Men, who have been bred up, amid the pursuits of trade, have been, with great propriety, selected, to fill the offices of _consuls_, in foreign lands; agreeably to the long established distinction, that _consuls_ represent the _commercial affairs_--_amba.s.sadors_ the _state and dignity_ of the country, from whence they come.

Oh! for the wand of that enchantress, the glorious witch of Endor! to turn up the sod of memory, and conjure, from their honorable graves, the train of ill.u.s.trious, and highly gifted men, who, from time to time, have been sent forth, to represent this great Republic, before the throne of England!

First, on that scroll of honor, is a name, which shall prove coeval with the first days, and with the last, of this Republic. It shall never perish, till the whole earth itself shall be rolled up, like a scroll. On the second day of June, 1785, JOHN ADAMS was presented to King George, the third. The very man, whom that obstinate, old monarch had never contemplated, in his royal visions, but as a rebel, suing for pardon, with a rope about his neck, then stood before him, calm and erect--the equal of that king, in all things, that became a man, and his mighty superior in many--the representative of a nation, which his consummate wisdom, and invincible, moral courage had contributed, so materially, to render free and independent.

What a tribute was conveyed, in the words of Jefferson, his political rival--"_The great pillar and support to the declaration of independence, and its ablest advocate and champion on the floor of the house was_ JOHN ADAMS. _He was the Colossus of that Congress: not graceful, not eloquent, not always fluent, in his public addresses, he yet came out with a power both of thought and expression, which moved the hearers from their seats._"

In those thoughtful days, secretaries of legation were carefully selected, and with some reference, of course, to their contingent responsibilities, in the event of the absence, or illness, of their princ.i.p.als. When, in 1779, Mr. Adams went, on his mission to France, a gentleman of high qualifications, Mr. Francis Dana, gave up his seat, _as a member of Congress_, to follow that great man, _as secretary of legation_. Mr. Dana subsequently figured, ably and gracefully, in the highest stations. In 1780, he was minister to Russia. In 1784, he was a delegate to Congress.

In 1797, he declined the office of envoy extraordinary to France. From 1792 to 1806, he was the able, impartial, and eminently dignified Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Ma.s.sachusetts.

In 1794, it was thought, by the appointing power, that John Jay might be trusted to represent our Republic, at the British Court. With what a reputation, for wisdom, and talents, and learning, that great man crossed the sea! Mr. Jay, an eminent lawyer, uniting the wisdom and dignity of years, with the vigor and zeal of early manhood, was a member of the first American Congress, at the age of twenty-nine. Chairman of the Committee, of which Lee and Livingston were members, he was the author of the eloquent "_Address to the People of Great Britain_." He was Chief Justice of the State of New York, from 1777 to 1779, and relinquished that elevated station, as incompatible with the due performance of his duties, as President of Congress. From his skilful hand came the stirring address of that a.s.sembly, to its const.i.tuents, of Sept. 8, 1779. He was appointed minister plenipotentiary to Spain, at the close of that year--a commissioner, to negotiate peace with Great Britain, in 1782--Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of the United States, in 1789--Governor of New York, in 1795, being then abroad, as minister plenipotentiary of the United States, to Great Britain, to which office he was appointed in 1794--and again Governor of New York, in 1798.

Rufus King graduated at Harvard College, in 1777, with a high reputation, as a cla.s.sical scholar and an orator; and studied his profession, with the late Chief Justice Parsons. In 1784, he was a delegate to Congress. He was a member of the Convention of 1787, to form the Const.i.tution of the United States. In 1789, he was a member of the United States Senate. Of the celebrated Camillus papers, commonly ascribed to Hamilton, all, excepting the ten first, were from the pen of Rufus King. In 1796, he was nominated, by Washington, minister plenipotentiary to the Court of Great Britain. He filled that high station, till the close of the second year of the Jefferson administration. After a long retirement, he was again in the Senate of the United States, in 1813. After quitting the Senate, in 1825, he was once more appointed minister to Great Britain; but, after remaining abroad, about a year, in ill health, he returned, and died at Jamaica, Long Island, April 29, 1827.

"_And what shall I more say?_ For the time would fail me, to tell of"

Pinckney, and Gore, and the younger Adams, that incarnation of wisdom and learning, and Gallatin, and Maclean, and Everett, and Bancroft, every one of whom has been preceded, by the well-earned reputation of high, intellectual powers and attainments, whatever may have been the difference of their political opinions.

