weak brother. It is the germ of society | joyments, and to the quiet amusements of and government, and should be preserved through all development of human intellect and character. There is already too much at work to sap this natural institution of family. The facility with which the wave of population surges over the country, or swells the current that makes to the West, though a main cause of the general prosperity and individual comfort, is most destructive to the delicate cords of relationship. The eagerness with which, in the flood of intelligence, all push forward in the social strife, the excitements and risks, in which the universal competition involves all business, the necessity which every man feels for his whole soul's being wrapped in his calling to ensure even moderate success, have gradually inspired a national indifference to social en home life almost a disrelish. And yet the means of creating home feelings were never more abundant. Of these, the chief is home education. Cheap books and good books no man need be without. Concentrated knowledge, partial, it is true, but not superficial, is at hand to give, with its widespread date, the means of the most comprehensive generalization, to form not the pedant, narrow-minded and bigoted, but the well-read man, the thinker, with wide sympathies and wide views, who alone makes his mark on the times. Leave colleges, then, to the tender mercies of supply and demand, and if you would find a system of education for the whole American people, seck it in American homes. SAMUEL S. PHELPS. THE desire universally felt to learn something of the personal history of those men who have acted, and are acting, a more or less prominent part in the conduct of our national affairs, is certainly natural, and can hardly be esteemed improper. An extended or eulogistic biography of the living, however, except in rare cases,-seems to be premature and out of place. It may be set down as a general truth, under such circumstances, that either a strong personal regard will tempt the writer to exaggerate the picture he is to draw, and to add here and there some flattering touches; or else, the want of that intimate and actual knowledge which can penetrate to the hidden springs of the whole character-at the same time that testimony no longer biassed by personal feelings is not yet within his reach -will leave only imperfect and distorted lineaments, where a full and true likeness is demanded. can Independence. He was the only son. of Edward Phelps, who died at an advanced age, on the same farm where a great part of his life had been spent, and to the possession of which his son succeeded. John Phelps married a lady whose maiden name was Sheather-also a native of Litchfield. He had several children, most of whom still reside in their native town. The subject of this sketch was one of the older sons, we believe, and named after his maternal uncle, Samuel Sheather. At an early age Samuel was placed under the care of the Rev. Mr. Robbins, of Norfolk,-who kept a family school for the instruction of boys,-where he pursued the preparatory studies required for entering college. Judge Phelps occasionally refers, with great apparent pleasure, to the days he spent with the good Connecticut parson who laid the foundation of his mental discipline--always speaking of him in affectionate terms, and as one of whom he has ever retained a reverent and kindly remembrance. To deal with personal topics relating either to the living or to the dead-but more especially the former-requires a great degree of delicate discretion; for the false and too partial estimates of a friend are scarcely less to be shunned than the open attacks and studied depreciation of an enemy. In the present instance, accordingly, we waive the formal office of biographer and shall aim simply at a brief record of what we believe will most interest the read-ger S. Baldwin, formerly Governor of er respecting our subject. In September, 1807, at the age of fourteen, he entered Yale College, where he was duly graduated, and with credit to himself, though considerably younger than most of his classmates-among the number of whom were Hon. John M. Clayton, the present Secretary of State, and Hon. Ro Connecticut, and now one of the United The winter ensuing was spent at the Litchfield Law School, where he attended the lectures of Hon. Tapping Reeve, and Judge Gould. In the following Spring he removed to Vermont, and took up his residence at Middlebury-a town which had been settled, chiefly, by emigrants from Connecticut, ánd, in a great proportion, from Litchfield County. He there contin ued his Law studies, in the office of Hon. Horatio Seymour, since a United States Senator from Vermont. At that time, (1812,) party spirit ran high: in New England, and in the particular region where he lived, the Federal, Anti-War party was strongly in the ascendant. Notwithstanding this, however, he was a decided Democrat and a warm supporter of the Administration. Soon after hostilities commenced, he was drafted as one of the 100,000 men who were to hold themselves in readiness, and during the Summer was ordered to the Canadian frontier. He served in the ranks at Burlington and Plattsburgh, until late in the Autumn, when he received from President Madison the appointment of Paymaster in the United States' Service. In that capacity he remained, until the object of his appointment was accomplished. This office he held by successive elections until 1838. In the autumn of 1838, Judge Phelps was elected to the Senate of the United States, and at the close of his term of six years, was re-elected to the same office in 1844. His second term expires with the close of the present Congress. The military appointments held by Senator Phelps-we may here add-have been, Paymaster in the United States' Service; Aid to Gov. Galusha; adjutant of a regiment; captain of a volunteer company of Riflemen; and colonel of a regiment. The office of brigadier-general he declined in favor of a friend who stood next in the line of promotion. The high reputation which Judge Phelps enjoyed, as a member of the Supreme Bench, would, undoubtedly-notwithstanding the too frequent change of judicial officers in his