and to submit to some alteration of long established habits, seemed likely to throw a shadow over his hitherto unconquerable spirits. He was not saddened by the change, but he became more placid and quiet, and more frequently thought and spoke of his approaching decease. Affecting signs that the end was at hand were not wanting; his paternal tree was fast shedding its leaves. His brother Samuel died in April of this year; in the August following, his two other brothers, one of whom had attained the age of eightysix, and a favorite niece, were carried to the grave. Judge Smith was ill when the news of these deaths came, and though there was nothing alarming in the symptoms of his complaint, he seemed to be conscious that he was not to recover. Firmly and patiently he awaited the closing scene, though severely tried at intervals by bodily suffering; the few words which escaped him showed that the Christian's faith did not fail in the trying hour. He died on the 21st of September, passing the last hour so quietly, that no one knew when he ceased to breathe. His remains were interred at Exeter, in a space which he had reserved between the graves of Ariana and her mother, and a plain marble headstone bears a modest and truthful inscription to his memory.

S.a. Elist,

ART. V. 1. Thirteenth Annual Report of the Trustees of the Perkins Institution, and Massachusetts Asylum for the Blind, to the Corporation. Boston. 1845. 8vo. pp. 84.

2. Quarterly Journal of the American Education Society. February, 1845. Boston: T. R. Marvin. 8vo. pp. 16. 3. Nineteenth Annual Report of the Board of Managers of the Prison Discipline Society. Boston. 1844. 8vo. 4. Annual Statement of the Treasurer of Harvard College; made October 5th, 1844. Cambridge: Metcalf & Co. 8vo. pp. 24.

IN September, 1830, at the celebration which took place, under the direction of the city authorities, of the two hundredth anniversary of the settlement of Boston, President Quincy delivered an address which was replete with interest

best, only in a contest between the judiciary and the legislature, from which nothing but evil would have ensued.

Judge Smith felt severely the disappointment of his hopes in the loss of this office, though another station, similar in its character, but less desirable, was immediately offered to him. The chief-justiceship of New Hampshire was now vacant, and his preeminent fitness for the post was so generally acknowledged, that all parties desired it should be offered to him. He was accordingly appointed by Governor Gilman ; but the salary attached to the office was so insufficient, being but eight hundred and fifty dollars a year, that he refused to serve. The legislature immediately raised the salary to one thousand dollars, and although this pitiful increase was even more indicative of an illiberal and parsimonious spirit than the smallness of the original sum, Judge Smith then determined to accept the appointment. "It is with great reluctance," he wrote to the governor, "that I have formed this determination, and I have a strong presentiment that I shall repent it. I mention this, that I may avoid the imputation of fickleness, in case on trial I should find it my duty to resign it." His acceptance under these circumstances was certainly an act of great disinterestedness, prompted by a high sense of public duty; for even the increased salary was less than a third of the sum which he had earned in one year by his practice at the bar. He kept regular accounts of his expenses, which he found to exceed twelve hundred dollars a year, not including the cost of going the circuit, which amounted to three hundred more. He had as yet accumulated but little property, which, of course, would be rapidly diminished by continuing in office upon these terms.

No one could be expected to submit to such a sacrifice of his private interests for a long period. Accordingly, in June, 1804, after he had been upon the New Hampshire bench but two years, he addressed an able and dignified letter to the two branches of the legislature, intimating that he should be obliged to resign, if his compensation was not increased. He showed that the duties of the office occupied his time both in and out of court, that the vacation had been no season of repose for him, and that the constitution had wisely prohibited a judge from holding any other office. The considerations of public policy, which go to prove the necessity of maintaining the dignity and independence of the

judiciary, were plainly but forcibly set forth, and the evil consequences of the penurious system were shown by an appeal to the past history of the courts.

"One would think it would be the policy of the public to invite, by holding out suitable encouragement, the most eminent at the bar or in the state, those of the fairest character both for talents and integrity, to a seat on the bench. There were, at a late period, living, ten persons who had resigned, and two who had declined, the office of judge of the Superior Court. Three are lately deceased. Since the Revolution, the judges of the Su-. perior Court, upon an average, have held the office less than five years. Can there be better evidence that the emoluments are not considered as adequate to the duties? While a judge holds the office no more than five years, have we much reason to expect uniformity in decisions? Do we not lose all the benefits flowing from experience?" - p. 162.

This letter had the desired effect, as the legislature immediately passed a bill by a large vote, fixing the salary of the chief-justice at fifteen hundred dollars. "This resolution," says Judge Smith's biographer, " was the more honorable both to him and to them, from the fact that a majority of the legislature were opposed to the political principles which he was perfectly well known to profess."