Knowledge is power; talent is power; and fine literary tastes and acquirements are, preeminently, power; and, in no spot, upon the surface of the earth, are they more truly so, than in the great British metropolis. The wand of a man of letters can there do more, than can be achieved, by the power of Midas, or the wonder-working lamp of Aladdin.

Our fathers, therefore, preferred, that the nation should be represented, in its simplicity and strength, by men of long heads, strong hearts, and short purses. They considered a regular, thorough, and polished education, literary attainments of a very high order, a clear and comprehensive knowledge of the law of nations, and an extensive store of general information, absolutely essential, in a minister plenipotentiary, from this Republic, to the Court of Great Britain; for our _state and dignity_ were to be represented there, not less than our _commercial relations_.

They well knew, that our representative should be qualified to represent the refined and educated portions of our community, in the presence of those elevated cla.s.ses, among whom he must frequently appear; and "_whose talk_," to use the expression of Dr. Johnson, was not likely to be "_of bullocks_." They therefore invariably selected, for this exalted station, one, who would be abundantly able to represent the nation, with gravity, and dignity, and wisdom, and knowledge, and power; and who would never be reduced, whatever the subject might be, to believe his safety was in sitting still, or of suffering the secret of his impotency to escape, by opening his mouth.

If I have pa.s.sed too rapidly for the reader's willingness to linger, over the names of some highly distinguished men, who have so ably represented our country, at the British Court, and who still _survive_--it is because _my dealings are with the dead_.

No. LXXIV.

"An immense quant.i.ty of fuel was always of necessity used, when dead bodies were burned, instead of buried; and a friend, learned in such lore, as well as in much that is far more valuable, informs us that the burning of a _martyr_ was always an expensive process."

This pa.s.sage was transferred, from the New York Courier and Enquirer, to the Boston Atlas, December 29, 1849, and is part of an article having reference to the partial cremation of Dr. Parkman's remains.

I must presume, as a s.e.xton of the old school, to doubt the accuracy of this statement, in the very face of the averment, that the editor's authority is "_a friend, learned in such lore_."

To enable my readers to judge of the comparative expense of burial, in the ordinary mode, by interment or entombment, and by cremation, I refer, in the first place, to Mr. Chadwick's Report, made by request of Her Majesty's Princ.i.p.al Secretary of State, for the Home Department, Lond.

1843, in which it is stated, that a Master in Chancery, when dealing with insolvent estates, will pa.s.s, "_as a matter of course_," such claims as these--from 60 to 100 for burying an upper tradesman--250 for burying a gentleman--500 to 1500 for burying a n.o.bleman.

But let us confine our remarks to the particular allegation. The "_friend, learned in such lore_," has greatly diminished the labor of refutation, by confining his statement to the burning of _martyrs_--"_the burning of a martyr was always an expensive process_," requiring, says the Courier and Enquirer, "_an immense quant.i.ty of fuel_."

I well remember to have read, though I cannot recall the authority, that aromatic woods and spices were occasionally used in the East, during the _suttees_, to correct the offensive odor. In addition to the reason, a.s.signed by Cicero, De Legibus, ii. 23, for the law against intramural burning, that conflagration might be avoided--Servius, in a note, on the aeneis, vi. 150, states another, that the air might not be infected with the stench. To prevent this, we know that costly perfumes were cast upon the pile; and the respect and affection for the defunct came to be measured, at last, by this species of extravagance; just as the funereal sorrow of the Irish is supposed to be graduated, by the number of coaches, and the quant.i.ty of whiskey.

But our business is with the _martyrs_. What was the cost of burning John Rogers I really do not know. I doubt if the process was very expensive; for good old John Strype has told us, almost to a f.a.got, how much fuel it took, to burn Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley. The fuel, employed to burn Latimer and Ridley, cost fifteen shillings and four pence sterling for both; and the fuel for burning Cranmer, nine shillings and four pence only. Then there were chains, stakes, laborers, and cartage; and the whole cost for burning all three, was _one pound, sixteen shillings, and six pence_! Not a very expensive process truly. The authority is not at every one's command: I therefore give it entire, from Strype's Memorials of Cranmer, Oxford ed., 1840, vol. i. p. 563:--

_s._ _d._ "For three loads of wood f.a.gots to burn Ridley and Latimer, 12 0 Item, one load of furs f.a.gots, 3 4 For the carriage of these four loads, 2 0 Item, a post, 1 4 Item, two chains, 3 4 Item, two staples, 0 6 Item, four laborers, 2 8

"FOR BURNING CRANMER.

