Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.)
- 1. Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.) download pdf https://ebookultra.com/download/constraints-in-discourse-172nd-edition- anton-benz-ed/ Visit ebookultra.com today to download the complete set of ebook or textbook!
- 2. We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click the link to download now, or visit ebookultra.com to discover even more! Wilhelm Reich in Hell Robert Anton Wilson https://ebookultra.com/download/wilhelm-reich-in-hell-robert-anton- wilson/ Conversion to Islam in the Balkans Anton Minkov https://ebookultra.com/download/conversion-to-islam-in-the-balkans- anton-minkov/ Uncle Vanya Anton Chekhov https://ebookultra.com/download/uncle-vanya-anton-chekhov/ Advances in Insect Physiology Vol 29 1st Edition Peter Evans https://ebookultra.com/download/advances-in-insect-physiology- vol-29-1st-edition-peter-evans/
- 3. Calculus 10th Edition Howard Anton https://ebookultra.com/download/calculus-10th-edition-howard-anton/ Lenin as Philosopher Anton Pannekoek https://ebookultra.com/download/lenin-as-philosopher-anton-pannekoek/ Immunogenetics 1st Edition Anton W. Langerak https://ebookultra.com/download/immunogenetics-1st-edition-anton-w- langerak/ Anton Chekhov 1st Edition Rose Whyman https://ebookultra.com/download/anton-chekhov-1st-edition-rose-whyman/ Adobe InDesign Classroom in a Book 2022 release 1st Edition Kelly Anton https://ebookultra.com/download/adobe-indesign-classroom-in-a- book-2022-release-1st-edition-kelly-anton/
- 5. Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.) Digital Instant Download Author(s): Anton Benz (ed.), Peter Kühnlein (ed.) ISBN(s): 9789027291431, 9027291438 Edition: 172 File Details: PDF, 4.06 MB Year: 2008 Language: english
- 8. Volume 172 Constraints in Discourse Edited by Anton Benz and Peter Kühnlein Editor Andreas H. Jucker University of Zurich, English Department Plattenstrasse 47, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland e-mail: ahjucker@es.uzh.ch Editorial Board Shoshana Blum-Kulka Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jean Caron Université de Poitiers Robyn Carston University College London Bruce Fraser Boston University Thorstein Fretheim University of Trondheim John C. Heritage University of California at Los Angeles Susan C. Herring Indiana University Masako K. Hiraga St.Paul’s (Rikkyo) University David Holdcroft University of Leeds Sachiko Ide Japan Women’s University Catherine Kerbrat- Orecchioni University of Lyon 2 Claudia de Lemos University of Campinas, Brazil Marina Sbisà University of Trieste Associate Editors Jacob L. Mey University of Southern Denmark Herman Parret Belgian National Science Foundation, Universities of Louvain and Antwerp Jef Verschueren Belgian National Science Foundation, University of Antwerp Emanuel A. Schegloff University of California at Los Angeles Deborah Schiffrin Georgetown University Paul Osamu Takahara Kobe City University of Foreign Studies Sandra A. Thompson University of California at Santa Barbara Teun A. van Dijk Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona Richard J.Watts University of Berne Pragmatics & Beyond New Series is a continuation of Pragmatics & Beyond and its Companion Series. The New Series offers a selection of high quality work covering the full richness of Pragmatics as an interdisciplinary field, within language sciences. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series (P&BNS)
- 9. Constraints in Discourse Edited by Anton Benz Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaften Peter Kühnlein Rijksuniversiteit Groningen John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia
- 10. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Constraints in discourse / edited by Anton Benz, Peter Kuhnlein. p. cm. (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, issn 0922-842X ; v. 172) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Discourse analysis. 2. Constraints (Linguistics) I. Benz, Anton, 1965- II. Kühnlein, Peter. P302.28.C66 2008 401'.41--dc22 2007048314 isbn 978 90 272 5416 0 (Hb; alk. paper) © 2008 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O. Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984. 8 TM
- 11. Table of contents Acknowledgements vii 1. Constraints in discourse: An Introduction 1 part i The Right Frontier 27 2. Troubles on the right frontier 29 Nicholas Asher 3. The moving right frontier 53 Laurent Prévot and Laure Vieu part ii Comparing Frameworks 67 4. Strong generative capacity of rst, sdrt and discourse dependency dags 69 Laurence Danlos 5. Rhetorical distance revisited: A parameterized approach 97 Christian Chiarcos and Olga Krasavina 6. Underspecified discourse representation 117 Markus Egg and Gisela Redeker part iii The Cognitive Perspective 139 7. Dependency precedes independence: Online evidence from discourse processing 141 Petra Burkhardt 8. Accessing discourse referents introduced in negated phrases: Evidence for accommodation? 159 Barbara Kaup and Jana Lüdtke
- 12. Table of contents part iv Language Specific Phenomena 179 9. Complex anaphors in discourse 181 Manfred Consten and Mareile Knees 10. The discourse functions of the present perfect 201 Atsuko Nishiyama and Jean-Pierre Koenig 11. German right dislocation and afterthought in discourse 225 Maria Averintseva-Klisch 12. A discourse-relational approach to continuation 249 Anke Holler 13. German Vorfeld-filling as constraint interaction 267 Augustin Speyer Index 291
- 13. Acknowledgements The contributions collected in this volume are based on the proceedings of the first conference on Constraints in Discourse held at the University of Dortmund. All con- tributions have been reviewed again and thoroughly revised before publication. The conference was organised by the two editors Anton Benz and Peter Kühnlein together with Claudia Sassen. Both editors regret that Claudia Sassen, who did a great job at organising the conference, had to leave the editorial board. We thank Angelika Storrer from the Institute for German Language at the Univer- sity of Dortmund as well as the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for their financial support. Furthermore, we have to thank our employers, the IFKI at the University of Southern Denmark, the University of Bielefeld, the ZAS in Berlin and the University of Groningen for their help and encouragement. John Tammena has helped reduce the unreadability of our introductory chapter. We want to thank him as well as Paul David Doherty who helped setting up the index. Our special thanks, however, go to Andreas Jucker, the series editor of PBns, and of course to Isja Conen from John Benjamins’ publishing company, for their untiring help and patience.
- 15. Constraints in discourse An introduction 1. General remarks For a long time the development of precise frameworks of discourse interpretation has been hampered by the lack of a deeper understanding of the dependencies between different discourse units. The last 20 years have seen a considerable advance in this field. A number of strong constraints have been proposed that restrict the sequencing and attaching of segments at various descriptive levels, as well as the interpretation of their interrelations. An early and very influential work on the sequencing and acces- sibility of expressions across sentence boundaries was concerned with the rfc (Right Frontier Constraint), often associated with a paper by Polanyi (1988). The rfc formu- lates a restriction on the possible discourse positions of pronominal expressions. Another much discussed constraint governing pronominal reference is the centering principle formulated by Grosz and Sidner (1986). In addition to the proposal of new discourse constraints, recent years saw the development of competing formal frameworks for discourse generation and interpretation, most importantly, Rhetorical Structure Theo- ry (rst, Mann and Thompson 1987) and Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (sdrt). Especially the recent publication of Asher and Lascarides (2003), which sum- marises more than ten years of joint research in sdrt, gave a strong impulse to the field of discourse semantics and led to the publication of an increasing number of papers. Constraints play a role not only in diverse fields of linguistics, but in a wide variety of fields of research in general, such as computer science, especially artificial intelli- gence (cf., e.g., (Blache 2000)). What the use of constraints has in common in all these fields is that they describe properties of objects in order to specify whether certain objects are well-formed from the point of view of the background theory. As soon as an object carries the property or properties specified by all of the constraints defined by the theory, it counts as well-formed and is accepted as (part of) a model of the theory. The object is then said to satisfy the constraints set by the theory. Inthepresentcollection,anumberofauthorscontributedtodefineconstraintsthus understood to specify properties that are relevant in the context of research on dis- course. The multiplicity of identified constraints mirrors the multiple facets of this re- search area itself. To give a rough understanding of major issues in discourse research, we will lay out three paradigms in this introduction and relate them to each other and to the texts in this volume. The three paradigms we selected share a focus on rhetorical relations: a discourse is conceived as such only if every part of it is connected to the rest via certain relations
- 16. Constraints in discourse — an introduction that specify its role. This property of discourse is classically related to coherence and cohesion and can be used as a constraint to distinguish well-formed discourses from arbitrary sets of objects. The paradigms were developed during the last 20 years and within their frame- works, a number of such constraints have been proposed for the description and explanation of the multiplicity of dependencies between units of discourse. Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (sdrt), for example, posits a selection principle over interpretations of discourse: among possible interpretations of a discourse the one is selected that renders the discourse as coherent as possible. This is operationalised via the number of rhethorical relations that connect parts of the discourse and an order- ing over preferences for those relations: the more the better, given their type for some discourse. This principle is called Maximise Discourse Coherence (mdc) and of course is a constraint over the selection of interpretations as well as discourses: of those interpretations that can be generated for a given discourse only those are acceptable that have the highest possible degree of coherence. And among objects generally only those count as discourse for which some interpretation establishes coherence. Con- sider what would happen if (1b) and (1c) were exchanged in example (1), taken from (Asher and Lascarides 2003); the resulting discourse would clearly be less acceptable, and one might well argue that this would be due to the loss of coherence. (1) a. One plaintiff was passed over for promotion three times. b. Another didn’t get a raise for five years. c. A third plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. d. But the jury didn’t believe this. One prominent constraint that is recognised by almost all theories of discourse is the so-called Right Frontier Constraint (rfc), see especially the chapters in Part I of this book. This constraint amounts to a restriction over attachment points in a discourse. (We will give a short characterization here and discuss the rfc a little more extensively in Section 3.) Consider Example (1) again. Under any reasonable interpretation, (1d) can only be related to either the immediately preceding utterance (1c) or to the totality of the preceding utterances (1a–1c). In the first case, what the jury didn’t believe was just the fact that one plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. In the second case, the jury wouldn’t believe any of the reported facts. What should not be possible—and that is the claim connected with the rfc—is an attachment of (1d) to (1a) or (1b) alone. These two utterances should be blocked as attachment points. The name Right Frontier Constraint derives from an assumption over representa- tions stating that more recent utterances, or, more general, constituents in a discourse are graphically represented to the right of less recent ones. Discussion of formal repre- sentations of discourse structure and measures of anaphoric distances can be found in the chapters of Part II of this book. The most recent constituents in discourse (1) prior
