in evidence in his defense the truth of the matter contained in the publication, charged as libellous: Provided always, that such evidence shall not be a justification, unless on the trial it shall be further made satisfactorily to appear that the matter charged as libellous was published with good motives and for justifiable ends." Chancellor Kent in his notes, referring to Hamilton's argument at this remarkable trial, says it " was the greatest forensic effort Hamilton ever made. He was at times highly impassioned and patriotic. His whole soul was enlisted in the cause."

On a fly-leaf of a pamphlet similar to mine, shown me by Mr. Spofford at the congressional library, a writer signing himself "C. H.," who evidently listened to Hamilton's argument, wrote that "Caines the reporter dropped his pen and sat with his faculties suspended in blank (still) admiration at a great part of Hamilton's speech, which was confessedly one of the best ever delivered."

Harry Croswell was born at West Hartford, Connecticut, June 16, 1778. Subsequent to his connection with the Wasp, in 1809 he edited a federal newspaper in Albany, where he was prosecuted for a libel on Mr. Southwick, a leading democratic editor, who recovered damages. He finally quit publishing if not politics, and was ordained a deacon in Christ church, May 8, 1814, at Hudson, where he remained in charge until June, 1815, when he became rector of Trinity church, New Haven. He died, March 13, 1858. Edwin Croswell of the Albany Argus was his nephew.

In his Life of Jefferson Randall speaks of Callender, a Scotchman by birth, as possessed of much coarse, vigorous ability, but says his course was steadily downward, owing to habits of inebriety, consorting with vicious and degraded men. He was drowned in James river, into which he had gone to bathe in a state of intoxication. Probably no one of our Presidents has been more violently assailed by his enemies than Thomas Jefferson, and James Thompson Callender was one who, after exhausting his vituperation against the administrations of Washington and Adams, employed the remnant of his worthless life in abusing the President who had come to his relief when, as the President thought, he was suffering unjust punishment under the sedition act.

Horatio King)

WASHINGTON, February 9, 1891.

POWER TO GRANT PATENTS FOR INVENTIONS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION IN 1787

The proceedings in the federal convention relating to the insertion in the Constitution of a clause giving power to congress to grant patents for inventions may be briefly told. On May 29, 1787, Edmund Randolph of Virginia opened the business of the convention by submitting a series of resolutions known as the "Virginia Plan;" then Charles C. Pinckney of South Carolina laid before it the draft of a federal government which he had prepared. There was no mention in either of these schemes of any power to grant patents. They were referred to a committee, and the committee subsequently reported in favor of Mr. Randolph's plan; which, however, had been amended in the committee of the whole house. Still no reference to such a power was made. Discussion of the “ "Virginia Plan" was postponed until Mr. Patterson of New Jersey could submit a plan. Both of these plans were referred to the committee of the whole, which reported again in favor of Mr. Randolph's plan as the basis of the Constitution. After debating the report for over a month, all the proceedings of the convention up to that time were referred to a committee of detail appointed for the purpose. Thirteen days later the committee made a report, but still there was no provision for granting patents. These details of the proceedings of the convention are only given to show that practically the Constitution had been agreed upon before it occurred to any member to suggest the power of granting patents. August 18, nearly three months after the convention had been in session, James Madison of Virginia arose in his place and "submitted, in order to be referred to the committee of detail, certain powers as proper to be added to those of the general legislature." Among these powers were two: "To secure to literary authors their copyrights for a limited time," and "to encourage by premiums and provisions the advancement of useful knowledge and discoveries." On the same day Charles Pinckney of South Carolina also submitted a number of propositions, among which were: "To grant patents for useful inventions, and "to secure to authors exclusive rights for a certain time."

The propositions of both these gentlemen were referred to the committee. On August 31 such parts of the Constitution as had not been

acted on were referred to a committee composed of one member from each state, and among these undisposed parts were the propositions to give congress the power to grant patents for inventions. Mr. Madison, but not Mr. Pinckney, was of this committee. On September 5 the committee reported and recommended, among other things, that congress have the power "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." This was agreed to without a dissenting vote. In the final revision of the style and arrangement of the articles in the Constitution this clause became paragraph 8, section 8, of article I., where it has ever since remained.