For an 100 of wood f.a.gots, 6 0 For an 100 and half of furs f.a.gots, 3 4 For the carriage of them, 0 8 To two laborers, 1 4."

1500 to _bury_ a n.o.bleman, and 1 16 6, to _burn_ three martyrs! Leaving the Courier and Enquirer, and the "_friend, learned in such lore_," to _bury_ or to _burn_ this record, as they please, I turn to another subject, referred to, on the very same page of Strype's Memorials, and which is not without some little interest, at the present moment.

A prisoner, charged with any terrible offence, innocent or guilty, lies under the _surveillance_ of all eyes and ears. The slightest act, the shortest word, the very breath of his nostrils are carefully reported. The public resolves itself into a committee of anxious inquirers, to ascertain precisely how he eats, and drinks, and sleeps. There are persons of lively fancies, whose imaginations fire up, at the mere sight of his prison walls, and start off, under high pressure, filling the air with rumors, too horribly delightful, to be doubted for an instant.

If the topic were not the terrible thing that it is, it would be difficult to preserve one's gravity, while listening to some portion of the testimony, upon which, it may be our fortune, one of these days, to be convicted of murder, by the charitable public.

Of the guilt or innocence of John White Webster I _know_ nothing, and I _believe_ nothing. But it has been currently reported, that, since his confinement, he has been detected, in the crime of eating oysters. I doubt, if this ordeal would have been considered entirely satisfactory, even by Dr. Mather, in 1692. Man is a marvellous monster, when sitting, self-placed, in judgment, on his fellow! The very thing, which is a sin, in the commission or observance, is no less a sin, in the omission and the breach--for who will doubt the blood-guiltiness of a man, that, while confined, on a charge of murder, can partake of an oyster pie! And if he cannot do this, who will doubt, that a consciousness of guilt has deprived him of his appet.i.te!

I have heard of a drunken husband, who, while staggering home, after midnight, communed with himself, as follows--"_If my wife has gone to bed, before I get home to supper, I'll beat her,--and if she is sitting up, so late as this, burning my wood and candles, I'll beat her_."

Good John Strype, ibid. 562, says of Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley, while in the prison of Bocardo--"They ate constantly suppers as well as dinners.

Their meals amounted to about three or four shillings; seldom exceeding four. Their bread and ale commonly came to two pence or three pence; they had constantly cheese and pears for their last dish, both at dinner and supper; and always wine." It is not uninteresting to note the prices, paid for certain articles of their diet, in those days, 1555. While describing the _provant_ of these martyrs, Strype annexes the prices, "_it being an extraordinary dear time_.--A goose, 14d. A pig, 12 oz. 13d. A cony, 6d. A woodc.o.c.k, 3d. and sometimes 5d. A couple of chickens, 6d. Three plovers, 10d. Half a dozen larks, 3d. A dozen of larks and 2 plovers, 10d. A breast of veal, 11d. A shoulder of mutton, 10d. Roast beef, 12d." He presents one of Cranmer's bills of fare:--

"Bread and ale, 2.d.

Item oisters, 1.d.

Item b.u.t.ter, 2.d.

Item eggs, 2.d.

Item lyng, 8.d.

Item a piece of fresh salmon, 10.d.

Wine, 3.d.

Cheese and pears, 2.d."

Two bailiffs, Wells and Winkle, upon their own responsibility, furnished the table of these martyrs, and appear never to have been reimbursed.

Strype says, ibid. 563, that they expended 63 10s. 2d., and never received but 20, which they obtained from Sir William Petre, Secretary of State. Ten years after, a pet.i.tion was presented to the successor of Cranmer, that these poor bailiffs might receive some recompense.

After the pile had burnt down, in the case of Cranmer, upon raking among the embers, his heart was found entire. Upon this incident, Strype exclaims--"Methinks it is a pity, that his heart, that remained sound in the fire, and was found unconsumed in his ashes, was not preserved in some urn; which, when the better times of Queen Elizabeth came, might, in memory of this truly good and great Thomas of Canterbury, have been placed among his predecessors, in his church there, as one of the truest glories of that See."