- 17. Constraints in discourse — an introduction to the utterance of (1d) are either (1c) or the compound constituent (1a–1c), which makes these two being situated on the right hand side of the representation given this assumption. As accordingly all and only those constituents that are accessible for pronominal anaphoric attachment are on the right hand side of the representation, this constraint is called rfc. As a reaction to the variety of constraints, there will be discussions on a broad spectrum of restrictions on well-formedness, be these universal, language indepen- dent restrictions, like the two mentioned seem to be, or language specific constraints. It is one interesting property of constraints that they can be more or less specific, and their effects can add to each other. Thus, one can end up with a very strong filter over admissible structures by combining constraints that pertain to different properties of objects. Exemplarily, there are discussions on language-specific constraints that don’t seem to be readily transferable to other languages from, e.g., German. For more on language specific constraints, see the chapters in Part IV of this book. Other chapters, Part III, deal with psycholinguistic or neurolinguistic reflexes of constraints and their empirical testing. During the processing of discourses by human participants, the linguistic constraints can be expected to produce effects and generate preferences for strategies or solutions. These predictions of course should be empiri- cally testable. 2. The cognitive status of rhetorical relations The theory of rhetorical relations is a cornerstone of discourse analysis. In general, it is undisputed that the meaning of text is more than the conjunction of the meanings of its sentences, but there are different opinions about the cognitive status of rhetori- cal relations. One position assumes that rhetorical relations are part of the linguistic inventory of language users and therefore of their linguistic competence. When faced with a sequence of two text segments, the hearer or reader searches a closed list of Figure 1. A graphical representation of what it means for a node to be on the right frontier: node α represents the last utterance in a discourse. α and every node dominating α (like β) is thus on the right frontier and available for attachment for a subsequent utterance γ. α β γ
- 18. Constraints in discourse — an introduction rhetorical relations and chooses that relation which fits best, where the criterion for fitting best varies from theory to theory. From this we may distinguish positions that assume that the extra information that the reader infers from the concatenation of two text segments is derived e.g., from assumptions about the speaker’s intentions, com- monsense world knowledge, and conversational maxims alone. Rhetorical relations are then not part of our basic linguistic inventory. We may call the first position a non–reductionist position and the second position a reductionist position. Within re- ductionist positions we may roughly distinguish between approaches that take their starting point in plan-based reasoning, and approaches that take their starting point in Gricean pragmatics. The most important frameworks of discourse analysis discussed in this volume are non–reductionist in character, e.g., the Linguistic Discourse Model (Polanyi 1986), Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann and Thompson 1987), and Seg- mented Discourse Representation Theory (Asher and Lascarides 2003). As an illustra- tion, we discuss the following example: (2) Ann calls a taxi service. Ann: (1) I need a taxi now. (2) Pick me up at the Dortmund railway station and (3) drop me at Haus Bommerholz. The first sentence is a directive speech act asking the taxi service to supply a transpor- tation to Ann. Propositions (2) and (3) provide more information about the lift. They elaborate the content of the first sentence. A non–reductionist would assume that there exists a rhetorical relation Elaboration that is inferred by the addressee. The inference of text coherence begins with an interpretation of the sentences (1), (2) and (3). The addressee then searches a mental library of rhetorical relations. We may assume that it contains the entries Elaboration, Explanation, and Result. Each rhetorical relation defines constraints that must be fulfilled by text segments which are connected by the relation. For example, a text segment β can only elaborate a text segment α if β denotes a sub-eventuality of α, whereas Explanation and Result assume that the eventualities are non-overlapping and that one is the result of the other. Hence, the addressee can infer Elaboration, and therefore text coherence, from the fact that the propositions in (2) and (3) refer to sub-eventualities of the event mentioned in (1). (For more on this cf. Section 6.) A reductionist tries to show discourse coherence without reference to a predefined set of rhetorical relations. Instead, the explanation may for example rest on assumptions about the speaker’s domain plans. Taking a lift with a taxi is an activity which can be bro- ken down into being picked up by the taxi at a certain place, the taxi ride, and being dropped at the destination. Schematically, we can describe this decomposition as follows: → 1 (S ) TakingTaxi(P) PickUp(P, Time1, Place1), TaxiRide, Drop(P, Time2, Place2) An analysis of Example (2) may proceed as follows: Sentence (1) states the speak- er’s domain intention. This activates schema (S1), which is shared knowledge in the
- 19. Constraints in discourse — an introduction relevant language community. In order to make the directive in (1) felicitous, some of the parameters in (S1) have to be specified. This is done in sentences (2) and (3); they state the place of departure Place1 and the destination Place2. Coherence is achieved by direct reference to a schema like (S1). Discourse becomes incoherent if the hearer cannot find a domain schema which connects the text segments, as seen in the follow- ing example: (3) Ann calls a taxi service. Ann: (1) I need a taxi now. (2) I grew up in Bielefeld, Ostwestfahlen–Lippe. A reductionist position which is based on plan recognition is widespread among approaches in artificial intelligence, e.g., (Grosz and Sidner 1986; Litman and Allen 1990). The assumption that rhetorical relations are part of our linguistic inventory has consequences for our understanding of both pragmatics and, especially, conversation- al implicatures (Grice, 1975). For an example we look at:1 (4) Ann: Smith doesn’t seem to have a girl friend. Bob: He’s been paying lots of visits to New York lately. Implicature: Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York (p). In order to understand Bob’s utterance as a contribution to the ongoing conversation, Ann has to find a rhetorical relation that connects his utterance to her contribution. We may assume that there exists a rhetorical relation of Counterevidence. The infer- ence of Counterevidence can proceed from the semantic content of the utterances and their prosodic and other linguistic properties. It is not necessary that the inference takes into account the interlocutors’ intentions. If Counterevidence holds between Ann’s and Bob’s utterances, then Bob’s utterance must provide evidence for the negation of Ann’s claim, i.e., it must provide evidence for the claim that Smith has a girl friend. This is the case if one assumes that Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York. Hence, the construction of a rhetorical relation between the two utterances leads to an accommodation of the implicature (p). We may contrast this reasoning with the standard theory of conversational impli- catures (Grice 1975), (Levinson 1983, Ch. 3), which assumes that the implicatures are derived by reasoning about each other’s intentions. According to Grice, interlocutors adhere to a number of conversational principles which spell out how discourse par- ticipants should behave in order to make their language use rational and efficient. In particular, Grice assumes that each contribution to the ongoing conversation serves a joint goal of speaker and hearer. A possible derivation of the implicature may proceed 1. For a more thorough discussion of this example and the relation between Grice’ theory of conversational implicatures and the assumption of rhetorical relations see (Asher and Lascarides 2003, Sec. 2.6).
- 20. Constraints in discourse — an introduction as follows: (1) Ann’s utterance raises the question whether Smith has a girl friend; (2) Bob’s contribution must be relevant to this question; (3) Bob’s contribution can only be relevant if Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York; (4) as Bob has done nothing in order to stop Ann from inferring that (p), it follows that she safely can infer that (p). In contrast to the first explanation, this explanation infers implicatures directly from joint intentions and a general principle of relevance.2 3. Topics in the analysis of discourse constraints In the previous section, we were introduced to different positions concerning the status of rhetorical relations. Rhetorical relations provide the backbone of some of the most important formal frameworks in discourse analysis. In this section, we want to address some topics in discourse analysis which are related to the investigation of discourse constraints. We start with constraints related to rhetorical relations and the discourse structures constructed by them. In this context, we introduce, for example, the Right Frontier Constraint as first codified by Livia Polanyi (1986) in her ldm (for more detail see Section 4). Text coherence is the result of interconnectedness of text segments. The analysis using rhetorical relations naturally leads to a representation as a graph. The terminal nodes of the graph can be identified with elementary illocutionary acts. The graph in Figure 2 shows an analysis of the following example, in which Ann tells how she came to Haus Bommerholz: (5) Ann: (1) I arrived at 10 am. (2) I took a taxi then. (3) It picked me up at the Dortmund railway station and (4) dropped me at Haus Bommerholz. (5) I thought it might be quite complicated to get to this place but (6) it wasn’t. A natural question that arises concerns the general structure of these graphs. First we may ask, what kind of branches are associated with the different rhetorical rela- tions. Are they always of the same kind or can we distinguish between different types of relations? Closely related to this question is that for the types of graphs that can be generated. For example, the graph in Figure 2 has a tree like structure and only binary branches. A third question concerns the comparability of different representations. The tree in Figure 2 is an rst graph (Mann and Thompson 1987). These trees are dif- ferent from trees which we usually find in syntax. In syntactic trees, the relations that connect two constituents are normally attached to the branching nodes. In rst graphs 2. Asher and Lascarides (2003) point out that any existing theory of conversational implica- tures in the tradition of Grice, has to assume that interlocutors carry out costly computations about each other’s intentions. Hence, a theory of conversational implicatures which is based on the theory of rhetorical relations is attractive from a cognitive point of view as it makes weaker assumptions about the inference capabilities of the interlocutors.
