4th and 5th Generations. PETER THACHER, jun. son of Peter, was born August 24, 1712. He married Anne Lewis, and resided at Yarmouth. They had eleven children, the youngest but one of whom was GEORGE, born April 12, 1754. He was graduated at Harvard university in 1776, and died April 6, 1824, leaving sons and daughters.

"He was at college, cotemporary with King, Gore, Sewall, Dawes, and other distinguished men, who, through life, retained for him sentiments of affection and attachment. Having prepared himself for the profession of law, he began the practice of it in Biddeford, Maine, and was for many years a popular and successful advocate in all the counties, in that district, in which terms of the supreme judicial court were established. He had, says his biographer, great acuteness of mind, much law learning, and was able to bring to his aid, in argument, more general knowledge on scientific subjects, than any of his competitors. Before the adoption of the federal constitution, he was chosen, by the Massachusetts Legislature, a delegate to congress, and afterwards was successively elected, by the people, a member of that honorable body, until 1801, when he resigned his seat, and accepted the appointment of an associate justice of the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts, where he remained for more than twenty years. While in congress, Judge Thacher was by no means an undistinguished member. The debates of that period will show that he took an active part in all the important concerns of the time, and his speeches will be found to contain, in the midst of frequent irony, and sometimes sharp satire, much useful information, and sound argument. His opponents often cowered under the lashes of wit and ridicule, which he bestowed upon what he thought was hollow pretence of patriotism; but such was the universal opinion of the goodness of his heart, and the honesty of his views, that no one felt any anger or resentment, except in one memorable instance, in which his independent and manly conduct, did more towards bringing the custom of duelling into contempt, than any thing which has occurred in congress before, or since. He refused to fight, and, instead of sinking in the opinion even of fighting men, overwhelmed his antagonist with confusion. On the bench of the supreme court, Judge Thacher was a faithful and upright public servant. His mind was well stored with legal principles, and his strong memory enabled him to apply them to the question which occurred, with great facility. His associates upon the bench have been often heard to say, that in their consultations upon cases argued, his discriminating power, sound technical knowledge, and recollection of old cases, not reported, have been invaluable to them. His integrity, independence, impartiality, and firmness, have been surpassed by none, who have adorned the seat of justice. But it is in private life, among his friends, and in his family, that we are to look for those virtues or blemishes, which exhibit the real features of moral beauty, or deformity, that make up the character of man. His heart was most disinterestedly benevolent and kind: all human beings were his friends and brothers. He either could not see faults, or he would not acknowledge them. Even the poor criminal, at the bar, had sometimes more of his compassion than suited the stern demand of justice. He had a vein of wit and humor, which irresistibly propelled him to put into ludicrous shapes, the arguments and opinions of those, with whom he entered into the war of words; but his heart never took side in the struggle, and the first appearance of wounded feelings, would blunt his weapons, and make him give the field to his adversary. In his domestice relations, he had no fault, unless an excess of kindness and indulgence be one. He lived a life of patriarchal simplicity. Surrounded by his sons and his daughters, and their children, and sharing the government of his family upon equal terms, with a most exemplary and excellent wife, his humble dwelling was the abode of peace, love and benevolence. It was also the scene of the most unlimited, frugal hospitality, where every human face was received with welcome. Judge Thacher was a man of great and various reading, and was particularly versed in the theological and polemic controversy. This was frequently the subject of his conversation and writings, and his particular friends know that he was a sincere believer in the great doctrines of Christianity-in immortality brought to light by Jesus Christ-in a future state of retribution. He laughed at the disputes, which prevail in the Christian church, and perhaps had some peculiar notions; but he was a Christian. It is enough to say that he was a member of a Christian church; for no particle of hypocrisy entered into his composition. He was a practical Christian, and his whole life would bare to be tested by the gospel, as much as the life of any who have doubted his faith. His life has been a happy one. He wanted nothing but comfort, friends, and family love, and he was rich in all these. He never aimed at accumulating property. He has lived for others, more than for himself. He died in the humble cottage endeared to him by forty years' familiarity, where every thing was the work of his own hands, with the wife of his youth to soothe his last moments, and his numerous children to receive his parting blessing. He has departed in peace with the world, leaving no enemy behind him, and many friends who dwell upon his memory with affection and delight. Eccentricities he bad, it is true; but they were innocent, sportive, and amusing. No one who had occasion to consult his heart, ever found that erring or trifling; and it may be added, that no man lives, who, with such narrow means, has bestowed more upon the unfortunate."