In 1821, Mr. William Ward, of Serampore, published, in London, his "_Farewell Letters_." Mr. Ward was a Baptist missionary; and, at the time of the publication, was preparing to return to Bengal. This work was very favorably reviewed in the Christian Observer, vol. xxi. p. 504. I have never met with a description, so exceedingly minute, of the _suttee_, the process of burning widows. He thus describes the funeral pile--"The funeral pile consists of a quant.i.ty of f.a.gots, laid on the earth, rising, in height, about three feet from the ground, about four feet wide, and six feet in length." Admitting these f.a.gots to be closely packed, the pile contains seventy-two cubic feet of wood, or fifty-six less than a cord.

"_A large quant.i.ty of f.a.gots are then laid upon the bodies_," says Mr.

Ward. As the widow often leaps from the pile, and is chased back again, into the flames, by the benevolent Bramins, the f.a.gots, which are not heaped _around_ the pile, but "_laid on the bodies_," cannot be a very oppressive load; and the quant.i.ty, thus employed in the _suttee_, is for the cremation of two bodies, at least, the dead husband, and the living widow.

There can be no doubt of the superior economy of cremation, over earth-burial. The notions of an "_expensive process_," and the "_immense quant.i.ties of fuel_," have no foundation in practice. If the ashes, as has been sometimes the case, were given to the winds, or cast upon the waters, the expense of cremation would be exceedingly small. But cremation, however inexpensive, in itself, has led to unmeasured extravagance, in the matter of urns of the most costly materials, and workmanship, of which an ample account may be found, in the _Hydriotaphia_ of Sir Thomas Browne, London, 1835, vol. iii. p. 449.

More remarkable changes have occurred, in modern times, than a revival of the practice of cremation. It is an error, however, to suppose this practice to have been the original mode of dealing with the dead. It was very general about the year 1225, B. C., but the usage, at the present day, was, doubtless, the primitive practice of mankind. So thought Cicero, De Legibus ii. 22. "Ac mihi quidem antiquissimum sepulturae genus id fuisse videtur, quo apud Xenophontem Cyrus ut.i.tur. Redditur enim terrae corpus, et ita locatum ac situm, quasi operimento matris obducitur."

Nevertheless, there is a strong cremation party among us. Who would not save sixpence, if he could, even in a winding-sheet! Should the wood and lumber interest be fairly represented, in our city councils, it would not be surprising, if there should be a majority, in favor of taking the remains of our citizens to Nova Scotia, to be burnt, rather than to Malden, to be buried. My friends, Birch, Touchwood, and Deal, are of this opinion; and would be happy to receive the citizens on board their regular coasters, for this purpose, at a reasonable price, per hundred, or by the single citizen--packed in ice.

An experienced person will be always on hand, to receive the corpses.

Religious services will be duly performed, during the burning, without extra charge; and, should the project find favor with the public, a regular line of funeral coasters, with appropriate emblems, and figure-heads, will, in due time, be established. Those, who prefer the more economical mode of water-burial, for their departed relatives, thereby saving the expense of fuel altogether, will be accommodated, if they will leave orders in writing, with the masters on board, who will personally superintend the dropping of the bodies, off soundings.

No. LXXV.

While attempting to rectify the supposed mistakes of other men, we sometimes commit egregious blunders ourselves. In turning over an old copy of John Josselyn's Voyages to New England, in 1638 and 1663, my attention was attracted, by a particular pa.s.sage, and a marginal ma.n.u.script note, intended to correct what the annotator supposed, and what some readers might suppose, to be a blunder of the printer, or the author. The pa.s.sage runs thus--"In 1602, these North parts were further discovered by Capt.

_Bartholomew Gosnold_. The first _English_ that planted there, set down not far from the _Narragansetts Bay_, and called their Colony _Plimouth_, since old _Plimouth, An. Dom., 1602_." The annotator had written, on the margin, "_gross blunder_," and, in both instances, run his indignant pen through 1602, and subst.i.tuted 1620. There are others, doubtless, who would have done the same thing. The first aspect of the thing is certainly very tempting. The text, nevertheless, is undoubtedly correct. It is altogether likely, that the matter, stated by Josselyn, can be found, so stated by no other writer. In 1602, Gosnold discovered the Elizabeth Islands, and built a house, and erected palisades, on the "Island Elizabeth," the westernmost of the group, whose Indian name was Cuttyhunk. In 1797, Dr. Jeremy Belknap visited this interesting spot. "_We had the supreme satisfaction_," says he, Am. Biog. ii. 115, "_to find the cellar of Gosnold's store-house_!"