We have dwelt long upon the history of this passage in Judge Smith's life, insignificant as it may appear to the hasty observer, because, when rightly considered, it is full of instruction for us at the present day. Within a few years, the rage for retrenchment in the public expenditures has caused the salaries of the judges to be materially diminished in nearly every State in the union, though they were before confessedly far below the yearly gains of a lawyer in full practice, and though the expenses of living within the same period have considerably increased. Quite recently, if newspaper accounts may be credited, New Hampshire herself has narrowly escaped losing the chief ornament of her supreme bench, because a private manufacturing corporation wished him to become their agent with a salary two or three times as great as that received by the chief-justice. Massachusetts has had the mortification of seeing four out of the five judges in one of her courts resign their offices within one year, because two political parties in her legislature were running a race with each other to see which should curry

most favor with the people by diminishing the public expenses. Ohio has just lost her chief-justice from a similar cause, and it is rumored that the whole bench are about to follow his example; while, in Pennsylvania, an important judgeship has recently gone a begging among the members of the bar on the same grounds. If this unwise, parsimonious spirit continues to govern our legislative assemblies, we may expect to see the character of the bench committed to judges who will dishonor it by their ignorance, or stain it by their corruption; or else, that the aristocratic and monarchical principle will prevail, of conferring high public office, as is now the case with a seat in the British parliament, only upon men whose great wealth enables them to serve without pay, and therefore without any sense of responsibility or obligation to their constituents.

It was not customary in Judge Smith's time to publish reports of judicial decisions, and, consequently, his reputation as a judge depends mainly upon tradition. How highly his services in this capacity were valued appears from the pains taken by the bar and the legislature to establish and continue him in office, and from the hearty testimony rendered by his contemporaries to the importance of the work he accomplished in renovating and building up the judicial system of the State. "With him," says the present chiefjustice of New Hampshire," there arose a new order of things." Methodical, vigilant, and industrious in his own habits, he reduced the business of the courts to form and method; exact and profound in his knowledge of the established principles of the law, his decisions rested on the sure basis of precedent and authority, instead of the vague and shifting impressions of an individual respecting the demands of natural justice. Many of the charges which he delivered to the grand juries still exist in manuscript, and show what comprehensive views he was wont to take of the general interests of society, and of the dependence of them all on a pure and correct administration of justice. They are remarkable, not for originality or refinement of speculation, but for broad, practical wisdom, and for sound views of the nature and intent of a criminal code, and the proper mode of administering it. They are always well written, and dignified in tone; and they set forth with impressive earnestness the high character and important bearing of the functions of a grand juror.

In June, 1809, Judge Smith resigned his seat upon the bench and became governor of New Hampshire, to which office he had been elected by popular vote in the preceding spring. The change was not one that he desired, and he had given only a tacit consent to be held up as a candidate. Even this passive acquiescence in the change was imposed upon him only by considerations of fidelity to the party to which he belonged, whose permanent success with the people, as appears from his letters, he had long since ceased to expect. He was chosen by a lean majority, at a time when party spirit ran high, and he could not reasonably have expected to retain his new office for more than one year. Almost the only object that he sought to obtain, while governor, was the passage of some law for the improvement of the judiciary; he was unsuccessful, and the attempt only tended to diminish his popularity. A high Federalist in principle, he acted out the uncompromising tenets of his party with no reserve; and the people resented the conduct of a governor who was too honest to deceive, and too proud to flatter them. At the very next election, they turned him out, and put another in his place; and he returned, not unwillingly, to his practice at the bar. There he found associates whom it was a high pleasure to meet, and rivals by whom it was an honor to be conquered; "for in the same county with himself were Jeremiah Mason, Daniel Webster, and George Sullivan," all of them in the full vigor of their powers. For a few years, he was connected with them in the management of all the important business in that part of the country, to the great advantage both of his fame and fortune, when a call, an unwelcome one to him, was again made for his services in a judicial capacity.

The vacancies upon the supreme bench had been filled by the party then in power with weak and incompetent persons, who could not command the respect of the bar, nor the confidence of the public. In 1813, the Federalists triumphed in the State elections, and one of their first objects was to improve the standing of the judiciary. Unable to reach the evil in any other way, as the constitution provided that the judges should hold their offices during good behaviour, they passed a law abolishing the courts as then constituted, and remodelling the whole system. This was an ingenious but unworthy mode of removing incompetent