time and labor to the founding of the University of Virginia. He planned the buildings, designated the departments of instruction, and framed the laws for its government. As president of the Board, he exerted a controlling influence for a number of years. The scheme of government at first proposed, which included a co-operative feature, did not come up to his expectations. It erred on the side of laxity; and very soon a spirit of riot and insubordination among the students brought the university to the verge of dissolution. Stricter regulations were afterwards adopted, and the university entered upon its career of usefulness and honor. With advancing years naturally came increased infirmity. As the end drew near in the summer of 1826, he earnestly desired to see one more return of the day that commemorated the Declaration of Independence. His prayer was heard. He passed away on the morning of July 4, fifty years after the adoption of his immortal Declaration. A nation mourned his death. The voice of partisan prejudice was lost for a time in the general homage paid to his life and character. buried at Monticello, where a modest granite shaft marks his resting-place. It bears the inscription composed by himself and found among his papers: HERE LIES BURIED THOMAS JEFFERSON, AUTHOR OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, The general features of his character have been brought out in the course of this sketch. He was a frank and honest man; and as he expressed himself freely in his writings, we have ample facilities for knowing him well. His intellect was capacious, penetrating, and strong. To the refinement of a superior literary culture he added rich stores of general information. He was singularly independent in thought and action- a natural leader among men. He was a prince among statesmen. The services he rendered his country are second only to those of Washington. His fundamental political faith was that all legitimate government is based on the consent of the governed. He had faith in humanity, and was opposed to aristocratic institutions of every kind. He was the friend of popular liberty. His integrity was above reproach. He loved a life of simplicity and retirement; and nowhere else does he appear more admirable than in the patriarchal dignity with which he presided over his large estate and numerous dependents at Monticello. IT is not without reason that we inquire after the ancestry of our great men. The transmission of personal and national traits from parents to children is a well-established fact. While heredity does not explain every peculiarity in offspring, it often furnishes us a key to leading traits. In order to understand any character thoroughly, it is necessary to know his antecedents. All this is illustrated in Alexander Hamilton, who was born on the island of Nevis, Jan. 11, 1757. "From his father, a cool, deliberate, calculating Scotchman, he inherited the shrewdness, the logical habits of thought, which constitute the peculiar glory of the Scottish mind. From his mother, a lady of French extraction, and the daughter of a Huguenot exile, he inherited the easy manners, the liveliness and vivacity, the keen sense of humor, the desire and the ability to please, which so eminently distinguish the children of the Celtic race.' When yet a mere boy, he was placed in a clerkship, and intrusted with the management of important interests. He met the responsibilities thrown upon him with extraordinary ability. But he was not at peace in the drudgery of his position. He felt in himself, as many other great men have felt in youth, the promise of higher things. In a letter preserved to us from this period, he says: "I contemn the grovelling condition of a clerk, or the like, to which my fortune condemns me, and would willingly risk my life, though not my character, to exalt my station. I am confident, Ned, that my youth excludes me from any hopes of immediate preferment, nor do I desire it; but I mean to prepare the way for futurity." This ambitious 1 McMaster, History of the People of the United States. |