the letters of his brother Dr. Arthur Lee, convinced him of the necessity there was for making a choice, and his countrymen will approve the conduct of him who chose the probability of achieving liberty at the risk of life, before the inevitable certainty of abject and degrading slavery.

A love of science divided the heart of Dr. Lee with the love of his country. The faculty of the University of Edinburgh bore testimony to his acquirements by awarding him the first prize in botany, and his contest at the bar, when he made the law his profession, against Dunning and Glynn, sheds a lustre even on these distinguished advocates. The friend and favoured correspondent of Sir William Jones cannot be supposed deficient in taste, or ignorant of literature ; and the attachment of Lords Shelburne and Cardross, of Barré and Wilkes, was founded on esteem and respect. His appointment to its agency in London by the colony of Massachusetts, before the revolution, his mission to the courts of France, Spain, and Prussia, are honourable testimonies from his country to his patriotism and talent. His vigilance was only equalled by his devotion to the cause of freedom, and his intimacy with the leading men of all parties in London, where he then resided, afforded facilities for observation. To his brother in 1768, he writes "that a change of men in the British Cabinet can produce no change of measures on the American question. So circumstanced here, the cause of American liberty will be desperate indeed, if it find not a firm support

peo

in the virtuous and determined resolution of the ple of America. This is our last, our surest hope, this our trust and refuge." Another letter, written about the same time, concludes thus, "once more let me remind you that no confidence is to be reposed in the justice or mercy of Britain, and that American liberty must be entirely of American fabric."

On such assurances from one so competent to form a correct opinion, aided by his own deductions from the course of events, the fixed resolution of Mr. Lee to propose the independence of his country might have been characterized as virtuous and prudent, even although his measures of policy or operations of war had been frustrated, by the accidents of circumstance to which they must ever submit.

Early in the session of 1769, Mr. Lee called the attention of the house of burgesses of Virginia to the late acts of the British parliament; his resolutions in opposition to the assumed right to bind the colonies, were characterized by some, as the overflowings of a seditious and disloyal madness, and produced the dissolution of the house; but not until he had, as chairman of a committee on the judiciary and internal relations, brought in his report recommending the improvement of the navigation of the Potowmac as high as fort Cumberland, thus evincing not only devotion to the cause of his country, but a deep penetration into her best interests.

The dissolution of the house of burgesses concentrated the opposition to the English ministry; the

members having met in a private house recommended their fellow citizens to refrain from the luxuries, and even necessaries of life, if any of these were not the productions of their native land. Their advice operated as a law, non-importation societies spread over the colony, which religiously observed and rigorously enforced the necessary restrictions. How far the exertions of Mr. Lee may have contributed to this most effectual means of raising the voice of the merchants of Britain against the measures of the ministry, has not been ascertained. It is certain, however, that as an individual, he had long practised that which this meeting proposed, and being convinced of its efficacy, he wished to see it generally adopted. To show that in the variety of her productions, his country was independent of the world, and "to testify his respect and gratitude for those, who had shown particular kindness to Americans," he sent presents of wine, the produce of his own hills, to distinguished men in England. The letters which accompanied these, and the orders to his London merchant not to furnish to him any article on which a duty had been laid, are dated previous to the formation of any non-importation society.

Mr. Lee was not deceived by the calm intervals of hope, which some of our countrymen permitted themselves to enjoy, during the years 1770 and 1771. He persevered in the course which he had marked out for himself, and by widely extending his correspond

ence, spread that information which the vigilance of his brother furnished.

Trial by jury, although in the hands of the deputies of kings it may be often an engine of oppression, is too unwieldy to be used for this purpose if other means can be applied. The English ministry knowing this, and the sentiments of the people of America, did not believe, that among them, this glorious bulwark of liberty could be turned against herself, hence they sought to substitute for it the forms of the civil law, by extending the jurisdiction of the courts of admiralty. The act for this purpose passed the British parliament in 1772, and immediately on the meeting of the house of burgesses, Mr. Lee, in opposition to this unconstitutional measure, proposed to address an humble petition to his majesty; which, after reciting the grievances of his faithful subjects, should pray, "that he would be most graciously pleased to recommend the repeal of the acts passed for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, and for subjecting American property to the determination of admiralty courts, where the constitutional trial by jury is not permitted."

While many, during the following year, 1773, listened with melancholy attention, to the rumours spread. abroad, in consequence of the burning at Providence of the Gaspie schooner, and the threatening aspect which the court of enquiry assumed, Mr. Lee only sought accurate information on the subject. For this purpose he commenced a correspondence with the

intrepid patriot Samuel Adams, which they afterwards continued, having been appointed by the legislatures of their respective states, members of committees on this subject. This correspondence exhibits so much dignified resentment, and firm determination, united with dispassionate observation and calm reasoning, as would obtain for it, even from the enemies of America, respect and consideration.

Lord North, the king's minister, suffered no passion to divert, no pursuit of pleasure to withdraw him from his deliberate design of destroying the liberties of this country. Plausible, deep and treacherous, he caused the duty acts, to be so far repealed, as would have imposed on the patriots of America a perplexing alternative, civil war for a trifling amount of taxes, or submission to a precedent of destructive tendency, had not the opposition of the inhabitants of Boston to the modified duty bill, taken the ministry by surprise, and caused them in their wrathful impatience to propose, and the parliament to enact, a new and unheard of punishment, very disproportionate to the offence.

The first intelligence of this violent measure of the parliament was received by Mr. Lee, from his brother Dr. Arthur Lee, then in London, while the house of burgesses was in session; the resolution of the house to spend the day on which this act was to take effect, as a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, caused the governor again to dissolve it. In a letter written immediately after this event, Mr. Lee states that the un