If on any subject Judge Thacher devoted himself with enthusiastic ardor, it was that of tracing the genealogy of his ancestry, from the earliest period of their emigration to this country. No man could delight more in the contemplation of the characters, and pecular circumstances of his progenitors. He had, with the most indefatigable industry, collected materials and formed a correct genealogical tree, with all its collateral expanding branches, from the original stock; the first Anthony Thacher having acquired a perfect knowledge of every family, and every individual, bearing the name down to the year

1816; and I have availed myself of his collection in composing the present sketches.

THOMAS THACHER, brother to the Judge, and youngest of eleven children, was born January 20, 1757. He was a man of great usefulness in his native town of Yarmouth. He was colonel of a militia regiment, and employed in various public services, in which he acquitted himself with fidelity and honor. In nothing, perhaps, was he more useful to the town, than in teaching a school,-in which laborious and important employment he spent a great part of his life. He possessed himself of a correct genealogical list of the descendants of Anthony Thacher, was strongly attached to the name, and never discredited the character of the family. Col. Thacher married Mary Churchill, of Barnstable. He departed this life February 24, 1806, in the fiftieth year of his age, leaving sons and daughters.

4th and 5th Generations. DAVID THACHER was the second son of Judah Thacher, Esq. the grandson of Col. John Thacher, and the great-grandson of Anthony. He inherited and lived on the place of his fathers. He was a representative for thirty, and senator for several years, in the General Court of Massachusetts, and was often employed on committees, when maturity of judgement and experience, gained by a careful attention to the interest of the commonwealth were particularly required. This gentleman was distinguished by talents of the solid, judicious and useful, rather than the brilliant and showy kind. He held, during the great part of his life, various offices, in town and country. He was one of the committee of safety, in time of the revolutionary war, and for fifteen years was one of the judges of the court of common pleas, for the county of Barnstable. He was also a member of the conventions, for forming and adopting the state and federal constitutions. The place of his residence and death was Yarmouth, county of Barnstable, where is a monumental stone consecrated "To the memory of the Hon. David Thacher, Esq. who having served his generation in many important public stations, with honor and fidelity, died November 9, 1801, aged 72. By a constant practice of the social virtues, he rendered himself greatly beloved and respected, in the various walks of domestic life. Reader, wouldst thou be honored in life, and lamented in death, go and do likewise. Also, erected to the memory of Mrs. Abigail Thacher, widow of the Hon. David Thacher, Esq. who died April 25, 1803, aged 76. She was justly esteemed as a Christian and a friend."

4th and 5th Generations. JOHN THACHER, LOT THACHER, ROLAND THACHER. These were sons of the Hon. John Thacher and Desire Dimmock of Barnstable. Lot died before his father. Roland was educated for the ministry, and graduated at Harvard College in 1733. He was the first pastor of the church and society at Wareham, where he was ordained in 1740, and died greatly beloved and respected in 1773, aged over sixty years, leaving a numerous family. Two of his sons removed to Lee, in the county of Berkshire, where they died; and Lot, the other son, resided in Rochester, county of Plymouth, where he died in 1833.

JOHN THACHER being the oldest, inherited and resided on the homestead at Barnstable. He was a mechanic and agriculturalist, and sustained an unblemished reputation, being strictly religious in prin

ciple and practice. He died in September, 1785, aged eighty-one years, leaving three sons and seven daughters. JETHRO, the oldest son, died at Lee, in the county of Berkshire, in 1826. JOHN died at Barnstable, July 4, 1833. JAMES, the youngest son, born February 14, 1754, still survives, and is the writer of these memoirs.