- 21. Constraints in discourse — an introduction they are labels to the edges connecting the nodes. We will see syntax like graphs in the section about the Linguistic Discourse Model. The answers to the above questions im- pose more or less strict constraints on discourse. These topics are especially discussed in the contributions by Danlos (Chapter 4) and Egg Redeker (Chapter 6). In Figure 2, we can find two types of relations: relations like Elaboration which are attached to an arch and relations like Narration which are attached to branches starting from a shared node. Text segments connected by Narration are intuitively on the same level, whereas a text segment that is attached to another text segment by Elaboration or Evidence is subordinated to this segment. The distinction between coordinating and subordinating discourse relations became very influential with (Grosz and Sidner 1986).3 One way of conceptualising the distinction between subordinating and coordinating rhetorical relations is based on the discourse intentions of the speaker. In Example (2), the sentences ‘Pick me up at Dortmund railway station’ and ‘Drop me at Haus Bommerholz’ provide information without which the addressee cannot successfully perform what was asked from him in the first sentence ‘I need a taxi now’. In a coordinated sequence like ‘(1) I arrived at 10 pm. (2) I took a taxi then.’ neither (1) is uttered in order to sup- port (2), nor is (2) uttered in order to support (1). Each sentence can stand alone, and none needs the other in order to justify its occurrence. In contrast, the utterance of (2) CONTRAST (5) EVIDENCE NARRATION (1) ELABORATION (2) NARRATION (3) (4) (6) Figure 2. An analysis of Example (5). The graph shows the rhetorical relations that hold between text segments. 3. rst distinguishes between multi-nuclear and nucleus-satellite relations. This distinctions is closely related to Grosz and Sidner’s (1986) distinction between coordinating and subordinating relations.
- 22. Constraints in discourse — an introduction ‘Pick me up at Dortmund railway station’ in Example (2) cannot be justified without the information that Ann needs a taxi. The distinction between coordinating and subordinating discourse relations is in- corporated in most formal frameworks and in all frameworks which we will present in the next sections. There are differences how subordination and coordination are defined. In particular, there are different ways of thinking about the nature of these relations. For example, they may be defined in terms of discourse plans and intentions, or in a purely syntactic way. Subordination and coordination are the properties of rhetorical relations that de- fine the right frontier. Roughly, the right frontier denotes the zone in a graph where new text segments can attach. It is on the right side of the discourse graph if we assume that the graph is a tree and that the order from left to right corresponds to the natural order of discourse segments in text or dialogue. We consider the following example, where Ann tells another story: (6) Ann: (1) I took a taxi to Haus Bommerholz. (2) It picked me up at the railway station. (3) The ride took more than half an hour. (4) The taxi driver didn’t know his way. (5) This was very annoying. To which proposition does (5) refer? Sentences (2) and (3) are coordinated to each other and subordinated to (1). Sentence (4) is subordinated to (3). The right frontier consists of the segments (1), (3), (4), and (2+3). It is defined as follows: the top node of a tree is always on the right frontier; if a sequence of coordinated nodes is subordi- nated to a node on the right frontier, then the sequence itself and its rightmost coordi- nated node are also on the right frontier.4 The right frontier constraint states that new discourse segments can only attach to segments that are positioned on the right frontier. This means that in our example (5) can only attach to (1), (3), (4), or the compound (2+3). This does not follow from expectations about annoying things: (7) Ann: (1) I took a taxi to Haus Bommerholz. (2) I had to wait very long for it. (3) Then, the ride took more than half an hour. (4) The driver didn’t know his way. (5) This was very annoying. Again, (5) can only attach to the segments on the right frontier, i.e., to (1), (3), (4), and the compound (2+3) but not to (2). The claim that new discourse segments can only attach to the right frontier needs some qualification. What can attach are anaphoric expressions, i.e., discourse elements which need a previous discourse element in order to receive a truth value. Examples of anaphoric expressions are pronouns like ‘he,’ ‘she,’ or ‘it’, but also abstract object 4. The precise definition of the right frontier and its associated constraint is, of course, frame- work dependent; see especially sections 4 and 6.
- 23. Constraints in discourse — an introduction anaphora (Asher 1993) like ‘this’ in sentence (5) which refers to an preceding event. Furthermore, we can think of a complete sentence like (5) as an anaphoric expres- sion that needs a previous discourse segment to which it can be linked by a rhetorical relation. Not all anaphoric expressions are bound by the right frontier constraints. For ex- ample definite descriptions can pick up objects which were introduced in segments left to the right frontier. Here is a slight variation of an example from (Asher and Lascarides 2003): (8) (1) One plaintiff was passed over for promotion three times. (2) Another didn’t get a raise for five years. (3) A third plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. (4) But the jury didn’t believe this. (4ʹ) But the jury didn’t believe the first case. ‘This’ in sentence (4) can only refer to either the compound of (1), (2), (3) or (3) alone. In contrast, ‘the first case’ in (4ʹ) refers to (1), which is not on the right frontier. An obvious problem for the right frontier constraint are cataphors, i.e., pronouns that refer to objects that are introduced later in discourse. The graph in Figure 2 shows another potential problem: The last coordinated sentences (5) and (6) are superordinated to the previous discourse (1)–(4) in such a way that (1)–(4) are at- tached to the last sentence (6). This is not possible if we assume that sentences (5) and (6) are attached sequentially to the previous graph for (1)–(4). It is possible to analyse the discourse in Example (5) in other ways which avoid this problem. The right frontier constraint is discussed especially in the papers by Asher (Chapter 2) and Prévot Vieu (Chapter 3). Consten Knees (Chapter 9) discuss abstract object anaphora. Chiarcos Krasavina (Chapter 5) discuss different methods to measure the distance between anaphors and their antecedents in discourse graphs. Another important constraint connected to rhetorical relations and the structures defined by them is the Maximize Discourse Coherence (mdc) constraint introduced by (Asher and Lascarides, 2003). rst graphs, for example, connect discourse segments Figure 3. An analysis of Example (6). ELABORATION (1) NARRATION EXPLANATION (2) (3) (4)
- 24. Constraints in discourse — an introduction by a single rhetorical relation. The mdc constraint represents the contrary position. It states that as many rhetorical relations as possible are realised between discourse segments. This can be understood best from the interpretation perspective. The addressee tries to connect the different segments by as many discourse relations as possible. Coherence is defined by connectedness through rhetorical relations. Maxi- mising the number of relations that hold between segments is then the same as max- imising discourse coherence. An intuitive example is the following one taken from (Asher and Lascarides 2003, p. 18): (9) (1) John moved from Brixton to St. John’s Wood. (2) The rent was less expensive. There are two possibilities to resolve the bridging anaphora in (2). ‘The rent’ can relate to the rent in Brixton or St. John’s Wood. In both cases, (2) provides background infor- mation, hence (2) can attach to (1) by a relation named Background. But if we assume that ‘the rent’ refers to St. John’s Wood, then we get in addition also an explanation for whyJohnmoved.ThisisthepreferredreadingofExample(9).Wegetthisinterpretation if we maximise the number of discourse relations as the preferred reading allows to connect (2) with Background and Explanation to (1), whereas the dispreferred reading allows a connection only with Background. So far, we presented phenomena and constraints directly related to the discourse structure defined by rhetorical relations. But not all discourse constraints are con- nected to these relations. We here mention two important principles: centering (Grosz et al., 1995) and DRT subordination (Kamp and Reyle 1993). Grosz and Sidner (1986) distinguished between three components of discourse structure: the linguistic structure, the intentional structure, and the attentional state. The linguistic structure is defined by discourse segments and the relations holding between them. The intentional structure is defined by the speaker’s intentions that underlie the discourse segments and the relation between these intentions. The atten- tional state is defined by the immediate focus of attention at each point of the discourse. Grosz and Sidner distinguish between local and global discourse coherence. Global discourse coherence roughly corresponds to the coherence defined by the discourse relations holding between discourse segments, i.e., it is associated with the linguistic structure. Local coherence refers to coherence among the utterances of one discourse segment.5 Centering Theory (CT) explains, for example, why the discourse in Example (10a) is more coherent than the discourse in (10b) (Grosz et al., 1995, p. 206). (10) a. (1) John went to his favourite music store to buy a piano. (2) He had frequented the store for many years. (3) He was excited that he could finally buy a piano. (4) He arrived just as the store was closing for the day. 5. Here, discourse segment has to be understood roughly as meaning a sequence of coordinated utterances.