State-have retained him in that capacity for many years beyond the time of his resignation, to enter the Senate, but for that event. No decisions of the Vermont Bench, we believe, are more highly valued than his, as contained in the Reports from 1831 to 1838. None, we think it is generally conceded by the profession, are more marked by clearness and force of language, as well as by a deep and thorough scrutiny of the whole case, in its several bearings, that exhausts the subject, and leaves scarcely room for a cavil. The confidence of the people at large in the integrity and ability of Judge Phelps in this ca Returning to Middleburry, he resumed his law studies, and was admitted, at that place, at the December term, 1814, to practice in the Superior Courts, and in January, 1818, in the Supreme Court. Here he continued in an extensive and successful practice, during the next seventeen years, and until called upon to give up these duties, to fill high and responsible public stations. Previous to this latter period he was elected (in 1827) one of the Council of Censors-a body now unknown to any other Constitution than that of Vermont, (though once existing in Pennsylvania,) which meets every seven years, to examine whether the Constitution has been faith-pacity has been rarely equalled, and their fully observed during the preceding Septennary, and to propose whatever amendments thereto they may think proper-to be adopted or rejected by the people. The address to the people, put forth by this Council, was written by Mr. Phelps. One peculiar feature in the Constitution of Vermont, at that period, was the vesting of the principal legislative power in one body of men, called the House of Representatives-subject, however, to the approval and consent of the Governor and Council. The latter was a body of men consisting of one member from each county in the state, elected by general ticket. In 1831, Mr. Phelps was chosen a member of the Legislative Council, and du ing the session of the Legislature of that year, he was made a judge of the Supreme Court. admiration of his judicial character and talents cannot well be expressed in exaggerated terms. As an advocate, his reputation is not confined to his own State, or to New England. His arguments before the United States Supreme Court, at Washington, have made him very generally known as one who has few superiors as a cogent and powerful reasoner-one who, at a glance, can look through the merits and bearings of a case, and leave no strong point for his client unoccupied, and no assailable point in the positions of his adversary unattacked. We deem it no impropriety to mention here the remark of one highly distinguished, both as an advocate, orator and statesman, after arguing a complicated and important case before the Supreme Court, in which Judge Phelps was In the Senate, he has been known as a useful and influential, rather than as a noisy member; a man of sound, practical judgment, taking in all the great outlines and relations of the several questions as they arise; acting fearlessly up to his convictions of the right; cautious and conservative, yet not to such an extreme but that he can recognize and cheerfully adopt every real and positive improvement; true to the Constitution he has sworn to support, and to the Union; and commending himself, by his courtesy and candor, as well as by the acknowledged talents which give him no slight influence in the Senate, to the respect and esteem of all parties. He seldom speaks, unless some important question is pending, and unless, on that question, he has some well-considered opinions, or pertinent and original illustrations, which it is worth the while of the Senate and the country to hear. His quiet and industrious labors in the Committee room-and especially as a member of the Committee on Claims, and of the Committee on Indian affairs, in one or both of which capacities he has rendered valuable and efficient service for several years-have been highly appreciated by his associates at Washington, and though less known to the people at large, have not been valueless to the country. We are fully warranted by his fellow Senators in saying, that the power he wields in the Senate, the consideration in which his judgment and practical acumen are held, and the secret, indefinable, yet (on this account) all the more real and legitimate sway which he unconsciously exercises in that body, cannot easily be overrated. During his Senatorial career, thus far, no occasion, perhaps, has presented itself, fitted to draw out, to the full extent, the powers of Judge Phelps as a public speak er. Able speeches from him, however, have not been wanting, and there are two, especially, which have attracted no little attention throughout the country, as well as much admiration, at home. We now allude to his speech on the bill (known as Clayton's Compromise) reported by a Select Committee of the Senate, of which he was a member, in the Summer of 1848; and to that on the Vermont Anti-Slavery resolutions, during the present session.From the well-known Anti-Slavery sentiment of the people of Vermont, and the course of Northern Senators generally, he was placed in a difficult position by his support of what was, for the moment, almost universally denounced at the North. Yet, he never wavered for a moment from his convictions in obedience to popular clamor, and he has now the satisfaction of seeing almost the entire North giving in their consent to his position;-though he certainly cannot but regret that the plan of pacification and settlement then proposed had been treated more dispassionately-as, if adopted, all the present agitations which afflict the country might have been avoided. No extract can do justice to this speech, yet we are impelled to quote two or three paragraphs, as specimens of his manner of treating this delicate subject, and of the general style of his oratory. The Territorial bill, reported by the Committee, had been stigmatized by a Senator as cowardly," "skulking," "evasive," and the like. Our first extract relates to these charges: "Sir, if I were to give a definition of a coward in relation to this matter, I should define it to be one who abandons his principles for fear