by the robust and athletic training which his struggles with Mr. Mason gave him.

From the beginning of his residence in Portsmouth to the date of his removal to Boston in 1832, Mr. Mason's life flowed on in a uniform current, varied only by his four years' service in the Senate of the United States from 1813 to 1817, and an occasional term in the Legislature of New Hampshire. It was a life of arduous and monotonous professional toil, relieved and refreshed by the cordial influence of a happy home, and the exercise of a wide and generous hospitality. The career of a hard-working lawyer leaves little for a biographer to record, and most lawyers are themselves quite willing to forget their professional experiences and struggles as soon as the (44) heat and dust of the fight are over.

Mr. John P. Lord, who was a student in Mr. Mason's office for three years, at a time when it was full of business, has put on record his recollections of his teacher, and of his manner of life, a liberal extract from which may be here appropriately introduced:-"

"I entered the law office of the late Hon. Jeremiah Mason of Portsmouth, N. H., as a pupil, in September, 1805, and continued there until my admission to the bar, in 1808. His office was overrun with clients, coming to him to write special contracts, conveyances, wills, and all other documents which required the finishing touch of a lawyer, as well as for all sorts of legal advice, to commence and defend suits of law, and for other purposes in the line of his profession. His charges were moderate, even for that day and place, and his office business would have been very lucrative under the circumstances. I think almost with incredulity, upon the office labor he performed, for he never had a clerk, to my knowledge, whom he would trust to do such work. The number of original entries he made at every session of court, was usually more than that of all the other attorneys in Portsmouth and more than three times as many as any other lawyer in the county; and he was employed in the defense of every important suit. During my clerkship, Mr. Mason was found at his office in business hours, morning, afternoon, and evening, unless otherwise prevented. Between his office and house, there was no half-way place for gossip. I know he was a There is nowhere else to be found a more succinct account of Mr. Mason's methods of conducting his office than the one here given by Mr. Lord, who had an abundance of knowledge upon that subject, as the three years in Mr. Mason's office were calculated to give him.

sometimes accosted in the street by certain persons for a legal opinion, gratis, but he used to request them politely to call at his office, and he would hear their case. When he came into his office, mornings, after breakfast, we were careful to have it swept and purified from the smoke of cigars, for young men, even in those days, had bad habits. He used every morning to look over his accounts and books, to see that all charges for the day preceding had been entered. He kept a day-book and ledger, and his only cash-book, to my knowledge, was that with the bank, which he kept in a private place. Mr. Mason usually spent a short time to converse with his students, about their studies, to ask them questions in reference thereto, and to direct them to the proper books and authorities; and at all other times, he was free to converse with them, and occasionally to entertain them with anecdotes about persons and things, of which he had an exhaustless stock. He required us to hunt up authorities, and prepare briefs of special cases. But the office was usually a dull place to all callers, except those who came to see the head of it. It never was a place for outside retailers of news or gossip. Mr. Mason was particular in small things, especially in paying over all moneys collected by him for others. No client had to call the second time for his money. All his private bills were paid at sight. He was never short. It was not his practice to loan money to individuals or to lend his name as surety or indorser. He abhorred the custom, then familiar with attorneys, to advance money on notes, accounts, or personal property lodged as collateral security, deeming it disreputable to the profession, for a lawyer to act as (45) broker or banker. Mr. Mason magnified his position by exerting all his influence to prevent petty litigation, or commencement of suits upon mere quibbles, or for the purpose of procrastination, or to gratify personal vindictiveness, or retaliation. He was eminently a peace-maker, and was instrumental in healing many wounds, and in preventing the useless expenditure of money, by a set of litigants, who were in the habit of annoying lawyers, to aid them in schemes of malice or revenge. Disputes, disagreements, and differences of opinion in Mr. contracts and insurance, were often settled at that time by arbitration. Mason was employed in most of such cases which occurred as counsel for one of the parties, and I have known him to be called to distant towns in that capacity. He was eminently successful in this field of professional labor. So much confidence was placed in his skill and ingenuity by referees, that their awards in such cases were complimentary to him, and as far as right and justice availed, Mr. Mason never lost a case. I had occasion to consult him in a case commenced shortly after my admission to the bar, which was submitted to reference. He

