“Mr. Adams rose in his chair and expressed the greatest surprise that anything should be objected to on account of its being taken from the practice of that Government under which we had lived so long and happily formerly; that he was for a dignified and respectable government and, as far as he knew the sentiments of the people, they thought as he did; that, for his part, he was one of the first in the late contest [the Revolution] and, if he could have thought of this, he never would have drawn his sword. “Painful as it was, I had to contend with the Chair. I admitted that the people of the colonies had enjoyed, formerly, great happiness under that species of government but the abuses of that Government under which they had smarted had taught them what they had to fear from that kind of government; that there had been a revolution in the sentiments of people respecting that government, equally great as that which had happened in the government itself; that even the modes of it were now abhorred; that the enemies of the Constitution had objected to it believing there would be a transition from it to kingly government and all the trappings and splendor of royalty; that if such a thing as this appeared on our minutes, they would not fail to resent it as the first step of the ladder in the ascent to royalty. “The Vice-President rose a second time and declared that he had mentioned it to the Secretary; that he could not possibly conceive that any person could take offense at it. I had to get up again and declare that, although I knew of it being mentioned from the Chair, yet my opposition did not proceed from any motive of contempt; that, although it was a painful task, it was solely a sense of duty that raised me. “The Vice-President stood during this time; said he had been long abroad and did not know how the temper of people might be now. Up now rose [George] Reed [Senator from Delaware] and declared for the paragraph. He saw no reason to object to it because the British speeches were styled ‘most gracious.’ If we choose to object to words because they had been used in the same sense in Britain, we should soon be at loss to do business. I had to reply: ‘It is time enough to submit to necessity when it exists. At present we are not at loss for words. The words, speech or address, without any addition will suit us well enough.’ The first time I was up Mr. Lee followed me with a word or two by way of seconding me; but when the Vice-President, on being up last, declared that he was the person from whom the words were taken, Mr. Lee got up and informed the Chair that he did not know that circumstance as he had been absent when it happened. The question was put and carried for erasing the words without a division.” VI. ADAMS EXPLAINS.