of popular clamor; I should define it to be one who departs from his own convictions lest somebody who does not understand the subject, or who does not choose to understand it, might raise a cry of disapprobation in some quarter; I should define it to be one who avails himself of the excitement upon this subject, and through its aid secures election to office. The man who acts the part of a political weather-cock, by indicating the slightest whiffle in the political wind, trembles at the least indication of popular excitement, and is paralyzed by an opinion which floats to him upon the atmosphere of some bar-room discussion. "I know not what other men may think on the subject, but in the discharge of my duty here, if I thought I could depart one iota from the doctrines which I have advanced, with a view to affect a decision at the ballot box, my own constituents would, in their deliberate judgment, administer a rebuke never to be forgotten. I know them too well to imagine that they will ever find fault with a strict adherence to duty, on this or any other subject, upon the part of their representatives. I have no hesitation in trusting my reputation, my standing, and my political existence, to the deliberate judgment of that people. But I We make one more extract from this speech, much farther on, which concerns the merit of the bill itself. "Sir, we have had a great deal of declamation upon the subject. Gentlemen do not seem able, although the bill is open to their inspection, to point out its defects, or to show us how it tolerates slavery. An important argument as to the effect of the bill, an argument which goes to explain its legal import and effect, is denominated sophistry. The very gentlemen who bestowed the epithet upon it, have repeated my argument word for word, and if there be sophistry, then the paternity lies with them. They have agreed with me almost entirely, and yet there is something in the bill which their astuteness has not enabled them to discover, but which requires sophistry to conceal. Now, sir, I put the question, where have we dodged, or endeavored to shuffle off the question. Suppose we had recommended to the Senate not to act upon it either way, but to defer it to a more favorable opportunity, it might have been said, that there was a shuffling off of the question. But I ask where is the shuffling, where is the skulking, iu relation to it? I believe I am about the last man to be charged with skulking, for, judging from present appearances, I am standing alone among the Whigs of the North, in my vindication of this measure, and am perhaps rendering myself obnoxious to all the Whig party of the North. Sir, I know the agitation of the question that is going on; I know how a man may become obnoxious to public feeling, under the excited sensibility of that feeling. Sir, I know the opprobious epithets that may be applied; I may be hung or burnt in effigy; but, sir, having formed my opinion of the propriety of the measure, and of the expediency of adopting it, it is my duty to stand here and vindicate those opinions, let the opinions or feelings of my friends at the North be what they may. I do not 'skulk,' and I tell gentlemen that, although the arts of the demagogue are to be put in operation, I shall never shrink from the vindication of my own honest convictions here or elsewhere. "But what could the committee do? Here is a very important question, the most troublesome, dangerous, alarming question that has arisen since the Government was established -a question more difficult of adjustment, pregnant with greater danger to our institutions, with greater danger to the harmony and prosperity of this country, than any question which has heretofore arisen, or is likely hereafter to arise. Sir, the committee have proposed the only measure which their ingenuity satisfactory, let me ask gentlemen who object could devise; and if their proposition is not to it, what it is they would propose? It is an easy matter to find fault. Nothing was ever done right in the estimation of all. The world itself, and man its inhabitant, were made wrong, in the opinion of some modern but it is well for us they philanthropists; have not the power of making it over again. But let me conjure gentlemen who find fault to inform us what proposition they would present. Let them tell us what is to be done. If this measure is not palatable to them, what do they propose? Sir, we have the Missouri compromise, will these gentlemen go for it? Will the Senators, either of them, go for it? Will the Senator from New Jersey go for it? They answer, no. If they will not sustain it, will they censure the committee for not recommending what they condemn? Will they censure me for not proposing a compromise against which both they and I are committed? I "Well, what else is there? The Wilmot proviso. These gentlemen will go for that. So will I. I am not behind them on that subject. But will a majority of the Senate do so? I knew, and every member of the committee knew, that if we met this question upon the ground of the Wilmot proviso, we would be voted down, and it was not my disposition to present the question to the Senate in such a form that it could not fail to be decided against me. It is not my purpose, in carrying out the principles and views of my constituents, to make up an issue in my case, which I know must be decided against me. may be permitted, I hope, to borrow something from my personal experience. If I were about to present a case before a judge whose capacity I distrusted, or a jury in whom I had no confidence, I should feel at liberty to save my case if I could by moving for a continuance, or by changing the mere form of the issue. Knowing that the Senate could not be brought to carry out my purpose in that form, I feel at liberty to attain my object in another way, and at the same time to obtain an arrangement altogether more satisfactory to the advocates of freedom than unfavorable decision upon the Wilmot proviso. The proposition of the committee is the only one which has been presented which affords the slightest chance of an adjustment of this matter, even for the present. I should be gratified if any gentleman of the Senate could propose any |