told me how to proceed, and to manage it myself. But I had not the courage, as it involved a large sum of money. Mr. Mason was called to my aid, and after one of the ablest arguments by the opposing counsel, he put his adversary to shame, and recovered an award in favor of my client, which was deemed a victory, as the issues were doubtful. The sum awarded my client exceeded $3,500, and for that most valuable and successful effort he declined to take a fee, out of friendship to me. The renown of Mr. Mason as a lawyer was earned in open court. This was the field of his glory. He had great power with the Court; for he was respectful, lucid, and always panoplied with a well prepared legal argument. When he addressed the jury of trials, he was felicitous in presenting the strong points of his case, as it were, in a nut-shell, and in hiding out of sight, as much as possible, the strong points of his opponent's case, and commenting with severity upon his weak points. No matter what the case was, he was ready for trial, with his witnesses, his brief, and his authorities at hand. He seemed to have an intuitive knowledge of character, especally jurors, and when he addressed them, adapted his speech to their comprehension, their judgment, and their consciences. He aimed to be brief, clear, and argumentative, and not prosy, florid, and declamatory. His words told. Mr. Mason was learned in criminal law. He was the first Attorney General in the State who comprehended the responsibilities of the office. His predecessors, as I heard, lacked knowledge. There was confusion in that department at his appointment. He purified it. His labors in that office were herculean. The Supreme Court was holden in every county of the State; and his official duties required him to be present at each session of the Court, when the Grand Jury was also in session. His punctuality was proverbial. As the legal adviser and organ of the grand inquest of the county, it was told me that he frowned upon all vexatious combinations to procure indictments, as had been the custom, and in all cases brought before them, counseled the jury of inquest never to agree upon indictments unless the (46) evidence of guilt would lead to conviction by the jury of trial. Hence it was the common remark of the lawyers, that prisoners, under the administration of the Attorney General, had a small chance of escape from the verdict of the jury of trial. It was said the vigilant Attorney for the State never lost a case; that conviction followed indictment, and that punishment was the consequence of guilt.

Letter to Dr. Appleton.

States Senator.

CHAPTER III.

Politics of New Hampshire. Mr. Mason chosen United Residence in Washington during the First and Second Sessions of the Thirteenth Congress. Letters to Mrs. Mason and to Dr. Appleton.

THE

HE Reverend Jesse Appleton, D. D., was an early friend and correspondent of Mr. Mason's. They were connections as well as friends, Mrs. Appleton and Mrs. Mason being sisters. Dr. Appleton was chosen President of Bowdoin College in 1807 and died in 1819, at the age of forty-seven. His death was regarded throughout New England as a heavy blow to the interests of religion, education, and literature. Mr. Mason was warmly attached to him, and had the highest respect for his character and capacity. ·

Dr. Appleton had probably in his course of instruction had occasion to consider the question of usury and usury laws, and had written to his friend for his views on the subject. Mr. Mason replies in a letter which is the earliest on date of any I find among his

papers.

JEREMIAH MASON TO THE REV. JESSE APPLETON, D. D.

PORTSMOUTH, August 12, 1811.

DEAR SIR, I know I ought long ago to have answered your letter of 20 June: not well knowing how to do it is the reason of the delay. I think it probable when you have read this you will be convinced of the sufficiency of the reason.

Theorists have often doubted the policy of laws against usury. The fact, however, that such laws have been adopted by most civilized nations, as well ancient as modern, is of itself strong evidence of their practical utility.

The protection of the poor from oppression (which you mention) (48)

is doubtless one, but I think not the principal object of these laws. Such laws have been in use in many countries where the rights of the poor were little respected.

The principal object has been said to be to induce the rich capitalist to use his own stock and be industrious. It is more advantageous to society that the rich capitalist should use his own industry in the employment of his stock, than that he should sit idle and take the benefit of the industry of others. The loan of money therefore at a high rate of interest, which would encourage the capitalist to be idle, has always been discouraged.

A nation has only a limited quantity of capital stock on which to employ the labor of all its citizens; without lands for the husbandman, or materials for the mechanic, there would be no labor. This capital stock, whether consisting in lands or personal chattels, will for obvious reasons be possessed by individuals in very unequal portions. The object to be attained is such a distribution of it as will afford the greatest incitement to productive labor, and thereby give the greatest increase of the capital stock. The increase is the joint product of the stock and the labor bestowed on it. The borrower wants to obtain stock on which he can bestow his labor with profit. The money received in the loan is merely the instrument which conveys a right to a certain portion of capital stock. A mechanic who hires money to purchase the materials he wants, finds the money to be only an efficient order for the materials. He might as well hire the materials of the money-lender, if he had them. The rate of interest of money therefore regulates the rate of hire of all other property. A prohibition to take any interest would generally prevent loans. Were benevolence to form the only motive, the fear of loss would prevent, or too much restrict lending. This prohibition, which was taken from the Mosaic code, and adopted in times of monkish superstition in England and most other countries of Europe, is now universally exploded. Under certain circumstances lending is beneficial to both the parties concerned and also to the public. When (49) the capitalist has more stock than he can manage to profit by his own industry, he ought to lend that part which he can