Atlantic Ocean! Yes, I cannot help repeating it, neither the Roman Senate, in their best days, nor the Areopagus of Greece, nor the Councils of Nice, Constance and Trent, or that of the Barons who extorted Magna Charta from John, were superior, if they were in any respect equal, to the American Congress of '76. "For myself," said the elder Pitt, "I must declare and avow-(and I have read Thucydides, and have studied and admired the master states of the world)—that for solidity of reasoning, force of sagacity, and wisdom of conclusion, no nation or body of men can stand in preference to the General Congress at Philadelphia." And yet this illustrious body of men, I must repeat it, Mr. Herttell, could most devoutly pray to God to crown with success their virtuous efforts for the freedom and glory of their country; and could see no scare-crows, no penny-wise conclusions, in the way of appointing a clerical Chaplain, as the organ of their patriotic and patriarchal aspirations to the Throne of Eternal Justice: And can we, sir, without offending the meekness and modesty of the present and the last House of Assembly, compare them to that patriarchal galaxy of virtue, genius and wisdom!

5. Congress, under the new or present constitution-illumined by the intellectual splendor of an Ames and a Madison-commenced with, and their successors have uniformly continued this most excellent and laudable custom.

6. All or nearly all of our State Legislatures, have had the piety and the sound sense to preserve it.

7. The Convention, which framed the first constitution of this state, and the one which abolished that constitution, and substituted the present, were opened regularly every morning with prayer by a Clerical Chaplain.

8. The clause, upon which you found your opposition, existed in the first constitution; yet under that constitution Clerical Chaplains were always employed by both branches of the Legislature.

7. It is remarkable, that Mr. Jay, the original author and mover of the clause in question, served as Governor of this state; and that he never objected to the appointment of Clerical Chaplains in his executive capacity, by way of speech or message to the Legislature: This is pretty strong evidence, that he did not think it unconstitutional, as indeed he well knew that it was not.

10. It is certain that the Convention which framed the present Constitntion, transferred the clause in question from the old to the new, without altering even a word, and with a full knowledge that Clerical Chaplains had uniformly been appointed under the former, at every session of the Legislature: Is not this unequivocal evidence, that they intended the practice should be continued? If not so, why did they continue it themselves in their own daily practice? And further, if they intended to exclude Clergymen from being appointed as chapains, would they not have inserted a different

clause, declaring expressly, that Clergymen should not hold any office or place, or perform any duty whatsoever for the government, and at the expense of the Treasury; instead of allowing it to stand as at first, that they should not hold "any civil or military office or place?"

Without further specific enumeration, I will go on to remark, that as to this clause, on which you have founded your opposition, it is clear that neither Mr. Jay, its original author and mover, nor any of the legislative or conventional bodies, since its first adoption, ever thought of applying it to the exclusion of Clergymen as Chaplains from the halls of the Legislature: Indeed I just recollect, that the first convention which met to revise the constitution, was opened from day to day with prayer by a clerical Chaplain.

To say no more of Mr. Jay's silence on the subject, although silence on his part was a loud argument in favor of the custom; I know the fact that George Clinton, Morgan Lewis, Daniel D. Tompkins, Joseph C. Yates, and De Witt Clinton, all concurred heartily in the necessity and constitutional propriety of the measure in question: It was indeed in relation to the constitutionality of the appointment of Clerical Chaplains, that I was conversing with the truly great and good man, last mentioned, when he declared to me, as already stated, that he "would rather increase than diminish the influence of the Clergy."

These eminent and all very worthy men, my

friend, certainly knew as much of legal and constitutional principles; certainly understood as well the rules of construction, by which all statutes are to be tested, and had at least as much regard for civil, political and religious liberty, as the modern horse-racers of Duchess county, or the band of Infidels and Jews, combined, in the last or the present House of Assembly! I repeat it, however, that I mean no personal offence to Infidels or Jews: And I do most cheerfully and gratefully seize the opportunity to acknowledge, that in very early life, and under very distressing circumstances, in a far off land of strangers, I experienced that liberality and humanity from a Jew, the truly benevolent Aaron Lopez, of Rhode-Island-but then more than a thousand miles from that state-which had been denied me by more than one pretended Christian. I am, then, opposed to Infidels and Jews, only as they stand opposed to my sentiments or opinions— and more especially as they stand between me and the cause of my Redeemer.

All this weight of authority and precedent, Mr. Herttell, connected with what I have said in my preceding letters, proves conclusively, that the appointment of Clerical Chaplains is not only a custom, both in the civil and military departments of all civilized and christian governments, so universal; and has been so uniformly preserved in practice for ages, that it ought not to be lightly esteemed, and much less dispensed with; but that it is, at the same time, a custom, founded on the laws of God and

the state constitution; and called for by the duty, which, as a people, we owe to that God, to ourselves, and to posterity: For we owe it to posterity to hand down to them unimparied, all that is excellent and benign in the glorious institutions, derived from the wisdom, the virtue and the valor of our ancestors: And in having proved thus much, sir, I have fairly stripped the opposition to the appointment of Clerical Chaplains to the Legislature of every rational pretence; and have shown it to have no other motive than that of hatred and persecution towards a valuable, a venerable, and an indispensable profession!

As to the Anecdote, which you relate, of the Presbyterian Clergyman in the Convention which framed the old constitution, and Mr. Jay-for I have not yet finally dismissed your speech-it may have been that the former displayed a little too much zeal for the Church in his then situation; but I must be permitted to doubt the fact, unless you can vouch for it yourself, that Mr. Jay so far lost sight of the urbanity and politeness of a gentleman, by which he was pre-eminently distinguished, as to treat the Clergyman, or any other man, as you have described. [R.] I am aware, that a great judge of human nature divided the vulgar portion of our species into the high and low, or great and little vulgar; and my own experience of mankind, which has enabled me to take a very broad and extensive view, fully confirms the correctness of the division; but Mr. Jay was not one of the high or great vulgar, any