My father's house was emphatically a house of prayer, and the same devotedness to the service of God, that shone so conspicuously in the families of his predecessors, and the example and instruction which I there received, will never be obliterated from my mind. In my juvenile days, unfortunately, the deficiency of schools and my father's pecuniary condition were such, that I was deprived of the proper means of instruction, and having no pretensions to precocity of genius, I was left to my own feeble powers of intellect for self-education at a future day. Having devoted a few years to the study of medicine, under the direction of my patron, Dr. Abner Hersey, of Barnstable, and having imbibed a good share of the pure principles of the whigs and patriots of the day, I resolved to test my courage in the great "rebellion" of 1775. In this service I continued seven years and a half, and participated in the glorious consummation of Independence. Since that period, about half a century has been devoted to the practice of medicine, no less laborious both to body and mind than that of my military career. It is through the favor of the Power from on high that I am yet among the living, a monument of a hoary head, crowned with innumerable, undeserved blessings. While I yet live, let me not live in vain. But God forbid that I should ever totter under the painful apprehension of witnessing my country's ruin. I have a recollection of days fraught with wondrous things and wondrous results; but the things of the present day are no less wondrous. I have seen our precious liberties and freedom wrested from the hands of the oppressors, by the immense sacrifice of lives, of treasure, of perils, and of sufferings. How many have I seen, at the hour of death, exclaiming-" I die for my country!" I now see the fair heritage of our fathers in imminent danger of being sacrificed at the shrine of a reckless sordid spirit of party interest. I have seen public offices courting competent men to fill them, and I have seen them filled by men, who, with a religious conscientiousness, acquitted themselves of duty. But this seems already to be antiquated morality; for I now see unworthy, incompetent men, seeking and laying claim to public offices, as a reward for desecration and unfaithfulness. My fellow-citizensI have seen the days that tried men's souls. I claim the privilege of age to forewarn you, that, unless you view your elective franchise in a light more precious than heretofore, ere long you will have no office to bestow; all will be anarchy and confusion, ruin and despair. O! how great would be my consolation, could my benediction avail for the melioration of my beloved country's welfare! JAMES THACHER.

Plymouth, Mass. June, 1834.

[The writer of the preceding Memoir is favorably known to the public by his Military Journal, comprising a mass of interesting facts, connected with the History of our Revolutionary War, and his Medical Biography. He has also, at various times, contributed essays, memoirs, &c. to the newspapers and other periodical publications. Presuming that the readers of the Magazine will be gratified to see a portrait of a man so well known and so highly respected, we have procured a likeness, which accompanies this memoir. They will also regret, with us, that the amiable writer should have been prevented, by any scrupulous regard to delicacy, from enriching the article with a more copious sketch of his own eventful life. EDITOR.]

THOUGHTS ON OPTIMISM.

By a writer, whose philosophy was equaled only by his poetry, and who was illustrious in both, it is declared, that

"spite of pride, in erring reason's spite,

One truth is clear,-whatever is is right."

This well-known and oft-recited couplet constitutes, in its spirit and meaning, the theme on which I purpose to make a few observations. It is a succinct comment on what has been well denominated the harmonies of nature; that prevailing aptitude between the various works of creation, which holds them in practical accordance with each other, and produces the grand result termed optimism. To this word a twofold interpretation has been affixed. By some philosophers, it has been made to express the best system and condition of things that the Deity is able to produce; by others, the perfection of the present system according to its grade, without saying whether, as a whole, it might or might not have been formed on a higher model. The difference between these two views of the subject is not so essential as to render it imperative on me to express a preference of either over the other. I therefore decline doing so. Both parties, concerned in the inquiry, concur in the belief, that, in its totality, creation is balanced as it ought to be; that it is, in all respects, fitted to itself; that there is not, in the entire machine, a faulty pin or pivot, axle or wheel; that, therefore, no portion of it could be revolutionized, without producing discord, and marring its operations; and that, to this, man does not constitute an exception, but is as well suited to his sphere, as any other subject of the animal kingdom is to that in which it

moves.

In the remarks I have to offer on this form of belief, it will be perceived, that I am a proselyte to it; that I consider it not only alone consistent with truth, but alone compatible with sentiments of becoming regard toward the AUTHOR of nature; that in fact it constitutes an essential element of religion, as inculcated by the structure and economy of the universe-by all we see, all we know, and all we can imagine of creation and its God. Nor was my adoption of it, in strict language, a voluntary act. I was not at liberty to perform or decline it at option. Evidence from every quarter, collected by observation and matured by reflection, pressed on me with a force, which I could not resist, and compelled me to adopt it. The term "compelled" is here employed neither figuratively nor inadvertently, but intentionally and in its literal meaning.

As relates to the adoption of opinions, the laws of mind are as fixed and compulsory as those of matter. Being equally under the authority of nature, they are executed by her with no less strictness, and must be obeyed. This sentiment is not at war with a belief in the freedom of the will. There are involuntary actions of mind as well as of body-actions, I mean, which we perform in obedience to motives not to be resisted. We are at perfect liberty to examine any given subject, or to decline it, at pleasure. So far we are free agents. But, being engaged in the examination, if evidence be fairly presented to us, and our minds are sound, and unbiased by sinister influence, we are driven into a conclusion, whether it be agreeable to us or not. Under such circumstances we can no more choose whether to believe, disbelieve, or suspend our opinion, than we can whether we shall fall downward or rise upward, by the principle of gravitation, when that, which supports, is suddenly withdrawn; no more than we can, whether we shall feel pain or pleasure, or not feel at all, when our flesh is lacerated, or an ignited body is applied to our skin. Hence no man, who faithfully and industriously inquires, and avails himself of every accessible source of information, is morally responsible for the opinion he forms, whether it be true or false. He may be unfortunate in it, but not culpable. He forms it of necessity, and is no more blame-worthy on account of it, than he is on account of his complexion or figure. Over a sound and well-disciplined mind, evidence is as controling and imperative, as are the laws of gravitation over ponderous bodies.