- 25. Constraints in discourse — an introduction b. (1ʹ) John went to his favourite music store to buy a piano. (2ʹ) It was a store John had frequented for many years. (3ʹ) He was excited that he could finally buy a piano. (4ʹ) It was closing just as John arrived. CT assigns to each utterance a set of forward looking centres and a unique backward looking centre. Forward and backward looking centres are semantic domain entities like persons, things, and events. The backward looking centre is the immediate focus of attention. The forward and backward looking centres of two consecutive utterances are related to each other as follows: The backward looking centre of the second ut- terance must be an entity from the forward looking centre of the first utterance. The elements of the forward looking centre are ranked according to salience. The subject is most likely to be ranked highest. CT formulates several discourse constraints that are derived from forward and backward looking centres. One rule states that the back- ward looking centre of a sentence must be realised as a pronoun if any element of the forward looking centre of the previous utterance is also realised by a pronoun. This predicts that (11a) is better than (11b): (11) a. John met Mary. He loves her. b. John met Mary. John loves her. Another rule states, for example, that a continuation of backward looking centres is preferred over a change. This explains the observation in Example (10) and explains why the use of the pronoun ‘he’ in sentence (5) of Example (12) is misleading (Grosz et al., 1995, p. 207). (12) (1) Terry really goofs sometimes. (2) Yesterday was a beautiful day and he was excited about trying out his new sailboat. (3) He wanted Tony to join him on a sailing expedition. (4) He called him at 6 AM. (5) He was sick and furious at being woken up so early. DRT subordination likewise imposes restrictions on anaphoric accessibility of discourse objects. In contrast to the constraints presented so far, DRT subordination is derived from the logical form of utterances. It explains why, for example, the following uses of pronouns are infelicitous: (13) a. In the cage there was no lion. *It was snoring and sleeping. b. If a farmer owns a donkey, he beats it. ?He is my neighbour. Discourse is interpreted incrementally by constructing Discourse Representation Structures (drss). Several construction algorithms have been proposed. One sugges- tion is to construct a unique drs for each new sentence and merge it with a drs rep- resenting discourse old information. A drs consists of a pair 〈U,Con〉 of a discourse universe U and discourse constraints Con. The universe U contains discourse referents, which correspond to the familiar variables in first-order logic. U represents the set of entities introduced by the discourse. The discourse constraints in Con are, in the most
- 26. Random documents with unrelated content Scribd suggests to you:
- 27. survive, on the tablet of enduring fame, through the revolutions of time.
- 28. WILLIAM WHIPPLE. A common error that has gained credence among mankind, consists in a belief that to obtain a sufficient share of knowledge to enable a man to appear advantageously upon the theatre of public action, he must spend his youthful days within the walls of some celebrated seminary of learning. In the view of many, it is necessary for a young man to commence his career under the high floating banner of a collegiate diploma in order to ensure future fame. That a refined classical education is a desirable and high accomplishment, I admit; that it is indispensably necessary, and always renders a man more useful, I deny. The man who has been incarcerated from his childhood up to his majority within the limited circumference of his school-room and boarding-house, although he may have mastered all the sciences of the books, cannot have acquired that knowledge of men and things necessary to prepare him for action in private or public life. Polite literature is one thing, useful knowledge, fit for every day use, is another, and of vital importance. By proper application a man may obtain both, and that without entering college. The field is open to all, especially under a republican form of government. Franklin and Sherman, both humble mechanics, became finished scholars and profound philosophers without the aid of collegiate professors. I do not design to deteriorate the usefulness of high seminaries of learning, but to stimulate those who have native talent and cannot enjoy their advantages, to imitate the examples of those who have risen to high stations of honour and distinction by the force of their own exertions, unaided by these dazzling lights.
- 29. Among the self taught men of our country the name of William Whipple stands conspicuous. He was the eldest son of William Whipple, and born at Kittery, Maine, in 1730. He was educated in a common English school, where he was taught reading, writing, arithmetic, and navigation. These branches he mastered at an early age, and was then entered as a cabin boy on board of a merchant vessel, which was in accordance with the wishes of his father and his own inclination. Before he arrived at the age of twenty-one years, he rose to the station of captain and made several successful voyages to Europe. Some writers have attempted to cast a stigma upon his character at that era of his life, because, in a few instances, he participated in the slave trade. If they will learn the general feeling that pervaded the minds of a large proportion of the civilized community at that time upon this subject, their anathemas will vanish in thin air. The trade was then sanctioned by the king of Great Britain, under whose government captain Whipple acted, and, according to the English law, the king can do no harm. The correctness of the principle was not then disputed or agitated generally, and the trade was ingrafted in the commercial policy of the mother country. That Captain Whipple became convinced upon reflection of the unjustness and barbarity of the traffic, fully appears from his subsequent acts. At the commencement of the revolution he manumitted the only slave he owned, who adhered to his old master during the war, and fought bravely for our liberties. If every man is to be condemned for the errors of youth, whose riper years are crowned with virtue, the list of fame will be robbed of many bright constellations. In 1759, captain Whipple relinquished his oceanic pursuits, and commenced the mercantile business in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. He also married Miss Catharine Moffat, and entered upon a new scene of life. During his numerous voyages he had become celebrated as a skilful navigator and a judicious commanding officer. He had carefully treasured a large fund of useful knowledge by close observation, attentive reading, and by mingling, when in port, with none but intelligent and good company. He had listened, both in
- 30. England and America, to the unwarranted pretensions of the former, and the increasing complaints of the latter. He had made himself familiar with the chartered rights of his own country, and with the usurpations of the crown over his fellow citizens. He was prepared to take a bold stand in favour of freedom. He took a conspicuous part in public meetings, and was chosen one of the committee of safety. He rose rapidly in public estimation, and the former cabin boy became a leading patriot. In January, 1775, he represented Portsmouth in the Provincial Congress, convened at Exeter, for the purpose of choosing delegates for the Continental Congress. On the 6th of January of the following year he was chosen a member of the provincial council of New Hampshire, and on the 23d of the same month, a delegate to the national legislature at Philadelphia, of which he continued a distinguished, active, and useful member, until the middle of September, 1779. He was present at the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, and affixed his name to that sacred and bold instrument with the same fearless calmness with which he would have signed a bill of lading. He was emphatically a working man, and from his extensive knowledge of business, rendered himself highly useful on committees. As a member of the marine and commercial committees, his practical knowledge gave him a superiority over his colleagues. He was also appointed one of the superintendents of the commissary and quartermaster department, and did much towards correcting abuses and checking peculation. He was untiring in his industry, ardent in his zeal, philosophic in his views, pure in his purposes, and strong in his patriotism. When he finally retired from Congress to serve his country in another and more perilous sphere, he carried with him the esteem and approbation of all his co-workers in the glorious cause of liberty. On his return to his constituents he was hailed as a SAGE, a PATRIOT, and a HERO. In 1777 he had received the appointment of brigadier-general, and was put in command of the first brigade of the provincial troops of New Hampshire, acting in concert with General Stark, who commanded the other. At that time General Burgoyne was on the
- 31. flood tide of his military glory in the north, spreading consternation far and wide. He was first checked in his triumphant career by General Stark, at Bennington, Vermont. General Whipple, about the same time, joined General Gates with his brigade, and was in the bloody battles of Stillwater and Saratoga, where the palm of victory was attributed in a great measure to the troops under his command. In the consummation of the brilliant victory over the British army under Burgoyne, which shed fresh lustre on the American arms, General Whipple contributed largely. Colonel Wilkinson and he were the officers who arranged and signed the articles of capitulation between the two commanders. He was also selected as one of the officers to conduct the conquered foe to Winter Hill, near Boston. His faithful negro, whom he manumitted at that time, participated in all the perils of his old master, and seemed as much elated with the victory as if he had been the commander-in-chief. In 1778, General Whipple was with General Sullivan at the siege of Newport, which was necessarily abandoned in consequence of the failure of the anticipated co-operation of the French fleet under Count D’Estaing, which was unexpectedly injured in a gale of wind. A safe and fortunate retreat was effected in the night, which saved that portion of the American army from total destruction. In 1780 General Whipple was appointed a commissioner of the board of admiralty by Congress, which honour he did not accept, preferring to serve in the legislature of his own state, to which he had just been elected, and in which he continued for a number of years. In 1782 he was appointed by Robert Morris financial receiver for the state of New Hampshire, which conferred upon him the highest eulogium for integrity and honesty. The office was arduous, unpopular, and irksome, but he performed its duties faithfully until the 2nd of July, 1784, when he resigned. In conjunction with the many honourable stations he filled, he was appointed a judge of the superior court on the 20th of June, 1782, and on the 25th of December, 1784, was appointed a justice of the peace and quorum
- 32. throughout the state, which offices he held to the day of his death. He was also one of the commissioners on the behalf of Connecticut, who met at Trenton to settle the unpleasant controversy between that state and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, relative to the lands in Wyoming valley. In all the multiform public duties that devolved upon him, he acquitted himself nobly, and retained, to his last moments, the entire confidence of his country. He possessed a strong and analyzing mind, a clear head, a good heart, and deep penetration of thought. In all the relations of private and public life, from the cabin boy up to the lofty pinnacle of fame on which he perched, he maintained a reputation pure as the virgin sheet. During the latter part of his life, he suffered much from disease in his chest, which terminated his useful and patriotic career on the 28th of November, 1785. Agreeably to his request before his death, his body underwent a post-mortem examination. His heart was found ossified; the valves were united to the aorta, and an aperture, not larger than a knitting needle, was all that remained for the passage of the blood in its circulation. This accounted for his having often fainted when any sudden emotion excited a rapid flow of his life stream.
