New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-05-29

In p u 1,y
-, froo noe was made of the biography Wy
FLANDERS In the present volume Proiessoi ~
80 hos baped himself literally to the fruls
lted t1ventv wears ago in the Lite Oh 9Arn ,'
Adams nv his great grandson. Wliiian -.
Accidents will happen III the best iceu ,'t:a of
prises: but when two such IIa. IN
,;to,ory nropriety fall close togethoi
the American Statesmen SERIES 'n0 20
lie will perhaps inquire WIN NJ
curiosity what are the editorial 1uncuo"S y.
Jobn #. Morse jr. We do not WISH 10 10 ,aIo
stood as accusing Professor Hosmer OIL 70
plagiarism, although there are pages " cor
narrative to which the charge OF pug 1,aa NJ
.oinlv annIes. We mean that he has foiio"eo M.
49,, I.,, ,,bolIv excessive fdelity-pot ohiy
roferri,o IN him as an authority for facts, ouU iu
go, his reflections AID often rewriting long P".o
80. &c his Iaborious work with only lew 'ri'i''i
oho,cos of phraseology or construction how t 20"
an antbor il ut liberty to use the wrltheS
predecessors as material cannot oe uehueu ~
general rule The limit must be nHcu W 'H d.
div,duaI sense of decorum. Clearly roiS'' ,,is
49, % NOT fastidious in this matter ana us
aroronrot;ons are not in the least justhed ny ING
fact that he admits deriving much heip HUI" '-'
work which he has in effect done over I'D
Ushouid be said, however. that ne mas 49,
sonnet hing to his original. He has cons.,U0u wv
Adams manuscripts IN the possession VI Hnl' -
croft (which Mr. Wells also used. ana mas in%uo
49, ..o,sorints from the Boston records, and other
,,nnpbIsbed stores of information. lie mas CA
,ressed moreover very lively dissent from MI
walls IN several particulars. He is much more ooh-
d;ol toward Governor Bernard and UoVeruoi
Hutchinson and much less cordial to"aIu "'
Adams than either Mr.. Wells or any Oh 'no
ard American historians His uelehoo "a
royal governors amounts to no more Vi~n
this that they believed III the o"oSo
which they eudeavOred to uphold. we heeu no'
dispute upon plea which might be urgeu III niUi-
cation of the sentence of history upon aiinos' any
political offender whatever. But ue'rao',o" -
SomnoI Adams IS a more serious matter Professor
Hosmer appears to have been influenced Ill MS eS-
innate of this illustrious aud upright man by 'he
roncorous misiudgments of Hutchinson. de re-
aotodlv accuses him of certain fox like snrewd-
ness which did not always scTutinlze the me"nS
over narrowly, while he pushed on TOT the ste"O
endn: of willy and devious management "ti0n "
,roner nlumb-lne will prove to be not quite In the
perpendicular; of trickery" OF sharp prao-
tice -: of the Yankee cuteness which the "oll" h"'
agreed to accept as a distinct type OF dlshohes'F
of cunning, and of frequent msincer,W'
He speaks of HIM also as q "pnrrlng ola cat,
"chahng fanatic of independence" ana O"inou
str;,,erv for extreme measures, "gnashng ms
helm These however, are only freaks OF the
sonewhat frolic rhetoric which at time gives the
book a grotesque effect In support OF the grave
allegations against Adams's honesty Professor
Uosmer cites several incidents; aud we nave no
hesitation in saying that none OF 'neni'
nor all of them together, prove MS case
His first point is that at period when AualiS
Individually desired independence, and was
perhaps even working for 1t, documents pfePaIeu
bv him in the name of town-meetings ana other
bodies which employed him to express their con-
elusiors contain professions of loyalty, ana
sometimes seem to disclaim the wish OF
4bonoht of ever seyering the connection with the
mother country" But where is the dupilelty III
that When these Massachusetts, assemblies called
unon Adams TO draw up their petitions, protests
resolutions and so on they required hlm 10 express
their sentiments, not his private expectations anu
desires. and this he did with entire franKhess'
They did not wish for independence at thaI uine'
and it would have been the height OF absurdity lor
their clerk to ask them to say that they olu DC
cause in his own heart he had become convinced
that independence was the only SOLUTION vi Vne
nnb,ic difficulties. "An advocate whose sense OF
honor is nice" observes Professor Hosmer, " hesi-
tates TO screen a criminal of whose guilt he
:; oonv,nced nv any reticence TO his
ouyn viewsD AS matter Of fact TINS
statement of the duty of counsel is not true ana
as an illustration it is singularly inappropriate IL
ia not even pretended that Adams argued against
independence in public while he worked ior IL IN
secret the most that be said is that, speaking
in the name of the public meeting he declared that
public sentiment still remained loyal winch was
the exact truth; although his personal Judgment,
which he had no business to folst upon a puohc
assembly. was that the time to throw of loyalty
had come or was close at hand.
The next example of Samuel Adams's "trickery"
10 which Professor Hosmer invites our attention
is his course in stimulating public approval OF
the great scheme of Committees of Correspond
ence These arose out of the action of the town
meetings on the high-handed proceeding of the
mother country IN making the judges and the
Governor pensionarles of the Crown, independent
of the Colonial Assembly The danger TO popular
liberty from placing the judiciary under the con-
troll of the Ministry was theme OF particular de-
nuuciation, and Adams spared no pains 10 rouse
the town-meetines throughout the colony to take
anpropriate notice of it. Under his management
the Boston town meeting adopted protest
against the proposed judiciary establishment,
as a violation OF the charter OF the province
as well as of some OF the fundamental
principles of the common law, and at the same time
requested the Governor to allow the General As
sembly to meet The arbitrary tone of Hutchin-
SONS reply TO the committee had great effect in
fanuing the popular Indignation. In compiling his
narrative of these occurrences from Wells, MIR.
Hosmer drops nearly all reference to the principal
subject of charlottesville salaries of the judges-al-
though the pages of Wells are full of it. He sup
presses the account of the action of the Boston
town-meetng on that leading topic, in order that he
may represent the whole course of proceedings as
a specimen of Adamss trickery. He states that the
resolution and request to the Governor-telng us
nothing about the character of the resolution ex
cept that it was resolution of inquiry "-reiated
to something very different from the real pnr.
dose which they covered and then he con-