It might perhaps be perceived, without any acknowledgement of mine to that effect, that I not only attach some importance to these remarks, as expressing a general truth, but that I feel at present a personal interest in them. In the ca3

VOL. VII.

pacity of a stranger, I am addressing an audience,* to whose good opinion I am far from being indifferent; more especially as relates to my moral character. That many will deem some of the sentiments, I am about to deliver, unfounded, I can scarcely doubt. But that does not disquiet me. To err is human; and it does not mortify me to confess, that, in that respect, I have my full share of conformity to my race. I trust, however, that a spirit of enlightened liberality will prevent the charge from extending any further; and that my supposed errors will not be visited on me as actual faults. Whether right or wrong, the views I shall deliver have not been hastily formed. They are as mature as time and industry, with such powers as I possess, have enabled me to render them. The subject of them has often and intensely occupied me by day, when some who may probably censure me for them were pursuing their amusements, and by night when they were unconsciously pressing their pillows. Perhaps, therefore, truth might justify me in alleging, that they have as little ground to blame me for differing in opinion from them, as I have to blame them for differing from me. And I am not so illiberal as to prefer any accusation against them on that score. I shall close these observations by adding, that my purpose is to treat the subject under examination as a matter of philosophy only, leaving to the consideration of others whatever connexion it may have with theology. And now to return from this digression, under an engagement not again to wander from my theme.

I have professed myself an optimist. Hence, according to the exposition already given, my belief is, that all things are as they ought to be; that creation is throughout in harmony with itself; that it presents a scheme of universal adaptation; and that, therefore, if one part of it is wrong, it is all wrong. And I repeat, that this creed is forced on me, and riveted in my mind, by a power of evidence, which I can no more resist, than I shall be able to break the grasp of death, when he shall have received his commission to lay his hand on me. A few of the reasons which have led to these views I shall briefly specify. A detail of the whole of them would fill volumes. In the language of the schools, my matter of argument shall be drawn a priori and a posteriori.

To begin with the former. I believe in the existence of a GREAT FIRST CAUSE, who is eternal in being, and infinite in wisdom, goodness, and power. Nor is he less so in justice, mercy, and his other attributes. I believe him to have been the creator and the arranger of the universe. He not only called it into being; he placed it in order, and laid it in subjection to the laws which govern it; and in obedience to those laws was every subsequent event to occur. This view of the subject appears, I think, to give the best interpretation to that beautiful text of Scripture, setting forth, that not even a sparrow can fall to the ground without his notice, or in contravention of his purpose. Yet, according to the prevailing hypothesis on the subject, thousands of events in direct opposition to his will (which is his law) are occurring every moment; and he is obliged to be constantly repairing, by special interposition, something which he has previously allowed to go wrong, either intentionally, accidentally, by neglect, or from a want of wisdom or power to prevent it. The soundness of the positions here laid down will not be controverted. Let us advert, then, for a moment, to their necessary consequences.

Is the Deity eternal in existence; was he anterior to all other existences, and did all others necessarily proceed from him? then is he literally the parent of all things, whether we denominate them good or bad. But he could not produce beings in direct opposition to his own nature, and in active hostility with his own views. For perfection thus to produce imperfection is impossible. Good and evil, each being positive and exclusive, cannot stand related to each other, as parent and offspring. An assertion to that effect would be self-contradictory. Let this point be examined more closely and analytically.

Was the Deity, in the morning of creation, as he is now, infinite in goodness and purity? From a necessity arising out of his own nature, he wished for a creation free from blemish. None other could be acceptable to him or worthy of him. An intention to produce one marked with imperfection, would have testified conclusively to his own imperfection. I mean his imperfection in morals. Was he, as he is now, infinite in knowledge and wisdom? He comprehended, of course, every thing requisite for the accomplishment of his desire. Was he, as

* This article was prepared and delivered, by invitation, as a public address, in a place where the author was a stranger; and it is not deemed necessary to alter the language. There is even some fitness in it to the present occasion, the author being also a stranger to the readers of the New-England Magazine, whose good opinion would be gratifying to him.