- 33. FRANCIS HOPKINSON, Esq. Times of high excitement, terminating in an important crisis, big with interests and events, tend greatly to the developement of character and talent. Thus, during the revolution, many talents were brought to light and action, that a supremacy of kingly power would have crushed in embryo, and left them to perish, unseen and unknown. Amongst the actors on that memorable stage we find a variety of characters, showing the powers of mind in all their varied forms and shades, from the sedate and grave Washington, to the sprightly and witty Hopkinson, and the pithy and original Franklin. Francis Hopkinson was the son of Thomas Hopkinson, of Philadelphia, born in 1737. His father was a man of superior talents and high attainments, his mother was one of the best of Heaven’s gifts. At the age of fourteen, death robbed Francis of his father, and left his mother to struggle, with limited means, with all the accumulating difficulties of maintaining and educating a large family of fatherless children. Under her guidance and instruction, young Francis soon evinced talents that promised well for him and his country. She used every exertion to improve his education, depriving herself of all the luxuries, and many of the comforts of life, to advance the interests of her children. Being a devoted Christian, she took peculiar care and delight in planting deep the purest principles of virtue, guarding their minds against all the avenues of vice and sin. She taught them the design of their creation, the duty they owed to their God and fellow men, and that to be truly happy, they must be truly good. The
- 34. foundation being thus firmly laid, she placed her favourite son, the future hope of her family, at the University of Pennsylvania, where he completed his studies and graduated. He then commenced a successful study of law under Benjamin Chew, Esq., and became a close and thorough student, making great proficiency in his judicial acquirements. He possessed a brilliant and flowing fancy, a lively imagination, a captivating manner, and was partial to polite literature as well as the more solid sciences. He was fond of poetry, music, and painting. He excelled in humorous satire, keen as that of his prototype Swift. Fortunately, these talents were made to subserve, pre-eminently, the cause of patriotism, science and philanthropy— the consequent result of deep-rooted morality. In 1765, he visited London, where he continued two years, making himself acquainted with the feelings and designs of the British parliament towards the Colonies, who had already began to feel oppression. On his return he married the amiable Miss Ann Borden, of Bordentown, N. J.; and soon found himself surrounded by all the accumulating cares of a rising family. In rearing his children, his mind was often carried back to the manner his venerable and esteemed mother had instructed him during his childhood. He could adopt no better plan or find no brighter example to follow. But the comforts of “sweet home” were soon to be interrupted. His country needed his services, which were cheerfully and promptly rendered. He was among its warmest and most zealous patriots. It was for him to do much in opening the eyes of the great mass of the people to a just sense of the injuries inflicted by the mother country. This he did by various publications, written in a style so fascinating and humorous as to be universally read; painting, in true and glowing colours, the injustice of the crown and the rights of the colonists. His Pretty Story—his Letters to James Rivington—his Epistle to Lord Howe—his two Letters by a Tory—his translation of a Letter written by a Foreigner—his Political Catechism—and the New Roof, were all productions of taste and merit, and were of vast importance in
- 35. rousing the people to a vindication of their rights and the achievement of their liberties. During the administration of Governor Dickinson, political dissensions and party spirit spread their mountain waves over Pennsylvania, threatening to destroy the fair fabric of her new government. The pen of Mr. Hopkinson was again instrumental in restoring order. In an essay, called “A full and true account of a violent uproar which lately happened in a very eminent family,” he exposed the factious partizans to such keen and severe ridicule, that they threw down the weapons of their rebellion much sooner than if a thousand bayonets had been pointed at their breasts. He was among the first delegates elected to the Continental Congress, and most cheerfully and fearlessly recorded his name on that declaration which has proved a consolation to the friends of FREEDOM, but a Boanerges to the enemies of LIBERTY. Always cheerful and sprightly, he contributed much in dispelling the gloom that often pervaded the minds of his colleagues in the midst of disaster and defeat. He knew the cause was righteous—he believed that Heaven would crown it with triumphant victory and ultimate success. He had sacrificed a lucrative situation in the loan office, held under the crown, at the shrine of liberty; he had embarked his fortune, his life, and his sacred honour, in defence of his country—and, with all his humour and wit, he was firm and determined as a gladiator. With the fancy of a poet, he united the soundness of a sage; with the wit of a humorist, he united the sagacity of a politician. He succeeded George Ross as Judge of the Admiralty court, and was subsequently one of the United States District Judges; and was highly esteemed for his judicial knowledge, impartial justice, and correct decisions.— He filled every station in which he was placed with credit, honour, and dignity. He continued to contribute, by his writings, much towards correcting the morals of society, by ridiculing its evils and abuses—Sarcasm and satire, properly timed, and guided by a sound discretion, are the most powerful and cutting instruments ever wielded by man. Their smart upon the mind is like cantharides upon the skin, but often requires a more powerful remedy to heal it. The
- 36. wit of Mr. Hopkinson was of a noble cast, flowing from a rich and chaste imagination, never violating the rules of propriety, always confined within the pale of modesty, but keen as a Damascus blade. He was an admirer of sound common sense, and a zealous advocate of common school education. He appreciated correctly the bone and sinew of our country, and knew well that the perpetuity of our liberties depends more upon the general diffusion of useful knowledge, fit for every day use in the various business concerns of life, than upon the high-toned literature of colleges and universities. He admired the industrious tradesman; he respected the honest farmer. In the yeomanry of the soil and inmates of shops, he saw the defenders of our country. Mr. Hopkinson was like some rare flowers, that, while they please by their beauty, they possess powerful qualities to alleviate distress and impart comfort. He was amiable and urbane in his manners; open and generous in his feelings; noble and liberal in his views; charitable and benevolent in his purposes; an agreeable and pleasant companion; a kind and faithful husband; an affectionate and tender parent; a stern and inflexible patriot; a consistent and active citizen; a valuable and honest man. His career was closed suddenly and prematurely by an apoplectic fit, on the 9th of May, 1791, in the 53d year of his age, and in the midst of his usefulness. He left a widow, two sons, and three daughters, to mourn his untimely end, and their irreparable loss.
- 37. JOSIAH BARTLETT. The profession of medicine in the hands of a skilful, honest, judicious, upright, and accomplished man, is one of the richest blessings in community, and one of the most honourable employments. Over his acquaintances, the influence of “the Doctor” is greater, when we include all classes, than that of any other profession; consequently, in the cause they espouse, physicians can wield an influence more powerful than many imagine. It is with pleasure I remark, that among the signers of the Declaration of Independence we find a goodly number from this highly honourable and useful profession. Among them was Dr. Josiah Bartlett, who was the son of Stephen Bartlett, of Amesburg, Massachusetts. Josiah was born in November, 1729. He early manifested a strong and vigorous mind, which was cultivated by an academical education. Possessing a retentive memory, he acquired the Latin and Greek languages, and finished the course assigned him at the early age of sixteen. He then commenced the study of medicine under Dr. Ordway, and pursued it assiduously for five years. He then commenced a successful practice at Kingston, where he soon became generally and favourably known and highly esteemed. Two years after he commenced his professional career, he was reduced so low with a fever that his physician gave up all hopes of his recovery. By an experiment of his own his life was saved. He induced those who were attending upon him to furnish him with cider, small and frequent quantities of which he took, a perspiration ensued, the fever was checked, and he recovered. From this time forward, he closely watched in his patients the operations and wants of nature, and often successfully deviated
- 38. from the stubborn rules that were laid down in books written in other countries and climates. With a physician of an acute and discerning judgment, matured by skill and experience, this practice is safe. Dr. Bartlett was the first who discovered, in that section of country, that the angina maligna tonsillaris, or canker, was putrid, instead of inflammatory, and the first who administered the successful remedy of Peruvian bark for this disease. He also introduced the successful practice of using antiphlogistic remedies for the cynanche maligna, or sore throat; by which disease hundreds of children were suddenly torn from the arms of their fond parents, three or four being frequently buried in one grave from the same family. Under the skilful hands of Dr. Bartlett this disease was checked in its career. Enjoying the unlimited confidence of his numerous acquaintances he was promoted to several important stations, both civil and military, under Governor Wentworth, discharging his duty with ability and approbation. In 1765 he was elected to the legislature of New Hampshire, where he soon became prominent from his steady and firm opposition to the infringements of the crown upon the rights of the colonists. Republican in all his views and feelings, he watched, with an eagle eye, the movements of the British ministry and the royalists around him. In granting charters to towns, the royal governors had uniformly reserved to themselves, and for the use of episcopal churches, the cream of the location. This injustice roused the indignation of the advocates of justice and equal rights, among whom Dr. Bartlett stood in the foremost rank. The burdens of taxation by the mother country were also severely felt and strenuously resisted. In effecting their early settlements, the colonists had been left unaided and unprotected to struggle with the stubborn wilderness and cruel savage. They were now unwilling to allow themselves to be stripped of their hard earnings to gratify the extravagant luxuries and avarice of the creatures of the crown. Resistance was natural—it was right. Taxation and representation are inseparable principles; without the one the other should not, cannot exist with an enlightened people. Power is not always a
- 39. creature of justice, and often adopts the principle that “might makes right.” Upon this corrupt and sandy foundation the British ministry based their conduct towards the colonies. Starting upon these false premises, their harsh measures recoiled upon them with a force that levelled their superstructure to the dust. For a time the cords of oppression were partially slackened, the stamp act was repealed, a spirit of conciliation seemed to pervade the heart of the king, but his old preceptor, lord Bute, in conjunction with lord North, soon induced him to sanction measures more oppressive and arbitrary than those previously complained of. The tax on tea was received with more indignation than the stamp act, and the popular rage soon rose to a foaming fury. Governor Wentworth thought to secure Dr. Bartlett by appointing him a member of the judiciary; but he could not be seduced by any trappings from the crown, and continued to oppose the innovations of the royalists. The minority in the legislature, to which the doctor belonged, was fast increasing, and to prevent a majority against his own views, the governor obtained the king’s writ for three new members from townships not entitled to an additional representation. This act of injustice disgusted many of the members who had not espoused the cause of liberal principles, and determined them to enlist under the banner of freedom. Opposition grew bolder under every act of oppression; private meetings were held, committees of correspondence and safety were appointed, a concert of feeling was produced through most of the colonies, and plans of resistance were rapidly taking the place of petitions to the king. Governor Wentworth several times dissolved the assembly at the commencement of its sessions, until he so exasperated the members and people as to virtually dissolve his own authority, and was obliged to seek safety on board the man-of-war Forney. The three new members had been expelled from the legislative body, a warfare commenced between the adherents of the crown and the friends of equal rights; Dr. Bartlett and others were deprived of all authority within the control of the governor, the line of demarcation was drawn, and the tocsin of war was sounded.
