Irish driver, listening to us, did not perceive a stump that was before him: the carriage made a terrible jolt, our photon was thrown from his seat, the horses took fright, and ran away with us at a dreadful rate. A river or creek was before us, and the bridge was not very safe. It was determined to jump out of the carriage. I was pressed to show the example, but I did not choose to do it, intending to take my own course. I have heard it related, that at that moment, I took a pinch of snuff very leisurely; but that I do not remember, and I very much doubt the truth of the fact. Be that as it may, all except myself jumped out of the carriage. Being then left alone, I collected all my presence of mind, looked about me, chose my position, and jumped out so fortunately, that I fell upon my feet without the least injury. Turning back to look behind me, the first thing I saw was my friend Lewis, sprawling upon the ground, and not able to rise alone. I raised him on his feet, and presently came our companions, who all complained of being more or less bruised. The driver alone, by a kind of miracle, had suffered nothing from his fall. We all determined to walk to Baltimore as well as we could: there was, indeed, nothing else for us to do; when to our great comfort, we saw cur stage returning, under safe guidance. The horses had been stopped in their mad career, and an honest countryman was bringing them back to us, with the vehicle. We joyfully resumed our places; and on our arrival at Baltimore at the Fountain Inn, a surgeon was immediately sent for, who bled all y companions. Feeling perfectly weil, I did not choose to submit to the operation. We spent the afternoon at Baltimore, and the next day resumed our

route towards Philadelphia. We had a narrow escape. I am now left alone on the stage of life, which they were doomed also to leave before me. I hope I shall meet them safe again in a better place.

In the year 1815, was received the joyful news of the peace with Great Britain. Until that period, a colonial spirit had prevailed throughout this country, that had checked all efforts at literary enterprisc. The successful issue of the war raised our spirits; and our minds took a direction towards literature and science. The news was received about the middle of February. On the 17th of March, the American Philosophical Society, which had been long slumbering, resolved "That a committee of their body should be added to those before existing; to be denominated 'The committee of history, moral science, and general literature."" This name was adopted on the suggestion of Mr. Rawle, who imme. diately inscribed his name among the members of the new association.

The business of the committee, (as is usual in such cases,) was carried on by a few. The active members were chief justice Tilghman, (the chairman,) Dr. Wistar, Mr. John Vaughan, Mr. Correa de Serra, Mr. Rawle, and myself, who was the corresponding secretary. Our meetings were frequent, and Mr. Rawle seldom failed to attend. His advice was followed in many instances. The report on the structure of Indian languages, which the committee presented to the society in 1819, when read at our small meeting, received from him several valuable corrections. He felt so interested in the subject, that he entered into a correspondence with me upon it, which the pressure of his professional business did not permit him to continue. He questioned the polysyllabic character ascribed by us to those languages, on the grounds that, as they are not written, it is impossible to know, whether what was called one long word, was not in fact several words combined or joined together. His arguments were ingenious, and in some instances conclusive. Other questions were in this manner amicably discussed between us. I regret that this correspondence was not allowed to proceed farther.

In the year 1820, a society was formed among the judges and members of the bar, called “The society for the promotion of legal knowledge and forensic eloquence." The Law Academy, still existing, was instituted as a branch of it, and under its patronage. The president of this association was chief justice Tilghman; and Mr. Rawle was the vice-president.' That society was incorpo

'I hope it will not be thought amiss to subjoin here a list of the officers of that society, as first instituted. Those whose names are in italics are deceased. President-William Tilghman. Vice-President-William Rawle.

Trustees: Charles Chauncey, Thomas Kittera, John M. Scott, Bloomfield M'Ilvaine, John Keating, Jr.

Secretary-John K. Kane.
Treasurer-Benjamin Tilghman.

Provost of the Law Academy-Peter S. Du Ponceau.

Vice-Provost-James Gibson.

See Hall's Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 222.

rated in 1821; and after continuing two or three years, it fell through by an accident; the room in which the.election of officers was to have been held, having been found locked, and no election having taken place. It was not revived, and the Law Academy has continued without it.

While that society remained in existence, Mr. Rawle was one of its most active officers. It gave an impulse to legal studies, and to the Law Academy, which has not ceased to operate. As one of the founders and patrons of the latter institution, Mr. Rawle always felt an interest in their pursuits; and as you have remarked, he favoured them in 1832, twelve years after their first establishment, with an interesting and instructive address. He was the friend of youth, and delighted in promoting the progress and advancement of the rising generation.

I have thus, my dear sir, related to you, all the circumstances of Mr. Rawle's life, within my present recollection, which have come under my personal observation, and which are not included in your biographical notice. There may be other facts, which I might have mentioned, but which have escaped my memory. I regret that I have been obliged to speak of myself so frequently in this narra. tive; but you will easily perceive that I could not avoid it; and indeed I feel no small degree of pride, in finding my name, on this occasion, necessarily connected with that of one whose friendship sheds lustre on all who have had the good fortune to enjoy it.

I am, very sincerely,

Your friend and humble servant,
PETER S. DU PONCEAU,

ART. II.-ALIENAGE.

THE policy of the national government, and of the individual states of the American union, has been to encourage growth of population and cultivation of the soil, by means of foreign immigration. Not only is facility afforded to strangers, by the naturalization laws, for the acquisition of the rights of citizenship, but the enjoyment of property under some restrictions, in most if not all the different states, is insured to such as do not choose to lay aside the distinctive character of aliens.