Thus it is seen that the distinction of submitting the proposals to give this power to congress rests jointly with James Madison and Charles Pinckney. Both of them were revolutionary patriots of marked ability and wide legislative experience, but neither appears to have had any special interest in science or the useful arts. They doubtless were prompted to this action by the same motives advanced by Mr. Madison in a paper in the Federalist in adverting to this power. He wrote as follows: "The utility of this power will scarcely be questioned. The copyright of authors has been solemnly adjudged in Great Britain to be a right at common law. The right to useful inventions seems with equal reason to belong to the inventors. The public good fully coincides in both cases with the claims of individuals. The states cannot separately make effectual provision for either of the cases, and most of them have anticipated the decision of this point by laws passed at the instance of congress." Time has justified the equity of Mr. Madison's argument, and the neglect and failure of the states to grant patents for inventions since the adoption of the Constitution have corroborated its truth.

Levin It 6 amphise

WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

PRESIDENT LINCOLN AND HIS ENGLISH VISITORS

One morning during the late civil war President Lincoln received some visitors by appointment at an early hour. A prominent senator ushered into his chamber four Englishmen of mature years and dignified bearing, one of whom was Professor Goldwin Smith. Mr. Lincoln greeted them cordially, and opened the conversation with an inquiry as to the health of John Bright, whom he said he regarded as the friend of our country, and of freedom everywhere. Presently the magnitude of recent battles was under discussion, and Professor Smith inquired if the enormous losses of men would not impair the industrial resources of the country and seriously affect its revenues, reciting at the same time the number of killed, wounded, and missing reported after one of the great engagements, then of recent date.

Mr. Lincoln replied that in settling such matters we must resort to "darky arithmetic." "To darky arithmetic!'" exclaimed the dignified representative of the learning and higher thought of Great Britain, "I did not know, Mr. President, that you have two systems of arithmetic?" “Oh, yes!" said Mr. Lincoln; "I will illustrate that point by a little story. Two young contrabands were seated together when one said, ' Jim, do you know 'rithmetic?' Jim answered, 'No; what is 'rithmetic?' 'Well,' said the other, it is when you adds up things. When you have one and one, and you puts them together, they makes two. And when you substracts, if you have two things and you takes one away, only one remains.'

'Is dat 'rithmetic?' asked Jim. 'Yes.' 'Well, 'tain't true den; it's no good.' Here a dispute arose, when Jim said, 'Now you s'pose three pigeons sit on dat fence, and somebody shoot one of dem; do t'other two stay dar? I guess not, dey fly away quicker 'n odder feller falls; and, Professor, trifling as the story seems, it illustrates the arithmetic you must use in estimating the actual losses resulting from our great battles. The statements you refer to give those missing at the first roll-call after the contest, which always exhibits a greatly exaggerated total, especially in the column of the missing." Mr. William D. Kelley who relates this incident says that after leaving the President, Goldwin Smith and his party of friends sat beside him (Mr. Kelley) at the dinner-table, and he heard one of the gentlemen inquire: "Professor, can you give me the impression President Lincoln made upon you?"

"Yes," was the reply; "it was a very agreeable one. Such a man is quite unknown to our official circles, or to those of continental nations. Indeed, I think his place in history will be unique. He has not been trained to diplomacy or administrative affairs, and is in all respects one of the people. But how wonderfully he is endowed and equipped for the performance of the duties of the chief executive officer of the United States at this time! The precision and minuteness of his information on all questions to which we referred was a succession of surprises to me."

The Hon. A. H. Markland once said: "It has been thought that Mr. Lincoln was controlled by his cabinet ministers. My observation was quite to the contrary. He was the master-spirit of his administration, and by unsurpassed tact he kept his ministers in harmony with each other. As President he was controlled only by law and the equities. He always had the courage to do the proper thing at the proper time." At one period there was some official jealousy between Postmaster-General Blair and Secretary Stanton. Markland had been sent to the latter for certain orders relating to the postal service within the lines of the army, and Stanton declined to issue them "to accommodate Mr. Blair," who proceeded to write a letter to the President, calling his attention to the situation. Markland was the messenger to bear the communication, and he tells us: "When I delivered the letter, Mr. Lincoln read it carefully and handed it back to me, saying, 'What is the matter between Blair and Stanton?' I told him all I knew in reference to the proposed orders. He then said: 'If I understand the case, General Grant wants the orders issued, and Blair wants them issued, and you want them issued, and Stanton won't issue them. Now don't you see what kind of a fix I will be in if I interfere? I'll tell you what to do: if you and General Grant understand one another, suppose you try to get along without the orders, and if Blair or Stanton makes a fuss I may be called in as a referee, and I may decide in your favor.

The orders were never issued, and pleasant relations were maintained all round."

Colonel Markland, who had the best of opportunities for critical observation, writes: "President Lincoln's sympathies were with the people and for the people, and his only ambition was that the Union might be preserved. It is a singular fact that all men who came in official or social relations with Abraham Lincoln while he was President were impressed with his unselfish patriotism and unyielding integrity."