- 40. Dr. Bartlett was one of the members elected by the eighty-five delegates convened for the purpose at Exeter, on the first of July, 1774, to meet the general Congress at Philadelphia. In consequence of the recent destruction of his house by fire he was compelled to decline the appointment at that time, but in September of the year following he took his seat in that patriotic body. Simultaneous with his election to Congress, he was appointed to the command of a regiment of provincial troops. In Congress he performed his duties with great zeal, industry, and ability. He was uniformly placed on the most important committees, whose duties occupied their time until a late hour at night. Congress met at nine in the morning, and sat until four in the afternoon. After this hour the arduous duties of the committees were performed. When we contemplate the labours of the Continental Congress, surrounded as they were by difficulties on every side, a tremendous storm bursting over their heads, retreating from place to place before a victorious foe; their country bleeding at every pore, without resources, their army almost annihilated, the only rational conclusion to be drawn how they were sustained is derived from the fact, that many of its members were consistent and devoted Christians, firmly relying upon Him who rules the destinies of nations to support them and crown their efforts with victory and success. Nor did they trust in vain. In 1776, Dr. Bartlett was again elected to Congress and took a conspicuous part in the discussion of separating from the mother country. Amongst the patriots there were many who doubted the propriety of this determination in consequence of their weakness. A concert of feeling was eventually produced and a decided majority declared in favour of emancipation. On the fourth of July the final question was put to each member. Commencing with the most northern colony, Dr. Bartlett was the first who was called. Firmly relying on the justice of the cause, with his eyes raised to heaven, he responded YEA and AMEN; and laid the first stone in the base of the fair fabric of liberty, now towering in majesty over our happy land. Next to the president, the venerable John Hancock, Dr. Bartlett was the first who signed that invaluable instrument which gave our
- 41. nation birth, and at one bold effort burst the chains of slavery and dissolved the power that had been swayed, with an iron hand, over the oppressed and bleeding colonies. Worn down with the fatigue of arduous duties, Dr. Bartlett found his health declining and was not able to take his seat in Congress after the close of this session, until 1778. He was, however, enabled to be useful to his native state in her civil departments, and also aided greatly in raising troops for the northern army. When Congress assembled at York Town Dr. Bartlett again resumed his seat. Although re-elected to the succeeding term, this was the last of his attendance in that body. His domestic concerns had suffered from his absence in the public service, and he obtained leave to remain at home. His services were immediately required by his fellow citizens of New Hampshire. He was appointed chief justice of the common pleas and muster master of the troops, then enlisting for the continental service. In 1782 he was appointed a justice of the superior court, and six years after, chief justice. The usefulness of Dr. Bartlett did not close with the war. Although victory had crowned the efforts of the patriots, and their independence had been achieved, much remained to be done. Numerous conflicting interests were to be reconciled, a system of government was to be organized, an enormous debt was to be paid, many abuses and corruptions were to be corrected, a concert of feeling and action to be produced, and the art of self-government to be learned. In my view the wisdom of the patriots and sages of the revolution shone more conspicuously in perfecting our system of government, than in driving the foe from our shores. It is a task of no small magnitude to reduce a nation from a seven years’ war to a civil and quiet government, entirely different from the one to which it has been accustomed. It often requires more sagacity and wisdom to retain and enjoy, than to obtain an object. Thus, with regard to our independence, after it was obtained, storms arose that threatened utter destruction and ruin. It required the combined wisdom of the wisest legislators to preserve it. Long
- 42. and arduous were the labours that effected a confederated consolidation. During the time this subject was under discussion, many of the states were shook to their very centre by internal commotions. That concert of action and feeling that had carried the people triumphantly through the revolution, was now, with a great mass of the community, lost in the whirlpool of selfishness. Fortunately for our country and the cause of liberty, those who stood at the helm during the storm of war still remained at their posts. Their labours resulted in the adoption of that constitution under which we have enjoyed a prosperity before unknown. Dr. Bartlett was a member of the convention of his native state for the adoption of the consolidating instrument, and gave it his warm and efficient support. In 1789 he was chosen a member of the national senate, the next year president of New Hampshire, and in 1793 he was elected the first governor of the state. He enjoyed universal confidence and esteem, and discharged his duties with so much wisdom and integrity, that slander and envy could find no crevice for an entering wedge. Worn down by years of arduous toil, old age fastening its wrinkled hand upon him, and the confines of the eternal world just before him, he resigned his authority and closed his public career on the 29th of January, 1794, covered with laurels of immortal fame, without a spot to tarnish the glory of his bright escutcheon. Governor Bartlett now retired to private life, anticipating the enjoyments that are peculiarly pleasing to men who accept of public stations from a sense of duty rather than a desire to acquire popularity for the sake of advancement. But his fond anticipations were soon blasted. Disease fastened its relentless grasp upon him, his amiable wife had died six years before, the world had lost its charms, and, on the 19th of May, 1795, his happy spirit left its tenement of clay, ascended to Him who gave it, leaving a nation to mourn the loss of one of its brightest ornaments, one of its noblest patriots. In the life of this estimable man, we behold one of the fairest pictures spread on the pages of history. His public career was of that
- 43. discreet and solid character, calculated to impart enduring and substantial usefulness. Without dazzling the eyes of every beholder, his course was onward in the cause of philanthropy and human rights. He could look back upon a life well spent; he stood acquitted and approved at the dread tribunal of conscience. He had nobly acted his part, fulfilled the design of his creation, discharged his duty to his country and his God, and filled the measure of his glory. In his private character he was all that we could desire in a patriot, a citizen, a friend, a husband, a father and a Christian. No man was more highly esteemed by all who knew him—no man more richly deserved it.
- 44. ARTHUR MIDDLETON. Those who are familiar with the history of England, with her constitution, with her great Magna Charta, and with the usurpations of men in power upon the rights of British subjects at various periods, can readily conceive why so many men of high attainments and liberal minds immigrated to America. Disgusted with oppression at home they sought liberty abroad. The cause that prompted them to leave their native land, impelled them to action when imported tyranny invaded their well-earned privileges. The mind of every immigrant patriot was as well prepared to meet the crisis of the revolution, as that of a native citizen. The feelings created by remembered injuries, which drove them from the mother country, rendered them as formidable opponents to the unjust pretensions of the crown as those who had never breathed the atmosphere of Europe. In tracing our own history back to the early settlements, we find an almost constant struggle between the people and the officers sent by the king to govern them; the former claiming their inherent rights, the latter frequently infringing them. Among those whom at an early period boldly espoused the cause of freedom was Edward Middleton, the great grandfather of the subject of this brief sketch, who immigrated from Great Britain near the close of the seventeenth century, and settled in South Carolina. His son, Arthur Middleton, imbibed all the feelings of his father, and in 1719, when the crown officers became insolent beyond endurance, he stood at the head of the opposition that boldly demanded and obtained their removal. His son, Henry Middleton, the father of Arthur, whose biographette is my present
- 45. object, also inherited the same bold patriotism, and took a conspicuous part in rousing his fellow citizens to action at the commencement of the revolution. Arthur Middleton, the subject of this memoir, was born in 1743, at Middleton place, on the banks of Ashley river, where his father owned a beautiful plantation. His mother was a Miss Williams, the only child of a wealthy and reputable planter. Arthur was the eldest of his father’s children, and received all the advantages of an early education. At the age of twelve years he was placed in the celebrated seminary of Hackney, near London, and two years after, was transferred to the classic seat of learning at Westminster. He applied himself with great industry to his studies, excelling in all he undertook, and gained the esteem and respect of those around him. In his nineteenth year he became a student at the University of Cambridge, and four years after, graduated with the degree of bachelor of arts, a profound scholar and a virtuous man. Trivial amusements and dissipation, which had ensnared many of his classmates, had no charms for him. Although an heir to wealth and liberally supplied with money, economy was his governing principle, wisdom his constant guide. After he had completed his education he spent nearly two years in travelling, making the tour of Europe. Familiar with the Greek and Roman classics, he enjoyed peculiar satisfaction in visiting Rome and other ancient seats of literature. He possessed an exquisite taste for poetry, music, and painting, and was well versed in all the technicalities of sculpture and architecture. After completing this tour he returned home. Soon after his arrival, he led the amiable and accomplished Miss Izard, daughter of Walter Izard, to the hymeneal altar. About a year after, he embarked with his wife for England. After enjoying a pleasant season with their friends and connexions there, they visited France and Spain, and in 1773, returned home and located on his native spot, which his father bestowed upon him, placing him at once in possession of an ample fortune.
- 46. Having resided so long in Great Britain, possessed of an observing mind, tracing causes and results to their true source, he was well qualified to aid in directing the destiny of his country through the approaching revolution. Rocked in the cradle of patriotism by his father, tracing its fair lines in the history of his ancestors, he acted from the genuine feelings of his heart when he boldly espoused the cause of liberal principles and human rights. The Middletons were the nucleus of the opposition in South Carolina. Unlike many others who mounted the stage of public action for the first time, untried and almost unknown, this family had been proved and their influence was felt throughout the colony, and was known in the mother country. Hence the importance of their services at the commencement of the doubtful struggle, and for the same reason they were peculiarly obnoxious to the creatures of the crown. Aristocracy, too often the attendant of riches, found no resting place in their bosoms. The very marrow of their bones was republican, and to defend their country’s rights they freely pledged “their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honours.” Arthur Middleton was a member of the different committees that were appointed by the people to devise means of safety. On the 17th of April, 1775, he was one of the committee of five, in South Carolina, that determined to have recourse to arms, and under whose direction the royal magazine was entered, in defiance of the king’s officers, and its contents put into the hands of the people for their defence. On the 14th of June following, the provincial Congress of this state appointed a council of safety, consisting of thirteen persons, of whom Arthur Middleton was one. They were fully authorized to organize a military force, and adopt such measures as they deemed necessary to arrest the mad career of the royalists. Mr. Middleton was one of its boldest and most decided members, and appears to have been much chagrined at the temporizing spirit of some of his colleagues.
- 47. That he possessed a penetrating sagacity as well as a firm patriotism, appears from the following circumstance. During the session of the first provincial Congress of South Carolina, the new governor, Lord William Campbell, fresh from his majesty, arrived to enter upon the duties of reducing the rebellious subjects to subordination. He was all mildness and did not pretend to justify the oppressions of which the people complained. To prove his sincerity, Captain Adam M’Donald, one of the council, was introduced to Lord William as a tory from the upper country, who seemed anxious to have some means devised to put down the rebels. The plan succeeded. The governor desired him and his friends to remain quiet for the present, as he expected troops in a short time that would put a quietus upon the new fangled authorities. When the report of this interview was laid before the council, Mr. Middleton, although nearly related to the governor by marriage, made a motion to have him immediately arrested and confined. This measure was too bold for his timid companions, a majority of whom voted against it. Soon after, his excellency retired on board a British sloop of war and did not venture to return until accompanied by Sir Henry Clinton and Sir Peter Parker, who showed more bravery than judgment in their unsuccessful attack on Fort Moultrie. In this engagement Sir William was severely wounded, and Sir Peter had his silk breeches badly mutilated by the unceremonious course of a rebel cannon ball. On the 11th of February, 1776, Mr. Middleton was one of the committee that drafted the first constitution of his native state. Soon after this he was elected a member to the Continental Congress, taking a conspicuous part in its deliberations. Bold in all his movements, he advocated, and by his signature sanctioned the declaration of independence, then called by many the death-warrant of the fifty-six, but ultimately proving the warrant of LIBERTY, the morning star of FREEDOM. Mr. Middleton was a man of few words in debate—these few words were to the point, and gave him a
- 48. substantial influence in every legislative body of which he was a member. He stood at the head of the delegation of his state. He possessed a strong mind, a clear head, and a good heart. He exercised plain common sense, attending diligently to the business of his constituents and his country. He was on the most intimate terms with John Hancock and was by him highly esteemed. He remained in Congress until the close of the session of 1777. The following year he was elected governor of South Carolina, not knowing that he was a candidate until his election was announced. The mode was by secret ballot by the members of the assembly, who had not then learned the art of intrigue and caucusing—merit was the only passport to office—management and corruption dared not show their hydra heads. For the same reasons that induced Governor Rutledge to resign a few days previous, Mr. Middleton declined accepting the proffered honour. These reasons were founded in objections to a new constitution, then before the legislature for adoption, and which required the sanction of the chief magistrate of the state before it could go into operation. Mr. Rawlins Lowndes was then elected, who approved the new form of government on the 19th of March, 1778. Political candour and honesty were marked traits in the character of Arthur Middleton. No inducements could swerve him from the path of rectitude. He weighed measures, men, and things, in the unerring scales of reason and justice. He went with no man when clearly wrong, he concurred with all whom he believed right. Patriotism, pure and unalloyed, governed his every action. Discretion, the helm of man’s frail bark, guided him in the path of duty. Philanthropy and love of country pervaded his manly bosom. He was sound at the core. His mind was pure and free as mountain air; his purposes, noble, bold, and patriotic. In 1779, when the British spread terror and destruction over South Carolina, Mr. Middleton took the field with Governor Rutledge, and cheerfully endured the privations of the camp. He was at Charleston when General Provost attacked that place, and was found in the front ranks acting with great coolness and courage. Knowing
- 49. that the plundering enemy would visit his plantation, he sent word to his lady to remove out of danger, but took no means to remove his property, which fell a sacrifice to the mercenary army. They did not burn but rifled his house, and several large and valuable paintings that they could not carry away they defaced in the most shameful manner. At the surrender of Charleston in 1780, Mr. Middleton was among the prisoners sent to St. Augustine, and endured the indignities there practised upon the Americans with heroic fortitude. In July of the following year he was included in the general exchange, and arrived safe at Philadelphia. He was shortly after appointed a member of Congress, and again assumed the important duties of legislation. Soon after this, the last important act of the revolutionary tragedy was performed at Yorktown, where the heroes of the revolutionary stage and of our nation took a closing benefit at the expense of British pride and kingly ambition. With the surrender of Lord Cornwallis the last hope of the crown expired in all the agonies of mortification. Had a spirit of retaliation predominated in the bosom of Washington, awful would have been the doom of his barbarian, desolating foe. But he possessed a noble soul that soared above revenge. He sunk his enemy into the lowest depths of humiliation by kindness and generosity. In 1782, Mr. Middleton was again elected to Congress, where he continued until November, when he visited his family, from whom he had long been separated. At the declaration of peace he declined a seat in the national legislature, believing the interests of his own state required his services at home. He was highly instrumental in restoring order, harmony, and stability in the government of South Carolina. He was several times a member of its legislature, and used every exertion to advance its prosperity. During the intervals of his public duties he spent his time in improving his desolated plantation, the place of his birth, and of the tomb of his venerable ancestors. He once more participated in the enjoyments of domestic felicity and fondly anticipated years of happiness. But, alas! how uncertain are all sublunary things. In the autumn of 1786, he was attacked with
- 50. an intermittent fever, which paved the way for disease that terminated his life on the first of January, 1787, leaving a wife, two sons and six daughters, to mourn their irreparable loss. By the public he was deeply lamented. His memory was held in great veneration by his contemporaries. He had a strong hold upon the affections of his fellow citizens. Those who knew him best esteemed him most. In his private character he was a consolation to his friends, an ornament to society, a consistent, honest, and virtuous man. His wife lived until 1814, highly respected and beloved. The example of a good man is visible philosophy; the memory of departed worth “lives undivided, operates unspent.”
- 51. JAMES WILSON. Among the strange freaks of human nature is that of inconsistency, showing itself in as many shapes and forms as are exhibited by the kaleidescope, but of a contrary character. One of its most odious features is persecution, prompted by jealousy and promulgated by slander and falsehood. Great and good men are often the victims of unprincipled and designing partisans, who stop at nothing and stoop to every thing calculated to accomplish their unholy desires. In recurring to the eventful period of the American revolution, we would naturally suppose that party spirit found no place in the bosoms of any of those who advocated the principles of liberty; that all were united in the common cause against the common enemy. This is the impression upon the minds of many, perhaps all who are not familiar with the history of the local politics of that period. But far otherwise was the fact. Many of the best men of that trying time were scourged and lacerated, and their noblest exertions for a time paralyzed by the reckless hand of party spirit. No one, perhaps, suffered more from this source, and no one gave less room for censure than James Wilson. He was born of respectable parents, residing near St. Andrews, Scotland, in 1742. His father was a farmer, in moderate circumstances, which he rendered still more limited by rushing into the whirlpool of speculation, a propensity which unfortunately seems to have been transmitted to his son. After receiving a good classical education, having been a worthy student at St. Andrews, Edinburgh, and Glasgow, James was finished under the master hand of Dr. Blair, in rhetoric, and of Dr. Watts, in logic. Thus fitly prepared, he immigrated to Philadelphia in 1766, with letters of high
- 52. recommendation, and soon obtained the situation of usher in the college of that city. His moral worth, combined with fine talents and high literary attainments, gained for him the esteem and marked respect of Dr. Richard Peters, Bishop White, and many others of the first rank in society. Indeed, those who knew him best admired him most. He subsequently commenced the study of law under John Dickinson, Esq. and when admitted to the practice, settled permanently at Carlisle, in Pennsylvania, where he exhibited powers of mind surpassed by no one at that bar, and equalled but by few in the province. A powerful display of his legal knowledge and Ciceronean eloquence at the trial of an important land cause between the Proprietaries and Samuel Wallace, gained for him an early celebrity in his profession. Mr. Chew, who was then attorney-general, is said to have fixed his eyes upon him soon after he commenced his speech, and to have gazed at him with admiring astonishment until he concluded. He was immediately retained in another important land case, and from that time forward he stood second to no one at the Pennsylvania bar. He removed from Carlisle to Annapolis, in Maryland, where he remained a year, and then removed to Philadelphia, where he obtained a lucrative practice. Notwithstanding the liberal patronage of the public, his circumstances frequently became embarrassed by unfortunate speculations, to which he frequently became a victim. Amidst his severest adversities he frequently sent remittances to his mother, in Scotland, his father having died and left her poor. To the day of her death he manifested an earnest and commendable solicitude for her comfort, and used every means within his power to alleviate her wants and smooth her downward path to the tomb. With the commencement of British oppression the political career of Mr. Wilson began. He freely spoke and ably wrote in favour of equal rights and liberal principles. He was an early, zealous, and able advocate of the American cause. Of a consistent and reflecting
- 53. mind, he sometimes censured the rashness of those who were less cool, which laid the foundation for many unjust and malicious slanders against him, which, in the dark fog of party spirit, several times enabled his enemies to obtain a momentary triumph over him, but which were always fully and satisfactorily confuted. In 1774, a short time previous to the meeting of the Continental Congress, the provincial convention of Pennsylvania convened to concert plans for the redress of wrongs imposed by the mother country, of which Mr. Wilson was a bold and efficient member. So conspicuous were his talents and so pure his patriotism, that he was nominated by the same convention one of the delegates to the national assembly. His appointment was opposed by Mr. Galloway, who had long been his bitter enemy; but on the sixth of May, 1775, he was appointed a member of that august body. At the commencement of hostilities he was honoured with the commission of colonel, and was one of the commissioners to treat with the Indians. He was continued a member of Congress until 1777, when his enemies again succeeded in their machinations against him. On the 4th of July, 1776, Mr. Wilson, with a bold and fearless hand, guided by love of country and motives pure as heaven, gave his vote in favour of independence, and subscribed his name to that matchless instrument which records the birth of our nation and liberty. That act alone was sufficient to confute the base slanders circulated against him, in the minds of all whose eyes were not covered by the baneful and deceptive film of party spirit. At the shrine of this dread Moloch, our country’s glory has been too often sacrificed. No purity of heart, no brilliancy of talent, no pre-eminence of worth, can save a man from the vile attacks of party spirit. Even Washington, the father of his country, often writhed under its withering lash. Some men seem born demagogues, and live under the influence of Gog and Magog during their whole lives. As a member of the Continental Congress, Mr. Wilson acted well his part, and was esteemed as one of its most active and useful delegates. Coolness and consistency, marked characteristics of the
- 54. Scotch nation, were the crimes of Mr. Wilson, on which his enemies based an accusation that he was not a pure patriot, and that he opposed the declaration of independence. But those who knew him well soon convinced the people of the falsity of the slander, and the character of this great and good man shone with renewed brightness. On the twelfth of November, 1782, he was again elected to the national legislature, and the same year was appointed one of the counsellors and agents of Pennsylvania to attend the court of commissioners at Trenton, to which was referred the final determination of the protracted controversy between Connecticut and the Commonwealth relative to certain lands claimed by the latter within the limits of the former, situated in Wyoming valley. The luminous and unanswerable arguments of Mr. Wilson, which lasted for several days, contributed, in no small degree, to influence that court to determine in favour of Pennsylvania, and put at rest for ever an angry litigation of years. During the interim in which he was not a member of Congress he held the office of Advocate General for the French nation, which led him to the close investigation of national and maritime law. At the close of his services, the French king rewarded him with ten thousand livres. He was at the same time a director of the bank of North America, and had the full confidence of Robert Morris as a safe and able adviser in financial matters. As an active, clear headed, and discreet member of the most important committees, Mr. Wilson stood in the front rank. He weighed every subject with a mathematical judgment, and traced all its bearings with the compass of wisdom. He arrived at the desired goal with less parade but with more certainty than many others, whose zeal was more impetuous but not more pure than his. He sought more to bestow lasting benefits upon his bleeding country than to excite the huzzas and gaze of the multitude. Substantial usefulness is not always found in the foaming
- 55. froth of popularity. It lives and is admired long after that transient vapour has disappeared and left its subject to repose in the peaceful shades of oblivion. Those who become inflated and rise by the power of party, vain pride and flattery, may soar aloft in the political atmosphere, followed by the eyes of thousands, but rely upon it, in a large majority of instances, their every action is dependent upon these subtile gases, and they will ultimately prove to be a mere bag of wind. Modest worth avoids etherial excursions; the terra firma of deep thought, calm reflection, and sound discretion, constitute its most congenial clime. It consents to launch into the revolving vortex of party with great reluctance, and nothing but a sense of duty to his country and fellow citizens, can induce a man of genuine merit to enter the vexatious arena of politics. How many such men are now in public stations, guarding the rights and directing the destiny of our nation, is a subject worthy of anxious and careful inquiry. If the people are not true to themselves, demagogues may easily ride into office who will not be true to them. Mr. Wilson was one of the most useful members of the convention that formed our national constitution. He warmly opposed the appointment of delegates to Congress by the legislatures of the several states, and was powerfully instrumental in placing their election in the hands of the people. He was one of the committee which framed that important document, as first reported to the delegates. When this model of wisdom received its finishing stroke, Mr. Wilson warmly advocated its adoption. He was the only member from Pennsylvania of the national convention that framed the constitution who had a seat in the convention of that state convened to consider its provisions. His closing remarks in favour of its acceptance are worthy the attention of this enlightened age. They manifest a thorough acquaintance with human nature and with the circumstances that prompted many to dissent from its ratification. “It is neither unexpected nor extraordinary, that the constitution offered to your consideration should meet with opposition. It is the nature of man to pursue his own interest in preference to the public good; and I do not mean to make any personal reflection when I
- 56. add, that it is the interest of a very numerous, powerful, and respectable body, to counteract and destroy the excellent work produced by the late convention. All the officers of government and all the appointments for the administration of justice and the collection of the public revenue which are transferred from the individual to the aggregate sovereignty of the states, will necessarily turn the influence and emolument into a new channel. Every person, therefore, who either enjoys or expects to enjoy a place of profit under the present establishment, will object to the proposed innovation;—not in truth, because it is injurious to the liberties of his country, but because it affects his schemes of wealth and consequence. I will confess, indeed, that I am not a blind admirer of this plan of government, and that there are some parts of it which, if my wish had prevailed, would certainly have been altered. But when I reflect how widely men differ in their opinions, and that every man —and the observation applies likewise to every state—has an equal pretension to assert his own, I am satisfied that any thing nearer to perfection could not have been accomplished. If there are errors, it should be remembered that the seeds of reformation are sown in the work itself, and the concurrence of two-thirds of the Congress may, at any time, introduce alterations and amendments. Regarding it, then, in every point of view, with a candid, disinterested mind, I am bold to assert, that IT IS THE BEST FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHICH HAS EVER BEEN OFFERED TO THE WORLD.” Mr. Wilson was also a member of the convention to alter the constitution of Pennsylvania, where he acted a very conspicuous part in defending the elective franchise, as belonging exclusively to the sovereign people. The last vestige of aristocracy trembled beneath his powerful eloquence, and the last whisper of slander against his pure, unsophisticated democracy, was forever silenced and hushed. The boldest features of liberal principles in the old revised constitution of Pennsylvania were penned by James Wilson; and, could his views have been fully incorporated in that instrument, I doubt much if a convention would ever have been called for its revision.
- 57. That the talents and integrity of Mr. Wilson were held in high estimation by Washington, appears from the fact, that he was appointed one of the first Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, in which office he continued until his death, discharging its duties with great ability, integrity, and justice. His manner was dignified, urbane, and pleasing. In 1790, he was appointed the first professor in the law college of Philadelphia, and the following year, when the college and university of Pennsylvania were united, he was called to fill the chair. In 1791, he was appointed by the legislature of that state to revise its laws, but a disagreement of the two houses relative to the disbursements necessary to prosecute the work, frustrated the plan. As a learned and eloquent lawyer, he stood at the head of the Philadelphia bar. He was honoured with the degree of LL.D. and, during the first year of his professorship, delivered a course of lectures to the students. Towards them he was reserved and distant, another marked characteristic of the Scotch literati. His writings were vigorous and logical, and did much to disseminate just conceptions of a republican form of government. As early as 1774, he wrote an essay, portraying, in language bold and strong, the assumptions of the British parliament not warranted by their constitution, and painted, in fascinating colours, the blessings arising from a republican form of government and the enjoyment of equal rights. To a person unacquainted with the bitterness of party feeling, it must seem mysterious that any one could have been found so base as to accuse him of being an aristocrat. A purer patriot and an abler advocate for the cause of freedom did not exist among the statesmen and sages of ’76. He several times passed through the ordeal of severe and relentless persecution, but truth-telling time, in every instance, forced his enemies to retrace their steps, covered with shame and disgrace. The private character of this truly great man was, in all respects, amiable and untarnished. It always stood beyond the reach of slander, a pure, unsullied sheet. As a friend, he was warm-hearted and benevolent; as a husband, kind and affectionate; as a father,
- 58. discreet and exemplary; consistently indulgent, and faithful in imparting that instruction and advice to his children calculated to prepare them for future usefulness and respect. In 1798, on the 28th of August, this venerable sage, eminent lawyer, able statesman, and profound judge, took his exit “to that country from whose bourne no traveller returns,” in the fifty-sixth year of his age. He died whilst on his circuit, of stranguary, in the hospitable mansion of his colleague, Judge Iredell, in Edenton, North Carolina, where his ashes rest in peace beneath the clods of the valley. In reviewing the life of this worthy man, no one can doubt his patriotism and purity. No one can doubt his devotedness to the American cause and his firm and uniform opposition to British oppression. Influenced, as he was, by the noblest motives; guided, as he was, by liberal principles, it is painful to reflect, that he was often wounded in the house of his professed friends, and placed under the castigating lash of persecution by those who had sworn to support the same cause he so ardently and ably espoused. The solution of the problem may be found in the present state of things, without travelling back to that time, of all others, when party should have hidden its hydra head. At the present day, the dark intrigues of party are proverbial. Low cunning is practised by men in the same ranks, to over-reach an approaching rival, and all the machinery of slander put in requisition to destroy him. Is he a man of superior talents and worth? Means proportionably base must be resorted to, in order to insure his destruction and drive him from the course. Disgusted at such corruption, the very men best calculated to advance our dearest interests and add new lustre to our national glory, are those who most dread the political arena and shrink from the public gaze. How small a proportion of such men as James Wilson, Benjamin Franklin, and others of the same stamina, are now to be found in our legislative halls. We pay large sums of money every year for party legislation, and but a small proportion of business is accomplished,
- 59. calculated to benefit our country. Let the people, the YEOMANRY, awake to this subject, and no longer be led blindfold towards the vortex of destruction. Unless we are true to ourselves, we need not expect purity in our legislators. The genuine salt grows less and less as time advances, and a dangerous carelessness is annually manifested in selecting men of proper industry and purity of moral and republican principles to transact our public business. Some of them are victims of the artful and designing, or are mere partisans, legislating for themselves and their immediate friends more than for the advancement of public good and national glory. These are facts that are self-evident to every reflecting, observing man, facts that demand our serious attention and timely correction, before the unholy leaven extends its baneful influence so far as to destroy our beautiful fabric of LIBERTY, and prostrate, at one bold stroke, the hopes of FREEMEN.
- 60. Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to specialized publications, self-development books, and children's literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system, we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and personal growth! ebookultra.com